Fiendbinder Build help

[liquidformat]

So I am looking at eventually going into Fiendbinder for a new character I am making for a villain game. We will be starting at level 6 and I am set on wizard as the base class I am just having a hard time on whether I should go standard wizard, Enchanter, or Conjurer. I will take Truename Training since it is the easiest and least painful way to get Truename skill and Mother Cyst for Necrotic Tumor fun.
Standard Wizard is always a pretty good choice since you don't have to worry about restricting schools. Yet Enchanter Social Proficiency would give me access to bluff, diplomacy, and sense motives which are important for binding the fiends. On the other hand Conjurer allows me to scoop up Augmented Summoning as a bonus feat and either take rapid summoning or Abrupt Jaunt in place of my familiar and master specialist prc which is quite nice. So what do people think, have you tried Fiendbinder before and have any suggestions?

[redking]

Here is a google search set for fiendbinder 3.5 (https://www.google.com/search?q=3.5+fiendbinder&oq=3.5+fiendbi&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i512.5946j0j4&client=ms-android-vivo-rvo3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8). There is a handbook and various threads about it.

[liquidformat]

yeah I have already read through the handbook, they didn't talk about enchanter base only that having bluff, diplomacy, and sense motives as skills was very useful. Similarly I had already done some google fu but nothing to useful came up beyond the handbook.

More or less I was hoping to get advice from people who have actually built and played a fiendbinder rather than just theory crafted one out...

[redking]

Fiendbinder is plenty flavourful, but the "standard action to give commands" is a huge annoyance. The 9th level ability Double Command (Ex), allowing two commands per standard action is just insulting.

I think you could ask your DM to make this a 3/5 spellcasting class, with all the abilities compressed into 5 levels.

[Darg]

Fiendbinder is plenty flavourful, but the "standard action to give commands" is a huge annoyance. The 9th level ability Double Command (Ex), allowing two commands per standard action is just insulting.

I think you could ask your DM to make this a 3/5 spellcasting class, with all the abilities compressed into 5 levels.

It's there to balance the fact that these demons are permanently in your employ.

Gate and planar ally/binding are limited by the need to spend xp (to a maximum that doesn't lose you levels) and gold/other services to compel them. Other than gate, ally/binding are also limited by your caster level for the maximum duration a task can take. It's not like there aren't ways of increasing your action economy either. The commands given in the table are also not the only commands you can make, just samples of acceptable commands.

[redking]

It's there to balance the fact that these demons are permanently in your employ.

Gate and planar ally/binding are limited by the need to spend xp (to a maximum that doesn't lose you levels) and gold/other services to compel them. Other than gate, ally/binding are also limited by your caster level for the maximum duration a task can take. It's not like there aren't ways of increasing your action economy either. The commands given in the table are also not the only commands you can make, just samples of acceptable commands.

I am talking about the standard action to give a command. You lose your action, while telling your demon to attack? LAME!

Endless Truespeak checks: "Issuing a new command (including ordering a bound fiend to attack a different foe) requires another standard action and another Truespeak check."

Demons cap at marilith. Fiendbinder is a class that I WANT to like, but cannot. Having the fiends permanently bound to your service is OK, but at the end of the day a planar binding demonist is doing better.

[Paragon]

I've made a build (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Aw4Nc0MhjU3OfDjQNEmPWCD45p7kJc5LEr1f53r0tKA/edit?usp=sharing) out of it recently.
Trying to capture the essence of Nathanael in the Bartimeus Trilogy

[Darg]

I am talking about the standard action to give a command. You lose your action, while telling your demon to attack? LAME!

Endless Truespeak checks: "Issuing a new command (including ordering a bound fiend to attack a different foe) requires another standard action and another Truespeak check."

Demons cap at marilith. Fiendbinder is a class that I WANT to like, but cannot. Having the fiends permanently bound to your service is OK, but at the end of the day a planar binding demonist is doing better.

Or you could come up with your own commands instead of the samples given in the table. You could order them to attack a group of foes for example.

True speak just plain sucks as a mechanic. Using that as a detraction is fair, but it isn't the whole story as you can order the demon to do multiple services forever.

A planar binding demonist is behind on levels and missing a lot more gold trying to keep up with the fiendbinder's constant use of their demons that are basically slaves. When not in combat you can take 10 or 20 with the checks. A command also doesn't necessarily override an earlier command either.

[Gruftzwerg]

Dvati twins (+1LA) could give 2 commends each round.

[redking]

A planar binding demonist is behind on levels and missing a lot more gold trying to keep up with the fiendbinder's constant use of their demons that are basically slaves.


Imagine Ebenezer Scrooge as a conjurer. He isn't paying for anything. He's planar binding demons and forcing them into no pay situations through debuffing and other disadvantageous tactics. Sure, he can only get the demon's service for 1 day per caster level, but he can keep calling as many as he likes.

If you are paying demons, you are doing something wrong. Demons are there to be forced into service for no pay. Sure, you'll end up with highly motivated enemies that will seek your destruction, but that is the hazard of dealing with evil incarnate. A malconvoker version of this would be hilarious. "Sorry, the creed of my god does not permit me to pay you".

[Darg]

Imagine Ebenezer Scrooge as a conjurer. He isn't paying for anything. He's planar binding demons and forcing them into no pay situations through debuffing and other disadvantageous tactics. Sure, he can only get the demon's service for 1 day per caster level, but he can keep calling as many as he likes.

If you are paying demons, you are doing something wrong. Demons are there to be forced into service for no pay. Sure, you'll end up with highly motivated enemies that will seek your destruction, but that is the hazard of dealing with evil incarnate. A malconvoker version of this would be hilarious. "Sorry, the creed of my god does not permit me to pay you".

Unreasonable demands are never agreed too. If you are liberal in what is reasonable, then obviously bindings get even more excessively powerful. My groups hold the standard that unfair trades are always unreasonable unless the creature believes it is fair, to an extent. Doing something for free is always unreasonable unless there is an advantage for the creature. Not to mention they only have to follow the letter of the agreement. Nothing more, nothing less. If you aren't a lawyer yourself, there's always a way to make the player regret binding the demon. So we generally compromise to speed up the game: no legal documents trying to trick the creature and the creature always gets paid reasonably for service that doesn't have to be too precise.

[redking]

"You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward".

"Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to".

That's planar binding. Impossible demands are in relation to the nature of the service, like "kill Mystra". Unreasonable demands are "assassinate my enemy then kill yourself". The way you negotiate isn't a demand.

In my example of a malconvoker, it's certainly possible that such a character would not pay a demon on principle.