View Full Version : 3rd Ed fixing tier issues with gestalting
as the title hints... I wish to make the tier issues go away by gestalting inferior classes with more potent ones...
It occured to me, that some of the problems with the warlock and warmage base classes might be solved this way:
when playing a warlock or a binder, you always play a new base class called the warlock binder, the warlock binder is actually a binder gestalted with a warlock
when playing a sorceror or a warmage, you always play a new base class called the war sorceror, the war sorceror is actually a sorceror gestalted with a warmage
it will somewhat retain the flavors of the 4 classes, but compress them in to 2 new classes that are more relevant and usefull than the previous 4 classes...
using this option, the sorceror, warlock, binder and warmage classes er purged from the game and 2 new classes called war sorceror and warlock binder are introduced in their place...
of course a player could choose to use the class names binder or warlock when playing a warlock binder while the
player playing a war sorceror, you choose to use the class names sorceror or warmage instead of the war sorceror class name...
---
the sorceror class will even get extra utility from the warmage in the sense that the sorceror can avoid using his limited spell potential to gain destructive / damage spells, since that would be covered by the warmage abilities... as well as being able to cast his arcane powers while wearing armor...
the warlock might get some additional options and might only provide a few handy tricks to the binder, but atleast the tier level would rise dramatically...
for both.... the tier should hopefully land on 2, so these flavors can avoid being so desperatly outshined by wizards, clerics and druids...
hopefully this could lead to a game where wizards, clerics, druids, warlock binder and war sorceror could be played together without
too many problems
---
this combination of tier 4 and 2 classes, might even extend to all tier 4 and tier 2 classes,
all these could potentially become "new tier 2 base classes" ?
Barbarian/battle sorceror OR barbarian/sorceror ?? ("sorcery is in your blood, but so is the raaaage")
druid avenger/barbarian ??? ("druidic barbarian?" ... druid is tier 1 though but barbarian fits well with the druid avenger)
Scout/Sorceror ("sorcery is in your blood, but so is the desire to scout ahead?")
ranger/favored soul
ranger/psion ("you are in balance with nature and you have mystical mind powers?")
hexblade/favored soul
rogue/sorceror ("you are indeed a sneaky spell slamming skillmonkey")
spellthief/sorceror ("you are indeed a sneaky spellcaster that steals your opponents magic")
marshal/favored soul
Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Variant)/favored soul
adept/psion
----
the house rule could be....
in a non-gestalt game....
whenever you select a tier 4 base class, you MUST gestalt it with a tier 2 base class &
whenever you select a tier 2 base class, you MUST gestalt it with a tier 4 base class
----
for the addiional tiers to compete with tier 1... well... I dunno....
perhaps tier 3 could also be made mandatory to gestalt with a tier 2 ?
while a tier 5, 6 and below (truenamer?) could be made mandatory to gestalt with a specific tier 1 ?
---
maybe something like this...
cleric/paladin ("holy knight with a lot more divine power")
cleric/knight ("almost paladin cleric?")
cleric/fighter ("skilled melee oriented cleric")
cleric/monk ("non priest martial arts clerical monk?")
wizard/aristocrat ("sophisticated master of the cosmos")
wizard/truenamer ("mad wizard?")
wizard/commoner ("hobo wizard?")
cleric/CW Samurai/OA samurai ("honerable warrior with divine power")
cleric/warrior ("melee oriented cleric")
CA Ninja/rokugan ninja/cleric ("ninja with divine power")
healer/cleric ("healing focused cleric"?)
swashbuckler/psion (the pirate has innate mental abilities?)
soulknife/psion ("full psionics"?)
expert/cleric ("skillmonkey wannabe cleric?")
Beguiler/sorceror?
sorceror/Dread Necromancer ("a better necromancer?")
favoured soul/Crusader ("a better crusader?")
Bard/favoured soul?
Swordsage/favoured soul?
Wildshape Varient Ranger/sorceror?
Duskblade/favoured soul?
Factotum/sorceror?
Warblade/favoured soul?
Psionic Warrior/psion ("a better psionic warrior?")
the various combinations for a cleric, druid, psion, sorceror and favoured souls, could be seen
as various areas in which that specific combo has selected to be awesome in...
in this context, the binder is assumed to have access to everything, including access to online vestiges...
for example ... the cleric fighter will be a more battle oriented cleric that will fit well with people
that wish to play a tanking cleric...
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-13, 06:52 AM
Hmm... So, essentially, everyone would be gestalt, and the tiers would have to exactly equal 6? That would most certainly work, and I've considered something similar. You wouldn't have specific combinations, like you posted, you would just say "Your tier needs to precisely add up to 6" and then that should be fine. It would have the notable ramification of just about everyone being a spellcaster; the only combination without Spellcasting I can think up at the moment is a Wild-shape ranger/Binder, and that's on a technicality.
You know, I actually quite like this idea. It would only work in a high magic game, though; for a low magic game you would have to increase the required sum significantly.
Bobby:
I like that it could be a houserule that all must be gestalt and tiers
must exactly be 6 (or whatever number fits the game they participate in).
It will give people the freedom to make the kind of charecter they want, and it should
make it possible to avoid mayor power differences within the same adventure group....
I would say that the gestalt combination should still be subject to the DM's approval though,
as it could be misused, as with everything else.
Since there are so many classes that are esentially the same thing, like a healer and a cleric for example,
then it shouldn't actually deprive players of options, and if they wanted to be either a healer or a cleric
to begin with, then I imagine they would only welcome the addition of additional power.
I think that the samurai and ninja classes should be gestalted with other classes as "a pair",
since they both are extremely weak and the game really doesnt need 2 types of samurai or 2 types of ninja...
example... CA Ninja + Rokugan Ninja always considered to be a single class called ninja, and it is tier 5....
when combined with a tier 1 class to make a gestalt combo of 6, it will be for example... cleric/ca ninja/rokugan ninja (tier 5 ninja and tier 1 cleric)
while other tier 5 classes would be like... fighter/cleric (tier 5 fighter and tier 1 cleric)
with the samurai.. the classes merge to be a single tier 5 samurai class (CW and OA Samurai), that must combine with a tier 1 class...
for example... cleric/OA samurai/CW samurai (tier 5 samurai and tier 1 cleric)
also.. the aristocrat class should be added to the knight class...
knight and aristocrat merge into a single tier 5 class called knight
example.... cleric/aristocrat/knight (tier 5 knight and tier 1 cleric)
while the truenamer class should be added to the soulknife? ...
truenamer and soulknife merge into a single tier 5 class called soulknife
example.... cleric/soulknife/truenamer (tier 5 soulknife and tier 1 cleric)
----
TIER 6
warrior class and commoner class can not be selected at all
Killer Angel
2016-01-13, 07:13 AM
The idea is charming, but many players like to play single class.
The idea is charming, but many players like to play single class.
Well people can do that as long as they then are aware that they will be lacking in power compared to the other classes.
Or they can still call it the name of the class they actually wished to play, they just get a bunch of extra stuff, usually themed to match their already selected class.
It could also be fluffed in a way were the extra powers are racial...ie. someone wants to play a tier 5 class in a high magic game... thats fine... the DM slaps on the wizard class and tells him that the mgic powers are racial powers, the player is born with the training normally gained by schooling and inherits a spellbook
MisterKaws
2016-01-13, 07:26 AM
That would likely result in an even greater power imbalance, simply by the fact that gestalt classes get DOUBLE the features, and thus can do ridiculous shenanigans:
Truenamer: a Truenamer/Cleric can bring complete chaos to the game, the only thing limiting the Truenamer's casting being the ridiculous skill checks, which Clerics are specialists in boosting.
Warmage: Sure, give the Sorcerer twice the spell slots so he has a dedicated pool to use Arcane Fusion, Wings of Cover, Arcane Spellsurge, and all those other ridiculous Sorcerer-only spells. Not to mention that the Warmage is, actually a Tier 2 with a REALLY low OP floor(as in, useless), and only because of that it was taken down to tier 4.
The other cases are mostly the same, with the rule being that cleric//anything is overpowered.
AvatarVecna
2016-01-13, 07:29 AM
The problem I see this running into is the difference between classes being a particular tier and builds being a particular tier; when you tie the mehanic to the tier of the class, it just means that some optimizers will try and squeeze as much as they can out of the build. For example, both Scout and Ranger are normally T4 classes on their own, so by these rules a build with Scout/Ranger on one side could have a T2 class on the other side, such as Sorcerer or Favored Soul. Both of those are full casters who can gain access to some pretty powerful tricks, but it's okay because the other side of the gestalt is considered T4 weak...despite the fact that it's a highly skilled DPR powerhouse due to the existence of the Swift Hunter feat. Rogue is usually T4 as well...but there's few people that won't agree on how a Rogue optimizing Abuse Magic Device can easily jump up a tier, just because magic is that awesome. And none of that is even touching on how debatable the tier system is (forinstance, the first tier list I found listed Psion is T2 and Beguiler as T3, which makes Beguiler//Factotum legal by this ruling), not to mention what effect PrCs have on a side's effective tier.
Something like the rule you're suggesting is what I'd call a helpful guideline for DMs looking to run a gestalt game and trying to get a feel for the general power level of his player's builds while they're being created, but looking at the build itself and having a decent understanding of what it's capable will give you a better idea of whether it's really balanced against the rest of the party. Knowing what tier their classes are helps, but knowing what tier their specific build is helps a lot more, and helps give you a better idea of what you need to do as a DM to keep things fair for everybody.
ExLibrisMortis
2016-01-13, 07:36 AM
You can fix some tier issues with gestalting, but it's hard to jump the t2/t3 gap without very specific synergy between classes (e.g. warmage/rainbow servant). I don't think binder//warlock is t2. It's a solid tier 3, possibly high tier 3, but still lacks the ability to break the campaign wide open.
That said, I'm all for gestalting lower-tier classes. Crusader//knight!
I don't think doing this in an open-ended way is a good idea. Setting up specific Gestalt replacements for classes (for example, Cleric // Crusader over Paladin) is a good way of balancing things without too much work, but this system will probably not produce balance in the hands of PCs.
The idea is charming, but many players like to play single class.
Single classes aren't balanced against each-other though. I also don't think there are many people who base their evaluations of builds on class rather than concept.
Truenamer: a Truenamer/Cleric can bring complete chaos to the game, the only thing limiting the Truenamer's casting being the ridiculous skill checks, which Clerics are specialists in boosting.
Utterances (with the exception of the gate one) aren't actually good. You could just get all of them at will and I wouldn't even care.
Warmage: Sure, give the Sorcerer twice the spell slots so he has a dedicated pool to use Arcane Fusion, Wings of Cover, Arcane Spellsurge, and all those other ridiculous Sorcerer-only spells.
Unless I've badly misunderstood the rules of Gestalt, I don't think you get one big pool of spell slots as you're implying. You still have to use everything for the class it came from.
The problem I see this running into is the difference between classes being a particular tier and builds being a particular tier; when you tie the mehanic to the tier of the class, it just means that some optimizers will try and squeeze as much as they can out of the build.
It's almost as if the tier system didn't measure anything useful. /derail
Rogue is usually T4 as well...but there's few people that won't agree on how a Rogue optimizing Abuse Magic Device can easily jump up a tier, just because magic is that awesome.
Also massive DPS with sneak attack. Particularly with a Sorcerer who can learn all the important spells. Rogue is already good enough at combat, giving them a pile of offensive spells is emphatically not what they need.
The Tiers are not linear.
Lets take one example: Cleric // Fighter
Now the Cleric, by means of the usual CoDZilla buffs, can do everything the Fighter can do - and then more.
All the Fighter gives is Full BAB, Good Fort save and a few Feats - all of these can be replicated by spells, DMM persisted too, so this is a futile gestalt.
There is a well known suggested houserule to allow lower tier classes to Gestalt: T4//T6, T5//T5 or T5//T6 in order to improve flexibility.
AvatarVecna
2016-01-13, 08:08 AM
It's almost as if the tier system didn't measure anything useful. /derail
It's a useful guideline, but it's hardly a hard-and-fast measure of how powerful every practitioner of the class is going to be. The higher tier something is, the more super-options it has, and the harder it is to really screw it up. Making a battle cleric? Even if you're not abusing DMM Persist, as long as you actually use the spells intended for battle clerics, you'll still be a full caster who has full BAB whenever they need it. Making a Druid? As long as your Wisdom is decent, you need basically nothing else past 5th lvl since spellcasting and wild shape should give you enough built-in versatility that you never don't have a potential answer to the problems presented to you.
Monks are pretty solidly T5, but getting a Monk build to reach a moderate T4 can be done with the right ACFs, feat combos, and/or dips. Still, you're never likely to see a T3 Monk build; it's hard to get that far from your class' basic tier without knowing what you're doing. A wizard played by Tippy and a wizard identical to Vaarsuvius are both theoretically Tier 1...but in practice, neither is operating at Tier 1, they're operating at Tier -1 and Tier 4, respectively. Getting out of your tier is possible with optimization, and sometimes not even that hard, which makes setting a hard-and-fast Tier limit based purely on the classes selected (like this one) akin to taking two steps forward and one step back.
The tier system is pretty useful as a general guideline for understanding how powerful/versatile a class can be, but the concept of the tier system being a hard and fast rule that must be adhered to...well, let's put it this way: in a game as infinitely complex as D&D 3.5 is, I'm sure the general capabilities of every potential character that could ever exist can be simplified down to 10 points on a line.
Also massive DPS with sneak attack. Particularly with a Sorcerer who can learn all the important spells. Rogue is already good enough at combat, giving them a pile of offensive spells is emphatically not what they need.
The rogue's DPR has a few issues: setting up the situation so that you get it on every attack every round can be problematic, but it's not impossible; however, combine that with the fairly common methods of becoming resistant/immune to precision damage, or becoming unflankable, and it becomes a little harder to deal with. Sure, there's usually ways around that, but it ultimately means that a Rogue's Sneak Attack has enough weaknesses that it's not really DPR on the same level as a standard Swift Hunter...if only because the Swift Hunter has ways of ignoring the immunity to precision damage. Rogue overall is a pretty high T4 class, with enough skills to specialize is a niche set while also having enough combat prowess to hold their own if necessary; they get bumped up to T3 purely through their ability to abuse magic items
The rogue's DPR has a few issues: setting up the situation so that you get it on every attack every round can be problematic, but it's not impossible;
Ring of blinking.
however, combine that with the fairly common methods of becoming resistant/immune to precision damage ... Sneak Attack has enough weaknesses that it's not really DPR on the same level as a standard Swift Hunter...if only because the Swift Hunter has ways of ignoring the immunity to precision damage.
gravestrike et al.
PersonMan
2016-01-13, 08:24 AM
All the Fighter gives is Full BAB, Good Fort save and a few Feats
Not even that - Clerics have good Fort/Will saves, so it's not even a boost to one save.
AvatarVecna
2016-01-13, 08:48 AM
Ring of blinking.
Sure, but a magic ring can be sundered, disjunctioned, dispelled, or stolen...and that's assuming we're not going into the various ways to get around Blinking, like See Invisibility, ghost touch weapons, True Sight, Mindsight, and no doubt a couple other senses I've forgot about (plus, Darkstalker only lets you get around those things when you're hiding). There's a lot of ways to get your Sneak Attack...but none of them are perfect. The system is set up to make sure that Sneak Attack cannot be guaranteed to always be available, because the designers couldn't let themselves leave it out, but they thought it was SA damage was ridiculously OP, so they had to build in ways to no-sell a rogues only way of meaningfully contributing to combat every chance they got.
gravestrike et al.
Gravestrike helps with undead, sure, but it eats up either spell slots or money; there's one for constructs as well, and both spells and money is much better spent elsewhere. There's way around a few of the others, but the ones that are difficult to work around are Fortification (which isn't absolute, but it can be pretty thorough) and oozes. The best option the Rogue has for bypassing all this stuff is the Penetrating Strike ACF (which halves their damage), but there's more than a few DMs with a leeriness of book-diving for ACFs, especially one that seems overpowered even though it isn't.
I generally prefer a good Swift Hunter because there's less hoops to jump through to get Skirmish (although it has its own issues), the Swift Hunter gets near-full BAB and some bonus feats to work with, and a single feat allows you to advance both skirmish and favored enemy while allowing you to ignore type-based immunities your favored enemies possess; sure, it requires that you maybe spend your favored enemy selections on things you wouldn't normally select (like oozes), but favored enemy bonuses are normally so minimal that your comparison becomes "do I go with +2 versus dragons or +5d6 versus constructs?", and the more versatile choice becomes more obvious.
And that's not to say Rogue is terrible, because it's not. It's got decent BAB, lots of damage when it can get it (which it usually, but not always, can when played right), and it's got enough skills to back it up that it remains viable. Rogue is a solid T4 that jumps to a solid T3 with UMD; Scout/Ranger is a shaky T4 that jumps to a solid T3 with the Swift Hunter feat all on its own.
Sure, but a magic ring can be sundered, disjunctioned, dispelled, or stolen...
So can your magic <literally anything>. I don't see people rejecting magic swords on that basis.
like See Invisibility, ghost touch weapons, True Sight, Mindsight, and no doubt a couple other senses I've forgot about
WTF do you think ghost touch weapons do?
That said, most of that is very rare and you can use stuff like grease if you want (out of an Item Familiar if your DM is nice).
There's way around a few of the others, but the ones that are difficult to work around are Fortification (which isn't absolute, but it can be pretty thorough) and oozes.
I literally don't care about oozes at all. They have no ranged attacks and move slower than a human, meaning they can be kited to death by anyone. There are also gloves in the MIC which let you bypass their immunity if you care (you don't care, just walk away).
Fortification is the easiest to bypass. It just negates the sneak attack damage, not the actual sneak attack. Which means that Crippling Strike still triggers. So you hit them like ten times and they collapse at 0 Strength.
OldTrees1
2016-01-13, 09:27 AM
Tiers are not additive.
X is a Tier equal to or less than the Tier on the left side
Tier 1//X = Tier 1
Tier 2//X = Tier 2 (or possibly low Tier 1 if it is 2 high Tier 2s)
Tier 3//X = Tier 3
Tier 4//X = Tier 3-4
Tier 5//X = Tier 4-5
Tier 6//Tier 6 = Tier 6 (there is not enough in this category to make progress)
MisterKaws: what changes to warmage would
bring it up to tier 2 or maybe even tier 1?
PersonMan: The cleric/fighter would still get access to
Fighter Bonus feats, pure BAB and extra feats.
With that combo the fighter would be removed and
Replaced by the cleric fighter.
Possibly with alternate ability fluff
As far as gestalting lower tier classes...
From what I understand,
A gestalt build will have a max tier equal
to the best tier of the 2 classes...
For example :
Tier 3 + Tier 4 = Tier 3
Could gestating more classes do something?
Like Tier 3 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = still Tier 3?
Combining many classes ought to increase
Versatility and thus the Tier?
Generally speaking
...
I wonder if some specific gestalts could pull lower Tier classes to Tier 1 or 2 in a meaningful way?
ExLibrisMortis
2016-01-13, 09:33 AM
I wonder if some specific gestalts could pull lower Tier classes to Tier 1 or 2 in a meaningful way?
Well, apart from the trivial case where a t1/t2 pulls a lower tier up to t1/t2, I don't think so. Usually, only prestige classes can do that. For example, Rainbow Servant 10 can take Warmage, Beguiler and Dread Necromancer straight into tier 1, and a strong t1 as well. Ur-Priest can do the same for practically any class. Base classes, on the other hand, don't really tie in enough into eachother's abilities (they can't advance eachother's casting, basically). There might be some gestalt comboes that set you up perfectly for a tier-boosting class, though.
You might be able to take t3 list casters into t2 by adding a class that offers a lot of non-class-specific Expanded Knowledge-type abilities. Beguiler is already as close to t2 as can be.
Beheld
2016-01-13, 09:36 AM
Sure, but a magic ring can be sundered, disjunctioned, dispelled, or stolen...
Wear ring under a gauntlet, now it is immune to all those things.
and that's assuming we're not going into the various ways to get around Blinking, like See Invisibility, ghost touch weapons, True Sight, Mindsight, and no doubt a couple other senses I've forgot about (plus, Darkstalker only lets you get around those things when you're hiding).
Uh... Only See Invis and True Seeing actually prevent Blinking damage. Blink makes you attack as if invisible, Ghost touch weapons allow you to hit incorporeal and ethereal enemies. Mindsight allows you to know the square of the person you already knew the square of. Neither of those prevents you from being denied Dex.
Gravestrike helps with undead, sure, but it eats up either spell slots or money; there's one for constructs as well, and both spells and money is much better spent elsewhere.
One 750gp wand is going to probably last you your entire adventuring career. Maybe in like 5-7 levels you might buy a second one. It seems really silly to argue "750gp could allow you to instantly murder any undead you ever run into in a single full attack action, but what a waste of money that would be!"
There's way around a few of the others, but the ones that are difficult to work around are Fortification (which isn't absolute, but it can be pretty thorough) and oozes.
Oozes don't matter, and yes, NPCs with fortification armor who are also immune to ability damage can mostly ignore rogues until their spells are dispelled. But then again, NPCs with 49,000gp and a spell spent on negating class Y can usually be counted on to have caused class Y a fair amount of trouble. Even most Wizards start to feel bad when they find out the enemy is immune to Fort saves that don't effect objects, is immune to all mind affecting effects, and also still has a high fort save such that Glass Strike will probably fail. (Also immune to stunning, and ability damage, and about 5000 other things, because undead immunities are dumb).
I generally prefer a good Swift Hunter because there's less hoops to jump through to get Skirmish (although it has its own issues), the Swift Hunter gets near-full BAB and some bonus feats to work with, and a single feat allows you to advance both skirmish and favored enemy while allowing you to ignore type-based immunities your favored enemies possess; sure, it requires that you maybe spend your favored enemy selections on things you wouldn't normally select (like oozes), but favored enemy bonuses are normally so minimal that your comparison becomes "do I go with +2 versus dragons or +5d6 versus constructs?", and the more versatile choice becomes more obvious.
So wait, your solution to "Rogues can't get SA because of Fortification armor" is to pick another class that also doesn't get bonus damage against Fortification Armor, and gets 5d6 damage at level 17 instead of level 7/9?
I wonder if some specific gestalts could pull lower Tier classes to Tier 1 or 2 in a meaningful way?
Mostly you can just use better classes. The only difference between a Cleric and a Paladin is that the Paladin sucks and the Cleric doesn't. They both fight in melee, they both care about alignment, and they both wear heavy armor. The Cleric is just good. The "Tier One" Paladin is just a Cleric, and there's a lot of stuff like that.
OldTrees1
2016-01-13, 09:46 AM
As far as gestalting lower tier classes...
From what I understand,
A gestalt build will have a max tier equal
to the best tier of the 2 classes...
For example :
Tier 3 + Tier 4 = Tier 3
Could gestating more classes do something?
Like Tier 3 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = still Tier 3?
Combining many classes ought to increase
Versatility and thus the Tier?
Generally speaking
...
I wonder if some specific gestaltskills could pull lower Tier classes to Tier 1 or 2 in a meaningful way?
There are some exceptions in Tier4//Tier5 to the Tier X//Tier Y, X>Y = Tier X rule but otherwise it holds. Gestalting the same Tier can rarely for some Tiers result in increasing the Tier(Sorcerer//Favored Soul or Fighter//Healer might be examples).
Could gestalting more classes do something? Depends on which Tier barrier. Some of the Tier barriers between High Tier X and Low Tier X-1 are quantitative(Tier 2 -> Tier 1) but others (Tier 3 -> Tier 2) are qualitative. Gestalting lots of Tier X classes will break a quantitative barrier but not a qualitative barrier.
Look at the definitions of the Tiers rather than just the list of classes. While the lists may obscure matters, Tiers 1-2 are defined by having "campaign smashing" abilities. Since this is a qualitative distinction from the Tier 3's general competence, the Tier 3 -> Tier 2 barrier is not breachable from beneath. (Although most people avoid designing towards Tier 2 once they read "campaign smashing")
Cosi: I agree that cleric is similar to paladin like
Druid is similar to ranger
I just wish the availability in tier 1 and 2 were greater
Exlibrismortis: considering prc is a good ideer.
Maybe some lower tier classes ought to get
Certain prc build-in
I just wish the availability in tier 1 and 2 were greater
You can fix that pretty easily:
1. Characters are created as Non-caster 1/Caster 4. That makes people high enough level to distinguish themselves somewhat, and gives everyone a secondary shtick that is at least pretty good.
2. Sorcerer/Beguiler/Dread Necromancer move their casting progressions forward one level. Sorcerers get extra spells known (probably four when they get a new level of spells, then two each level for the next two levels).
3. All (caster) PrCs are full progression. That lets people diversify into paths that were previously not good enough (for example, more than one level of Mindbender or Bonded Summoner).
There's more you can do, but that gives you characters that are both diverse and effective. Ideally you'd give people more class features, and maybe expand the spell lists for the Beguiler/Dread Necromancer, but there's only so much you can do quickly.
The tier system is about looking at the power differences between classes. It has several uses: to try and build a balanced party, or to set the style of the game, etc.
The tiers are not linear means that they have different progression: like Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard though actually the progressions are more like Quadratic Fighter, Exponential Wizard. You cannot add up lower tiers and expect to make a higher tier.
Psyren
2016-01-13, 10:17 AM
Some of the combinations in the OP are really jarring. Scout//Sorcerer?
It's a useful guideline, but it's hardly a hard-and-fast measure of how powerful every practitioner of the class is going to be. The higher tier something is, the more super-options it has, and the harder it is to really screw it up. Making a battle cleric? Even if you're not abusing DMM Persist, as long as you actually use the spells intended for battle clerics, you'll still be a full caster who has full BAB whenever they need it. Making a Druid? As long as your Wisdom is decent, you need basically nothing else past 5th lvl since spellcasting and wild shape should give you enough built-in versatility that you never don't have a potential answer to the problems presented to you.
Monks are pretty solidly T5, but getting a Monk build to reach a moderate T4 can be done with the right ACFs, feat combos, and/or dips. Still, you're never likely to see a T3 Monk build; it's hard to get that far from your class' basic tier without knowing what you're doing. A wizard played by Tippy and a wizard identical to Vaarsuvius are both theoretically Tier 1...but in practice, neither is operating at Tier 1, they're operating at Tier -1 and Tier 4, respectively. Getting out of your tier is possible with optimization, and sometimes not even that hard, which makes setting a hard-and-fast Tier limit based purely on the classes selected (like this one) akin to taking two steps forward and one step back.
The tier system is pretty useful as a general guideline for understanding how powerful/versatile a class can be, but the concept of the tier system being a hard and fast rule that must be adhered to...well, let's put it this way: in a game as infinitely complex as D&D 3.5 is, I'm sure the general capabilities of every potential character that could ever exist can be simplified down to 10 points on a line.
All of this.
You can fix some tier issues with gestalting, but it's hard to jump the t2/t3 gap without very specific synergy between classes (e.g. warmage/rainbow servant). I don't think binder//warlock is t2. It's a solid tier 3, possibly high tier 3, but still lacks the ability to break the campaign wide open.
That said, I'm all for gestalting lower-tier classes. Crusader//knight!
This too.
Tiers are not additive.
X is a Tier equal to or less than the Tier on the left side
Tier 1//X = Tier 1
Tier 2//X = Tier 2 (or possibly low Tier 1 if it is 2 high Tier 2s)
Tier 3//X = Tier 3
Tier 4//X = Tier 3-4
Tier 5//X = Tier 4-5
Tier 6//Tier 6 = Tier 6 (there is not enough in this category to make progress)
Also this.
Dammit, people keep saying the things I would have said.
AvatarVecna
2016-01-13, 10:33 AM
So can your magic <literally anything>. I don't see people rejecting magic swords on that basis.
Your DMs are very clearly a lot nicer to you than mine are. :smallamused:
WTF do you think ghost touch weapons do?
The ability to attack ethereal creatures helps negate the miss chance Blink grants, although it doesn't prevent the Dex loss, so it was wrong for me to bring it up. I'm tired, sue me.
That said, most of that is very rare and you can use stuff like grease if you want (out of an Item Familiar if your DM is nice).
You're right, second level spells are so rare, as are characters dipping Mindbender, or taking one of half-a-dozen feats that increase your ability to sense creatures under such effects. :smalltongue: Grease is pretty useful for getting SA, sure...right up until flight becomes a regular part of the game. Still, useful while it works...
I literally don't care about oozes at all. They have no ranged attacks and move slower than a human, meaning they can be kited to death by anyone. There are also gloves in the MIC which let you bypass their immunity if you care (you don't care, just walk away).
I say again, your DM has clearly been a lot nicer to you than mine have been to me; my DMs generally have a basic understanding of tactics, and so they put oozes in situations where oozes actually have a chance to pose a threat if they're going to use oozes at all.
Beyond that, I'd still rather save my money and just get oozes as my third favored enemy, since I've got basically nothing better to do with it.
Fortification is the easiest to bypass. It just negates the sneak attack damage, not the actual sneak attack. Which means that Crippling Strike still triggers. So you hit them like ten times and they collapse at 0 Strength.
I've seen it argued the other way as well by people debating the RAW: the language of the Fortification ability (at least the magic item one) includes " there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated", and they see that as including all effects of it being a sneak attack, including the potential Str damage from Crippling Strike. Mind you, I think that's a stupid view of the RAW, and that Crippling Strike works regardless of Fortification, but even then you have the basic problem of Crippling Strike: the people it's most useful against are spellcasters who can get ganked to 0 in a single round, but you'll never get the chance because spellcasters cheat; meanwhile, the people you get to use it against (other melee'ers) tend to have pretty solid AC (including FF AC), lots of HP, are more likely to have Fortification, and are more likely to have enough Str that it won't be drained quickly.
The rogue's comparative accuracy issues can be a bit of an issue; I personally prefer employing a custom item of continuous Wraithstrike to solve this problem (which is ~50k gp IIRC) but it only helps melee'ers...and a lot of people, even here on the forum, frown on custom item creation, especially to that degree.
If you wanna continue debating the Rogues tier, feel free to start a thread for it, and I'm sure someone will show up to discuss it with you further. Me, I've got to get some sleep before work, and I'm unlikely to give much of a crap when I wake up regardless.
Wear ring under a gauntlet, now it is immune to all those things.
Sunder the gauntlet, and then the ring (could be difficult while Blink is up without See Invisibility, but it's still a valid tactic); Dispel Magic, its Greater version, and can be used as area attacks, which bypasses the gauntlet
Uh... Only See Invis and True Seeing actually prevent Blinking damage. Blink makes you attack as if invisible, Ghost touch weapons allow you to hit incorporeal and ethereal enemies. Mindsight allows you to know the square of the person you already knew the square of. Neither of those prevents you from being denied Dex.
True Seeing completely bypasses it, See Invisibility partially bypasses it, ghost touch weapons partially bypass it (and ghost touch+see invisibility completely bypasses it). Blinking has a similar effect to invisibility, but it does so by shifting you back and forth between normal state and invisible ethereal state; if you've got weapons that can hit ethereal targets, turning ethereal doesn't really stop them from hurting you. This is literally called out in the spell description...although it's more about your ability to affect the target; ghost touch weapons don't do anything to make you less vulnerable to a rogue.
One 750gp wand is going to probably last you your entire adventuring career. Maybe in like 5-7 levels you might buy a second one. It seems really silly to argue "750gp could allow you to instantly murder any undead you ever run into in a single full attack action, but what a waste of money that would be!"
Unless you play rather short "campaigns", one wand lasting you the entirety of your career makes it a pretty rare occurrence; if it was that rare a thing, but still something I could count on happening, I would probably just dip Cleric rather than spending the money. Alternatively, if it ends up coming up all the time (undead-heavy campaign, for example), I'd prefer a method that requires a one-time investment rather than a continual investment into an expendable buff, rather than a more continuous option.
Oozes don't matter, and yes, NPCs with fortification armor who are also immune to ability damage can mostly ignore rogues until their spells are dispelled. But then again, NPCs with 49,000gp and a spell spent on negating class Y can usually be counted on to have caused class Y a fair amount of trouble. Even most Wizards start to feel bad when they find out the enemy is immune to Fort saves that don't effect objects, is immune to all mind affecting effects, and also still has a high fort save such that Glass Strike will probably fail. (Also immune to stunning, and ability damage, and about 5000 other things, because undead immunities are dumb).
NPCs with Fortification are likely to have a decent enough FF AC that you'll have a bit of trouble hitting, unless you're also packing that wand of Wraithstrike (which isn't a terrible idea, although I prefer the custom item of it to the wand for mid-level play and up. Incidentally, NPCs with Fortification are also likely to have higher Str than those that don't. And yeah, the seemingly-endless list of undead immunities can be exhausting at times; it especially hurts when undead options are made readily available to players through templates and the like, but that's a whole different argument.
So wait, your solution to "Rogues can't get SA because of Fortification armor" is to pick another class that also doesn't get bonus damage against Fortification Armor, and gets 5d6 damage at level 17 instead of level 7/9?
No, I like Swift Hunter better I like hitting more often and getting hit less often, because I like having one feat solve my builds major DPR problems, and because I generally find it easier to employ Skirmish than Sneak Attack when playing in a real game (often because the DM in question feels rogues are "too powerful" and nerfs SA to compensate, but also because investing in methods of continually denying all opponents Dex to AC requires a few more invested resources than teaching my character "The Cha Cha Slide"). Optimizing damage to the point that you can annihilate your foes isn't that difficult, but I generally find that more accuracy helps, especially when it's granting me an extra attack to work with. My comment on preferring the Swift Hunter was a conclusion to the whole post and was part of my original discussion point, rather than specifically in response to the fortification discussion.
Ultimately, it's all a side-discussion to the real point, and it's a side-discussion based off a poorly-selected example apparently.
Getting back to the topic at hand, the side-discussion helps showcase one of the point I was making: even if we assume that a class can't be optimized out of its starting tier (which we know for a fact isn't true), the fact remains that its hard to get a group consensus on what exact tier some classes are. As an example of varying tier, I mentioned that my perception of Rogues has generally been T4, with T3 if they're abusing some of their options, and two people have popped out of the woodwork to start debating it.
Making a hard and fast rule based on a classes "offical and standard" tier isn't taking into account some of the deeper complexities of the system. D&D is more complicated than the tier chart makes it out to be; class tier is a guideline at the best of times.
Flickerdart
2016-01-13, 10:36 AM
Truenamer: a Truenamer/Cleric can bring complete chaos to the game, the only thing limiting the Truenamer's casting being the ridiculous skill checks, which Clerics are specialists in boosting.
Not the case. Read Zaq's guide - he got his skill bonus high enough to reliably use Utterances, and he still sucked due to the Law of Sequence and Utterances generally being super weak.
Your DMs are very clearly a lot nicer to you than mine are. :smallamused:
I assume you don't play casters because people can sunder spell component pouches. Or is this just a double standard?
You're right, second level spells are so rare, as are characters dipping Mindbender, or taking one of half-a-dozen feats that increase your ability to sense creatures under such effects. :smalltongue:
19 CR 10 monsters. By my count none of them have detect invisibility. Ring of Blinking + wand of gravestrike et al lets you sneak attack every single one of them. And yes, dipping a PrC out of one splatbook to qualify for a feat out of another splatbook is absolutely rare.
I say again, your DM has clearly been a lot nicer to you than mine have been to me; my DMs generally have a basic understanding of tactics, and so they put oozes in situations where oozes actually have a chance to pose a threat if they're going to use oozes at all.
Such as...
the people it's most useful against are spellcasters who can get ganked to 0 in a single round, but you'll never get the chance because spellcasters cheat; meanwhile, the people you get to use it against (other melee'ers) tend to have pretty solid AC (including FF AC), lots of HP, are more likely to have Fortification, and are more likely to have enough Str that it won't be drained quickly.
The bolded indicates that you don't actually understand how Rogues fight. You aren't meleeing people, you are hitting them with flasks against flatfooted touch AC, a number which is basically never larger than 10.
Beheld
2016-01-13, 11:00 AM
And yes, dipping a PrC out of one splatbook to qualify for a feat out of another splatbook is absolutely rare.
And more importantly, doesn't even work. Mindsight doesn't prevent you from being flat-footed at all. So you can still SA the Mindsight Wizard just fine.
If you wanna continue debating the Rogues tier, feel free to start a thread for it, and I'm sure someone will show up to discuss it with you further. Me, I've got to get some sleep before work, and I'm unlikely to give much of a crap when I wake up regardless.
No one wants to debate the Rogue's Tier, because the Tier system is meaningless garbage that tells no one anything of interest.
Sunder the gauntlet, and then the ring (could be difficult while Blink is up without See Invisibility, but it's still a valid tactic); Dispel Magic, its Greater version, and can be used as area attacks, which bypasses the gauntlet
Area attacks don't effect items. Area attacks need line of effect. Gauntlets are unsunderable, as armor. Again, nothing you have here even allows the DM to be a **** and destroy the parties items every fight even though that is a suboptimal tactic for the enemies in question being used specifically to deny the Rogue WBL because the Rogue for the most part gets SA when it has WBL.
True Seeing completely bypasses it, See Invisibility partially bypasses it, ghost touch weapons partially bypass it (and ghost touch+see invisibility completely bypasses it). Blinking has a similar effect to invisibility, but it does so by shifting you back and forth between normal state and invisible ethereal state; if you've got weapons that can hit ethereal targets, turning ethereal doesn't really stop them from hurting you. This is literally called out in the spell description...although it's more about your ability to affect the target; ghost touch weapons don't do anything to make you less vulnerable to a rogue.
Ugh... Are you in mirror universe having a conversation with a completely different entity? No one cares if the enemy can attack the rogue that kills it in one round. Blink isn't being used as a defense, sure it is that too, but it's a way to deny dex. No one cares if they have ghost touch weapons, it is literally irrelevant.
Arguably, See Invis and True Seeing don't even stop you from having your dex bonus denied by RAW, but I think that's a silly argument that is unlikely to ever be allowed. But once again, knowing what square the Rogue is in with Mindsight or Blindsense or Tremorsense, or being able to hit him with ghost touch weapons is meaningless, since the entire reason Ring of Blink was ever brought up was to establish that Rogues can get Sneak Attack. Infinity methods of knowing where the rogue is or hitting them never stop being completely irrelevant to whether or not the Rogue is getting sneak attack.
Unless you play rather short "campaigns", one wand lasting you the entirety of your career makes it a pretty rare occurrence; if it was that rare a thing, but still something I could count on happening, I would probably just dip Cleric rather than spending the money. Alternatively, if it ends up coming up all the time (undead-heavy campaign, for example), I'd prefer a method that requires a one-time investment rather than a continual investment into an expendable buff, rather than a more continuous option.
You can kill an entire encounter in one round. You get 50 rounds per 750gp wand. If you fight nothing but undead over and over, you will use up the wand in about 3 levels, taking into account about 1/4th of encounters you might need a second usage. That's a 100% undead campaign. If you are not facing a 100% undead campaign, then all the better, it last longer. How many undead do you face in a non undead campaign that you can't stretch that out over 5-7 levels. How many campaigns go past level 12? If you play an entire campaign from 1-12 you probably only need one wand.
The idea that you should spend a character level instead of 750gp is absurd.
NPCs with Fortification are likely to have a decent enough FF AC that you'll have a bit of trouble hitting, unless you're also packing that wand of Wraithstrike (which isn't a terrible idea, although I prefer the custom item of it to the wand for mid-level play and up. Incidentally, NPCs with Fortification are also likely to have higher Str than those that don't. And yeah, the seemingly-endless list of undead immunities can be exhausting at times; it especially hurts when undead options are made readily available to players through templates and the like, but that's a whole different argument.
Or you know, throw flasks, because that's a cheaper and more effective way to attack flat-footed touch AC. But yeah, whatever, enemies who spend 49k just to screw the rogue and no one else might take a couple of rounds for the rogue to beat. But you know, 49k is more than 100% of an NPCs WBL at level 14. So unless you are playing a level 15+ character, they can't even have Heavy fortification armor at all. Moderate Fortification is 100% of the WBL of a level 10 NPC. If you are a level 10 or under character, you can just be confident that there will never be any enemy with anything besides light fortification anywhere.
No, I like Swift Hunter better I like hitting more often and getting hit less often, because I like having one feat solve my builds major DPR problems, and because I generally find it easier to employ Skirmish than Sneak Attack when playing in a real game (often because the DM in question feels rogues are "too powerful" and nerfs SA to compensate, but also because investing in methods of continually denying all opponents Dex to AC requires a few more invested resources than teaching my character "The Cha Cha Slide"). Optimizing damage to the point that you can annihilate your foes isn't that difficult, but I generally find that more accuracy helps, especially when it's granting me an extra attack to work with. My comment on preferring the Swift Hunter was a conclusion to the whole post and was part of my original discussion point, rather than specifically in response to the fortification discussion.
TWFing and Rapid Shot are not unique features of the Ranger class. In fact, while you are spending a feat on Swift Hunter, the Rogue is spending the exact same feat on TWFing or Rapid Shot. The Rogue gets more than twice the damage at and level you care about, and the same number of attacks. Certainly, it's easier to move 10ft than it is to deny dex, but since the bonus is extremely tiny amounts of damage for your level, that shouldn't be surprising. And accuracy concerns are mostly a joke, since most builds can attack flat-footed touch AC.
Flickerdart
2016-01-13, 11:02 AM
Gauntlets are unsunderable, as armor.
Whether or not gauntlets are armor or weapons is not entirely clear, given that they are listed on the weapons table as well as as parts of armor. In fact, since missing gauntlets doesn't affect your armor's AC at all, it's fair to say that gauntlets aren't armor but are simply included with armor, like the batteries in your remote.
ComaVision
2016-01-13, 12:39 PM
I attempted something similar in the last campaign I ran. Specifically, I allowed anyone playing a T4 or lower to gestalt, in the hopes that they'd increase their versatility and minimize their weaknesses. What actually occurred is that my players doubled down on their strengths, for an increase in power but no increase in versatility (Werebear RHD//Barbarian, for an example).
Failed experiment, for me.
johnbragg
2016-01-13, 01:50 PM
I attempted something similar in the last campaign I ran. Specifically, I allowed anyone playing a T4 or lower to gestalt, in the hopes that they'd increase their versatility and minimize their weaknesses. What actually occurred is that my players doubled down on their strengths, for an increase in power but no increase in versatility (Werebear RHD//Barbarian, for an example).
Failed experiment, for me.
Were the players happy, though? The Barbarian player, I'm guessing, wanted to beat the snot out of bad guys (or not so bad guys), and with increased power I'm sure he did.
The most convincing argument I saw for the tier system was a campaign I played in back in the early days of 3.5, where a wizard's player attended sporadically. Gameplay was radically different when he was and wasn't there--everyone wanted to use the best available strategy in a situation, so when he was there, everyone was looking through Monster Manuals for the best form to polymorph into (Rule of Cool was at play--I'm fairly certain he couldn't have turned into a water elemental by RAW). When he wasn't there, everyone had a chance to contribute by using their character's toolkit.
On the other hand, you weren't happy, so there's that.
ComaVision
2016-01-13, 02:34 PM
On the other hand, you weren't happy, so there's that.
This is very true. My other characters had similar builds so I was incredibly bored with encounter design, since they didn't have any capabilities beyond "hit it hard". I ended up basically ending the game when an enemy cast Prismatic Spray on them.
As far as I can tell though, my players were enjoying it. I just needed to have one or two players bringing something else to the table for my sake.
I attempted something similar in the last campaign I ran. Specifically, I allowed anyone playing a T4 or lower to gestalt, in the hopes that they'd increase their versatility and minimize their weaknesses. What actually occurred is that my players doubled down on their strengths, for an increase in power but no increase in versatility (Werebear RHD//Barbarian, for an example).
Failed experiment, for me.
Maybe the solution is to predetermined what classes that may gestalt and what their gestalt options are...
Anyone have some suggestions for specific
Gestalts for all tier 3, 4 & 5 classes that would result in tier 1 or 2?
The 1 non caster/4 caster option is indeed interesting...
ComaVision
2016-01-13, 02:57 PM
Maybe the solution is to predetermined what classes that may gestalt and what their gestalt options are...
Anyone have some suggestions for specific
Gestalts for all tier 3, 4 & 5 classes that would result in tier 1 or 2?
The 1 non caster/4 caster option is indeed interesting...
That's closer to what I'm doing now. I gestalt weaker classes with similar flavour, and just buff the ones without a pairing. My target is Tier 3 though, not 1 or 2. Currently available as options in my game are Soulknife//Divine Mind, Marshall//Knight, and Dragonfire Adept//Dragon Shaman (all with some extra little buffs).
Gestalts for all tier 3, 4 & 5 classes that would result in tier 1 or 2?
I'm not going to answer in terms of tiers (because I don't think they're useful), but I'll give it a shot.
The first thing to be mindful of is the difference between low and high levels. A first level Fighter is useful to a party with a first level Wizard in a way that a tenth level Fighter isn't useful to a party with a tenth level Wizard. That's a big problem with Gestalting together, say, Ranger and Barbarian. Having the abilities of both a Ranger and a Barbarian at 1st level can push you from "competitive" to "superior", while having the abilities of a Fighter, a Ranger, a Barbarian, a Paladin, a Knight, and your mom won't make you useful at 20th.
So I would probably try to establish a few baseline cases (Wizard // Ranger, Factotum // Warblade) and then figure out what other people need to get to be in that area. Very roughly, here are a couple of combos I think should be okay:
1. Sorcerer // Marshal
2. Rogue // Binder
3. Dread Necromancer // Evil Paladin Variant
4. Barbarian // Druid
5. Cleric // Bard
6. Duskblade // Warmage (Duskblade should probably have Arcane Channeling moved down if you intend to start at 1st level, Warmage should probably get some extra spells like bull's strength or minor creation)
Troacctid
2016-01-13, 03:23 PM
I don't like tier-based gestalt because too many classes are under-tiered, like Healer and Warlock, so it ends up being unbalanced in their favor.
johnbragg
2016-01-13, 04:02 PM
This is very true. My other characters had similar builds so I was incredibly bored with encounter design, since they didn't have any capabilities beyond "hit it hard". I ended up basically ending the game when an enemy cast Prismatic Spray on them.
As far as I can tell though, my players were enjoying it. I just needed to have one or two players bringing something else to the table for my sake.
Hmmm. Sounds like you were using mechanics (gestalt) to solve a playstyle problem. Gestalt can make a character more versatile. But if the whole party lacks versatilty, that's a different issue.
Out of curiosity, what did you have besides the wearbear barbarian
ComaVision
2016-01-13, 04:56 PM
Hmmm. Sounds like you were using mechanics (gestalt) to solve a playstyle problem. Gestalt can make a character more versatile. But if the whole party lacks versatilty, that's a different issue.
Out of curiosity, what did you have besides the wearbear barbarian
I had a broader array of skills in the group when I put in the rule (wizard, factotum, and a barbarian IIRC). I was trying to deal with the tier drift problem before it affected the game much. As players died, they replaced their characters with meatier substitutes. Maybe it's just due to my players being inexperienced, and thinking that was the best way to stay alive.
I believe, at the end, the group was a Cloud Giant//Something, Werebear//Barbarian and Fighter//Ranger/Scout.
It was mentioned earlier that gestalt cleric/ anything was too powerful. .. but I would say that some classes like the aristocrat, noble or the dragon mark heir is too weak to alter the power of a cleric
for example..
cleric/aristocrat - adds a more nobility or aristocratic fluffy flavor tothe cleric while in game terms at most will add a few class skills to the cleric....
hardly anything that is more game breaking than a pure cleric...
My goal with this is that more and stronger base classes emerge by result of gestalting weaker classes with stronger classes
So for example a warlock/Sorceror
One new base class called
Warlock sorcerer
so if it takes eldritch theurge
it will be
Warlock Sorceror 3/eldritch theurge 10 = class level 13
Cosi:
Interesting options.
I know that many see the tier system as flawed and
that the tiers are more a guideline.
But Tier 5 classes are still in trouble if competing with tier 1 classes.
I would personally place rogue in tier 4 because the class is limited in both versatility and power.
I considered something like the following this morning :
Target tier is 1
Tier sum is 7
Tier 1/tier 6 (mostly only tier 1 and aristocrat or commoner because tier 1's are already potentially game breaking as it is)
Tier 2/tier 5
Tier 3/tier 4
Maybe also
Tier 2/tier 4
Target is tier 2
Tier sum is 8
Tier 1
Tier 2/Tier 6 (mainly aristocrat and commoner)
Tier 3/Tier 5
Tier 4/Tier 4
Maybe
Tier 2/Tier 5
Tier 3/Tier 4
Target is tier 3
Tier sum is 9
Tier 1 not allowed
Tier 2
Tier 3/tier 6
Tier 4/tier 5
Target is tier 4
Tier sum is 10
Tier 1 not allowed
Tier 2 not allowed
Tier 3
Tier 4/tier 6
Tier 5/tier 5
Examples..
Cleric/aristocrat (aristocrat is mainly for flavor)
Wizard/aristocrat (-"-)
Druid/warrior (already have wildshape so bab isn't evil, alternatively aristocrat)
Sorceror/rogue
Sorceror/barbarian
....... I would even consider allowing
this class to:
- level 1: purge familiar
- level 1 : enable spellcasting in rage
- level 2 : deliver touch spell with melee attack
- level 3 : deliver touch spell with ranged attack
ComaVision :
Are you using any general guidelines?
What buffs are you giving?
What would you recommend if aiming at tier 1 or 2?
What about the following classes...
Warmage, warlock, rogue, barbarian, fighter, ranger,
I was thinking that maybe if warmage got all wizard spells added = tier 2 ?
And if ranger got full druid spellcasting (but no wildshape and the other druid powers) = tier 2 ?
Also
Sorceror / warlock ? and
Sorceror / dragonfire adept ?
....
found this abyssal warlock, what tier? 3?
http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Warlock,_Abyssal_%283.5e_Class%29
...
I might have written noble a few places, where I actually meant aristocrat :)
...
Lots of very interesting replies in this thread already, thanks for that :)
Tier 6//Tier 6 = Tier 6 (there is not enough in this category to make progress)
Divine Mind + Samurai or Warrior is T5 easily
Troacctid
2016-01-14, 03:55 AM
Divine Mind + Samurai or Warrior is T5 easily
That's because Divine Mind is naturally T5.
That's because Divine Mind is naturally T5.
According to the tier list thats only with minds eye updates. Though I do disagree with that placement
If a warmage got access to his own spell list as well as the sorceror / wizard spell list,
would that put him in Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 or Tier 4 ?
otherwise, I could try gestalting the warmage with the rainbow servant prc, I do not like that option though.
alternatively, I will consider gestalting warmage with urpriest.
....
I decided that I want to DM a red hand of doom adventure, like so many others have done,
in order to make that happen I am presenting 4 builds at level 5 to the players,
actually it is 2 players that each get 2 charecters each...
gestalt Cleric/Aristocrat - or possibly some ebberron dragon mark gestalt option for the cleric ?
gestalt Barbarian/Psion ? - will this work or is Barbarian/Sorceror better? Won't Barbarian/Druid overshadow the cleric/aristocrat ?
gestalt Rogue/Sorceror - should have nice synergy
gestalt warmage/urpriest ? - must be at same power level as the rest of the group
maybe
gestalt cleric/aristocrat
gestalt barbarian/druid avenger? OR a barbarian with access to druid spellcasting, eschew materials
and ability to deliver touch spell in melee but no wildshape or shapechanging?
(the power goes down a tad with druid avenger, since the druid avenger already sacrifices some druid power to gain barbarian stuff)
gestalt warmage/psion
gestalt rogue/sorceror
because of the cleric, I don't want to gestalt warmage with rainbow servant...
if the warmage wants that prc later, then thats fine,
but both players intend to play their charecters straight from 1 to 20.
Troacctid
2016-01-14, 04:37 AM
If a warmage got access to his own spell list as well as the sorceror / wizard spell list,
would that put him in Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 or Tier 4 ?
T1, and probably the strongest of all the T1s.
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-14, 06:44 AM
I don't see anything wrong with just keeping it a free for all, and having some heavy nudging during character creation. In addition, I have to wonder how well something similar would work as a tristalt, perhaps with a requirement of having exactly 9 tiers total, or perhaps 10...
I don't see anything wrong with just keeping it a free for all, and having some heavy nudging during character creation. In addition, I have to wonder how well something similar would work as a tristalt, perhaps with a requirement of having exactly 9 tiers total, or perhaps 10...
Could be quite interesting and it would add some needed 2e flavor :)
Hmmm..
Sorceror/Rogue/Barbarian could be fun
Slight of hand.... miss...
YOU DIDN'T SEE NOTHIN :)
Hammer-time!
Finishing him...
Puts the magic MOJO on him
:)
But yes it needs heavy DM approval to avoid cheese
It was mentioned earlier that gestalt cleric/ anything was too powerful. .. but I would say that some classes like the aristocrat, noble or the dragon mark heir is too weak to alter the power of a cleric
Not really. The Cleric is strong enough that very few classes actually add anything. Most full BAB classes are essentially worthless to the Cleric (on account of divine power). Frankly, Gestalting something like Paladin is probably an improvement because it gives people a reason to stick with Cleric.
I know that many see the tier system as flawed and
that the tiers are more a guideline.
But Tier 5 classes are still in trouble if competing with tier 1 classes.
I would personally place rogue in tier 4 because the class is limited in both versatility and power.
The problem is that the tiers measure power in a way that isn't very useful. JaronK thinks about power in terms of game breaking abilities, rather than in terms of level appropriate power. Also he massive overvalues versatility. So you end up with the Bard or Binder (who do a variety of things poorly) over the Rogue (who does one thing well). And you end up with the Rogue in the same tier as Barbarian (who does one thing poorly, barring Ubercharger builds).
If a warmage got access to his own spell list as well as the sorceror / wizard spell list,
would that put him in Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 or Tier 4 ?
That would be totally absurd. You'd need less than ten Sorcerer/Wizard spells per level to make spontaneous casting competitive with Wizards. All of them is insane. I might give the Warmage something like this:
1st - bless, magic weapon
2nd - bear's endurance et al, rope trick
3rd - create food and water, magic weapon, greater
4th - minor creation, stone shape
5th - major creation, fabricate
6th - bear's endurance, mass et al, hero's feast
7th - gate (travel only), control weather
The goal is to give him some non-combat and buffing options. Probably not enough to make him good without damage buffs, but some reasonable stuff. Nothing at 8th or 9th that really fits (teleportation circle maybe, but he's already got travel gate).
Cosi: I will need adding spells or something else to
the warmage so that he will be classified as tier 1 or 2 in terms of versatility (and power)... since he will be competing directly with a cleric.
The spell list you presented, will that make
a basic 20lvl warmage tier 2?
Maybe even a list of spell like abilities that will put a basic 20lvl warlock at a solid tier 2 or tier 1 ?
Maybe some sudden metamagic spell like abilities?
The Aristocrat addition to the cleric adds a few class skills and is only to be able to say that all
the charecters are gestalts
---
As a side note, I wonder if the red hand of doom would translate to a sci-fi setting ... then the warmage could get the ability to deliver touch spells with a rifle or a magnum or something more sci-fi :)
Monster army with laser rifles
Beheld
2016-01-14, 10:42 AM
The spell list you presented, will that make
a basic 20lvl warmage tier 2?
It continues to amaze me that people will insist on phrasing all possible balance discussion as about tiers, even going so far as to ask someone who explicitly repudiated tiers in the post they are quoting to phrase their answer in the form of tiers.
Psyren
2016-01-14, 10:58 AM
According to the tier list thats only with minds eye updates. Though I do disagree with that placement
Troacctid is correct, Divine Mind is T5. Mind's Eye gets it to T4, namely the Ectopic Ally ACF.
The spell list you presented, will that make
a basic 20lvl warmage tier 2?
Probably not. It gives the Warmage some real punch of out combat (getting travel gate early is going to be big), but it doesn't do anything to remedy the fact that the Warmage's basic combat strategy (being a blaster mage) sucks. You could try gestalting with Warlock and letting it apply EB damage to spells. Also, it's only core spells so Wizards (and especially Druids or Clerics) are going to be some amount of ahead because they get snake's swiftness and other non-core spells. Fixing that is a bigger issue.
Maybe even a list of spell like abilities that will put a basic 20lvl warlock at a solid tier 2 or tier 1 ?
Maybe some sudden metamagic spell like abilities?
Getting the Warlock to Wizard level is difficult. I'd probably just use the Tome of Fiends Conduit.
Gnaeus
2016-01-14, 12:43 PM
The problem is that the tiers measure power in a way that isn't very useful. JaronK thinks about power in terms of game breaking abilities, rather than in terms of level appropriate power. Also he massive overvalues versatility. So you end up with the Bard or Binder (who do a variety of things poorly) over the Rogue (who does one thing well). And you end up with the Rogue in the same tier as Barbarian (who does one thing poorly, barring Ubercharger builds).
.
I would agree and disagree. Part of the problem is that JaronK made the tiers years ago, and it's not always easy to tell what the criteria are. For example:
Tier 1: can always contribute to encounters, often better than a low tier specialized in that encounter. Can break the game in many ways, including campaign nukes.
Can radically redesign with 8 hours notice, so the same wizard will be totally different on a downtime day, or in town, or in underdark.
Ok, all of those are features of all T1s. But what makes them T1? The Nukes? The in-game versatility? The broken spells/combos? So, when trying to gestalt to balance a T1, does it need tools like polymorph/planar binding? Does it need to be able to level cities? Or does it "merely" need to be better at most or all tasks in and out of combat than a relevant T4-5 would be.
For one example, we had a long thread comparing a gestalt of all tier 4-5 classes vs a tier 1. The T4 guy is a superb combatant and skill monkey with a huge list of spells and abilities. But it can't level a city or summon outsiders as minions or do some other T1 tricks. It is either better or worse than a T1 depending on what T1 means to you.
Waazraath
2016-01-14, 01:25 PM
The problem is that the tiers measure power in a way that isn't very useful. JaronK thinks about power in terms of game breaking abilities, rather than in terms of level appropriate power. Also he massive overvalues versatility. So you end up with the Bard or Binder (who do a variety of things poorly) over the Rogue (who does one thing well). And you end up with the Rogue in the same tier as Barbarian (who does one thing poorly, barring Ubercharger builds).
Though I agree with you that the tier system of JaronK has flaws and is biased, I can't help thinking he understands the game a lot better than you. Binder and Bard "do a variety of things poorly"? Either you've never played (with) these classes, or they were used at a dismal optimization level. The optimization level of a bard is extremely high; one prestige class gives access to level 9 spells; a few simple spells, feats and/or items can give a massive boost in combat to all players (and animals, mounts and other cronies) with insprire courage; it can be a great melee combattant. For the binder goes the same, it can do a numerous things, inclusing being just as good an ubercharger as the barbarian (though a bit later in the game. Or be a summoner; have almost irrisitable SoD/SoS's; have unlimited healing between combats; etc. etc. At higher levels, he can do some of this stuff at the same time. At the same level of optimization, a rogue is nowhere more powerfull then either.
Beheld
2016-01-14, 01:41 PM
The optimization level of a bard is extremely high; one prestige class gives access to level 9 spells;
Yes, if you are a sublime chord, then you are much stronger than a Bard from level 8-20 ( but does nothing to improve Bards from 1-7, and Bard gives you basically zero of your power), I also hear that Shadowcasters are great because they can Ur-Priest.
Meanwhile, if you actually discuss the Beguiler and Dread Necro at all, people will throw a fit if you suggest Divine Oracle/Contemplative/Rainbow Servant, because getting domains on those casters with prestige classes is filthy cheating that negates all ability to measure tiers.
a few simple spells, feats and/or items can give a massive boost in combat to all players (and animals, mounts and other cronies) with insprire courage; it can be a great melee combattant.
"A few simple feats, items, and spells" from like 14 different sources in 3 different campaign settings can make a Bard contribute piles of energy damage to combat. A Core rogue can already contribute piles of energy damage to combat. Like, yeah if your DM let's you stack effects from 14 sources and then dragonfire, and then never sends enemies immune to your element, you can contribute by giving enough damage to kill things.
But that doesn't make you better than a Rogue, that makes you not quite as good as Rogue, who can already contribute by doing enough damage to kill things in one round, and he can do more types of damage, adjusted to the enemy.
[Binders] have almost irrisitable SoD/SoS's;
I would love to hear this.
Beheld:
Until someone makes a system that everyone agrees upon, the tier system is all we have to
estimate the power and versatility of a class across 20 levels.
Knowing every class completely and understanding
everything about every single class might be possible for some, but many people like me, are relying on
other people's understanding of the classes.
When relying on other people's understanding of
specific classes and other people's guides,
there really is no alternative (that I know of),
that will allow most people to compare classes.
If you can make a better system for this then
that would be very useful and
Informative
Especially if it would include all d20 classes.
Troacctid
2016-01-14, 02:09 PM
I think if you don't understand the tier system and why classes are placed where they are, you probably aren't the right person to develop a "fix" for them.
Beheld
2016-01-14, 02:45 PM
Beheld:
Until someone makes a system that everyone agrees upon, the tier system is all we have to
estimate the power and versatility of a class across 20 levels.
There are many better systems, the first qualifier for a good system is "does it attempt to create a single measurement for 20 levels?" and if the answer is yes, then you know that system is ****.
I mean, if you made a class that was a Warrior for levels 1-10, and then at level 11 gets to pick one spell of any level and cast it at will, and then another spell each level, that class cannot be measured against other classes "across 20 levels" as that is basically meaningless. If a class does just fine at some levels but then is garbage at other levels (like the Barbarian or Fighter) then you can't create a single measurement for that class.
Another qualifier is that the system has to define something as broken, and then not allow it. If your system seriously purports to measure the difference between a Wizard who walks around with 49 Glabrezu's as his personal minions who do whatever he wants at level 11 with any level 11 character at all, your system is garbage. If it claims "Wizard is X because Planar Binding" then it's just wrong. Either a Wizard completely breaks the game in half, or he doesn't cast Planar Binding, those are the only two options.
SGT measure's brokenness by calling any build that scores above a certain arbitrary percent as too strong, and below as too low. So it tells you what sort of things should be allowed, and what shouldn't (Playing a Wizard is fine, Casting Planar Binding isn't) which makes it infinity times better than the Tier system that tells you that casting Flesh to Stone is exactly the same as having 49 CR 13 creatures following you around doing whatever you say.
There are better systems, because there exist systems that provide any useful information at all, or even no information, which are both better than the outright lies that the Tier system conveys to people.
I think if you don't understand the tier system and why classes are placed where they are, you probably aren't the right person to develop a "fix" for them.
I think that I do know why they are placed where they are, which makes me more knowledgeable than you, since you think the Sublime Chord is allowed to count for Bard's Tier. But more importantly, it doesn't actually matter if I don't know the specific reason why each class is in it's place (I don't know or care what a Divine Mind even is), because the entire criticism of the Tier system is that the metric used for measuring classes is flawed on first principles.
Waazraath
2016-01-14, 02:46 PM
Yes, if you are a sublime chord, then you are much stronger than a Bard from level 8-20 ( but does nothing to improve Bards from 1-7, and Bard gives you basically zero of your power), I also hear that Shadowcasters are great because they can Ur-Priest.
Meanwhile, if you actually discuss the Beguiler and Dread Necro at all, people will throw a fit if you suggest Divine Oracle/Contemplative/Rainbow Servant, because getting domains on those casters with prestige classes is filthy cheating that negates all ability to measure tiers.
"A few simple feats, items, and spells" from like 14 different sources in 3 different campaign settings can make a Bard contribute piles of energy damage to combat. A Core rogue can already contribute piles of energy damage to combat. Like, yeah if your DM let's you stack effects from 14 sources and then dragonfire, and then never sends enemies immune to your element, you can contribute by giving enough damage to kill things.
But that doesn't make you better than a Rogue, that makes you not quite as good as Rogue, who can already contribute by doing enough damage to kill things in one round, and he can do more types of damage, adjusted to the enemy.
I would love to hear this.
Wait a second, weren't you that guy who posted something last week, some highly specific optimized rogue build that used items that he shouldn't have access to at that level and using a setting specific race, using that to claim that
1) this was the default power level for rogues and
2) that therefor rogues are very powerful?
Cause if you are, we can just as well now agree to disagree.
As for the bard, yes, at low levels their power level isn't too high, I'd always dip something like cleric 1 or warblade 1 if I'd play a bard. But let's be honest, rogue's aren't the powerhouses either at low levels. The whole tier system (again, with which I don't fully agree) mainly used level 5-12 (or something like it, could be 15). I don't know what you're talking about with the dread necro and the beguiler. Getting more a few extra spells known seems a smart move to me, and basic optimization (don't know if it works with a domain since those are divine spells, but nvm). As for inspire courage, you need nothing but core, spell compendium, item compendium, and book of exalted deeds. The rest is gravy. Dragonfire inspiratin / energy damage isn't needed, just have power attack (your melee allies will).
As for the binder, for example: go acererak, paralyzing touch; have an ally have an x4/crit weapon, and delay. Have a build that maxes cha (since you're focussing mainly on abilities); get the 2 vestiges that give -2 on saves (that's -4). Get ability focus (+2 on saves). Buy a veil of alure (+2 on saves). If you have the bonus feats to spare, get favored vestige focus (another +1). That's already effectively +9 on the DC, on top of the 10 + 1/2 lvl + cha. Use sudden ability focus, if you're want to throw a feat away on that. At level 20, get the vestige that increases the DC of abilities. Yes, this is a mid/late game trick.
NOTE: Edited with response to Waazraath's second post.
So, when trying to gestalt to balance a T1, does it need tools like polymorph/planar binding?
That answer is, almost by definition, no. After all, those spells are not balanced, so they cannot possibly be required to produce something balanced.
The optimization level of a bard is extremely high; one prestige class gives access to level 9 spells;
Also to someone with literally one level of Bard. And remember, the tiers don't count PrCs - otherwise Beguiler would be T1 off Rainbow Servant.
a few simple spells, feats and/or items can give a massive boost in combat to all players (and animals, mounts and other cronies) with insprire courage; it can be a great melee combattant.
Translation: If you allow all the splats, it's almost as good as the Core Wizard.
Or be a summoner;
summon monster sucks. Also, it's stuck with the same deal as the Alienist PrC people condemn as an awful trade for summoners.
Wait a second, weren't you that guy who posted something last week, some highly specific optimized rogue build that used items that he shouldn't have access to at that level and using a setting specific race, using that to claim that
1) this was the default power level for rogues and
2) that therefor rogues are very powerful?
Were you the guy who claimed that core items were released too late in the edition to be a reasonable assumption in a Rogue build?
As for inspire courage, you need nothing but core, spell compendium, item compendium, and book of exalted deeds. The rest is gravy. Dragonfire inspiratin / energy damage isn't needed, just have power attack (your melee allies will).
If you're relying on Power Attack, you should probably count the books PA stackers use (for example, Complete Champion for Pounce).
Also, the idea that "you just need these three supplements" is not needing supplements is deeply absurd.
*snip - Binder*
Because clearly, the ability to set up another ally for one kill is good at all when compared to the Rogue or the Wizard.
ComaVision
2016-01-14, 03:02 PM
That answer is, almost by definition, no. After all, those spells are not balanced, so they cannot possibly be required to produce something balanced.
Um. Balance is relative. Rogue isn't balanced to wizard but wizard is more-or-less balanced to cleric. Nothing is inherently unbalanced.
Waazraath
2016-01-14, 03:11 PM
Cosi: I'm not talking about tiers, I'm talking about the optimization ceiling. And sublime chord is a bard prestige class. Theoreticly others can enter, but that's hardly woth the effort, given the other prereqs.
And who care's about the wizard? Were we talking about that? I thought this was about rogues, and bards, and binders, and maybe barbarians. Wizards have a lot of overpowered nonsense options, as is commonly known, and an optimized wizard breaks a game in half. That's not a good measuring stick for anything (though somehow you see this as a 'point of balance', I know).
As for summon monster that would suck: having acces to over 100+ utility spells and pick exactly the critter you need is extremely powerful. If you dont' see that, that says all there is to say about your comprehension of the game. And when you can do so with only 1 supernatural ability, next to a dozen other stuff, that's great.
Were you the guy who claimed that core items were released too late in the edition to be a reasonable assumption in a Rogue build? No, I wasn't, I guess you should go and read again.
Also, the idea that "you just need these three supplements" is not needing supplements is deeply absurd. Again, read again. Someone claimd you needed 13 splatbooks. I replied to you can optimize this greatly with only 3.
Because clearly, the ability to set up another ally for one kill is good at all when compared to the Rogue or the Wizard. Again, which I didn't claim. Somebody gave an example, I provided it.
How about adressing stuff I said, and respoinding to my arguments? If you don't care to, please do not bother to reply at all.
Troacctid
2016-01-14, 03:22 PM
I think if you don't understand the tier system and why classes are placed where they are, you probably aren't the right person to develop a "fix" for them.
I think that I do know why they are placed where they are, which makes me more knowledgeable than you, since you think the Sublime Chord is allowed to count for Bard's Tier. But more importantly, it doesn't actually matter if I don't know the specific reason why each class is in it's place (I don't know or care what a Divine Mind even is), because the entire criticism of the Tier system is that the metric used for measuring classes is flawed on first principles.
I was talking about tsj and his gestalt fix, which, for the record, I don't like. Also, I'm pretty sure I'm on the record as saying Sublime Chord should be tiered separately from straight Bard; I think you have me confused with another poster.
And sublime chord is a bard prestige class. Theoreticly others can enter, but that's hardly woth the effort, given the other prereqs.
It requires casting (which Beguilers, Dread Necromancers, Wizards, Sorcerers, Warmages, and I think Duskblades can fulfill), skills, and any bardic music at all. What "other prereqs"?
(though somehow you see this as a 'point of balance', I know).
I thought we weren't supposed to carry baggage over to new threads. I count twice you've done that in this thread.
As for summon monster that would suck: having acces to over 100+ utility spells and pick exactly the critter you need is extremely powerful. If you dont' see that, that says all there is to say about your comprehension of the game. And when you can do so with only 1 supernatural ability, next to a dozen other stuff, that's great.
As far as utility, it's about as good as UMD. Decent, not anything to write home about.
As far as combat power, it's meaningless (especially given that you only get one summon).
Again, read again. Someone claimd you needed 13 splatbooks. I replied to you can optimize this greatly with only 3.
Have you heard of hyperbole?
Again, which I didn't claim. Somebody gave an example, I provided it.
You were asked to provide an example of an "irresistible save or die". Allowing another party member to spend their action to kill something is not an "irresistible save or die". Given that melee characters should be one shotting enemies at that point, it isn't anything at all.
Also, if you aren't going to defend the ability being better than a Rogue, why bring it up in the context of Binders being better than Rogues?
Beheld
2016-01-14, 03:31 PM
Wait a second, weren't you that guy who posted something last week, some highly specific optimized rogue build that used items that he shouldn't have access to at that level and using a setting specific race, using that to claim that
1) this was the default power level for rogues and
2) that therefor rogues are very powerful?
No, I'm the guy who described the 3 core feats that a Rogue can just take, and an item that he can absolutely afford easily to show how a Rogue in a game balanced to a Wizard can contribute, and that if you are playing in a game balanced to Wizards, then getting additional attacks is normal for the Rogue.
As for the bard, yes, at low levels their power level isn't too high, I'd always dip something like cleric 1 or warblade 1 if I'd play a bard. But let's be honest, rogue's aren't the powerhouses either at low levels.
Actually, they kind of are. 8d6 damage per round at level 3 is pretty damn powerhousing, and at low levels it's a lot easier to get your enemies flat-footed in your range, since the mobility and detection games haven't kicked in.
The whole tier system (again, with which I don't fully agree) mainly used level 5-12 (or something like it, could be 15).
Except that is 100% made up and no where in the Tier system, and half the people you say that to will say that's not true.
I don't know what you're talking about with the dread necro and the beguiler. Getting more a few extra spells known seems a smart move to me, and basic optimization (don't know if it works with a domain since those are divine spells, but nvm).
And yet, the Tier system is based on the absurd idea that Beguilers and Dread Necros can't do that, because PrCing is dirty cheating.
As for inspire courage, you need nothing but core, spell compendium, item compendium, and book of exalted deeds. The rest is gravy. Dragonfire inspiratin / energy damage isn't needed, just have power attack (your melee allies will).
Or you know, they might not. But yeah, if all you are adding is +7 to ab and damage as a morale bonus, then you are not anywhere in even the same ballpark as a Rogue.
As for the binder, for example: go acererak, paralyzing touch; have an ally have an x4/crit weapon, and delay. Have a build that maxes cha (since you're focussing mainly on abilities); get the 2 vestiges that give -2 on saves (that's -4). Get ability focus (+2 on saves). Buy a veil of alure (+2 on saves). If you have the bonus feats to spare, get favored vestige focus (another +1). That's already effectively +9 on the DC, on top of the 10 + 1/2 lvl + cha. Use sudden ability focus, if you're want to throw a feat away on that. At level 20, get the vestige that increases the DC of abilities. Yes, this is a mid/late game trick.
So you have a Fort save that triggers on a touch attack, for paralysis, you have to have at least 3 vestiges for this, so that's level 14, or you can have a lower bonus and use it when Acereak first goes online at level 7 (but let's make it 8 for two vestiges). So you have a DC of what 26 at level 8 or DC 35 at level 14.
Let's see how that fairs against monsters of those CRs:
Level 8:
Gynosphinx +7 Loses.
Nine Headed Hydra +11 Loses
6 Headed Pyro or Cryo Hydra +10 loses
OgreMage gets paralyzed, then either dies, or is immune to Coup de Grace, depending on how DM rules non-lethal damage interacts with Coup De Grace, uses SLAs while you beat on it. But let's just say loses.
Dark Naga Fails,
Lammasu, +10, Fails
Gorgon, Fails
Efferti, Fails
Noble Djinni, Fails
Erinyes, +11 probably Fails
Destrachan, Fails
Behir, +11 Probably fails
Athach, Fails
Stone Giant, +13, 35% chance of passing.
Xorn, +13, 35% chance of passing
Dire Tiger, +13
ArrowHawk, +12
Gargantuan Spider +12, 30% chance.
Grey Render, +14, 40% chance.
Tyrannosaurus, +16, 50%
Bodak, Immune.
Morg, Immune.
All skeletons, Immune.
All Zombies, Immune.
4 Dragons, Immune.
Treant Immune.
Hellwasp Swarm, Immune.
Shield Guardian, Immune.
Greater Shadow, Immune.
So you devote yourself 100% to a single thing, it requires two peoples actions, it requires being in melee range with the monster, and 1/3 the monsters are immune, and all the rest are either kite monsters, melee bruisers, or ambush monsters, none of whom do you want to be adjacent to, since it means they used their abilities already, or you had to let them beat on you...
I'm really not impressed, I doubt I'll be even remotely impressed at level 14.
Waazraath
2016-01-14, 03:35 PM
It requires casting (which Beguilers, Dread Necromancers, Wizards, Sorcerers, Warmages, and I think Duskblades can fulfill), skills, and any bardic music at all. What "other prereqs"?
Look at the skills. GL with most of those classes.
I thought we weren't supposed to carry baggage over to new threads. I count twice you've done that in this thread. Fair enough. I refered to earlier threads as I considered relevant for this one. Of course, I could have asked you why you come up with the wizard, because for me that's hardly relevant since a wizard isn't balanced, but that would have been a bit silly, since we both know we discussed exactly that last week. But if you want to make a point of it, fine, I won't refer to it again.
As far as utility, it's about as good as UMD. Decent, not anything to write home about. [
As far as combat power, it's meaningless (especially given that you only get one summon). No, of course it's much more powerful then UMD. UMD requires you need the item, and to pay for it. The SM ability of the binder is 'pick at will'. In combat, it can be good, depending on the situation.
Beheld
2016-01-14, 03:41 PM
Cosi: I'm not talking about tiers, I'm talking about the optimization ceiling. And sublime chord is a bard prestige class.
Dude, you defended the Bard as being higher tier than the rogue because of Sublime Chord exists. That's silly. If someone criticizes the Tier system for poorly ranking bards, you can't say "well they can be Sublime Chords" unless you think that is relevant to their ranking.
Have you heard of hyperbole?
Actually I wasn't even using hyperbole. I know of 13 sources that add to Bards Singing for damage. If he's only using 3, then he's only doing +3-9 ab/damage per attack, so I don't even care.
I was talking about tsj and his gestalt fix, which, for the record, I don't like. Also, I'm pretty sure I'm on the record as saying Sublime Chord should be tiered separately from straight Bard; I think you have me confused with another poster.
Sorry. :redface:
Waazraath
2016-01-14, 03:42 PM
Except that is 100% made up and no where in the Tier system, and half the people you say that to will say that's not true.
Funny, I thought I discussed this in one of the original threads on the tier system with the creator of the tier system.... but maybe I'm mistaken. Oh no, wait: I'm not! http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293.msg365464#msg365464
Relevant quote JaronK: "generally speaking I consider 6-15 to be the most important levels to look at (1-5 is most played but the balance differences are also less noticeable in general, while 16+ seems very rarely played). The lower levels of that (6-10) are weighted highest... "
Actually I wasn't even using hyperbole. I know of 13 sources that add to Bards Singing for damage. If he's only using 3, then he's only doing +3-9 ab/damage per attack, so I don't even care. Eh... +4 (bard), +1 (item), +1 (spell), x2 (words of creation), = +12 attack / +12 damage, with power attack something like +4 attack +20 damage, on each attack, with power attack, much more, and that's for the entire party. Most people would care.
Dude, you defended the Bard as being higher tier than the rogue because of Sublime Chord exists. That's silly. If someone criticizes the Tier system for poorly ranking bards, you can't say "well they can be Sublime Chords" unless you think that is relevant to their ranking.
No, I'm not. I claim the bard is in general more powerful then a rogue, and give a few examples (options bards have) why. I could have given others. But to be honest, I'm a bit done with this, cause examples will either be explained wrong, or be the aim of some theorycrafting why it doesn't work.
I think I've made my point, everybody can make of it what he or she wants.
Beheld
2016-01-14, 03:46 PM
Look at the skills. GL with most of those classes.
Since one level of Bard gets you all the skills as class skills, almost any caster is going to have Spellcraft, Profession, and Knowledge Arcana as class skills, and Listen and Perform aren't that big a deal, a Sorcerer or Dread Necro with int 12 and human aptitude could qualify at the same level if they wanted.
Funny, I thought I discussed this in one of the original threads on the tier system with the creator of the tier system.... but maybe I'm mistaken. Oh no, wait: I'm not! http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293.msg365464#msg365464
Relevant quote JaronK: "generally speaking I consider 6-15 to be the most important levels to look at (1-5 is most played but the balance differences are also less noticeable in general, while 16+ seems very rarely played). The lower levels of that (6-10) are weighted highest... "
Let me add the rest of the relevant quote you omitted: "Note that "weighted a bit less" isn't the same as not weighted..."
If the tier system itself doesn't claim it only applies to some levels, and if the person who made it claims it applies at levels 1-5 (he does), and if Bards still suck at every level, and only stop sucking when they take Sublime Chord (they do). Then you are wrong.
Eh... +4 (bard), +1 (item), +1 (spell), x2 (words of creation), = +12 attack / +12 damage, with power attack something like +4 attack +20 damage, on each attack, with power attack, much more, and that's for the entire party. Most people would care.
Look man, I don't care about +12 damage at level 20. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you could get at least +9 by level 10. I mean, apparently you can't, so again, +9 damage per attack doesn't even matter at level 10, why would +12 matter at level 20?
dascarletm
2016-01-14, 04:01 PM
Tiers are not additive.
X is a Tier equal to or less than the Tier on the left side
Tier 1//X = Tier 1
Tier 2//X = Tier 2 (or possibly low Tier 1 if it is 2 high Tier 2s)
Tier 3//X = Tier 3
Tier 4//X = Tier 3-4
Tier 5//X = Tier 4-5
Tier 6//Tier 6 = Tier 6 (there is not enough in this category to make progress)
Well since the combo has to equal 6,
Tier 1/5 = Tier 1
Tier 2/4 = Tier 2, possibly 1
Tier 3/3 = Tier 3, or maybe 2... maybe.
Tier 4/2 = Tier 2, possibly 1
Tier 5/1 = Tier 1
The worst we can get is a tier 3. The worst. (Assuming no one builds to bring themselves down a tier.)
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-14, 04:12 PM
Well since the combo has to equal 6,
Tier 1/5 = Tier 1
Tier 2/4 = Tier 2, possibly 1
Tier 3/3 = Tier 3, or maybe 2... maybe.
Tier 4/2 = Tier 2, possibly 1
Tier 5/1 = Tier 1
The worst we can get is a tier 3. The worst. (Assuming no one builds to bring themselves down a tier.)
Exactly. That's what you want in this system, and it means that this would, in fact, actually work. And any further discussion on the merits of tiers in and of themselves should ideally be continued in a different thread, by the way.
johnbragg
2016-01-14, 04:19 PM
Exactly. That's what you want in this system, and it means that this would, in fact, actually work. And any further discussion on the merits of tiers in and of themselves should ideally be continued in a different thread, by the way.
Should we try to advise OP, who isn't super-familiar with the Tier system, about the wisdom of AIMING at Tier 1-3 as a balance point?
(I advise against--Tier 1 is generally considered too powerful, in that experienced players have to rein themselves in to not break the game/campaign. Tier 3s are not as outclassed as Tier 4-5s by Tier 1s, but the gap is usually visible.)
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-14, 04:25 PM
I mean, feel free. But it seemed like it was venturing quite a bit off the rails there, hence a certain need to reel it in. I, personally, do think that it's perfectly fine in a high fantasy setting; in a lower power/fantasy, you would of course want a higher number; for instance, 8.
Look at the skills. GL with most of those classes.
Because obviously Able Learner doesn't exist.
But if you want to make a point of it, fine, I won't refer to it again.
If you want to stop forcing me to repeat the exact same arguments about Rogues being good, feel free. If you want to be snippy about something that has an open thread, don't
No, of course it's much more powerful then UMD. UMD requires you need the item, and to pay for it. The SM ability of the binder is 'pick at will'. In combat, it can be good, depending on the situation.
You'll notice I described it as "about as good as UMD" not "exactly the same as UMD". Having summon monster at will will provide you with more uses of spells it grants (for example, the Dretch's stinking cloud), but no uses of spells it doesn't grant (for example, wraithstrike) or spells that cost XP (for example, simulacrum). Also, it doesn't have the cheese potential with Staves or other items that UMD does.
I will check out SGT.
Regarding aiming at tier 1.
I suppose it depends on what game the DM and players want.
If you play a wizard and uses broken spells then
the game is in trouble no matter how you tried to balance things
If you as a DM ban the most broken spells, then everyone can be "tier 1" builds without any issues (assuming any "tier 1 builds" are casters)
If the charecter creation process can
ensure that builds normally won't go under "tier 3" when aiming at tier 1 or 2 using 6 as target sum,
then mission accomplished.
I think if you don't understand the tier system and why classes are placed where they are, you probably aren't the right person to develop a "fix" for them.
You are most likely right. This is why I am lucky to be able to get help developing this "fix" or "houserule" from more experienced players with better system mastery such as yourself.
It is still possible for someone like me to get an ideer about the solution to a problem even if
I do not master everything about the problem.
And indeed even produce something useful
when given help from more experienced players.
As well as learning a lot in the process.
Look man, I don't care about +12 damage at level 20. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you could get at least +9 by level 10. I mean, apparently you can't, so again, +9 damage per attack doesn't even matter at level 10, why would +12 matter at level 20?
You are discounting the bonus to accuracy, which I believe should only matter for the last attack. Might help with the 3rd iterative slightly
Troacctid is correct, Divine Mind is T5. Mind's Eye gets it to T4, namely the Ectopic Ally ACF.
My source says other wise
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5052.0
Florian
2016-01-15, 04:36 AM
Gestating does not fix the issue, it actually makes it even worse.
Consider this:
- The highter-tier component will still dictate the power ceiling
- The lower-tier component will only add the "at will" stuff to it.
- SAD combos will have better synergies and bump up the higher tier even more.
- MAD combos will hit the PB value even harder but will not affect the higher tier class.
- High synergy combos will make low or no synergy combos next to unplayable then.
So the whole exercise doesn´t change the problematic "Power Ceiling" at all, it only raises the way less problematic "Power Bottom" on the right combinations, is all.
When it comes gestating fixing the tier system- It only significantly helps to raise things towards tier 3. Rogue/shadow caster might be on par with beguiler. Barbarian/adept compares well with warblade or crusader.
It helps with boosting the tier 2s to better compete with tier 1s, but the effect is not nearly as close as the lower tiers. The warmage adding an extra 2nd, 4th and 7th level spell from any school helps. The warmage spell list may suck, but it has a few gems like shatter, stinking cloud, and ice storm. These can push the sorcerer from being arguably worse than the beguiler to the point where there is a significant less weight to the argument.
When it comes to the tier 3s competing with the tier 1s your only options are basically beguiler and dread necromancer. There might be an argument for dread necromancer and bard if there is a way for bardic music to affect undead, and you want 4e minions in 3e.
Beheld
2016-01-15, 06:56 AM
You are discounting the bonus to accuracy, which I believe should only matter for the last attack. Might help with the 3rd iterative slightly.
I'm not discounting the accuracy bonus at all, it's level 20. If your entire character amounts to a +12 bonus to attack and damage, I have to ask why we are even pretending you are a real character, even just assuming Rogue 19/X 1, the Rogue could be throwing out 15d6+20 (70ish) bonus damage on every attack, it just seems beyond silly to consider yourself a contributor at that level.
It's level 20, aside from that one monster that can be killed by level 13s with flight, every one of those monsters is a high level spellcaster.
On the subject of irresistable save or dies:
DC 35 at level 14 Touch range paralyze:
CR 14:
Astral Deva:
Well first you and your ally walk through the Blade Barrier. Then it gets a full attack on your ally at least (or perhaps you). Then you make a touch attack, it succeeds on a 15 on the save, and you have to make a save or go blind. Then your ally, presuming they are still alive and unstunned from a full attack and two rounds of blade barrier, coup de graces, and then they make a save against being blind. If your try to avoid letting the Deva full attack your ally, then he just planeshifts away, makes the save in a couple rounds, planeshifts back, and attempts to hunt you down, now knowing your strategy.
Trumpet Archon:
First you make a save against paralysis, then your ally walks through the blade barrier as before, but on the Trumpet Archon's turn, it just casts either Holy Word or Dictum at CL 15, making your ally at least slowed and deafened, or blinded and deafened, in either case, he can't coup de grace next round when you walk through the blade barrier and force a save to paralyze. Also chances are decent you might also be blinded or slowed. THen after your ally begins the process of starting the coup de grace (because slowed or blinded, in either case, requiring two rounds) the Trumpet Archon Teleports away, makes the save, and then prepares a set of spells from the Cleric list specifically to destroy you, then Greater Teleports back, and begins hunting you down, including using Freedom of Movement. And all this is assuming it didn't have Freedom of Movement the first time.
Werewolf Lord:
He probably just loses, but that's his fault for being a CR 5 with fighter levels.
Nalfeshnee:
75% chance you are also facing at least one (possibly two) Glabrezu(s) who could eat you alive while the Nalfeshnee Teleports away, or for that matter, Power Word Stuns you or your coup de grace ally before you can even set up the combo, or for that matter, does everything a Glabrezu can already do to mess up your combo (Reverse Gravity, confusion, chaos hammer, unholy blight, beat you in melee while mirror imaged, and let the Nalfeshnee attack from a distance).
But let's just say, for the sake of argument, that the Glabrezu summon fails: Still, we are talking about a Demon that Greater Dispels, FeebleMinds, and Slows, from range, and has no reason to stand adjacent to whatever ally you have moving adjacent to it on their turns.
And then, if you ever do get your touch attack off, first he makes the on 14 or higher, and second, since your ally wasn't in position, he just teleports away to come back in 2-4 rounds when he is no longer paralyzed.
Mature Adult Black Dragon, Adult Blue Dragon, Adult Copper Dragon, Young Adult Gold Dragon, Nightwing: All immune.
So it looks like one sure win, a whole bunch of loses, and a couple "situational" wins where you might win or not, depending on your goal, and in either case you now have a powerful good outsider who knows your strategy hunting you down. (The Trumpet Archon just prepares FoM for the rest of forever, and instantly becomes like the Dragons or Undead, totally immune to your trick).
I'm not discounting the accuracy bonus at all, it's level 20. If your entire character amounts to a +12 bonus to attack and damage, I have to ask why we are even pretending you are a real character, even just assuming Rogue 19/X 1, the Rogue could be throwing out 15d6+20 (70ish) bonus damage on every attack, it just seems beyond silly to consider yourself a contributor at that level.
It's level 20, aside from that one monster that can be killed by level 13s with flight, every one of those monsters is a high level spellcaster.
).
Its a bonus thats a non action, where you can still dominate person, scry, bardic knowledge or other things to justify your character.
Beheld
2016-01-15, 02:44 PM
Its a bonus thats a non action, where you can still dominate person, scry, bardic knowledge or other things to justify your character.
It's a bonus that's a standard action to start (+however much time it costs to cast the spells needed to boost it), alerts enemies to your presence if you keep it up all the time, and allows you to, while giving it to people, act like a level 12-14 Beguiler when you are a level 20 character. I'm unimpressed.
summon monster sucks. Also, it's stuck with the same deal as the Alienist PrC people condemn as an awful trade for summoners.
.
[QUOTE=Cosi;20299180
As far as utility, it's about as good as UMD. Decent, not anything to write home about.
As far as combat power, it's meaningless (especially given that you only get one summon).
[/QUOTE]
You get it every 4 or 5 rounds, so you can have 5 storm elementals for 180d6 damage in an area and another 60d4.
Beheld
2016-01-15, 02:53 PM
You get it every 4 or 5 rounds, so you can have 5 storm elementals for 180d6 damage in an area and another 60d4.
Summon monsters duration is pretty short. I mean, I guess you are talking about a level 20 build? But even then it's every 5 and you can only have 4. As compared to level 10, when you basically choose that instead of being a level 10 character, you will be two CR 5 monsters. Or basically, a level 7 character.
But more specifically I suspect he was talking about the Summon Monster spells, not the Binder's ability to use them.
Summon monsters duration is pretty short. I mean, I guess you are talking about a level 20 build? But even then it's every 5 and you can only have 4. As compared to level 10, when you basically choose that instead of being a level 10 character, you will be two CR 5 monsters. Or basically, a level 7 character.
But more specifically I suspect he was talking about the Summon Monster spells, not the Binder's ability to use them.
From the context of what he was responding to it looked like he was refering to the binder
Troacctid
2016-01-15, 03:23 PM
Summon monsters duration is pretty short. I mean, I guess you are talking about a level 20 build? But even then it's every 5 and you can only have 4. As compared to level 10, when you basically choose that instead of being a level 10 character, you will be two CR 5 monsters. Or basically, a level 7 character.
But more specifically I suspect he was talking about the Summon Monster spells, not the Binder's ability to use them.
Zceryll's ability pulls from the Summon Monster lists, but it doesn't duplicate Summon Monster. It has no listed duration. By RAW, the summons remain indefinitely.
Beheld
2016-01-15, 03:30 PM
From the context of what he was responding to it looked like he was refering to the binder
I'm not saying it wasn't a mistake to respond to the spells, but it seemed to me that's what he was talking about. I could be wrong.
Zceryll's ability pulls from the Summon Monster lists, but it doesn't duplicate Summon Monster. It has no listed duration. By RAW, the summons remain indefinitely.
Well I mean, if you want to balance to Planar Binding/Shadow Over the Sun, you can balance to Planar Binding/Shadow Over the Sun, but I don't know why you would.
I suppose that's the problems you face when your entire class is garbage without a specific poorly written online article churned out in 20 minutes without editing. At least the Factotum has a friend though.
I suppose that's the problems you face when your entire class is garbage without a specific poorly written online article churned out in 20 minutes without editing. At least the Factotum has a friend though.
I really want the binder to be a good class, but it has a lot of problems. I think its the best class from tome of magic, but I'm not sure its good at anything compared to another class except for being a summoner at level 10. Its advantage should be in its versatility, but I don't think the versatility is there. You have a few, I was going to say good, but I have to go with meh options for your stats, and the other options suck even more because you don't have the stats for them.
Basically
Amon Bad warrior with crappy fire breath
1st Aym On Fire
1st Leraje Ranger with worse skills, no AC
1st Naberius Expert
1st Ronove Monk with out flurry
2nd Dahlver-Nar Interesting
2nd Haagenti Shield proficiency
2nd Malphas Ninja with Bird's eye view. Is nice
2nd Savnok Infinite supply of plate mail that you then equip your party with and sell. I mean a soulknife that traded his knife for armor
3rd Andromalius Rogue -skills
3rd Focalor Sad electric mermaid
3rd Karsus detect magic
3rd Paimon Swashbuckler
4th Agares A bad truenamer/summoner
4th Andras Spell less paladin
4th Buer Bad healer
4th Eurynome soulknife with full BAB
4th Tenebrous The Darkness!! Some how one of the better options
5th Acererak Speak with dead and a save or lose touch
5th Balam Icy glare and monk level defensive abilities
5th Dantalion No
5th Geryon No
5th Otiax knock, knock
6th Chupoclops Pounce and a few nice abilities
6th Haures Bard minus with mind blank
6th Ipos cat scratch fever
6th Shax extra 7 points a damage a round
6th Zagan- Why did it have to be snakes? Is at least fun
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-16, 11:30 AM
Well, using a tristalt system geared off of a total of 9, you can have-
1/2/6
1/3/5
1/4/4
2/2/5
2/3/4
3/3/3
Combinations, which seems reasonable to me. You can have a Cleric/Sorcerer/Aristocrat, and a Bard/Beguiler/Factotum in one party, and I don't think number 2 would feel too overshadowed.
Beheld
2016-01-16, 11:39 AM
The Binder is the best class in Tome of Magic... which might literally be the most meaningless complement it is possible to give a class.
Tome of Magic was clearly a way to test different mechanics to see what people liked, but because it was made by WotC, they did a terrible job by making them all so weak that no one would play them for good mechanics at all, and instead they only play them fluff or the desperate need to optimize a bad character.
The concept of "You prepare ability lists, and you get a few different abilities that are thematically tied together" is a great idea. You could use some global system to recover abilities that set up a division: 1) Passive always on defense or some sort of utility effect, 2) At will standard action, 3) Once and then you need to spend a minute to recharge all 3 abilities, 4) X per day."
Then you could "prepare" ability sets like "Fire" which gives you 1) Some Fire Resistance that scales with level, 2) A fire blast that does crappy damage, like a Warlock or something, 3) Fireball every fight, 4) Some kind of once per day Firewall as an immediate action, or a Firewall that's a standard to activate but can be redirected once per round as a free action, or whatever.
And then you just do that for a bunch of abilities sets and you end up with a class that always has some level appropriate defenses, a variety of at will attacks at about Reserve Feat strength, some once per fight abilities, and some powerful daily abilities, but unlike every other class in D&D, that class prepares them as entire ability sets. That could have been a great class.
But, because WotC never wants to make anything even 1/4th as strong as Wizards or Clerics or Druids oh my, because they want everything to suck, instead you get the Binder:
1) All of the Binder's abilities are too weak to do anything level appropriate, because you can't have nice things. I mean, look at the only non-Summon monster trick put forth in this thread, it basically amounts to casting Ghoul Touch, but worse, once every five rounds, and it's literally impossible for anyone less than Binder level 7, and even that requires a feat to be able to do it then. Ghoul Touch is a touch attack with a Fort save against paralysis that doesn't offer a new save each round, and sickens others, and it's a second level spell. Yeah, there are some tricks you can do because it's a supernatural ability you can boost the save DC with some things that don't work on ghoul Touch (Although honest, you can probably boost Ghoul Touch higher), and you bypass SR because it's supernatural. So it's not worse than Ghoul Touch in every way, but "not worse than a 2nd level spell in every way" is a really low bar to clear.
2) Then on top of that, they give you basically no prepared slots. Like, that "Fire" Ability I described earlier would be mega weak if it was the only thing a Sorcererlike class could prepare for seven levels, and yet, it's actually more powerful than most of the vestiges! But if you were making a "Sorcerer" who used this mechanic, you would probably give them at least two slots at level 1 to prepare two different thematic abilities, and then scale up from there to like 5 at level 10. The Binder never even sees five at all. He gets his second at level 8 and his third after the campaign is over at level 14.
It just kills me to look at how WotC refused to make decent classes that aren't spellcasters, while continuing to make good spellcasters (Beguiler/Dread Necro).
@Zceryll/summon monster: I'll admit to having misread the ability. You do appear to be able to summon more than one critter at a time. That said, I'm not convinced the utility is actually super awesome. You get a bunch of (effectively) at-will SLAs, but from a fairly limited list and you can't use the really good ones (because they cost XP). That's good, but I'm not convinced it's better than a smaller number of uses of any spell in the game.
@Binders: I think the most damning criticism of the Binder's power is that they get a feat that gives +2 levels to their "casting" and aren't horribly broken.
Jormengand
2016-01-16, 12:01 PM
Utterances (with the exception of the gate one) aren't actually good. You could just get all of them at will and I wouldn't even care.
Some of them are quite nice, like Ether Reforged, Anger the Sleeping Earth (Although no-one takes it because it's competing with Conjunctive Gate), Reversed Energy Negation (Especially empowered, extended and mortalbaned), Reversed Mystic Rampart, and a fair few others.
Some of them are quite nice, like Ether Reforged, Anger the Sleeping Earth (Although no-one takes it because it's competing with Conjunctive Gate), Reversed Energy Negation (Especially empowered, extended and mortalbaned), Reversed Mystic Rampart, and a fair few others.
You should probably provide descriptions of those. Because the chance that anyone knows what specific utterances do off the top of their head is close to zero. Fortunately, I have access to the book, so here goes:
ether reforged: At 18th level, you can use ethereal jaunt (a 7th level spell) and to give people a small bonus to AC against incorporeal enemies. So good.
anger the sleeping earth: It's an 8th level spell with no repeat value. It's not even offensively great. How many Clerics do you see jumping to prepare this at 15th level? And the Truenamer gets it at 20th, when real classes have had wish, gate, shapechange, time stop, and wail of the banshee for three levels already.
energy negation (Reversed): It's almost okay. You get a small DoT. It's about as good as a Warlock hitting someone every round. Okay, on review I take that back, it's bad.
mystic rampart (Reversed): At 18th level, you get to give one target -5 to saves. How is that something people care about when they have 9th level spells?
Jormengand
2016-01-16, 12:21 PM
ether reforged: At 18th level, you can use ethereal jaunt (a 7th level spell) and to give people a small bonus to AC against incorporeal enemies. So good.
Right, so what you do is you use the duration instantaneous on the normal version so you can attack ethereal enemies forever, then the first thing you do each combat is use the duration instantaneous on the reversed version to shunt enemies to the ethereal forever, and then you run around beating things up because they can't hit you. Also make sure the fighter has a version of the normal.
anger the sleeping earth: It's an 8th level spell with no repeat value. It's not even offensively great. How many Clerics do you see jumping to prepare this at 15th level? And the Truenamer gets it at 20th, when real classes have had wish, gate, shapechange, time stop, and wail of the banshee for three levels already.
Oh, it's not amazing in comparison to what everyone else can do, but it's a nice tool to have at will.
energy negation (Reversed): It's almost okay. You get a small DoT. It's about as good as a Warlock hitting someone every round. Okay, on review I take that back, it's bad.
Right, so what you do here is you throw mortalbane, empowered and extended on it, so you're now doing 4d6*1.5 damage/round for 10 rounds, meaning that you're spending one action to do 210 damage.
mystic rampart (Reversed): At 18th level, you get to give one target -5 to saves. How is that something people care about when they have 9th level spells?
Because quite a lot of spells allow saves, and you can utter as a swift action before - you're a cleric//truenamer, right, that was what they said? Why you're not a wizard for the dual INT dependency I don't know, but - if something needs to be imploded, you might decide to chuck your swift action on making that 25% more likely to happen - and that's absolute probability, not relative probability.
Right, so what you do is you use the duration instantaneous on the normal version so you can attack ethereal enemies forever, then the first thing you do each combat is use the duration instantaneous on the reversed version to shunt enemies to the ethereal forever, and then you run around beating things up because they can't hit you. Also make sure the fighter has a version of the normal.
Unless, you know, you read the part where the spell works "as ethereal jaunt", a spell which has duration of 1 round/level. Also, you're 18th level at this point, you could have spells that kill people, or even actually disable them, rather than just maybe stopping them from attacking you.
Right, so what you do here is you throw mortalbane, empowered and extended on it, so you're now doing 4d6*1.5 damage/round for 10 rounds, meaning that you're spending one action to do 210 damage.
Did you miss the part where that's over ten rounds? You're doing 21 damage a round. That's first level damage. Like the Barbarian's 2d6 +12 (average 19) or the Rogue's 6d6 (average 21).
Because quite a lot of spells allow saves, and you can utter as a swift action before - you're a cleric//truenamer, right, that was what they said? Why you're not a wizard for the dual INT dependency I don't know, but - if something needs to be imploded, you might decide to chuck your swift action on making that 25% more likely to happen - and that's absolute probability, not relative probability.
Or you could use your swift action to cast again. Which probably gives you a better chance of getting your spell through, and didn't require you to invest all the resources to get a Truespeak check that does anything at all at high levels.
Jormengand
2016-01-16, 01:26 PM
Unless, you know, you read the part where the spell works "as ethereal jaunt", a spell which has duration of 1 round/level.
Unless, you know, you read it properly. It renders them ethereal, as the ethereal jaunt spell. It does not work as the ethereal jaunt spell; it has its own duration.
Did you miss the part where that's over ten rounds? You're doing 21 damage a round. That's first level damage. Like the Barbarian's 2d6 +12 (average 19) or the Rogue's 6d6 (average 21).
Did you miss the part that you're still free to act during those rounds?
Or you could use your swift action to cast again. Which probably gives you a better chance of getting your spell through
Sure, if by "Your spell" you mean "A spell four levels lower than your spell which still eats up a ninth-level slot". And unless your opponent's save is absolutely godawful (Less than half chance to succeed) you're better off using mystic rampart even if you could drop off a second ninth-level spell, and even if it didn't take up any spell slots.
Unless, you know, you read it properly. It renders them ethereal, as the ethereal jaunt spell. It does not work as the ethereal jaunt spell; it has its own duration.
If all it did was render them ethereal, it would not cite to the ethereal jaunt spell. It would cite to the ethereal condition.
Did you miss the part that you're still free to act during those rounds?
Yes, because it regularly takes ten rounds for combat to end ever at all.
Sure, if by "Your spell" you mean "A spell four levels lower than your spell which still eats up a ninth-level slot".
Someone hasn't heard of DMM. Also arcane spellsurge.
And unless your opponent's save is absolutely godawful (Less than half chance to succeed) you're better off using mystic rampart even if you could drop off a second ninth-level spell, and even if it didn't take up any spell slots.
Or you could drop an Empowered enervation to have nearly the same effect on saves and some extra debuffs. Maybe stack some extra metamagic to blow truenaming out of the water. Also, you're going to get better saves because you didn't have to blow all your WBL on Truespeak boosters.
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-16, 01:47 PM
How are Truenamers related to balancing things with fixed gestalt tiers again? Are they even inside the tier system? I thought that they were considered too mobile in tier for that.
Jormengand
2016-01-16, 01:49 PM
How are Truenamers related to balancing things with fixed gestalt tiers again? Are they even inside the tier system? I thought that they were considered too mobile in tier for that.
This was someone insisting that a cleric//truenamer (which, you are correct, is dubious in even being doable due to truenamer tiermobility) is basically no better at anything than a cleric. Which, of course, is wrong.
How are Truenamers related to balancing things with fixed gestalt tiers again? Are they even inside the tier system? I thought that they were considered too mobile in tier for that.
I have no idea. I made an offhanded comment about Truenamers sucking, then someone appeared out of nowhere to argue about how they didn't suck.
Jormengand
2016-01-16, 01:54 PM
I have no idea. I made an offhanded comment about Truenamers sucking, then someone appeared out of nowhere to argue about how they didn't suck.
I made my True Nickname "Truenamer" so I could use my capstone to show up out of nowhere every time someone mentions them. :smalltongue:
Beheld
2016-01-16, 02:41 PM
Right, so what you do is you use the duration instantaneous on the normal version so you can attack ethereal enemies forever, then the first thing you do each combat is use the duration instantaneous on the reversed version to shunt enemies to the ethereal forever, and then you run around beating things up because they can't hit you. Also make sure the fighter has a version of the normal.
I'm not sure, and I'm definitely not going to look up actual 18th level Truespeech abilities at all, but let's assume for the sake of argument that you can always make your truespeak check, that there is no save at all, that you can hit them from any point at which you have line of effect, and that the duration is instantaneous:
You are 18th level, and you spend a standard action to send one enemy to the Ethereal "forever." And then, I guess if there is a second enemy, you can spend a swift action to do that to a different enemy, but let's assume for the moment, that you are fighting one enemy.
Here is a list of CR 17-19 Monsters, and how they deal with that:
Dragons: So many Dragons. There are 17 Dragons within that range, that's way more than everything else combined. High level D&D has too many ****ing Dragons. But here's the thing, Every single one of these Dragons has triple standard treasure for an EL 17-19 encounter, and can probably use most of the magic items that they get. So right away, we have no idea what they have on them, but it could very possibly just make this ability worthless. Second, of all 17 Dragons the absolute slowest one can go 600ft in any direction on one round, many can go faster. If their items and spellcasting don't allow them to attack you, they just leave. That could sort of be a victory in some circumstances, but for the most part, pissing of a rich high level dragon and not seriously inconveniencing him, and maybe, if you are really lucky, getting a chance to steal all the wealth he wasn't using because it's in gold instead of magic items, is a poor strategy. Thirdly, the CR 17 White casts as a level 7 Sorcerer, every other CR 17 casts as either 9th or 11th. Some of the CR 18 and 19s cast as 13-15th casters. Every single one of these people can fly to the nearest group of people and start explaining the choice of death or planeshift the dragon.
So since I doubt your ability has infinite range anyway, you probably get breathed on once, and then you send him to Ethereal Plane, and then he comes back like a week later really pissed at you. I think that qualifies for "Better than a level 18 Binder against a Dragon" but hardly something that real characters would brag about.
Now with the tremendously large amount of Dragons out of the way, can treat the others more normally:
NightCrawler: 1/day Planeshift, you sent it to the ethereal for one whole round, and then it gets right back to work doing whatever it was doing before. (Or if it was location specific, burrows some miles.) And while it does that you can fight it's Dread Wraiths. But of course, you basically have to be ambushed first, since it has a burrow speed, and you don't have line of effect to it.
Frost Giant Jarl: He loses because he's really just a CR 9 monster that has levels in a class worse than yours.
Formian Queen: She Teleports away, then uses Divination at will to find someone with a scroll of planeshift, and some dimensional shackles, she plane shifts back, teleports home, and wears dimension shackles while she continues her plans and/or plots your murder. About a day delay, if that.
Maralith: It turns out you target her Project Image instead, but if you didn't, she instantly teleports away and a week later finds her way back to the material plane.
AbolethMage: He's a 9th level Wizard and an Aboleth, so if you successfully pierce all his illusions and such... Then he goes to the ethereal... and casts fly an leaves? And then enslaves something to get it to the material, or heck, prepares Lesser Planar Binding and comes back the next day.
Basically, it seems like a great strategy to get high level monsters to waste a small amount of time and come to hate you, and know your tactics when they chase you down later. It doesn't seem to actually kill anything. Wasting a small amount of time is not worthless in all situations, but it is in a lot, Banishment (while not working on all possible monsters) wastes way more time for the monsters it effects as a "no save" bye bye spell at level 13 instead of level 18. If your entire character concept amounts to "I make people who are really powerful go away for a while, until they come back with a method of beating my tactics in an hour to a week or two." That seems really unimpressive, and definitely not something that would ever actually make me even care about a Truenamer in the party.
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-18, 08:49 AM
Oh, and, in other news, the creator of tiers himself decreed that parties are generally fine if they have only a 2 tier difference. I figure that's relevant, since this fix would make everyone only have a two tier difference for their highest tier class.
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 10:49 AM
Oh, and, in other news, the creator of tiers himself decreed that parties are generally fine if they have only a 2 tier difference. I figure that's relevant, since this fix would make everyone only have a two tier difference for their highest tier class.
On the other hand, this is a weird edge case, with Tier 1//6, Tier 2//4 and 3//3 combinations being suggested. OP is using gestalting to raise the power level of the higher tiers. That's a delicate and possibly impossible project. By the "RAW" of the tier system, those are Tier 1-3, and the 3's should be better than standard 3s, but it's very tough to say that this will work out well. A Fighter can keep up with a Bard or Beguiler, who can keep up with a Cleric is what JaronK is saying there. That's no guarantee at all that a Bard//Dread Necromancer will be able to keep up with a Cleric//Ninja or a Wizard//Monk.
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-18, 10:55 AM
It would be a Cleric/Aristocrat, or Cleric/Samurai, but that's otherwise a good point. You'd be boosting the higher tiers a tad, but it seems like the Bard is getting much more of a boost there.
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 11:06 AM
It would be a Cleric/Aristocrat, or Cleric/Samurai, but that's otherwise a good point. You'd be boosting the higher tiers a tad, but it seems like the Bard is getting much more of a boost there.
His rule was that the gestalted tiers add up to 6. So Cleric//Tier 5 is legit. (I don't know the OA books enough to evaluate whether the OA and Rokujan Ninja and OA Samurai classes are really better than the CW Samurai, I just went for the Tier 5 that probably gave the most stuff the straight Cleric doesn't have.) OR a Cleric//Soulborn. (Likewise, I don't know the incarnum classes at all.)
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-18, 11:09 AM
Oh, duh :smallsigh:. This is what I get for typing this early in the morning.
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 11:23 AM
Oh, duh :smallsigh:. This is what I get for typing this early in the morning.
Just scanned back through the thread, and I think it was YOUR rule to start with.
I'd still like to advise OP that, without really understanding the Tier system better than he seems to, he probably shouldn't push it in a direction it's not meant to go as a "fix" to a problem he may not be having in his games.
The Tier system comes out of the experience of early 3X players, when they get to mid and high level, having the Tier 1 casters doing most of the work for the party, what with their nigh-unlimited options if they have 24 hours notice to swap out spells and access to a magic mart to buy and scribe scrolls, and characters who started at level 1 as healbots evolving into CoDzillas that melee and missile just as well as their fighter and barbarian friends, while still being full casters; and of course Rogue Classic being obsoleted by a backpack full of 1st-3rd level scrolls.
That's not the problem OP is having, when he's looking at melding together Warlocks and Sorcerors because, um, actually I don't remember why.
EDIT: Ok, it was Warlocks and Binders and Sorcerors and Warmages.
The owlbear may have been a successful experiment in demented magical breeding. However, in most cases you are just as likely to produce a Bearowl, with all the combat power of the owl combined with the flying capabilities of the bear.
Bobbybobby99
2016-01-18, 11:46 AM
Looking it over, I do think I was the one that suggested that it just be free for all, rather than having fixed combinations (which would be rather tedious). But I really don't see how it would actually be less fun than not doing it. I can't imagine it widening tier gaps.
Nifft
2016-01-18, 11:54 AM
AFAICT the things that tend to widen gaps and reinforce the strengths of the leading class is when you allow LA to only occupy one side of the Gestalt. Templates and powerful races -- which are usually priced prohibitively in terms of LA -- become very cheap when you allow them to not lower caster level.
So: if you want broadening rather than deepening, don't allow LA on one side. This tends to have the effect of removing high LA from consideration, and that's usually fine.
- - -
In regards to the Binder // Warlock combo specifically, I think it can get near T1 around level 12, because you can use the Cityscape WE Vestige Astaroth in combination with the Warlock's Imbue Item ability to emulate an Artificer.
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 11:54 AM
Looking it over, I do think I was the one that suggested that it just be free for all, rather than having fixed combinations (which would be rather tedious). But I really don't see how it would actually be less fun than not doing it. I can't imagine it widening tier gaps.
It won't widen the tier gaps, you basically can't. But I doubt that the problem in OP's games is Tier gaps. Tier-based Gestalting is the wrong tool to fix whatever problems OP is attempting to fix.
Much like the other poster in the thread who experimented with gestalt to increase versatility, and ended up with a party full of Bruiser-class//Racial HD bruiser monsters.
So: if you want broadening rather than deepening, don't allow LA on one side. This tends to have the effect of removing high LA from consideration, and that's usually fine.
Surely you just need to ban LA from being opposite to casters ?
Taking this further you could force high tier classes to take some LA, which would at least delay the problem for a few levels.
In regards to the Binder // Warlock combo specifically, I think it can get near T1 around level 12, because you can use the Cityscape WE Vestige Astaroth in combination with the Warlock's Imbue Item ability to emulate an Artificer.
Reminds me of the Warlock 12 / Chameleon 2 build.
Nifft
2016-01-18, 03:26 PM
Surely you just need to ban LA from being opposite to casters ? ... and ban brute-smack buffing LA from being opposite to brute-smack classes, which is the actual problem mentioned by the thread's OP.
So you also need to ban LA from being opposite to casters, not just.
IMHO banning LA on one side entirely is the easiest way to fix the OP's issue, which was that the LA side was being used to directly buff the strengths of the main class rather than being used to diversify the character.
Reminds me of the Warlock 12 / Chameleon 2 build.
Yep! Same principle, the main difference is that this build works at level 12 (not 14), and it works without a high-Tier PrC added on top, and it doesn't dilute the Warlock powers (so you get full Warlock casting all the way).
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 03:27 PM
Surely you just need to ban LA from being opposite to casters ?
There was a DM way upthread who decided to let his martial brutes play with gestalt. As characters died and were replaced, he went from a "brute, factotum, caster" party to a party of 3 high-LA race brutes.
johnbragg
2016-01-18, 03:31 PM
I attempted something similar in the last campaign I ran. Specifically, I allowed anyone playing a T4 or lower to gestalt, in the hopes that they'd increase their versatility and minimize their weaknesses. What actually occurred is that my players doubled down on their strengths, for an increase in power but no increase in versatility (Werebear RHD//Barbarian, for an example).
Failed experiment, for me.
I had a broader array of skills in the group when I put in the rule (wizard, factotum, and a barbarian IIRC). I was trying to deal with the tier drift problem before it affected the game much. As players died, they replaced their characters with meatier substitutes. Maybe it's just due to my players being inexperienced, and thinking that was the best way to stay alive.
I believe, at the end, the group was a Cloud Giant//Something, Werebear//Barbarian and Fighter//Ranger/Scout.
This may be OP's problem, too. Trying to fix the Tiers problem before he and his players have learned the system mastery to have a Tiers problem.
Yep! Same principle, the main difference is that this build works at level 12 (not 14), and it works without a high-Tier PrC added on top, and it doesn't dilute the Warlock powers (so you get full Warlock casting all the way).
Except that I still have one side of my gestalt open, oh and also
Tier 2: ...
Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges)
Beheld
2016-01-18, 03:48 PM
In regards to the Binder // Warlock combo specifically, I think it can get near T1 around level 12, because you can use the Cityscape WE Vestige Astaroth in combination with the Warlock's Imbue Item ability to emulate an Artificer.
Now, don't bet me wrong, the Artificer is a terrible class that sucks a lot, and isn't actually good for playing D&D, but that seems singularly unimpressive. To the extent that the Artificer is better than anyone at all who has ranks in UMD, it is only because he has some artificer specific ways of negating XP and gold costs to a significant extent to make up for the fact that he's just pretending to be a rogue who lights money on fire as a method fighting.
The Warlock post doesn't have any of that. He's just a Rogue with twice as much money and less XP, which is singularly unimpressive. If that counted as Tier 1, everyone with UMD as a class skill would be Tier 1. Now, in addition to that, Binder is offering approximately nothing to that gestalt. If you are level 12, you make staves. That's what you do, and nothing else. So yeah, like, you can make rings and stuff without spending a feat, and wondrous items, but that's just having more gold (except, since you spend half your money on UMD, so really it's just bringing you up to the same wealth as a non-UMD character at the cost of XP). All the allegedly "Tier 1" things you can do with UMD you can do with staves, and you don't need anything else, so you really are just saying that Binder class amounts to one feat.
I mean, ultimately, any claim that you can take a level 12 gestalt character and spend XP and gold to do the same thing a Dread Necro can do for free better than you, or that any idiot can do at level 3 is super unimpressive. It doesn't even come close to the "Tier 1" status of "DUUUURR, most ways of breaking game classes are best classes" since it is only one way of breaking the game. Once the DM tells you that lighting a stack of bills on fire to smoke out your termites doesn't instantly cause you to end up with more money, then your trick is done, and you are just a Rogue.
Nifft
2016-01-18, 04:07 PM
Except that I still have one side of my gestalt open, oh and also You're locked into Human-only, and you're locked into Eberron, and you're two levels too late, and "oh also" 2 + 4 = 6 ... so what's your problem in specific?
Now, don't bet me wrong, the Artificer is a terrible class that sucks a lot, and isn't actually good for playing D&D, but that seems singularly unimpressive. To the extent that the Artificer is better than anyone at all who has ranks in UMD, it is only because he has some artificer specific ways of negating XP and gold costs to a significant extent to make up for the fact that he's just pretending to be a rogue who lights money on fire as a method fighting.
The Warlock post doesn't have any of that. He's just a Rogue with twice as much money and less XP, which is singularly unimpressive.
Warlocks have Deceive Item, which allows them to take 10 on UMD, which makes them the best UMD class in the game. They get this at level 4, and it doesn't cost anything but 4 levels of Warlock.
I didn't think that needed specific mention, but it's actually kinda impressive. It makes an otherwise unreliable mechanic totally reliable, if you can hit the breakpoint where taking 10 is sufficient for your gear -- instead of needing to hit the breakpoint where a 1 would be a success.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 04:15 PM
Warlocks have Deceive Item, which allows them to take 10 on UMD, which makes them the best UMD class in the game. They get this at level 4, and it doesn't cost anything but 4 levels of Warlock.
I didn't think that needed specific mention, but it's actually kinda impressive. It makes an otherwise unreliable mechanic totally reliable, if you can hit the breakpoint where taking 10 is sufficient for your gear -- instead of needing to hit the breakpoint where a 1 would be a success.
If you are abusing UMD, then 10+whatever is not enough, because the entire point is to skill dance your Caster level up to NI to cast spells at such absurd caster levels that you kill everything with word spells and/or some saving throw spell with a DC in the 50s while operating under the effect of buffs that last for years. Nobody who's abusing UMD as their combat actions and buffs with nonsensical durations cares about missing on a 1.
Nifft
2016-01-18, 04:22 PM
If you are abusing UMD, then 10+whatever is not enough, because the entire point is to skill dance your Caster level up to NI
That's a nice perspective for Theoretical Optimization, but this isn't a theory thread.
The guy wants to have a mechanical system that rewards diversification across both sides of a Gestalt, not to break the game and watch his players cut themselves on the shattered pieces.
Not sure what ~you~ expect from this thread, but I think NI caster level isn't going to be helpful here.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 04:26 PM
That's a nice perspective for Theoretical Optimization, but this isn't a theory thread.
The guy wants to have a mechanical system that rewards diversification across both sides of a Gestalt, not to break the game and watch his players cut themselves on the shattered pieces.
Not sure what ~you~ expect from this thread, but I think NI caster level isn't going to be helpful here.
Then UMD is garbage and you shouldn't waste your time on it, so being a Warlock 12 offers basically nothing aside from a pathetic blast and a few invocations. And you definitely aren't "Tier 1" because of your ability to light money on fire to cast spells with lower DC at lower Caster levels when you know exactly what spell you will need a month in advance, because everyone can do that.
UMD isn't good if you aren't using it to cast spells with Caster Level or save DCs above what you could get by just being that level. It's just the ability to burn money to wish you had taken levels in a class that does something else. (It's somewhat essential where low level wands fix the flaw in your classes natural mechanic, like Rogues, but it's pretty meaningless if UMD does nothing to help you in combat, because the utility offered is basically non-existent).
Troacctid
2016-01-18, 04:59 PM
Then UMD is garbage and you shouldn't waste your time on it, so being a Warlock 12 offers basically nothing aside from a pathetic blast and a few invocations. And you definitely aren't "Tier 1" because of your ability to light money on fire to cast spells with lower DC at lower Caster levels when you know exactly what spell you will need a month in advance, because everyone can do that.
So your argument is that Warlock is bad because the only things it offers are the things it offers, and UMD is garbage because all it does is give you access to things that anyone with UMD can access?
You're locked into Human-only, and you're locked into Eberron, and you're two levels too late, and "oh also" 2 + 4 = 6 ... so what's your problem in specific?
Ah, for some reason I though that Warlock was T3, my bad.
Still I could go something like
Warlock 12 / Chameleon 2 // Sorcerer 12 / (T3) 2
Whereas you have eaten several levels of one side for the same trick.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 05:13 PM
So your argument is that Warlock is bad because the only things it offers are the things it offers, and UMD is garbage because all it does is give you access to things that anyone with UMD can access?
I'm saying that having UMD as a class skill doesn't magically turn you into a real character, and that if it did, Experts would also be Tier 1.
The things Warlock offers are not Tier 1. UMD doesn't synergize with the things Warlock offers, and also isn't Tier 1.
No combination of Warlock + UMD + Item crafting that still costs money and XP is ever going to make a Warlock ever in the same universe as a Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Sorcerer. So Binder//Warlock gestalt at level 12 doesn't magically become equivalent to a Wizard, just like Warlock 12/Chameleon 2 doesn't make a character comparable to a Wizard. Because being able to do the same thing the Wizard already does, but not level appropriately, and have to know a month in advance you wanted to do it, and having to spend money and XP to do it is never going to be even close to the same thing as a Wizard.
Troacctid
2016-01-18, 05:19 PM
Oh, so what you really meant was that anything below T1 is garbage? Because you did say UMD is garbage, and now you've clarified that your reason behind this is that it's not as good as being T1.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 05:27 PM
Oh, so what you really meant was that anything below T1 is garbage? Because you did say UMD is garbage, and now you've clarified that your reason behind this is that it's not as good as being T1.
{Scrubbed}
Someone claimed Binder//Warlock was Tier I, so of necessity my response to that was primarily based on responding to that.
Yes, UMD is also garbage, because anyone who is using it, by definition, could have written "Wizard X" on their character sheet if they wanted to do nothing but cast spells.
Now I also specified that if, for example, you are a rogue, and UMDing Gravestrike drastically helps you in a way it wouldn't help a Wizard, then that's not garbage. But I also pointed out that there is no equivalent to that for Warlocks. Warlocks get literally nothing out of UMD they wouldn't have gotten for free on a days notice, instead of costing money on a months notice, by writing Wizard on their character sheet.
If you want to be a Warlock, be a Warlock, but if you want to be a Wizard, be a Wizard, don't take levels in some other class and then put ranks into UMD so you can whip out a staff Finger of Death.
Nifft
2016-01-18, 06:18 PM
Ah, for some reason I though that Warlock was T3, my bad. Maybe it is on some lists.
Still I could go something like
Warlock 12 / Chameleon 2 // Sorcerer 12 / (T3) 2
Whereas you have eaten several levels of one side for the same trick. ... plus a bunch of other tricks, most of which are more obvious, like having Naberious + Hellfire Warlock levels instead of Chameleon levels.
There's nothing wrong with the Chameleon trick -- but you're stuck with those two Chameleon levels forever, while the Binder version can just swap to a different Vestige if you don't need the crafting feat that day.
But it's not actually better than the specific trick that I was talking about. It's just another way to accomplish the same thing, except later and with a different degree of commitment.
(IMHO it'd be plenty of fun to play a Warlock 12+ // xx 5 / Chameleon 7+. But that's not the character that I'm currently talking about.)
... plus a bunch of other tricks, most of which are more obvious, like having Naberious + Hellfire Warlock levels instead of Chameleon levels.
There's nothing wrong with the Chameleon trick -- but you're stuck with those two Chameleon levels forever, while the Binder version can just swap to a different Vestige if you don't need the crafting feat that day.
But it's not actually better than the specific trick that I was talking about. It's just another way to accomplish the same thing, except later and with a different degree of commitment.
(IMHO it'd be plenty of fun to play a Warlock 12+ // xx 5 / Chameleon 7+. But that's not the character that I'm currently talking about.)
True - you pays your xp and you takes your levels.
Someone claimed Binder//Warlock was Tier I, so of necessity my response to that was primarily based on responding to that.
No we are talking about Imbue Item + Astaroth or Imbue Item + Chameleon's Bonus feat
Tier 1 is about being able to meet any challenge with preparation which you can do with either of the above.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 08:44 PM
No we are talking about Imbue Item + Astaroth or Imbue Item + Chameleon's Bonus feat
Tier 1 is about being able to meet any challenge with preparation which you can do with either of the above.
Well, no, you can't. Even if that was all Tier one was about, you still don't even have that (barring a specific absurd reading or wealth rules, or the DM allowing you to cast Caster level 112 Holy Words at level 12).
Being able to craft items that way doesn't allow you to know what you are facing ahead of time, and therefore doesn't allow you to actually customize yourself to opposition. Nor does being able to pull out a bunch of low level effects at relatively low cost allow you to beat challenges. Nor does being really bad at level appropriate things, or spending tons of money to do it about as well as the Sorcerer look very impressive at all. These are not things that beat level appropriate challenges.
Well, no, you can't. Even if that was all Tier one was about, you still don't even have that (barring a specific absurd reading or wealth rules, or the DM allowing you to cast Caster level 112 Holy Words at level 12).
Being able to craft items that way doesn't allow you to know what you are facing ahead of time, and therefore doesn't allow you to actually customize yourself to opposition. Nor does being able to pull out a bunch of low level effects at relatively low cost allow you to beat challenges. Nor does being really bad at level appropriate things, or spending tons of money to do it about as well as the Sorcerer look very impressive at all. These are not things that beat level appropriate challenges.
Where did Caster level 112 come from ?:smallconfused:
{Scrubbed}
If I need to cast a certain spell then I can make a scroll of it.
If a Wizard needs to cast a certain spell then he either knows it, or has to buy or research it, which can cost more.
If I want to know what I'm facing then I need to do some reconnaissance, information gathering or divination. But preparation really means being able to acquire to tools which you are likely to need to solve a variety of problems — like having silver weapons/whatever.
As to cash, well I can sell my stuff for twice what it costs me to make - so over time I should be able to keep up.
Now an artificer does this better, for various reasons, but the example class features give you a similar ability.
I would also argue that the two combos we were discussing are at the lower end of Tier 1, but they still allow me to solve any issue - if I have prepared for it.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 09:35 PM
Where did Caster level 112 come from ?:smallconfused:
It's a CL you can get on UMD, but being able to break the skill system, and replace character level with skill ranks -X is pretty meaningless. DMs don't let you cast Holy Word at the CL needed to kill gods from a staff, because some rules are dumb. Just like they don't let Dread Necro's Planar Bind 49 Glabrezu and use them instead of adventuring. Planar Binding is not a relevant measure of Dread Necro strength, and likewise staff CL cheese is not a relevant measure of Expert class strength.
If I need to cast a certain spell then I can make a scroll of it.
If a Wizard needs to cast a certain spell then he either knows it, or has to buy or research it, which can cost more.
A Wizard can buy every not level 1 spell for cheaper than you can make it. If you need a certain spell, you can spend actual gold and XP and at least a day to get that scroll, good for you I guess, but who cares, because now you have a one shot use of spell that often isn't even helpful because of it's inferior CL. And if you needed that spell and didn't have 8 hours notice, well then tough luck, you don't have it.
If I want to know what I'm facing then I need to do some reconnaissance, information gathering or divination. But preparation really means being able to acquire to tools which you are likely to need to solve a variety of problems — like having silver weapons/whatever.
So you can blow a bunch of money and XP in order to cast divinations and do reconnaissance, and then you can spend a month crafting items to deal with the situation, and then you can find out that things change in a month, and that most of your preparation is wasted. Not exactly the height of usefulness. Maybe you should have been any class at all that is capable of dealing with level appropriate challenges, so that you could have gone in the next day before everything changed, and actually accomplished something.
As to cash, well I can sell my stuff for twice what it costs me to make - so over time I should be able to keep up.
No you can't, you can sell it for exactly the same amount of gold you spent on it, but not get the XP back. So in other words, sucks to be you. But sure keep telling us about how if the DM just lets you have infinite gold you can totally beat challenges by spending months crafting the appropriate gear. On the other hand, if the DM let's you have infinite gold, why not just be a "Tier 1" Dread Necromancer who Planar Binds an Efferti, wishes for a Ring of Infinite Wishes at CL 90000 and a Belt of Magnificence +9000000, and then wins every challenge in the game by using a Wish spell every round and having broken numbers? I mean, if you can be Tier 1 with infinite money, then surely it matters that he can be even more tier 1 with his much better method of infinite money?
Or you know, if your DM doesn't let Dread Necro's have infinite wealth, he won't let you either, and if he does, you are just a Commoner who waits until level 12 to get the same thing commoners get at level 5 when they buy their first Candle of Invocation.
It's a CL you can get on UMD, but being able to break the skill system, and replace character level with skill ranks -X is pretty meaningless. DMs don't let you cast Holy Word at the CL needed to kill gods from a staff, because some rules are dumb. Just like they don't let Dread Necro's Planar Bind 49 Glabrezu and use them instead of adventuring. Planar Binding is not a relevant measure of Dread Necro strength, and likewise staff CL cheese is not a relevant measure of Expert class strength.
Strawman
A Wizard can buy every not level 1 spell for cheaper than you can make it. If you need a certain spell, you can spend actual gold and XP and at least a day to get that scroll, good for you I guess, but who cares, because now you have a one shot use of spell that often isn't even helpful because of it's inferior CL. And if you needed that spell and didn't have 8 hours notice, well then tough luck, you don't have it.
I have class features which will handle most situations, I only need items for certain situations. I can make any item.
So you can blow a bunch of money and XP in order to cast divinations and do reconnaissance, and then you can spend a month crafting items to deal with the situation, and then you can find out that things change in a month, and that most of your preparation is wasted. Not exactly the height of usefulness. Maybe you should have been any class at all that is capable of dealing with level appropriate challenges, so that you could have gone in the next day before everything changed, and actually accomplished something.
{Scrubbed}
No you can't, you can sell it for exactly the same amount of gold you spent on it, but not get the XP back. So in other words, sucks to be you. But sure keep telling us about how if the DM just lets you have infinite gold you can totally beat challenges by spending months crafting the appropriate gear. On the other hand, if the DM let's you have infinite gold, why not just be a "Tier 1" Dread Necromancer who Planar Binds an Efferti, wishes for a Ring of Infinite Wishes at CL 90000 and a Belt of Magnificence +9000000, and then wins every challenge in the game by using a Wish spell every round and having broken numbers? I mean, if you can be Tier 1 with infinite money, then surely it matters that he can be even more tier 1 with his much better method of infinite money?
Wrong on the first point
Magic supplies for items are always half of the base price in gp and 1/25 of the base price in XP. For many items, the market price equals the base price.
XP is a river and your mention of infinite wealth is another strawman.
Or you know, if your DM doesn't let Dread Necro's have infinite wealth, he won't let you either, and if he does, you are just a Commoner who waits until level 12 to get the same thing commoners get at level 5 when they buy their first Candle of Invocation.
Another Strawman.
Beheld
2016-01-18, 11:44 PM
Strawman[High CL]
No, it's something that I never said was your argument and made a point to forestall anyone bringing it up. Before whining about strawman, maybe you could point to someone claiming something is your argument?
I have class features which will handle most situations, I only need items for certain situations. I can make any item.
Well, since you are a warlock, those situations are "everything" and also "everything" because you get no level appropriate non-combat abilities and no level appropriate combat abilities (except a brief period where you get EBT at will, before that falls off in a couple levels).
Did you even read what I typed ?
Yes, you said ""
So you are going to to craft items to cast Divination spells, then do reconnaissance, then start crafting items to face the encounter, and the result is... you have to craft for a month because crafting times exist, and then you end up with the situation changing.
You didn't explain how you were going to cast Divinations, because like all Schroedingers UMD claims vagueness is your first line of defense. You didn't explain how you are going to do reconnaissance, because vagueness is your first line of defense, you didn't explain how you are going to prepare for encounters and situations, because vagueness is your first line of defense. But come on, you are sitting here extolling the virtues of a UMD warlock, obviously the solution to every problem is craft items, because you sure aren't getting anything from the Warlock class.
If you want to explain how anything you said is in any way a contradiction to anything I said, go right ahead.
[I]XP is a river and your mention of infinite wealth is another strawman.[infinite wealth]
Another Strawman.[infinite wealth]
No, those are just things you wish weren't true. If you insist that you can sell and item for twice what it costs to make it, then you have infinite wealth. If your DM allows you to have infinite wealth, he will allow anyone to have infinite wealth, and any class that wants it can get it before level 12, and use their infinite wealth to buy everything that you craft. If your argument relies on the claim that your character is good because he has infinite wealth and infinite consumables, then everyone else can do that to, and all balance instantly collapses into a singularity black hole of Staves and +30 UMD items at level 5, or +90000 Belt's of Magnificence.
If you want to make an argument that doesn't rely on your character having infinite wealth, go right ahead.
Also, as a brief note: XP is a river is a thing that was almost true when it was first said, and then people who didn't understand it (like you) just said it whenever the mention of XP costs comes up. Yes, spending XP to get gold and then facing weaker challenges than characters with the same XP, and getting more XP for them than character of the same gold exists, but you don't instantly get the XP back. It's a great reason to set an entire level of XP on fire in order to double your WBL in permanent items you get to keep, and then just catch back up. But if you make consumables, then once they are gone, the XP you paid stops making you stronger than another character with the same level and starts making you weaker than a character of the same level and also a lower level than you could have been. And if your only possible solution to all level appropriate problems is consumable items, then you can never catch back up in the first place, because you are always dropping back at least as fast as you move forward with more XP costs.
XP costs are a dumb mechanic because they can be used to make characters that are just objectively more powerful than other characters of their level, but if you are making consumable items and then burning them hand over fist, you aren't doing that, you are just buying suck later at the cost of effectiveness now, but since the effectiveness you are buying is "not even as good as a Wizard" and the exchange rate is really bad, you are just buying way too much suck later.
No, it's something that I never said was your argument and made a point to forestall anyone bringing it up. Before whining about strawman, maybe you could point to someone claiming something is your argument?
All of your posts about CL 112 are strawman arguements.
Well, since you are a warlock, those situations are "everything" and also "everything" because you get no level appropriate non-combat abilities and no level appropriate combat abilities (except a brief period where you get EBT at will, before that falls off in a couple levels).
This doesn't even make sense ?
Yes, you said "[I'm going to cast Divinations and do reconnaissance to know what I'm facing and then craft my items to match it (even though my class can't cast Divinations)."
No I didn't. I posted
If I want to know what I'm facing then I need to do some reconnaissance, information gathering or divination. But preparation really means being able to acquire to tools which you are likely to need to solve a variety of problems — like having silver weapons/whatever.
The second sentence is the important one clearly, though Warlocks can be very good at infiltration and information gathering. Divination is more difficult, and that would require cra
So you are going to to craft items to cast Divination spells, then do reconnaissance, then start crafting items to face the encounter, and the result is... you have to craft for a month because crafting times exist, and then you end up with the situation changing.
Strawman - see above.
You didn't explain how you were going to cast Divinations, because like all Schroedingers UMD claims vagueness is your first line of defense. You didn't explain how you are going to do reconnaissance, because vagueness is your first line of defense, you didn't explain how you are going to prepare for encounters and situations, because vagueness is your first line of defense. But come on, you are sitting here extolling the virtues of a UMD warlock, obviously the solution to every problem is craft items, because you sure aren't getting anything from the Warlock class.
Strawman - see above.
No, those are just things you wish weren't true. If you insist that you can sell and item for twice what it costs to make it, then you have infinite wealth. If your DM allows you to have infinite wealth, he will allow anyone to have infinite wealth, and any class that wants it can get it before level 12, and use their infinite wealth to buy everything that you craft. If your argument relies on the claim that your character is good because he has infinite wealth and infinite consumables, then everyone else can do that to, and all balance instantly collapses into a singularity black hole of Staves and +30 UMD items at level 5, or +90000 Belt's of Magnificence.
The resource limitation is downtime not gold. With infinite downtime I get infinite gold, but that isn't a thing and I never claimed it was nor was I aiming for infinite wealth. This infinite wealth thing is a strawman of your invention.
Also, as a brief note: XP is a river is a thing that was almost true when it was first said, and then people who didn't understand it (like you) just said it whenever the mention of XP costs comes up. Yes, spending XP to get gold and then facing weaker challenges than characters with the same XP, and getting more XP for them than character of the same gold exists, but you don't instantly get the XP back. It's a great reason to set an entire level of XP on fire in order to double your WBL in permanent items you get to keep, and then just catch back up. But if you make consumables, then once they are gone, the XP you paid stops making you stronger than another character with the same level and starts making you weaker than a character of the same level and also a lower level than you could have been. And if your only possible solution to all level appropriate problems is consumable items, then you can never catch back up in the first place, because you are always dropping back at least as fast as you move forward with more XP costs.
I understand it perfectly well. You seem to be focussed on consumables and an attempt to gain double WBL which is not a point I ever claimed — hence Strawman.
If you wish me to stop complaining about Strawmen then perhaps you should avoid making such points.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 07:44 AM
All of your posts about CL 112 are strawman arguements.
So you have no idea what a strawman is? I posted about how something isn't a reason for X, without claiming it was your argument at all at any point. That means it is literally impossible for that to be a strawman argument. I am made a single offhand statement to forestall talking about a specific problematic rules interaction.
Why don't you go jump into every thread where someone says anything about balance at all and then says "not counting Diplomacy, because that's stupid" and yell at them for strawmanning you about Diplomacy.
This doesn't even make sense ?
Warlocks are a bad class that cannot beat level appropriate challenges. This isn't even particularly controversial.
The second sentence is the important one clearly, though Warlocks can be very good at infiltration and information gathering. Divination is more difficult, and that would require cra
Wow, to bad you fell asleep at the keyboard mid sentence or you might have accidentally said anything at all worth saying in the next sentence. You don't have the ability to get the things you need to deal with challenges, because the thing you need to deal with challenges is custom consumables crafted for each encounter, which, once again, takes time, and requires that encounter not change in the ensuring months.
Strawman - see above.
Strawman - see above.
The resource limitation is downtime not gold. With infinite downtime I get infinite gold, but that isn't a thing and I never claimed it was nor was I aiming for infinite wealth. This infinite wealth thing is a strawman of your invention.
I understand it perfectly well. You seem to be focussed on consumables and an attempt to gain double WBL which is not a point I ever claimed — hence Strawman.
If you wish me to stop complaining about Strawmen then perhaps you should avoid making such points.
So you still don't understand what a strawman is, and you want to make perfectly clear that as long as your character is allowed to have infinite gold and no one else is allowed to use their much easier methods of getting infinite gold your character can totally compete? Sure, whatever.
On the other hand, if the DM allows my commoner to buy a candle of invocation and use that to get infinite gold and infinite consumables, but doesn't let anyone else have access to it, then my Commoner is "Tier 1" too.
Once again, any time you want to make any argument that doesn't amount to "If the DM just lets me have infinite gold I can be a real character" I'm ready to address it, but I can't do that until you make such an argument, and you still haven't.
johnbragg
2016-01-19, 07:52 AM
Warlocks are a bad class that cannot beat level appropriate challenges. This isn't even particularly controversial.
Out of curiousity, Beheld, would this statement apply to
--all JaronK Tier 4 classes?
--all classes that do not get level 9 spells?
Out of curiousity, Beheld, would this statement apply to
--all JaronK Tier 4 classes?
--all classes that do not get level 9 spells?
Rogues have been stated to be able to beat LAC via flasks and blinking.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 08:19 AM
Out of curiousity, Beheld, would this statement apply to
--all JaronK Tier 4 classes?
--all classes that do not get level 9 spells?
All classes that fail the SGT. Which classes pass and fail depends on level, Chilling Tentacles at will might allow a Warlock to pass at levels 11-12, but it might not, outside of that, the Warlock fails pretty much every level.
At sufficiently low levels Barbarians/Fighters can be expected to pass or approach passing when built well. Rogues can usually pass until about level 13-15, when they just can't. Most 9th level casters can at all levels. Favored Souls, Warmages, Healers would be my picks for probably failing a good chunk of levels.
Any build that uses some dumb cheese can probably pass at any level, Commoners with infinite gold can pass.
johnbragg
2016-01-19, 08:26 AM
All classes that fail the SGT. Which classes pass and fail depends on level, Chilling Tentacles at will might allow a Warlock to pass at levels 11-12, but it might not, outside of that, the Warlock fails pretty much every level.
At sufficiently low levels Barbarians/Fighters can be expected to pass or approach passing when built well. Rogues can usually pass until about level 15, when they just can't. Most 9th level casters can at all levels. Favored Souls, Warmages, Healers would be my picks for probably failing a good chunk of levels.
Any build that uses some dumb cheese can probably pass at any level, Commoners with infinite gold can pass.
I don't have the system mastery to do it, but I've always wanted to see someone trick out a (Batman) Expert with UMD and WBL and try them against the Single Game Test.
The argument is over whether Warlock//Binder is Tier 1, which is making you sound like only Tier 1s are worth playing.
Florian
2016-01-19, 08:38 AM
Out of curiousity, Beheld, would this statement apply to
--all JaronK Tier 4 classes?
--all classes that do not get level 9 spells?
The problem rather is, that LAC in a vacuum is an absolutely meaningless term. It´s a cornerstone of nothing. An Ice Devil, a Fighter 14 and a Commoner 18 have the same CR, But CR is not EL, which has to be calculated by hand for the group you´re GMing for (see DMG). So we talk talk LAC in a vacuum, we need the specific monster, the specific character and a bit of knowledge about the players.
Remember: The Tier system is about two things: 1) Versatility of a class and 2) breaking the game.
I´m a proponent of the ida that WBL and items tend to get overlooked but can level the playing field pretty much, but I do have to agree with Beheld here, that any tactic that hinges on using items to replicate a class can neither be a core concept nor come close to the replicated class in sheer efficiency.
So yes, while Warlocks can do certain things pretty well and can reacher a higher power ceiling, I would´t say that this option, open to nearly any class out there, should vacant a shift in rating.
I don't have the system mastery to do it, but I've always wanted to see someone trick out a (Batman) Expert with UMD and WBL and try them against the Single Game Test.
The argument is over whether Warlock//Binder is Tier 1, which is making you sound like only Tier 1s are worth playing.
There is no real system mastery necessary here. Pick exactly that kind of stuff that a, say, wizard prefers because it always works, so no saves, SR or anything, pack it on an item an use it.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 09:02 AM
I don't have the system mastery to do it, but I've always wanted to see someone trick out a (Batman) Expert with UMD and WBL and try them against the Single Game Test.
The argument is over whether Warlock//Binder is Tier 1, which is making you sound like only Tier 1s are worth playing.
The same game has some specific things which it doesn't measure well, so for example, it undervalues characters who provide a force multiplier to the team, such as Wizards and Bards, but it also overvalues limited use abilities, like the Barbarian, Wizard, and in this case, Expert with UMD.
To have the SGT measure an Expert at all, you need to have some accounting for how wasting money forever on a challenge is not as good as beating it without money (like every other class does). Now, that can vary, technically, a Rogue who activates a wand of Golem Strike and throws acid flasks on a golem "wastes" gold, but since it comes out to 15 gold for the wand charge and 14 gold for the flasks, you can see how that character can afford to spend that much gold on every level 10 challenge and still keep competing with everyone else forever.
On the other hand, and Expert might have to umd a scroll of Ghostform, and then just, as many CL 7 charges of Orb of Fire as it takes to kill the Golem, and since the scroll alone costs 2,275gp, and the wand (while probably having charges left over for future use) costs 21,000gp, you can see how this is an entirely different universe of expenditure.
In some circumstances a wand of silent image alone may be enough, but that's extremely circumstantial. The level 15 SGT prevents that by making the encounter two CR 13s, so that he has an intelligent master giving orders, but it can also be beaten by just sticking an item you need inside his chest.
dascarletm
2016-01-19, 12:10 PM
The resource limitation is downtime not gold. With infinite downtime I get infinite gold, but that isn't a thing and I never claimed it was nor was I aiming for infinite wealth. This infinite wealth thing is a strawman of your invention.
So you still don't understand what a strawman is, and you want to make perfectly clear that as long as your character is allowed to have infinite gold and no one else is allowed to use their much easier methods of getting infinite gold your character can totally compete?
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
I'm seeing a disconnect here.
However, I'm pretty sure in the DMG it says you can only sell items for half of their base value. RAW I don't think it would work. Though if you took that feat from Eberron that cuts crafting costs in half you might be able to. I don't have access to the specific wording.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 12:25 PM
I'm seeing a disconnect here.
Saying two mutually contradictory things doesn't magically allow him to accuse everyone of a strawman.
1) I have infinite consumables because I sell items for twice what they cost to make, and then use that money to make more items so I always have a staff with every spell in the game at all times.
and
2) But I'm not saying I have infinite money!
Doesn't make arguments against the first thing incorrect. If the Warlock makes items and sells them for half what the cost, and then uses that money to make more consumables such that you have an infinite supply of consumables, then sure, he does in fact have infinite money, even if he claims he doesn't.
And again, the Expert can also buy a candle of invocation and wish for a Ring of 50 Wishes, and then Wish up 49 consumable items and then save that last wish for another Ring of 50 Wishes when he runs out of consumables and be exactly like the level 12 warlock from level 5, except that he doesn't take 10 on UMD checks (Although I think there is a PrC that lets has like a one level dip that lets you take 10 in the skill, and it works on UMD, so still).
dascarletm
2016-01-19, 12:35 PM
Doesn't make arguments against the first thing incorrect. If the Warlock makes items and sells them for half what the cost, and then uses that money to make more consumables such that you have an infinite supply of consumables, then sure, he does in fact have infinite money, even if he claims he doesn't.
While I understand what you mean when you say infinite, it isn't truly infinite. Probably just a pet-peeve/nitpick of mine, but I see infinite thrown around all willy-nilly.
Really it isn't truly infinite because there isn't an infinite lifespan/game time for the character. Even if there was, there isn't infinite time to play said game.
However this isn't particularly relevant.
I believe nedz only said, "so over time I should be able to keep up." I don't ever see a claim for infinite, just a claim that WBL could be offset partially to allow said character to keep up.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 12:44 PM
I believe nedz only said, "so over time I should be able to keep up." I don't ever see a claim for infinite, just a claim that WBL could be offset partially to allow said character to keep up.
Yes, if he claims that he can use consumables without losing wealth, then for all intents and purposes, he no longer has any even theoretical limit on his wealth, and again, an Expert with one level in that skill master class can do that even better than the warlock, since the game already allows for you to create items for free in a standard action by spending consumables. (That you then immediately get back, because they are consumables and you have infinite consumables).
His argument basically boils down to "I expect the DM to let me do this thing where I spend 10k per fight on consumables, but still have the same wealth as other characters, but I expect him to ban all the other characters who can also do that same thing."
Which... Sure. If your DM doesn't ban your cheese but bans all cheese that does the exact same thing, then you character is strong and no one else's is. But that applies universally to all claims about cheese exploitation, power of classes, or anything. If the DM doesn't let Clerics cast spells, but does let Beguilers gain entry at level 1 into Rainbow Servant, then the Beguiler is "Tier 1" and the Cleric is "Tier 6" but if your argument for how you are Tier anything involves you being allowed to do the same thing other people can already do, but not letting those other people do it, then no one cares.
Florian
2016-01-19, 12:59 PM
@Beheld:
Well, the whole Tier-stuff happens in a vacuum, so in a way it is fair to say that a class that revolves around crafting stuff simply has double WBL in that (nonexistent) environment. That is not dissimilar to factoring in Rings of Wizardry or Pearls of Power on other classes.
Beheld
2016-01-19, 01:06 PM
@Beheld:
Well, the whole Tier-stuff happens in a vacuum, so in a way it is fair to say that a class that revolves around crafting stuff simply has double WBL in that (nonexistent) environment. That is not dissimilar to factoring in Rings of Wizardry or Pearls of Power on other classes.
Being able to expend XP to have double WBL is dumb for the reasons I have stated earlier, but even that isn't what he is talking about. He's not claiming to have double WBL, he's claiming to be able to turn any amount of gold into that same amount of gold + consumable items, such that building a staff that casts Contact Other Plane and Divination the casting Contact Other Plane 50 times, then throwing the useless stick of wood away cuts 0% into his wealth in any way.
Which like, yeah, if your DM lets you do that, and doesn't let the Expert who can do the same thing at level 5 do the same thing, then sure, you can cast CoP a bunch. But since the Expert can do the same thing, I'm not sure what Warlock is bringing to the table here.
He's basically arguing that when he plays a Warlock he makes a staff of Planar Binding and breaks the game, but his DM would never let a Dread Necromancer cast Planar Binding and break the game, and that's why Warlock is Tier 1.
dascarletm
2016-01-19, 01:39 PM
Which like, yeah, if your DM lets you do that, and doesn't let the Expert who can do the same thing at level 5 do the same thing, then sure, you can cast CoP a bunch. But since the Expert can do the same thing, I'm not sure what Warlock is bringing to the table here.
How does an expert qualify for crafting feats?
Beheld
2016-01-19, 01:47 PM
How does an expert qualify for crafting feats?
He doesn't need to, he can have zero crafting feats and just have all the items created from nothing. Any level 5 Character can buy a candle of invocation, call a Genie, and have him wish for two consumable items and a candle of invocation. He can do this until he has all the items the Warlock was going to craft + a Candle of Invocation for more items in the future. He can do this as many times as he wants at any time at any level and have the exact same items as the Warlock.
If it's fine for the Warlock to have all those items at all those levels, then if you should be fine for the Expert to have them. If it's not fine for the Expert to have them, then it shouldn't be fine for the Warlock to have them. It's really just that simple. Allowing X to do Y, but not allow Z to do Y is just declaring that you will cheat for X to come off better.
Soranar
2016-01-19, 04:12 PM
I have some issues with this thread so I'll try to stay on topic but I'll have to digress for a second concerning the warlock's tier
level 1-5
You have a touch attack that affects everything you're likely to encounter, you can do this for as long as you want. No tier 1 class can even keep up with you at this level. Level appropriate encounters are a joke. Level inapropriate encounters can be handled through UMD
Level 6-11
Your eldritch blast is no longer damaging enough to handle every encounter, turning it into an eldritch glaive fixes that problem (effectively doubles your damage, you still hit on your secondary attack and your attacks of opportunity because it's a touch attack and you have medium BAB with a half decent DEX score)
You get permanent abilities that easily break the game at this level (flight, animate dead) which are further boosted by your UMD (desecrate, divine power)
Level 12+
You can create magic items that no other character can create except for an artificer. You can effectively cast any spell from any spell list (arcane or divine) , you can spam black tentacles which easily solves half the encounters you get and you have a way to ignore spell resistance.
If you just take 1 feat (scribe scroll or craft contingent spell) and you are literally unstoppable with enough preparation. You can easily defeat tier 1 classes of similar level.
Level 21+
You take 1 epic feat that grants you unlimited use of every level 1-8 conjuring spell, everything else can be handled by the epic magic items you can create.
This isn't some specific build or a specific strategy, this is just a simple warlock with feats that should be mandatory to the class the same way natural spell is mandatory to druids.
A warlock is more than just UMD, he is a very rewarding chassis if you just stick with it long enough. It's also one of the very few classes that can make a creature roll several saving throws per round. Eventually everyone rolls a 1, the problem is a warlock can make you roll 3-4 times per round if he's built right. He doesn't even need to concentrate on charisma to achieve that.
What are the warlock's flaws?
-lowish hitpoints
-low skillpoints
-feat starved
Just pairing it with a rogue side fixes all of that (since a rogue's special ability lets you take any feat, sneak attack combined with penetrating strike lets you handle mundane encounters more efficiently and the insane amount of skillpoints lets you handle everything else)
Or you can pair it with a Paladin of Freedom to gain defensive abilities, or a fighter for the feats /hitpoints/BAB. My point is that in every one of these pairings the dominant half is the warlock half.
As for complaining that the sorcerer is tier 2, honestly I find the sorcerer (and most tier 2 classes) are plenty strong to start with. Sorcerer only spells alone (like wings of cover. arcane fusion, wings of flurry) are definitely strong enough to keep him relevant and the kobold ritual makes a sorcerer catch up to a wizard's spellcasting.
There aren't that many combos that result in a tier 1 or 2 class though. I can only think of these of the top of my head and most of them are basically classes that are on the verge of tier 2 to begin with that get the extra edge to reach it.
Warlock + Rogue
Warlock + Binder
Factotum + Warblade (extra actions from Factotum, worthwhile actions from Warblade)
Factotum + Duskblade (see above)
Warmage + Beguiler (even with the MAD it should be tier 2)
Warmage + Dread Necromancer (no MAD, complementary abilities)
Dread Necromancer + Bard (with the requiem feat undead minions become insanely strong)
Beheld
2016-01-19, 04:49 PM
Binder levels and strength (Response to Soranar):
level 1-5
You have a touch attack that affects everything you're likely to encounter, you can do this for as long as you want. No tier 1 class can even keep up with you at this level. Level appropriate encounters are a joke. Level inapropriate encounters can be handled through UMD
You have a touch attack for garbage damage. A Druids AC does more damage than you if he literally sits in a corner and watches, Color Spray alone probably equals if not exceeds your output in this entire range, to say nothing of second and third level spells.
Level 6-11
Your eldritch blast is no longer damaging enough to handle every encounter, turning it into an eldritch glaive fixes that problem (effectively doubles your damage, you still hit on your secondary attack and your attacks of opportunity because it's a touch attack and you have medium BAB with a half decent DEX score)
You get permanent abilities that easily break the game at this level (flight, animate dead) which are further boosted by your UMD (desecrate, divine power)
You get animate dead worse than the Cleric (apparently you are going to spend money for desecrate) after the cleric, and you had to spend any resources at all. If you really abuse Animate Dead, you can replace your worthless warlock with a pile of skeletons, and that's really the height of what you can accomplish.
If you are a d6 HD light armor class going into melee with Eldritch Glaive, then you suffer all the flaws of a melee rogue (need full attacks, squishy but in melee range, melee range, so you can't even attack half the enemies) if you shoot lazers from afar, you do crap damage (still). Flight doesn't break the game.
Level 12+
You can create magic items that no other character can create except for an artificer. You can effectively cast any spell from any spell list (arcane or divine) , you can spam black tentacles which easily solves half the encounters you get and you have a way to ignore spell resistance.
If you just take 1 feat (scribe scroll or craft contingent spell) and you are literally unstoppable with enough preparation. You can easily defeat tier 1 classes of similar level.
As I have gone over, spending all your money and XP to wish you were a Wizard is super unimpressive on literally every possible level. Black Tentacles might be enough to make your character not terrible, but it might not (Monsters have grapple modifiers that destroy chilling tentacles, or teleport, or they are ambush monsters, or FoM, or they just laugh it on home while flying because you can't summon EBT in the air, or multiples of those).
Level 21+
You take 1 epic feat that grants you unlimited use of every level 1-8 conjuring spell, everything else can be handled by the epic magic items you can create.
This isn't some specific build or a specific strategy, this is just a simple warlock with feats that should be mandatory to the class the same way natural spell is mandatory to druids.
a) This is the most important response, epic play is meaningless, it doesn't even function.
b) A single epic feat also gives everyone all your abilities and all the abilities in the game, no one cares that you can duplicate conjuring spells of levels 1-8.
A warlock is more than just UMD, he is a very rewarding chassis if you just stick with it long enough. It's also one of the very few classes that can make a creature roll several saving throws per round. Eventually everyone rolls a 1, the problem is a warlock can make you roll 3-4 times per round if he's built right. He doesn't even need to concentrate on charisma to achieve that.
"one of the very few classes that can make a creature roll multiple saves per round" another is the monk, another is every casting class. The Warlock is a lot more like the former than the latter. If you think the Warlock can go even on SGTs I'll happily run them for you.
Troacctid
2016-01-19, 05:57 PM
If you think the Warlock can go even on SGTs I'll happily run them for you.
SGT is strange for a Warlock because you build differently if you're expecting to be a solo character. I normally build Warlocks for support and utility and count on the other party members to provide the muscle. If I were going solo, though, I'd put a lot more emphasis on avoiding fights entirely, because a battlefield controller and backup/supplemental damage-dealer is not going to fare well on his own in combat. Either that or Charm people left and right until you're not solo anymore, which is also viable.
Binder levels and strength (Response to Soranar):
You have a touch attack for garbage damage. A Druids AC does more damage than you if he literally sits in a corner and watches, Color Spray alone probably equals if not exceeds your output in this entire range, to say nothing of second and third level spells.
Mortalbane, a feat to be psionic, and a flaw to get psionic shot will net you a 6d6 touch attack at first level.
Florian
2016-01-20, 04:34 AM
Mortalbane, a feat to be psionic, and a flaw to get psionic shot will net you a 6d6 touch attack at first level.
And nearly every other class can pull that of, so it is not unique to the Binder class at all.
And nearly every other class can pull that of, so it is not unique to the Binder class at all.
They were talking about the warlock, and I'm not sure how most classes get a touch attack spell like ability
Beheld
2016-01-20, 09:32 AM
Mortalbane, a feat to be psionic, and a flaw to get psionic shot will net you a 6d6 touch attack at first level.
Except even after you use a 3.0 feat and three other feats on your eldritch blast at level 1, making you a human with two flaws, you still can only do that damage 5 times a day, you have to restore your psionic focus after every shot, and it only applies to living non-outsiders.
As compared to an Illumian Wizard 1 who can just do 9d6 damage reflex half at will, or summon a Large Elemental at will.
If you want to talk about silly level 1 builds that stop being good later, but are broken at level 1, you still aren't even in the same timezone as the Wizard.
Except even after you use a 3.0 feat and three other feats on your eldritch blast at level 1, making you a human with two flaws, you still can only do that damage 5 times a day, you have to restore your psionic focus after every shot, and it only applies to living non-outsiders.
As compared to an Illumian Wizard 1 who can just do 9d6 damage reflex half at will, or summon a Large Elemental at will.
If you want to talk about silly level 1 builds that stop being good later, but are broken at level 1, you still aren't even in the same timezone as the Wizard.
Luckily, I wasn't trying to compete with the wizard.
How does a wizard get 9d6 damage at 1st?
Wait is it launchbolt, psionic shot, and mortal bane?
Luckily, I wasn't trying to compete with the wizard.
WTF were you trying to compete with? You posted a 1st level trick build, Beheld posted another.
How does a wizard get 9d6 damage at 1st?
I assume Heighten Spell/Extra Slot loops.
Beheld
2016-01-20, 03:39 PM
Luckily, I wasn't trying to compete with the wizard.
You emphatically were. He claimed that no tier 1 caster can keep up with warlocks at level 1, I pointed out that Wizards totally outdo warlocks starting at level 1, you quoted me saying that and responded by posting silly power now for suck later level 1 build for warlocks.
In the context of the conversation, that can't possibly be anything else but a claim that warlocks keep up with Tier 1 casters.
How does a wizard get 9d6 damage at 1st?
Illumian Heighten + Extra Slot + Reserve Feat. You can have a 9th level slot at level 1, and put some heightened burning hands in it, and do 9d6 with your fire attack, or you can do the same thing with Summon Monster 1 and just summon a CR 5 creature.
Silly level 1 builds are always silly, but even if you are going to measure, the warlock is still pretty damn pathetic at it.
If you're going for silly TO builds then Warlock 1 can, theoretically, do 57,600d6 damage per day.
Nifft
2016-01-20, 09:40 PM
Why are people trying to turn this into a silly TO thread?
TO has no relation to this topic.
Also, it's silly.
Beheld
2016-01-20, 10:37 PM
SGT is strange for a Warlock because you build differently if you're expecting to be a solo character. I normally build Warlocks for support and utility and count on the other party members to provide the muscle. If I were going solo, though, I'd put a lot more emphasis on avoiding fights entirely, because a battlefield controller and backup/supplemental damage-dealer is not going to fare well on his own in combat. Either that or Charm people left and right until you're not solo anymore, which is also viable.
Why are you saying that Warlock is Tier 0 because it's your favorite class?
You emphatically were. He claimed that no tier 1 caster can keep up with warlocks at level 1, I pointed out that Wizards totally outdo warlocks starting at level 1, you quoted me saying that and responded by posting silly power now for suck later level 1 build for warlocks.
In the context of the conversation, that can't possibly be anything else but a claim that warlocks keep up with Tier 1 casters.
I was responding to you saying that the warlocks damage was garbage. I should of narrowed the quote box down.
Illumian Heighten + Extra Slot + Reserve Feat. You can have a 9th level slot at level 1, and put some heightened burning hands in it, and do 9d6 with your fire attack, or you can do the same thing with Summon Monster 1 and just summon a CR 5 creature.
z Cool
Silly level 1 builds are always silly, but even if you are going to measure, the warlock is still pretty damn pathetic at it.
I was mostly using it as a starting point to see how it could perform in a same game test with using pact infernus to get empower and maximize spell-like abilities at level 5. But that was mostly idle musing than anything
WTF were you trying to compete with? You posted a 1st level trick build, Beheld posted another.
.
SGT challenges
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.