"Optimization Woes", or "How I learned to stop worrying and make a character".

[RMS Oceanic]

Just for fun, I thought I'd analyse how the various members of the Order of the Stick have built their characters "Wrong", and what they could have done to improve efficiency.

N.B. I don't really care that they're built this way. As we've seen with Belkar, his suboptimal choices do not bar him from having a good time or doing fun stuff in battle. Besides, a "character", rather than a "race/class combo", will always have flaws. Otherwise, it would be boring.

:belkar:: He's chosen the two-weapon fighting branch, which is generally subpar as it is. He's also running around with small-sized daggers instead of something like a short sword, which would deal more damage. He has no ranks in Survival, so has little use for his Track feat, and a Wisdom penalty, denying him access to a small but handy cache of spells, even healing ones.

:elan:: He's a Bard with High charisma, ranks in lots of charisma skills, and has a prestige class that compliments his charisma nicely. He pretty much has the skills to be the face of the party. His main problem is that he doesn't use the tools he has effectively, although he's improving. He could also have picked a couple of healing spells.

:haley:: Haley and Belkar seems to have crossed wires: the TWF branch is good for Sneak Attack damage, while Archery is not. She's been geeked to have spent all her feats, even wasting special abilities to gain more, on archery combat. She'd be more effective with two short swords, Weapon Finesse and being a flank-buddy for Roy.

:durkon:: A cleric with high wisdom is pretty much automatically optimised. Like Elan, Durkon's main problem is he doesn't really abuse his class, and sticks mainly to the classic roll of healing and buffing.

:vaarsuvius:: Evocation is a relatively weak class to specialize in, as higher level foes usually have means to resist the damage, such as the pit fiend did. What's worse is that (s)he barred conjuration. Even before 3.5 rolled out and deprived h** of teleportation, (s)he denied h**self access to some pretty nifty spells, many of which would suplement the "hit it until it breaks" tactics Vaarsuvius prefers.

:roy:: A standard Fighter build, through and through, which puts him on the wrong footing already. He's gone the most effective damage-dealing route, however, namely two-handed power attack. I doubt he's taken the feats which allow one to abuse this to get rediculously high modifiers, however. Whether that feat of his Grandfather's proves to help him out, only time will tell.

So what do you think?

[evileeyore]

What makes you believe Vaarsuvius is a Specialized Caster? Vaarsuvius has never said one way or the other. Limiting oneself to using specific schools does not mean one is limited to specific schools.

[Scion_of_Darkness]

V did say that she had Conjuration and something else prohibited. This was why she couldn't use teleport.

[RMS Oceanic]

In Origin of PC's, (s)he declared h** profession as "Wizard - Evoker", a title only used to those who specialise in Evocation. Also, (s)he made reference to choosing Conjuration as a barred school.

[Mike62]

Your build assumptions are based on the premise that this party has been together since first level, however, they have not been. They all had substantial "careers" before joining forces, so many of their build choices had already been made.

[evileeyore]

V did say that she had Conjuration and something else prohibited. This was why she couldn't use teleport.

Ah. I must have forgotten. Any idea what part of the story this was in?

[RMS Oceanic]

Linear Guild Round 2 - the strip the Order Teleport into Cliffport.


Your build assumptions are based on the premise that this party has been together since first level, however, they have not been. They all had substantial "careers" before joining forces, so many of their build choices had already been made.

That's why I said they were characters, rather than PC's.

[Samurai Jill]

Just for fun, I thought I'd analyse how the various members of the Order of the Stick have built their characters "Wrong", and what they could have done to improve efficiency.
I don't disagree on any particular point. These points have been discussed often enough before, and the general consensus reflects your estimates pretty closely. Good job.

[Euron]

Ah. I must have forgotten. Any idea what part of the story this was in?

Second panel. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0340.html)

[SinsI]

N.B. I don't really care that they're built this way. As we've seen with Belkar, his suboptimal choices do not bar him from having a good time or doing fun stuff in battle. Besides, a "character", rather than a "race/class combo", will always have flaws. Otherwise, it would be boring.

:belkar:: He's chosen the two-weapon fighting branch, which is generally subpar as it is. He's also running around with small-sized daggers instead of something like a short sword, which would deal more damage. He has no ranks in Survival, so has little use for his Track feat, and a Wisdom penalty, denying him access to a small but handy cache of spells, even healing ones.
Allow me to disagree with you.
Belkar has an extremely good pure damager build, taking advantage of the few good stats he has - not everyone is born with munchkin stats like Roy!
He has 6 attacks per round, and they can easily be something like +13 (twice improved racial enemy: human +6, strength bonus (+2 +Rage bonus +2, and his daggers are probably +3 like Haley's bow...) - that puny +1 damage from shortsword just won't be enough to compensate for additional -2 to hit penalty.
Can you think of anything better if you have such low stats to begin with?

[Tempest Fennac]

Actually, a shortsword is as much of a light weapon as a dagger, so that wouldn't really be a problem (he could actually have a one-handed weapon and a light weapon without taking any additional penalties for TWF).

[SPoD]

I think Belkar relies on getting his Favored Enemy (human/kobold/whatever) bonus five times per round, especially in a fight like today's where more than half of his foes were human.

Belkar is highly optimized for killing large numbers of weaker creatures quickly, which is not necessarily "wrong", just not normally what one shoots for in D&D. Usually, you want to be able to fight the big tough monster efficiently and take as long as necessary to mop up the minions. But note that Belkar shines against hordes of thieves/bandits/hobgoblins/etc., and rarely is much use against dragons or other powerful monsters.

[Epiphanis]

Belkar: Two-Weapon fighting is not a bad choice for rangers, especially if they have decent strength and fight favored enemies a lot. As a halfling, Belkar would be a little gimped in the strength area, but a little barbarian rage can go a long way to make up for that. Personally, I feel that 2-Weapon style rangers are usually better served to take an exotic double weapon proficiency and Power Attack via feats, so they can shift between 2-Weapon and doublehand freely and still get most of the bang from the latter when they can't make full attacks or are facing opponents with DR, but its natural for a presumably high-Dex halfling to go with finessable weapons. I'm not sure that its ever been established that Belkar has Weapon Finesse, but I assume so.

Haley: most optimizers seem to think that rogue archers suck compared to 2-weapon rogues, but I just don't see it. 2-weapon is useful in Full Attack situations, but if the target is smart he will either unleash his own Full Attack on the rogue (who has meh hit points and not much better AC unless the Dex is uberbuffed) or keep maneuvering around to deprive the rogue of multiple attacks (take a withdraw action every other round to avoid AoOs). Rogue archers get to stay out of harm's way while putting their high dex to use.

V: Evokers get a bad rap by many optimizers, usually because they think Grease and Acid Fog can solve any combat problem. While blaster-build sorcerers are typically better than blaster wizards, evocation is still one of the best ways to take out hoardes of weaker enemies, which the Order often run into.

Roy: I think Roy is "suboptimal" for the exact opposite reason than most optimizers would: I think Roy should have gone with the Combat Expertise tree (actually, he may have, there has just been no indication of it that I've noticed). Roy is obviously above Int 13 and the Order has other martial damage-dealers; I would have preferred Roy be more of a defender build.

On the whole, I actually think the Order is a pretty well-balanced large party.

[King of Nowhere]

I don't understand:
Everybody here say that two handed fighting is better than two weapon or weapon + shield, but if that was the way, why should someone spend a ton of feats to fight dual wield if you can use a two handed weapon for free and is more efficient?
I think two weapons are often better because you can get magic bonuses from two different items.
I mostly prefer, from my videogaming experience, weapon and shield, because even if you lose damage, you're much harder to hit. This is most important considering that I use fighters mostly as meat shield (they need AC for this) and to wipe out weaker enemies so the casters save spells (and even if you don't have your damage optimized, against weaker opponents it's not that bad; more important having high AC so they need a 20 to hit you).
So form my experience a two handed weapon sucks.

Also, for rogues, in my experience rogues are too fragile to do melee effectively, and they do better by sniping from beind the meat shield(s). A rogue in melee is easy meat, unless they are a horde so most of them can use sneak attack.

But note that I always played with rules prior to 3.5, so it may be that things are changed.

[Hydro Globus]

I think two weapons are often better because you can get magic bonuses from two different items.

Do you have any idea how expensive that is? Even Haley (even without most of her "flthy lucre" burned) couldn't afford two fully enchanted weapons... Or if she could, she couldn't buy anything else. At all.

[tribble]

I was tempted to say something witty about how all of the order is horrendously subpar because none of them are pun-pun, but i couldn't think of anything funny, so I'll let you imagine what i said.:smallbiggrin:

EDIT: and why is it that everyone assumes belkar has +3 daggers?:smallfurious::smallconfused:

[RMS Oceanic]

Roy has a +5 sword. Elan has a +3 Rapier. Haley has had a +3 bow. I think they believe Belkar is just as lucky.

[evileeyore]

Linear Guild Round 2 - the strip the Order Teleport into Cliffport.


Second panel. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0340.html)

Thanks guys.


As for Belkar...

It has occured to me he is pretty decently optimized as a 4e Ranger. TWF is a good build with a high Str and Con, getting Favored Enemy all the damn time is nice for hitting the big guys, and having multiple attacks is good for mopping up the mooks.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I believe that Belkar has Favored Enemy: Everyone.

[chiasaur11]

I believe that Belkar has Favored Enemy: Everyone.

I'm not sure.

The man does love his whores.

[Lokasenna]

Favored Enemy: Things that Move

[Evil DM Mark3]

I don't understand:
Everybody here say that two handed fighting is better than two weapon or weapon + shield, but if that was the way, why should someone spend a ton of feats to fight dual wield if you can use a two handed weapon for free and is more efficient?

You have just put your finger on a prime reason, there is no point buying those feats for the pathetic extra damage. Both the two weapons and weapon and shield (that less so) builds have a much higher financial demand too.

Only 2 weapon fight if you have a way of getting extra damage dice on all your attacks.

[Archangel62]

I don't understand:
Everybody here say that two handed fighting is better than two weapon or weapon + shield, but if that was the way, why should someone spend a ton of feats to fight dual wield if you can use a two handed weapon for free and is more efficient?
I think two weapons are often better because you can get magic bonuses from two different items.
I mostly prefer, from my videogaming experience, weapon and shield, because even if you lose damage, you're much harder to hit. This is most important considering that I use fighters mostly as meat shield (they need AC for this) and to wipe out weaker enemies so the casters save spells (and even if you don't have your damage optimized, against weaker opponents it's not that bad; more important having high AC so they need a 20 to hit you).
So form my experience a two handed weapon sucks.

Also, for rogues, in my experience rogues are too fragile to do melee effectively, and they do better by sniping from beind the meat shield(s). A rogue in melee is easy meat, unless they are a horde so most of them can use sneak attack.

But note that I always played with rules prior to 3.5, so it may be that things are changed.

It's basically a matter of economics

1) Most games are based around Point buy, at least in theory, in order to be effective at two weapon fighting I need high dexterity which means that my other physical stats as a fighter are likely going to have to suffer to allow for it.

2) Economics in character gold, if I follow the wealth by level charts even mildly those two weapons if they're fully enchanted eat a nice big hunk of my gold at max level, in fact combined they take up over half, that alone can be an issue if you're looking at what else a fighter needs since they really lack mobility options and escape mechanisms.

3) Economics in feats, if I take two fighters and run them parallel one doing TWF one doing 2h if I have access to all D&D materials the 2h guy will do more damage, and usually be much more efficient about it too.

4) Yeah, the rogue is a bit squishy, but if you're building for combat, then odds are your con will be higher as will your dex, and since sneak attack can be applied to all attacks...well let's face it you're going to make your enemy most ventilated.

5) As for a shield, part of the issue is that AC actually matters less at high levels. Most things will either be able to ignore your armor through spells and abilities or simply have such a high bonus to hit that you would have to be buffed out the wazoo to avoid anything but their first two hits. Miss chances or being able to act first are usually the order of the day for most people that melee at high levels. Then again this is also part of what leads to what my friends and I refer to as rocket launcher tag.

[iceguy]

I'm not sure.

The man does love his whores.

I am prety sure he has Favored Enemy: Everything not on his lust list. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html)

[Underground]

I dislike the whole idea of specialization, really.

The special power of wizards is their broad knowledge of spells. Blocking ANY school of magic always results in loss of important and useful spells.

For example, in NWN2, the Party Wizard Sand would have been so much, much better if he would have not been a specialist.

[evileeyore]

For example, in NWN2, the Party Wizard Sand would have been so much, much better if he would have not been a specialist.

In NWN Casters are suboptimal anyway. Fighter/Rogue is the best option (either single or multiclass).

Never have to rest that way. I played through both games resting only when forced to.... and was very upset when I couldn't get my favorite Murder Machine partner in the second series.

[yanmaodao]

In NWN, I played a Chaotic Neutral Ranger/Rogue who was absolutely built for two short sword (or rapier/short sword, kukri/kukri, rapier/dagger, w/e) fighting. Obscenely high DEX modifier (for most of the game past the first chapter I had to wear some form of padded armor) meant very good accuracy w/ weapon finesse and sweet reflex saves, but somewhat low STR meant I had issues dealing damage to those enemies who were not favored enemies and were also immune to Sneak Attack.

I didn't run the gamut with STR and CON because I'm bigger on the roleplay aspect and not much of a powergamer - I envisioned myself as a cunning death stalker, not a brute, and I always felt protagonists should have decent CHR, and so more pertinent stats suffered a bit. With the release of Hordes of the Underdark, I took a few levels in Shadowdancer to mitigate my CON problem. Hide in Plain Sight almost always worked against every enemy, go around a corner to drink a potion or else just Sneak Attack at will. (I do wish animal companions were tougher, though. Using my bear as a Sneak Attack shield works for all of one round at higher levels.)

I think my favored enemies were Human, Elf, and Demon, and I forget the two others.

So basically, yeah, two weapon fighting is super-optimized for fun, if nothing else.

[whitelaughter]

In NWN Casters are suboptimal anyway. Fighter/Rogue is the best option (either single or multiclass).
[snort] The original NWN is vanilla 3rd: running around with stats buffed through the roof for hours was better than any rubbish fighters get.

[Roderick_BR]

I don't understand:
Everybody here say that two handed fighting is better than two weapon or weapon + shield, but if that was the way, why should someone spend a ton of feats to fight dual wield if you can use a two handed weapon for free and is more efficient?
Simple answer: TWF sucks in D&D 3.0/3.5.
You need a ton of feats, and if you need to walk up to an enemy (as in, the enemy move around all the time), you can only make one single attack, making you waste all these feats. And while having a shield to resist attacks may be good, people are adept of the "kill things dead" (i.e.: Kill the enemy before he even try to attack you), that not commenting on how most powerful attacks will simply ignore your armor anyway (touch attacks, and spells that target will or reflex saves).
So, the only people that actually uses TWF or sword & shield are either new players, before noticing that Wizards of the Coast messed up, or people that still thinks it looks cool and takes it anyway.
You'll see that most "builds" in these forums always suggests you to use Power Attack and a two handed weapon. If someone do try something else, it's usually a "challenge to try to be better than the two handed power attack/leap attack/shock trooper".

Edit:

[snort] The original NWN is vanilla 3rd: running around with stats buffed through the roof for hours was better than any rubbish fighters get.
You never fought an optimized monk that would resist anything you throw at him, and stun-lock/trip-lock you with in seconds in NWN. One single guy defeated me and other 6 high level buffed casters in few rounds.

[whitelaughter]

You never fought an optimized monk that would resist anything you throw at him, and stun-lock/trip-lock you with in seconds in NWN. One single guy defeated me and other 6 high level buffed casters in few rounds.

What do you think Grimnaw is? I always made a point of killing him for the xp on every scenario; seemed the appropriate way to 'reward' him for going on about death.
And while I admit Monks in NWN are deadly (certainly superior to Fighters) they die horribly facing any decent spellcaster:
- they can't exploit terrain. Rivers, Cliffs, tables: you get multiple free attacks as they try to close.
- summoned monsters only reduce xp if they *survive* the fight. When facing a superior foe, using them as cannon fodder discourages opponents from closing, at no cost. Particularly good at high levels is the Balor - summon them while invisible, and they are a potential source of both xp and treasure (yes, you can get both from killing your own Balor!) Just be sure to avoid casting Protection from Evil, and to deliver the coup yourself, preferably with an area effect spell.
- Even if a monk does close, special combat techniques in NWN are resisted by the Discipline skill - which can be increased by your buffing spells and common magical items.
- No matter how good the Monk, spells that give a concealment bonus - eg Improved Invisibility - are costing them attacks.
- NWN has so many powerful magical weapons that Monks don't really stand a chance. Start with the smith weapons in the base campaign: require reagent plus magic weapon? No, reagent plus ordinary weapon plus magic weapon spell! With the SoU expansion you're running around with +10 weapons with multiple special abilities, one in each hand. (Unlike regular D&D the Monty Haul element to NWN means that this is very feasible).
- Finally, Time Stop: for Wizards and Sorcerers, this is the ultimate killer, as you can cast another Time Stop before the first expires. Actions? Why would your opponent get actions?

[ZtM]

5) As for a shield, part of the issue is that AC actually matters less at high levels. Most things will either be able to ignore your armor through spells and abilities or simply have such a high bonus to hit that you would have to be buffed out the wazoo to avoid anything but their first two hits. Miss chances or being able to act first are usually the order of the day for most people that melee at high levels. Then again this is also part of what leads to what my friends and I refer to as rocket launcher tag.

This is one reason I really like the shield system in the roguelike Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup. Instead of just having shields add AC, they give a "SH" score which more or less acts like a second score: whenever an enemy would normally hit you, your shield score gives you a chance to block the attack based on your SH. (as long as it's something that could be realistically blocked of course: it doesn't do anything for fireballs of poisonous mist attacks or whatever.) Before this was introduced to the game (back when it was still Linley's Dungeon Crawl) players usually ignored shields entirely because they had more than enough AC from elsewhere that losing damage wasn't worth it. After the Stone Soup team changed it to the current version, the prospect of faux evasion is very attractive to AC fighters since their actual EV scores are generally in the toilet, with the result that there is now roughly equal numbers of AC fighters using both the more powerful two-handed weapons and the weaker but better defensive 1H/SH combo. I also like this system because it's more realistic (real shields don't make attacks less damaging, they either block them or don't), and wish that more games would adopt a similiar system (maybe even future versions of D&D!)

[King of Nowhere]

I didn't knew of the rules for full attack/partial attack; are they from 3.5 or they existee in 3.0? Anyway in NWN the fight is not in rounds, so it don't matter. But it seems fair that, if you fight with two weapons, a partial attack is a single attack with every hand.
About shields: I never reached high levels in DnD except for videogames, so maybe I miss some key knowledge, but for NWN 1 I invested a lot in AC and it was worth it: my cleric had +1 dex, +5 full armor (total +13), tower shield +3 (total +6) +5 amulet of natural armor, cloack of resistance, and boots of speed, my AC was over 40. Plus I had high fortitude and will saves because cleric, and a ring that granted 15 resistance against all elements. That way I was almost invulnerable. From average levels, I played at maximum difficulty and when I fought a caster, I just stood still until he used all his spells for no effect.
The only 3 opponents that were capable of consistently overcoming my protections where the ancient dragon, that had a 56 or like as attack bonus, Aribeth who had a +50 to her attack, but I think it was a bonus from the game because I can't see how someone can get a +50 to attack at level 20 with a +4 weapon without cheating, and Morag, her first spells hurt a bit, but as a cleric I hadn't many troubles.
That without the expansions.
In the expansions, I played a monk who had an armor class of like 56, so I was almost invulnerable to everything.

Anyway, I like and prefer defensive tactics: what is the point in being strong if any schmuck can beat you if only he act first? In most forms of fighting, an encounter between two highly trained professionals last more than an encounter between two noobs, and i would like it that way also in roleplaying.
I always tought that there should be a base bonus to armor class, for example, and items should be rebalanced accordingly.

[HealthKit]

Only 2 weapon fight if you have a way of getting extra damage dice on all your attacks.

Such as the extra damage that you might get for having a favored enemy? :smallconfused:
Comes with the whole Ranger package.

[Hydro Globus]

No. That's extra damage (and not really high either).

Evil said extra damage dice. So for +4 (favored enemy) it's not worth it. For +4d6 (rather low-level (compared to the OOTS) sneak attack), it is.

[Half-Orc Rage]

I would say that the ability score placement is the way Durkon isn't optimized. He has a poor charisma and would therefore be bad at turning undead, as well as using certain cleric feats. In the story it makes sense that he would let the more charismatic Roy take the lead.

Elan's biggest problem is similarly his poor intelligence. For a bard that would mean a lack of skill points. Of course the comic would not be as funny if he had a higher int.

Belkar having dump stats is fine, but wisdom should not have been one as many ranger skills depend on it. Again, this would make the stories less entertaining.

Haley might or might not have a good build as an archer rogue, but it would help if she at least carried a melee weapon. Stat-wise she seems decent.

Roy seems like the kind of PC where he spread his ability score points out pretty evenly to be a well rounded character. This has good and bad points to it. Skills and will saves are nice things for a fighter to get a bump to, but maybe if he was more buff he'd be a better fighter. Or maybe the player rolled and got pretty good stats across the board, but stuck with fighter over a more multi-stat class. I would recommend a prestige class or a few level dips, but again, the concept is that Roy is trying to prove a single class fighter can be successful.

[ErrantMage]

Ever consider the fact that they have maybe 1-2 big baddie battles and focus on the small fry? At the start of the comic it seemed that everyone was invited for their ability and not because of any 'optimization'.

Belk, the horrible fiend he is, is a great horde killer. He gets bonuses and is pretty insane as far as things go. He doesn't need a high wisdom score or tracking if your main goal is a simple dungeon and you have a dedicated healer.

V, its a mage. Capable of delivering the punch to many foes and doing plenty of buffing when needed. Everyone thinks V is weak, but his buffing spells are extremely capable of getting the job done. The spells always come in handy in a pinch, enough to cover Belk's wisdom issues to cast CSW, enough to have a dozen low leveled npcs hold off hordes of hobos and still engage in AoE and single target battles against most enemies. In OoTS set up, V is not needed to be the sole threat to a mage in close quarters, so sure its a drawback, but V is balanced.

Haley, yeah. Archer isn't great for melee, we see that. She's a decent rogue regardless and is obviously the weakest in the party, but she is capable.

Roy, DD build, meh, not starting out together in an 'ideal' situation makes Roy well rounded, but he fails to excel in anything other then standard melee.

Durk, he fits the bill pretty well, but he doesn't engage in combat very often, he is very capable of it too, but the only thing we see him do is heal for the most part.

Elan, he has great potential, but is too dumb to realize it and make use of his abilities. He seemed like the last member to be added to the party, simply because no other options existed and the lack of a decent buffer or wizard was absent.

[hungryLIKEALION]

I've never really played heavily optimized characters, so... >_>

But I must say I love the thread title. Major props for the reference, OP.