PDA

View Full Version : PvP Build Advice (The Showdown)



kjones
2008-04-15, 09:43 PM
First of all, if you're participating in The Showdown (you know who you are), would you kindly stop reading this thread.

As an end-of-the-semester thing, I'm planning a 6v6 PvP battle (with 10th-level characters) set in my campaign world some twenty years in the past, during a great war. It's a neat way to establish some history in a very direct way, and it will be fun for the players in each of my two campaigns to go head-to-head in a way that's pretty infeasible for their actual parties.

To keep things balanced, I'll be building all twelve characters myself. I'll give the players a little leeway, but ability scores, class, race, feats, spells, maneuvers, and major equipment will be decided by me.

My goals here are threefold:
1. Above all, these builds need to be balanced - the team strengths need to be as close to even as possible. Of course, this is almost impossible in practice - the only way to make them perfectly balanced would be to give them the exact same characters. But I don't want the full casters to dominate, or the support classes to feel left out. Thus, the builds will not be the most optimal for the given class and level. They'll be good - I know a thing or two about optimization - but if all the characters were fully optimized, things would get pretty broken.

2. I want these builds to be fun. An ubercharger barbarian will be very effective (and one build resembles this somewhat), but doing the same thing every round can get pretty boring. These should be characters that have enough options to make them fun to play.

Additionally, I want the battle to be fun, and by "fun" I mean "not over in three rounds because the casters save-or-sucked everyone into oblivion." I want these builds to focus more on tactics, mobility, and teamwork than on pure offense or damage output.

3. These builds need to be logistically feasible for a twelve-player PvP game. I have a lot of plans in the works that will hopefully make this combat run as smoothly as possible, but if one character is controlling half a dozen henchmen and a dozen summoned creatures, and another is making eleven attacks of opportunity per round, things get bogged down very quickly. These builds should minimize such interruptions to gameplay (extra combatants and immediate actions are the only ones that come to mind, but I'm sure you can think of more.) Invisibility/hiding are other things that might be problematic, since trying to hide the location of a player (out-of-game) presents problems.

That being said, anything is fair game. I'd appreciate any constructive criticisms with regards to my builds - I don't have a whole lot of experience with higher-level characters, and making everybody balanced is a significant challenge. I'll be posting them as soon as I complete them - I hope to have most of them finished within the week.

A note on themes: The two sides, the Kromians and the Vanguard, are a little bit like the Romans and the Gauls, respectively. Thus, I envision the Kromian characters to be very brash, straightforward, and melee-focused. The Vanguard, on the other hand... well, all their classes are nature-based (to an extent) for a reason. These themes aren't absolutes, but they served as a basis for my thoughts.

Here are the builds:

Team 1
The Kromians

Crusader

Sergeant Petra (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3773)

Notes:
Petra is the Kromian party tank. I want her to be able to take a lot of punishment, and a lot of her maneuvers were chosen with that in mind. She's hammer-and-board, so she's not a real damage powerhouse, but a lot of her maneuvers should help shore that up too.
I've never built a crusader before, and I'm not terribly confident about her feat selection. Suggested improvements would be welcome.


Cleric

Leo (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3757)

Notes:
Leo should be both an effective melee combatant and a good support caster. I imagine I might take some flak for giving him Divine Metamagic (these are supposed to be balanced!) but making it apply to Extend Spell just makes him a better buffer - he'll still have to choose between casting or going into combat. Besides, the other team will have lots of access to Dispel-type stuff, so too much buffing will just go to waste.


Wizard

Under construction. Suggestions welcome; he will focus on battlefield control and tactical movement. I'll be getting rid of his familiar, but the PHBII variants are pretty lame; any suggestions for a worthwhile replacement?


Scout

The Scout will be a skirmisher, appropriately. I can't decide whether to make him ranged-focused (more mechanically effective) or melee-focused (kind of awesome; this would be the Spring Attack route most likely.) Leaning towards ranged at the moment, since the Kromians lack much ranged support.


Warlock

Megan (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3784)

Not terribly happy with this one. It seems like she'll be fairly overpowered in comparison to the other classes - she can throw down two 5d6 Chained Hellrime Eldritch Blasts, every round, as touch attacks. That's gonna hurt.

Aside from that, I'm not really sure what to give her for feats or equipment. I could think of lots of ways to make this character extremely powerful, but that's exactly what I don't want to do, and I don't want my players to do it, either.


Duskblade

Under construction. The Duskblade will be a more mobile melee combatant than the cleric or rogue, an effective counter to the more mobile classes the Vanguard has.


Team 2
The Vanguard

Barbarian

Logan the Small (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3765)

Notes:
Pretty straightforward build. Maybe too charge-focused; the battlefield will make frequent charging difficult. I considered the fairly cheesy Lion Totem variant from CChamp, but decided against it for this reason. I do like his obscene bonus to Bull Rush (especially when charging); combined with Shock Trooper, this gives him some tactical options that will (hopefully) prove very useful to the team.

Also, his AC is way too low. Bit of a glass cannon.


Swordsage

Enoch (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3755)

Notes:
I think I'll be making some substantial changes to his maneuvers. My goal was to make a TWF and Tiger Claw focused swordsage, but as a result of the Tiger Claw focus, the TWF bit suffered somewhat. (He really should have Inferno Blade.) Also a bit charge-focused, though I may give him that stance that lets you float above the ground, to get around the difficult terrain problem. Also, two handaxes is extremely pimp.

For both the barbarian and the swordsage, I'm considering those skill tricks (Twisted Charge and Nimble Charge?) that let you change direction during a charge and charge over difficult terrain, respectively.


Druid

Under construction. I'll be using the Shapeshifter variant from PHBII, both for balance and because of logistical constraints (shifting into a few fixed forms is a lot quicker to work out than polymorphing into any animal, and I'm trying to avoid animal companions / familiars anyway.


Sorcerer

Under construction. While the Druid will focus on buffs, the Sorcerer will be more battlefield control / debuffs. (I'll figure out some way to boost his CL for Dispel Magic.) He will not have a familiar, but I'll probably do the quick metamagic variant from PHB II.


Ranger

Raina (http://www.coyotecode.net/profiler/view.php?id=3782)
Favored Enemy (Dwarf) fits reasonably well, but I bumped it down to +2 to prevent her from being overwhelmingly effective against the crusader on the other team. Otherwise, she'd be able to hit her three times per round pretty much effortlessly.

The ranged distraction class feature should fit nicely with the spellthief.


Spellthief

Under construction. I envision the spellthief as being a very effective counter-buffer, as well as a strong melee support class. However, I might try to make him ranged-attack-focused; still, the Kromians are deliberately melee-focused.



General notes:
All of these are straight progressions, no multiclassing or prestige classes. This is both to simplify the process for me (I've gotta do twelve of these!) and to make the characters easier to balance and play. I'm not inherently adverse to the idea, I'm just trying to keep things simple.

Armor classes seem a little low across the board, but I'm not entirely sure what to do about that.

Item selections so far have been pretty straightforward and boring. This is definitely something I'd like to make more interesting, but cherry-picking miscellaneous stuff for twelve characters is just too much work. I'll be farming some of this out to the players (pending my approval) but suggestions in this area are definitely appreciated. (Especially with regards to weapons. It seems like everyone has the same weapons.)

That's all for now, I'll be coming back pretty frequently to edit these. Thanks for reading, and I appreciate your suggestions.

EDIT 1: Switched the Scout and Spellthief around, as per suggestion. Makes a lot more sense this way, so thank you for that.

EDIT 2: Posted Warlock and Ranger.

Lord Tataraus
2008-04-15, 09:55 PM
Um....why is the spellthief in the party with all the casters? The only guy he can effectively go after is Sorcerer. This will completely hose the sorc and cause a bit of unbalancing. I realize you might be going for the "we are the magic-y guys" vs the "were are the nonmagic-y, barbaric guys" but wouldn't a faction whose enemy uses lots of casters come up with anti-casters not the other way around? I dunno, it seems really weird to me.

Hal
2008-04-15, 10:17 PM
I'm not sure I understand. Are these the parties your players already have, and you're just rebuilding their characters for the fight? Or are you starting all of this from scratch?

In the meantime, as far as Duskblades go, I've found that the biggest problem with them is their lack of AC. They hit hard enough to stay at the front line, but their Medium Armor proficiency does them no favors. Either give that guy Battle Caster as a feat, which grants zero arcane % failure in an armor class one level heavier (so, heavy for Duskblades), or slap a Ring of Blinking on that guy.

Alternatively, there's a list of "extra" Duskblade spells floating around here somewhere. I'm sure the guy playing the Duskblade won't say no to a few new options.

kjones
2008-04-15, 10:29 PM
Lord Tatarus: You raise a good point. My hope was for the spellthief to be a sort of general de-buffer, undoing all the hard work done by the druid and sorcerer. However, I may swap the scout and the spellthief - which would solve my conundrum as to whether to be ranged or melee.

I don't think it would be unbalanced, though. If one side seems more powerful than the other, I'll just make that side more powerful. I have enough control over the characters to be able to do that.

Hal: These characters are built from scratch. This battle is set twenty years before when my current campaigns (in the same world, with the same factions) are taking place.

As for the duskblade, I'm not set on actually using one - he just seemed like a solid partial caster support class. I'd consider replacing him with a bard, but most of my players kind of hate bards (though I'm sure if I could make a good one they'd be whistlin' a different tune). Would you really recommend that he wear heavy armor? I would think that mobility would be more important. (was considering mithril twilight breastplate...)

But a Ring of Blinking is always a good decision.

Prometheus
2008-04-15, 11:11 PM
I always thought building the characters is half the fun. However, I can understand your desire to get rid of cheese in a PvP game. A happy compromise might be to generate 12 to 15 characters, and have each team take turns picking characters and than delegate players to those characters (although the players could also pick first, and than teams could be picked). Of course, you ruin any assemblence of a theme when you do this.

I'd also recommend a more interesting combat scenario than a simple deathmatch. Ideas in order of my recommendation:
-Hunters: There are a number of monsters of various types on the field, each with different point values. Teams get points for killing monsters, not for killing each other, but of course, it is to there every advantage to kill each other when the opportunity strikes them. There is a great deal of strategy involved here. There should be a time-limit, so it doesn't end when everyone dies.
-CTF: You know how to play the game. Players respond on the side that has their own flag, near enough for it to make sides meaningful, but far enough for it to be annoying.
-Kill the King: One player on each team is the king, to win the game you must kill the king. All other kills are helpful, but only so much as they facilitate killing the other side's king first.
-Deadly race: Both sides compete to reach the goal first, obviously with the understanding that they can inhibit each other. A goal could be a physical location to reach, but it would be more fun if the goal was to steal something important and bring it back to their base or assassinate a powerful person and come back with his head.
-Fort & Firepower: One team has defensive formations, the other has extra magic items. This is intended to be balanced, but asymmetric.
-Strate-Siege: Both sides are give money to build their own stronghold: money that can only be spent on walls and traps. This can be combined with almost all the above.

Bassetking
2008-04-16, 01:56 AM
Kjones, this sounds like a great big bundle of semester-end fun for your players.

As a D&D PvP veteran, I'm here to talk to you today about equipping your characters, and how you should go about handling aforementioned equipment in an arena/pvp setting.

-First of all, right off the bat, give your players the "NO!" List. These are things that, flatly, obviate or subvert either the spirit or the manner of the challenge. I'd encourage your list to include

1) Candles of Invocation. No. No no no. a 10k wish for a Solar to attack the other team is not cool by any stretch of the imagination. See Also: Scrolls of Wish/Miracle. See Also: Ring of Three Wishes. See Also: Luck Blade.

2) Dust of Sneezing and Choking. 5 rounds paralyzed in aerial-dispersible methods. It's a TPK in a baggie.

3)Eversmoking bottles. A toy that'll block out a significant portion of your battle-map and render it uninhabitable for everyone concerned. Does nothing in this situation but to reduce the total area in which the fight can occur.

Really, when you look at your "NO!" List, look at it from the viewpoint of "Will this item, more so than the character using it, change the course of the battle." If you find yourself even CONSIDERING "Yes". Throw that puppy out.

-Now, you had asked about weapons, and, specifically, how you can go about livening things up/changing the fact that everyone has the same weapons. Well... You're looking at a few choices here.

1.} If the issue you're having is "All of my players are either selecting Glaives, Greatswords, Morningstars, or Spiked Chains" then you're looking down the barrel of the "Limited range of really, really useful melee weapons" that Wizards provided. It's not that your players are trying to all do the same thing, it's that the 2d6 they're rolling for their greatsword is just a mathematically better weapon than any other two-handed non-reach weapon. Sure, they COULD choose a dwarven battle-axe, but why spend the proficiency feat in a PvP fight, when that feat is vastly more valuable picking something that will do terrible, TERRIBLE things to the other person.

To solve this problem, consider a few solutions.

1) Give your melee characters an Exotic Weapon Prof.(For things other than a spiked chain) for free. Just hand it to 'em. Tell 'em to pick something that they're really going to enjoy using. Also tell them that you're the final arbiter on WHAT exotic melee weapon they get to choose. Feel free to tell them to choose again if you start seeing things like a Sodegarami show up.

2) DM Fiat a few alternative weapons that have the exact same mechanical stats as the items all of your characters are taking, but just "Look Different".

2.} If the issue is "All my players have +1 flaming swords" there's a few fun ways to make them consider the more fun sides of weapon enhancement. A suggestion I'd make would be to write down all the +1 enhancements you can think of on slips of paper, and dump 'em all in a hat. Then, have your players rummage around, and yank out the enhancements their weapons are going to be carrying. While this may remove some player choice, it's unlikely your players are going to forget the barbarian with the screaming(+d6 Sonic) acidic(+d6 Acid) morningstar any time soon.

-In regards to just "General PvP Gear" I'm going to leave you with a few words of caution.

Wands. Scrolls. Potions. *One Use Items*

Be very, very, very cautious about how you put these in that situation. I'd price 'em at 1/4 retail, with 1/10 charges. Things like a character having a necklace of fireballs with three beads? That's pretty harmless. A character with a full necklace, and the rest of his cash spent on Alchemist Fire? Is a charge action, a handslap, a loud noise, and a greasy stain away from a TPK. Wand of Magic Weapon? Nifty! Five charges puts most of the team at a melee advantage. Wand of Wall of Ice? At CL 10, and five charges, we're looking at 50 10'x10' vertical sections of ice that just ONE individual has placed onto the field. Things that seem odd, things that seem out of place... Question.

's the advice I'm able to think of currently. If you're looking for more, ask, and I'll be happy to chime back in.

kjones
2008-04-16, 02:44 PM
Prometheus:

I really like your suggestions as to different types of battles, and if I had more time or more experienced players, I'd probably do something other than a straight-out deathmatch. (However, I think that considering my players, any kind of game would devolve into a general slaughter-fest very quickly...) Most of these present more balance issues as well - not insurmountable, but it's pretty difficult already.

Also, this battle will represent a skirmish in a war very important in the history of this world... I'm not sure I could have these players playing capture-the-flag and reconcile that with, you know, war.

I'd love to have my players roll up their own characters, but some are much better at optimization than others, and it would end very badly. If I decide which characters are on which sides, then I don't need to balance each individual character's power - I just need to balance the relative power of the teams, which is quite a bit easier. This way, I can give each character a well-defined role on each team. The players will get to choose which character they want to play, and they seem pretty happy with that thus far.

Bassetking:
Thanks for the excellent advice. Believe me when I say that I've been considering a lot of these sort of things. All miscellaneous magic items will have to be directly approved by me; the general idea is the same as which spells I'm allowing in that I don't want anything that will end the battle in a round, or take a player out of the fight instantly. Any others I should keep an eye out for?

You're absolutely right about weapons - I'm being much too pedantic about things that will really only make a minor difference, if that. Sure, the crusader has a warhammer, but it would be a lot cooler if it were a maul, and the only difference is an average 1 point of damage - no big difference there. I'll consider DM-fiat-ing a few cool things too.

The larger problem is the one you address below - so few weapon enhancements are actually worth taking. I like your idea of randomly generating stuff like that, but out of (say) the core +1 weapon enhancements, about half of them would be completely useless for this fight. (Bane, Ghost Touch, Ki, Disruption...) They'd just be better off with an additional +1. This isn't *that* much of an issue, I just feel like these could be more exciting.

One-time-use items: Your idea of "1/4 price for 1/10 uses" is an excellent one; I'll definitely be using it. Scrolls, wands, etc. will have the same restrictions as the spells the casters have access to. I'll be very, very careful... And I'll probably post equipment and such up here before the battle.

I've posted the ranger; more to come.