PDA

View Full Version : Beguiler?



Yehomer
2008-01-28, 01:37 PM
I just finished reading the beguiler section in PHII, and all I've got to say is WTF? They took a sorcerer, gave him D6 HD, tons of cool abilities, a wide selection of spells and tons of class skills. Did I miss something, or is this class insanely unbalanced?!

Tempest Fennac
2008-01-28, 01:48 PM
I think the fact that just about all of their spells get Will saves is potentially a huge weakpoint, as is the fact that they mainly use Illusion and Enchantments (I'm new to D&D, and I'm playing one in a solo game, but I can't tell you if it's overpowered yet).

Fax Celestis
2008-01-28, 01:48 PM
Take a look again and try to figure out a way for a beguiler to be effective against an opponent who is immune to mind-affecting spells and/or various status effects. The beguiler's sneaky, sure, but they're not very good in the killin' things department. They do, however, make spectacular thieves and infiltrators.

Duke of URL
2008-01-28, 02:00 PM
Take a look again and try to figure out a way for a beguiler to be effective against an opponent who is immune to mind-affecting spells and/or various status effects.

Well, UMD is a class skill...

Yehomer
2008-01-28, 02:03 PM
He can charm\ dominate other stuff to kill them.
Well, he might be slightly balanced in a kick in the door campaign, but in a campaign like I play, where most encounters are against humanoids, and diplomacy is a factor, he would be a god :S

Draz74
2008-01-28, 02:08 PM
I just finished reading the beguiler section in PHII, and all I've got to say is WTF? They took a sorcerer, gave him D6 HD, tons of cool abilities, a wide selection of spells and tons of class skills. Did I miss something, or is this class insanely unbalanced?!

Well, yes, it is insanely unbalanced ... but not necessarily more than the Sorcerer itself. :smalltongue:

The limited spell selection (a lot of spells, but many of them very similar to each other) means there's tons of tricks available to the Sorcerer that the Beguiler just can't duplicate.

The Sorcerer, Psion, and Beguiler are the three possible candidates for the title of "7th-most overpowered class," after Wizard, Artificer, Druid, Cleric, Erudite, and Archivist.

Person_Man
2008-01-28, 02:11 PM
The Beguiler is a great class. It fills the Skill Monkey and Toolbox spellcaster niches very well, without being overpowered, and without the need for strained mult-classing or PrC choices.

But it has several down sides:

Poor BAB
Weak Fort and Ref Saves
Limited Spell Selection
Very little support in books outside of PHBII
Virtually all of the offensive spells require a Will Save
Virtually all of the offensive spells are Mind Affecting (undead, contructs, etc are immune)

A Rogue has the protection of Evasion and Uncanny Dodge, and can be a force in melee or ranged combat. A Beguiler cannot.

A Sorcerer can use Polymorph, Greater Mighty Wallop, Celerity, Black Tentacles, etc. A Beguiler cannot.

So in sum, a Beguiler is a fun and balanced class that is very good at what it does. But it doesn't really break anything, and in many ways its the model for what all of the other full casters in D&D should be.

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 02:16 PM
The DMG suggests no homebrewed class should be better at fighting than the fighter, at sneaking than the rogue, etc. But this is not a perfect guide because many of the core classes aren't brilliantly balanced. Many consider the sorcerer to be weaker than it should be because Wizards were, basically, afraid that spontaneous casting would break the game and overcompensated. So, the Beguiler (along with the Warmage and Dread Necromancer) have better HD, armour, weapons etc. They also have more limited spell lists; more flexible perhaps, but they are forever denied most of the best options available to sorcerers.

Of course, the Beguiler has a heck of a lot going for it. Of the classes of its type, it's certainly the best, with the best spells and the advantage of Int-synergy with its skillmonkey role. ...But full and open casting is ridiculously powerful, and having your spell list restricted justifies a fair bit of beefing up in other class features.


Well, he might be slightly balanced in a kick in the door campaign, but in a campaign like I play, where most encounters are against humanoids, and diplomacy is a factor, he would be a god :S

They can't balance every class against every game. Yours is different in many ways from the assumptions made by the designers. It sounds like an Archivist would be half-useless in your game, but that doesn't make that a weak class.

Craig1f
2008-01-28, 02:22 PM
I think Vertigo Field is a fort save.

But yeah, beguilers are not powerful if they're ambushed. Only if they control the fight.

Yehomer
2008-01-28, 02:27 PM
I guess you may be right... I haven't been really playing the classis D&D campaign...
BTW, In what books do those Archivist, Articifer and Dread necromancer appear?

Frosty
2008-01-28, 02:27 PM
Beguilers are only broken if they are 1) a Gnome and 2) multiclass into Shadowcraft mage.

Otherwise, they are one of the most balanced caster classes there is. All other casters should follow its example. WoTC experimented with something similar in the Warmage, and the Beguiler is the Enchantment/Illusion version of a Warmage. The fact that Warmages suck and Beguilers don't is due to the fact that WoTC actually learned from their mistakes of the Warmage.

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 02:38 PM
I guess you may be right... I haven't been really playing the classis D&D campaign...
BTW, In what books do those Archivist, Articifer and Dread necromancer appear?

Artificer is from the Eberron Campaign Setting and is a ridiculously flexible crafter. Archivist and Dread Necro are both from Heroes of Horror. Dread Necromancer is essentially a Beguiler-style caster for necromancy instead of enchantment/illusion (but without the skills). Archivist is a divine Wizard, pretty much.

Aquillion
2008-01-28, 02:54 PM
Artificer is from the Eberron Campaign Setting and is a ridiculously flexible crafter.Artificers get the ability to mimick any spell from any class for crafting two levels before that class would normally get access to it. They also get metamagic spell trigger, which lets them burn charges from a wand to metamagic the effect... this is probably one of the most broken abilities in the entire game, since it lets them just go completely nova with absurdly high-leveled metamagicked effects every single round at the cost of a few gold worth of charges.

So, to summarize, they do everything that any other spellcasting class does, at lower levels than that class does, and better than that class does. They can even take apart other magical items to help pay the xp cost for crafting things. They also get sorta-spellcasting 6-level-progression infusions which they can use in armor (including a few nice things like Wall of Force), 3/4ths BAB, D8 hd, 4 skill points per level with a decent list of skills... oh, and they can search/disarm high-DC / magical traps like a rogue. You get the idea.

(To be fair, though, they're setting-specific, and they're supposed to have a huge impact on the setting, so it makes sense that they'd be pretty overwhelming.)

RTGoodman
2008-01-28, 02:58 PM
Also, the Archivist class was in the Heroes of Horror excerpt on the Wizards website. Here it is (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20051007a&page=3).

valadil
2008-01-28, 03:00 PM
I haven't actually played a beguiler, but I'm starting to really like them. I've tried going for arcane trickster and I've seen other players go for similar characters that never quite work out. I think this does a wonderful job of filling the niche of a rogue who uses magic to aid in his thievery. A regular sorcerer just doesn't have the spell selection to be able to have a tool box of utility spells. Still, I'd have to see one of these in action to decide if the mostly will saved based offense is viable/worthless/broken.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 03:06 PM
You have to invest a lot of feats to raise your spell DCs to make it good. How good really depends on the types of enemies you fight. If you constantly come up against high Will save enemies with SR, then it'll be harder. Mindless enemies make you cry. Most humanoid enemies you can eat for lunch.

Craig1f
2008-01-28, 03:13 PM
You have to invest a lot of feats to raise your spell DCs to make it good. How good really depends on the types of enemies you fight. If you constantly come up against high Will save enemies with SR, then it'll be harder. Mindless enemies make you cry. Most humanoid enemies you can eat for lunch.

Mindless enemies are still subject to illusions, as long as they aren't constructs. In any event, beguilers have some boost spells like Haste that they can use to help the party.

sonofzeal
2008-01-28, 03:18 PM
I see the Beguiler and Dread Necromancers more as 20 level PrCs than as base classes. They're tremendously effective in a very narrow scope, which is generally the hallmark of PrCs over base classes.

As to balance, I DMed one campaign with both a Beguiler and a Dread Necromancer, and my experience was that they were solidly the two most powerful characters. The Beguiler's ability to deal ludicrous amounts of non-lethal damage, and the Dread Necromancer's ability to heal himself all over the place (Tomb Tainted Soul), nearly threw off the game. Nearly.

All in all, I think there are more broken classes out there (ToB, and CoDzillas, are good examples), but they are still noticeably above par. My advice is to treat this sort of class (Artificer falls into this category too) as PrCs - they should be available but require special training, DM permission, and some kind of sacrifice. Artificers and Beguilers might be required to tithe some of their earnings to the guild in exchange for continued access to necessary training resources; Dread Necromancers might be required to take the Necropolitan template at level 5 before they can unlock further abilities.

kamikasei
2008-01-28, 03:24 PM
As to balance, I DMed one campaign with both a Beguiler and a Dread Necromancer, and my experience was that they were solidly the two most powerful characters. The Beguiler's ability to deal ludicrous amounts of non-lethal damage, and the Dread Necromancer's ability to heal himself all over the place (Tomb Tainted Soul), nearly threw off the game. Nearly.

What other classes were in the party? If they were the only full casters it's natural they'd seem exceptionally powerful.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 03:31 PM
Then Wizards should be PRCs as well, since they're 10 times more powerful than a Dread Necromancer or Beguiler. And eriously, you thought Beguielrs can do tons of non-lethal damage? On average they do less because all of their damage spells are save negates, not reflex half.

Sucrose
2008-01-28, 03:34 PM
I see the Beguiler and Dread Necromancers more as 20 level PrCs than as base classes. They're tremendously effective in a very narrow scope, which is generally the hallmark of PrCs over base classes.

As to balance, I DMed one campaign with both a Beguiler and a Dread Necromancer, and my experience was that they were solidly the two most powerful characters. The Beguiler's ability to deal ludicrous amounts of non-lethal damage, and the Dread Necromancer's ability to heal himself all over the place (Tomb Tainted Soul), nearly threw off the game. Nearly.

All in all, I think there are more broken classes out there (ToB, and CoDzillas, are good examples), but they are still noticeably above par. My advice is to treat this sort of class (Artificer falls into this category too) as PrCs - they should be available but require special training, DM permission, and some kind of sacrifice. Artificers and Beguilers might be required to tithe some of their earnings to the guild in exchange for continued access to necessary training resources; Dread Necromancers might be required to take the Necropolitan template at level 5 before they can unlock further abilities.

I object to your toss of Tome of Battle characters into the "broken" group. They are simply more well-rounded than standard fighters. They have less potential for game-breaking damage, and in exchange, they have ways to make up for poor saves, and mobility. That's about all that there is to it.

They also happen to be more interesting to play in a strict, OOC tactical sense.

AKA_Bait
2008-01-28, 03:36 PM
So in sum, a Beguiler is a fun and balanced class that is very good at what it does. But it doesn't really break anything, and in many ways its the model for what all of the other full casters in D&D should be.

I cannot agree more.


I see the Beguiler and Dread Necromancers more as 20 level PrCs than as base classes. They're tremendously effective in a very narrow scope, which is generally the hallmark of PrCs over base classes.


Indeed. Beguilers are what a rogue sorcerer always wanted to be back in 3.0 but without breaking the system. I see that it was a problem for balance in your game, but I'm not sure if that is a result of the class, a disparity in ability of players or the setting of the game itself.

Craig1f
2008-01-28, 03:49 PM
Beguilers don't break the game until level 20. That is the most awesome Capstone ability ever.

Irreverent Fool
2008-01-28, 03:57 PM
Sonofzeal: ToB is NOT BROKEN. Please don't say such things. What do you want us to do, play single-class fighters?

I played a Beguiler (and later PrC'd into Mindbender, boy that was dumb) and against anything that wasn't immune to will saves I was like unto a tiny god. While it was quite fun plying my skills against things with brains, against undead I could do just about nothing. It's a fine class. Very good at ONE THING.

BTW, you can pick up those shadow spells that mimic other spells with their ability to learn a new spell of the illusion or enchantment school that doesn't otherwise appear on their list.

sonofzeal
2008-01-28, 04:05 PM
What other classes were in the party? If they were the only full casters it's natural they'd seem exceptionally powerful.
The rest of the party included a Cleric, a Sorcerer, and a Dragon Shaman. So no, they weren't the only full casters. They did happen to be played by the strongest players of the group, which helped, but I still see those classes as a little overpowered within their niche.


I object to your toss of Tome of Battle characters into the "broken" group. They are simply more well-rounded than standard fighters. They have less potential for game-breaking damage, and in exchange, they have ways to make up for poor saves, and mobility. That's about all that there is to it.

They also happen to be more interesting to play in a strict, OOC tactical sense.
I happen to like ToB. But I have played Warblades and Crusaders, and have seen Swordsages played, and every single time they've always been able to beat anything of their CR singlehandedly, and have outshone the rest of the party. My lvl 20 Warblade (Well, Warblade17/PsiWar2/EternalBlade1) took out a VoP Druid with ease in a duel. The Druid then went and prepared better spells and tactics, and managed to last another two turns before losing horribly. So yes, I think ToB is broken. I also agree they're more fun to play. We're getting off topic though.

Craig1f
2008-01-28, 04:16 PM
The rest of the party included a Cleric, a Sorcerer, and a Dragon Shaman. So no, they weren't the only full casters. They did happen to be played by the strongest players of the group, which helped, but I still see those classes as a little overpowered within their niche.

Illusionists are very powerful if they're played by experienced and creative players. Unexperienced or uncreative players will have a hard time with them though.

I'd argue that, played by a sufficiently creative, experienced, and fast-thinking player, illusionists are the most powerful in the game, as long as the DM doesn't require you to kill everything in order to win.

Dullyanna
2008-01-28, 04:34 PM
@Sonofzeal:VOP druid's aren't exactly a benchmark for balance, nor are they even particularly powerful. They just represent the best one can make with VOP (Which is widely considered to be a crappy feat). If the TOB user had beaten an experienced player using a regular druid, then that would be different.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 04:38 PM
Duels also dont prove much. DnD is not PvP. As for ToB, yes they have nice and cool stuff. However being able to do 2 full-attacks a round just isn't the same as "I create a new pocket dimension" or "My tsunami ENDS the battle, and the opposing army is dead."

AKA_Bait
2008-01-28, 04:47 PM
Illusionists are very powerful if they're played by experienced and creative players. Unexperienced or uncreative players will have a hard time with them though.

I'd argue that, played by a sufficiently creative, experienced, and fast-thinking player, illusionists are the most powerful in the game, as long as the DM doesn't require you to kill everything in order to win.

You know, I've actually found quite the opposite to be true. Once you get to the level where charaters have permanent detect magic (or worse true seeing) through a class feature, making it permanent with the spell or some other means, Illusionists are nigh useless.

CockroachTeaParty
2008-01-28, 05:16 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Beguiler is the most fun class I've ever played. In my opinion, it almost makes the rogue obsolete, and given the choice between the two, I'll almost always take beguiler.

The nice thing about the beguiler is that you can be sneaky, or be really brazen. Illusion is the single most rewarding school of magic for creative people. The only thing that could make playing a beguiler is against a boring / vindictive / uncreative DM.

AKA_Bait
2008-01-28, 05:22 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Beguiler is the most fun class I've ever played. In my opinion, it almost makes the rogue obsolete, and given the choice between the two, I'll almost always take beguiler.

Me too, although Sneak Attack can be quite fun for a Melee build.


The nice thing about the beguiler is that you can be sneaky, or be really brazen. Illusion is the single most rewarding school of magic for creative people. The only thing that could make playing a beguiler is against a boring / vindictive / uncreative DM.

Or one who doesn't really understand how illusons work. If they think 'interaction' with an illusion is just looking at it then most illusions are way way less useful than intended. Never assume vindictiveness when plain old ingnorance will suffice.

Jerthanis
2008-01-28, 05:24 PM
I'm going to have to say that while I don't think they're wildly overpowered on the scale of Wizards, Clerics, or Druids, I do think they err on the side of overpowered when compared to any other class, and are at the very least stronger out of the box than a non-totally-cheesed out Sorcerer.

Those of you who are saying that Beguilers get nothing but Illusion and Enchantment spells need to take another look, because they get some amazing Transmutations, Divinations, Abjurations and Conjurations as well. You know what an 8th level Beguiler would do if confronted by a host of Undead and Constructs? Solid Fog to keep them at bay, followed by Displacement on the tank, followed by Haste on the party... the Constructs break out of the Solid Fog only to find themselves eaten alive by a party well and fully prepared for them. Then the Beguiler will likely have two more 4th level spells for the day, cast spontaneously from a list longer than a Wizard of comparable level will know. Take a long, honest look at the Beguiler spell list, and admit that a sorcerer who picked half of those spells would be pretty damn good... and the Beguiler is just better still, because they'd have the other half, a more synergistic casting stat, more and better skills, and a few mediocre class abilities (amazing, when compared to the Sorcerer's distinct lack of any class abilities beyond Familiars and Spellcasting).

To reiterate, I'm not calling them the most overpowered things in existence... as that's clearly not the case. I'm saying they're significantly more powerful than practically anything that isn't a Wizard, Cleric or Druid... a solid entry in what is becoming the iconic powergaming party of Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Beguiler, and can easily become the primary contributor if an average party lacks a Wizard.

However, I also wouldn't ban them from games I run because I think they're kind of neat, and a fun alternative to playing a Rogue if you want to be a skillmonkey. I don't yet have the book with Factotum in it, and Artificers have their own balance problems, and are only usable in Eberron, so the Beguiler is the only real alternate primary skillmonkey I like and can use in many different settings.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 05:32 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Beguiler is the most fun class I've ever played. In my opinion, it almost makes the rogue obsolete, and given the choice between the two, I'll almost always take beguiler.

The nice thing about the beguiler is that you can be sneaky, or be really brazen. Illusion is the single most rewarding school of magic for creative people. The only thing that could make playing a beguiler is against a boring / vindictive / uncreative DM.

Almost? :smallbiggrin: When would you want to play a Rogue instead?

On a scale of 1 to 20, where 1 is CW Samurai, 2 is Commoner, 8 is Fighter, etc, where would you all rank the Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, Artificer, Archivist, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Beguiler?

Dullyanna
2008-01-28, 05:32 PM
I'd say Factotums are slightly above par compared to beguilers, in terms of skills/skillpoints. The former has an advantage in that they have all skills available as class skills, as well and have a similar INT score (Since it powers a lot of their abilities).

Edit:
@Frosty:I know this is nitpicky and/or irrelevant, but do you need to put the CW Samurai below commoners? It's fun to bash crappy classes/feats/weapons, but I think that's a bit too much of an overrexageration. Perhaps I'm just being too anal about this...

sonofzeal
2008-01-28, 05:44 PM
Almost? :smallbiggrin: When would you want to play a Rogue instead?

On a scale of 1 to 20, where 1 is CW Samurai, 2 is Commoner, 8 is Fighter, etc, where would you all rank the Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, Artificer, Archivist, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Beguiler?

20 - Artificer
19 - Wizard
18 - Archivist, ToB, Cleric
17 - Dread Necro (with Tomb Tainted Soul), Druid, Sorc
16 - Factotum, Beguiler
...
14 - Rogue, Dread Necro (without TTS)



Factotum and Beguiler especially depend on how clever the player is, and can be much higher or much lower depending on the skill with which they're handled.

The brokenness of ToB is in not requiring anything in the way of buffs or prep time. If a monster pops up right in front of the party, the casters may take some time to layer their buffs and get up to speed, but the ToB character can start wailing away with their strongest attacks, while their strongest defenses protect them. The other reason I rank them highly is because I usually play in the lvls 3-12 range, and there's little that can compare to them in that level range. Wizards only pull solidly ahead as you approach lvl20.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 05:57 PM
1) You left out Warmage
2) There is way Druid is less powerful than ToB characters in terms of contributing to a party. 9th level spells > 9th level maneuvers anyday

CockroachTeaParty
2008-01-28, 06:08 PM
I'll agree with Jerthanis that beguilers are a more powerful 20 level class out of the box, but they are not alone in this trait. As 3.5 edition has aged to maturity, there's undeniably been some power creep. Would you rather play a beguiler, or a wizard / rogue / arcane trickster? Would you rather play a wizard / fighter / eldritch knight, or a duskblade?

The power creep has obvious mechanical implications as far as class balance is concerned, but it has never really been too astronomical an impact to effect how the game works, at least in my games. Really, classes like beguiler, duskblade, or even sword sage help players create mechanically sound, balanced, competitively powerful classes without having to worry about creating intricate, byzantine builds. It's hard to be a gish at level 1, but with duskblade that's now an option. It's hard to execute a good duelist build, but with the right selection of maneuvers a Diamond Mind warblade or swordsage can create a believable, dexterous, lightly armored swordsman more easily and effectively than a fighter or rogue, or even a swashbuckler.

Perhaps the presence of this power creep is evidence of 3.5 edition's shortcomings and age, and granted, it's perfectly possible to create just about any character using only core, I find 3.5's current existence, splatbooks included, to have a sort of rich, fermented charm to it, not unlike a well-aged wine.

So yes, beguilers are more powerful than many core base classes in many ways, but they are simply the product of an aged system. It's like saying that an adult is more powerful than a teenager; they both have their advantages, flaws, and charms. Nothing's stopping anyone from playing whatever game they want to play, but if you're considering playing a beguiler, I'd heartily recommend it. And if you have a skeptic DM, concerned for the balance of his game, I'd ask him to seriously consider allowing the beguiler, as it's perhaps one of the most fun classes ever to have come out of 3.5 edition.

sonofzeal
2008-01-28, 06:12 PM
1) You left out Warmage
2) There is way Druid is less powerful than ToB characters in terms of contributing to a party. 9th level spells > 9th level maneuvers anyday

1) I really have no experience with Warmages. I've made CW Samurai builds that were reasonably effective, and I can talk about them if you want (I'd place them maybe 6 or 7 because of the good Cha synergy, or higher if Leadership is allowed), but Warmage is something I've never seen in action or played with myself.

2) Depends what you're talking about. This is the problem with a single numeric score - Druids are better at utility, ToB is better at combat. As much as Wildshape and full casting is powerful, in my experience an equal level ToB char will rip him to shreds in a few rounds. Combat, and the ability to dominate in it, is big enough that ToB takes the lead over Druids in my books, but if you weight Utility more highly than Combat, I could see Druids taking the lead. Utility is always much harder to measure though.

Mojo_Rat
2008-01-28, 06:18 PM
In our current campaign I am playing a level 4 fighter/level 5 beguiler and I am finding beguilder a fun class. I havent noticed anything over powered about it. I have noticed some of its drawbacks however. Our game is currently in the outer planes and we are fighting things with spell resistance that are outsiders.

Currently my only Damaging spells are Whelm and Whelming burst and If SR stops either of them i basically cant really afect our oponents at all. The all Will saves thing has been a curse and a hindrance depending alot on what one is fighting.

Reel On, Love
2008-01-28, 06:26 PM
Druids are better at utility, ToB is better at combat. As much as Wildshape and full casting is powerful, in my experience an equal level ToB char will rip him to shreds in a few rounds.

That, right there? That is crazy talk. Have you just never seen a remotely optimized high-level Druid? On top of an insane Strength and Pounce, he's got +16 enhancement to strength, +6 CON, +5 enh. to Nat Armor (and that's shared with his animal companion) from Bite of the Werebear, which is just one buff.

And then there's his spellcasting. Mounted on a Phantom Stag, he can avoid the ToB characters' melee forever... or he could just deny them multiple rounds of actions with Greater Whirlwind. I won't even mention Shapechange.


At lower levels, the Druid is two Fleshraker dinosaurs, with buffs.

ToB is great and all, but it's nothing like the Druid.

Saph
2008-01-28, 06:28 PM
I agree with Jerthanis here; I'd say the Beguiler is significantly more powerful than a non-cheesed Sorcerer, and on par or better than a Wizard for levels 1-10. While most of their spells are mind-affecting and require will saves, enough aren't that they can always do something very effective in a fight (heck, haste and slow are almost enough just on their own!)

Excluding cantrips, a 6th-level Sorcerer knows 7 spells. A 6th-level Beguiler knows 54, and on top of that has a better Hit Die, a better casting stat, way more skill points, a better skill list, better weapon proficiencies, casts in light armour, and has trapfinding and a few other nifty class features too.

The Sorcerer's spell selection is going to have to be very, very good to compete with that.

- Saph

Reel On, Love
2008-01-28, 06:32 PM
The Sorcerer's spell selection is going to have to be very, very good to compete with that.

- Saph

With crap like Wings of Flurry, Avasculate, Veil of Undeath, Radiant Assault, &etc availible to him, the Sorcerer's spell selection can be that good.

Then there's Arcane Spellsurge, and the Arcane Fusion spells. Put those two things together and you have a machine-gun sorcerer, and liberal use of Imbue Familiar with Spell Ability can mean you're pretty much throwing four or five spells a round. You can singlehandedly demolish encounters by nuking your enemies to bits *while* denying them actions.

Saph
2008-01-28, 06:40 PM
With crap like Wings of Flurry, Avasculate, Veil of Undeath, Radiant Assault, &etc availible to him, the Sorcerer's spell selection can be that good.

Then there's Arcane Spellsurge, and the Arcane Fusion spells. Put those two things together and you have a machine-gun sorcerer, and liberal use of Imbue Familiar with Spell Ability can mean you're pretty much throwing four or five spells a round. You can singlehandedly demolish encounters by nuking your enemies to bits *while* denying them actions.

Most of these are pretty high-level, though, by which point casters completely dominate anyway, so it's just a choice of which flavour of overpowered you want.

However, at lower levels, I think the Beguiler does much better than a Sorcerer, because he gets so many of the utility spells for free. A 6th-level Sorcerer has a tough choice as to which 3rd-level spell he picks - does he get Haste? Slow? Maybe something else? A 6th-level Beguiler gets Haste and Slow, and a dozen other spells besides.

- Saph

sonofzeal
2008-01-28, 06:47 PM
That, right there? That is crazy talk. Have you just never seen a remotely optimized high-level Druid? On top of an insane Strength and Pounce, he's got +16 enhancement to strength, +6 CON, +5 enh. to Nat Armor (and that's shared with his animal companion) from Bite of the Werebear, which is just one buff.

And then there's his spellcasting. Mounted on a Phantom Stag, he can avoid the ToB characters' melee forever... or he could just deny them multiple rounds of actions with Greater Whirlwind. I won't even mention Shapechange.


At lower levels, the Druid is two Fleshraker dinosaurs, with buffs.

ToB is great and all, but it's nothing like the Druid.
The aforementioned VoP Druid was actually a VoP Druid17/Monk1/Saint2, and I have absolutely no qualms about concidering that an "optimized character". Wis synergy out the wazoo, enormous AC (wis*2 to AC, with a +2 Wis from Saint), a number of good immunities from Saint, flurrying with wildshape natural attacks, and some spiffy feat choices including some sort of draconic wildshaping. The only thing of note was that combat began buffless, and the player only used the SRD list of actual spells.

This underlines why I think a lot of casting classes are overrated - they depend on a huge range of spells from various splatbooks to really shine, and usually require large pre-combat buffs in order to be survivable. Deny them either, and a well-made martial character can crush them before they can get their defenses in place. So, yes, I'd put ToB above Druids in combat. Your mileage may vary.



Again though, we're getting off topic. In terms of low-level play the power balance does change somewhat. In the lvl5-ish range I'd have few qualms about ranking Beguilers above Sorcs, and possibly even Wizards. Artificers are still dominant though.

Jerthanis
2008-01-28, 07:25 PM
Again though, we're getting off topic. In terms of low-level play the power balance does change somewhat. In the lvl5-ish range I'd have few qualms about ranking Beguilers above Sorcs, and possibly even Wizards. Artificers are still dominant though.

I guess I might be colored in this case by the fact that I tend to play low level games, from 1-9 or 10, but at what point exactly does the one to three spells a Sorcerer knows at each level from any source outstrip the Beguiler's seven to ten spells, each of which is pretty freakin' good? Because barring Shivering Touch and Polymorph cheese, I don't really see anything beyond save-or-dies (specifically the -or-dies, Beguilers still have plenty save or loses, and even some of the good no-save no-SR fallbacks) and some utility that the Sorcerer gets that Beguilers don't. Not to mention that UMD is a class skill for beguilers, meaning they do anything that can be bought on scrolls in addition to their already phenomenal casting abilities.

Also, Tome of Battle classes aren't even absolutely more capable at raw martial prowess than Fighters and Barbarians in all cases, especially since they're hugely limited by being almost exclusively melee oriented, and melee becomes unbelievably dangerous late in the game. Warblades, Crusaders and Swordsages are better overall as classes because they have more versatility and mobility than Fighter types tend to have, not because they can hit more often for more damage or anything like that.

Severus
2008-01-28, 07:49 PM
I looked at this class hard for a enchantment/deceit focused sorcerer I was building, but decided against it.

1) Your spell list won't get built out over time as more supplements come out. You've got what you got.

2) If you face something that's immune to mind stuff, you're stuffed.

3) Sorcerers may have limited spells, but they can collect scrolls, giving them richer options.

Frosty
2008-01-28, 07:54 PM
Sorcerers don't have UMD as a class skill.

Farmer42
2008-01-28, 08:06 PM
But if the spell is on their list they can use the scroll and/or wand.

Jacob Orlove
2008-01-28, 08:09 PM
Right, but Sorcerers can just use scrolls of Sor/Wiz spells, because every single one of those spells is on the Sor/Wiz list.
(Edit: ^ what he said)

Beguilers get a good mix of utility spells, but Sorcerers can easily match or exceed that utility with good scroll selection (even in core).

However, the Beguiler spell list is pretty much solid gold, and it's hard for a Sorcerer to compete without resorting to the Spell Compendium. Core-only, you'd really want to grab Grease, Web, and Stinking Cloud if you were a Sorcerer in a party with a Beguiler (and quite possibly even if you weren't).

Overall, Beguilers are really good, fun to play, and have obvious, strong weaknesses that can keep you from running your A-game in every encounter. It's a great class for players to use, and for DMs to manage (no surprise spells you didn't see coming!).

Beguilers are very good out of the box, though, so they tend to compare favorably to characters with more build options (like Sorcerers).

Frosty
2008-01-28, 08:33 PM
But if the spell is on their list they can use the scroll and/or wand.

They don't know that many spells on their spells known. If a sorcerer doesn't know Fireball, then he needs UMD to cast it from a scroll.

Leon
2008-01-28, 08:39 PM
This underlines why I think a lot of casting classes are overrated - they depend on a huge range of spells from various splatbooks to really shine

No, not really - the basic Core casters with basic Core spells are pretty darn nasty (if you know what your doing with them)
Splat books are just the icing on the cake or allow you to reflavor the cake

RTGoodman
2008-01-28, 08:39 PM
They don't know that many spells on their spells known. If a sorcerer doesn't know Fireball, then he needs UMD to cast it from a scroll.

Not according to the SRD (http://systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/magicItemsSSW.html):


To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements.
The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his or her class.)
The user must have the spell on his or her class list.
The user must have the requisite ability score.

You don't have to know it, it just has to be on your list. Otherwise, scrolls would be useless for Sorcerers. The only problem they might have is either not having a high enough Charisma, or not having a high enough Caster Level (which is solved by either UMD as you suggested or a CL check, respectively).

Frosty
2008-01-28, 08:42 PM
I was always under the impression scrolls *are* pretty worthless for a sorcerer. It explains why I never play one. I will have to reconsider.

But of course, the fact that sorcs get NO class features doesn't help either.

Talya
2008-01-28, 08:46 PM
I really like the beguiler. I just wish the casting was charisma based...

Frosty
2008-01-28, 08:50 PM
I wish you had a choice between the two casting stats (chosen at char-gen)

Jerthanis
2008-01-28, 10:41 PM
But if the spell is on their list they can use the scroll and/or wand.

Even so, Beguilers getting UMD means they can use wands and scrolls of divine spells. Try that thought on for size... considering a Rogue with enough heal-sticks can pretty much fulfill a Primary healer role by level 5, think of all the roles Beguilers can fill with that in mind.

Sure, it adds no more to a beguiler than it adds to a rogue, but considering they're the ones who are already full almost-primary casters AND full skillmonkeys, the added UMD potential is just phenomenal.

Fishy
2008-01-28, 11:30 PM
So, how do we feel about Beguiller/Rogue/AT? Or Beguiller/Ninja/Spellthief/AT with Master Spellthief and Carmine Monk? Seems like it would be silly and fun, unless your class features end up pulling you in vastly different directions.

Wolfwood2
2008-01-28, 11:44 PM
Beguilers may be a little over-powered, but they're over-powered in a way that doesn't decrease the fun of any of the players.

See, the thing about a Beguiler is that he's the ultimate set-up man. He makes it easier for the Fighter to hit the bad guys. He makes it harder for the bad guys to hit the fighter. He helps control the battlefield. He stuns, he confuses, he blinds, and he sets up sneak attacks for the rogue.

But he's not a finisher.

The Beguiler is a team player. Ultimately, he depends on the rest of his party to come in and finish off the bad guy's he's weakened. That's the difference between the Beguiler and other powerful classes. Nobody ever looks at a Beguiler and wonders if he couldn't do whole the job himself. A Beguiler could replace a rogue, but if a Beguiler and a rogue are in the same party they go together like peanut butter and jelly.

That's what makes the Beguiler a well-balanced class.

Draz74
2008-01-29, 12:24 AM
On a scale of 1 to 20, where 1 is CW Samurai, 2 is Commoner, 8 is Fighter, etc, where would you all rank the Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, Artificer, Archivist, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Beguiler?

20) Artificer
19) Wizard, Erudite
18) Druid, Archivist
17) Cleric
16) Beguiler, Psion
15) Ardent, Sorcerer
14) Wu Jen, Favored Soul
13) Crusader, Psychic Warrior, Factotum
12) Warblade, Swordsage, Duskblade
11) Bard, Binder, Dragonfire Adept
10) Rogue
9) Ranger, Knight
8) Scout, Paladin, Hexblade
7) Barbarian, Warlock
6) Dragon Shaman, Shadowcaster, Wilder, Ninja
5) Adept
4) Fighter, Swashbuckler, Truenamer
3) Monk, Soulknife
2) Aristocrat, Expert, Samurai
1) Healer, Warrior
0) Commoner

IMHO the ideal "balanced class" range, on this scale, is in the 11-13 area. (I don't really like the design of all of the classes in this range, i.e. the Vancian casters, but other than that, I feel these are some of the best-designed classes.)

(For reference, here are other base classes that I didn't bother to figure out how to fit in here:
Spirit Shaman, Spellthief, Totemist, Dread Necromancer, Lurk, Shugenja, Soulborn, Incarnate, Warmage, Divine Mind, Marshal)

Frosty
2008-01-29, 01:36 AM
And here I thought the Monk would be the worst of the PC classes. Guess Samurai and Healer gets that dubious honor.

But hey look, the Adept is ranked higher than like 7 PC base classes. Very funny.

Aerogoat
2008-01-29, 03:02 AM
@Draz74
Why would you rank the Fighter beneath the Barbarian or the Knight? The Barbarian trumps the Fighter in Core, but that's only because Core rules only have about four worthwhile feats.

With each splatbook comes a new set of class abilities for the Fighter. This isn't true of the Barbarian who is improved by the new feats, but who can't afford to take nearly as many. If there were other features available exclusively to the Barbarian, maintaining the Barb>Fighter ranking would make perfect sense. This isn't the case though, and I don't think Pounce alone is enough to support that ranking.

Voyager_I
2008-01-29, 03:17 AM
@Draz74
Why would you rank the Fighter beneath the Barbarian or the Knight? The Barbarian trumps the Fighter in Core, but that's only because Core rules only have about four worthwhile feats.

With each splatbook comes a new set of class abilities for the Fighter. This isn't true of the Barbarian who is improved by the new feats, but who can't afford to take nearly as many. If there were other features available exclusively to the Barbarian, maintaining the Barb>Fighter ranking would make perfect sense. This isn't the case though, and I don't think Pounce alone is enough to support that ranking.

Probably because the Barbarian can be a viable character without being a Tripmonkey/UberCharger/Other Specific build type. Fighters are a pretty hazardous class for the inexperienced, especially with Wizards nudging them into the trap of Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization. Barbarians you can just pick up and go without planning a convoluted twenty-level feat progression.

Craig1f
2008-01-29, 10:54 AM
Beguilers may be a little over-powered, but they're over-powered in a way that doesn't decrease the fun of any of the players.

See, the thing about a Beguiler is that he's the ultimate set-up man. He makes it easier for the Fighter to hit the bad guys. He makes it harder for the bad guys to hit the fighter. He helps control the battlefield. He stuns, he confuses, he blinds, and he sets up sneak attacks for the rogue.

But he's not a finisher.

The Beguiler is a team player. Ultimately, he depends on the rest of his party to come in and finish off the bad guy's he's weakened. That's the difference between the Beguiler and other powerful classes. Nobody ever looks at a Beguiler and wonders if he couldn't do whole the job himself. A Beguiler could replace a rogue, but if a Beguiler and a rogue are in the same party they go together like peanut butter and jelly.

That's what makes the Beguiler a well-balanced class.

That's a good analysis. I want to play a beguiler in my next campaign, but I'm struggling between how cool they are, and how much I like to actually land killing blows.

Thinker
2008-01-29, 11:37 AM
@Draz74
Why would you rank the Fighter beneath the Barbarian or the Knight? The Barbarian trumps the Fighter in Core, but that's only because Core rules only have about four worthwhile feats.

With each splatbook comes a new set of class abilities for the Fighter. This isn't true of the Barbarian who is improved by the new feats, but who can't afford to take nearly as many. If there were other features available exclusively to the Barbarian, maintaining the Barb>Fighter ranking would make perfect sense. This isn't the case though, and I don't think Pounce alone is enough to support that ranking.

Plenty of variants for the Barbarian make them great for a starting class (pounce). Even with all the new feats in every splatbook it makes little difference as everyone can take feats. None of the fighter-exclusive feats are worthwhile and the Barbarian gets enough feats to take the ones that matter.

Craig1f
2008-01-29, 11:39 AM
Plenty of variants for the Barbarian make them great for a starting class (pounce). Even with all the new feats in every splatbook it makes little difference as everyone can take feats. None of the fighter-exclusive feats are worthwhile and the Barbarian gets enough feats to take the ones that matter.

Plus, if you consider a barbarian that takes the first two levels of fighter to still be a barbarian, then the barbarian gets even better.

CockroachTeaParty
2008-01-29, 02:32 PM
In a great many circumstances, the beguiler is indeed a team player, but given enough time and precaution, a beguiler can easily solo, especially in an urban or espionage setting.

Invisibility, Silence, Hide and Move Silently ranks on top of that, Undetectable Alignment, and a variety of cunning illusion spells can, well, beguile the crap out of any poor unsuspecting foe.

I played a beguiler once that single-handedly infiltrated and sabotaged a huge white dragon's lair. Granted, the rest of my party wound up actually killing it (I just sat back and laughed), but I was only one UMD'd wand of fireball away from cooking it myself.

Draz74
2008-01-29, 05:41 PM
Probably because the Barbarian can be a viable character without being a Tripmonkey/UberCharger/Other Specific build type. Fighters are a pretty hazardous class for the inexperienced, especially with Wizards nudging them into the trap of Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization. Barbarians you can just pick up and go without planning a convoluted twenty-level feat progression.

Yeah, this is pretty much what I was going to say. My rankings weren't based on specific optimized builds of a class. (If they were, it would have been very hard to make, since even an Aristocrat can be super-nasty if you just cheese him out enough (i.e. Diplomancer). And Paladin would have had to be #1 because of Pun-Pun.)

Frosty
2008-01-29, 05:46 PM
So your ranking was based on how difficult to optimize, and not highest level of optimization? No wonder Beguiler was up there. It's hard to mess one up.

Draz74
2008-01-29, 06:03 PM
So your ranking was based on how difficult to optimize, and not highest level of optimization? No wonder Beguiler was up there. It's hard to mess one up.

Given the existence of game-breaking builds such as the Diplomancer ... is there another way to rank classes' power? If so, what?

Person_Man
2008-01-29, 06:09 PM
I agree with Jerthanis here; I'd say the Beguiler is significantly more powerful than a non-cheesed Sorcerer, and on par or better than a Wizard for levels 1-10. While most of their spells are mind-affecting and require will saves, enough aren't that they can always do something very effective in a fight (heck, haste and slow are almost enough just on their own!)

Excluding cantrips, a 6th-level Sorcerer knows 7 spells. A 6th-level Beguiler knows 54, and on top of that has a better Hit Die, a better casting stat, way more skill points, a better skill list, better weapon proficiencies, casts in light armour, and has trapfinding and a few other nifty class features too.

The Sorcerer's spell selection is going to have to be very, very good to compete with that.

- Saph

I'm going to have to disagree with your main point here Saph, which is rare.

I agree in general with your second point, that an ECL 6ish or lower Sorcerer is certainly in a tougher position compared to a Beguiler. I absolutely stipulate that, and agree that a the spells known, hit die, Skills, etc., are a real and serious advantage for the Beguiler compared to the Sorcerer. The Sorcerer sucks rocks at Skills, Illusions, and Enchantments compared to the Beguiler.

But a core only Sorcerer can potentially have access to Alarm, Grease, Mount, Ray of Enfeeblement, Enlarge Person, Web, Shatter, Rope Trick, Stinking Cloud, Ray of Exhaustion, Fly, Phantom Steed, etc. This makes the Sorcerer very powerful, although he'll definitely be powerful at a very different and much much much more narrow set of abilities compared to the Beguiler. A low level Sorcerer is a lot like the Shock Trooper charge builds we see on a daily basis. Strong, but only strong at one or two things.

Once you get to ECL 8ish+, then the Sorcerer gets access to 4th level spells, and a huge power bump. Polymorph, Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, Fear, etc. Nothing the Beguiler ever gets will ever approach this level of potential buffing or battlefield control. And on balance, I would argue that buffing and battlefield control are more powerful in D&D then Skills, stealth, illusions and mind control.

Plus Sorcerers have a HUGE amount of support in the expansion books, especially Races of the Dragon, Dragon Magic, and the Spell Compendium. (Although I will fully acknowledge that much of it falls into the cheese category. But everything tastes better with cheese on it!!!)

So again, I love the Beguiler, I think its a great, balanced class that is very powerful at certain things. But I don't more powerful than a Sorcerer in most contexts. Its just different. Apples aren't oranges, and whatnot.

Saph
2008-01-29, 07:17 PM
But a core only Sorcerer can potentially have access to Alarm, Grease, Mount, Ray of Enfeeblement, Enlarge Person, Web, Shatter, Rope Trick, Stinking Cloud, Ray of Exhaustion, Fly, Phantom Steed, etc. This makes the Sorcerer very powerful, although he'll definitely be powerful at a very different and much much much more narrow set of abilities compared to the Beguiler. A low level Sorcerer is a lot like the Shock Trooper charge builds we see on a daily basis. Strong, but only strong at one or two things.

Once you get to ECL 8ish+, then the Sorcerer gets access to 4th level spells, and a huge power bump. Polymorph, Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, Fear, etc. Nothing the Beguiler ever gets will ever approach this level of potential buffing or battlefield control. And on balance, I would argue that buffing and battlefield control are more powerful in D&D then Skills, stealth, illusions and mind control.

I'd actually say the opposite here; an 8th-level Beguiler jumps ahead of an 8th-level Sorcerer by a big margin. Have you seen the Beguiler's 4th-level spell list? They get Charm Monster, Confusion, Freedom of Movement, Greater Invisibility, Greater Mirror Image, and Solid Fog, all at once. That's a pretty awesome spell list, and I don't think there's any 4th-level spell the Sorcerer can pick that would equal all that. Polymorph, maybe, but Polymorph is often banned or restricted, and given a choice I'd still rather have the above six spells instead.

That said, the Beguiler kind of peaks at 8th-level, and from there on their spell choice starts to diminish. Their 5th- and 6th-level spell list is much less impressive (although by level 10 they'll have gotten Still Spell and Silent Spell for free, as well as a few Advanced Learnings, which isn't too shabby compared to the sorcerer's total lack of class features). At higher levels the Beguiler is much less effective due to the number of enemies with some way of ignoring illusion and/or enchantment spells.

So from level 11 up, the sorcerer is on par, in a different way. But I'd stick by my claim that from levels 1 to 10, the Beguiler wins out by a fair margin (although I've never properly looked at the Dragon books, which I admit could change things).

- Saph

UserClone
2008-01-29, 08:02 PM
That 8th-level peaking thing is why you want to dip Mindbender at 7th CL. That way, advanced learning nets you Shadow Conjuration. And, of course, you wisely chose to be a Whisper Gnome, which gets you access to the excellent Shadowcraft Mage. This is widely considered an optimal path for a beguiler who is looking to expand into a solo-worthy character.

Craig1f
2008-01-30, 10:16 AM
That 8th-level peaking thing is why you want to dip Mindbender at 7th CL. That way, advanced learning nets you Shadow Conjuration. And, of course, you wisely chose to be a Whisper Gnome, which gets you access to the excellent Shadowcraft Mage. This is widely considered an optimal path for a beguiler who is looking to expand into a solo-worthy character.

There is no need to get Shadow Conjuration from Advanced Learning, since you'll be able to spontaneously cast Shadow Conjuration at Shadowcraft Mage 3. Personally, I pick Shadow Well from Spell Compendium.

Edit: You need the feat Heighten Spell to truly spontaneously cast the spell, in order to heighten minor, silent, or major image. The Shadowcraft Mage version of Shadow Conjuration/Evocation is much more powerful than the actual Shadow Conjuration/Evocation spells because the illusion strength is much more potent.