[3.5] Core only with stingy DM... need advice [Archive]

Daelnoron

2016-08-15, 12:21 PM

ComaVision

2016-08-15, 12:25 PM

FearlessGnome

2016-08-15, 12:36 PM

Ouch. Sorry to hear about your DM.

I would go Wizard, and work with your Sorcerer friend to put his spells in your book too. You're probably not very likely to be able to walk into a temple of Boccob/Arcane university and buy some copying time with their libraries. If he's dead set on core, the alignment/skill/class limited item discounts might fly, and exp is a river that favours crafters.

Daelnoron

2016-08-15, 12:41 PM

Yeah, I was afraid of that. Well, I'm quite confident in my ability to build up a neat sorcerer or cleric.

However I am fairly open to classes or combinations that are merly mediocre but interesting. Tho group is propably going to be running a fairly unoptimized game and with potentially 3,5 full on casters, I'd prefer something different...

FearlessGnome

2016-08-15, 12:44 PM

I know what you mean. I love Binders and Shadowcasters, both considerably below a Core only Sorcerer in power, but quite fun. It's very unfortunate when DMs feel the only way they can run a game is by blanket banning the vast majority of the players' options.

Troacctid

2016-08-15, 12:44 PM

Just play a druid. You don't need items, you don't need prestige classes, you certainly don't need to multiclass, and you don't need any material from outside core.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 12:54 PM

Stuck in Core, you're pretty much restricted to Wizard, Cleric, Druid, or Sorcerer for a competent character. There just aren't good options for any of the other classes. Consider going Wizard and grabbing crafting feats so you can mitigate the lack of wealth your DM is going to be saddling you with.

Ignore him. He is of the opinion "only casters are good."

His idea of being a crafter has merit, but with a gm this stingy, it's likely that he will nerf crafting with serious time imitations, making you waste a lot of feats for only a little added value.

Some ideas:

Sorceror or druid who specializes in summons. The summons will allow you to fill most gaps in the party. High dex and improved init are your friends.

Paladin: Can add some extra healing to what the cleric does, and can deal some decent pain without major magic items.

Barbarian or Monk; Great damage potential regardless of magic items. Doesn't need to spend too many feats in one weapon to be good. Avoid weapon focus/specialization for barb, focus on power attack type feats.
For monk, focus on combat maneuvers. A good spiked chain monk focusing on trip or disarm can dominate the field with one.
Avoid wizard and fighter at all costs. Too specific for fighter, they need to focus on a particular weapon to be good, and a stingy gm won't likely give it to you. And you already noted spell scarcity as a real wizard problem.

Avoid rogue as well, unless you want to do the whole rogue sandwich thing with the other rogue. In that case, make sure there's no redundancy.

I would also advise against cleric since that roll is already taken.

So of the core classes, I suggest eliminating cleric, wizard and fighter straight up.

Going by current party make up, you are completely lacking in both arcane and martial support.

So if your other undecided goes barbarian, go sorceror. Summon monster should be your first pick each spell level. If he goes wizard, go barbarian, paladin or monk.

Eldariel

2016-08-15, 12:58 PM

Sadly ComaVision speaks the truth, any non-caster gets royally shafted by those limitations where-as full casters barely notice. Even more-so, on level 2 Sorcerer is just rather difficult to play as you need to wait until level 4 to get your 2nd level spells. That's something I never really was into myself, though if you don't mind being behind half the levels, it's an option.

In a vacuum, the safest bet is Druid: you get an animal companion that's almost as good a Fighter as a Fighter (and you can always get new ones), you get divine spellcasting to cure ability damage and drain, to resurrect people and to use Wand of Cure Light Wounds, you get a good mix of divine/arcane-level control spells (starting with Entangle on level 1) & save-or-Xs, and on level 5 you become a competent warrior for 5 hours/day on your own right. On level 7, you can stay in animal form for 21 hours daily and cast spells thanks to Natural Spell.

However, given the current party configuration, you already have a Cleric and a Druid and a maybe-Wizard; in that case, the best path to take would most likely indeed be to go Wizard. Arcane spells solve encounters like nothing else on these levels (Color Spray, Sleep, Grease) and it would be a pain for the party to not have access to them, or Web/Glitterdust/Pyrotechnics on the next level. Enlarge Person is also a very potent buff and you'd bring that on the table as well. Further, multiple arcanists complement each other rather well, being able to hit enemies from multiple angles or to have one guy open up and the other disable the stragglers or whatever.

The only drawback is that compared to Druid, you want PRCs a bit more: the Loremaster PRC is a nice theme and a continuation for your character. It comes quite late though (level 8 the earliest) and the real must-have, Archmage, comes so late it probably doesn't matter (level 13). The only significant option and advancement over the baseline is the Red Wizard of Thay, which is printed in the DMG. That combined with Leadership (obviously you'd get apprentices as your cohort and followers to fuel Circle Magic) can create some truly awesome stuff (you finally unlock Circle Magic on ECL 10 at Wizard 5/Red Wizard 5); talk with your DM if that happens to interest you.

In short, if I were in your shoes, I'd pick out of:
Druid
Wizard
Wizard/Loremaster/Archmage
Wizard/Red Wizard/Archmage

Depending on how much hassle the PRCs are. If the DM makes it too difficult, straight Wizard is more than reasonable here as well. Cleric isn't horrible either but Druid is probably better this early on. Wizard might have some trouble getting more spells in his spellbook with this limitation but at the very least you have good level-up spells and you can probably scrounge some up if the world contains other Wizards. If the other player rolled a Wizard too, you could synchronize with the spells you learn and scribe each others' spells from the level-ups. If you also can get Leadership, you could also have a Wizard apprentice.

And yeah, Craft-feats are probably good if equipment isn't forthcoming otherwise. You start with Scribe Scroll as a Wizard and the party probably wants at least one person with Craft Wands and Craft Wondrous Items. The others aren't that essential. Wands are mostly for out-of-combat healing and all-day endurance.

Demidos

2016-08-15, 01:06 PM

There's always the option of the Horizon Tripper, which you could nerf somewhat (e.g. use a glaive or something similar) to keep in line with the party.

You could try some sort of Ranger/Fighter Hybrid (just make sure one is a favored class). This would allow TWF.

Sorcerer would indeed provide arcane and martial support (via summons), which is nice. You can augment summon there.

I would AVOID Leadership and Red Wizard of Thay, because those seem utterly out of proportion to the rest of your party, and you have mentioned that your DM is rather new. If you're starting an arms race, you could at least inform your party first. (Though it does sound like you've already thought that through, so Kudos).

Troacctid

2016-08-15, 01:11 PM

There's nothing wrong with having two druids in the party. It's the most powerful and versatile class in the game, and it can fill any role. Two is better than one.

For monk, focus on combat maneuvers. A good spiked chain monk focusing on trip or disarm can dominate the field with one.
Ha ha what

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 01:24 PM

There's nothing wrong with having two druids in the party. It's the most powerful and versatile class in the game, and it can fill any role. Two is better than one.

Ha ha what

Yeah, I went there. At 2nd level, 2 trips per round, combat reflexes and some decent magical backup, the enemy never gets to the squishy casters. As you level, it only becomes more effective. And as a reach weapon you can pretty much cover the whole party.

I have seen it wielded to amazing effect.

You just suck as a role player and strategist if you can't make one work for you.

With his stats, he could easily work in a good 5 attacks of opportunity a round which is fantastic.

Nubsternator

2016-08-15, 01:26 PM

Daelnoron

2016-08-15, 01:32 PM

Strigon

2016-08-15, 01:34 PM

Yeah, I went there. At 2nd level, 2 trips per round, combat reflexes and some decent magical backup, the enemy never gets to the squishy casters. As you level, it only becomes more effective. And as a reach weapon you can pretty much cover the whole party.

I have seen it wielded to amazing effect.

You just suck as a role player and strategist if you can't make one work for you.

Look, mate, it's one thing to accuse somebody of being a poor optimizer or combat strategist if they can't appreciate your build, it's another thing entirely to call them a bad roleplayer. The first is a faux pas, the second is... well, to be perfectly honest, it's ludicrous.

I mean, really?
"Try this build"
"That build's bad"
"You suck at roleplaying" - what?

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 01:35 PM

Nubsternator

2016-08-15, 01:42 PM

eggynack

2016-08-15, 01:45 PM

You can't flurry with a spiked chain.

CharonsHelper

2016-08-15, 01:49 PM

I would say the extra attack from flurry trumps the bab for the first 8 or 9 levels. And I believe chains can be used with finess.
To be fair though, a fighter wouldn't need to beef his wisdom and could assign a 17 to his strength. With a half orc, and with enlarge person cast, he could be dealing some serious pain across the battlefield relying on not even a magical chain.

3.5 core only fighter & monk are both terrible.

The fighter is terrible for two reasons.

1. There aren't enough good feats in core only for them to benefit much.

2. The main advantage of 3.5 fighter is the feats allowing you to enter prestige classes faster. You should never take more than 4 levels at absolute max.

The monk is terrible because... it's a 3.5 monk, and the class is terrible beyond MAYBE a 1-2 level dip.

But yes - losing 'easy' access to prestige classes hurts martials a lot more than it does casters. It actually boosts casters slightly because all of that bouncing between prestige classes can bump up a martial's saves, and lower opposing saves make casters better. (assuming NPCs are built similarly to PCs)

Eldariel

2016-08-15, 01:52 PM

If you want "Summon nature's ally", druid can convert any spell to one of that level. They also get an animal companion that can be used for tripping and such.

If you want to trip by yourself, fighter may be a better choice than monk. Less MAD and full BAB are more beneficial, IMO, although you did get good rolls.

I would say the extra attack from flurry trumps the bab for the first 8 or 9 levels. And I believe chains can be used with finess.
To be fair though, a fighter wouldn't need to beef his wisdom and could assign a 17 to his strength. With a half orc, and with enlarge person cast, he could be dealing some serious pain across the battlefield relying on not even a magical chain.

Barbarian would be better than both (the only martial base class with any advantage in tripping; Barbarian > Dragon Disciple is actually pretty strong far as Core mundanes go). Tripping is Strength-check and Barbarian gets bonus to Strength. However, the party already has a Cleric that can fulfill the function; indeed, if I wanted to make a Tripper, I'd just make another Cleric and get the Strength-domain so I could cast my own Enlarge Person without having to rely on someone in the party playing an arcanist and wanting to take the spell and spend the action.

Sadly Monk weapons don't contain a single reach weapon, let alone a reach weapon that enables tripping so he can't Flurry to trip unless he's adjacent to the enemy (in which case the prone enemies can strike back, albeit at -4, missing half the point of tripping). Generally you want to use Spiked Chain/Guisarme/etc. - a reach weapon that enables tripping.

Thanks for the advice so far :) Thats a whole ton in a very short time!

I don't seem to be able to warm up to a wizard that much. I don't know, maybe I need to take an unbiased look at the differences.
The summoning Sorcerer is indeed something I can get behind. A sweet talking, arrogant someone, willing to strike a deal with anything to get some power... only they get diplomacy as a cross class... is there a way to circumvent this in core? And/or a way to get +2 charisma via race? I am not near my books right now...
Though the low level trouble is something I heard of a lot... in case I were to play the soecerer this way... any useful tipps to live past the first levels?

@Demidos: Thanks. Yeah, I need to gulp down the temptation to just break his game hard and claim "well, you wouldn't let my play anything INTERESTING, so..." but I'd like a few more dips into dnd later on so... I'll behave^^

Don't forget, just because you have power doesn't mean you have to use it. You can make yourself powerful and only go all-out if things really go wrong and you're on the verge of a TPK. That's how I often play in less optimized groups; often the situation never comes up and you can cruise along nicely.

Sadly there's no good way to get additional class skills in Core. And the only Charisma-bonus races have level adjustment (as opposed to Int where Gray Elves have a bonus). But if you don't feel like a Wizard, don't play one. It's all down to what you want, after all. These are just options (and their assessments) getting thrown around. Just mind the difference in getting higher level spells and day-to-day versatility between Wizard and Sorcerer. Also the skill points; being Int-based, Wizards actually have a fair bit while Sorcerers are generally starved (since casters need Concentration and Spellcraft/Knowledge: Arcana have a lot of key uses for arcane casters too...and now we're out of skill points per level on a 12 Int character).

That said: Wizards' shtick is mastery through knowledge; understanding the inner workings of the multiverse and arcana to bring spells about and in the side, knowing everything about everything (it's very convenient party-wise to have a character with good Int and at least all the creature-related Knowledges ranked to some degree; enables you to know a bit about the strengths and weaknesses of everything you face without metagaming). Of course, where you'd go from there is your choice.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 01:54 PM

Thanks for the advice so far :) Thats a whole ton in a very short time!

I don't seem to be able to warm up to a wizard that much. I don't know, maybe I need to take an unbiased look at the differences.
The summoning Sorcerer is indeed something I can get behind. A sweet talking, arrogant someone, willing to strike a deal with anything to get some power... only they get diplomacy as a cross class... is there a way to circumvent this in core? And/or a way to get +2 charisma via race? I am not near my books right now...
Though the low level trouble is something I heard of a lot... in case I were to play the soecerer this way... any useful tipps to live past the first levels?

@Demidos: Thanks. Yeah, I need to gulp down the temptation to just break his game hard and claim "well, you wouldn't let my play anything INTERESTING, so..." but I'd like a few more dips into dnd later on so... I'll behave^^

(My mobile's power is dieing btw, may be a bit till more answers from me)

Str 8, Dex 15, Con 17, Int 15, Wis 13, Cha 17. Hit points are an absolute necessity, bumping your con via items will allow you to survive when everything will need a nat 2 to hit you. Plus good fort saves are good.

Improved init and gloves of dex will help you a lot as well.

Sorcerors benefit most from prestige classes in 3.5, but ONLY if the prestige class does not interfere with spell casting gains.

As for wizards gaining spells faster, I have NEVER had a problem with it using a sorceror. When the wizard is tapped out, the sorceror has power to spare. Past 6th level, sorcerors almost never run out of useful spells.

For spell selection I recommend Summon:Blast:Utility:Utility:Utility

IE: Summon 1:Burning Hands/Sleep OR Color spray then Mage Armor:Shield:Expeditious retreat.

Have as many options as possible. Summon a monster. Ineffective? Blast it. Still ineffective? Buff my party let them deal. Still ineffective? Time to go.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:02 PM

Barbarian would be better than both (the only martial base class with any advantage in tripping; Barbarian > Dragon Disciple is actually pretty strong far as Core mundanes go). Tripping is Strength-check and Barbarian gets bonus to Strength. However, the party already has a Cleric that can fulfill the function; indeed, if I wanted to make a Tripper, I'd just make another Cleric and get the Strength-domain so I could cast my own Enlarge Person without having to rely on someone in the party playing an arcanist and wanting to take the spell and spend the action.

Sadly Monk weapons don't contain a single reach weapon, let alone a reach weapon that enables tripping so he can't Flurry to trip unless he's adjacent to the enemy (in which case the prone enemies can strike back, albeit at -4, missing half the point of tripping). Generally you want to use Spiked Chain/Guisarme/etc. - a reach weapon that enables tripping.

Don't forget, just because you have power doesn't mean you have to use it. You can make yourself powerful and only go all-out if things really go wrong and you're on the verge of a TPK. That's how I often play in less optimized groups; often the situation never comes up and you can cruise along nicely.

Sadly there's no good way to get additional class skills in Core. And the only Charisma-bonus races have level adjustment (as opposed to Int where Gray Elves have a bonus). But if you don't feel like a Wizard, don't play one. It's all down to what you want, after all. These are just options (and their assessments) getting thrown around. Just mind the difference in getting higher level spells and day-to-day versatility between Wizard and Sorcerer. Also the skill points; being Int-based, Wizards actually have a fair bit while Sorcerers are generally starved (since casters need Concentration and Spellcraft/Knowledge: Arcana have a lot of key uses for arcane casters too...and now we're out of skill points per level on a 12 Int character).

That said: Wizards' shtick is mastery through knowledge; understanding the inner workings of the multiverse and arcana to bring spells about and in the side, knowing everything about everything (it's very convenient party-wise to have a character with good Int and at least all the creature-related Knowledges ranked to some degree; enables you to know a bit about the strengths and weaknesses of everything you face without metagaming). Of course, where you'd go from there is your choice.

I thought spiked chain WAS a monk weapon. That changes things if it's not.

Barbarian just doesn't get enough feats early on to be an effective tripper, so eh. And as for cleric, pffft. Already 2 divine casters in the party. It will be obnoxiously redundant with 3. I would personally say no to that.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:11 PM

I stand corrected, monk cannot flurry a spiked chain.

So a half orc fighter+spiked chain +enlarge or a summon monster sorc.

I am guessing which one you take will direct the undecided towards the other.

Sounds like you want sorc though.

Eldariel

2016-08-15, 02:23 PM

Barbarian just doesn't get enough feats early on to be an effective tripper, so eh. And as for cleric, pffft. Already 2 divine casters in the party. It will be obnoxiously redundant with 3. I would personally say no to that.

You only need 2 feats to be an efficient tripper: Combat Expertise and Improved Trip. Beyond that, just pick up Power Attack & Combat Reflexes and you're more or less done with feats. Human Barbarian can be a good tripper from level 1 while other races need until level 3. Also, you can always multiclass Barbarian/Fighter to get an extra feat or two (just take the first level in Barbarian for the (4+Int)x4 skills and 12 HP). 2 levels of Fighter is still okay for a game crammed to these levels. But feats are something everyone gets, while class features are irreplaceable, and Barbarian gets the only useful class feature to this end - thus, Barbarian should take the priority, having superior chassis overall. If forced to single-class, Barbarian all the way.

And divine casters, they complement each other great. Divine casters have superb self-buffing abilities as well as group buffing; more characters means more slots, which means the party has access to buffs for a longer time and less of a chance of spells targeting enemy's weak save not being available. Basically, the more spellcasters, the higher the chance of you being prepared for whatever you encounter are. The doubly awesome part is that the divine casters themselves eventually work towards buffs like Divine Power/Righteous Might (plus Quickened Divine Favor) or Wildshape which make them perfectly competitive with buffed warriors far as combat prowess goes (that is to say, they are warriors that can buff themselves). They also have good HP, armor, and protective spells; Clerics and Druids are just as tanky as any other frontline characters. They truly are the ultimate "do-everything" classes. Summoning, control, fighting, buffing, debuffing, whatever, they can do it and rather well at that.

But Gray Elf Wizard would indeed be awesome with these stats. Going middle-aged, you'd get:
10 Str, 16 Dex, 14 Con, 20 Int, 9 Wis, 16 Cha

That's pretty much just perfect. You could even take advantage of the Elven native proficiencies and wield a Longbow at no damage penalties and be rather efficient with it on these levels; +4 to hit for 1d8 (x3) is perfectly reasonable for a level 2 character. Down the line you get stuff like Greater Magic Weapon, Flame Arrow, Minor Creation (for various poisons) and such making you actually scary as an Archer with just few spell slot investments. You could go 18 Dex, 12 Con too which would give you better Hide/Move Silently/AC/Initiative (that is, tools that make it less likely that you take damage) as well as accuracy, but ultimately a d4 HD class generally wants some Con.

The alternative Archer Line-up would be something like 12/18/12/20/14/9; +5 for 1d8+1 is certainly fine on these levels. Of course, the minor bonuses quickly lose meaning and higher Charisma is cool but there's something to be said for decent Spot, Listen, Will-saves and such as well. Strength could also be dumped to 6 if one felt so inclined but that might cause some problems with the carrying capacity.

Bakkan

2016-08-15, 02:28 PM

For a low- to mid-op core-only game I think a barbarian is plenty good as a tripper. Go human for a bonus feat and take Combat Expertise and Improved Trip and level 1. With the 17 in Strength, your attack bonus (at level 2) with a non-masterwork guisarme is +5 (+7 when raging). That's plenty to hit most enemies' touch AC, and with a +7 (+9) bonus on the opposed check you're got a decent chance of tripping anything Medium-sized or smaller. Once they're down, your followup attack is at a +9 (+11) and deals 2d4+4 (2d4+7) damage, average 9 (12).

The half-orc fighter has a one feat advantage and +2 strength over the barbarian, which he can use to pick up spiked chain proficiency. This gives him an initial attack bonus of +6, an opposed check at +8, a post-trip attack at +10 and 2d4+6 damage on a hit, average 11. This is slightly worse than the barbarian when he is raging and slightly better when he is not, and the fighter has the advantage of being able to hit things adjacent to him.

All in all, the two builds are very close in effectiveness. As levels increase, the barbarian pulls ahead as he is able to rage more often and gains more bonuses for doing so. He can pick up spiked chain proficiency next level (and then probably Power Attack at 6).

Incidentally, if one is restricted to the SRD instead of Core, then barbarian pulls so far ahead it's embarassing, with Whirling Frenzy and Wolf Totem alternate class features.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:28 PM

Look, mate, it's one thing to accuse somebody of being a poor optimizer or combat strategist if they can't appreciate your build, it's another thing entirely to call them a bad roleplayer. The first is a faux pas, the second is... well, to be perfectly honest, it's ludicrous.

I mean, really?
"Try this build"
"That build's bad"
"You suck at roleplaying" - what?

Anyone who claims any of the core classes is bad or too weak has no clue how to roleplay and are probably better off playing something out of a cardboard box. Maybe some descent is better for these people.
I can have fun playing ANYTHING. I once played with a guy who played a goblin gunslinger with a 3 round set up time. He would place two sticks in the ground 1 round, attach a sheet to them 2 rounds, then fire normally. This prevented him from being blown back as he used a rifle sized for a human.

ROLEPLAYING IS NOT A COMPETITION.

If you feel it is, or should be... seriously, go play descent. If pvp erupts constantly in your games, you have a problem.

**** optomizing.

Op, play a bard. Straight bard. Go Elan on their ass. 8 int. Let's do this.

With a spiked chain. No feat, eat the -4.

Galacktic

2016-08-15, 02:35 PM

Buddy, I can play a max strength wizard who tries to be a fighter with 11 int but that's still a crappy build. You're sincerely just not good at the game, and being competent doesn't mean I'm not role-playing. It means I'm role-playing someone who is actually half decent.

Deadline

2016-08-15, 02:35 PM

As for wizards gaining spells faster, I have NEVER had a problem with it using a sorceror. When the wizard is tapped out, the sorceror has power to spare. Past 6th level, sorcerors almost never run out of useful spells.

At low levels this isn't really a noticeable difference, and at high levels, unless both the wizard and sorcerer are playing blasters, it will be a rare day where the casters run out of useful spells. Edit - It's a shame that this is a core only game, because Reserve Feats are a real handy way to ensure that even Blasters have some versatility left over at the end of a really long adventuring day.

For spell selection I recommend Summon:Blast:Utility:Utility:Utility

IE: Summon 1:Burning Hands/Sleep OR Color spray then Mage Armor:Shield:Expeditious retreat.

Have as many options as possible. Summon a monster. Ineffective? Blast it. Still ineffective? Buff my party let them deal. Still ineffective? Time to go.

I'd actually avoid summons for a few levels in general, because they are far too weak, don't last very long, and take too long to cast at low levels. If you have no BSF in the party to stand up front and play whack-a-mole then they can be somewhat useful. Summon Monster III is where that line of spells really opens up though. I'd suggest Grease or Color Spray instead in the lineup above. I'd probably also go with Magic Missile instead of Burning Hands, but that's a personal preference thing (MM will be somewhat useful later whereas BH caps out in use pretty early).

CharonsHelper

2016-08-15, 02:38 PM

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:41 PM

At low levels this isn't really a noticeable difference, and at high levels, unless both the wizard and sorcerer are playing blasters, it will be a rare day where the casters run out of useful spells.

I'd actually avoid summons for a few levels in general, because they are far too weak, don't last very long, and take too long to cast at low levels. If you have no BSF in the party to stand up front and play whack-a-mole then they can be somewhat useful. Summon Monster III is where that line of spells really opens up though. I'd suggest Grease or Color Spray instead in the lineup above. I'd probably also go with Magic Missile instead of Burning Hands, but that's a personal preference thing (MM will be somewhat useful later whereas BH caps out in use pretty early).

Really?
Because each time I have played a summon build, I would plop summon 1 where it would take an enemy charge. Summons aren't good for what they can do to the enemy, they are good because they literally soak up damage that would otherwise hit your party. At summon 2, I opt for 1d3 eagles. At 3x attacks with +4 to hit and +3 damage, they dish out some serious pain, being useful even at high levels because hordes + smite +nat 20 is a thing.

Troacctid

2016-08-15, 02:44 PM

At low levels this isn't really a noticeable difference, and at high levels, unless both the wizard and sorcerer are playing blasters, it will be a rare day where the casters run out of useful spells.

I'd actually avoid summons for a few levels in general, because they are far too weak, don't last very long, and take too long to cast at low levels. If you have no BSF in the party to stand up front and play whack-a-mole then they can be somewhat useful. Summon Monster III is where that line of spells really opens up though. I'd suggest Grease or Color Spray instead in the lineup above. I'd probably also go with Magic Missile instead of Burning Hands, but that's a personal preference thing (MM will be somewhat useful later whereas BH caps out in use pretty early).
Chill Touch is hands-down the best 1st level damage spell IMO. Yeah, you have to be in melee, but the fact that you get to make that many attacks in a single standard action, uncapped by CL, with Strength damage on every hit—it's pretty damn good value out of a 1st level slot.

(And yes, you make all the attacks at once when you first cast the spell—it works like Scorching Ray, not Call Lightning.)

Nubsternator

2016-08-15, 02:45 PM

Eldariel

2016-08-15, 02:46 PM

Anyone who claims any of the core classes is bad or too weak has no clue how to roleplay and are probably better off playing something out of a cardboard box. Maybe some descent is better for these people.
I can have fun playing ANYTHING. I once played with a guy who played a goblin gunslinger with a 3 round set up time. He would place two sticks in the ground 1 round, attach a sheet to them 2 rounds, then fire normally. This prevented him from being blown back as he used a rifle sized for a human.

ROLEPLAYING IS NOT A COMPETITION.

If you feel it is, or should be... seriously, go play descent. If pvp erupts constantly in your games, you have a problem.

**** optomizing.

Op, play a bard. Straight bard. Go Elan on their ass. 8 int. Let's do this.

There's no need to post as if you were upset. It is actually detrimental to communicating your point or convincing anybody of your stance. That said, some things I'd like to ask you to keep in mind:

People enjoy different things. My preference is no better than somebody else's. Same goes for you as well.
There are no "right" and "wrong" ways to play. As long as the people around the table are getting what they want out of the game, the players and the DM are doing their job. Thus, some games involve PvP, some are highly competitive, some are highly cooperative and none of them is doing everything wrong as long as everybody in-game is on board.
Optimization is an act everybody playing the game partakes; it's the act of picking the options that best work for this character (such as Improved Trip/Combat Reflexes-feats for a tripper - you and every other D&D player ever optimizes all the time - some just have different priorities and some have more knowledge of the intricacies of the system). Roleplaying is the act of acting as your character in play and entering the role. One does not exclude the other.
Balance issues exist. There's over 10 years worth of data on that. Feel free to read any old discussions or campaign journals on the matter; I'm not going to waste my time rehashing how ridiculous spells such as Polymorph, Simulacrum, Planar Binding & company are. Yes, a skilled optimizer can do a fair bit even with Monk in mid-powered game but that's nothing compared to what the same person could do with a caster.
Balance issues can be issues even if there's no PvP. The game is about the participants having a good time. That means different things to different people but generally sitting at the table not doing much is not a lot of fun. Thus, poorly built characters can actively be detrimental to a player's chance to enjoy themselves. Furthermore, these are highlighted by intra-party differences. If someone in-party does something way better than another character, the player of the other character might not have a tremendously good time (I've seen this occur e.g. with Sorcerers and Wizards in the same party; when Wizards play many sessions with mostly the same stuff but with access to a whole higher level of spells compared to the Sorcerer, Sorc hasn't been having that much of a blast).

If you can have fun playing anything, great for you! Not everybody is like you though. And a couple of years of having someone else do everything you do better gets old for most people, which is why it's usually a good idea to coordinate a bit in character creation and try and ensure people have different niches. Wizard is a great class in this regard since arcanists have some niches other classes don't really fill in Core and they can play a supportive role not taking the spotlight but working great as teamplayers (regardless of what's in the team).

Demidos

2016-08-15, 02:48 PM

B
Don't forget, just because you have power doesn't mean you have to use it. You can make yourself powerful and only go all-out if things really go wrong and you're on the verge of a TPK. That's how I often play in less optimized groups; often the situation never comes up and you can cruise along nicely.

The rest of your post is great!

However, having played in a group where someone did this, it really has the potential to make the other players feel terrible if it comes out and they weren't aware or okay with that, as you've pretty much just pointed out that their characters were superfluous and not truly in danger this whole time. Its like sending DMPC Elminster with your level 2 party, only the DMPC is another party member. Alternately, its like your DM's girlfriend getting plot-level powers that can be used to save the whole party at will. Does it help TPKs? Sure! Will the party hate it? I can't speak for other groups, but mine would hate it.

If you play in a low op group, play low-op, play a party buffer, maybe even toss in some BFC, but don't make a character that invalidates the rest of the group.

For example, in our case, one player had a horrifying strength poison that dealt some ridiculous amount of strength damage, but had never used and the party was not aware that he was anything but a regular power-attacking scythe build. Decently strong, and one of the most consistent damage dealers.
The DM had planned an encounter where a swarm of vicious creatures chased the party, as the swarm dealt little damage but was functionally immune to the party's attacks. The party begins to flee, and the player says "Screw this, I use my strength poison. The swarm is taken down, no save". When the party asked about why he had never used it before, he said that his character had taken a vow not to use it except in some very specific situations.
Now, I don't have any problem with the player having a secret trump card, or with him managing to defeat an encounter the party was supposed to run from. The problem is, the character could have been using this ability EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER, meaning that he had functionally been sandbagging everything before this. Every single tough encounter before this had therefore been a joke, basically, because the player could have whipped this out at any time and completely wiped the floor with his superior abilities. In this particular case, he had a vow that he had stuck to, which very slightly mitigated the issue, but it still felt bad to learn that basically every encounter could have been soloed by just this one player.
As something that everyone is aware of and fine with, great! However, it sucks to not be aware of that, seeing yourself as an integral part of the team, and then suddenly being shown that your character, to be honest, was completely superfluous this whole time.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:48 PM

I'm not even sure what you're arguing here other than perhaps a direct contradiction to the Stormwind Fallacy.

Sure - you can have fun playing any build, but this is a thread to discuss various builds, so their power level is entirely relevant.

My point is... D&D is about getting together with friends and having a blast. Any build the op can say "That was fun" at the end of the srssion is a successful build.

To denegrate a build as "weak" or "lame" is to defeat the whole purpose of roleplaying.
OOTS is a perfect example of this. Is Elan optomized? Absolutely not. Would I have a blast playing that character? Hell yeah.

So, instead of concentrating on overpowered builds, let's concentrate on FUN.

Deadline

2016-08-15, 02:50 PM

Really?
Because each time I have played a summon build, I would plop summon 1 where it would take an enemy charge. Summons aren't good for what they can do to the enemy, they are good because they literally soak up damage that would otherwise hit your party. At summon 2, I opt for 1d3 eagles. At 3x attacks with +4 to hit and +3 damage, they dish out some serious pain, being useful even at high levels because hordes + smite +nat 20 is a thing.

Yes, really. "Tanking" in D&D requires DM cooperation (well, there are a handful of methods to kind of do it, but I don't think any of them are in core aside from Shield Other). Unless you have a DM that "plays along" with this and validates your use of the spell rather than simply avoids the summon (or the enemy has something active on them like, say, Protection From [Alignment]). At higher levels, the summons can make for great flanking buddies, and the Summon Monster line in particular is capable of summoning creatures that have a bevy of useful abilities themselves. The lower level summons are most useful for either trapspringing or engaging low-int (animals and vermin and the like) in combat.

CharonsHelper

2016-08-15, 02:52 PM

My point is... D&D is about getting together with friends and having a blast. Any build the op can say "That was fun" at the end of the srssion is a successful build.

To denegrate a build as "weak" or "lame" is to defeat the whole purpose of rollplaying.
OOTS is a perfect example of this. Is Elan optomized? Absolutely not. Would I have a blast playing that character? Hell yeah.

So, instead of concentrating on overpowered builds, let's concentrate on FUN.

Okay - but that has nothing to do with this thread.

The OP is specifically asking for options for a potent build given his limitations.

And having an optimized build is in no way an anathema to having fun. Variation of the Stormwind Fallacy. (And what makes you think that a dumped INT is a bad choice for a bard? It sounds like a good way to save stat points. Plus Elan even took that OP 3rd party class to become a competent combatant.)

Telonius

2016-08-15, 02:53 PM

- The Party so far: sneaky Halfling Sorcerer/Rogue (will propably avoid most fights), Stabby Halfling Rogue, propably melee Cleric (very team oriented player, most likely no abuse here), Druid (our local PG... not too bad, but his characters have a tendency for high efficency) and 1 undecided (propably wizard or barbarian).

I'm counting 5 so far, not including you; plus whatever pets/summons the Druid has along with him. Core only game, stingy DM, probably low gp/magic? I'd say Bard is actually a pretty solid choice. Bard is always a force multiplier, and the more people you have the better of an option it is.

Flickerdart

2016-08-15, 02:56 PM

I'm counting 5 so far, not including you; plus whatever pets/summons the Druid has along with him. Core only game, stingy DM, probably low gp/magic? I'd say Bard is actually a pretty solid choice. Bard is always a force multiplier, and the more people you have the better of an option it is.

Core bards are pretty miserable, since there are no ways to boost Inspire Courage and no access to all those wonderful bard-only feats and magic items and spells.

Deadline

2016-08-15, 02:57 PM

So, instead of concentrating on overpowered builds, let's concentrate on FUN.

Many of us are fully capable of doing both, sometimes even at the same time!

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 02:58 PM

I'm counting 5 so far, not including you; plus whatever pets/summons the Druid has along with him. Core only game, stingy DM, probably low gp/magic? I'd say Bard is actually a pretty solid choice. Bard is always a force multiplier, and the more people you have the better of an option it is.

Actually, you're right. I was suggesting bard facetiously, but it would add a very nice amount of damage to the party overall.

AnimeTheCat

2016-08-15, 02:59 PM

So, I'm a fan of going Bard in this case. You can fill in gaps that are left by the rogues, primarily in the social department, you bring buffs to the party that can easily last all of combat even without other book support. You get spontaneous spells that can be used to help the party. You get decent proficiencies. And you can jazz it up with mounted combat and spirited charge if you're looking for something "interesting". Play a Halfling mounted bard that charges with a rapier if you need to. You'll be dealing decent (not good mind you) damage, and there isn't too much in core that you'll be taking to increase your songs so you've got feats to spend. Also, if you're looking for an interesting prestige class that honestly doesn't require much training (aka, I feel you could enter it without the need of "proper teaching"), you could prestige in to Lore Master or Horizon Walker. You're a wandering minstrel, why wouldn't you know a lot of neat stuff about random things (loremaster) or know maybe you've traveled a lot, why wouldn't you be familiar with using the land to your advantage (Horizon Walker). These Prestige Classes aren't OP or anything, but they're interesting and that seems to be a big draw for you. Granted, for Loremaster, you'll probably not be able to go with mounted combat unless you want to end your career with that, and even then you'll likely want to be a human instead so you can get a bonus feat, but human and bard are lovely together because of skill points.

I advocate Bard. It is (in my opinion) one of the most fun classes and can have any flavor you want added, without too much hassle.

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 03:03 PM

Core bards are pretty miserable, since there are no ways to boost Inspire Courage and no access to all those wonderful bard-only feats and magic items and spells.

With 5 party members plus at least one animal, possibly more, boosting the bonus isn't needed. With a 10% boost to hit and extra damage, add some bard spells and make him a reasonably decent combatant he could easily become the teams mvp. And with the good amount of skill points, high charisma, and bardic knowledge, he could be the team's mvp outside of combat.

Eldariel

2016-08-15, 03:11 PM

The rest of your post is great!

However, having played in a group where someone did this, it really has the potential to make the other players feel terrible if it comes out and they weren't aware or okay with that, as you've pretty much just pointed out that their characters were superfluous and not truly in danger this whole time. Its like sending DMPC Elminster with your level 2 party, only the DMPC is another party member. Alternately, its like your DM's girlfriend getting plot-level powers that can be used to save the whole party at will. Does it help TPKs? Sure! Will the party hate it? I can't speak for other groups, but mine would hate it.

If you play in a low op group, play low-op, play a party buffer, maybe even toss in some BFC, but don't make a character that invalidates the rest of the group.

For example, in our case, one player had a horrifying strength poison that dealt some ridiculous amount of strength damage, but had never used and the party was not aware that he was anything but a regular power-attacking scythe build. Decently strong, and one of the most consistent damage dealers.
The DM had planned an encounter where a swarm of vicious creatures chased the party, as the swarm dealt little damage but was functionally immune to the party's attacks. The party begins to flee, and the player says "Screw this, I use my strength poison. The swarm is taken down, no save". When the party asked about why he had never used it before, he said that his character had taken a vow not to use it except in some very specific situations.
Now, I don't have any problem with the player having a secret trump card, or with him managing to defeat an encounter the party was supposed to run from. The problem is, the character could have been using this ability EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER, meaning that he had functionally been sandbagging everything before this. Every single tough encounter before this had therefore been a joke, basically, because the player could have whipped this out at any time and completely wiped the floor with his superior abilities. In this particular case, he had a vow that he had stuck to, which very slightly mitigated the issue, but it still felt bad to learn that basically every encounter could have been soloed by just this one player.
As something that everyone is aware of and fine with, great! However, it sucks to not be aware of that, seeing yourself as an integral part of the team, and then suddenly being shown that your character, to be honest, was completely superfluous this whole time.

That sounds like a really strange thing. No-save poison that works on swarms and autohits? What the hell? But isn't it also one-shot nature and thus he had the ability to solve exactly one encounter? Well, either way, that's a bizarre set of circumstances. Such would be something that would have to be cleared up with the players anyways.

My "backup plan"s aren't the kind; they take preparation, are expensive and work only once. I always make sure to try and acquire some irregular options that can be used in attempts to solve ordinarily impossible problems where things go wrong. But those are always investments and never the kind of stuff that could just be mindlessly spammed. Be it Portable Hole + Bag of Holding, some Shrunk Item objects, Explosive Runes bomb, Tree Feather Tokens or whatever, they offer irregular options for when they are needed. I've yet to encounter players who dislike it; if anything, it's occasionally props for cleverness and occasionally shaking of the head. And other players do it too. And then sometimes we're tapped out and die a horrible death. All in a day's work.

That said, playing a Wizard overall is all about holding back; having limited daily resources means having to keep a tally of how much one needs to and can afford to spend on any given encounter. Thus it plays naturally into also having the option of throwing a nova at any given encounter, at the cost of making any future problems all the more difficult with the diminished resources. Something like Red Wizard doesn't really change that equation; it just provides some more options available (some free metamagic, some free caster levels). As long as you don't go all Planar Binding/Simulacruming yourself underlings stronger than the rest of your party, you should be fine; a Wizard alone will certainly benefit of a party. The stronger options can be used to improve the buffing options.

Troacctid

2016-08-15, 03:11 PM

Core bards are pretty miserable, since there are no ways to boost Inspire Courage and no access to all those wonderful bard-only feats and magic items and spells.
Eh. Still the best face in the game and a better skillmonkey than the rogue.

Flickerdart

2016-08-15, 03:11 PM

With 5 party members plus at least one animal, possibly more, boosting the bonus isn't needed. With a 10% boost to hit and extra damage
10% bonus to hit and damage, times 5 party members... oh look, you're only as useful as half a person. Except not everyone in the party is going to be attacks-based, so you're actually contributing even less.

, add some bard spells
Your spells known and spells per day are miserable, and your list is very bad. Anything you can do, the real party members have been doing for a few levels already.

and make him a reasonably decent combatant
How? Weapon Focus? Weapon Proficiency (not garbage)? There aren't really options for this in Core.

he could easily become the teams mvp.
No, he couldn't. D&D is a game of specialization (otherwise, good luck hitting those scaling DCs) and if you try to do everything, you will achieve nothing.

And with the good amount of skill points, high charisma, and bardic knowledge, he could be the team's mvp outside of combat.

Druids, wizards, and clerics have spells to spare to win non-combat, and then also win combat. Bards do not. Skills are weak, Bardic Knowledge is just like a skill but worse, and the Sorcerer will have better CHA than him anyway.

AnimeTheCat

2016-08-15, 03:24 PM

Core bards are pretty miserable, since there are no ways to boost Inspire Courage and no access to all those wonderful bard-only feats and magic items and spells.

I would be inclined to agree if the other classes weren't limited in a similar fashion. No additional books means no specialist wizards, no DMM for Clerics, a far cry fewer feats for Fighters/Barbarians/Rogues/etc. (any martial class really). +1 Attack and damage is pretty useful when you're giving it to all of your allies, as many have said before, and could be a tipping point for a combat. No, I don't think that it will be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it will certainly help and that's what matters in lower-powered games with fewer options like this. Even if the songs aren't boosted and bolstered with the use of feats, +1 is still +1 and +1 is helpful. Not to mention, inspire competence for skill checks. That's useful in a wide array of scenarios. Bards are great support, and they've got the spells to back it up. As a bard in this party, you won't need to worry about knowing every spell you can. Instead, focus on simple BFC spells like Daze (for 0th level), Grease, sleep, silent image, charm person, hideous laughter, expeditious retreat, and more are all very useful utility spells that the bard can bring to the table and open up more options for the Druid and Cleric to prepare around, knowing that the bard has those fields covered. I can see some very good party synergy and cooperation coming from a bard plopping itself in to the party to make the party a little more cohesive.

After all of that, however, I do see what you mean and understand why you feel core bards are not that great. I personally feel that given the situation and limitations, that a bard is perfectly warranted and would be a great asset to the party.

CharonsHelper

2016-08-15, 03:27 PM

10% bonus to hit and damage, times 5 party members... oh look, you're only as useful as half a person. Except not everyone in the party is going to be attacks-based, so you're actually contributing even less.

That's not actually how the math works.

If you have 5 people who are each getting +2 to hit (by level 8), that is far more than a 10% increase. If varies depending upon base accuracy and the target's AC, but likely around 15%. A 15% increase in accuracy alone would increase overall damage by 15% for each of the 5 characters, or 75% of a character on its own. Then the +2 damage increase is added to that, though the % increase varies greatly depending upon the rest of the party.

Added to that are the bard's own attacks (sub-par relative to full BAB martials, but not terrible) and all of his buffing besides Inspire Courage. Sure, most of his spells could be cast by the sorcerer earlier (though not until 3rd level spells), but if the bard casts them, the sorcerer can use his spells for debuffing etc. instead. And there are a few, like Heroism (awesome spell!) which the bard gets earlier. (Admittedly, it makes me sad that the 3.5 bard's Inspire Courage is a morale bonus and therefore doesn't stack with Heroism & Good Hope.)

Now - I prefer the Pathfinder bard, but unlike 3.0, the 3.5 bard is a pretty decent class, and a solid choice in a larger party.

Daelnoron

2016-08-15, 06:06 PM

Yeah, the lack of stacking with the (i assume) very bufffriendly cleric and a lack of clear attacking party members (the druid doesn't believe in sending natures animals in to die and will focus on battlefield shaping, the sorcerer/rogue will propably be very pacifistic) spoke against a bard... though I still consider one, shooting (heh) for arcane archer later on... though I haven't taken a particularly close look on the bards spell list for that... I just figured it would go well with little money... have an expensive bow and self enchant my arrows.

Yeah, of cause Fun is first. But having fun during roleplay is something I get done, don't worry :) It's just the rules part that I need assistance with.

I THINK I can modify the Horizon Tripper into something possible... I just need a few levels of leeway that won't muck up my build if I don't get Horizon Walker right away... a half orc Ranger 2/Fighter 2/ Barbarian 2-6/ Horizon Walker X should work. (And the spiked chain is looked at a bit funny in my group... I'd like to avoid that. Though I've always had a thing for polearms...^^)

I guess I'll just ask the DM friendly if I can swap Diplomacy in for something else... and maybe fetch a solid crossbow for fight participarion early on.

Oh and I usually have so many character ideas, filling the gaps in the group is not a chore but a pleasure^^ so tough to decide otherwise...^^ I was just lacking Ideas on the martial side of it...

Anyway thanks a whole lot for the suggestions and ideas! If you got more, keep em coming, the campaign will not start for about 2 weeks, so the main thing is to wait for the last player to pick his class.

Oh one more question: were one to create a small sized mounted charger on a riding dog... what class would work best? Paladin got the special Mount, Ranger could get a Horse Companion, Fighter could get started way sooner, Barbarian... can rage while mounted. And would you rather consider Halfling or gnome?

And how bad is middle aged for a martial class? that 19th point in strength isn't doing much for me and with almost all my scores odd-numbered it seems rather useful...

EDIT: And it really rubs me the wrong way, that Thamaturgist is Divine Caster only... Any tipps on a Summon focused Cleric?

Big Fau

2016-08-15, 06:12 PM

Also, a monk wouldn't have armor capping his dex to for combat reflexes, too, along with more armor given to him with the class. As noted, the good rolls he got does offset the monk's MADness a good bit.

I too think chains can be finessed

Pointing this out cause others missed it: Max Dex on armor doesn't apply to Combat Reflexes. At all.

Seppo87

2016-08-15, 07:12 PM

Option A: Make a point, win, get hated

Don't play a Wizard. Play a Sorcerer.
He WILL fiat your spellbook away. Do not have a spellbook.
Grab Eschew Material as soon as possible, you don't want to be told you need tarts to cast Irresistable Laughter.
You also want 18 in CON because he will fiat you into damage, too, whenever he feels like you're getting away with too many things. But if you *really* have a high HP pool, if he wants to kill you he will have to deal ludicrous amounts of unwarranted damage, giving away that he, indeed, murdered your character on purpose. He'll never do that.
Instead, take the damage and go on like a man.
Do not learn Divinations that would bypass a quest written by an inexperienced GM, he will fiat them into uselessness.
Do not try to use Portal, Wish, or any other effect that relies on anyone else's understanding or willfulness. Such effects will never work.
Get Battlefield control. Immunities. Contingency plans. Use every mean to be above mundane dangers.
Go nuts. Be God. Rock the world.

Option B: Adapt, be likeable, get rewarded

This involves being diplomatic and manipulative.
Make sure your opinion counts, and then suggest unfair advantages disguised as reasonable ideas.
If yours is a reward/punishment kind of DM, make sure to pander to his tastes with the way you play. See that new, shiny, unbalancedly powerful sword that goes to the best player?
You are that player.
If you're good at this kind of thing and you feel comfortable with it, go ahead.

Option C: Who cares anyway?

Accept that your character will be weak, deal with it, play anyway
(this is what I usually do, BTW)

Honest Tiefling

2016-08-15, 07:18 PM

Go bard or cleric. It'll probably be easier to sneak in a bit of power past the DM if you are just buffing everyone else.

If you go cleric, butter up your DM by worshiping a god they have built or love from the setting. You might have to deal with an NPC or two, but it might also net you Hierophant if you play your cards right.

nedz

2016-08-15, 07:24 PM

Horizon Tripper is a specific Core-only build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?80415-The-Horizon-Tripper-(Core-Melee-Build)) - wasn't sure if you were aware of this ?

Middle aged is poor for a melle type - that 19 could be a 20 at level 4

Seppo87

2016-08-15, 07:25 PM

Horizon Tripper is a specific Core-only build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?80415-The-Horizon-Tripper-(Core-Melee-Build)) - wasn't sure if you were aware of this ?
Not an option I'm afraid.

PRCs aren't guaranteed. WBL isn't guaranteed.

Daelnoron

2016-08-15, 08:00 PM

sigh. Long post lost to the pit of "accidentially touched f5".

Quick question: What is WBL?

basically:
without middle aged (and with say, half orc):
lvl 1: 19/17/15/13/13/6 total: +9
lvl 8: 20/18/15/13/13/6 total: +11
middle aged:
lvl1: 18/16/14/14/14/7 total: +11
lvl8: 20/16/14/14/14/7 total: +12.

higher stats, especially at earlier levels, more spread out but especially easing into races with multiple stat mali.

@Seppo: he is not malicious, just overly careful to avoid brokenness. And we disagree on the success of his methods, but eh, so what. I work with the tools I'm given. Mostly c), only that I won't suck badly^^

LTwerewolf

2016-08-15, 08:30 PM

WBL is wealth by level. It's the amount of money you're assumed to have by the game at any given level. When it's low, it hurts mundanes far more than casters and feeds more into the constant problem that mundanes can't have nice things. With the dm you describe, I suggest staying away from pure mundanes like the fighter or monk as much as possible. Everyone wants to have a character that's good at things when they do them, not just when they talk about doing them (and then proceed to fail everything when it actually happens).

CharonsHelper

2016-08-15, 08:31 PM

Quick question: What is WBL?

Wealth By Level. 3.x is based around the assumption that the PCs get wealth in the right ballpark or balance goes out the window. (Especially that the PCs' defenses will be in the toilet.)

Edit: dang ninjas!

Calthropstu

2016-08-15, 10:33 PM

Wealth By Level. 3.x is based around the assumption that the PCs get wealth in the right ballpark or balance goes out the window. (Especially that the PCs' defenses will be in the toilet.)

Edit: dang ninjas!

Be glad they were ninjas and not nunjas. Their ruler is very strict I hear.

And beware of nun chucks. Getting hit with a falling nun is most unpleasant.

trikkydik

2016-08-15, 10:49 PM

My first DM was also a douche when it came to "FUN" in the campaign.

I ended up making a dwarven barbarian, because orcs were also banned, with bad stat rolls. I was very unhappy with him.

That being said...

MAKE A DWARVEN BARBARIAN. LOL

Âmesang

2016-08-15, 11:59 PM

That reminds me of actually wanting to make a CE-turned-LG dwarf/duegar ex-barbarian turned dwarven defender for a Core-ish game, someone who was probably hit with that helm of opposite alignment and now desires to undo the atrocities he had committed in the past.

…granted, the concept works best if he can start off with ten levels of ex-barbarian, making the alignment change a part of his backstory.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 02:02 AM

And how bad is middle aged for a martial class? that 19th point in strength isn't doing much for me and with almost all my scores odd-numbered it seems rather useful...

Crunch-wise, being middle-aged is optimal with those numbers in any case. Martials do benefit of mental scores as well.

EDIT: And it really rubs me the wrong way, that Thamaturgist is Divine Caster only... Any tipps on a Summon focused Cleric?

Honestly, summoner Clerics are awesome. And your stats make for a superb Cleric. Also, being a Cleric means you can be whatever you want to be day-in day-out. You don't even need to focus on any particular thing: you're just good in general. There isn't much to say about it though: prepare Summon-spells, take Augment Summoning, max your Wisdom and go to town. You could also play Neutral and channel negative energy in order to keep some Undead around. With your stats I'd go something like:

14 Str/7 Dex/16 Con/16 Int/18 Wis/14 Cha

OR 7 Str/14 Dex/14 Con/18 Int/18 Wis/14 Cha

OR 14 Str/12 Dex/16 Con/16 Int/18 Wis/9 Cha

The big question is which stat to dump. The real options are Strength (no melee, encumbrance), Dex (no ranged, AC and Initiative penalties) & Cha (Diplomacy penalties, penalties to turning/rebuking Undead). Int can't be dumped; you need more than 1 skill point per level and indeed, high Int gives you better modifiers for Diplomacy than high Charisma. You can get ranks in Diplomacy and up to +6 in synergy bonuses from Bluff/Knowledge (local)/Sense Motive - though you have to cross-class lots of ranks to that end (level 7 you can finally hit the cross-class synergy bonus range). Wis and Con are undumpable for obvious reasons; you need HP and you need spells.

Considering a Cleric tends to wear heavy armor, low strength might be problematic. If you accept that you'll be in heavy load, low Strength might be reasonable if you don't plan on fighting yourself - though on low levels, the party might just need an extra hand in the front. Low Dex is always annoying in that you go last, have poor AC and so on. You can use magic to address many related problems anyways. You could even get 14 Dex and use ranged weapons with reasonable efficiency. The last stat line is if you also want to double as a frontliner. Sadly dumping Dex or Str is problematic to that end so you'd end up losing Charisma. Then again, Charisma isn't that important as turning isn't particularly strong in Core. As much as I like high Charisma, here it might make sense to dump it anyways.

But yeah, you could be a bit of a different Cleric by playing Neutral alignment and channeling negative energy. Undead are pretty cool and combine nicely with your summons for flanking and generic combat purposes (and once you get a Zombie Hydra...). Though nothing wrong with channeling positive either.

Domain-wise, Trickery is cool and convenient; I do recommend picking it up. Bluff gives you synergy in Diplomacy, and spells like Invisibility, Confusion, Mislead and eventual Polymorph Any Object are just awesome in increasing your versatility and shoring up the lack of an arcanist. The other, I suggest either Travel or Luck. Travel has the Freedom of Movement-effect to not get your ass handed, and it's another key piece in helping you get along without an arcanist (getting stuff like Fly, Teleport and company - strategic and tactical mobility). Luck mostly has the superb granted power for saving your arse from unlucky saving throws/whatever, though later on it also gets Mislead, Moment of Prescience and other cool spells.

Ultimately, I recommend: Channel Negative, Trickery & Travel Domains, Human or Dwarf (Dwarf gets miscellaneous stuff and Dwarf Clerics are just plain cool, while Human gets the bonus feat and bonus skills both of which are awesome). Spell Focus: Conjuration on first feat, Augmented Summoning on third. Other feats, honestly, at this point you're down to stuff like Craft Wondrous Items, Improved Initiative, Extend Spell & company for future use. Outside Improved Initiative, feats aside from Augmented Summoning aren't terribly impressive for a couple of levels yet, unless you plan on fighting yourself (in which case you can pick up Combat Expertise > Improved Trip and profit).

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 03:17 AM

Crunch-wise, being middle-aged is optimal with those numbers in any case. Martials do benefit of mental scores as well.

Honestly, summoner Clerics are awesome. And your stats make for a superb Cleric. Also, being a Cleric means you can be whatever you want to be day-in day-out. You don't even need to focus on any particular thing: you're just good in general. There isn't much to say about it though: prepare Summon-spells, take Augment Summoning, max your Wisdom and go to town. You could also play Neutral and channel negative energy in order to keep some Undead around. With your stats I'd go something like:

14 Str/7 Dex/16 Con/16 Int/18 Wis/14 Cha

OR 7 Str/14 Dex/14 Con/18 Int/18 Wis/14 Cha

OR 14 Str/12 Dex/16 Con/16 Int/18 Wis/9 Cha

The big question is which stat to dump. The real options are Strength (no melee, encumbrance), Dex (no ranged, AC and Initiative penalties) & Cha (Diplomacy penalties, penalties to turning/rebuking Undead). Int can't be dumped; you need more than 1 skill point per level and indeed, high Int gives you better modifiers for Diplomacy than high Charisma. You can get ranks in Diplomacy and up to +6 in synergy bonuses from Bluff/Knowledge (local)/Sense Motive - though you have to cross-class lots of ranks to that end (level 7 you can finally hit the cross-class synergy bonus range). Wis and Con are undumpable for obvious reasons; you need HP and you need spells.

Considering a Cleric tends to wear heavy armor, low strength might be problematic. If you accept that you'll be in heavy load, low Strength might be reasonable if you don't plan on fighting yourself - though on low levels, the party might just need an extra hand in the front. Low Dex is always annoying in that you go last, have poor AC and so on. You can use magic to address many related problems anyways. You could even get 14 Dex and use ranged weapons with reasonable efficiency. The last stat line is if you also want to double as a frontliner. Sadly dumping Dex or Str is problematic to that end so you'd end up losing Charisma. Then again, Charisma isn't that important as turning isn't particularly strong in Core. As much as I like high Charisma, here it might make sense to dump it anyways.

But yeah, you could be a bit of a different Cleric by playing Neutral alignment and channeling negative energy. Undead are pretty cool and combine nicely with your summons for flanking and generic combat purposes (and once you get a Zombie Hydra...). Though nothing wrong with channeling positive either.

Domain-wise, Trickery is cool and convenient; I do recommend picking it up. Bluff gives you synergy in Diplomacy, and spells like Invisibility, Confusion, Mislead and eventual Polymorph Any Object are just awesome in increasing your versatility and shoring up the lack of an arcanist. The other, I suggest either Travel or Luck. Travel has the Freedom of Movement-effect to not get your ass handed, and it's another key piece in helping you get along without an arcanist (getting stuff like Fly, Teleport and company - strategic and tactical mobility). Luck mostly has the superb granted power for saving your arse from unlucky saving throws/whatever, though later on it also gets Mislead, Moment of Prescience and other cool spells.

Ultimately, I recommend: Channel Negative, Trickery & Travel Domains, Human or Dwarf (Dwarf gets miscellaneous stuff and Dwarf Clerics are just plain cool, while Human gets the bonus feat and bonus skills both of which are awesome). Spell Focus: Conjuration on first feat, Augmented Summoning on third. Other feats, honestly, at this point you're down to stuff like Craft Wondrous Items, Improved Initiative, Extend Spell & company for future use. Outside Improved Initiative, feats aside from Augmented Summoning aren't terribly impressive for a couple of levels yet, unless you plan on fighting yourself (in which case you can pick up Combat Expertise > Improved Trip and profit).

Oh come on, dump wisdom. He can be the god loving cleric who can't cast spells!

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 03:27 AM

Oh come on, dump wisdom. He can be the god loving cleric who can't cast spells!

Summoning gonna be mighty difficult if you can't summon.

Mutazoia

2016-08-16, 03:44 AM

Okay, so....

Restricting your options to core only is not tha bad, considering this is going to be your groups fisrt foray into 3.5. It's usually a good idea to limit options to the basic stuff when you are DM'ing a new system that you are not familiar with, especially since a lot of the extras that you find in the various splats and expansions can get very broken, very fast, even if your DM know's the system inside and out. It's probably best to think of this as a dry run to get everyone use to 3.5 and roll with the limitations. You can open up a few more options next campaign.

That said, as most people have pointed out already, non-casters kind of get hosed in 3.X as WoTC had pretty much thrown class balance out the window when they bought the franchise.

Fighters CAN bue semi-useful as a meat shield, setting up flanking, and generally keeping agro, but you have to be very selective with your feat choices (feats that get you into an opponents face asap and makes him suck AOE's for trying to get away).

As already said, Druid is probably the best choice, if you want to go pure optimization, as you can fill the caster and meat shield roll at the same time, plus drag along an animal companion.

All that said, however, you should also consider what kind of character you want to play. If the character you have in mind isn't "optimized", then to hell with optimization. After all, your playing the game to have fun, not see who can do the most damage per round.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 04:00 AM

Summoning gonna be mighty difficult if you can't summon.

You just walk around with a bag of tricks shouting "summon monster 1" and throwing a critter on the ground.

Troacctid

2016-08-16, 04:27 AM

I like summoner clerics in core-only, but I'm not as big a fan if the game is starting at level 2. Summoning spells take a while to come online, so if it's your main schtick, you risk being stuck with dead feat slots for a while. If I were playing a cleric, I'd lean towards more of a tanky gishy melee support in the early game, with heavy armor and the War domain, and then maybe transition into summoning later.

But honestly, I'd probably still just play a druid. More skill points, better action economy, and you get actual class features that do things—it's just so much more appealing all around.

You just walk around with a bag of tricks shouting "summon monster 1" and throwing a critter on the ground.
Yes, you're very clever and funny and your suggestion of playing an NPC class is totally helpful.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 04:36 AM

I like summoner clerics in core-only, but I'm not as big a fan if the game is starting at level 2. Summoning spells take a while to come online, so if it's your main schtick, you risk being stuck with dead feat slots for a while. If I were playing a cleric, I'd lean towards more of a tanky gishy melee support in the early game, with heavy armor and the War domain, and then maybe transition into summoning later.

You don't really need War-domain either; it's just +1 and one weapon prof. The spells from the domain are mediocre and Weapon Focus is meh as a feat; I'd rather look at other Domains but that does nothing to discredit the "armored gish"-approach. Just stats, simple weapons and heavy armor go a long way and you can eventually pick up EWP: Spiked Chain or something if you want a better weapon (enlarged tripping is pretty brutal and works passively). Even without summons, a Cleric with stuff like Cause Fear, Command and Protection from Evil does fine on these levels, particularly in this kind of a party where a Knowledge-buff is somewhat missing.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 05:50 AM

You don't really need War-domain either; it's just +1 and one weapon prof. The spells from the domain are mediocre and Weapon Focus is meh as a feat; I'd rather look at other Domains but that does nothing to discredit the "armored gish"-approach. Just stats, simple weapons and heavy armor go a long way and you can eventually pick up EWP: Spiked Chain or something if you want a better weapon (enlarged tripping is pretty brutal and works passively). Even without summons, a Cleric with stuff like Cause Fear, Command and Protection from Evil does fine on these levels, particularly in this kind of a party where a Knowledge-buff is somewhat missing.

It has been a long while since I played 3.5. Pathfinder is just much MUCH more active here. It is still even selling better than 5th edition here. Which is good. Because to hell with wotc. (4th kinda turned me away from them completely. It was just so very very bad, and was a clear backstab to their loyal customers for years and a grab at the WoW crowd.)

Rant aside, you are pretty much advocating a... cleric. Just a plain old normal cleric. No special gimmick, nothing cool at all. The sorcerer trumps the cleric in every way here, from base character story line (I summon outsiders, and have an outsider planar bloodline because my soul was supposed to be part of some sort of bargain my parents made when I was young...) or some such to the number of summons per day (I can summon as ALL of my spells vs I have to prepare a summon in order to summon... which may or may not be useful and will more than likely be sacrificed for a healing spell) to the whole fact that summoning can ultimately lead to binding which sorcerers are EXTREMELY good at. Because charisma.

In all honesty, I think a cleric is a terrible choice for this concept because I honestly don't see this "summoner" actually summoning anything. Ever.

Summon monster 1 starting at first level. Because "my parents wouldn't let me have a dog when I was a kid. So I started making my own."

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 06:18 AM

Rant aside, you are pretty much advocating a... cleric. Just a plain old normal cleric. No special gimmick, nothing cool at all. The sorcerer trumps the cleric in every way here, from base character story line (I summon outsiders, and have an outsider planar bloodline because my soul was supposed to be part of some sort of bargain my parents made when I was young...) or some such to the number of summons per day (I can summon as ALL of my spells vs I have to prepare a summon in order to summon... which may or may not be useful and will more than likely be sacrificed for a healing spell) to the whole fact that summoning can ultimately lead to binding which sorcerers are EXTREMELY good at. Because charisma.

Creating the character personality, modus operandi, goals, aspirations, wishes, organizations, relationships, etc. is the player's job, not ours. You seem to be wanting to write this person's character for him even though he's asking for help with the mechanics. And of course he'll summon stuff. It's just that first level Summon Monster lasts for 1 round. You spend 1 full round casting the spell (that is, you start on your turn and the spell resolves at the start of your next turn) making it easy to disrupt and difficult to disrupt with. Then that monster disappears 1 round from there. 2 rounds on level 2. And it's a worse fighter than you.

You could literally spend that same round attacking and accomplish more than you do with that spell slot. That's just not very efficient and that's the problem with low level summoning; full round casting time and duration of rounds/level. Fine once you have some caster levels but as of right now, bide your time. You need high enough caster level for your summons to stick around to really get to enjoy them. Level 3 is already good but they really take off around level 5 when you get both, Summon Monster III and sufficient duration to last for most of an average encounter.

Soranar

2016-08-16, 07:51 AM

Considering your STATS are so high, I would make a paladin if I were you.

Play a small race (I'm guessing strong heart halfling isn't core so go for gnome)

You also have a lot of odd numbers so middle aged will definitely help

Dump DEX, you won't need it much in full plate

Should give you something like 14 STR, 7 DEX, 18 CON, 16 INT, 14 WIS, 18 CHA

Take a riding dog as a paladin's mount, since it's medium you can ride it anywhere and dogs are easily allowed in most PC only places, unlike a larger animal companion

The riding dog can wear barding and trip, he's basically a secondary fighter

Your skills should be Ride, Handle animal, Sense motive and Diplomacy (so you can maximize your abilities as the party's face and remain a useful mounted character)

get lance, use all the mounted combat feats (mounted combat, ride by attack, spirited charge)

eventually get power attack

Charge, if the enemy is evil smite (which will be doubled or tripled by the lance effect + spirited charge, power attack if you need to)

It's a fairly decent charger build in core and ride by attack lets you stay safe while you do it.

Roles you play: BSF, party face, damage dealer and you bring a secondary BSF to the table

Advantages : lots of hit points, huge saves, secondary healing abilities

Nubsternator

2016-08-16, 10:06 AM

Pointing this out cause others missed it: Max Dex on armor doesn't apply to Combat Reflexes. At all.

I actually didn't know that. Great catch!

eggynack

2016-08-16, 10:26 AM

Considering your STATS are so high, I would make a paladin if I were you.
I don't think a paladin fits the general situation. When you're dealing with someone who's limiting things in so many ways, you really want a class that can pull out a new trick when another is shut down, and when cash isn't flowing, you want something that can operate fine without cash. Which, overall, generally means a caster. I'd tend towards druid or cleric, because wizards are a bit wealth reliant and both sorcerers and bards lose some of that casterly adaptiveness to spontaneous casting. Melee characters of all types just have a lot of difficulty in this sort of environment, due to the factors I listed above and some others.

Segev

2016-08-16, 10:31 AM

One build I like the idea of, but have barely had a chance to play, is an enchantment-focused sorcerer, with carefully-selected fallback spells to cover extraneous bases. Admittedly, wizard might do it better (if for no other reason than planar binding and its lesser and greater siblings won't eat up precious spell-known slots on a wizard).

But a sorcerer who abuses charm person and hypnotism can make anybody (well, any humanoid) Friendly to him with charm person, and use hypnotism to make a request of the target for which he counts as two bands friendlier...and it sticks. If your DM were using Epic, that would put them into Fanatic territory for trying to carry out your request. Without it, they're in Helpful territory, and will still take significant risks to follow through on that request for you, even after the charm wears off.

Use this to hire help that is extremely happy to be working for you; as long as you pay them a fair wage, they are Helpful in carrying out their duties and keeping their jobs. They won't steal or betray you. Mercenaries and bodyguards are good here, too. And since charm person is a fairly long-duration spell, you can use it to keep one or two minions under your control. Do it subtly and you might be able to turn bandit and orc/goblin type encounters on your own, just by befriending enough of them. Make sure to keep a thug or two around to help be your contribution to a fight when facing things you can't charm.

Splash in summon monster at levels where you have a free slot, and things like sleep or grease or web, and you should be able to do enough battlefield control to help out. High social skills (diplomacy you may just have to bite the bullet and accept is going to be cross-class, unless you go Bard) will complement this well, allowing you to sway those you're not Enchanting.

Do pick up lesser planar binding (and the spell you need to use it effectively, magic circle against [alignment of your choice]) when you can. It's frustrating to eat up a spell known with it (which is why wizard is better with it), but the ongoing services of a bound planar minion are not to be overlooked.

The idea behind this character is somebody everybody likes. They just can't help themselves. He can make friends with anybody, and twist them around his little finger.

Soranar

2016-08-16, 10:52 AM

Wizards can be seriously hampered by a stingy DM (no access to scrolls to learn knew spells, difficulty resting to recover said spells)

There's already a cleric and a druid in his party

The sorcerer rogue is most likely going to be a waste of space though he might be a half decent party face

That leaves a melee class of some sort (due to the lack of a BSF)

Barbarian's don't get pounce in core nor do they get most of their useful class features (survival for trap hunting. intimidate tricks)
Rangers are ok at best in core (his animal companion is more of a liability than anything) and the horizon tripper is certainly a decent build but it comes ''on'' late and he already said prestige class access is limited
Bards have next to no support in core though he certainly has the stats to make one work
Fighters make decent archers in core... that's about it

A Paladin gets a mount which is only a step behind a druid's animal companion
Charging from atop a medium mount is very easy to do in nearly every encounter and (without pounce, shock trooper and leap attack shenanigans) most DMs won't go out of their way to hamper the combo which turns ''on'' at level 5 when you get the dog and the lance

But sure, he could just play a second druid or cleric, of course that will be a stronger choice.

Pugwampy

2016-08-16, 11:52 AM

Your group needs a tank . If your DM is equipment stingy , Barbarian is probably the best option.

If we have to be honest the core books do offer plenty of options . I am sure you can make it work . Its DM,s game and he gets to choose after all .

Gnaeus

2016-08-16, 11:53 AM

A Paladin gets a mount which is only a step behind a druid's animal companion
Charging from atop a medium mount is very easy to do in nearly every encounter and (without pounce, shock trooper and leap attack shenanigans) most DMs won't go out of their way to hamper the combo which turns ''on'' at level 5 when you get the dog and the lance .

I disagree.
1. The mount is way worse than an AC. Something like a tiger, with pounce and grapple, is vastly better than a warpony is ever going to be. And if it dies you are in much worse shape.
2. In core, all kinds of things stop charge. Difficult terrain. Flight. LOS issues.
3. Even if you can charge, how do you bypass concealment? How do you hit incorporeals? How do you beat DR without appropriate gear?

Core 3.5 paladin is Tier 5. Worse than a fighter. It does get some love in splats, but nothing great in core. Muggles need gear that this campaign is assumed not to have. Muggles need to jump through hoops to remain relevant, and the best ways to do it are all non-core.

Flickerdart

2016-08-16, 12:07 PM

Yeah, the only way to make core Paladin good is liberal (ab)use of the exotic mounts rules in the DMG. A newbie DM, especially the kind that wants to restrict DMG content, is not going to be permissive in this respect. However, a druid may have the same issue with fancy companions and wildshape forms.

I would be reluctant to use a barbarian, since it's Timmy-strong - its advantages are plain to see and appear powerful. Raging gives you how much Strength? You have how many hit points? I'm tired of you murdering all my monsters, choke on some Shadows.

Sorcerer is a good choice because the vectors the DM can mess with you are very limited. Clerics and druids - for all their versatility benefits - are vulnerable to "your god decides that you cast flame strike on yourself."

eggynack

2016-08-16, 12:16 PM

Wizards can be seriously hampered by a stingy DM (no access to scrolls to learn knew spells, difficulty resting to recover said spells)
Sure. Hence my saying it's a good choice, but not the best one.

There's already a cleric and a druid in his party
Feh. Spells are varied, even in core. You can get pretty solid differences between characters on spells alone. Especially clerics, given domains.

That leaves a melee class of some sort (due to the lack of a BSF)
The cleric is already fightering, and a new cleric or druid would be highly capable of that if necessary.

Bards have next to no support in core though he certainly has the stats to make one work
Bards have some support, and it's called the spell list. They get absolute gems at most spell levels, especially the early ones, to the extent that their tier ranking holds up even in core. They're certainly not as good as they are out of core, but they can do good work.

A Paladin gets a mount which is only a step behind a druid's animal companion
One step behind is massive. The animal companion is already only hitting near fighter status, and getting one later in, losing out on all the better alternate companions, and losing statistical potency, hits really hard. It's like bringing a fighter to the party, except it's also several levels behind. Anything they might have been contributing is stripped away by losing all of their advantages.

But sure, he could just play a second druid or cleric, of course that will be a stronger choice.
I'm not just saying stronger. I'm saying better. Sure, the cleric and druid do surprisingly well against the paladin, even in direct melee combat comparisons, but that's not why I think they're superior choices. They're superior because they're harder to screw with, because they don't need wealth overmuch, and because the stated limits of the game, the ones on prestige classes and multiclassing as well as additional books, happen to fit well with casting over melee. The critical overall issue here is that casting is really what you should be doing when you don't fully trust a DM, and this DM doesn't seem entirely trustworthy from what information we have. When you're dealing with a sporadic situation, you really want the ability to pivot, and adjust. and handle bad situations in general. A paladin doesn't let you do that at all. A caster has a good shot at doing so.

eggynack

2016-08-16, 12:22 PM

Clerics and druids - for all their versatility benefits - are vulnerable to "your god decides that you cast flame strike on yourself."
As much as Jedipotter may have been in favor of that mode of doing, it doesn't really seem to have any connection to the actual mechanics of the game. So, you could just as easily say that a wizard's connection to the arcane suddenly unravels such that their fireball hits themself rather than an enemy, and be just as true to the stated rules and even flavor of the game. Even mundane characters can be stymied by perfectly mundane means. Oh, whoops, there was a pool of oil on the ground which you lacked any awareness of, perhaps even one spontaneously placed by your deity, so you accidentally trip in your approach towards the enemy, and stab yourself in the heart. Besides, a cleric and a druid can always just, y'know, not have a god. Clerics can pray to an ideal, and druids can just revere nature in general.

Flickerdart

2016-08-16, 12:38 PM

As much as Jedipotter may have been in favor of that mode of doing, it doesn't really seem to have any connection to the actual mechanics of the game. So, you could just as easily say that a wizard's connection to the arcane suddenly unravels such that their fireball hits themself rather than an enemy, and be just as true to the stated rules and even flavor of the game. Even mundane characters can be stymied by perfectly mundane means. Oh, whoops, there was a pool of oil on the ground which you lacked any awareness of, perhaps even one spontaneously placed by your deity, so you accidentally trip in your approach towards the enemy, and stab yourself in the heart. Besides, a cleric and a druid can always just, y'know, not have a god. Clerics can pray to an ideal, and druids can just revere nature in general.

They can all fail by GM fiat, but they are much less likely to do so, because a wizard doesn't have "ex-wizard" in his class description, but a druid can become an ex-druid within the rules. So the GM reads this and goes "this is a possibility in my mind now." Why do you think so many paladins fall? Because the book said it's possible.

Most GMs realize that they control NPCs, but fewer consider that they also control physics, because the rules don't stress that beyond rule 0. Wizards cast spells with physics, but clerics cast spells that they get from gods, and gods are NPCs. Getting spells from an ideal is the same thing as munchkinry to a GM who thinks this way.

You and I will never play this way. But there's a saying in my line of work - the user is not like me.

eggynack

2016-08-16, 12:49 PM

They can all fail by GM fiat, but they are much less likely to do so, because a wizard doesn't have "ex-wizard" in his class description, but a druid can become an ex-druid within the rules. So the GM reads this and goes "this is a possibility in my mind now." Why do you think so many paladins fall? Because the book said it's possible.
The path from druid to ex-druid is very well defined, and does not include anything you've described. Ex-cleric seems a bit murkier, but it's easily bypassed. The reason so many paladins fall is because the paladin falling rules are insane

You and I will never play this way. But there's a saying in my line of work - the user is not like me.
Sure, but it seems weird to strictly define the actions of these people we aren't as doing these specific things to only these classes.

Pugwampy

2016-08-16, 01:02 PM

what you should be doing when you don't fully trust a DM, and this DM doesn't seem entirely trustworthy from what information we have.

Why ? Because he only wants core rules and is a wee bit stingy ?

There's already a cleric and a druid in his party

Who does not like having 2 clerics in a party ? If you gonna skip on a tank thats the next best choice .

I'm tired of you murdering all my monsters, choke on some Shadows.

Once again everyone assumes DM is a douche bag because he only wants core rules to make his life a bit easier .

eggynack

2016-08-16, 01:13 PM

Why ? Because he only wants core rules and is a wee bit stingy ?

That, and his rules seem weird and sporadic. Why orcs? Why MM feats? Multiclass penalties and PrC limits are technically in the rules, but they're so wonky. And that thing about poorly calibrated encounters seems troublesome. And, yes, limited WBL can cause problems. I'm not saying this DM is definitely gonna do something that demands a serious pivot, but cautiousness seems warranted.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 01:15 PM

No matter how one plays, a Cleric of Boccob or Olidammara or something should have a seriously hard time falling. Boccob's epithet is literally "the Uncaring", Olidammara's agenda is basically "sex, love and rock'n'roll", and it's pretty hard to grossly break against a code like that (if you're already so aligned). And any of those is a fine pick (though why Olidammara doesn't have Travel domain even though he's listed as "the vagabond" and is a god of Bards is beyond me).

Who does not like having 2 clerics in a party ? If you gonna skip on a tank thats the next best choice .

Cleric is just as good a tank as Barbarian. A Druid is even better.

Flickerdart

2016-08-16, 01:29 PM

The path from druid to ex-druid is very well defined, and does not include anything you've described. Ex-cleric seems a bit murkier, but it's easily bypassed.
A druid falls for "ceasing to revere nature" which a sufficiently-asinine DM can interpret as anything from "hurting an animal" to "sleeping in a bed" to "not immediately murdering every lumberjack he sees." The worst part is that such a DM may not know (or care) that the player doesn't know where this line is drawn. The same thing applies to clerics and their gods.

Telok

2016-08-16, 03:09 PM

Hey! I just realized that he could do the negative xp guy. Elf, fighter, barbarian, ranger, cleric, bard, (alignment change) monk, ranger++. Then when the character inevitably dies you're further into the game and have more information about how th GM runs things.

Failing that in a level 1 to 4 game straight dwarven fighter isn't bad. You can start with improved trip, pick up weapon focus and a masterwork weapon at level 2, iron will at 3 and power attack at 4. It's not a great build, there's really nowhere to go and no benefit to fighter levels after that. But through level 4 in a core only game it's not bad. For funsies dump intelligence, cross class your one skill into knowledge: nobility, and insist that as a noble you are the leader and face of the party. Getting killed at level 4 when acting like a snotty upstuck noble ought to be really easy.

Other than that having multiple druids in the party dispenses with the need for big stupid fighters.

eggynack

2016-08-16, 03:10 PM

A druid falls for "ceasing to revere nature" which a sufficiently-asinine DM can interpret as anything from "hurting an animal" to "sleeping in a bed" to "not immediately murdering every lumberjack he sees." The worst part is that such a DM may not know (or care) that the player doesn't know where this line is drawn. The same thing applies to clerics and their gods.
That's a fairer criticism. Or, the druid one is. The cleric can still go godless. But, back to druids, revering nature is intrinsically somewhat internal, rather than external. It's hard to argue that someone isn't revering nature on the basis of their closeness to nature, because how much you revere nature is dependent on your mental state. Point being, as long as an action is in accordance with your personal code of nature reverence, you should be fine. And, presumably, if you're sleeping in a bed, then sleeping in a bed isn't opposed to your view of nature reverence. Either way though, the ex-druid through nature hatred doesn't seem to imply spells going awry to me at all. Worst case scenario, clerics seem perfectly safe if you worship an ideal.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 03:56 PM

Creating the character personality, modus operandi, goals, aspirations, wishes, organizations, relationships, etc. is the player's job, not ours. You seem to be wanting to write this person's character for him even though he's asking for help with the mechanics. And of course he'll summon stuff. It's just that first level Summon Monster lasts for 1 round. You spend 1 full round casting the spell (that is, you start on your turn and the spell resolves at the start of your next turn) making it easy to disrupt and difficult to disrupt with. Then that monster disappears 1 round from there. 2 rounds on level 2. And it's a worse fighter than you.

You could literally spend that same round attacking and accomplish more than you do with that spell slot. That's just not very efficient and that's the problem with low level summoning; full round casting time and duration of rounds/level. Fine once you have some caster levels but as of right now, bide your time. You need high enough caster level for your summons to stick around to really get to enjoy them. Level 3 is already good but they really take off around level 5 when you get both, Summon Monster III and sufficient duration to last for most of an average encounter.

The difference is: you don't care if it takes a hit or not.

And how is 3 attacks a round with a +4 bonus to hit a worse fighter than you? Celestial Eagle. claw claw bite, +4 to hit, 1d4 damage. Starting at 2nd level, that's 2 rounds, 6 attacks with smite adding +1 damage. For a second level, a potential damage of 6d4+6 from a first level spell? Able to flank, and take a hit that would otherwise go to a party member? And no saving throw? Show me another 1st level spell that versatile.

Yeah, show me another spell with that kind of versatility. They are starting at 2nd level. That is 2 rounds of kick ass. 3rd level you take augment summoning, and now it is +4 to hit and +3 to damage (because eagles use dex to hit) for 3d4+9 damage potential per round. 4th level, with summon 2 you summon 1d3 of them. 2(avg)x3d4+9 for 4 rounds... 24d4+72 damage potential. 5th level, Superior summons. 1d3+1. 75d4+225 potential damage. From one second level spell. Yeah, few of those attacks will hit. But the smite bypasses ALL dr. So... show me another spell with that kind of damage potential at that level. Any level for that matter.

Summon Monster is the highest damage output spell in the game. At every possible level. 1st - 20th. It absorbs hits, has remarkable staying power, can chase down fleeing enemies, deal good damage, block enemy advancement, attack flying enemies, and is probably the most versatile spell in the game. Even from first level.

Edit: I am, obviously, going from a sorcerer, not a cleric. Cleric can take all the same stuff, but a cleric would be dropping many of his summoning spells to do some healing. That's the biggest problem with cleric, they have to sacrifice a lot of power in order to keep the group healthy. Since the group already has a cleric AND a druid, sorcerer fits much better. You need someone who can completely focus on the battlefield and eliminate the encounter rather than worry about after the battle.

Bakkan

2016-08-16, 04:12 PM

What is it that makes the smite bypass DR? I can't seem to find the rule.

Big Fau

2016-08-16, 04:14 PM

Summon Monster is the highest damage output spell in the game. At every possible level. 1st - 20th. It absorbs hits, has remarkable staying power, can chase down fleeing enemies, deal good damage, block enemy advancement, attack flying enemies, and is probably the most versatile spell in the game. Even from first level.

Orb of Force, Maw of Chaos, Legion of Sentinels, and several other spells disagree. At 1st level you are able to match the damage output of a SM1 casting by just spending 2 turns to fire a light crossbow twice.

You want a summoning spell at 1st level? Try Mount. 19hp, two attacks, and actually decent if you use Augmented Summoning and buff spells.

What is it that makes the smite bypass DR? I can't seem to find the rule.

Likely Pathfinder-exclusive.

Daelnoron

2016-08-16, 04:27 PM

Wow. I'll try to keep this a bit chronological... tl;dr exists :D

That being said...

MAKE A DWARVEN BARBARIAN. LOL
Weeell... I usually play Dwarfs more in the calm, reserved, very dry humouristic way... if anything I might go for a Gnome for a barbarian (plus, of course half-orc and human), the whole emotional, fairy beings gels very nicely with rage... but I don't particularly plan on playing a barbarian ;)

But yeah, you could be a bit of a different Cleric by playing Neutral alignment and channeling negative energy.

That was indeed pretty much my idea. Lawful Neutral guy, not worshipping a God, pretty much fluffed as an Ur-Priest... His (Un-)Holy Symbol would be a scroll-casing including the scroll holding the contract, he managed to wrest from some outerplanar power... somehow^^
I would propably not go for Travel and might want to avoid Trickery... Though I do understand, they are very strong.

Ultimately, I recommend: [good tips]
Thanks a lot^^ I already got most of these on my radar, but it is good to see, that I don't seem to have overlooked something good or overvalued something bad :)

Restricting your options to core only is not tha bad, considering this is going to be your groups fisrt foray into 3.5. It's usually a good idea to limit options to the basic stuff when you are DM'ing a new system that you are not familiar with, especially since a lot of the extras that you find in the various splats and expansions can get very broken, very fast, even if your DM know's the system inside and out.

Our DM actually claims 3.5 is the setting he is most familiar with... Which implies more knowledge than 3-4 years of Warhammer Fantasy RPG and Dark Heresy, but he tends to have lots of trouble with those systems... I just assume he doesn't really has a good grasp on balance.

As already said, Druid is probably the best choice, if you want to go pure optimization, as you can fill the caster and meat shield roll at the same time, plus drag along an animal companion.

All that said, however, you should also consider what kind of character you want to play. If the character you have in mind isn't "optimized", then to hell with optimization. After all, your playing the game to have fun, not see who can do the most damage per round.
Yeah, I'd much rather add a second Cleric than a second Druid. I can see tons of different characteristics for Clerics but seem to be a bit short on ideas for Druids.
And I don't care much for optimized. I want "somewhat capable given the limitations, while still entertaining to play". As long as I got some interesting stuff I can do, I'll be fine.

You just walk around with a bag of tricks shouting "summon monster 1" and throwing a critter on the ground.
If only I could afford one :D

I like summoner clerics in core-only, but I'm not as big a fan if the game is starting at level 2. Summoning spells take a while to come online, so if it's your main schtick, you risk being stuck with dead feat slots for a while. If I were playing a cleric, I'd lean towards more of a tanky gishy melee support in the early game, with heavy armor and the War domain, and then maybe transition into summoning later.

And of course he'll summon stuff. It's just that first level Summon Monster lasts for 1 round. You spend 1 full round casting the spell (that is, you start on your turn and the spell resolves at the start of your next turn) making it easy to disrupt and difficult to disrupt with. Then that monster disappears 1 round from there. 2 rounds on level 2. And it's a worse fighter than you.

Yes, that is indeed a problem... The cleric can deal with this easier than the sorcerer and the Not-Quite-Evil Cleric has a slight advantage as a gish... the inflicts.

Considering your STATS are so high, I would make a paladin if I were you.

Yeah, as I mentioned, the Stuntie Charger is a high possibility for a martial class... Not too certain whether I'd go with Halfling or Gnome... +1AC or +1HP/Level... though as he can use a shield with the lance, the HP is propably better... I will have a very specific question for exactly this though. I'll post it at the bottom.
(Oh and what is a BSF?)

Pointing this out cause others missed it: Max Dex on armor doesn't apply to Combat Reflexes. At all.I actually didn't know that. Great catch!
Neither did I. Thanks!

One build I like the idea of, but have barely had a chance to play, is an enchantment-focused sorcerer
[...]
The idea behind this character is somebody everybody likes. They just can't help themselves. He can make friends with anybody, and twist them around his little finger.
Yeah, he is not very open to tactics like that. Sadly.

Clerics and druids - for all their versatility benefits - are vulnerable to "your god decides that you cast flame strike on yourself."

I don't think a paladin fits the general situation. When you're dealing with someone who's limiting things in so many ways, you really want a class that can pull out a new trick when another is shut down
[...]
The critical overall issue here is that casting is really what you should be doing when you don't fully trust a DM, and this DM doesn't seem entirely trustworthy from what information we have.

Once again everyone assumes DM is a douche bag because he only wants core rules to make his life a bit easier .
Yeah, maybe I miscommunicated here a bit. The DM isn't that bad. He is pretty unlikely, to take the players stuff away and would hardly fiat against us that badly. He is just SO VERY stingy with the stuff he GIVES us. And yeah, maybe it's going to be ok once in game, but... I'm cautious.

That, and his rules seem weird and sporadic. Why orcs? Why MM feats?
Well, he seems to see orcs as too socially shunned to be particularly viable and sees MM feats reserved for Monsters and exceptions like the Dragon Disciple...

cautiousness seems warranted
yeah, a bit.

A druid falls for "ceasing to revere nature" which a sufficiently-asinine DM can interpret as anything from "hurting an animal" to "sleeping in a bed" to "not immediately murdering every lumberjack he sees." The worst part is that such a DM may not know (or care) that the player doesn't know where this line is drawn. The same thing applies to clerics and their gods.
He told me on the topic of paladins, that I can assume my Paladin knows his code better than I do, so if I muck something up (or rather: am about to), he'd warn me about it. And even if it happens, the gods won't kick me without a warning. That might not be a gentle one, but hey.

tl;dr: DM is not THAT bad, just reluctant to hand out stuff. And 1000 Thanks for all your answers! Holy moly...

sooo... my Ideas right now: Undecided goes martial: (not only) summoning sorcerer or cleric (negative energy, godless). Undecided goes wizard: Gnome-Paladin(?)-Rider or tweaked Horizon Tripper.

My question about Mounted Charges:
The main benefit is, that your mount does the move action so you can still full-attack, right? So lets assume Mounted Combat, Spirited Charge and Ride-By-Attack. Gnome with lance on riding dog:
Can I:
1. Charge him until I am 10ft away.
2. Do a full attack with my lance, all attacks t triple damage.
3. Continue my Charge for another 5ft.
4. Have my mount make a Standard attack (at double damage? propably not...)
5. Ride away into the sunset without provoking AoO?

Thanks again!

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 04:35 PM

The difference is: you don't care if it takes a hit or not.

And how is 3 attacks a round with a +4 bonus to hit a worse fighter than you? Celestial Eagle. claw claw bite, +4 to hit, 1d4 damage. Starting at 2nd level, that's 2 rounds, 6 attacks with smite adding +1 damage. For a second level, a potential damage of 6d4 from a first level spell? Able to flank, and take a hit that would otherwise go to a party member? And no saving throw? Show me another 1st level spell that versatile.

Yeah, show me another spell with that kind of versatility. They are starting at 2nd level. That is 2 rounds of kick ass. 3rd level you take augment summoning, and now it is +4 to hit and +3 to damage (because eagles use dex to hit) for 3d4+9 damage potential per round. 4th level, with summon 2 you summon 1d3 of them. 2(avg)x3d4+9 for 4 rounds... 24d4+72 damage potential. 5th level, Superior summons. 1d3+1. 75d4+225 potential damage. From one second level spell. Yeah, few of those attacks will hit. But the smite bypasses ALL dr. So... show me another spell with that kind of damage potential at that level. Any level for that matter.

Summon Monster is the highest damage output spell in the game. At every possible level. 1st - 20th. It absorbs hits, has remarkable staying power, can chase down fleeing enemies, deal good damage, block enemy advancement, attack flying enemies, and is probably the most versatile spell in the game. Even from first level.

First of all, yes, summons are good, but that's overselling it. Things depend a lot. 1 round cast time makes the spells exceedingly disruptable and ill-suited for any reactionary plays; without ACFs like Rapid Summoning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#rapidSummoning) you basically need to precast summons or cast them from safety. Enemies have one full round where any effects you suffer force Concentration vs. losing the spell. Something like Color Spray or Cause Fear has a much more immediate impact, working on your turn 1 as opposed to turn 2 - enemies disabled are basically dead without having to spend a single action on damaging them. Then you just clean it up. Other spells like Haste, Polymorph, Shapechange, etc. can easily compete with Summons in terms of damage too, particularly higher up where fights tend to become really polarized and thus rather short.

The Celestial Eagle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterI.htm) you mention? It's not a 1st level summon. It is available on Summon Monster II (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterII.htm), and indeed nothing on Summon Monster I list compares to a 16 Strength L2 Cleric attacking two-handed with Mw. Longspear at +5 for 1d8+4 at 20/x3 crit (average 8.5 on a hit). Celestial Dog (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm) hits at +2 for 1d4+1 or +4 for 1d4+4 with Augment Summoning (Human Cleric can have it). Celestial Badger has +4/+4 for 1d2-1 and -1 for 1d3-1 or +4/+4 for 1d2+1 and -1 for 1d3+1. Either way, the damage is rather minimal; vs. target AC 15 the level 2 Cleric's normal attack averages 5.33 damage, while even including the Smite, the Augmented Summons Dog averages 3.93 and the Badger averages 3.92. This at the cost of a spell slot and a full round of actions (attacking or casting another spell leaves you free to move afterwards). Honestly, the best summon from SMI is the Fiendish Spider with its Webbing ability. Celestial Giant Fire Beetle does decent damage but its to hit is just too low.

Compared to what you could do with other spells, even with a two-feat investment they're mediocre; yeah, they serve to flank and Aid Another but compared to disabling enemies, that isn't that amazing. Intelligent enemies with basic understanding of magic won't bother attacking them (though they can indeed take a hit in many cases). Summon Monster II is a huge step up with Fiendish Wolf and Celestial Riding Dog both offering some nice combat ability but particularly Augment Summoning Wolf offering the wonderful trip-on-hit effect which can really make a huge difference and comes kinda tacked on for free. Sadly as Celestial Eagle is a Weapon Finesse-fighting creature, its to hit doesn't benefit of Augment Summoning leaving it at +3/+3/-2 though 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+2 looks nice otherwise. Vs. AC 15 it only averages 5.65 damage per round even with the Smite. Comparatively, Wolf offers mere 4.46 damage but the added Trip is about a 50% chance vs. average humanoids to get massive bonuses. Note, the Celestial Riding Dog does offer 6.06 damage on a smite being the best of the pack but it probably doesn't know the Trip maneuver.

Summon Monster III is where things really kick off. The summons hang around long enough to be reliable so it's worth taking the risk of casting a summon spell (and casting it over another spell), and the summons you can get are packing serious punch to demand attention. Dretch offers you your first awesome spell-likes in Stinking Cloud and Scare (low DCs but these are free proxy actions and Stinking Cloud & Scare both have effects even on a successful save) alongside decent combat prowess while Celestial Bison and Fiendish Ape are both great combatants (to put it into perspective, vs. the earlier AC 15, the Ape averages 19.93 without Smite and the Bison does 13.86. There are even more options: Crocodile offers a wonderful grappler at +8 Grapple with Augmented Summoning plus Improved Grab plus good damage (9.92 on the bite, 11.39 on the tail). Hell Hound even gives you a 10' Cone of fire for 2d6 (DC15 Reflex for half) and elementals provide some utility. You have great radar options like Dire Bat as well.

My question about Mounted Charges:
The main benefit is, that your mount does the move action so you can still full-attack, right?

Mounted combat rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#mountedCombat) limit you to a single melee attack if your mount moves more than 5'. However, you can still do full ranged attacks. Generally the multipliers from Spirited Charge are comparable to the bonuses of a full attack though until very high up (and much higher on low levels before Haste comes into the picture) so it becomes kind of a wash.

So lets assume Mounted Combat, Spirited Charge and Ride-By-Attack. Gnome with lance on riding dog:
Can I:
1. Charge him until I am 10ft away.

Mounted charge and attack at reach? Yeah, sure.

2. Do a full attack with my lance, all attacks t triple damage.

As above, that is not possible without Pounce.

3. Continue my Charge for another 5ft.

Thanks to Ride-By Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#rideByAttack) your mount can continue movement but you only attack the target you charged.

4. Have my mount make a Standard attack (at double damage? propably not...)

Probably but that probably stops the Mount's movement as well. An alternative would be attempting Overrun (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#overrun) with Trample (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#trample)-feat.

5. Ride away into the sunset without provoking AoO?

This part works if you make your own charge and keep on moving. If your mount attacks outside the Trample-feat, that most likely stops his movement. There's no proviso in Ride-By Attack allowing the Mount to attack and keep moving, just that you can keep moving with your mount after your attack.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 04:49 PM

Orb of Force, Maw of Chaos, Legion of Sentinels, and several other spells disagree. At 1st level you are able to match the damage output of a SM1 casting by just spending 2 turns to fire a light crossbow twice.

You want a summoning spell at 1st level? Try Mount. 19hp, two attacks, and actually decent if you use Augmented Summoning and buff spells.

Likely Pathfinder-exclusive.

Maw of chaos... 9th level spell. 1d6 per caster level. Focused on one spot.

VS: Summon monster 9

ROUND 1:
Summoner begins casting.
Maw Caster Casts, 20d6 avg 70 damage.

Round 2:
Summoner: Summons appear.
1d3+1 Dire Bear. With smite. (3 attacks. Claw(2d4 + 10 + 2 + 12) * 2 + bite (2d8 + 5 +2 + 12)) * 3(avg) So (29 + 29 + 26) * 3 for a damage output potential of: 258.
Maw Caster: 20d6 140 damage output.

Looks like Maw of Chaos gets obliterated the first round the monsters show up.

Legion of sentinels: Damage output... NEGLIGIBLE because they do not attack, they can only take AOO. Unless someone decides to keep walking through them each round (which only an idiot would do) they get 16 d8 + 1/3 caster level ONCE.

Orb of force: standard 10d6 orb. Not even coming close to comparing with a 4th level summon monster. Hell, it doesn't even match the base damage of the summon monster 2 from 5th level I just posted.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 04:59 PM

1d3+1 Dire Bear. With smite. (3 attacks. Claw(2d4 + 10 + 2 + 12) * 2 + bite (2d8 + 5 +2 + 12)) * 3(avg) So (29 + 29 + 26) * 3 for a damage output potential of: 258.
Maw Caster: 20d6 140 damage output.

Looks like Maw of Chaos gets obliterated the first round the monsters show up.

You forgot the attack rolls. Vs. an average CR 20 enemy's AC of 36 (from the list of SRD average stats for all CRs), an Augment Summoning Dire Bear (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/direBear.htm) attacks at +21 / +21 / +15. Thus it needs to roll 15+/15+/20 to hit, giving us 30% hit chance on Claws and 5% on Bite. Counting for crits this averages 6.24 damage each Claw and 1.57 from the Bite for a total of 14.05 per Dire Bear full attack. So the average 3 bears do a total of 42.15 in a round, or 59.04 if they're flanking. Compare to Maw of Chaos that does damage at no save. This is before we even begin to account for things like miss chance and damage reduction. By comparison, Maw of Chaos only cares about Spell Resistance and Assay Resistance makes that all but a moot point on these levels, let alone caster level stacking (Maw of Chaos does uncapped damage so if you pump your caster level to 40, you're doing 40d6 instead while summons remain largely the same).

LTwerewolf

2016-08-16, 05:01 PM

I've never understood the "there's already an X in the group, so can't play that" mentality. Two of the same class (especially druid/cleric) works just fine. The chance that both are going to be built exactly the same way and have no synergy is pretty much nonexistent. Two druids make a rockin combination. Two clerics can be built entirely differently.

Bakkan

2016-08-16, 05:11 PM

Round 2:
Summoner: Summons appear.
1d3+1 Dire Bear. With smite. (3 attacks. Claw(2d4 + 10 + 2 + 12) * 2 + bite (2d8 + 5 +2 + 12)) * 3(avg) So (29 + 29 + 26) * 3 for a damage output potential of: 258.
Maw Caster: 20d6 140 damage output.

You're using Pathfinder rules when the thread is about 3.5.

In 3.5, smite takes a standard action (which means if you're smiting, you only get one attack that round) and it doesn't bypass DR. It also only applies to a single attack, which means that it is essentially never a good idea to smite if you can full attack. This drops your potential damage down by 108, without accounting for misses, inability to full attack, damage reduction (even in Pathfinder the celestial smite doesn't bypass DR), or anything else.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 05:17 PM

First of all, yes, summons are good, but that's overselling it. Things depend a lot. 1 round cast time makes the spells exceedingly disruptable and ill-suited for any reactionary plays; without ACFs like Rapid Summoning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#rapidSummoning) you basically need to precast summons or cast them from safety. Enemies have one full round where any effects you suffer force Concentration vs. losing the spell. Something like Color Spray or Cause Fear has a much more immediate impact, working on your turn 1 as opposed to turn 2 - enemies disabled are basically dead without having to spend a single action on damaging them. Then you just clean it up. Other spells like Haste, Polymorph, Shapechange, etc. can easily compete with Summons in terms of damage too, particularly higher up where fights tend to become really polarized and thus rather short.

The Celestial Eagle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterI.htm) you mention? It's not a 1st level summon. It is available on Summon Monster II (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterII.htm), and indeed nothing on Summon Monster I list compares to a 16 Strength L2 Cleric attacking two-handed with Mw. Longspear at +5 for 1d8+4 at 20/x3 crit (average 8.5 on a hit). Celestial Dog (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm) hits at +2 for 1d4+1 or +4 for 1d4+4 with Augment Summoning (Human Cleric can have it). Celestial Badger has +4/+4 for 1d2-1 and -1 for 1d3-1 or +4/+4 for 1d2+1 and -1 for 1d3+1. Either way, the damage is rather minimal; vs. target AC 15 the level 2 Cleric's normal attack averages 5.33 damage, while even including the Smite, the Augmented Summons Dog averages 3.93 and the Badger averages 3.92. This at the cost of a spell slot and a full round of actions (attacking or casting another spell leaves you free to move afterwards). Honestly, the best summon from SMI is the Fiendish Spider with its Webbing ability. Celestial Giant Fire Beetle does decent damage but its to hit is just too low.

Compared to what you could do with other spells, even with a two-feat investment they're mediocre; yeah, they serve to flank and Aid Another but compared to disabling enemies, that isn't that amazing. Intelligent enemies with basic understanding of magic won't bother attacking them (though they can indeed take a hit in many cases). Summon Monster II is a huge step up with Fiendish Wolf and Celestial Riding Dog both offering some nice combat ability but particularly Augment Summoning Wolf offering the wonderful trip-on-hit effect which can really make a huge difference and comes kinda tacked on for free. Sadly as Celestial Eagle is a Weapon Finesse-fighting creature, its to hit doesn't benefit of Augment Summoning leaving it at +3/+3/-2 though 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+2 looks nice otherwise. Vs. AC 15 it only averages 5.65 damage per round even with the Smite. Comparatively, Wolf offers mere 4.46 damage but the added Trip is about a 50% chance vs. average humanoids to get massive bonuses. Note, the Celestial Riding Dog does offer 6.06 damage on a smite being the best of the pack but it probably doesn't know the Trip maneuver.

Summon Monster III is where things really kick off. The summons hang around long enough to be reliable so it's worth taking the risk of casting a summon spell (and casting it over another spell), and the summons you can get are packing serious punch to demand attention. Dretch offers you your first awesome spell-likes in Stinking Cloud and Scare (low DCs but these are free proxy actions and Stinking Cloud & Scare both have effects even on a successful save) alongside decent combat prowess while Celestial Bison and Fiendish Ape are both great combatants (to put it into perspective, vs. the earlier AC 15, the Ape averages 19.93 without Smite and the Bison does 13.86. There are even more options: Crocodile offers a wonderful grappler at +8 Grapple with Augmented Summoning plus Improved Grab plus good damage (9.92 on the bite, 11.39 on the tail). Hell Hound even gives you a 10' Cone of fire for 2d6 (DC15 Reflex for half) and elementals provide some utility. You have great radar options like Dire Bat as well.

With several other people in the party, and intelligent placement, you will get that spell off. Plus, if you're not maxing out your concentration as a summoner archetype you're doing it wrong. My PFS summoner sorcerer has NEVER failed to get his summon spells off, and he has no rapid summoning. and this is going from level 1 to his current level 12.

So we are looking at (given his stats) a starting concentration check of +8 (max ranks, 17 con)

That should pretty much resist most concentration checks. Add a skill focus (concentration) and you will automatically make all concentration checks of 1 damage. (You'd have to play a human to get that feat at first level) I would add some extra stuff to it in order to beef it up further as I could.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 05:35 PM

With several other people in the party, and intelligent placement, you will get that spell off. Plus, if you're not maxing out your concentration as a summoner archetype you're doing it wrong. My PFS summoner sorcerer has NEVER failed to get his summon spells off, and he has no rapid summoning. and this is going from level 1 to his current level 12.

So we are looking at (given his stats) a starting concentration check of +8 (max ranks, 17 con)

That should pretty much resist most concentration checks. Add a skill focus (concentration) and you will automatically make all concentration checks of 1 damage. (You'd have to play a human to get that feat at first level) I would add some extra stuff to it in order to beef it up further as I could.

I wouldn't bother putting resources into it. You generally have better uses for those; there are many more important feats for instance (Augment Summoning for starters). It's just a drawback to eat up. Which is fine: it's worth it but early on it weighs heavily in the scales.

And yeah, PFS is kinda nice about that sorts of things but that's because it's designed for fairly weak random parties with poor coordination; even the famously lethal modules such as God's Market Gamble or Thornkeep are really rather nice about not throwing well-constructed casters, efficient ambushes or such at the party. Enemies with both, the ability and the know-how to properly disrupt casting are rare indeed. My own Conjurer has never had a spell disrupted either and indeed, it's been smooth sailing throughout (though granted, he's only hit tier 3-4 thus far).

A campaign made for veteran players with reasonably optimised characters involving ties, active opposing organisations and such would certainly make the life of a caster much, much harder.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 06:27 PM

You forgot the attack rolls. Vs. an average CR 20 enemy's AC of 36 (from the list of SRD average stats for all CRs), an Augment Summoning Dire Bear (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/direBear.htm) attacks at +21 / +21 / +15. Thus it needs to roll 15+/15+/20 to hit, giving us 30% hit chance on Claws and 5% on Bite. Counting for crits this averages 6.24 damage each Claw and 1.57 from the Bite for a total of 14.05 per Dire Bear full attack. So the average 3 bears do a total of 42.15 in a round, or 59.04 if they're flanking. Compare to Maw of Chaos that does damage at no save. This is before we even begin to account for things like miss chance and damage reduction. By comparison, Maw of Chaos only cares about Spell Resistance and Assay Resistance makes that all but a moot point on these levels, let alone caster level stacking (Maw of Chaos does uncapped damage so if you pump your caster level to 40, you're doing 40d6 instead while summons remain largely the same).

If you want to play it THAT way, your casting is... stationary. It is easily defeated by simply... moving. Something nearly every creature is capable of (not all, I'll grant you, but most) Meanwhile, the bears move with the target (assuming non flight).

All the while, taking hits that would have been directed at... you or your party. And at size Huge, nothing melee is getting around them easily.

So while your maw of chaos is defeated by simply... going around it or leaving the effect area (yes, I know, daze saving throw etc) the bears are free to roam the battlefield looking for more targets. So while your maw might be better at a small group of humanoids, the bears are better against a single target as well as a larger group or small army. Or against anything immune to daze or makes the saving throw against the daze. Which will be most things you will be fighting at that level.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 06:29 PM

First of all, yes, summons are good, but that's overselling it. Things depend a lot. 1 round cast time makes the spells exceedingly disruptable and ill-suited for any reactionary plays; without ACFs like Rapid Summoning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#rapidSummoning) you basically need to precast summons or cast them from safety. Enemies have one full round where any effects you suffer force Concentration vs. losing the spell. Something like Color Spray or Cause Fear has a much more immediate impact, working on your turn 1 as opposed to turn 2 - enemies disabled are basically dead without having to spend a single action on damaging them. Then you just clean it up. Other spells like Haste, Polymorph, Shapechange, etc. can easily compete with Summons in terms of damage too, particularly higher up where fights tend to become really polarized and thus rather short.

The Celestial Eagle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterI.htm) you mention? It's not a 1st level summon. It is available on Summon Monster II (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterII.htm), and indeed nothing on Summon Monster I list compares to a 16 Strength L2 Cleric attacking two-handed with Mw. Longspear at +5 for 1d8+4 at 20/x3 crit (average 8.5 on a hit). Celestial Dog (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm) hits at +2 for 1d4+1 or +4 for 1d4+4 with Augment Summoning (Human Cleric can have it). Celestial Badger has +4/+4 for 1d2-1 and -1 for 1d3-1 or +4/+4 for 1d2+1 and -1 for 1d3+1. Either way, the damage is rather minimal; vs. target AC 15 the level 2 Cleric's normal attack averages 5.33 damage, while even including the Smite, the Augmented Summons Dog averages 3.93 and the Badger averages 3.92. This at the cost of a spell slot and a full round of actions (attacking or casting another spell leaves you free to move afterwards). Honestly, the best summon from SMI is the Fiendish Spider with its Webbing ability. Celestial Giant Fire Beetle does decent damage but its to hit is just too low.

Compared to what you could do with other spells, even with a two-feat investment they're mediocre; yeah, they serve to flank and Aid Another but compared to disabling enemies, that isn't that amazing. Intelligent enemies with basic understanding of magic won't bother attacking them (though they can indeed take a hit in many cases). Summon Monster II is a huge step up with Fiendish Wolf and Celestial Riding Dog both offering some nice combat ability but particularly Augment Summoning Wolf offering the wonderful trip-on-hit effect which can really make a huge difference and comes kinda tacked on for free. Sadly as Celestial Eagle is a Weapon Finesse-fighting creature, its to hit doesn't benefit of Augment Summoning leaving it at +3/+3/-2 though 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+2 looks nice otherwise. Vs. AC 15 it only averages 5.65 damage per round even with the Smite. Comparatively, Wolf offers mere 4.46 damage but the added Trip is about a 50% chance vs. average humanoids to get massive bonuses. Note, the Celestial Riding Dog does offer 6.06 damage on a smite being the best of the pack but it probably doesn't know the Trip maneuver.

Summon Monster III is where things really kick off. The summons hang around long enough to be reliable so it's worth taking the risk of casting a summon spell (and casting it over another spell), and the summons you can get are packing serious punch to demand attention. Dretch offers you your first awesome spell-likes in Stinking Cloud and Scare (low DCs but these are free proxy actions and Stinking Cloud & Scare both have effects even on a successful save) alongside decent combat prowess while Celestial Bison and Fiendish Ape are both great combatants (to put it into perspective, vs. the earlier AC 15, the Ape averages 19.93 without Smite and the Bison does 13.86. There are even more options: Crocodile offers a wonderful grappler at +8 Grapple with Augmented Summoning plus Improved Grab plus good damage (9.92 on the bite, 11.39 on the tail). Hell Hound even gives you a 10' Cone of fire for 2d6 (DC15 Reflex for half) and elementals provide some utility. You have great radar options like Dire Bat as well.

Mounted combat rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#mountedCombat) limit you to a single melee attack if your mount moves more than 5'. However, you can still do full ranged attacks. Generally the multipliers from Spirited Charge are comparable to the bonuses of a full attack though until very high up (and much higher on low levels before Haste comes into the picture) so it becomes kind of a wash.

Mounted charge and attack at reach? Yeah, sure.

As above, that is not possible without Pounce.

Thanks to Ride-By Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#rideByAttack) your mount can continue movement but you only attack the target you charged.

Probably but that probably stops the Mount's movement as well. An alternative would be attempting Overrun (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#overrun) with Trample (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#trample)-feat.

This part works if you make your own charge and keep on moving. If your mount attacks outside the Trample-feat, that most likely stops his movement. There's no proviso in Ride-By Attack allowing the Mount to attack and keep moving, just that you can keep moving with your mount after your attack.

Wow.

Pathfinder REALLY beefed up the low level summons. Didn't realize how different summon monster was between them.

Still, the summons are still fairly effective even with the low level summons. And the control of the battlefield, flanking, AOO and the whole taking hits for the team is still incredibly valuable... more so at level 1-2 than anything else. "Go harass the archer" is a very valid summon tactic at that point.

Eldariel

2016-08-16, 08:36 PM

If you want to play it THAT way, your casting is... stationary. It is easily defeated by simply... moving. Something nearly every creature is capable of (not all, I'll grant you, but most) Meanwhile, the bears move with the target (assuming non flight).[

All the while, taking hits that would have been directed at... you or your party. And at size Huge, nothing melee is getting around them easily.

So while your maw of chaos is defeated by simply... going around it or leaving the effect area (yes, I know, daze saving throw etc) the bears are free to roam the battlefield looking for more targets. So while your maw might be better at a small group of humanoids, the bears are better against a single target as well as a larger group or small army. Or against anything immune to daze or makes the saving throw against the daze. Which will be most things you will be fighting at that level.

The save DC on Maw is actually extremely non-trivial. Daze-immunity is exceedingly rare (Favor of the Martyr is about the only option and that's a level 4 Paladin spell) - that's why Maw is so good in the first place. No creature type is immune to Daze by default. And a 9th level spell cast by a level 20 Wizard, if we have 18 base stat we're looking at 18 + 5 levels + 5 inherent + 6 enhancement = 36 casting stat without trickery (stuff like Polymorph Any Object can be used to manipulate your base Int though and there are additional bonuses for those who feel like seeking them) for save DC of 10 + 9 + 13 = 32. Average CR 20 Will-save modifier is 21, which means the creatures have a 50% chance of getting stuck there. Either way, the initial damage is already done and with decent likelihood, a second set.

Further, things like Craft Magic Tattoo, Archmage, UMDd Beads of Karma, Orange Prism Ioun Stone, etc. enable very high caster level, which can make it do a lot more. And the damage is automatic; it's done immediately without save or such; if you metamagic it a bit and buff your caster level, you can just one-shot a good bunch of things without any rolls. It can always be maximized or empowered with a Metamagic Rod. And since everyone can fly on these levels, the Bears not being able to do so actually restricts the locales where they are usable. Sadly all summons suffer of relatively weak To Hit-scores on these levels; it takes a lot of buffing for them to be hitting single tough enemies like Pit Fiend or Balor with any sort of regularity. Summons can work vs. single opponents on these levels but not alone: you'll have to debuff the target. They do offer great utility tho (Does enemy lack Freedom of Movement? Colossal Centipede! Does the enemy fly? Greater Air Elemental! Hezrou has the Nausea-field, Vrocks have Telekinesis, etc.) and act as solid buff carriers.

And yeah, Pathfinder buffed summons to high heavens. It's completely ridiculous; you can get like a Shadow Demon from Summon Monster VI when you learned Telekinesis the previous spell level. This thing has Telekinesis at will combined with Magic Jar, Shadow Conjuration/Evocation and all that.

Calthropstu

2016-08-16, 09:43 PM

The save DC on Maw is actually extremely non-trivial. Daze-immunity is exceedingly rare (Favor of the Martyr is about the only option and that's a level 4 Paladin spell) - that's why Maw is so good in the first place. No creature type is immune to Daze by default. And a 9th level spell cast by a level 20 Wizard, if we have 18 base stat we're looking at 18 + 5 levels + 5 inherent + 6 enhancement = 36 casting stat without trickery (stuff like Polymorph Any Object can be used to manipulate your base Int though and there are additional bonuses for those who feel like seeking them) for save DC of 10 + 9 + 13 = 32. Average CR 20 Will-save modifier is 21, which means the creatures have a 50% chance of getting stuck there. Either way, the initial damage is already done and with decent likelihood, a second set.

Further, things like Craft Magic Tattoo, Archmage, UMDd Beads of Karma, Orange Prism Ioun Stone, etc. enable very high caster level, which can make it do a lot more. And the damage is automatic; it's done immediately without save or such; if you metamagic it a bit and buff your caster level, you can just one-shot a good bunch of things without any rolls. It can always be maximized or empowered with a Metamagic Rod. And since everyone can fly on these levels, the Bears not being able to do so actually restricts the locales where they are usable. Sadly all summons suffer of relatively weak To Hit-scores on these levels; it takes a lot of buffing for them to be hitting single tough enemies like Pit Fiend or Balor with any sort of regularity. Summons can work vs. single opponents on these levels but not alone: you'll have to debuff the target. They do offer great utility tho (Does enemy lack Freedom of Movement? Colossal Centipede! Does the enemy fly? Greater Air Elemental! Hezrou has the Nausea-field, Vrocks have Telekinesis, etc.) and act as solid buff carriers.

And yeah, Pathfinder buffed summons to high heavens. It's completely ridiculous; you can get like a Shadow Demon from Summon Monster VI when you learned Telekinesis the previous spell level. This thing has Telekinesis at will combined with Magic Jar, Shadow Conjuration/Evocation and all that.

Yeah, yeah they did. Looking at the summon lists, the monsters are... MUCH more powerful in PF.

You get the dire bear and t-rex at summon 7 instead of summon 8. They did a lot of moving things around. Still, summons are extremely versatile even with the drop in what I am used to. Doesn't look like you are contending that though.

But that isn't the actual argument here... it's whether or not they are tactically viable at low levels. 3 attacks at 1d4 - 1 (smite increases damage 1) is still commendable, since at level 3 they get the stat boost 1d4+1. My argument still stands. 3rd level 9d4+9 is still quite respectable for a first level spell, and providing flanking, extra targets for the enemies, and adding an AOO cannot be underestimated.

Big Fau

2016-08-16, 11:06 PM

Maw of chaos... 9th level spell. 1d6 per caster level. Focused on one spot.

Uncapped, in a 15ft radius. And its saving throw only negates being dazed. It doesn't let you reduce the damage through any means except by having the Chaotic subtype (a very rare trait).

VS: Summon monster 9

ROUND 1:
Summoner begins casting.
Maw Caster Casts, 20d6 avg 70 damage.

If you don't have a CL of at least 25 at EL20 you literally aren't even trying. Never mind that having a maxed out Empower/Maximize Rod at this level should be mandatory for a blaster-oriented mage.

Round 2:
Summoner: Summons appear.
1d3+1 Dire Bear. With smite. (3 attacks. Claw(2d4 + 10 + 2 + 12) * 2 + bite (2d8 + 5 +2 + 12)) * 3(avg) So (29 + 29 + 26) * 3 for a damage output potential of: 258.

At an attack bonus of what exactly? +19/+13? +4 for Flanking+Augmented Summoning?

Maw Caster: 20d6 140 damage output.

Looks like Maw of Chaos gets obliterated the first round the monsters show up.

CR 20 encounters have an average AC of 36.
(http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=3472)

Legion of sentinels: Damage output... NEGLIGIBLE because they do not attack, they can only take AOO. Unless someone decides to keep walking through them each round (which only an idiot would do) they get 16 d8 + 1/3 caster level ONCE.

Do LITERALLY NOTHING except 5ft step or attack the illusions or you get ganked by a MASSIVE number of them for being any size category above medium. And there are spells that can be used to force someone to provoke an AoO (one that outright does so is Slapping Hand). Seriously, a Large-sized target is screwed if it provokes even one AoO.

Orb of force: standard 10d6 orb. Not even coming close to comparing with a 4th level summon monster. Hell, it doesn't even match the base damage of the summon monster 2 from 5th level I just posted.

Go read up on the
Mailman Sorcerer and see just how much damage those Orb spells can do.

Using summons for damage isn't viable at the low levels when your crossbow does the same kind of damage over the same amount of time. Once your CL gets above 4 the crossbow is useless, but trying to use summons at 1st-3rd is a fool's errand (speaking from a lot of experience on this matter, both as a player and DM).

Telok

2016-08-17, 12:10 AM

Hey now, don't dis the crossbow too much. Just last Sunday my 7th level wizard disrupted two spells from enemy casters with a crossbow and a readied action.

Of course he'd already thrown out two spells each time that harshed up some enemies. Once you're done defining the encounter and are letting the melee guys mop up you can plink your crossbow and run interference with the other casters.

Bakkan

2016-08-17, 03:09 AM

Big Fau

2016-08-17, 03:19 AM

Smite doesn't work that way.

He plays PF, where it works differently.

Eldariel

2016-08-17, 05:38 AM

But that isn't the actual argument here... it's whether or not they are tactically viable at low levels. 3 attacks at 1d4 - 1 (smite increases damage 1) is still commendable, since at level 3 they get the stat boost 1d4+1. My argument still stands. 3rd level 9d4+9 is still quite respectable for a first level spell, and providing flanking, extra targets for the enemies, and adding an AOO cannot be underestimated.

Assuming that most of the attacks hit is unfounded. You should work assuming about 50% hit rate at best, or worse. If you account for the average AC, the damage potential of the low level summons drops too low that I'd consider bothering with them until they last for at least 3 rounds, but preferably 5. The formula to follow is:

Non-Crit Hit Probability * Av. Damage + Crit Probability * Av. Crit Damage. Non-crit hits include critical threats that weren't confirmed (that is, the math amounts to Crit * Miss * Dmg).

Remember that they can only Smite once per day too. That said, the real question is the matter of opportunity cost. The greatest costs into casting a Summon are the spell slot and the actions taken. Is it as good as alternatives? That's the ultimate measurement of if it's a competitive action to take. Generally arcane casters have better alternatives on these levels; 1 round casting time gets you Sleep instead (which is absolutely brutal vs. all the dumb brutes on these levels; an Ogre fails a DC 16 Will-save 50% of the time for instance) and there's the standard action Grease/Color Spray. Enlarge Person, Silent Image, Ray of Enfeeblement and company are all situationally awesome.

Cleric's core spells are less impressive: Cause Fear and Command are both strong but single target and Bless is a minor enough buff, though generally still worth the action/slot in a party of 4+. Protection from Evil/Good/Whatever might just be the biggest impact level 1 Cleric spell. Outside core they get Ice Slick and Conjure Ice Beast I which are both awesome though (Frostburn) alongside some good buffs. So in Core, it might be vindicated for a Cleric to prepare a Summon Monster I on level 2-3 mostly because the alternatives aren't all that impressive. Sorcerer/Wizard though, I can't imagine a single scenario.

Calthropstu

2016-08-17, 06:44 AM

He plays PF, where it works differently.

I am seriously getting bit in the ass with active PF knowledge vs 3.5 knowledge that I haven't used in years. To be fair, there is still some times where I remember 3.5 rules. To this day, I am still correcting people who think that PF golems are immune to criticals.

Calthropstu

2016-08-17, 06:56 AM

Assuming that most of the attacks hit is unfounded. You should work assuming about 50% hit rate at best, or worse. If you account for the average AC, the damage potential of the low level summons drops too low that I'd consider bothering with them until they last for at least 3 rounds, but preferably 5. The formula to follow is:

Non-Crit Hit Probability * Av. Damage + Crit Probability * Av. Crit Damage. Non-crit hits include critical threats that weren't confirmed (that is, the math amounts to Crit * Miss * Dmg).

Remember that they can only Smite once per day too. That said, the real question is the matter of opportunity cost. The greatest costs into casting a Summon are the spell slot and the actions taken. Is it as good as alternatives? That's the ultimate measurement of if it's a competitive action to take. Generally arcane casters have better alternatives on these levels; 1 round casting time gets you Sleep instead (which is absolutely brutal vs. all the dumb brutes on these levels; an Ogre fails a DC 16 Will-save 50% of the time for instance) and there's the standard action Grease/Color Spray. Enlarge Person, Silent Image, Ray of Enfeeblement and company are all situationally awesome.

Cleric's core spells are less impressive: Cause Fear and Command are both strong but single target and Bless is a minor enough buff, though generally still worth the action/slot in a party of 4+. Protection from Evil/Good/Whatever might just be the biggest impact level 1 Cleric spell. Outside core they get Ice Slick and Conjure Ice Beast I which are both awesome though (Frostburn) alongside some good buffs. So in Core, it might be vindicated for a Cleric to prepare a Summon Monster I on level 2-3 mostly because the alternatives aren't all that impressive. Sorcerer/Wizard though, I can't imagine a single scenario.

Having a spell work half the time to end an encounter vs a guaranteed battlefield control for 2 rounds is actually a no brainer for me. My summoner sorcerer started at 1st level. His spells were charm person and summon 1. He was actually quite useful. Out of combat, he was a beast, with massive bluff, diplomacy and handle animal bonuses. Add charm person, and he was a social machine. In combat he was... ok at first level. He never carried a weapon, relied a lot on summon monster to attack (to good effect) and used his 8x/day ray attack when he was out of spells. (He was PF, not 3.5. PF sorcerers get cooler stuff)
By 3rd level, he was using augment summoning. His eagles were dominating. By 5th level, he was making other players mad because he was spamming so many summons the other players couldn't get into combat. With the bard in our party giving a +2, and adding flanking, smite, and augment summoning, those eagles were doing 3 attacks each with a +8 to hit and 1d4+5 damage per attack. With an average of 3 per summon, and 2 summons cast per fight... I would have 6 eagles out causing so much havoc in the enemy ranks that they could do nothing BUT fight the eagles. Which meant WE didn't get hit. Encounters that were supposed to be really tough suddenly became a breeze. Many encounters, we didn't take a single point of damage. The summoned creatures absorbed every hit.

THAT is the purpose of a summoner in my experience. I am casting "Wall of hit points."

Eldariel

2016-08-17, 07:29 AM

Having a spell work half the time to end an encounter vs a guaranteed battlefield control for 2 rounds is actually a no brainer for me. My summoner sorcerer started at 1st level. His spells were charm person and summon 1. He was actually quite useful. Out of combat, he was a beast, with massive bluff, diplomacy and handle animal bonuses. Add charm person, and he was a social machine. In combat he was... ok at first level. He never carried a weapon, relied a lot on summon monster to attack (to good effect) and used his 8x/day ray attack when he was out of spells. (He was PF, not 3.5. PF sorcerers get cooler stuff)
By 3rd level, he was using augment summoning. His eagles were dominating. By 5th level, he was making other players mad because he was spamming so many summons the other players couldn't get into combat. With the bard in our party giving a +2, and adding flanking, smite, and augment summoning, those eagles were doing 3 attacks each with a +8 to hit and 1d4+5 damage per attack. With an average of 3 per summon, and 2 summons cast per fight... I would have 6 eagles out causing so much havoc in the enemy ranks that they could do nothing BUT fight the eagles. Which meant WE didn't get hit. Encounters that were supposed to be really tough suddenly became a breeze. Many encounters, we didn't take a single point of damage. The summoned creatures absorbed every hit.

THAT is the purpose of a summoner in my experience. I am casting "Wall of hit points."

Walls of Summons only work on melee enemies who lack the means to get past them though. Certainly effective vs. some enemies but not vs. all, and a tactic where the validity depends a lot on the DM. I find it much more productive to use summons as a part of a massive toolbox rather than the only tool in town; pick the right tool for any given job and you shall have great success. Much depends on how the DM plays the enemies too. E.g. an Ogre would be able to just walk past the Eagles, eat up the meaningless scratches if any and go for the beef. But whether it has the wits to do so is up to the DM; they're not bright but ignoring random birds when people with bows, swords and magic are attacking you doesn't require much.

Either way, someone protected by Magic Circle/Protection from Alignment would be able to ignore them altogether. In such a case I'd generally opt for either a spellcasting summon or a different approach. Likewise, I generally prefer to AOE where AOE is due; if I can catch two dangerous targets in Color Spray or Sleep, that's awesome. Three is just peachy. Good chance of knocking two out and a decent of all 3. I mislisted the chance the Ogre fails; it needs to roll 15+ to succeed so it fails 70% of the time. DC 10 + 1 Lvl + 5 Stat vs. +1 Will-save. 50%, I'd agree it's actually probably not worth the slot with no effect on a successful save but the odds are well in your favor; and doing essentially 30 points of damage (enough to incapacitate the Ogre and either let you capture it or kill it at your leisure) with a single spell and no attack roll is pretty cool.

Calthropstu

2016-08-17, 08:38 AM

Walls of Summons only work on melee enemies who lack the means to get past them though. Certainly effective vs. some enemies but not vs. all, and a tactic where the validity depends a lot on the DM. I find it much more productive to use summons as a part of a massive toolbox rather than the only tool in town; pick the right tool for any given job and you shall have great success. Much depends on how the DM plays the enemies too. E.g. an Ogre would be able to just walk past the Eagles, eat up the meaningless scratches if any and go for the beef. But whether it has the wits to do so is up to the DM; they're not bright but ignoring random birds when people with bows, swords and magic are attacking you doesn't require much.

Either way, someone protected by Magic Circle/Protection from Alignment would be able to ignore them altogether. In such a case I'd generally opt for either a spellcasting summon or a different approach. Likewise, I generally prefer to AOE where AOE is due; if I can catch two dangerous targets in Color Spray or Sleep, that's awesome. Three is just peachy. Good chance of knocking two out and a decent of all 3. I mislisted the chance the Ogre fails; it needs to roll 15+ to succeed so it fails 70% of the time. DC 10 + 1 Lvl + 5 Stat vs. +1 Will-save. 50%, I'd agree it's actually probably not worth the slot with no effect on a successful save but the odds are well in your favor; and doing essentially 30 points of damage (enough to incapacitate the Ogre and either let you capture it or kill it at your leisure) with a single spell and no attack roll is pretty cool.

Here is the build for my summoner sorcerer in PFS.

20 point buy:

Str: 7
Dex: 7
Con:16 (14 Base, +2 race.)
Int: 12
Wis: 12
Cha: 20 (18 Base, +2 race.)
Race: Agothian Blooded Aasimar.
Class: Fire Elemental Bloodline Sorcerer.
Level 1: Summon 1, Charm Person. Ray of fire 8x/day. Summon Natures Ally 2, 1x per day. Spell Focus Conjuration. Resist Acid/Electricity/Cold 5. Cantrips.
Level 2: Whee, a cantrip. (Ever notice that there are no cantrips that can trip? Weird huh?)
Level 3: Burning Hands (auto), Mage Armor, Augment Summoning. Resist 10 fire.
Level 4: Summon 2, +1 CHA, cantrip.
Level 5: Scorching Ray(Auto), Invisibility, Magic Missile, Superior Summons
Level 6: Summon 3, cantrip. Drop Mage Armor for expeditious retreat.
Level 7: Prot from Energy(Auto), Fireball, Levitate, Comprehend Languages, Improved Initiative, Skill Focus(Diplomacy)
Level 8: Summon 4, Swap Summon 1 for True Strike, Cantrip, +1 CHA (This was also the level I had saved enough to purchase a +6 CHA headband. I had purchased a special trait only available in PFS that gave me 10% off purchases, but our regional captain said that it only applied to initial purchases, not upgrades. So I started saving at level 3, purchasing almost nothing. Coincidentally, My AC was still... 8, but my CHA jumped to 28)
Level 9: Elemental Body 1(Auto), Dimension Door, Fly, Protection from Arrows, Elemental Blast 1x/day, Fire resist 20, Spell Penetration. (Level 9 is a really nice level for sorcerers in PF)
Level 10: Summon 5. Cantrip.
Level 11: Elemental Body 2(Auto), Dominate Person, Wall of Ice, Haste, Minor Image, Greater Spell Penetration. (Note, this is the last NORMAL playable PFS level)
Level 12 (current): Summon 6, +1 CHA.

Not exactly super optimized, but pretty much a summoning Juggernaut. My HP is so high (22 con, belt + 6), I actually top many of the front line fighters. My concentration check is at a +26, (12 + 9 + 5 from items) so I automatically make anything of 17 damage or less, I have resistance to ALL major elements(5/5/5/20) and can use summon monster 6 to place 1d3 + 1 Ankylosaurus out... which will pretty much stop anything.

If I took planar binding at 12th level instead of Summon 6?

DC 28 means anything I can conjure with it will need a nat 20 to avoid the call. Using the diagram means literally NOTHING can use its spell resistance to get free. There is no getting free. And with a +15 on the charisma check, not much will be refusing him either.

But when I mentioned this to the PFS crowd, they were VERY unappreciative. It would literally break the game if I used that they claimed. So I went Summon 6.

Eldariel

2016-08-17, 10:06 AM

Like we already discussed, PFS is low-powered and can't handle the broken higher level spells as written. I believe the goal of the level 12 retirement home was to avoid that but Magic Jar (which can steal bodies), Planar Binding and such sneak in already. Planar Binding (both, Lesser and standard) are way too good as they are; there's no way you should be able to force a pact with a Charisma-check off a damned Conjuration-spell - Dominate Monster is a 9th level spell! Planar Bindings and Gate are the worst offenders far as senseless brokenness go in the game precisely because they come with built-in Dominate Monster for no reason (while Shapechange/Polymorph/Simulacrum/etc. are "sensible brokenness" in that they work sensibly but are just way too good).

But yeah, even a Wizard can easily rig the Charisma-checks off Planar Binding to mind control whatever. Moment of Prescience works on the opposed check and autowins, or you can debuff the helpless bound creature until you can make the check (Geas, Bestow Curse, Enervation, Cause Fear, etc. work) and buff yourself (Eagle's Splendor is obvious but there's also e.g. Circlet of Persuasion). This means that starting on level 9 Wizards (and level 10 for Sorcerers) will be adventuring with subservient Outsiders just as powerful as they are for days/level. In 3.5 you can Lesser Planar Bind a Nightmare (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightmare.htm) for at will Astral Projections and Etherealness (or a Succubus for its wonderful spell-likes or so). In PF, the options aren't quite as amazing. Many Outsiders had their HD increased and SLAs cut down. You can still get stuff like Barghest (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/barghest), Janni (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/genie/janni) or such. And Planar Binding proper is as ridiculous as ever; in 3.5 it can get e.g. Glabrezu (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#glabrezu) which still works in Pathfinder (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/demon/glabrezu). Reverse Gravity at will, among other things. Avoral, Rakshasa, whatever. The best part? You can give them mundane equipment and buff them with stuff like Mage Armor, Greater Magic Weapon and Haste allowing them to punch way above their weight class easily.

That said, I don't know if I would've survived if I played your character; my own is 7/16/12/20/11/7 (Elf with Darkvision) taking simple Improved Initiative, who has played as everything from the party scout and trapfinder (his Perception is great and Stealth decent) to archer (Light Crossbow and Alchemist's Fire) to Knowledge-buff (1 rank in all Knowledges, more in Arcana) to, of course, buffer and encounter ender. Level 1 he prepared Grease/Sleep/Color Spray/Charm Person adding Enlarge Person or Mage Armor depending on the party, and then Glitterdust/Web/Pyrotechnics/Invisibility/etc. (again, depending on the party). There were a couple of really close calls in some of the harder lower level adventures I played where the Conjurer's teleportation and the save-or-X disables were the only thing that saved our party. I'm not sure the summons would've been enough to save us in e.g. God's Market Gamble or the Dalsine Affair.

Of course, now beyond the first levels it doesn't really matter and life as a caster is smooth sailing anyways. I began using more summons after hitting 5. Being forced to pick Spell Focus anyways means it's basically free for a Wizard. But I stand by my assessment than on the first ~3-4 levels there are better uses for your spellslots. Color Spray, Sleep, Grease, Glitterdust, Pyrotechnics and Web all trivialised countless encounters (particularly easily dropping many boss-type enemies) and I definitely stand by my assessment of picking them over Summon Monster I & II. Daze- and Detect Magic-cantrips have also been extremely impactful. Charm Person on the other hand is the sole reason this guy has succeeded in many of the social encounters; though there was one time he managed to roll 20 on the key Diplomacy check as well which was barely enough.

Big Fau

2016-08-17, 12:52 PM

But when I mentioned this to the PFS crowd, they were VERY unappreciative. It would literally break the game if I used that they claimed. So I went Summon 6.

Piazo in general has issues with high powered options. They barred Monks from taking Improved Natural Attack, nerfed the Spiked Chain, crippled the Gunslinger's best option, etc. The spell nerfs completely missed a lot of higher-level options. Hell, they can't even deal with at-will healing abilities in any capacity but won't ban wands of CLW.

There are ways to break PFS still, but doing any of those just makes them yell at you and try to get whatever you used nerfed in the next errata.

Calthropstu

2016-08-17, 04:27 PM

Piazo in general has issues with high powered options. They barred Monks from taking Improved Natural Attack, nerfed the Spiked Chain, crippled the Gunslinger's best option, etc. The spell nerfs completely missed a lot of higher-level options. Hell, they can't even deal with at-will healing abilities in any capacity but won't ban wands of CLW.

There are ways to break PFS still, but doing any of those just makes them yell at you and try to get whatever you used nerfed in the next errata.

Which is perfectly fine by me. In fact, I attribute this to the success of pathfinder.

It drops the learning curve considerably.

Plus, every character is pretty much useful. Whereas at your tables, I doubt Conan would fare very well.

Flickerdart

2016-08-17, 04:29 PM

Plus, every character is pretty much useful. Whereas at your tables, I doubt Conan would fare very well.
Conan is not a character concept, because the actual Conan is shackled at a specific power level.

Big Fau

2016-08-17, 06:18 PM

Which is perfectly fine by me. In fact, I attribute this to the success of pathfinder.

It drops the learning curve considerably.

Plus, every character is pretty much useful. Whereas at your tables, I doubt Conan would fare very well.

One of the most successful characters from my past campaigns was a Scout/Ranger with Swift Hunter. He didn't PrC at all, he just went straight archery-focus Scout 4/Ranger 11. Didn't cast a single spell the entire time (dumped Wis for some odd reason), and still ended up being a contributor to most encounters that didn't involve Windwall. No high-op abilities, not even a Splitting bow. This was in a party with a Beguiler, a Psion, and a high-op Druid. He was not the first non-caster build to do so. Several Fighters, Swordsages, Warblades, and Crusaders, a Binder, two different meldshapers, and every single Rogue-like class has done reasonable well even when they faced threats that had extensive immunities.

Why? Because I tailored the encounters to my party instead of just trying to overwhelm everyone, ran reasonable encounters/day, and didn't give completely random loot that made no sense.

I'm not an idiot at running this game, despite what you think of me. Do not insult me.

GreyBlack

2016-08-19, 03:53 AM

Hi Giants!

I am a bit at a loss. My long time RPG group and I are about to play our first round of D&D 3.5, but our DM to be raised a few rough Limitations.
I absorb any Roleplaying rulebook with a passion and tend to go for 'interesting' variations on certain classes... I prepared a few characters (Elven Archer - Paladin, Healfocused Cloistered Cleric of Pelor with Vows of Peace and Poverty, Warblade...) but got shut down hard, when he declared "Core only"...

The situation I'm facing right now:
- Core only (PHB1, MM1, DMG)
- Prestige Classes need hard work (aka I cannot rely upon getting access to one, especially regarding the Timing)
- Multiclass Penalties are happening
- Start at lvl 2 but only the money of a lvl 1 starting character ("Medieval Times are gritty!"). Campaign will propably stop before lvl 12. But who knows?
- MM Feats are off limits, exceptions may happen (a dragon disciple has a good cause to make for improved natural weapons. A monk won't get it)
- subraces are allowed, orcs not.
- The Party so far: sneaky Halfling Sorcerer/Rogue (will propably avoid most fights), Stabby Halfling Rogue, propably melee Cleric (very team oriented player, most likely no abuse here), Druid (our local PG... not too bad, but his characters have a tendency for high efficency) and 1 undecided (propably wizard or barbarian).
- our dm isn't the most rules savvy guy. His encounters may well be having glaring weaknesses or be a bit overpowert. Loot tends to be little and not properly tailored towards the characters.
- 4d6 drop lowest resulted in: 17, 17, 15, 15, 13, 8. Nice! Allows for some MADness.
- The one thing to tweak: Starting age can be set freely, Middle Aged would be a possibility.
- Leadership... might be possible. Maybe. But propably not^^

Now I don't quite know what to play. My most recent Ideas would be a Fighter or Paladin Halfling Mounted Charger, a full on Sorcerer (spell access for a wizard is... unclear) or a dual wielding + Archery Wood Elf Fighter... propably kukri.

Do you have any suggestions for interesting, not too weak, characters that work with the least amount of dm cooperation and without requiring specific equipment?

Thanks in advance!

Ask you DM about the Loremaster's abilities and if they stack with Bardic Knowledge. If they do, maybe go Bard/Loremaster?

Otherwise.... how attached are you to being Good? If not, might I recommend Human Rogue 2/Fighter 5/Blackguard 10/Assassin 3? Human offsets the Favored penalty, your stat spread will give you amazing saves from Dark Blessing... basically you'll become the Dark God's Hand of (in)Justice. Your casting will actually be really good when you look at it, your feats are covered from just your Fighter bonus feats freeing you up for whatever else you want (I recommend grabbing Augment Summoning when you can)... what's not to love?

Benefits of this build:
+6d6 sneak attack damage
God-tier saves
Aura of Despair helps control the battlefield and actually might let you get off a death attack
Invisible/Sneak Attack
Smiting Good is never expected
Perfect for world domination and preparing for whatever Dark God you pledge to.
Fiendish Servant and some summoning

Cons:
HUGELY MAD. Seriously, the only stat that isn't tied to something is Dex, but with your stat spread you can manage it.
Assassin and Blackguard cast off different stats (I originally thought they did, but you don't need a lot for either one)
Sort of a long-ish term build
The Assassin is kind of tacked on, so it can be taken off if you want
Won't be on the same tiering as the other Tier 1's, but it isn't meant for that anyway.

Moral of the story? If you want something fun to play that will contribute to your party? Run this.

Âmesang

2016-08-19, 09:31 AM

Reminds me of wanting to play as a human blackguard again, though my plans are for more of a simple build utilizing Unearthed Arcana's fighter variants, so it's not completely core:

Thug 1
Power Attack, CleaveB, +1d6 sneak attack

Thug 2

Thug 3
Improved Sunder, +2d6 sneak attack

Thug 4

Thug 5
+3d6 sneak attack

Thug 6
Leadership

Thug 7
+4d6 sneak attack

Blackguard 1

Blackguard 2
Greater Sunder†

Blackguard 3

Blackguard 4
+5d6 sneak attack

Blackguard 5
Nightmare Steed†

Blackguard 6

Blackguard 7
+6d6 sneak attack

Blackguard 8
Divine Might‡

Blackguard 9

Blackguard 10
+7d6 sneak attack

Thug 8
Weapon Focus (deity's favored weapon)

Thug 9
+8d6 sneak attack

Thug 10

Epic Blackguard 11
Epic Leadership

Epic Blackguard 12

Epic Blackguard 13
Widen Aura of DespairB, +9d6 sneak attack

Epic Blackguard 14
Improved Aura of Despair

Epic Blackguard 15

Epic Blackguard 16
Great SmitingB, +10d6 sneak attack

Divine Emissary 1
Legendary Commander

Divine Emissary 2

Divine Emissary 3

Divine Emissary 4
Unholy Strike

†Polyhedron #159, p.23
‡Complete Warrior, p.106

(I wonder how much cheese would I have to pull off to have him go ten levels of paladin, fall, and then retrain his 12th-level feat for Nightmare Steed? :smalltongue:)

Flickerdart

2016-08-19, 09:47 AM

(I wonder how much cheese would I have to pull off to have him go ten levels of paladin, fall, and then retrain his 12th-level feat for Nightmare Steed? :smalltongue:)
I don't know what feat that is, but you need 11 levels of paladin to trade them out. So at minimum you must be Ex-Paladin 1/Blackguard 10 with 9 class levels left over.

Or you go Paladin of Tyranny 10/Blackguard 10 and get the paladin level benefits without losing your paladin abilities. Noice.

smetzger

2016-08-19, 09:49 AM

Here is the build for my summoner sorcerer in PFS.
...

And this may very well work in PF, don't know haven't played it.

But in a core only 3.5, not so good. Really only viable summoner option is the Druid for core only 3.5. Their summon list is just so much better.

But then summoning your huge air elemental and then it getting shut down with a 1st level protection spell kind sucks.

ComaVision

2016-08-19, 10:18 AM

might I recommend Human Rogue 2/Fighter 5/Blackguard 10/Assassin 3?

Why in the seven hells would you go Rogue 2/Fighter 5 over Rogue 3/Fighter 4?

Flickerdart

2016-08-19, 10:52 AM

Why in the seven hells would you go Rogue 2/Fighter 5 over Rogue 3/Fighter 4?

I thought maybe saves, but not even that - Rogue 3 grants +1 to Fort and Will, and Fighter 5 grants literally nothing.

Âmesang

2016-08-19, 12:13 PM

I don't know what feat that is, but you need 11 levels of paladin to trade them out. So at minimum you must be Ex-Paladin 1/Blackguard 10 with 9 class levels left over.

Or you go Paladin of Tyranny 10/Blackguard 10 and get the paladin level benefits without losing your paladin abilities. Noice.
Nightmare Steed lets you replace your regular fiendish servant with a nightmare which subsequently receives all of the perks of a fiendish servant. :smallsmile:

I had my plan built around taking advantage of the thug's extra skills/skill points and adding the ACF's sneak attack to the blackguard's.

Aside from that one last extra smite good I can't really see any benefit of going paladin 11 as opposed to paladin 10 when it comes to trading in levels (since, as far as I can tell, you can trade as little or as many levels as you want at any time). Still, I suppose that's where retraining comes in; simply swap out the dead "ex-paladin" level for a level in thug.

(I've never really been big on taking two spellcasting classes aside from unifying them with a prestige class like mystic theurge; just seems a hassle to keep track of 'em. :smalltongue:)

Flickerdart

2016-08-19, 12:18 PM

Aside from that one last extra smite good I can't really see any benefit of going paladin 11 as opposed to paladin 10 when it comes to trading in levels (since, as far as I can tell, you can trade as little or as many levels as you want at any time).
Nope. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/blackguard.htm#fallenPaladins)

"11 or more
A fallen paladin of this stature immediately gains a blackguard level for each level of paladin he trades in."

You can't trade in any levels unless you were originally a paladin of 11th level or higher

Still, I suppose that's where retraining comes in; simply swap out the dead "ex-paladin" level for a level in thug.
You need to undertake a rebuild quest when changing class levels, and your build needs to have been legal at all times. So you can't do this.

Troacctid

2016-08-19, 01:27 PM

You can't trade in any levels unless you were originally a paladin of 11th level or higher
Well, not in core, anyway.

Flickerdart

2016-08-19, 01:31 PM

Well, not in core, anyway.

There are non-core options that change the way paladins trade in levels for blackguard?

Troacctid

2016-08-19, 01:59 PM

Yeah, Gray Guard and Shadowbane Inquisitor can be used in place of paladin levels. I believe Uncanny Trickster would technically count as well.

tsj

2016-08-19, 04:00 PM

I think every party needs a druid and a cleric.

I played a game once where we were a 2 man party. I was a Druid and a friend of mine was a Cleric.
And we were extremely awesome... We faced challenges and monsters that were designed for a 4 man party
but we owned it all... even monsters with too high CR's ... and with spells to spare... it was... awesome :-)

And we had the most amazing synergy.

I of course had natural spell and some other metamagic like silent spell and possibly others :-)
I were both tank, 'god', buffer, hunter and rogue...

The cleric was tank, healer, buffer, 'controller' and party face

Âmesang

2016-08-19, 04:42 PM

I was basing it on this particular line:

"Blackguards who have levels in the paladin class (that is to say, are now ex-paladins) gain extra abilities the more levels of paladin they have. Those who have tasted the light of goodness and justice and turned away make the foulest villains.
https://www.schadenfreudestudios.com/backup/pictures/indent.gifA fallen paladin who becomes a blackguard gains all of the following abilities that apply, according to the number of paladin levels the character has."
Otherwise what would have been the point of breaking up each benefit into different levels? Why not just lump all of the benefits into a single paragraph?

EDIT: Alright, alright, I think I get it now. After rereading the section I'm leading myself to believe that the extra abilities are obtained not by trading in levels, but simply having them, i.e. an ex-paladin 5/blackguard 6 gains extra abilities due to those five levels of paladin; the blackguard levels just grant regular blackguard stuff. So in order to receive full benefit, I take it you would have to be at least an ex-paladin 9/blackguard 10 (or, I suppose, an epic level ex-paladin 11/blackguard 10 to get that extra smite good).

GreyBlack

2016-08-19, 09:02 PM

You guys all make a valid point about my build. Consider my idea amended.

Recommended build is now Rogue 3/Fighter 4/Assassin 3/Blackguard 10. Changed progression because it might make more sense from a difficult DM standpoint: you become an assassin, which prompts extraplanar beings to become interested in your activities and offer you the chance to serve the Dark Gods in a bigger way by becoming their champion. Same bonuses, just differently structured and may potentially give easier entrance if your DM is going to be a stickler on PrC entrance. I recommend discussing your plan with him first if you do decide on this route.

AnachroNinja

2016-08-19, 09:30 PM

I want to throw my hat in the ring for a doubled druid or cleric. They are very versatile and it's easy to avoid stepping on each other's toes. The synergy is great and it's all around solid.

P.F.

2016-08-19, 10:36 PM

I want to throw my hat in the ring for a doubled druid or cleric. They are very versatile and it's easy to avoid stepping on each other's toes. The synergy is great and it's all around solid.

I can also throw in with a second cleric. I really enjoyed playing neutral-negative* cleric in our most recent Pathfinder game. I ended up referring to him as the party's "dark-square bishop."

Actually, I played a Schrödinger's cleric for most of the session, as I was a neutral cleric off a neutral deity, had not revealed whether I channeled negative or positive, had not spontaneously converted any spells, had not chosen a Turn/Control feat, and had not written anything on my character sheet indicating one way or the other. I insisted that my character had already chosen, but refused to divulge. Our DM insisted that it had to be one or the other, but sportingly played along until the big reveal.

Narren

2016-08-20, 02:54 AM

Doubling up on clerics can also present interesting role playing opportunities, depending on the which god each cleric serves.

AnachroNinja

2016-08-20, 07:42 AM

Anyone who has read Another Gaming Comic knows what fun an all cleric party can be. Behold the power of on demand healing

Âmesang

2016-08-20, 08:54 AM

…and such a party also knows how frustrating it can be to deal with other "heroes (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2010/02/20/episode-1221-longest-set-up-in-webcomic-history/)."

Quertus

2016-08-21, 12:44 AM

First and foremost, talk to your DM, and see if you can get a more reasonable set of rules. Ask him why he is has these house rules, and explain why they are bad.

If you cannot change his mind, IMO, your best bet is to play a second wizard. You each get 2 automatic spells each level; between the two of you, that's 4 spells per level you can learn from each other. If people take wizard cohorts, that's even more spells in the party pool.

Although, personally, I'd go cleric. Having a spare healer when your healer is down is invaluable - and, with the lack of funds, you can't count on UMD and cleric in a stick being an option. That, and clerics are fun to play, and easily adapt to almost any game - and almost any role in almost any game.

Or, if you want to be evil, go sorcerer - but never take a single spell from the book. Work with the DM to invent custom spells for every single spell known slot you get.

The rest of your post is great!

However, having played in a group where someone did this, it really has the potential to make the other players feel terrible if it comes out and they weren't aware or okay with that, as you've pretty much just pointed out that their characters were superfluous and not truly in danger this whole time. Its like sending DMPC Elminster with your level 2 party, only the DMPC is another party member. Alternately, its like your DM's girlfriend getting plot-level powers that can be used to save the whole party at will. Does it help TPKs? Sure! Will the party hate it? I can't speak for other groups, but mine would hate it.

If you play in a low op group, play low-op, play a party buffer, maybe even toss in some BFC, but don't make a character that invalidates the rest of the group.

For example, in our case, one player had a horrifying strength poison that dealt some ridiculous amount of strength damage, but had never used and the party was not aware that he was anything but a regular power-attacking scythe build. Decently strong, and one of the most consistent damage dealers.
The DM had planned an encounter where a swarm of vicious creatures chased the party, as the swarm dealt little damage but was functionally immune to the party's attacks. The party begins to flee, and the player says "Screw this, I use my strength poison. The swarm is taken down, no save". When the party asked about why he had never used it before, he said that his character had taken a vow not to use it except in some very specific situations.
Now, I don't have any problem with the player having a secret trump card, or with him managing to defeat an encounter the party was supposed to run from. The problem is, the character could have been using this ability EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER, meaning that he had functionally been sandbagging everything before this. Every single tough encounter before this had therefore been a joke, basically, because the player could have whipped this out at any time and completely wiped the floor with his superior abilities. In this particular case, he had a vow that he had stuck to, which very slightly mitigated the issue, but it still felt bad to learn that basically every encounter could have been soloed by just this one player.
As something that everyone is aware of and fine with, great! However, it sucks to not be aware of that, seeing yourself as an integral part of the team, and then suddenly being shown that your character, to be honest, was completely superfluous this whole time.

First, that poison was, I'm guessing, expensive, and thus not "solve every encounter", but "solve any one encounter".

Also, there are other ways to play "Hidden God Mode (TM)" than to solo an encounter. My signature character is quite adept at surviving, throwing up walls, teleporting the party to safety, etc. The party lives, but they are the BDH's; Quertus is just a facilitator.

Most people just go buffing and battlefield control so as to not steal the limelight.

Eh. Still the best face in the game and a better skillmonkey than the rogue.

... How is Bard a better skill monkey than Rogue?

10% bonus to hit and damage, times 5 party members... oh look, you're only as useful as half a person. Except not everyone in the party is going to be attacks-based, so you're actually contributing even less.

That's... not how the math works. If you have 5 identical party members, who all hit the monster 50% of the time, a 10% boost turns that to 60% hit, which turns 50 damage to 60... Just like an identical party member would do.

However, against monsters which they hit on a 2, a 10% boost does nothing (barring allowing additional power attack or the like). On the other hand, if the target AC is exactly 20 points higher than the party's attack bonus, a +2 to hit triples their damage output! But at 22 points higher, it does nothing.

Why ? Because he only wants core rules and is a wee bit stingy ?

Once again everyone assumes DM is a douche bag because he only wants core rules to make his life a bit easier .

Yes, that's a good reason. What are the three terrors of the fire swamp... I mean, what are the things that make 3e cool? 1) easy, unified system (that I've taught multiple 7-year-olds to play competently); 2) fantasy play at a variety of "levels"; 3) lots and lots of options to pick from.

If a GM is going to say that 3.5 is his best known system, then ask for a core only game, that throws up some red flags. Aside from some of my personal favorite extra cheese options, the most broken things are in core. Martial characters can't have nice things in core. Being poor hurts mundanes. Not being able to prestige easily hurts mundanes. This... sounds like a noob mistake by someone who claims to know what they're doing - which is, in and of itself, a big red flag.

If these concerns are mentioned to him, and he responds reasonably - provides a compelling reason why he is unbalancing the game or changes his policy - he might be salvageable; personally, with the number of red flags thrown, I'd be tempted to just bail.

Or possibly to build the most broken thing imaginable in core, and later compare that to the characters you had intended to play, and ask him why was it he wanted a core only game, again?

A druid falls for "ceasing to revere nature" which a sufficiently-asinine DM can interpret as anything from "hurting an animal" to "sleeping in a bed" to "not immediately murdering every lumberjack he sees." The worst part is that such a DM may not know (or care) that the player doesn't know where this line is drawn. The same thing applies to clerics and their gods.

Yeah, too many DMs are too horrible for me to think that playing a druid under an unproven DM is advisable.

This isn't aimed at any forum member in particular, but it always makes me sad and disappointed when I see people suggesting things like "Oh, your DM allows core only? Make a Batman Wizard or CoDzilla and break the game! That'll show him! LOL!".

Intentionally trying to make a problematic character within the limits the DM has set is far more likely to make the game (more) unenjoyable for everyone involved, DM and players included.

Best option, IMHO, is to talk with the other players - see if they are struggling with the game restrictions and if they share your concerns. If enough of them do, approach the DM and try to reach a compromise.

Personally? I'd rather walk from a game I'm not enjoying, if the DM can't be reasoned with, than trying to sabotage the game for everyone...

I may be wrong (I'm a little late to the party, and so I may have missed something), but I think I'm the only one suggesting being a ****.

I make that suggestion in the case where the DM obviously needs to be educated. If the DM wants core only because "balance" (not that such was started as this particular DMs reason), then they're an idiot, and need to be told so. If they can't hear when told, they need to be shown so. Otherwise, they will continue to ruin everyone's fun.

But, no, don't take a fun game and ruin it for everyone. Even I, who am conditionally advocating being a ****, am not recommending that.

Also, not everyone who wants to play tier 1 characters wants to do so in order to break the game. In this particular instance, where the DM has already broken the game, tier 1 is almost the only way to have a chance to play the game. To exaggerate slightly, The fighter with his no items will just bounce off the monsters, and, with his no skill points and no non-combat abilities, won't contribute anywhere else, either.

So, my advise is, fix the broken game if you can; if you can't, find something you can enjoy playing in a broken game.

Calthropstu

2016-08-21, 12:56 AM

Ask you DM about the Loremaster's abilities and if they stack with Bardic Knowledge. If they do, maybe go Bard/Loremaster?

Otherwise.... how attached are you to being Good? If not, might I recommend Human Rogue 2/Fighter 5/Blackguard 10/Assassin 3? Human offsets the Favored penalty, your stat spread will give you amazing saves from Dark Blessing... basically you'll become the Dark God's Hand of (in)Justice. Your casting will actually be really good when you look at it, your feats are covered from just your Fighter bonus feats freeing you up for whatever else you want (I recommend grabbing Augment Summoning when you can)... what's not to love?

Benefits of this build:
+6d6 sneak attack damage
God-tier saves
Aura of Despair helps control the battlefield and actually might let you get off a death attack
Invisible/Sneak Attack
Smiting Good is never expected
Perfect for world domination and preparing for whatever Dark God you pledge to.
Fiendish Servant and some summoning

Cons:
HUGELY MAD. Seriously, the only stat that isn't tied to something is Dex, but with your stat spread you can manage it.
Assassin and Blackguard cast off different stats (I originally thought they did, but you don't need a lot for either one)
Sort of a long-ish term build
The Assassin is kind of tacked on, so it can be taken off if you want
Won't be on the same tiering as the other Tier 1's, but it isn't meant for that anyway.

Moral of the story? If you want something fun to play that will contribute to your party? Run this.

This being his first foray into the 3.5 universe, I would advise gainst doing the evil thing. A new gm will have a hard enough time trying to play standard monsters, let alone creating npcs to go after the pc for doing something villianous.