Awesome Class abilities that come to late

[Godna]

Have you ever encountered this? Your looking over a character class and it seems like it would be awesome if only the most fun ability didnt take until way to late. Most Games i play in begin to peter out at around level 10 and thus i end up missing out on things like the factotums ability to imitate other class features which is something i had long been looking forward to. How about you guys any similar problems?

[Tacoma]

This game, it is like the amusement park. You go in wanting to try the best rides. But they say no, this ride, she opens only at dusk. So you wait and become bored with the makings-out of your womanfriend. And you begin to try the other rides.

You are having some fun times, but you realize once the best rides open you are already tired and empty of pocket. So you leave. Is timeless dilemma.

A way to choose abilities as you want them, like pocketpickings in marketplace of Old Country. This is what we want. But we do not want the Whirlingwinds happenink at the level 1!

[monty]

I like breaking the universe with high-level spells. I don't get to do that nearly often enough.

[Fax Celestis]

Spellthieves' Absorb Spell comes immediately to mind.

[Kris Strife]

Monk class. Just the entire class.

[Glyphic]

Any class that gives you wings/flight at 20th level.

[Eldariel]

Just about any capstone, especially ToB-classes' Dual Boost & Dual Stance, Island in Time, etc. (ToB-classes tend to easily make the list, because they're ones of the very few classes with actually interesting Capstones and solid class construction; Knight's Loyal Beyond Death and Factotum's Cunning Brilliance are really the only other level 19-20 abilities you really, really want to play with at some point). That said, since we do play pre-Epic games quite a bit, I actually get to play around with them. That's really why I love playing high levels; you get so much more to play with. Sure, it takes a while to prepare, but once it's going, I find it all easily worth it.

[Aron Times]

The 30th-level epic abilities in 4E come to mind. They're incredibly powerful, but since PCs can't advance beyond level 30, you only get to enjoy them on your game-ending destiny quest.

[Kurald Galain]

Monk's Slow Fall. Come to think of it, most or all high-level monk abilities.

[Kantolin]

The incredibly awesome seeming Bite of the King, which has the drawback of being an 8th level specific cleric domain spell.

*Grumblecakes*

[Saph]

Shapechange!

Okay, technically it's a spell, not a class ability, but it's so cool it might as well be. In all my games of D&D, I've only ever gotten to use it with one character in one campaign, but it was so much fun that it was worth the wait.

- Saph

[Tacoma]

Monk class. Just the entire class.

Yeah I really could have used Improved Unarmed Strike at Level 0. Just disappointing.

I played a Commoner instead.

[Godna]

I wish there were a way to get the abilities earlier because there is too much awesome they we miss out on.

[Blood_Lord]

I wish there were a way to get the abilities earlier because there is too much awesome they we miss out on.

There is. It's called starting at higher level. It works wonders, and it's way more fun.

[Person_Man]

Dragon related classes and PrC are famous for this:

Low Light Vision and/or Darkvison
Immunity to Sleep
Most breath weapons
Scent, Tremorsense, Blindsight, See Invisibility, etc.
Flight/Wings
Any Fear ability


You know now that I think about it, i think I homebrewed something once specifically to address this issue, but never posted it. I'll see if I can dig it up...

[Kizara]

This is a rampant problem. So, so many classes have abilities that you get WAAY too late to be useful or competitive compared to spells of that level.

Things like: Flight at level 16+. The wizard has been doing it for 10 levels now, don't you feel special?

Or anything else that replicates a spell but is only available like 8-12 levels after a straight caster would have had it.


Even wrose are capstones that are simply terrible, and provide you with almost no useful ability or benefit but you can't get until level 18 or so.

Examples *randomly flips through a book*:

Dread Pirate gets an inferior version of leadership (no cohort) at level 15 (minimum). Debatably it could stack with regular leadership, but so what?

Daggerspell Shaper gets a (mildly) circumstantial Quicken Spell at level 15.

Nightsong Enforcer gets the ability to use status on all allies within 100 feet.. at level 16.

And that says nothing of classes that don't even have a notable capstone, and just get an extra per-day usable of a mediocore ability.

[DownwardSpiral]

Dread necromancer gets free lich template at 20th.

Everything between 8th and that is pretty meh.

[Douglas]

The Monk's capstone. DR 10/magic... at level 20. How often is a level 20 character going to be seriously threatened by something that doesn't ignore DR/magic? Not that the rest of the class is much better, but that particular ability is exceptionally terrible at the level you get it.

[Cruiser1]

I like the rogue's (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm) capstone ability the best. :smallwink:

[FMArthur]

It's mostly not the powerful stuff for me - it's the things that would be balanced at lower levels but are placed at high levels anyway to fill in gaps that irritate me. What I like are abilities that you gain early in the class that grow in power proportionate to the class level, so that there are no gaps even when you're not gaining some new ability. I feel that most classes need this sort of thing to maintain interest early on and to give more indication of growth that isn't just BAB, HP, saves and skills. Throwing in a series of entirely separate abilities that are gained at certain levels is honestly more like a collection of feats than a class. ****ing Samurai...

[Roland St. Jude]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

[Godna]

There is. It's called starting at higher level. It works wonders, and it's way more fun.

But unfortunately i much perfer the low level play style with the way that weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage and the magic user is not god yet and i the only thing i have to worry making me feel useless is pun-pun . Where fighters are more useful and where monks... are well almost useful actually come to think of it they start with decent saves so yeah even the monk has a rare chance to do something.

[Pirate_King]

Monk class. Just the entire class.
ditto. I love monk fixes for this reason.

[Sinfire Titan]

Someone beat me to the Monk joke. Must have been a Wizard.

Sorcerer spells in general. The Totemist's 20th level class feature that makes the ballistically good (and even at 20th, it's still worth it!). Stance Mastery of the Warblade. Dual Boost. Steely Resolve 30 (should have been at 5th level, so we could have Steely Resolve 200 for the win).

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Barbarian's DR. 5/- at 19th level. Yes, when your HP during a rage should be minimum 270 with average rolls, 5 points off of each attack really matters. Heck, their entire DR progression is worthless.

Lichdom for the Dread Necro. Would have been nice to get something else over those 12 levels, though it's not as bad as people make it out to be.

[SurlySeraph]

I second "Every class that gets wings."


I like the rogue's (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm) capstone ability the best. :smallwink:

The rogue's capstone ability? Wait, but there's no... there is... there...
OH I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE.

[Shades of Gray]

Dread Necromancer's comes a bit late. Lich transformation.

[Blood_Lord]

But unfortunately i much perfer the low level play style with the way that weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage and the magic user is not god yet and i the only thing i have to worry making me feel useless is pun-pun . Where fighters are more useful and where monks... are well almost useful actually come to think of it they start with decent saves so yeah even the monk has a rare chance to do something.

Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage, and it's not like Wizard's and Druids aren't the best level 1 characters in the game.

[FMArthur]

Oh man, I wish chameleons (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90955) got Dangerous Unpredictability before level 17. That would be so awesome.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage, and it's not like Wizard's and Druids aren't the best level 1 characters in the game.At 1st level Weapon damage is 50% of the damage, assuming moderate optimization. Though at that level, optimizing focuses more on # of attacks and AB-boosting than actual damage.

[KKL]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

I'm going to second and third this. Both at once.

[monty]

Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage, and it's not like Wizard's and Druids aren't the best level 1 characters in the game.

I wouldn't say the magic-types are best, since they rely heavily on the party to keep them from getting squished, but I definitely agree with your first point, since it's usually fairly easy for a fighter to get +6 damage from strength at first level. Throw in Power Attack, and it's +8, more than the average damage from any Medium weapon.

[Blood_Lord]

@Stptallkid: Yeah, but does 50% count as a lot when everyone dies from one hit? And they would die from one hit that did half damage?


I wouldn't say the magic-types are best, since they rely heavily on the party to keep them from getting squished, but I definitely agree with your first point, since it's usually fairly easy for a fighter to get +6 damage from strength at first level. Throw in Power Attack, and it's +8, more than the average damage from any Medium weapon.

Rely on non-magic types for what? Fighter has 14hp, Wizard has 6, doesn't matter because Wizard kills everything in one hit, has higher Init, and the fighter dies in one hit as easily as the Wizard.

And as I said, Druid. Druid has the same HP as the fighter, and he's got entangle/aspect of the wolf/an animal companion with more Hp then the fighter.

Seriously, play a level 1 game, explain to me how your fighter protected anyone.

[Kizara]

@Stptallkid: Yeah, but does 50% count as a lot when everyone dies from one hit? And they would die from one hit that did half damage?



Rely on non-magic types for what? Fighter has 14hp, Wizard has 6, doesn't matter because Wizard kills everything in one hit, has higher Init, and the fighter dies in one hit as easily as the Wizard.

And as I said, Druid. Druid has the same HP as the fighter, and he's got entangle/aspect of the wolf/an animal companion with more Hp then the fighter.

Seriously, play a level 1 game, explain to me how your fighter protected anyone.


Explain to me how a wizard kills something CR 1 (like a wolf) in 1 hit? Best he can do in my estimation is use greese, hope it fails, and let his fighter get the AoO.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Explain to me how a wizard kills something CR 1 (like a wolf) in 1 hit? Best he can do in my estimation is use greese, hope it fails, and let his fighter get the AoO.Sleep/Color Spray.

[monty]

Four kobolds, then. Assume they are using intelligent tactics, and not doing something stupid like standing in a clump where you can AoE them all at once.

[Blood_Lord]

Four kobolds, then. Assume they are using intelligent tactics, and not doing something stupid like standing in a clump where you can AoE them all at once.

Well, since you are talking about an actual CR 1 challenge, the party of Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Beguiler would probably do something like:

Animal companion charges one, Cleric charges next, Wizards stay near other party members, let animal companion systematically destroy any creatures stupid enough to stay far apart.

Or you know, the Kobolds could be smart, try to attack, and get Color Sprayed in the face.

Seriously, How does Wizard beat X? Oh really easily, um Y? Seriously, four kobolds aren't actually a threat, they have to roll like a 12 or higher to do 1.5 damage? quaking in my boots. I'll just watch them attempt to sling me to death while the AC eats them one by one. Or I'll just crossbow them to death, because I have more HP, higher to hit, and do more damage.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Four kobolds, then. Assume they are using intelligent tactics, and not doing something stupid like standing in a clump where you can AoE them all at once.4 anything are, by definition, not one-shotable without AoE. Assuming you wouldn't allow a Human Wizard to go Precocious Apprentice-Fiery Burst at level 1, the best bet would be to catch as many as possible in a Color Spray/Sleep first round, then attack with a crossbow on any remaining while letting your party handle it.

[monty]

Animal companion charges one, Cleric charges next, Wizards stay near other party members, let animal companion systematically destroy any creatures stupid enough to stay far apart.


since they rely heavily on the party

Thank you for proving my point.


while letting your party handle it.

You too.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Thank you for proving my point.

You too.What I'm saying is the Wizard can handle most CR1(very difficult) opponents with 1 spell. The few he can't are generally A:Over CRd and B:must be set up to take advantage of his few weaknesses, and the Wiz has to avoid cheese. Yes, he can't one-shot every CR 1 encounter, but he can get most, and those he couldn't would be just as much of a problem for any other ECL 1 char as well.

[monty]

What I'm saying is the Wizard can handle most CR1(very difficult) opponents with 1 spell. The few he can't are generally A:Over CRd and B:must be set up to take advantage of his few weaknesses, and the Wiz has to avoid cheese. Yes, he can't one-shot every CR 1 encounter, but he can get most, and those he couldn't would be just as much of a problem for any other ECL 1 char as well.

So he does very well against single opponents, in other words. However, since an intelligent enemy would probably not attack alone unless they were confident of their superiority, that's not really playing it intelligently.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

So he does very well against single opponents, in other words. However, since an intelligent enemy would probably not attack alone unless they were confident of their superiority, that's not really playing it intelligently.So, does no CR-appropriate enemy with an Int(remember, wolves have Int 2) ever attack your parties?

[monty]

So, does no CR-appropriate enemy with an Int(remember, wolves have Int 2) ever attack your parties?

Generally, no, the party fights multiple opponents pretty much every time. I find that tends to cut down on Save-or-Lose tactics from the casters.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Generally, no, the party fights multiple opponents pretty much every time. I find that tends to cut down on Save-or-Lose tactics from the casters.But any group of enemies would have an even easier time figuring out when they're overmatched, and wouldn't attack.

[Jasdoif]

The primary problem a first-level wizard faces is the very limited number of spell slots. Once they're gone, whether because the target did well on its saving throw or simply because this is the third encounter today, contributing becomes a lot more difficult.


Anyway, as for the the original topic....Soulknife's Multiple Throw and Knife to the Soul. The class needs a lot more help then that, but those abilities would be a lot more useful if you got them earlier.

[Rockphed]

Generally, no, the party fights multiple opponents pretty much every time. I find that tends to cut down on Save-or-Lose tactics from the casters.

It also evens the action budget between the two sides and makes evocators more powerful.

[SurlySeraph]

But any group of enemies would have an even easier time figuring out when they're overmatched, and wouldn't attack.

But then there would be no encounters, and the campaign would consist entirely of walking around.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

But then there would be no encounters, and the campaign would consist entirely of walking around.Precisely my point.

[monty]

Precisely my point.

So it's more realistic for a single creature to think they can take on a group adventurers, without actually being stronger than them, than it is for a group of creatures to think they can take on a group of adventurers?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

So it's more realistic for a single creature to think they can take on a group adventurers, without actually being stronger than them, than it is for a group of creatures to think they can take on a group of adventurers?I'm saying that if you play both intelligently, then neither would attack, especially not at the standard CR.

[Blood_Lord]

1) I showed how both the Druid and Wizard could solo the encounter.

2) Four Kobolds would have to be stupid to attack a party, because every single person in that party has a higher to hit, does more damage, and has more HP, they are more outclassed then the Wolf, who could at least reasonably expect to be able to kill one of the creatures.

3) If your Kobolds arbitrarily stand 30ft apart and never attempt to close with the party, yes it is difficult for a Wizard to one shot them. If however they all attempt to actually fight the party, then the Wizard can sleep the whole group of them at once.

But of course, your entire premise is designed around the idea that no one every engages anyone, because if they are weaker, then they don't fight, so no one would ever run into an encounter.

4) There is a difference between what a Wizard needs, and what is expedient. If he has a big stupid fighter, and the kobolds choose to stand really far apart and not attack, the fighter can take them all out one at a time, sort of like an animal companion could. So they are about equal. A Wizard with the AC feature instead of familiar doesn't even need the fighter, because the riding dog can seriously beat four kobolds on it's own if they don't try to gang up on it. If they do, well it probably still can, but the Wizard can also sleep them all.

A wizard is perfectly capable of killing four kobolds on it's own, and if he is on his own, then those four kobolds represent all the fights he is expected to fight that day. So he can freely blow spells.

I understand that you want to pretend Wizard's are weak, but they aren't. Given actually using the CR rules, the Wizard is fully capable of contributing more to every fight then the Fighter.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Keep in mind that I'm not saying Wizards can solo everything, I'm saying that a party with a Wizard, Cleric, Druid, and Beguiler is far more suited for facing most encounters than a party of Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard. At all levels from 1-20. I'm saying that solo a Wizard can kill things that would slaughter a Fighter.

[monty]

I understand that you want to pretend Wizard's are weak, but they aren't. Given actually using the CR rules, the Wizard is fully capable of contributing more to every fight then the Fighter.

I never said that. The point I was trying to make is that they aren't quite as awesome as people claim and still benefit noticeably from a party, at least at low levels.

[Blood_Lord]

I never said that. The point I was trying to make is that they aren't quite as awesome as people claim and still benefit noticeably from a party, at least at low levels.

And what I'm saying is that it is functionally impossible to not benefit from having a party. And that they are as awesome as some people say they are, because they are better to have around then fighters.

[weenie]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

I'll second this one. You are pretty limited with your attacks from lvl 6-12.

[Dairun Cates]

Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage, and it's not like Wizard's and Druids aren't the best level 1 characters in the game.

I have a level 8 Dwarven fighter that can easily do 30 damage a hit, and if I'm willing to put it all into one attack, it's 60 damage minimum all with a +11 to hit.

On top of that, his weapon crits on a 17-20, and we're using Eberron... complete with action points... so yeah.

I'm sorry. Level 8 wizards have a few nice things, but none of them can quite do 120 damage in one hit. They can shoot status effects and AOE like crazy, but the fighter is still doing the damage here.

Mind you, that's a smidgen bit of optimization with leap attack feat (my GM may be an ass, but I'm not evil enough to go shock trooper. I also didn't go for spring attack because of a silly point at the beginning). Still, a fighter with a good strength score and a 2-handed weapon can expect to be doing about 10 damage minimum on an attack and should be hitting most of the time at low levels. It's not as bad as you think.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

All this talk of a level 1 Cleric/Druid/Wizard/Beguiler party makes me think of how awesome level 1 Beguilers are compared to level 1 Wizards. I mean really, if you know you're going to be at level 1 for a while, why even play a Wizard? Scribe Scroll? Grease? Let's not even talk about Sorcerers.

Anyway, that has me thinking about the Beguiler's 'ignore SR' capstone ability. It's wonderful, but like any other base class capstone, I'll probably never get to use it in actual play.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

All this talk of a level 1 Cleric/Druid/Wizard/Beguiler party makes me think of how awesome level 1 Beguilers are compared to level 1 Wizards. I mean really, if you know you're going to be at level 1 for a while, why even play a Wizard? Scribe Scroll? Grease? Let's not even talk about Sorcerers.Precocious Apprentice+Fiery Burst is the best Wiz option at level one, especially if retraining is allowed. You'll die by the time either of those becomes a complete waste.

As to the guy talking about a level 8 Fighter? Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, Polymorph, Greater Invisibility. Yeah, I'll admit, 4th level spells are a bit of a dead level.

[Dairun Cates]

As to the guy talking about a level 8 Fighter? Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, Polymorph, Greater Invisibility. Yeah, I'll admit, 4th level spells are a bit of a dead level.

I believe the argument was for damage, and aside from Polymorph (which has pretty much been universally banned from most casual games of D&D at this point) those are still general field control or status effects with little to no damage. I said NOTHING about usefulness. Once again, this is about damage.

Also, Evard's Black Tentacles is honestly a bit over-rated if you're not constantly fighting humans since monster grapple checks for appropriate monsters at that level are generally stupid high.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Precocious Apprentice+Fiery Burst is the best Wiz option at level one, especially if retraining is allowed. You'll die by the time either of those becomes a complete waste.You could also sell your spellbook to buy a variety of dirty tricks, but that just means Beguiler's only a lot better without short-sighted cheese. What with the skill points, armor, better hp, and fourteen first level spells known.

And don't forget Enervation and Fear. Necromancy is almost worth specializing in at level 7.

Per black tentacles: The fact that it doesn't work some of the time doesn't negate the fact that it completely rips apart any medium-sized encounter at the level you get it.

[Dairun Cates]

Per black tentacles: The fact that it doesn't work some of the time doesn't negate the fact that it completely rips apart any medium-sized encounter at the level you get it.

Seeing as you'll have MAYBE 3 level 4 spells at that point (4 if you specialized), I still don't see taking Evard's at that level as that great of an option. A 16 grapple doesn't actually have that big of an advantage on a fighter of the same level (+13 in my fighter's case), and since they only grapple and don't pin, it won't take horribly long for the high BA classes to break out.

It's a good spell, but it's mostly a waste of a slot at level 8 when you'd be better off with less circumstantial spells. When you have more spells slots, it's a good one to throw one or two slots at.

I digress though. The argument is still about DAMAGE. 1d6+4 does not massive damage make.

[Blood_Lord]

I have a level 8 Dwarven fighter that can easily do 30 damage a hit, and if I'm willing to put it all into one attack, it's 60 damage minimum all with a +11 to hit.

On top of that, his weapon crits on a 17-20, and we're using Eberron... complete with action points... so yeah.

I'm sorry. Level 8 wizards have a few nice things, but none of them can quite do 120 damage in one hit. They can shoot status effects and AOE like crazy, but the fighter is still doing the damage here.

Mind you, that's a smidgen bit of optimization with leap attack feat (my GM may be an ass, but I'm not evil enough to go shock trooper. I also didn't go for spring attack because of a silly point at the beginning). Still, a fighter with a good strength score and a 2-handed weapon can expect to be doing about 10 damage minimum on an attack and should be hitting most of the time at low levels. It's not as bad as you think.

I think you should probably go back and read what I said in context again.

I said: "Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage."

In response to: "i much perfer the low level play style with the way that weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage."

My point being that things like Str damage and Power attack make a greater percentage then the actual die of your weapon.

Now how much of you 60 damage is from weapon dice, and how much from static boni, such as Str and Power attack. You are actually proving my point for me.

Also, how about 14d6 damage each round for two rounds, and a save against stun? That's only 49 damage a round, but it repeats and it stuns. Oh yeah, and it's a 20ft radius AoE.

[ken-do-nim]

The Monk's capstone. DR 10/magic... at level 20. How often is a level 20 character going to be seriously threatened by something that doesn't ignore DR/magic? Not that the rest of the class is much better, but that particular ability is exceptionally terrible at the level you get it.

The level 19 ability to turn ethereal is actually much better - and still pretty late in the game.

I came up with the idea to spread the magic dr out:
4th level: dr 2/magic
8th level: dr 4/magic
12th level: dr 6/magic
16th level: dr 8/magic
20th level: dr 10/magic

It does help against animals after all.

At 20th level, the monk should achieve enlightenment, an ability which shouldn't be modelled by damage reduction. Maybe some kind of limited wish ability instead.

[mikeejimbo]

The 30th-level epic abilities in 4E come to mind. They're incredibly powerful, but since PCs can't advance beyond level 30, you only get to enjoy them on your game-ending destiny quest.

You know though, you're allowed to continue playing even at level 30 for a while. I mean, by RAW you're not, but it's not like WotC ninjas are going to break in and

[monty]

You know though, you're allowed to continue playing even at level 30 for a while. I mean, by RAW you're not, but it's not like WotC ninjas are going to break in and

And? AND?!?!?!

...how did you submit that post, anyway? I guess it'll be a mystery.

[mikeejimbo]

And? AND?!?!?!

...how did you submit that post, anyway? I guess it'll be a mystery.

Um... a wizard did it.

Also, Wizards of the Coast is the perfect company who makes my very soul happy and giddy and I would never contradict or houserule away one of their perfect rules.

[Dairun Cates]

I think you should probably go back and read what I said in context again.

I said: "Um? I don't think Weapon damage ever accounts for a lot of damage."

In response to: "i much perfer the low level play style with the way that weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage."

My point being that things like Str damage and Power attack make a greater percentage then the actual die of your weapon.

Now how much of you 60 damage is from weapon dice, and how much from static boni, such as Str and Power attack. You are actually proving my point for me.

Also, how about 14d6 damage each round for two rounds, and a save against stun? That's only 49 damage a round, but it repeats and it stuns.

Well, then you're really just trying to nit-pick words here. I believe the original context was making reference to physical damage in general and there's no reason to read it otherwise. In low levels, a fighter with an strength and skill in his weapon does more damage that any level 1 wizard can hope. You can't really argue that point. Just because it's mostly strength damage doesn't make that point any less valid. If said fighter is using his fists instead of his weapon, he does a lot less damage from both the power attack AND the weapon damage. It DOES count up.

The point still remains that a fighter with HIS weapon deals more damage WITH his weapon for quite a while before the wizard takes over. Seeing as he wouldn't do that damage WITHOUT his weapon, I'd still count it as weapon damage. Trying to argue semantics is silly. Rogues don't do much damage without sneak attack damage. It's BONUS damage.

And as for your example, seeing as save for Leap Attack (and the normal attacks are just power attacks after all), I'm not pulling my feats and abilities out of supplements to specifically pick the most powerful option for one instance, and, unlike said Wizard, my fighter can continue to do that all day every round without the "I need to rest for spells" talk, I like my damage better. Less assumptions with mine.

But yes. If you're honestly just trying to argue someone's wording because of your definition of "weapon damage", then I guess I concede the point. Although, I don't see the point in bringing it up in that case since it actually contributes almost nothing to the conversation.

Edit: Oh, and I suppose if we want to go really silly, what about the Paladin with Charging Smite and Leap attack who power attacks for full and crits on a scythe? 268 minimum damage at a minimum 13 STR FTW! Mind you, they can't get there yet without a level of fighter or some kind of feat that allows you to take a cross-class skill as a class skill, but still fun.

[Ceaon]

I have a level 8 Dwarven fighter that can easily do 30 damage a hit, and if I'm willing to put it all into one attack, it's 60 damage minimum all with a +11 to hit.

On top of that, his weapon crits on a 17-20, and we're using Eberron... complete with action points... so yeah.

I think the meaning of "weapon damage" was the number of damage done with the weapon itself, as opposed to the damage done by strength, power attack, leap attack, etc. You're proving the point you thought you were disproving. :smallsmile:

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Well, then you're really just trying to nit-pick words here. I believe the original context was making reference to physical damage in general and there's no reason to read it otherwise. In low levels, a fighter with an strength and skill in his weapon does more damage that any level 1 wizard can hope. You can't really argue that point. Just because it's mostly strength damage doesn't make that point any less valid. If said fighter is using his fists instead of his weapon, he does a lot less damage from both the power attack AND the weapon damage. It DOES count up.

The point still remains that a fighter with HIS weapon deals more damage WITH his weapon for quite a while before the wizard takes over. Seeing as he wouldn't do that damage WITHOUT his weapon, I'd still count it as weapon damage. Trying to argue semantics is silly. Rogues don't do much damage without sneak attack damage. It's BONUS damage.I interpreted it as "most damage dealt is dealt by weapon, instead of PA/Str/Precision/Weapon Enchants", too. Are you sure your interpretation is what Godna meant? Yeah, Fighters always outdamage Wizards(other than Cindy). Doesn't mean that the Wizard's Scythe isn't more effective than the Fighter's Greatsword.

[Dairun Cates]

I think the meaning of "weapon damage" was the number of damage done with the weapon itself, as opposed to the damage done by strength, power attack, leap attack, etc. You're proving the point you thought you were disproving. :smallsmile:

And as I said, if we're going with such a silly description, his point is valid, but also incredibly pointless. It's understood that a fighter's damage comes from a strength score and feats and when the comment is brought up that weapon damage outdamages wizards, I would assume they mean a melee class's damage COMPLETE with their skills. That's like calculating rogue damage without sneak attack or wizard power without spells.

Also, as I pointed out, since a lot of that extra damage doesn't happen unless you're wielding a two-handed weapon, that extra 1.5 strength multiplier and +1 power attack damage can and should be considered damage done by the weapon itself. No matter how strong you are, you don't get it without the weapon.

Edit: I guess the best analogy would be to say that a Wizard's INT score doesn't make a huge difference on his class power since it's the SPELL power that does the damage instead of the int score. But the wizard can't cast spells without the INT score. They're synonymous. So, separating weapon damage and bonus damage is kinda silly.

[Blood_Lord]

Well, then you're really just trying to nit-pick words here. I believe the original context was making reference to physical damage in general and there's no reason to read it otherwise. In low levels, a fighter with an strength and skill in his weapon does more damage that any level 1 wizard can hope. You can't really argue that point. Just because it's mostly strength damage doesn't make that point any less valid. If said fighter is using his fists instead of his weapon, he does a lot less damage from both the power attack AND the weapon damage. It DOES count up.

The point still remains that a fighter with HIS weapon deals more damage WITH his weapon for quite a while before the wizard takes over. Seeing as he wouldn't do that damage WITHOUT his weapon, I'd still count it as weapon damage. Trying to argue semantics is silly. Rogues don't do much damage without sneak attack damage. It's BONUS damage.

And as for your example, seeing as save for Leap Attack (and the normal attacks are just power attacks after all), I'm not pulling my feats and abilities out of supplements to specifically pick the most powerful option for one instance, and, unlike said Wizard, my fighter can continue to do that all day every round without the "I need to rest for spells" talk, I like my damage better. Less assumptions with mine.

But yes. If you're honestly just trying to argue someone's wording because of your definition of "weapon damage", then I guess I concede the point. Although, I don't see the point in bringing it up in that case since it actually contributes almost nothing to the conversation.

Edit: Oh, and I suppose if we want to go really silly, what about the Paladin with Charging Smite and Leap attack who power attacks for full and crits on a scythe? 268 minimum damage at a minimum 13 STR FTW! Mind you, they can't get there yet without a level of fighter or some kind of feat that allows you to take a cross-class skill as a class skill, but still fun.

1) I'm pretty sure you are confused. The post I was replying to is a statement about preferring low level because weapon damage is a greater percentage of damage, unlike later levels. Therefore, the fact that fighters always do more damage at every level proves that that post must be referring to actual weapon dice.

You are the one nitpicking an issue that no one else is talking about.

2) Yes a fighter generally does more damage. Wizards are still more effective.

3) That build, it's a one trick pony build. Just like my damaging sorcerer. You know what the difference is? My one trick works on every single creature in every single MM except Force dragons. Yours doesn't work on anything with high AC, or miss chances, or the ability to fly, ect, ect.

My build is not designed for a situation. My builds are all characters. They are also all awesome.

4) That build, poor spells per day. He can only cast a Repeating Wings of Flurry at CL 14 with a DC 24 save against stun 5 times a day. Not that it matters, because a single one defeats most encounters, and he has plenty of other spells.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I guess the best analogy would be to say that a Wizard's INT score doesn't make a huge difference on his class power since it's the SPELL power that does the damage instead of the int score. But the wizard can't cast spells without the INT score. They're synonymous. So, separating weapon damage and bonus damage is kinda silly.I blame 4e for the confusion.

And I still think Black Tentacles is more than a viable option at 7th level for a wizard, outside any fighter damage argument, because things with large grapple scores tend to have lower will saves, and a wizard should have plenty of will save-or-loses by 7th level. Also, it pretty much gets rid of opposing spellcasters, which can be the most important thing to do early in the fight.

[Blood_Lord]

And as I said, if we're going with such a silly description, his point is valid, but also incredibly pointless. It's understood that a fighter's damage comes from a strength score and feats and when the comment is brought up that weapon damage outdamages wizards, I would assume they mean a melee class's damage COMPLETE with their skills. That's like calculating rogue damage without sneak attack or wizard power without spells.

No one brought up the fact that melee classes out damage Wizards.

A poster brought up the fact that at lower levels, weapon die is a greater percentage of damage then static mods.

That is what happened. You are wrong.

[Dairun Cates]

I blame 4e for the confusion.

And I still think Black Tentacles is more than a viable option at 7th level for a wizard, outside any fighter damage argument, because things with large grapple scores tend to have lower will saves, and a wizard should have plenty of will save-or-loses by 7th level. Also, it pretty much gets rid of opposing spellcasters, which can be the most important thing to do early in the fight.

True enough, but these conversations always seem to go the way of "Fighters are worthless, because wizards are more powerful". I'm not going to argue that without some massive uber-twinking, a fighter isn't going to be as good as the wizard at high levels. I blame some of Wizard's game theory and the release of constant spell supplements for that one (Seriously, a class that's weak at low levels but more powerful at higher ones makes sense in a 1-player game, but when you add a social aspect, it falls apart).

Still, I think the arguments for wizards as one man armies get really silly and circumstantial. You have these wizards with thousands of contingencies and spells from 9 different supplements and it all just gets a bit silly, and I can't help but think if your GM is letting you do all of this, he's either a bit naive or about to rain hell on you as your reputation for being well-prepared gets an army sent after your party.

You can hide behind contingencies and save or dies for only so long though before you wish you had someone with more than a d4 hit-die blocking that raging barbarian in front of you. You may argue that the Barbarian is a better option in the long run, but I think you can still manage some interesting choices with the right feats on a fighter.

Oh, and with Evard's. That's really just a case of what you're facing. With my 7th level wizard, it was NEVER useful enough to use. Anything that was a caster got killed by the barbarian in 2 rounds tops and casting Evard's just kept the melee people from attacking the enemies. It sounded awesome, but it just never came up in practice.

The one time it should've come up (a boss that needed to be attacked on his various power supplies) it didn't do enough damage to hurt him. I still think it's a good spell, I just think it's really bad for 7-9th level when there's better choices.

Also, on the topic of awesome class abilities. There's a hilariously mean one in Slayers d20. Minimum level you can get it 16, but it allows you to roll an attack roll for your armor class and take whichever one is higher for one round. Makes a good fighter invincible, but by 16th level, you're facing Mazoku who deal primarily horrible magical area effects with stupid high DCs. Really only for showing off against a crapton of low level fighters.


No one brought up the fact that melee classes out damage Wizards.

A poster brought up the fact that at lower levels, weapon die is a greater percentage of damage then static mods.

That is what happened. You are wrong.


But unfortunately i much perfer the low level play style with the way that weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage and the magic user is not god yet and i the only thing i have to worry making me feel useless is pun-pun

EXACT Quote. I'm reading "weapon damage alone" as damage done with a weapon rather than spells. You're reading it as damage die. It doesn't SPECIFICALLY say either, and reading it specifically as the ONLY die rolled itself is a bit silly. You're technically right if you choose to read it like that, but it's also a REALLY nit-picky point.

[Blood_Lord]

You can hide behind contingencies and save or dies for only so long though before you wish you had someone with more than a d4 hit-die blocking that raging barbarian in front of you.

No, I really don't. I am perfectly content to be invisible and flying, and to be able to neutralize him in a single round.

Not even remotely concerned.

[Blood_Lord]

EXACT Quote. I'm reading "weapon damage alone" as damage done with a weapon rather than spells. You're reading it as damage die. It doesn't SPECIFICALLY say either, and reading it specifically as the ONLY die rolled itself is a bit silly. You're technically right if you choose to read it like that, but it's also a REALLY nit-picky point.

NO. I am right technically, I am right in spirit, I am right in every possible way that one can be right, because I know what the conversation is about, and you have no idea.

Read the post. It does not say that weapon damage is greater then Wizard damage. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT. It says that, "weapon damage alone accounts for a lot of your damage [at lower level]" which is the damage done by a fighter.

You are wrong. You misunderstood. Stop trying to weasel out of it. No one has ever said that fighters can't do damage, I am not arguing against a technical statement, I am talking about the actual statement made. You are completely off base and talking about something that was never said.

[monty]

EXACT Quote. I'm reading "weapon damage alone" as damage done with a weapon rather than spells. You're reading it as damage die. It doesn't SPECIFICALLY say either, and reading it specifically as the ONLY die rolled itself is a bit silly. You're technically right if you choose to read it like that, but it's also a REALLY nit-picky point.

You missed the "accounting for a lot of your damage" part. A lot. Not all. That is, the weapon still adds significant damage beyond the OMG POWER ATTACKZ and whatnot. Which is more impressive for base greatsword damage, 2d6+8 (1st level, 18 Str and Power Attack) or 2d6+9001? That's the difference they're talking about.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

So you've had some disappointing experiences with preparing black tentacles. I've experienced more than one near-TPK resulting from an NPC caster's well-placed black tentacles combined with some good meat shielding. I say near-TPK because I rolled a natural 18 on my concentration check to Dim Door out of the grapple and finally cast it back at him the next round, and the other time it happened we just got sissy-DM'd out of it.

Note that I'm not the one arguing that wizards are one man parties. They're powerful, but until the high levels they only really shine when they have someone to hit things for them. I'm just arguing that Black Tentacles is a staple 4th level spell until the low teens, where grapple checks actually do start to get out of hand, to say nothing of rings of FoM.

[Dairun Cates]

No, I really don't. I am perfectly content to be invisible and flying, and to be able to neutralize him in a single round.

Not even remotely concerned.

Okay. I already know where this argument goes.

I can bring up logical counters for some 5 odd off-topic pages and this theorhetical wizard is going to have every possible counter prepared and up and not have a cleric dispel him out of the sky for being such an obvious target. Furthermore, anything anyone sends against said wizard is not going to be nearly as prepared as said wizard and any level of counter that is reasonable considering your level of preparation care taken is ultimately going to be considered over-preparation on the GM's part and thus horrendous meta-gaming because he clearly doesn't like you. All other classes that aren't a druid or cleric should just give up, and Beholders and spell-casting resistant monsters don't exist. And the wizard is so omni-powerful that no one can ever hope to defeat it in the history of ever because of his amazingness. Furthermore, ALL GMs are willing to let you get away with this. Also, theory and practice are exactly the same thing.

Anyone that wants to play a non spell-casting class must be insane or cheating and everyone power games to the extent of needing 3 or more books to build their character.

By the end of it, I eventually give in because of your flawless argument and not because I'm tired of hearing the same spiel over and over and just don't give a damn anymore.

So, I'm conceding ahead of time before I disgrace myself in front of the entire internet and look like a tool about a topic I clearly know nothing about.

Congratulations! You've won your argument and proven once and for all that your one class is superior to all classes and makes a party pointless in what is considering to be a social gaming experience. Rejoice in the fact that I award you one full internet of win. This is officially sanctioned. I'll even sign the necessary paperwork.

Now, seeing as I've conceded this argument. There should be no reason to actually continue down this line of reasoning and destroy this topic by getting it locked with an argument that has nothing to do the original topic and everything to do with proving one sentence of someone's off-hand comment wrong.

I'll go ahead and ignore anything left on this issue since I've already admitted defeat. No point in arguing a point that has no opposition.

And since Wizard's don't get any abilities beyond spell-casting, bonus feats, and the occasional familiar, there should be little or no reason to bring them up in a topic about abilities that you get too late.


You missed the "accounting for a lot of your damage" part. A lot. Not all. That is, the weapon still adds significant damage beyond the OMG POWER ATTACKZ and whatnot. Which is more impressive for base greatsword damage, 2d6+8 (1st level, 18 Str and Power Attack) or 2d6+9001? That's the difference they're talking about.

And actually, I was reading that as damage from weapon wielders versus spell casters. So, you have your OMG Power attacks weapon damage versus a 1d4+1 magic missle. The damage from weapons outweighs the damage from spells and makes itself the main form of damage. It accounts for a LOT of your party's damage.

It's still a completely legitimate reading of the sentence, and considering the way it was worded, it's what I'd consider to be the intent regardless of terminology. You're free to disagree, but if you read it the other way and are arguing it so vehemently, you're right, but you don't really prove what a bit of simple math didn't already know. It's literally an argument that should've gone without saying and shouldn't have gone for a full page. And I really see little point in going out of the way to correct every small technical mistake in a sentence just to go on a tyrade about wizards.

[KnightDisciple]

For me, the Favoured Soul wings at, what, 16, 17? Yeah.
I liked the flavor, I love flight and wings. But come on! Like someone else said, wizards are doing it way earlier. Lvl 10 or so wouldn't have killed them. It seems like a good midway point.
Barbarian DR is another good point. I'd add the Warlock's resistances as well.

[Dairun Cates]

For me, the Favoured Soul wings at, what, 16, 17? Yeah.
I liked the flavor, I love flight and wings. But come on! Like someone else said, wizards are doing it way earlier. Lvl 10 or so wouldn't have killed them. It seems like a good midway point.
Barbarian DR is another good point. I'd add the Warlock's resistances as well.

I don't know. Regardless of how silly D&D gets at 20, I do think the lower DRs are entirely worthless. It still helps against large groups of weaker things.

Also, I understand why flight takes so long. It's an issue of flight gives a lot of power. Even if wizards get it early on, it still takes up a spell slot. Mind you, it's pointless with the right GM as he'll challenge you despite flight, but in pre-made modules, it breaks them pretty fast.

Oh, and it's not a class skill, but I guess I always thought Whirlwind Attack would've been nifty if it either didn't have so many qualifications or didn't take a full attack. It'd be worth taking if it didn't take up nearly all your feats until level 8 and only pure fighters can reasonably get it at low enough levels.

[KnightDisciple]

I don't know. Regardless of how silly D&D gets at 20, I do think the lower DRs are entirely worthless. It still helps against large groups of weaker things.

Also, I understand why flight takes so long. It's an issue of flight gives a lot of power. Even if wizards get it early on, it still takes up a spell slot. Mind you, it's pointless with the right GM as he'll challenge you despite flight, but in pre-made modules, it breaks them pretty fast.

Oh, and it's not a class skill, but I guess I always thought Whirlwind Attack would've been nifty if it either didn't have so many qualifications or didn't take a full attack. It'd be worth taking if it didn't take up nearly all your feats until level 8 and only pure fighters can reasonably get it at low enough levels.

Hm. I see my miswording. I meant good argument, or good point in the argument. That is, both of those are worthless when you get them, and take forever to get.

[Coplantor]

Factotum's 16th level ability, bite of the king and favoured soul's wings. I want those wings earlier!
is there some variant or something allowing that?

[hewhosaysfish]

Also, I understand why flight takes so long. It's an issue of flight gives a lot of power. Even if wizards get it early on, it still takes up a spell slot.

But when you consider that 6th level Warlocks can get a 24 hour duration flight effect as an at will spell-like ability... Mine did and the DM jokes that he has since forgotten what his legs are for.

[Coplantor]

But when you consider that 6th level Warlocks can get a 24 hour duration flight effect as an at will spell-like ability... Mine did and the DM jokes that he has since forgotten what his legs are for.

That's my point! Warlocks get to fly at 6th level! What do you leave for poor favoured souls? I would give them wings in 10th level or something near it.

[Thanatos 51-50]

The Dark Wanderer's level 24 Ability "Dark Road".
Dark Wanderer is an Epic Destiny for Rangers and Rogues introduced in the Martial Power splatbook.
Not even bringing up its level 30 ability (Which amounts to a free ressurection), the Dark Road lets you and up to five + WIS mod others go from anywhere to anywhere else in exactly twenty-four hours. Safe from harm, requiring no food, sustinance or rest.
Plane of existance does not matter.

The only "drawbacks" are that you cannot enter a specific room in a structure using this ability, and you must be specfic in choosing your destination.

'Tis very nice.

[Triaxx]

On-topic: Don't forget the Paladin's capstone.

Off-topic: Those four Kobolds? Yeah, they aren't going to spread 30' from each other, but two groups 30' apart? Yeah you can catch two with sleep at which point the other two charge you. Can you keep casting with two AoO's going off in your face and then the flanking bonus dropping the needed roll to 10?

As for the Animal Companion alternate class feature, or Druid's Animal companion, you're doing the same as if you had a fighter. So yes, the Wizard can one shot the monster, but not the encounter.

[Kesnit]

I think the meaning of "weapon damage" was the number of damage done with the weapon itself, as opposed to the damage done by strength, power attack, leap attack, etc. You're proving the point you thought you were disproving. :smallsmile:

Using that argument, Wizards can't add their INT bonus to saves, since INT serves a purpose for Wizards like STR does for fighters. Suddenly, Sleep/Color Spray doesn't look as impressive if the save is 11.

[mikej]

Monk & Favored Soul come to mind.

Anything that grants dmg reduction magic /X is pretty much redundant, serious whats the point. The druid's thousand faces is also pretty " meh " when you get it. In general I dislike class features that are not unique and can be replicated with low level spells ( example; Monk ) and if I played such classes I would feel cheated.

[monty]

Using that argument, Wizards can't add their INT bonus to saves, since INT serves a purpose for Wizards like STR does for fighters. Suddenly, Sleep/Color Spray doesn't look as impressive if the save is 11.

Did you even read the original argument? That has nothing to do with it.

[monty]

In general I dislike classes that are not unique and can be replicated with low level spells ( example; Monk )

Fixed for you.

[mikej]

Monks are good...if your a Werewolf Monk in a party of Humans. Dwarfs, and Half-Elves. Noo joke, this really happened >.>

[Kesnit]

Did you even read the original argument? That has nothing to do with it.

I did. Guess I wasn't clear.

Summary of the argument:
1) Fighters do more damage at LVL 1 than Wizards with their weapons.
2) No, Wizards can do more. All they have to do is Sleep/Color Spray the monster.
3) A Fighter can do a lot of damage with high STR and proper feats
4) Oh wait, STR, enhancements, and feats shouldn't count for weapon damage, just the weapon itself.

That's where my argument came in. Saying a Wizard can do more (by counting spells, which require saves, which is boosted by INT) but not allowing the bonuses to damage from a Fighter's STR (including a 2-handed weapon) is intentionally weighting things in favor of the Wizard.

[Telonius]

The ability for a Rogue to take Weapon Finesse as a feat. Gee, that would have been nice two levels ago.

The Knight's "Bond of Loyalty" ability.

The Ninja's "Ghost Mind" ability.

The Swashbuckler's "Acrobatic Mastery" ability.

[monty]

I did. Guess I wasn't clear.

Summary of the argument:
1) Fighters do more damage at LVL 1 than Wizards with their weapons.
2) No, Wizards can do more. All they have to do is Sleep/Color Spray the monster.
3) A Fighter can do a lot of damage with high STR and proper feats
4) Oh wait, STR, enhancements, and feats shouldn't count for weapon damage, just the weapon itself.

That's where my argument came in. Saying a Wizard can do more (by counting spells, which require saves, which is boosted by INT) but not allowing the bonuses to damage from a Fighter's STR (including a 2-handed weapon) is intentionally weighting things in favor of the Wizard.

The argument was never about which one could do more damage. It was whether the person quoted meant

A) At low levels, more of a fighter's damage comes from their base weapon damage than bonuses.

or

B) At low levels, a fighter does more damage than a wizard.


In the first case, the strength score doesn't count, but wizards aren't involved. In the second case, the strength score does count, and wizards are involved. Either way, you're wrong.



The ability for a Rogue to take Weapon Finesse as a feat. Gee, that would have been nice two levels ago.

That always bugged the hell out of me.

[FinalJustice]

You know though, you're allowed to continue playing even at level 30 for a while. I mean, by RAW you're not, but it's not like WotC ninjas are going to break in and

Now THAT would be fun. So you finish your game with your fellow players, than WotC Highly Visible Ninjas break in. The group leave the dice aside, pick up their weapons and proceed to a relaxing ninja beat'em up, just like the old Bad Dudes vs Drago Ninja days of yours.

[DrizztFan24]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

Wait. Wait. I thought Roland didn't play games!?:smallwink:

I like the Rogue special abilities. Slippery Mind is nice but other than that...they kind of blow. It seems to me like Rogue is just too much of an open class to allow for any really sweet abilities.

[Person_Man]

The Monk's capstone. DR 10/magic... at level 20. How often is a level 20 character going to be seriously threatened by something that doesn't ignore DR/magic? Not that the rest of the class is much better, but that particular ability is exceptionally terrible at the level you get it.

DR 10/magic is actually quite useful, in that tons of enemies don't have magic weapons. This is especially true of enemies that use natural attacks. Animals, plants, ooze, vermin, constructs, most magical beasts, plenty of undead, most Summoned enemies, etc. It also helps a lot if your DM is fond of ambushing you with 100 Kobolds, or similar mook rush tactics.

Even at level 20, these things are an issue. But I agree with you that it should definitely come earlier. Maybe level 15ish.

[Fax Celestis]

DR 10/magic is actually quite useful, in that tons of enemies don't have magic weapons. This is especially true of enemies that use natural attacks. Animals, plants, ooze, vermin, constructs, most magical beasts, plenty of undead, most Summoned enemies, etc. It also helps a lot if your DM is fond of ambushing you with 100 Kobolds, or similar mook rush tactics.

Even at level 20, these things are an issue. But I agree with you that it should definitely come earlier. Maybe level 15ish.

Are you forgetting that any creature that has DR/Magic also has its natural and unarmed attacks also overcome DR/Magic? Because that makes it significantly less useful.

[Narmoth]

The psionicist, at least in 2nd ed. On low level he is weak as a wizard, with little contribution to the battle. On high level, the wizard vastly outclass him.
The paladins spell casting ability

[Blackfang108]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

I have to also agree with this.

But I got lucky:

The one campaign I play as a duskblade in started(and stayed) at level 22, so I was able to take 20 Duskblade/2 Fighter, for a slew of MM feats and Improved Critical(Halberd). (and Improved Combat Casting. an Epic Duskblade NEEDS this feat.)

Nothing's more fun than Having and extra 20-25d6 on a full attack. (shocking Grasp.)

The second campaign where I played a Duskblade, we started at level 1 and I didn't even get the Combat Casting ability

[Duke of URL]

That's my point! Warlocks get to fly at 6th level!

At the cost of a precious invocation known. It's not like they get it for free.

[valadil]

Justiciar's Hog Tie ability. I've always wanted to play one, but been put off by the need to hit level 14 on a fighter type.

Also, can we get this thread back to its original topic please? I liked it before it got all flamey. And the stuff about wizards vs fighters wasn't even relevant anymore!

[Blood_Lord]

At the cost of a precious invocation known. It's not like they get it for free.

And Favored Souls get it at level 16 at the cost of taking levels in a good class, or at the cost of getting four domains and actual class features.

[Blood_Lord]

{Scrubbed}

[Kesnit]

{Scrubbed}

{Scrubbed}

Guess what? Some people get EXTREMELY TIRED of seeing so many thread fall into "yeah, but Wizards own everyone. So there."

All your vaulted Wizard builds? How many people actually play them? How many DMs will let their players get away with all the cheese involved?

[Fax Celestis]

Children, children, settle down. This is a case of misunderstanding, not the onset of World War III.

I am, however, obligated to side with Dairun as he's a fellow Anansite. *ninja props*

[Kesnit]

Children, children, settle down. This is a case of misunderstanding, not the onset of World War III.

(sigh) All right, all right...

But my last comment still stands. Can we please have a thread that doesn't degrade into "Wizards rule, everyone else drools"? :smallsmile:

[mikej]

Can we please have a thread that doesn't degrade into "Wizards rule, everyone else drools"?

Its easy to fall towards that, its hard to look at a class seriously knowing that most of the cool features can be replicated and probally done better with a full-caster or items.

Designers in 3.5 should've thought non-caster capstone or trademark class features better and not get replaced by a caster.

[The Mormegil]

Duskblade's Arcane Channeling on Full Attack. :smallannoyed:

Thirded, or maybe fourthed or what it is, I didn't read the whole thread. But I agree.

[Blood_Lord]

{Scrubbed}

All your vaulted Wizard builds? How many people actually play them? How many DMs will let their players get away with all the cheese involved?

Or how about. I don't like it when other people claim to know what I think and will say, especially when they are colossally wrong.

I didn't bring up Wizards are better then everything. Dairun had to give his hate speech, after having to defend the poor beleaguered fighter against the attacks that never even existed in the first place.

If he could have just said, "Oh, the conversation wasn't about Wizard vs Fighter? My bad, carry on." two pages ago instead of feeling obligated to insult me because he didn't know what the conversation was about, this wouldn't be an issue.

[Person_Man]

Dragon related classes and PrC are famous for this:

Low Light Vision and/or Darkvison
Immunity to Sleep
Most breath weapons
Scent, Tremorsense, Blindsight, See Invisibility, etc.
Flight/Wings
Any Fear ability


You know now that I think about it, i think I homebrewed something once specifically to address this issue, but never posted it. I'll see if I can dig it up...

OK, found my old homebrew on my computer and posted it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5456760#post5456760). I think it speaks directly to this issue.

[Blackfang108]

OK, found my old homebrew on my computer and posted it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5456760#post5456760). I think it speaks directly to this issue.

Looks like fun, but there is no way in HADES that my DMs would allow that class.

Pity, it'd be fun.

[Grynning]

Looks like fun, but there is no way in HADES that my DMs would allow that class.

Pity, it'd be fun.

They might, if you pointed out that it doesn't do anything that a spellcaster can't. Person-Man's class is basically just what the Dragon Shaman should've been.

[Epinephrine]

Scout abilities, like freedom of movement, blindsight, hide in plain sight and so on.

[Person_Man]

Are you forgetting that any creature that has DR/Magic also has its natural and unarmed attacks also overcome DR/Magic? Because that makes it significantly less useful.

Yes, I did forget that.

You're correct of course. But I still contend that it has its purposes. There are plenty of high level monsters that don't auto bypass DR/magic. For example, the tarrasque, elementals, golems, and most devils and demons. More importantly though, I think it makes you much more resistant to mass mook rush tactics, which every DM will do at some point.

We don't want to just hand out DR 10/- or DR 10/obscure to every melee build out there. It just ends up increasing number of enemies the DM has to throw at you in order to challenge you.

[Blackfang108]

They might, if you pointed out that it doesn't do anything that a spellcaster can't. Person-Man's class is basically just what the Dragon Shaman should've been.

No arguements here.

but they see a reasonable build, like an Awakened Dire Wolf barbarian in a high ECL(22) game and say no.

OK, maybe the Dire Wolf was a bit much, but still, considering that everyone else is either a Paladin, Psion, or Ranger, I don't see the problem. I do two things (hurting people and breaking things) very well, but that's about it.

I can't even open doors... Though I could probably bite through most of them.

Maybe it was the level of sorceror, for Mage Hand and Mage armor. and prestidigitation...

My revenge is a level 22 Sorceror, with Leadership and a lvl 17 Half-Orc Barbarian Cohort. Oh, and Epic Casting. And Shapechange. And every other (nonevil, nonlawful) spell on the Sorceror/Wizard list.

:smallbiggrin:

What, I'm evil.

[Curmudgeon]

Wings for a Favored Soul: at level 17.

All the Rogue special abilities, like Skill Mastery, just start at level 10; level 13 to pick up the second one.

Hide in Plain Sight for most classes: level 8 for the Assassin PrC; level 14 for Scout; level 17 for Ranger. The Shadowdancer PrC gets it at level 1, but that's only after you acquire the prerequisite 3 feats and 23 skill ranks.

[monty]

the tarrasque

has epic natural weapons. Epic>magic.
/nitpick

[Godna]

My arguement was that at low levels everyone gets a chance to shine and the character tend to work togeather better ( in personal experience) the other things is just a few other things i like.




edit: Sorry about the sh*tstorm i cause there.