PDA

View Full Version : Power Creep much? (now yet another fighter vs. wizard thread)



Skjaldbakka
2007-06-14, 07:08 PM
I'm starting to get annoyed with the trend to balance the fighter/caster power disparity is to make fighters more powerful. What's the point? A fighter can KO a balor in one freakin' shot by level 20 (insert two-handed power attack build here). A balor is supposed to be CR 20. Gettin' one-shotted isn't using up 20% af the parties resources. At least the wizard is burning 2-3 high level spells to take out the balor (although still taking it out in one round).

And now tome of battle- like we need fighters to be more powerful? Wizards are too powerful. Therefore everyone else needs to be more powerful?

Seriously, with the Complete Series, and Tome of Battle, you could probably take a Balor with a level 13-15 party, and use about 20% resources. Possibly with all fighter-classes.

I'm not a big fan of throwing out MM encounters, but sheesh. At least CRs are still valid for my encounters, since I tend to use villainous humanoids, who gain their CR from class levels.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 07:16 PM
Hey, this again?

It's no big deal, really. Whether you up the power of Non Spell Casters or bring down the power of Spell Casters only affects the game relative to CR and ECL. It's the same sort of thing as allowing 60 Point Buy instead of 28 Point Buy or whatever. Sure, game balance long ago took a tumble, but that was a flaw inherent in the design.

Power Creep was always going to be part of Wizards' business plan. ever played Magic the Gathering? This set trumps that one!

It's no big deal, just use the original set and tweak things for balance or only allow X, Y and Z. Most Wizards adventures are balanced for a much weaker party than seems to be the average.

Arbitrarity
2007-06-14, 07:17 PM
Not... really.

If you think about it, casters could always kill Balors, even core, so... fighters can too.

It's a combination of powergaming and the insufficiency of the CR system.

If I make gimpy the kobold, he doesn't adhere to CR. If I make Pun-Pun, he doesn't adhere to CR. If I make an IOTSOV, an Incantatrix, a Planar Shepard, or anything like that, they don't adhere to the CR system. Hell, if I make a cheesed out wizard with 44 intelligence for bonus spells, he doesn't adhere to the CR system.

It all depends on relative power of characters, and if you assume a wizard is slightly more powerful than what the average power should be, all melee falls in the dirt. What's the point of the fighter when the cleric does it as well?

And if you nerf the casting classes excessively, they die against CR appropriate encounters, cause the fighter does jack all.

Actually, what with new supplements, there is powercreep. But that's not homebrew fixes, that's WOTC making dumb classes and PrC's.

Tokiko Mima
2007-06-14, 07:19 PM
I'm starting to get annoyed with the trend to balance the fighter/caster power disparity is to make fighters more powerful. What's the point? A fighter can KO a balor in one freakin' shot by level 20 (insert two-handed power attack build here). A balor is supposed to be CR 20. Gettin' one-shotted isn't using up 20% af the parties resources. At least the wizard is burning 2-3 high level spells to take out the balor (although still taking it out in one round).

And now tome of battle- like we need fighters to be more powerful? Wizards are too powerful. Therefore everyone else needs to be more powerful?

Seriously, with the Complete Series, and Tome of Battle, you could probably take a Balor with a level 13-15 party, and use about 20% resources. Possibly with all fighter-classes.

I'm not a big fan of throwing out MM encounters, but sheesh. At least CRs are still valid for my encounters, since I tend to use villainous humanoids, who gain their CR from class levels.

Well, what are you suggesting? When one type of class (full-casters) makes all other class types irrelevant, how do you fix the rather massive disparity?

Nerfing full casters is not as easy as it sounds, and other than raising fighter power levels to match wizards... what other option is there? What I do is trust and know my players, but if you have another solution I'd love to hear it.

Skjaldbakka
2007-06-14, 07:21 PM
Kinda felt like ranting, is all.

Related Point:

How low level can you make a character that can take a Balor(solo)?

We will assume 32 point buy, pure average HP, standard wealth, All completes + tome of battle.

corollary- What build, at level 20, can single-handedly defeat the most Balor's consecutively (same rules, assume every 15 minutes a Balor appears in the room/arena.).

Matthew
2007-06-14, 07:22 PM
Bah, reducing the power of Spell Casters is fairly easy, but it's case by case.

ocato
2007-06-14, 07:28 PM
There's the answer we're looking for cats and kittens. WotC can put out all sorts of garbage if they see fit. In the end, they have absolutely 0 power over our individual groups and games except the power that we ourselves give them.

If casters make half your party unhappy, talk to your caster players. Say 'hey bob, let's trade time stop out for another spell, Jim is getting awfully annoyed at you winning encounters in the first round' or "Jill, sorry but we're not gonna allow any more divine metamagic persistant spell stuff. You're taking a temporary power boosting spell that gives you the ability to back the fighter up pretty well in harsh combat and using it to make him hate playing with you. For the sake of game balance and everyone having fun, please trade in those feats.'

Because if your players can't be responsible with their power, they can't have it. Rule 0. Wizards can write 50 books and each one can say Clerics can do this and wizards can do that. Rule 0 says those books don't exist in your game.

So, unfortunately, it seems the answer is not new books and rules that change the stuff, it's policing your own games so that they are fairly balanced. Because this is a game of improvisation, creativity, and teamwork, not Keanu Reeves style one man saves the day B.S.

Ramza00
2007-06-14, 07:33 PM
for once I am in 100% agreement (and not some lesser number like normally) with Ocato

Well maybe not I am 100% agreement, Rule 0 should be used like this, well DMM isn't in our game, neither is RSoP but everything else in CD is fine. (or some other combination).

I am believer of free choice as long as it isn't hurting someone, thus an opening up of books and thus an opening up of options.

Arbitrarity
2007-06-14, 07:34 PM
Yeah, I've had to voluntarily nerf myself recently.

Must... ignore... wizard....

Yeesh, we have a wannabe powergamer. He's playing a wiz2/sorc3 going into UM, and is venerable. With point buy. And human. So he has 2 dex, 2 str, 8 con...

*touch of fatigue*

I have a bard. We also have a full sorceror, and a half-dragon barbarian (Thog really smash!)

Ramza00
2007-06-14, 07:39 PM
Yeesh, we have a wannabe powergamer. He's playing a wiz2/sorc3 going into UM, and is venerable. With point buy. And human. So he has 2 dex, 2 str, 8 con...

*touch of fatigue*
You made my day :smallsmile:

Ramza00
2007-06-14, 07:41 PM
Also this
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm

Turcano
2007-06-14, 07:47 PM
Yeesh, we have a wannabe powergamer. He's playing a wiz2/sorc3 going into UM, and is venerable. With point buy. And human. So he has 2 dex, 2 str, 8 con...

*touch of fatigue*

I have a bard. We also have a full sorceror, and a half-dragon barbarian (Thog really smash!)

No kidding about the wannabe powergamer. It's very likely that your character will be more powerful.

Starsinger
2007-06-14, 07:48 PM
Yeesh, we have a wannabe powergamer. He's playing a wiz2/sorc3 going into UM, and is venerable. With point buy. And human. So he has 2 dex, 2 str, 8 con...

*touch of fatigue*

In our group we've never had a problem with people being over powered, part of that is because my cousin is missing some screws, and thinks Fighter is the most powerful base class. "He gets Feats!" :smallannoyed:

Myself, I almost always play arcane spell casters, and when i'm not, I'm a divine spell caster. But I've never over powered the group, mostly cuz I... I like blasting. *prepares to be lynched by the community* But also, Timestop+ForceCage+Cheese doesn't appeal to me.

Jorkens
2007-06-14, 07:50 PM
Power Creep was always going to be part of Wizards' business plan. ever played Magic the Gathering? This set trumps that one!
Oh, has that started power creeping now? Back when I used to play, the general complaint was that anything half decent was considered 'unbalancing' and would thus get left out of newer sets, meaning that each new edition or expansion seemed a little less exciting than the last...

Ramza00
2007-06-14, 07:51 PM
blasting is fun, you roll more dice, and usually it sounds more exciting.

It is though a non optimal use of resources, but who cares, you had fun and thats the most important thing.

MeklorIlavator
2007-06-14, 08:26 PM
Myself, I almost always play arcane spell casters, and when i'm not, I'm a divine spell caster. But I've never over powered the group, mostly cuz I... I like blasting. *prepares to be lynched by the community* But also, Timestop+ForceCage+Cheese doesn't appeal to me.

Ehh. I pretty much always play sub optimal. I mean, I once was going to go half-dragon warmage, then into elemental savant. Sure, I will debate the relative power of one class on the boards, but once the dice hit the table, I'm perfectly happy playing a duel-wielding halfling ranger.


@Skjaldbakka: On reason for the power levels to go up is that, in general, people don't complian when they get more powerful, but do when they are weakened. Also, even if you get people to agree that something needs to be weakened, people won't agree on the degree that it needs to be weakened. Thus, to avoid contreversy( and to better move their product, they are a buisness) Wizards tends to up the overall power level.

SpiderBrigade
2007-06-14, 08:34 PM
Oh, has that started power creeping now? Back when I used to play, the general complaint was that anything half decent was considered 'unbalancing' and would thus get left out of newer sets, meaning that each new edition or expansion seemed a little less exciting than the last...That must have been a while ago. I stopped playing for a while and then bought a few decks around the time Kamigawa came out...and it was like all my old cards were obsolete. Well, many of them anyway.

Actually, M: tG balance puzzles me. They take out old staples like Lightning Bolt because it's "too powerful." And then they introduce slivers. What!?

Damionte
2007-06-14, 08:37 PM
Magic the gathering Sets actually got "LESS" powerful over time. Walk into a game shop where they guys are playing with current sets, with your cards from Alpha/Beta/antiquities/Legends and so on. You'll tear them up in a street fight without tournament rules.

Ben_the_dragon
2007-06-14, 08:46 PM
i was trying out the incarnum classes, but in the setting and with the other people i was so overpowered that i decided to stop playing class becasue it was not as fun. but holy man, having a lvl. 4 with 24 ac and able to dimensional door at will from 10-40feet was fun...for about 4 fights and a prison break with no outside help or equipment, and one day to prepare, its like whats the point.

for those who are wondering, i was playing a totemist and he could put the x-man to shame...his nickname was nightcrawler, and my DM hated him

ocato
2007-06-14, 08:50 PM
Ramza doesn't like me, but I love Final Fantasy Tactics so much. IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE! *score from west side story*

Ahem!

Anyway, I agree. When we're here at our computers, thought excersizes are fun! However, when it's time to play together like good little boys and girls, teamwork and friendship 100%

Matthew
2007-06-14, 08:51 PM
Oh, has that started power creeping now? Back when I used to play, the general complaint was that anything half decent was considered 'unbalancing' and would thus get left out of newer sets, meaning that each new edition or expansion seemed a little less exciting than the last...

That must have been a while ago. I stopped playing for a while and then bought a few decks around the time Kamigawa came out...and it was like all my old cards were obsolete. Well, many of them anyway.

Actually, M: tG balance puzzles me. They take out old staples like Lightning Bolt because it's "too powerful." And then they introduce slivers. What!?

Magic the gathering Sets actually got "LESS" powerful over time. Walk into a game shop where they guys are playing with current sets, with your cards from Alpha/Beta/antiquities/Legends and so on. You'll tear them up in a street fight without tournament rules.
Interesting, I quit after Ice Age came out (back in the day, I know...)and, by all reports, the trend for more and more powerful new sets was continued. I suppose they would have to scale back at some point in order to implement the business plan again. No idea what it's like now

Ramza00
2007-06-14, 09:09 PM
Ramza doesn't like me, but I love Final Fantasy Tactics so much. IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE! *score from west side story*

Ahem!

Anyway, I agree. When we're here at our computers, thought excersizes are fun! However, when it's time to play together like good little boys and girls, teamwork and friendship 100%

Oh I like you, I just disagree with you, just like I like Roy even though I am more Chaotic Good/Neutral Good/True Neutral and LG irk me

Gavin Sage
2007-06-14, 09:58 PM
What I've found looking into what people consider optimal relies upon some basic assumptions. The most comprehensive guide I've seen on "optimizing" a Wizard relies unconciously upon the assumption that you have you the basic three other party members to go smack things for you. The fighter being chief among that. At the end of the day save-or-suck or Forcecage doesn't actually put enemies actually in the ground, and instant death isn't going to work on undead or creatures with the right save. And if you don't get to rest after every encounter? The fighter is still needed and without the fighter the mage would have been dead, if not now then five levels back.

I do think there need to be adjustments, but something like what Tome of Battle does is completely the wrong way. I don't think that book in anything but a complete ToB game (lacking the normal classes) should be allowed. Especially flavor wise. What the PHB II though does is much better, giving fairly cool but fairly hard to reach feats to give fighters more high level flavor. Without reworking the basics of the game.


Wizards don't need so much nerfing as a bit of limiting and/or exploitable weaknesses, like not being able to move and cast in the same round so that all you have to do to beat one is get a decent BAB in to force Concentration checks all day. Or have clerics loose their spontaneous healing so they have to devote more resources again to their basic role in the party. Don't make Domains a bonus spell. Or maybe not let clerics get to use metamagic. And never allow an open shop ever where character can just buy whatever they have gold enough for, and nothing over +3 or so is availible for sale without comission a wizard for strong reasons.

Tor the Fallen
2007-06-14, 10:39 PM
What I've found looking into what people consider optimal relies upon some basic assumptions. The most comprehensive guide I've seen on "optimizing" a Wizard relies unconciously upon the assumption that you have you the basic three other party members to go smack things for you. The fighter being chief among that. At the end of the day save-or-suck or Forcecage doesn't actually put enemies actually in the ground, and instant death isn't going to work on undead or creatures with the right save. And if you don't get to rest after every encounter? The fighter is still needed and without the fighter the mage would have been dead, if not now then five levels back.

I do think there need to be adjustments, but something like what Tome of Battle does is completely the wrong way. I don't think that book in anything but a complete ToB game (lacking the normal classes) should be allowed. Especially flavor wise. What the PHB II though does is much better, giving fairly cool but fairly hard to reach feats to give fighters more high level flavor. Without reworking the basics of the game.


Wizards don't need so much nerfing as a bit of limiting and/or exploitable weaknesses, like not being able to move and cast in the same round so that all you have to do to beat one is get a decent BAB in to force Concentration checks all day. Or have clerics loose their spontaneous healing so they have to devote more resources again to their basic role in the party. Don't make Domains a bonus spell. Or maybe not let clerics get to use metamagic. And never allow an open shop ever where character can just buy whatever they have gold enough for, and nothing over +3 or so is availible for sale without comission a wizard for strong reasons.

I disagree almost completely.

A moderately well played wizard really only needs one good stat- intelligence, a postive dex and con score only helps, but isn't necessary. A fighter needs at least two good scores. This means that a fighter is far less likely to be getting the same amount of skill points as a wizard, since int is a suboptimal place to put good rolls, most of the time.
Wizards will virtually always have higher intelligence scores, and consequently more skill points, than a base fighter, AND much more useful places to put the skills- knowledge (whatever). Those skills let you know how to overcome the DR of demons, what undead are immune to, how to kill trolls, etc.

Wizards dominate in battle; if they've got the right spells. They also totally dominate outside of battle. Teleport, knock, rope trick, charm person, invisibility, fly, darkvision, waterbreathing, detect spells.... The wizard can pretty much mimic any class ability with a spell, not to mention boost skill checks by +10, +20, or even +30. A fighter gets feats.

Now, you may be saying a wizard gets limited spells (which is true), and has to prepare the right ones (also true). However, the wizard also gets scribe scroll, and doesn't need to spend his gold upgrading a weapon, which means purchasing scrolls. Not only can the wizard stay prepared by storing important, but highly situational spells in scrolls (jump, spider climb, knock, detect), he can also use divination spells to look into places that no other non-caster has access to. For instance, the future.

Simply making it so a wizard gets deaded in one hit doesn't really fix the problem with wizards. First of all, it doesn't at all limit their incredible usefullness OUTSIDE of battle. Second, at most levels, if anything gets near your wizard, you die anyway. Making wizards more fragile doesn't really fix the problem; it just makes them a glassier glass cannon. It also doesn't address the issue that a fighter is outclassed by the wizard in virtually every realm, and is only around to give the wizard enough time to work his magic.

For instance, I recently played a level 10-13 6 month campaign with mostly core classes. Every battle fell to "tankers block until sorceror casts hold monster". That was it. We were there as the sorceror's escort, really. When the sorc was out of spells, we stopped. Taking HP wasn't an issue for stopping, even without a cleric. Ride-by attack and a high AC kept my paladin from taking much damage. The troll barbarian had regeneration. It was just that vs. an enemy that did anything other than stand and swing weapons, we were helpless.

Most of my experiences with campaigns that don't allow a diverse amount of source material have been the same, once level 9 or 10 is broken. The casters are getting a ton of spells to throw around, some very powerful save-or-die, druids are turning into dinosaurs and trees and grizzly bears, and the fighter gets a new feat. Oh wow.

Gavin Sage
2007-06-15, 12:24 AM
I disagree almost completely.

A moderately well played wizard really only needs one good stat- intelligence, a postive dex and con score only helps, but isn't necessary. A fighter needs at least two good scores. This means that a fighter is far less likely to be getting the same amount of skill points as a wizard, since int is a suboptimal place to put good rolls, most of the time.
Wizards will virtually always have higher intelligence scores, and consequently more skill points, than a base fighter, AND much more useful places to put the skills- knowledge (whatever). Those skills let you know how to overcome the DR of demons, what undead are immune to, how to kill trolls, etc.

Two of those skill points are going to go to Concentration and Spellcraft so it is somewhat lessened. A fighter could certainly use more skill point for their class, but given the Knowledge check rules its nice but not that important, that's why Rich has that upgrade to Knowledge in the gaming section.


Wizards dominate in battle; if they've got the right spells. They also totally dominate outside of battle. Teleport, knock, rope trick, charm person, invisibility, fly, darkvision, waterbreathing, detect spells.... The wizard can pretty much mimic any class ability with a spell, not to mention boost skill checks by +10, +20, or even +30. A fighter gets feats.

Now, you may be saying a wizard gets limited spells (which is true), and has to prepare the right ones (also true). However, the wizard also gets scribe scroll, and doesn't need to spend his gold upgrading a weapon, which means purchasing scrolls. Not only can the wizard stay prepared by storing important, but highly situational spells in scrolls (jump, spider climb, knock, detect), he can also use divination spells to look into places that no other non-caster has access to. For instance, the future.

Remember how I mentioned "don't run an open store" as a fix. That's what its for. If a wizard can't simply buy any scroll they want then they have to rely on what they find, and can't simply dive into the Spell Compendium for whatever they might need for whenever. A mage can still make them but thats going by what they already know. And while fighters are very reliant on equipment, they only need one major weapon at a time and its more sensible to find an excellent weapon in a treasure horde then just the one spell a mage is looking for.

And a fighter can use their feats generally speaking without expiration. The more encounters per day, the more important they fighters become.

Also outside of battle is incredibly situational as well. Many spell useful in battle are not going to be useful out of it. Which gets back into limiting spell selection, especially with Wizards.


Simply making it so a wizard gets deaded in one hit doesn't really fix the problem with wizards. First of all, it doesn't at all limit their incredible usefullness OUTSIDE of battle. Second, at most levels, if anything gets near your wizard, you die anyway. Making wizards more fragile doesn't really fix the problem; it just makes them a glassier glass cannon. It also doesn't address the issue that a fighter is outclassed by the wizard in virtually every realm, and is only around to give the wizard enough time to work his magic.

I don't have a problem with the basic idea of fighters as meatshields. That still makes them very damn important. Since if there not there the mage dies, and makes them able to counter enemy by breaking said glass canon.

Later levels are what the pay off for mages is, to balance their near complete impotence at low levels.


For instance, I recently played a level 10-13 6 month campaign with mostly core classes. Every battle fell to "tankers block until sorceror casts hold monster". That was it. We were there as the sorceror's escort, really. When the sorc was out of spells, we stopped. Taking HP wasn't an issue for stopping, even without a cleric. Ride-by attack and a high AC kept my paladin from taking much damage. The troll barbarian had regeneration. It was just that vs. an enemy that did anything other than stand and swing weapons, we were helpless.

Anecdotes can be horribly dependent. I mean honestly just Hold Monster, since that's one enemy a round and renews its Will Save each round. Something attacks in a group, is immune to mind effects, or heaven forbid can make its will saves its usefulness is going down quickly.

If HP wasn't an issue then why stop? Here's where a simple fix in style can solve this issue. If your dungeon crawling don't allow rest simply in any old corridor, and if PCs are running around there mages and the mages are using spells every encounter, throw some nasty on them before they can renew the spells so the caster has to keep some back and practice conservation. Or have a plot that requires haste. Yes in the big important fights the caster is going to own, but so what? Getting to the fight is more than half the battle.


Most of my experiences with campaigns that don't allow a diverse amount of source material have been the same, once level 9 or 10 is broken. The casters are getting a ton of spells to throw around, some very powerful save-or-die, druids are turning into dinosaurs and trees and grizzly bears, and the fighter gets a new feat. Oh wow.

Which is a reason to upgrade/expand the feats available to fighters. Like what the PHB II does, at least conceptually and we can debate whether they go far enought and what a fighter should get etc.

Remember though, at level 1 a fighter can actually kill goblins and keep his party alive. A mage can get lucky and make two fall asleep or chicken-fry a bug.

(And druids need work because shapeshifting in any form is broken worse then casters as a whole. No Natural Spell would be a good start.)

Jack Mann
2007-06-15, 12:33 AM
Fighters have three basic problems.

One is their low will save, and their inability to guard against attacks that target it. This means that a lot of spells are going to put a real hurt on the fighter. Especially at higher levels, many creatures have supernatural and spell-like that force will saves, and have disastrous results for failure. Granted, spells like mind blank help, but that's an eighth level spell, and not everything that forces a will save is mind-affecting. Illusions, for example, or imprisonment, or repulsion. This is leaving aside spells and effects that don't allow saves.

Their other problem is mobility. Many high level monsters (dragons, pit fiends...) are mobile to an extent that it's virtually impossible for any melee-based fighter to hit them. Most means by which they can achieve flight don't give them sufficient speed to keep up. As well, most fighter builds require full attacks to get the most out of them. If they can catch up to the monsters, then oftentimes the monster can do more damage to them in a round than they can do to the monster. That leaves only the charge builds, using various methods to get maximum damage on a single attack, and praying that the enemy doesn't survive. Archers are better off, since they can stay well back and get their full attacks off even if the enemy is out of melee range, which is why ranged builds tend to be the ones with the most staying power.

The third problem is that clerics and druids, by and large, do these things better. Even in a core game, they tend to dominate melee combat. Given the clerical buffs, a cleric can even become a good archer (and makes the best archer outside of core).

Tome of Battle makes an effort to alleviate these problems. It succeeds admirably at the first two, and makes a go at three. Martial adepts are more able to handle high level monsters without limiting themselves to a single trick (charger) or putting themselves in a secondary role (archer). They are still not as good in melee as a cleric or druid, but at least the gap is smaller.

LotharBot
2007-06-15, 01:10 AM
If you're talking about power creep, Tome of Battle is the wrong thing to complain about. Having classes that are behind the curve catch up isn't power creep. Having the classes that are ahead get farther ahead is power creep.

In order to have class balance, you need the classes to gain power at approximately the same rate. It's not "power creep" to take a class that gains power more slowly and modify it so that it gains power at a similar rate. Tome of Battle is not power creep; Tome of Battle simply makes the melee classes gain power at a similar speed to the caster classes so that they can remain relevant and useful all game. (Now all they need to do is make the rogue fit the same system and we're good.)

There is power creep in this game, but it's not the melee classes that are to blame. It's the new spells and abilities for casters -- divine metacheese, arcane genesis, and so on. All of those splatbooks that take incredibly powerful 13th+ level casters and make them into even MORE powerful casters... those are power creep.

But, of course, the DM can always stop power creep. Just limit what you allow your players to do. "No, that spell isn't available in this universe." "No, you can't get that item." "No, you can't take a feat of +10 to caster level." DM's need to learn to say NO and keep the players within the confines of their universe.

AtomicKitKat
2007-06-15, 01:27 AM
I'm sorry, I just have to laugh here at the insinuation that mages are "near impotent" at lower levels. That might have been true back in AD&D and older, but in 3.x, the only limiter to a caster's power is if you throw 1 more encounter per day than the number of spell slots they have. And even then, if they get something like Mage Armour, which lasts for an hour per level, they might be able to make the spell last long enough to cover 2 battles.

Callix
2007-06-15, 03:00 AM
Kitkat: If you had to use a spell for Mage Armor, then that's 2 fights you're a low-Dex, low-BAB archer (Wiz and sorc), or an unskilled (cleric) and possibly underarmored (druid) melee guy. Up to level 5, the glass cannon problem is a big limiting factor. After that, Fireball, Wildshape, and later Divine Power make this no longer true all the time. Persistent metacheese makes this true none of the time. That is why DMM(Persistent) is broken. Not why clerics are ovverpowered.

Jack Mann
2007-06-15, 03:22 AM
Granted, divine metamagic is broken, but clerics don't need it to outclass the fighter. Once they have access to fourth level spells, they're in business. When combat begins, they're really only a round behind the fighter.

As for low-level wizards, they're fairly weak, hp-wise, and they have to be careful of their resources. They can still contribute significantly, however, when they use those resources. Sleep can win a fight at level one. Fireball, incidentally, is almost never worth casting. A wizard who focuses on damage-dealing spells is not going to contribute overmuch to his party's success. Haste does much more damage over the course of a fight.

The Mormegil
2007-06-15, 05:39 AM
In my games I have a real trouble with powergame.

This is the situation: all my party loves powergame, 'cause it's fun to smash things good. I'm OK with it, I only threw out of the window Monster Manuals and started makng 10000hp (exagerated) bosses and the like. Not a real problem: encounters are fun for everyone and our fighter smashes down almost everything I put in front of him (I recall a certain DR 30/- SR 30 200hp boss that he killed at level 13... No kidding: they were supposed to run...).

But the problem comes out outside the combat. Afore mentioned fighter plays always Chaotic characters. And when he plays CG characters he still act as CE. And he's not alone: some other players make awfully painful characters (like, Exalted Paladin, LN St.Cuthbert cleric-warrior...).

Therefore, everytime they can, they try to kill each other. And that is ok even then: they have fun! But the rest of the party (the useless dwarf fighter with 16 Str and no Weapon Specialization, the bard, the monk...) is in front of a choice: being suppressed into slavery or being killed. By either good or evil characters, 'cause difference seem not to be a problem.


And now, we're going to play another campaign. It's not me to DM this one, so I'm a player. And I want to be a Swordsage. An LG Swordsage. That means that I can: optimize the build, but I don't want this [I am actually giving up my feats for some things like Weapon Syntony (Eberron) or Unnerving Calm]; resigne to a secondary sight, without playing and letting other to have fun; or die.

So, this is what I call "Power Creep": the choice to either feel like cheating, or useless. And this IS a problem.

AtomicKitKat
2007-06-15, 06:29 AM
Mage Armour was merely an example, since I couldn't think of too many non-combat spells that lasted for more than a few minutes. Batman never uses a gun, and the Wizard who focuses on dealing damage is a dead duck. Sleep >>> Coup De Grace beats Magic Missile.

Fenix_of_Doom
2007-06-15, 07:25 AM
About the Magic: the gathering argument
(this far as my understanding of magic goes)
It's true that when magic was releast they had little idea what was powerful, but for every powerfull card there where many weak cards.
Later in the urza block they made some(read: lots of) mistakes with the power of mechanics and so the tournament decks where really powerful.
Not to long ago they did the mirrodin block which was really powerful, I played against skullclamp(banned card) and trust me it wasn't fun.
I believe kamigawa is seen as a slow and rather weak block actually. Ravnica(multicolour block) was powerfull. I don't know how the most recent block was received.

in magic certain cards have become more powerful(creatures, especially green) and others became weaker, they can do this because they assume most people play "standard" or "extended" which contains only the more recent blocks

Indon
2007-06-15, 12:22 PM
Granted, divine metamagic is broken, but clerics don't need it to outclass the fighter. Once they have access to fourth level spells, they're in business. When combat begins, they're really only a round behind the fighter.


That's an interesting point.

The one-round kill mentality of D&D optimization, in which Clerics are viewed as potentially more powerful than Fighters, also renders individual rounds (or even individual points of initiative bonus) to be astoundingly valuable.

An optimized party that includes a cleric who needs to buff himself for even just one round beforehand won't neccessarily even see battle, let alone be better than the fighter at it.

ravenkith
2007-06-15, 12:39 PM
If you can't kill at least one party member with a Balor in a straight up cr 20 v 20th lvl characters fight, when you know your player characters are munchers?

You aren't playing it right.

Balors are lethal.

But only if played intelligently.

Skjaldbakka
2007-06-15, 12:53 PM
How does knowingg your PCs are munchkins help here? Unless by 'playing a balor right' you mean changing out its feats, and setting up the scenario to give the Balor maximum advantage, then a level 20 party of munchkins can own the Balor. All they have to do is win initiative (oh wait! celerity!).

Not to mention the frenzied berserker-power attack one-shot kill on the Balor scenario. I've heard there is even a way to add pounce into the build!


EDIT- which btw, listed CR does not assume setting up the fight the way the critter would want it, it assumes an even playing field. Giving a tactical advatantage to the Balor (which it would likely do with its high int), technically increases the CR.

Jannex
2007-06-15, 02:01 PM
There's one thing I've never really understood about the discussion of how overpowered arcane casters are, and that's the idea that "blasters suck." Now, I've never played a full-caster Sorcerer or Wizard, so I only know what I've observed in other players. One of my friends who I've gamed with a lot is a great guy and a good roleplayer, but he's also a pretty egregious powergamer, and he tends to go for the blaster-casters. And, between Nerveskitter to hit the top of the initiative order, and his Quickened Sudden Maximized Sudden Empowered Magic Missile and whatever "real" damage spell (metamagicked, of course), he uses for his standard action, he's doing at least as much damage as any of the main fighter-types in the party (if not more), and doing it first. DMs in games he plays have taken to "maximizing" (and sometimes "empowering") the hit points of things they fight, just so that the other characters will have an opportunity to participate in the battle (which isn't always a good thing, as enemies that are a reasonable challenge for him are often strong enough to wipe out the rest of the party...). So I'm really not seeing the part where "blasters suck." Unless the idea is that if he concentrated more on things like his Black Tentacles, he'd be even more egregious?

Jack Mann
2007-06-15, 02:08 PM
By the time the wizard can toss out that combo, the melee combatants shouldn't have trouble dealing more damage than that in a round. They may need help improving their own builds.

But really, the main problem with that is the fact that he's had to spend an inordinate amount of resources on a single attack. He can pull off that combo once a day. What does he do in any other round?

A much better use of his resources are things like save-or-suck and battlefield control spells. This takes a lot less effort, and is more effective in the long run. It's all right to take an extra round to finish off the baddies, if that means that you ultimately expend fewer resources in the fight.

Amphimir Míriel
2007-06-15, 02:21 PM
In our group we've never had a problem with people being over powered, part of that is because my cousin is missing some screws, and thinks Fighter is the most powerful base class. "He gets Feats!" :smallannoyed:

Oh, that's nothing... a few days ago we had a post here by someone who thought that monks were overpowered...

My group is also blessedly uninterested in powergaming, however just in case somebody gets any funny ideas, I already have some simple fixes ready:

For example, some wizard/sorc no-save spells now either have a saving throw or are banned (the "batman" document helped a lot!). This does not solve the problem entirely, however the only arcane caster in my party is a "blaster-type" sorcerer.

The Cleric self-only buffs are either banned or changed to "touch" range, so it becomes a better idea to cast them on the fighter than on oneself.

Natural Spell is also banned in my game, however this turned out to be unnecessary, since the party druid decided to play the "Aspect of nature" variant (the original list of abilities is a bit short, so we extended it a bit)

Tor the Fallen
2007-06-16, 08:11 PM
Two of those skill points are going to go to Concentration and Spellcraft so it is somewhat lessened. A fighter could certainly use more skill point for their class, but given the Knowledge check rules its nice but not that important, that's why Rich has that upgrade to Knowledge in the gaming section.

Spellcraft is waaaaaaay more useful than "jump" or "intimidate". And knowing something about an obscure monster is very, very helpful, as it saves you the trouble of learning about its killer Su ability through trial-and-error. For instance, if you didn't know werewolves had a weakness to silver, wouldn't they be difficult to kill?



Remember how I mentioned "don't run an open store" as a fix. That's what its for. If a wizard can't simply buy any scroll they want then they have to rely on what they find, and can't simply dive into the Spell Compendium for whatever they might need for whenever. A mage can still make them but thats going by what they already know. And while fighters are very reliant on equipment, they only need one major weapon at a time and its more sensible to find an excellent weapon in a treasure horde then just the one spell a mage is looking for.

I agree with that sentiment. But you can always scribe scrolls. And what of captured spell books, or the mage out actively hunting for scrolls? Unless you run really tight campaigns, the wizard WILL get a chance to find those scrolls.


And a fighter can use their feats generally speaking without expiration. The more encounters per day, the more important they fighters become.

Until the cleric runs out of healing spells, actually.


Also outside of battle is incredibly situational as well. Many spell useful in battle are not going to be useful out of it. Which gets back into limiting spell selection, especially with Wizards.

A wizard only needs one or two battle spells, and one or two utility spells, and one or two buff spells per spell level. And he gets 4 spells per spell level, if he never, ever find a scroll, ever. That's easily enough to a) contribute lots during a battle, b) buff and c) do other things.



I don't have a problem with the basic idea of fighters as meatshields. That still makes them very damn important. Since if there not there the mage dies, and makes them able to counter enemy by breaking said glass canon.

But ineffective meatshields?


Later levels are what the pay off for mages is, to balance their near complete impotence at low levels.

I've played extensively at lower levels, as well, and mages are not at all completely incompetent at lower levels. By the time they run out of spells, the cleric is also out of spells, having healed up all those holes in the fighters. Once the healing's out, it's time to rest. Even low level fighters risk getting KO'd in a single hit.


Anecdotes can be horribly dependent. I mean honestly just Hold Monster, since that's one enemy a round and renews its Will Save each round. Something attacks in a group, is immune to mind effects, or heaven forbid can make its will saves its usefulness is going down quickly.

Mobs are even better canon fodder for mages, as they'll have lower SR and saves than a single, big monster, as well as fewer HD and HP (metamagic'd color spray, sleep, fireball, glitterdust, grease all serve quite nicely against mobs).

The efficacy of mages can be highly campaign dependent, I agree, especially what's being thrown out the party. Wizards, though, have a far easier time adapting, than a fighter. If they have access to new spells, that is.

btw, it was 3.0, so the sorc was hasted, which meant two holds a round.


If HP wasn't an issue then why stop?

Because if something flew, we couldn't do anything about it. And just about everything at that level can fly. If something was out of reach, we couldn't do anything about it. If we came across something magical, we couldn't do anything about it.



Here's where a simple fix in style can solve this issue. If your dungeon crawling don't allow rest simply in any old corridor, and if PCs are running around there mages and the mages are using spells every encounter, throw some nasty on them before they can renew the spells so the caster has to keep some back and practice conservation.

Rope Trick. 2nd level spell. Very useful. 'Course, you could always bump the spell level up, or remove it. What can the fighter do, other than fight? He can't conjure up an extradimensional space that's safe and invisible everynight to rest in.



Or have a plot that requires haste. Yes in the big important fights the caster is going to own, but so what? Getting to the fight is more than half the battle.

Yup. That's one way. 'Course, it gets a little tiresome if every campaign is hurry, hurry hurry. Or if the players don't actually care if they show up late.


Which is a reason to upgrade/expand the feats available to fighters. Like what the PHB II does, at least conceptually and we can debate whether they go far enought and what a fighter should get etc.

Oh yes, I agree. But if there's a limit to source material, fighters get shafted, while the mage really has all he needs in the PHB.


Remember though, at level 1 a fighter can actually kill goblins and keep his party alive. A mage can get lucky and make two fall asleep or chicken-fry a bug.

Gobbos have a will save of +0. At least half of them are taking a dirt nap with one single arcane flick of the wrist. A level one dwarf fighter, 20 con, 16 dex, breastplate will have AC 18, HP 15. He can kill one or two gobbos per round, if he has cleave. He's not untouchable. He will be hit and because his to hit will only be around +4 or +5, he will definitely be missing (vs. ac 15) half the time. And since he can't afford healing potions, he relies on the cleric for healing. Who is limited with spells/day, just like the wizard.

Low level characters rest constantly.


(And druids need work because shapeshifting in any form is broken worse then casters as a whole. No Natural Spell would be a good start.)

Oh, totally.

Kioran
2007-06-17, 02:42 AM
One thing that really sucks about Fighters and martial characters is the fact that they totally rely on the healbot and are actually almost as fragile as the "glass cannon".
They have more HP - in most cases that just means more Spellslots necessesary to heal them. Great. Their AC? Better, usually, but if you use heavy armor their mobility is non-existant, making retreats from losing battles exceedingly difficult. They have pathetic saves, meaning theyīll lose many HP to breath weapon and such and (this is the worst point) run away crying most of the time against monster with Psycho effects. Their ineffective Skill list just adds insult to injury.
The Fighter needs more Power. Just making him like a caster with "Triple Phoenix Ascendant slash" and "Dance of the infuriated Squirrel" and what have you just sucks fluff wise and evades the problem of making the Fighter fighty. Argh.
And Wizards proft much more from the recent Powercreep. Ray of stupidity anyone? Orbs(Yes, these spells that, by RAW, made the entire School of evocation with the possible exception of Force effects, useless)
I realize what I suggest is Powercreep as well, but itīs easier to give something like the Fighter a little boost when he is not even able to perform his Part role. Just make sure most of ith stays in the advanced levels of the class, so that "dipping" into the class to get those new features is actually an investment.

So my wishlist:
- A (Su) ability that lets the Fighter(of at least lvl 6, otherwise itīs to easy to acquire per dip) generate a certain amount of temporary HP(duration 1 Minute or such) in exchange for a move action (shaking of damage), letting a "tanking" Fighter actually have staying power and less reliance on the cleric
- Additional Fighter Feats that let you gain a real advantage, unlike Toughness or improved Feint for my crit-monkey or what-have-you. As it stands, the Fighter cannot really use half of his Feats as he has everything he needs (for example the entire Focus-Specialization Chain + Power Attack + 2 or 3 Improved somethings) and from then on trades his Feats into Ostmark, getting significantly less out of them. Feats for Ab-increases(only physical), DR, AC, Move Speed (Dash with stacking) would do much good.
- A little more Skill Points for the Fighter. The ranger and the Barbarian both have these, unlike the Fighter, however, theyalso have class Features. I never quite got the impression the Fighter was so much Stronger than the Barbarian in a Fight, so youīd have to imit his effectiveness out of combat. Feats that unlock Skills as class skills(call it "Seasoned Campaigner" and let it make two additional Skills class skills) then give you the opportunity to sacrifice Feats for additional utility out of Combat
- Better Saves for the Fighter. Give him a good will save, or, more fitting, make Feats like Iron Will stack(call it "Greater Iron will" and give Fighter lvl 8 as prerequisite or somesuch)

Power Creep? Maybe, but the most important thing is it is only available for a very weak class and locked in way that ensure it stays with the Fighter......

Jack Mann
2007-06-17, 02:54 AM
To be fair, the orb spells haven't made evocation any less useful. Anything they replaced was worthless to begin with.

Kioran
2007-06-17, 04:21 AM
To be fair, the orb spells haven't made evocation any less useful. Anything they replaced was worthless to begin with.

hmmm - agreed. SR makes short work of Blasting, which is a crying shame. i know no Monster that can better be finished off by blasting than by save-or-die. Another design flaw. There should have been Evocation ignoraing SR or a Metamagic Feat that letīs blaster spells do this, instead of granting conjurers that power. Thatīs Power creep as well - nowadays most people tend to think a specialist wizard is a fine idea, since you can be diviner for free, or can become anything else for sacrificing only one school - Evocation is much like Charisma in most RPGs - an automatic dump. That WoTC thought that magic was balanced when the balanced with blaster-casters in mind just goes to show.........

Oh, and for my (Su) ability generating temporary HP, Iīve found a better solution. Tie it to Fighter class lvl (make it 1d4+Cha+Fighter lvl, with the die increasing on later lvls). That makes it useless for dips, since the action is to expensive for only a few HP, at least later on, but is useful to Fihters, even of low levels. Since the Temp-HP donīt stack, it means the fighter can ignore some minor hits and takes damage much slower, especially at lower lvls but even later.........

Kurald Galain
2007-06-17, 04:48 AM
A swordsman battled a sorcerer, once upon a time.

In that age such battles were frequent ... Usually the swordsman lost, and humanity's average intelligence rose some trifling fraction. Sometimes the swordsman won, and again the species was improved; for a sorcerer who cannot kill one miserable swordsman is a poor excuse for a sorcerer.

-- Jack Vance, The Magic May Return

Kioran
2007-06-17, 05:32 AM
A swordsman battled a sorcerer, once upon a time.

In that age such battles were frequent ... Usually the swordsman lost, and humanity's average intelligence rose some trifling fraction. Sometimes the swordsman won, and again the species was improved; for a sorcerer who cannot kill one miserable swordsman is a poor excuse for a sorcerer.

-- Jack Vance, The Magic May Return

Since your Nick indicates familiarity with a series of books, Iīd ask you to remember a battle between Kalam and a certain order of Warrior Mages...........

A Swordsman can kill a mage if done cleverly. That supplements have given mages spells to win even if played with utter stupidity is a crying shame. Also, power creep. Any sensbile DM does not allow the Spell compendium, or even complete Arcane, unless he wants an all-caster party. Now that would be pretty boring.

Starsinger
2007-06-17, 12:42 PM
The Fighter needs more Power. Just making him like a caster with "Triple Phoenix Ascendant slash" and "Dance of the infuriated Squirrel" and what have you just sucks fluff wise and evades the problem of making the Fighter fighty. Argh.

Why must fighters be mundane? A level 15 fighter is so far above what normal people are able to do why can't he have quasi-mystical powers?




So my wishlist:
- A (Su) ability that lets the Fighter(of at least lvl 6, otherwise itīs to easy to acquire per dip) generate a certain amount of temporary HP(duration 1 Minute or such) in exchange for a move action (shaking of damage), letting a "tanking" Fighter actually have staying power and less reliance on the cleric

Why supernatural? That stinks of casting False Life as a move action, why re-invent the wheel when you can just put on a shiny hub-cap? But only half the problem with a tanking fighter is his reliance on the cleric. The other half is the fact that nothing makes a monster go for the fighter, especially later on when you have all the flying/teleporting/burrowing/what-have-you monsters who can ignore the fighter and go straight towards the casters/archers/what-have-you in the back.


- Additional Fighter Feats that let you gain a real advantage, unlike Toughness or improved Feint for my crit-monkey or what-have-you. As it stands, the Fighter cannot really use half of his Feats as he has everything he needs (for example the entire Focus-Specialization Chain + Power Attack + 2 or 3 Improved somethings) and from then on trades his Feats into Ostmark, getting significantly less out of them. Feats for Ab-increases(only physical), DR, AC, Move Speed (Dash with stacking) would do much good.
Feats for DR? Sure, I can see that, actually, but why couldn't barbarians take it too? Or Knights? Or Paladins?

Feats for AC? Already exist, be a race with natural armor, and take improved natural armor from the monster manual. There's also dodge.

Feats for Move Speed? First you want DR, then better move speed? Are you sure you don't want barbarian? :smalltongue: But yeah, I could see an increased movement speed feat. But why do only fighters get it? Scouts would love it, and I'm sure other melee characters would want it too.


- A little more Skill Points for the Fighter. The ranger and the Barbarian both have these, unlike the Fighter, however, theyalso have class Features. I never quite got the impression the Fighter was so much Stronger than the Barbarian in a Fight, so youīd have to imit his effectiveness out of combat. Feats that unlock Skills as class skills(call it "Seasoned Campaigner" and let it make two additional Skills class skills) then give you the opportunity to sacrifice Feats for additional utility out of Combat

If you ask me, no class, other than possibly Wizard/Psion should have 2+int for their skill points. The fact that classes have it is a shame. Especially classes like Sorcerer, who have to invest 2 skill points, well atleast 1, in order to be effective.


- Better Saves for the Fighter. Give him a good will save, or, more fitting, make Feats like Iron Will stack(call it "Greater Iron will" and give Fighter lvl 8 as prerequisite or somesuch)
Why does he get good will saves? Mundane fighters aren't known for their spectacularly strong wills as a whole. And if you're giving it to them because they deserve it, why not for everyone else who doesn't have good will?
Now, letting Iron Will be taken more than once and letting it stack? That's neat... I like that. Again I ask, why only fighters? Why can't a rogue practice his will saves until he's better than your average rogue? Especially since Rogues get slippery mind, it would seem like it should work to me. Why only fighters?

Kioran
2007-06-17, 04:43 PM
Why must fighters be mundane? A level 15 fighter is so far above what normal people are able to do why can't he have quasi-mystical powers?

I donīt think he should be mundane in the most classical sense - His abilities just should be relatively devoid of attached fluff to reflect his ubiquitous nature.



Why supernatural? That stinks of casting False Life as a move action, why re-invent the wheel when you can just put on a shiny hub-cap?

It is very similiar, intentionally so. However, false life is too weak at higher lvls and too powerful at lower. With a mechanic similiar to the one I advise, the ability is a Fighter Class-Feature that grows with your Fighter levels and has some usefulness on most Sub-Epic lvls. We can discuss about the (Su) bit though. I didnīt want to introduce to much power......


But only half the problem with a tanking fighter is his reliance on the cleric. The other half is the fact that nothing makes a monster go for the fighter, especially later on when you have all the flying/teleporting/burrowing/what-have-you monsters who can ignore the fighter and go straight towards the casters/archers/what-have-you in the back.

Bad luck. Smart Monsters wonīt do it. However, you can still provide a rearguard for them and smack the monster when it appears.


Feats for DR? Sure, I can see that, actually, but why couldn't barbarians take it too? Or Knights? Or Paladins?

Feats for AC? Already exist, be a race with natural armor, and take improved natural armor from the monster manual. There's also dodge.

Feats for Move Speed? First you want DR, then better move speed? Are you sure you don't want barbarian? :smalltongue: But yeah, I could see an increased movement speed feat. But why do only fighters get it? Scouts would love it, and I'm sure other melee characters would want it too.

Barbarians can take "greater Resilency" to improve their DR. Paladins? Give them the Benefit of the Warblade and let them buy Fighter Feats like a Fighter a few lvls lower, though they rarely have the Feat to spare. Everyone else, especially Rangers and Duskblades(which I, irrationally, loathe deeply) shouldnīt have access to DR. They are frail, more wimpy, and mostly Elven. They have Skills or casting. Strong defense doesnīt suit them.
AC with Feats: Dodge would be fine if it applied against everyone and stacked. Natural Armor is equally fine(and similiar in Power to Dodge bonuses, so I think itīs okay), and should not be restricted to races with natural Armor because they always have LA
Move Speed: Shouldnīt be restricted to Barbs. Besides, they donīt have it anymore - they have pounce, with the ability to trade in the wet dream of everyone Chargebuild twinker for a misguided bonus to movement :smallbiggrin:
Making the "Dash" Feat apply to medium armored Chars as well and making it Stack would suffice. And thereīs no harm in making it available to everyone - again, losing Feats hurts them more than the Fighter, and i donīt see 5ft/Feat as all that powerful


If you ask me, no class, other than possibly Wizard/Psion should have 2+int for their skill points. The fact that classes have it is a shame. Especially classes like Sorcerer, who have to invest 2 skill points, well atleast 1, in order to be effective.

Okay, we agree on this.


Why does he get good will saves? Mundane fighters aren't known for their spectacularly strong wills as a whole. And if you're giving it to them because they deserve it, why not for everyone else who doesn't have good will?
Now, letting Iron Will be taken more than once and letting it stack? That's neat... I like that. Again I ask, why only fighters? Why can't a rogue practice his will saves until he's better than your average rogue? Especially since Rogues get slippery mind, it would seem like it should work to me. Why only fighters?

Again, I see little harm in making it available to all. Itīs a lot more costly to others, and is only really effective if taken multiple times. So Yeah, love for everyone.......

DSCrankshaw
2007-06-17, 08:57 PM
Out of curiosity, has anyone played d20 Modern? I get the impression that Urban Arcana is better balanced than regular D&D, for several reasons:

1. All spellcasting classes are advanced classes. You need at least three levels of a non-casting class before you can learn to cast spells.

2. Spell levels only go up to 5. If you want something more powerful than that, you need to perform a ritual spell, and ritual spells take hours, require numerous spellcasters, and are pretty risky.

3. Technology. If the fighter gets an automatic rifle and hand grenades, your fireball is going to look less impressive.

The thing is, d20 Modern is a system that can be used in any technology age. d20 Future and d20 Past both discuss what's available in different time periods. You could set an Urban Arcana campaign in the Middle Ages and essentially do the low magic version of D&D. You lose balancing factor number 3, but it should still work, although a few things more geared towards later time periods would end up a bit wonky. (Some skills, feats, and spells don't make much sense this way, but I think just leaving those out wouldn't much hurt things.) This is one of the things Rich Burlew's discussing doing with his world design.

Starsinger
2007-06-17, 09:13 PM
Out of curiosity, has anyone played d20 Modern? I get the impression that Urban Arcana is better balanced than regular D&D, for several reasons:

1. All spellcasting classes are advanced classes. You need at least three levels of a non-casting class before you can learn to cast spells.


Which is great at higher levels, when you have most of your spells, but.. y'know that part of D&D where all you have is one 1st level spell/day? Imagine doing that as a 4th level character... magic missile isn't impressive at all then.

DSCrankshaw
2007-06-17, 09:44 PM
Which is great at higher levels, when you have most of your spells, but.. y'know that part of D&D where all you have is one 1st level spell/day? Imagine doing that as a 4th level character... magic missile isn't impressive at all then.
Remember, you still have those other three levels, and assuming you didn't waste them completely, at low levels a Smart Hero/Mage is a pretty effective skill monkey, with just a little magic for pizazz. The mage advanced class is a little more powerful in mundane circumstances than the wizard class, what with more skill points, better skill selection, more HP, a Defense Bonus, and no disadvantages when it comes to the weapons he can use (no one gets free feats for weapons and armor: everyone has to pay the same price). Use the right occupation to select a few skills you want that aren't in the usual skill list, and the Mage's useful even when he's just beginning to learn magic.

LotharBot
2007-06-18, 06:24 PM
I donīt think he should be mundane in the most classical sense - His abilities just should be relatively devoid of attached fluff to reflect his ubiquitous nature.

Now that's something I agree with. The one thing I don't like about ToB is that it attaches too much fluff to a crunch system that really should be universal for all melee builds. I'm perfectly willing to ignore that and adopt Warblade mechanics directly for fighters, but others think the fluff is important and think fighters need their own fix to let them compete.



And a fighter can use their feats generally speaking without expiration. The more encounters per day, the more important they fighters become.
Until the cleric runs out of healing spells, actually.

Why is the cleric using spell slots on healing outside of combat beyond about level 5? Wands of cure light wounds cost something like 2.8 gold per HP healed. That's such a tiny amount that every cleric, ranger, paladin, and anyone else with CLW on their spell list should be walking around with a wand by that stage of the game. Sure, if someone gets low on HP during a fight, you might need to use up an actual spell slot to heal them... but if the fight is over, heal them by d8+1 hp at a time until they're full again. Higher-level spell slots are far too valuable to waste them on things you can do with a level 1 wand.

Dhavaer
2007-06-18, 06:32 PM
Remember, you still have those other three levels, and assuming you didn't waste them completely, at low levels a Smart Hero/Mage is a pretty effective skill monkey, with just a little magic for pizazz. The mage advanced class is a little more powerful in mundane circumstances than the wizard class, what with more skill points, better skill selection, more HP, a Defense Bonus, and no disadvantages when it comes to the weapons he can use (no one gets free feats for weapons and armor: everyone has to pay the same price). Use the right occupation to select a few skills you want that aren't in the usual skill list, and the Mage's useful even when he's just beginning to learn magic.

Dedicated 2/Fast 1 Hedge Wizard is probably a more powerful entry into Mage than Smart 3. Without houserules or varients, it gets +4 Defence, +1 Fortitude, +1 average hp and a better selection of Talents. In exchange, slightly less skills.

DSCrankshaw
2007-06-18, 06:59 PM
Dedicated 2/Fast 1 Hedge Wizard is probably a more powerful entry into Mage than Smart 3. Without houserules or varients, it gets +4 Defence, +1 Fortitude, +1 average hp and a better selection of Talents. In exchange, slightly less skills.
I was thinking of mixing in a Fast Hero level or two. It didn't occur to me to do Hedge Wizard as the occupation. I usually like Adventurer, since you can get Decipher Script and Knowledge (arcane lore) as class skills plus Personal Firearms Proficiency as your feat. If you're willing to spend some cross-class skill points, you can do two Fast levels and just one Smart level. Evasion and Linguist and Two Weapon Fighting.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-06-18, 07:30 PM
So my wishlist:
- A (Su) ability that lets the Fighter(of at least lvl 6, otherwise itīs to easy to acquire per dip) generate a certain amount of temporary HP(duration 1 Minute or such) in exchange for a move action (shaking of damage), letting a "tanking" Fighter actually have staying power and less reliance on the cleric
- Additional Fighter Feats that let you gain a real advantage, unlike Toughness or improved Feint for my crit-monkey or what-have-you. As it stands, the Fighter cannot really use half of his Feats as he has everything he needs (for example the entire Focus-Specialization Chain + Power Attack + 2 or 3 Improved somethings) and from then on trades his Feats into Ostmark, getting significantly less out of them. Feats for Ab-increases(only physical), DR, AC, Move Speed (Dash with stacking) would do much good.
- A little more Skill Points for the Fighter. The ranger and the Barbarian both have these, unlike the Fighter, however, theyalso have class Features. I never quite got the impression the Fighter was so much Stronger than the Barbarian in a Fight, so youīd have to imit his effectiveness out of combat. Feats that unlock Skills as class skills(call it "Seasoned Campaigner" and let it make two additional Skills class skills) then give you the opportunity to sacrifice Feats for additional utility out of Combat
- Better Saves for the Fighter. Give him a good will save, or, more fitting, make Feats like Iron Will stack(call it "Greater Iron will" and give Fighter lvl 8 as prerequisite or somesuch)

Power Creep? Maybe, but the most important thing is it is only available for a very weak class and locked in way that ensure it stays with the Fighter......

Mechanically there are already some in game:

Hidden Talent Psionic Vigor Expanded Psionics Handbook. Give the fighter PP bonus for leveling up and his choice of mental to fuel the power and there is a fix extra temporary hit points which last minutes per level 5 per PP whenever he wants to use them.

Mettle from the Templar PRC Complete Divine the fighter counter feat akin to withstanding the damage and shrugging it off with fortitude vice avoiding it with Reflex like the Monk or Rogue with Evasion.

Stand Tough Street Fighter PRC from Complete Adventurer make a check and convert weapon or blow damagebut not from a spell and convert it to non lethal damage.

Spellfire Wielder from Magic of Faerun is great for a fighter if you want to power them up a little.

I think it was D20 where I saw the Improved Toughness feat which gives the PC an extra hit point at each level.

Corolinth
2007-06-18, 07:43 PM
Of course, an annis hag never comes up from behind and catches your party by surprise, dropping the wizard in one attack, forcing their fighter to have to save everybody's bacon. That never happens in actual play. Everything always goes as planned, and the wizard kills everything.

Dhavaer
2007-06-18, 11:01 PM
I was thinking of mixing in a Fast Hero level or two. It didn't occur to me to do Hedge Wizard as the occupation. I usually like Adventurer, since you can get Decipher Script and Knowledge (arcane lore) as class skills plus Personal Firearms Proficiency as your feat. If you're willing to spend some cross-class skill points, you can do two Fast levels and just one Smart level. Evasion and Linguist and Two Weapon Fighting.

Hedge Wizard gets you either Arcane Skills or Magical Heritage, Heritage is probably better. If you take Mood Lighting (from the Modern Player's Handbook) as one of your cantrips and Shadow Heritage (or a race with low-light vision) you can get 20% concealment for an encounter.
You can spend your other feat on Personal Firearms or Archaic Weapons (a half-elf or full elf can get both, in addition to other abilities) and you'll be a reasonably effective fighter. You can take Skill Emphasis for a skill monkey, or Empathy for a face.
Taking Fast at second level can make you a reasonably good tank and gets you Tumble as a class skill and either Increased Speed or Evasion.
Taking Dedicated at third level means if you have an automatic weapon you can get Advanced Firearms and Burst Fire, as well as qualifying for Mage without using cross-class skills.
At fourth level you can get True Strike, and cast it before Burst Firing you HK G3. 4d10 damage will force a massive damage save on just about anyone.

Adventurer doesn't really measure up to Hedge Wizard because the only Mage skill it gives is Knowledge (arcane lore), which every mental class gets anyway. With Hedge Wizard you can take everything but Knowledge and take your first and third levels in Dedicated, which gives you good saves and defence.

Kioran
2007-06-19, 12:26 AM
Mechanically there are already some in game:

Hidden Talent Psionic Vigor Expanded Psionics Handbook. Give the fighter PP bonus for leveling up and his choice of mental to fuel the power and there is a fix extra temporary hit points which last minutes per level 5 per PP whenever he wants to use them.

Mettle from the Templar PRC Complete Divine the fighter counter feat akin to withstanding the damage and shrugging it off with fortitude vice avoiding it with Reflex like the Monk or Rogue with Evasion.

Stand Tough Street Fighter PRC from Complete Adventurer make a check and convert weapon or blow damagebut not from a spell and convert it to non lethal damage.

Spellfire Wielder from Magic of Faerun is great for a fighter if you want to power them up a little.

I think it was D20 where I saw the Improved Toughness feat which gives the PC an extra hit point at each level.

Notice that most of these are either not Fighter, but a PrC, or use mechanics like Psionics which are not supported by most DMs, so this is really a moot point. Iīm talking about more Power for the Fighter base class.

sleeping fishy
2007-06-19, 01:02 AM
Of course, an annis hag never comes up from behind and catches your party by surprise, dropping the wizard in one attack, forcing their fighter to have to save everybody's bacon. That never happens in actual play. Everything always goes as planned, and the wizard kills everything.

why would the wizard be in the back of the party & without any defenses?? your right, that never happens... at least not to me...