PDA

View Full Version : Most overpowered 3.5 classes



ivendale
2008-12-15, 09:26 PM
1. Sword sage
2. Ninja
3. War blade
4. Scout
5. Dread Necromancer
6. Vampire
7. P.C worrior
8. Bigiuler
9. PC spellcaster
10. Crusader

I would love to hear your opinion on the most overpowered classes

Defiant
2008-12-15, 09:28 PM
Core:

1. Wizard
2. Cleric
3. Druid

Keld Denar
2008-12-15, 09:28 PM
D) None of the above.

EDIT:

You are new around here, aren't you? Time to duck and cover, flamewar inc!

Yukitsu
2008-12-15, 09:29 PM
Outside core:

Wizard
Cleric
Druid
Artificer

WaterTengu
2008-12-15, 09:31 PM
D) None of the above.

EDIT:

You are new around here, aren't you? Time to duck and cover, flamewar inc!

can you feel the ground shaking, it is the feeling of an onrush of trolls and flamers all converging on this position.

konfeta
2008-12-15, 09:31 PM
You missed Archivist and a bunch of imbaRCees?

Draz74
2008-12-15, 09:32 PM
What's your definition of overpowered? Cuz if you think Swordsage is the most powerful class, you're way off. But "over"powered seems to carry a connotation of expectation, like "this class is stronger than it should have been." Which could be a totally different question, if you think Swordsages are an archetype that should be especially weak.

{Scrubbed} Because the "PC Worrior" and "PC Spellcaster" entries on your list don't make any sense.

Anyway, I'd say
1) Artificer
2) Druid
3) Wizard
4) Archivist
5) Cleric
6) Beguiler
7) Psion
8) Sorcerer
9) Wu Jen
10) Spirit Shaman

Nohwl
2008-12-15, 09:32 PM
every full caster.

Mr.Bookworm
2008-12-15, 09:34 PM
1. Sword sage
2. Ninja
3. War blade
4. Scout
5. Dread Necromancer
6. Vampire
7. P.C worrior
8. Bigiuler
9. PC spellcaster
10. Crusader

I would love to hear your opinion on the most overpowered classes

...

Huh?

The ToB classes are regarded as powerful, but not overpowered. Ninja is regarded as a weak class, and Scout is the same. Dread Necromancer, while a full caster, and thus powerful, is one of the weaker full spellcasters. Beguiler, while very powerful, is not at the top of the power rankings. Vampire isn't even a class, and even if it was, it's still pretty weak, due to LA. I don't even know what you mean by PC warrior and PC spellcaster. Do you mean the generic class variant?

My top 5 list, in no particular order.

1. Artificer
2. Druid
3. Cleric
4. Wizard
5. Archivist

AmberVael
2008-12-15, 09:35 PM
The TRUENAMER! :smalltongue:
Those utterances are horribly powerful you know, and I mean, you can hit those truename checks every time.

VerdugoExplode
2008-12-15, 09:36 PM
The TRUENAMER! :smalltongue:

Lies! The Samurai is clearly superior being able to fight with two weapons at once and his inspiring shouts to demoralize his enemies!

Artanis
2008-12-15, 09:38 PM
every full caster.
The Warmage begs to differ :smallbiggrin:

Shosuro Ishii
2008-12-15, 09:40 PM
Lies! The Samurai is clearly superior being able to fight with two weapons at once and his inspiring shouts to demoralize his enemies!


semi related question:

Why is it that Samuari and truenamer take so much crap for being bad (not that they don't deserve) but the spelltheif, who is just a rogue who trades a vast majority of his abilities for a crappy ability that is only useful in fairly specific situations, gets a free pass?


That's just alway bugged me. Or am I just missing some really obvious reason that the spelltheif isn't one of the worst classes out there?

ericgrau
2008-12-15, 09:42 PM
1. Sword sage
2. Ninja
3. War blade
4. Scout
5. Dread Necromancer
6. Vampire
7. P.C worrior
8. Bigiuler
9. PC spellcaster
10. Crusader

I would love to hear your opinion on the most overpowered classes

Wait? The ninja?

AmberVael
2008-12-15, 09:43 PM
semi related question:

Why is it that Samuari and truenamer take so much crap for being bad (not that they don't deserve) but the spelltheif, who is just a rogue who trades a vast majority of his abilities for a crappy ability that is only useful in fairly specific situations, gets a free pass?


That's just alway bugged me. Or am I just missing some really obvious reason that the spelltheif isn't one of the worst classes out there?

Because Fax likes the spell thief and none of us want to provoke his ire. :smallwink:
But really, the Spell Thief isn't that bad. Spell casting ability, the ability to deal with spellcasters, and roguish abilities allow them to contribute. They're better than some of the other classes, at least.

Kesnit
2008-12-15, 09:43 PM
semi related question:

Why is it that Samuari and truenamer take so much crap for being bad (not that they don't deserve) but the spelltheif, who is just a rogue who trades a vast majority of his abilities for a crappy ability that is only useful in fairly specific situations, gets a free pass?


That's just alway bugged me. Or am I just missing some really obvious reason that the spelltheif isn't one of the worst classes out there?

There's levels of sucky-ness. Spellthief is not good, but Samurai and Truenamer are worse. As I understand it (not having played them), Spellthief is actually playable. Samurai and Truenamer are not.

kopout
2008-12-15, 09:45 PM
can you feel the ground shaking, it is the feeling of an onrush of trolls and flamers all converging on this position.

actually thing hear are rather civil

Shosuro Ishii
2008-12-15, 09:47 PM
actually thing hear are rather civil

I think that's because a vast number of the people participating in the other 7class flame wars over the last few days have been banned.

There are no flames when no one cares enough to flame.

imperialspectre
2008-12-15, 09:47 PM
The spellthief trades a couple defensive class features and a few dice of Sneak Attack in exchange for casting slightly better than a ranger and the ability to emulate full casters from time to time. That's both playable and quite capable, if played well.

Artanis
2008-12-15, 09:49 PM
semi related question:

Why is it that Samuari and truenamer take so much crap for being bad (not that they don't deserve) but the spelltheif, who is just a rogue who trades a vast majority of his abilities for a crappy ability that is only useful in fairly specific situations, gets a free pass?


That's just alway bugged me. Or am I just missing some really obvious reason that the spelltheif isn't one of the worst classes out there?
To add to what Kesnit said, there was a thread on the WotC boards a while back where a guy compiled the "general consensus" of every class's power level. The Samurai was in the bottom 5...and that included the NPC classes :smalleek:

Now, the list itself is debateable (and would be anyways even if it weren't :smalltongue: ), but it's the closest thing to an actual list that I know of.

Assassin89
2008-12-15, 09:51 PM
The most overpowered class in any D&D games is purely subjective. With the correct combination of feats and skills, any class can become overpowered.

I better break out the fire extinguishers and vials of acid in case there are complications which would lock this thread.

Shosuro Ishii
2008-12-15, 09:51 PM
The spellthief trades a couple defensive class features and a few dice of Sneak Attack in exchange for casting slightly better than a ranger and the ability to emulate full casters from time to time. That's both playable and quite capable, if played well.

I can see that.

I just always looked at the spelltheif and thought, "Well, I can play this, or a rogue, or a caster, or a beguiler, or one of a dozen other things and not be as terrible. I suppose that the truenamer is uniquly bad.

Also, isn't having better spellcasting than a ranger sorta of a back handed compliment. I was under the impression that they had one of the worst spell casting lists avaliable (I've always just houseruled it out for convience...gave the class an animal companion at level 1...none of my players ever had a problem).

Edit: In regards to the WoTC list of class power, I saw it, but it didn't actually explain why certain classes were placed where they were. It was just a numerical listing.

monty
2008-12-15, 09:55 PM
My top 5 list, in no particular order.

1. Artificer
2. Druid
3. Cleric
4. Wizard
5. Archivist

Conclusion reached.

Those are the Big Five.

Flickerdart
2008-12-15, 09:58 PM
7. P.C worrior
Oh yes, those blasted Progressive Conservatives. I can't stand the way they parade their superior budget around. It drives me utterly mad!


@^: What about Erudites with that thing (feat?) that lets them learn Arcane spells? They could go toe to toe with those guys easy.

Lert, A.
2008-12-15, 09:59 PM
Anyway, I'd say
1) Artificer
2) Druid
3) Wizard
4) Archivist
5) Cleric
6) Beguiler
7) Psion
8) Sorcerer
9) Wu Jen
10) Spirit Shaman

I personally find the Psion to be powerful but not overpowered (certain builds excepted). I would be hard pressed to find a #10 to replace him though. Maybe Totemist. Maybe.

Otherwise, this would be my list as well, just shuffled around a wee bit.

monty
2008-12-15, 10:01 PM
What about the ridiculous arcane swordsage variant? It's a caster, but with effectively infinite spell slots! Isn't that a great idea?

AmberVael
2008-12-15, 10:03 PM
What about the ridiculous arcane swordsage variant? It's a caster, but with effectively infinite spell slots! Isn't that a great idea?

With the number of spells they know, combined with the suggested limitation of what spells they can choose? It really isn't that bad.

Draz74
2008-12-15, 10:04 PM
I personally find the Psion to be powerful but not overpowered (certain builds excepted). I would be hard pressed to find a #10 to replace him though. Maybe Totemist. Maybe.

Otherwise, this would be my list as well, just shuffled around a wee bit.

Well, pretend it's the Erudite variant of the Psion, then. As someone else just pointed out, that's Big-5-level cheese.


What about the ridiculous arcane swordsage variant? It's a caster, but with effectively infinite spell slots! Isn't that a great idea?

Mostly I pretend it completely doesn't exist. I assume no DM would be that dumb, even if they were dumb enough to allow Pun-Pun. :smallwink:

Eldariel
2008-12-15, 10:05 PM
Conclusion reached.

Those are the Big Five.

Eh. You forgot Erudite.

BRC
2008-12-15, 10:06 PM
1. The Secret Bonus Base Class*
2. DMPC's
* Now that 4e is out, I can tell you how to get the SBBC. Get a brand new copy of the PHB, now, read each page at a time, spending approx 1 minute per page until page 16, at which point you MUST go and get a sandwhich. Now, while eating your sandwhich, go to the following pages in this order, 14, 72, 23,01, 21. After reading page 21 in full, finish your sandwhich. Now, roll a D20 until you get a prime number. Add the number of rolls you made to the prime number and open the PHB to that page. There you will find the Secret Bonus Base Class (AKA, Knight of Gygax), it has Heavy Armor Proficiency, Proficiency with all weapons, Monk saves, a Druids animal companion, fighter bonus feats, sneak attack, Full Spontaneous Arcane Casting (without ASF and accsess to all spells on the sor/wiz spell list), Full Divine Casting (Spontaneous, accsess to entire list), and D20 HD. That page also has a sidebar which describes a simplified Grapple system.

VerdugoExplode
2008-12-15, 10:07 PM
To add to what Kesnit said, there was a thread on the WotC boards a while back where a guy compiled the "general consensus" of every class's power level.

This (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=369436) is, I believe, the thread in question.

In regards to the samurai they are essentially a fighter, but instead of getting a plethora of workable bonus feats you are instead forced to use the two weapon fighting chain, which is generally not a great idea without some sneak attack backing it up. Aside from that they get a shout which relies on charisma, quick draw and a bonus to intimidate for intimidating people in combat.

Eldariel
2008-12-15, 10:10 PM
Samurai also needs the two-weapon fighting chain, but cannot pick the actual feats and thus doesn't qualify for anything requiring TWF and actually gains his improved TWF 5 levels late! Oh, and the Samurai is forced to spend another of his precious feats (compared to Fighter) on BASTARD SWORD PROFICIENCY, and so on [Bastard Sword Proficiency adds an average of 1 point of damage to 1 of your attacks over Longsword for a Samurai...].


As for the tiers-list, I'd default to this (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0). It lacks beginners voting that skew up the stats (Healer is bad, but by far better than many classes on that list simply because they get spellcasting and thus can acquire new spells through various means - should be closer to Fighter than Monk).

Lert, A.
2008-12-15, 10:13 PM
Well, pretend it's the Erudite variant of the Psion, then. As someone else just pointed out, that's Big-5-level cheese.

Yeah, the Erudite is a mediocre class that gets a super power boost from a single ability. Even with non-broken spells, the difference between casting and manifesting is large enough to be a problem.

RS14
2008-12-15, 10:13 PM
...

Huh?

The ToB classes are regarded as powerful, but not overpowered.

Correct. It's not as if what the OP is saying should be confusing, though. People play in unoptimized games. In those games, the ToB classes are quite powerful compared to everything else. Then they come here and learn to optimize. ::shrug:: Even a wizard is weak when only blasting.

Keld Denar
2008-12-15, 10:28 PM
Lightning Warrior

I mean, its balanced because he casts wizard spell, but can't specialize, right? And he doesn't get a familiar, which is like, the most powerful feature of a wizard, right?

Never mind
All 3 good saves
Full BAB
Entire TWF chain (including the epic Perfect TWF) as bonus feats
Full wizard casting without ASF
d20 HD
....

Am I missing anything? If you don't believe me, google it.

Mr.Bookworm
2008-12-15, 10:31 PM
Correct. It's not as if what the OP is saying should be confusing, though. People play in unoptimized games. In those games, the ToB classes are quite powerful compared to everything else. Then they come here and learn to optimize. ::shrug:: Even a wizard is weak when only blasting.

Ah, that makes sense. Still, I thought the default standard was slightly optimized?

In the spirit, I would also like to propose my list of underpowered classes, not counting NPC classes and the like.

1. Samurai
2. Monk
3. Truenamer
4. Fighter?
5. Soulknife?

Truenamer might be removed, due to the fact that it's more broken (as in shattered into pieces, not Tippy) than actually bad.

I'm iffy on Soulknives and Fighters.

Kesnit
2008-12-15, 10:31 PM
Samurai also needs the two-weapon fighting chain, but cannot pick the actual feats and thus doesn't qualify for anything requiring TWF and actually gains his improved TWF 5 levels late! Oh, and the Samurai is forced to spend another of his precious feats (compared to Fighter) on BASTARD SWORD PROFICIENCY, and so on [Bastard Sword Proficiency adds an average of 1 point of damage to 1 of your attacks over Longsword for a Samurai...].

Samuari's get Bastard Sword for free at LVL 1.

Graymayre
2008-12-15, 10:52 PM
I've seen artificer posted here a few times. I did play as one (at low levels) and never became to cheesy, does its ability to make items improperly scale or something?

woodenbandman
2008-12-15, 10:57 PM
I'll throw in Warmage, Erudite, Beguiler, and Dread Necro.

Those 3 are powerful because they can get the entire cleric spell list at will via the lovely Rainbow Servant prestige class. Without that they suck hard.

monty
2008-12-15, 10:59 PM
I'll throw in Warmage, Erudite, Beguiler, and Dread Necro.

Those 3 are powerful because they can get the entire cleric spell list at will via the lovely Rainbow Servant prestige class. Without that they suck hard.

Warmage is weak compared to other casters, but hardly a terrible class. Dread Necro's kind of average, Beguiler is good, and Erudite is borken. I don't know where you're getting "suck hard" from.

Kyeudo
2008-12-15, 10:59 PM
I've seen artificer posted here a few times. I did play as one (at low levels) and never became to cheesy, does its ability to make items improperly scale or something?

They can get spells off of any and every spell list, such as the lists for PrCs and NPC classes, and they get them 2 levels early (that's caster levels, by the way, so Ur-Priest level 9 spells at level 8). They can metamagic stuff for gold instead of increased spell slots by burning extra charges, get free XP to make stuff with, can disarm traps, can drain useless magic items for XP to make useful magic items, and have all the fun abilities of CoDzilla, minus turning and wildshape. They are more Batman than Batman.

Yukitsu
2008-12-15, 11:02 PM
Warmage is weak compared to other casters, but hardly a terrible class.

They are actually a little bit behind martial type archers. Types of spell lists are actually really important to say a full caster is a good full caster.


Dread Necro's kind of average, Beguiler is good, and Erudite is borken. I don't know where you're getting "suck hard" from.

Erudite isn't that great, but yeah, those are OK. Dread necro gets a bit boggy though, so most people don't play it to its full potential.

Eldariel
2008-12-16, 12:21 AM
Samuari's get Bastard Sword for free at LVL 1.

That's my point, compared to a Fighter, that's their "level 1 bonus feat". And bad "TWF" on level 2. You can pick exact same feats as a Fighter - only, just about every Fighter-player knows better. Effectively, it's a prebuilt Fighter with really, really bad feat choices (I mean, TWF tree without any bonus damage and different weapon types? TWF tree 5 levels late? Bastard Sword Proficiency? Skill Focus: Intimidate-wannabes?), and less of them than a standard Fighter too.


Erudite from Comp. Psi itself isn't impressive, but you add the "Spells as Powers" alternative class feature from "Mind's Eye" web enhancements and suddenly you have the most broken class in D&D with multiple infinite-action, infinite-PP and infinite everything else-loops.

Frog Dragon
2008-12-16, 12:34 AM
Lightning Warrior

I mean, its balanced because he casts wizard spell, but can't specialize, right? And he doesn't get a familiar, which is like, the most powerful feature of a wizard, right?

Never mind
All 3 good saves
Full BAB
Entire TWF chain (including the epic Perfect TWF) as bonus feats
Full wizard casting without ASF
d20 HD
....

Am I missing anything? If you don't believe me, google it.
This. I googled it. Will provide a link

Oh and you are missing something. It has 6 skill points per level
Oh and during it's progression it also gets 5 bonus feats

http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-868384

Seriously this is the epitome of brokenness. d20 hit die shouldn't even exist!!

Artanis
2008-12-16, 12:44 AM
This (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=369436) is, I believe, the thread in question.
Ah, found it (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=968062). That's the one I was thinking of.

monty
2008-12-16, 01:02 AM
This. I googled it. Will provide a link

Oh and you are missing something. It has 6 skill points per level
Oh and during it's progression it also gets 5 bonus feats

http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-868384

Seriously this is the epitome of brokenness. d20 hit die shouldn't even exist!!

That was a fun thread to read.

STUPED

SoD
2008-12-16, 01:04 AM
1. The Secret Bonus Base Class*
2. DMPC's
* Now that 4e is out, I can tell you how to get the SBBC. Get a brand new copy of the PHB, now, read each page at a time, spending approx 1 minute per page until page 16, at which point you MUST go and get a sandwhich. Now, while eating your sandwhich, go to the following pages in this order, 14, 72, 23,01, 21. After reading page 21 in full, finish your sandwhich. Now, roll a D20 until you get a prime number. Add the number of rolls you made to the prime number and open the PHB to that page. There you will find the Secret Bonus Base Class (AKA, Knight of Gygax), it has Heavy Armor Proficiency, Proficiency with all weapons, Monk saves, a Druids animal companion, fighter bonus feats, sneak attack, Full Spontaneous Arcane Casting (without ASF and accsess to all spells on the sor/wiz spell list), Full Divine Casting (Spontaneous, accsess to entire list), and D20 HD. That page also has a sidebar which describes a simplified Grapple system.

But...do I get the sandwhich when I hit page 16, or after reading page 16? And what if there's no sandwhiches, does it matter if I spend time going to the shop to buy stuff? And what if I accidentally make a sandwitch instead??? Does it still work???

Draz74
2008-12-16, 01:29 AM
That was a fun thread to read.

STUPED

QFT. Priceless.

Best example of how people on the Internet take themselves too seriously.

Thurbane
2008-12-16, 02:19 AM
Wizard
Archivist
Artificer
Druid
Cleric
Psion
Sorcerer
Erudite
Beguiler
Wu Jen



...source. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5256132&postcount=138)

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-16, 03:30 AM
Conclusion reached.

Those are the Big Five.

As it has been said, I need not repeat it.

In order of Power:

1: Erudite (Spell-to-Power only)
2: Druid
3: Wizard
4: Archivist
5: Cleric
6: Artificer
7: Sorcerer
8: Psion
9: Favored Soul
10: Spirit Shaman

Reasons:

1: Spontaneously able to cast every single 1st -7th level spell at his leisure, in addition to having every 8th level spell and any 8th or 9th level psionic powers. That means Divine Power+Body of War+other rediculous buffs for his Psicrystal, while he himself can sit back and rape reality. Arcane Fusion allows him to bypass the normal PP cost for manifesting a lot of his powers, and Linked Power just makes it worse.

2: Duh. A single class feature capable of replacing the Fighter, another class feature capable of turning the Druid into a Fighter, and 9th level spells. One of the few classes that can be taken to 20 without fear of being underpowered. Adding in a single PrC makes it either worse or unstoppable (Planar Shepard).

3: I rate the Wizard above the Cleric and Archivist due to how effective their spells are. Oh, and Familiars. Extra actions are bad for balance.

4: Higher than the Cleric due to potential spell list, better at buffing the party and himself, and capable of being God.

5: Another duh. DMM: Persist/Echo is stupidly powerful. Without it they still have one of the best buff lists in the game, and they can get access to a similar feat from Complete Champion.

6: Easily capable of disrupting the only thing that keeps the class balanced (price of items), easily capable of mimicing every other caster out there. Granted, they are vulnerable to Suppress Magic/MDJ, and they take considerable downtime to be effective.

7: Arcane Fusion puts them above the Psion, but barely.

8: Not as powerful due to lack of support, but still capable. Expanded Knowledge can technically get them Divine Power...

9: Cleric-lite.

10: Druid-lite.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-16, 04:29 AM
Samurai also needs the two-weapon fighting chain, but cannot pick the actual feats and thus doesn't qualify for anything requiring TWF and actually gains his improved TWF 5 levels late!

Please read this guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66567) which explains the sheer awesomeness of the Samurai!!!1!

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-16, 04:38 AM
I generally hate all the "bohoho monks sucks fighter sucks" and so on, but there are not excuse for the CW Samurai. It's the best example of bad design ever. If a player of mine want to play a Samurai, I show him the OAdv one.

I wonder WHY the CW designers throwed in the class. It's a mystery. My only thought is that they wanted a "control" class for a Martial-only campaign but:

1) You can do something similar with a Paladin and few feats in the same splatbook

2) Such concept would be anyway a failure

......:smalleek:?

Eldariel
2008-12-16, 06:38 AM
They added it there simply so that even the densest person on the planet realizes that they don't have a clue of "balance", don't know how to design classes and that indeed, the whole game is full of stupid printing mistakes and lack of proper testing. They probably printed it to rub the point that they don't even care in. That's the only way I can rationalize its existence - Monk wasn't enough for some people, so they went a step further and basically built the worst Fighter possible and made it a class.

Hmm, my other theory is that it was an early, subliminal, "Buy 4E Books!"-message.


Please read this guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66567) which explains the sheer awesomeness of the Samurai!!!1!

Didn't we have one for Monks too?

Heliomance
2008-12-16, 07:23 AM
I'd dispute the Spirit Shaman. The flavour rocks, but having played one I found it decidedly "meh".

Immutep
2008-12-16, 07:49 AM
This. I googled it. Will provide a link

Oh and you are missing something. It has 6 skill points per level
Oh and during it's progression it also gets 5 bonus feats

http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-868384

Seriously this is the epitome of brokenness. d20 hit die shouldn't even exist!!

I want my DM to allow me to be a lightning warrior now, it means i don't need to worry as much abojut ANYTHING going on around my character in terms of maybe dying so can focus on my roleplay :smalltongue:

Kris Strife
2008-12-16, 08:08 AM
This. I googled it. Will provide a link

Oh and you are missing something. It has 6 skill points per level
Oh and during it's progression it also gets 5 bonus feats

http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-868384

Seriously this is the epitome of brokenness. d20 hit die shouldn't even exist!!

Holy crap, its Gandalf... Give him an +5 orc bane sacred burst longsword and a quarterstaff as weapons...

Kesnit
2008-12-16, 08:15 AM
That's my point, compared to a Fighter, that's their "level 1 bonus feat".

Ah, gotcha. I thought you were saying Samuari have to take the feat to use a Bastard Sword.

BRC
2008-12-16, 08:39 AM
But...do I get the sandwhich when I hit page 16, or after reading page 16? And what if there's no sandwhiches, does it matter if I spend time going to the shop to buy stuff? And what if I accidentally make a sandwitch instead??? Does it still work???
After reading Page 16. If you have no Sandwhiches in your house, you are permitted to go to your nearest place that sells Sandwhiches and purchase one. If you have the materials to make a Sandwhich in your house, you may make one OR go and purchase one as stated above.

AslanCross
2008-12-16, 09:14 AM
can you feel the ground shaking, it is the feeling of an onrush of trolls and flamers all converging on this position.

Ahh, the Interwebs. The only Material Plane where where trolls and fire can coexist.

Anyway, Wizard is definitely up there. I totally disagree with any of the ToB classes being in the top 10, let alone Ninja.

Zen Master
2008-12-16, 09:20 AM
Level one, PHB only, I'd say barbarian. Minimum damage on a hit in excess in the expected hitpoints of all other classes.

I mean - the superoptimizers will have their own funny ideas, but instagib of all opponents must account for something.

AslanCross
2008-12-16, 09:37 AM
Level one, PHB only, I'd say barbarian. Minimum damage on a hit in excess in the expected hitpoints of all other classes.

I mean - the superoptimizers will have their own funny ideas, but instagib of all opponents must account for something.

Consider, however, that classes are not measured in their ability to kill other PCs, but their ability to deal with whatever the DM throws at them.

Also consider that PCs are supposed to survive four level-appropriate encounters every day and not die.

arguskos
2008-12-16, 09:42 AM
Consider, however, that classes are not measured in their ability to kill other PCs, but their ability to deal with whatever the DM throws at them.

Also consider that PCs are supposed to survive four level-appropriate encounters every day and not die.
And, at level 1, a barbarian is better than almost everyone ever at doing just that. Rage+d12 HD+great damage potential=ending fights rapidly, and if he can't, then his d12 HD will carry the day.

I can't think of anyone else that can survive four level-appropriate combats as well as the barbarian at level 1 (well, maybe the knight).

AslanCross
2008-12-16, 09:48 AM
And, at level 1, a barbarian is better than almost everyone ever at doing just that. Rage+d12 HD+great damage potential=ending fights rapidly, and if he can't, then his d12 HD will carry the day.

I can't think of anyone else that can survive four level-appropriate combats as well as the barbarian at level 1 (well, maybe the knight).

Warblade. d12 HD, full BAB, can use a fresh set of maneuvers every encounter. Depending on the maneuvers chosen he can actually attack two opponents as a standard action at Lv 1 (at no penalty), which is something no other melee class can do. Just like Barbarian, it isn't proficient with heavy armor. With the mooks at level 1, I don't think the extra damage matters so much, honestly.

arguskos
2008-12-16, 09:56 AM
Warblade. d12 HD, full BAB, can use a fresh set of maneuvers every encounter. Depending on the maneuvers chosen he can actually attack two opponents as a standard action at Lv 1 (at no penalty), which is something no other melee class can do. Just like Barbarian, it isn't proficient with heavy armor. With the mooks at level 1, I don't think the extra damage matters so much, honestly.
Fair enough, I forgot warblade got a d12. :smallannoyed:

Zen Master
2008-12-16, 10:21 AM
Warblade. d12 HD, full BAB, can use a fresh set of maneuvers every encounter. Depending on the maneuvers chosen he can actually attack two opponents as a standard action at Lv 1 (at no penalty), which is something no other melee class can do. Just like Barbarian, it isn't proficient with heavy armor. With the mooks at level 1, I don't think the extra damage matters so much, honestly.

In so far as that is a comment on my post, and not the opening post, a warblade isn't PHB. And the barbarian can take cleave, getting a free attack at no penalty (not to imply the warblade can't do that as well).

Mook? What mook? Killing in one blow - being sure of doing so - matters rather a great deal.

kamikasei
2008-12-16, 10:32 AM
In so far as that is a comment on my post, and not the opening post, a warblade isn't PHB.

I would assume it was a response to arguskos, who brought up the Knight and thus moved outside core.

TRM
2008-12-16, 11:21 AM
1. The Secret Bonus Base Class*
2. DMPC's
* Now that 4e is out, I can tell you how to get the SBBC. Get a brand new copy of the PHB, now, read each page at a time, spending approx 1 minute per page until page 16, at which point you MUST go and get a sandwhich. Now, while eating your sandwhich, go to the following pages in this order, 14, 72, 23,01, 21. After reading page 21 in full, finish your sandwhich. Now, roll a D20 until you get a prime number. Add the number of rolls you made to the prime number and open the PHB to that page. There you will find the Secret Bonus Base Class (AKA, Knight of Gygax), it has Heavy Armor Proficiency, Proficiency with all weapons, Monk saves, a Druids animal companion, fighter bonus feats, sneak attack, Full Spontaneous Arcane Casting (without ASF and accsess to all spells on the sor/wiz spell list), Full Divine Casting (Spontaneous, accsess to entire list), and D20 HD. That page also has a sidebar which describes a simplified Grapple system.
Awww... :smallfrown: Now I know it's too good to be true; you must be teasing.

Celeres
2008-12-16, 11:37 AM
oh c'mon, fighter's not overpowered? you get so many feats, slap some vow of poverty on it, you've got more feats than a centipede.

*sarcasm*

ok, but really. any class has the potential to be overpowered (barring samurai, of course), it's just a matter of who uses it. i know i personally have a very easy time making martial characters who my DM's hate. barbarian and fighter mostly.

Kesnit
2008-12-16, 11:45 AM
ok, but really. any class has the potential to be overpowered (barring samurai, of course), it's just a matter of who uses it. i know i personally have a very easy time making martial characters who my DM's hate. barbarian and fighter mostly.

And Truenamer. Short of a homebrew fix, I don't think it's possible to make one of those overpowered.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-16, 12:46 PM
Level one, PHB only, I'd say barbarian. Minimum damage on a hit in excess in the expected hitpoints of all other classes.

I mean - the superoptimizers will have their own funny ideas, but instagib of all opponents must account for something.

Wizard casting Color Spray has a greater chance of any CR 1 creature or character failing the save then the Barbarian does of hitting AC.

If one shotting is important, you want to be a Wizard.

KIDS
2008-12-16, 12:49 PM
This is so wrong :(

Apart from the obvious 1. Cleric 2. Wizard 3. Artificer 4. Druid 5. Archivist list, I can't possibly imagine how a Ninja actually was proposed for the second most overpowered class...

sebsmith
2008-12-16, 12:51 PM
Sorry, but they did break the Truenamer, its here (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=614007) under "The UBER Truenamer". It required item familiar cheese, Leadership cheese, and every generic skill boosting item in the game, but they got the Truespeak check over 100.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-16, 01:03 PM
I can't possibly imagine how a Ninja actually was proposed for the second most overpowered class...

But they can liek totally flip out and kil ppl! And thats wat I call RAEL ULTIMAET PWOER!!!

arguskos
2008-12-16, 01:03 PM
But they can liek totally flip out and kil ppl! And thats wat I call RAEL ULTIMAET PWOER!!!
This makes me laugh and cry at the same time. I hope you're happy with yourself.:smallwink:

Reinforcements
2008-12-16, 01:17 PM
Ah, found it (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=968062). That's the one I was thinking of.
Interesting. You really can't count the NPC classes, though, since they all got so few responses. I mean, the monk, healer, spellthief, truenamer, soulknife, and samurai all SUCK, but they're not less powerful than the adept. Look at that list, though. They all fail for very specific and obvious reasons - the healer only, well, heals, the monk's abilities are all over the place, and the spellthief, truenamer, and soul knife all have unique mechanics that didn't work out - except the samurai. The samurai shouldn't even be a class. What the hell, samurai?

Also, I want to point out that you don't have these issues in 4e. <_< >_>

BobVosh
2008-12-16, 01:26 PM
This is so wrong :(

Apart from the obvious 1. Cleric 2. Wizard 3. Artificer 4. Druid 5. Archivist list, I can't possibly imagine how a Ninja actually was proposed for the second most overpowered class...

Read this...and you will understand the power of NINJAS! (http://drmcninja.com/page.php?issue=2)

Aneantir
2008-12-16, 01:31 PM
Warblade. d12 HD, full BAB, can use a fresh set of maneuvers every encounter. Depending on the maneuvers chosen he can actually attack two opponents as a standard action at Lv 1 (at no penalty), which is something no other melee class can do. Just like Barbarian, it isn't proficient with heavy armor. With the mooks at level 1, I don't think the extra damage matters so much, honestly.

I'd say Crusader, actually. d10 hit dice, full BAB, good fort save, delayed damage pool, heals himself when he hits other people in the face. As far as level 1 survivability goes, Crusader is second to none in my books, if only because of that time I got hit for 23 damage at level 1 in one round and lived to tell the tale.

Immutep
2008-12-16, 02:20 PM
Level one, PHB only, I'd say barbarian. Minimum damage on a hit in excess in the expected hitpoints of all other classes.

I mean - the superoptimizers will have their own funny ideas, but instagib of all opponents must account for something.

SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You're not supposed to tell people about it! Let the wizards think they're what holds the adventures together, otherwise they'll go off on their own in a huff and get caught out without their tanks!

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-16, 02:32 PM
Sorry, but they did break the Truenamer, its here (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=614007) under "The UBER Truenamer". It required item familiar cheese, Leadership cheese, and every generic skill boosting item in the game, but they got the Truespeak check over 100.Dang it. I've been making one of those in my spare time, and now I find out it's been done already? I'll still post mine when I finish it, but that takes some of the fun out of breaking the unbreakable class.

HolderofSecrets
2008-12-16, 02:49 PM
What the hell? The Big Five have already been listed and this thread is still going. Appearently the ones still argueing otherwise have never Optimized in there lives. I am glad to hear that some of you aren't completely burned out on D&D because of the Horrors that over took the WotC Forums a while back.

The sad part is even when not optimized yet still played corrently the Big Five still out match every other class in the game. Heres a quick Description of what these classes are like unoptimized.

Wizard - I can bend reality with a snap of my fingers.
Cleric - My God allows me to bend Reality in a more limited manner but I get to wear armor and can probably Heal anyone I want.
Druid - Beware the Land gives me power and fluffy here will bite you.
Artificer - What spell list are you talking about, no its not on my spell list but I do have a scroll or wand or staff of it here somewhere.
Archivists - Beware I cast spells like a wizard but from the clerics and druids spell lists.

I even put them in the order there power comes in. Now optimized its another story because there power changes a bit depending on how they are optimized. I will list some quick descriptions on how they can be optimized.

Archivist - I can cast any and all Divine spells and picked up turn undead from a PrC for use with Divine Metamagic. I am now taking bets on how long it takes me to make the DM cry.

Artificer - No I am not only game breaking, I made the entire party Game Breaking powerful. Now if you give me all the useless Magical loot you have I can make you an awesome set of armor and maybe a pretty good weapon too.

Cleric - Divine MetaMagic is my bread and butter. What else do I need I can either quicken any spell I ever need or I can Persist a few buffs every day.

Druid - I know I can cast Frostfell as a Dire Polar Bear and summon alsorts of things but I still don't have Divine MetaMagic.

Wizard - Even my Farts bend reality but those other guys worry me.

Thats also how the power breaks down. If you really want to know how all that works go over to the WotC boards and ask them. I am sure an expert can tell you how it all works. Though someone here could probably inform you as well. I am too interested in playing to game for the fun of it and only use enough power to stay alive. Now for my Sanity's sake never ask that question again.

Immutep
2008-12-16, 03:51 PM
I am too interested in playing to game for the fun of it and only use enough power to stay alive. Now for my Sanity's sake never ask that question again.

If only everyone thought as you do.

AslanCross
2008-12-16, 04:28 PM
I would assume it was a response to arguskos, who brought up the Knight and thus moved outside core.

Yes, that was the idea.

In the end, though, I don't consider Warblade or Barbarian to be overpowered. They're pretty strong, yes, but not overpowering. The Barbarian will get worn down. The Warblade will get worn down. And don't even speak of flying creatures at level 1.

KIDS
2008-12-16, 04:36 PM
That Ninja comic totally rocks! Thanks, BobVosh :)

chiasaur11
2008-12-16, 05:12 PM
Read this...and you will understand the power of NINJAS! (http://drmcninja.com/page.php?issue=2)

I think issues 4-8 work even better for that job.

If ninjas were more like that, the PHB would be labeled "Ninjas! and maybe some other stuff, but trust me, you want to be a ninja.

Philistine
2008-12-16, 06:36 PM
Wizard casting Color Spray has a greater chance of any CR 1 creature or character failing the save then the Barbarian does of hitting AC.

If one shotting is important, you want to be a Wizard.

Sure... a couple of times a day. A Specialist Wizard with 20 Int (18 base +2 racial) gets four Level 1 spells per day - that's one Color Spray per encounter in the standard four-encounter day. If one or more opponents do make their saves, and the Wizard has to use more spell slots on a single encounter, then he's looking at facing the last encounter(s) of the day without his big guns; at level 1 he can't just Rope Trick out for eight hours whenever he needs a break. The Barbarian, on the other hand - or any other physical attacker - may have a lesser chance of hitting with each attack, but he can keep making attacks until he's killed or disabled.

Wizards are powerful, yes; but not overwhelmingly so at level 1. Overstating your case does not make it stronger.

Aneantir
2008-12-16, 06:50 PM
Sure... a couple of times a day. A Specialist Wizard with 20 Int (18 base +2 racial) gets four Level 1 spells per day - that's one Color Spray per encounter in the standard four-encounter day. If one or more opponents do make their saves, and the Wizard has to use more spell slots on a single encounter, then he's looking at facing the last encounter(s) of the day without his big guns; at level 1 he can't just Rope Trick out for eight hours whenever he needs a break. The Barbarian, on the other hand - or any other physical attacker - may have a lesser chance of hitting with each attack, but he can keep making attacks until he's killed or disabled.

Wizards are powerful, yes; but not overwhelmingly so at level 1. Overstating your case does not make it stronger.

Well, if this is non-core, you could also have the Wizard take the focused specialiast variant, bringing it up to 6 castings per day. Significant increase at those levels, giving you something to fall back on if the initial casting fails.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-16, 07:59 PM
Well, if this is non-core, you could also have the Wizard take the focused specialiast variant, bringing it up to 6 castings per day. Significant increase at those levels, giving you something to fall back on if the initial casting fails.Not even mentioning Precocious Apprentice, or, even better, Precocious Apprentice+Reserve Feat. :smallbiggrin:

Blood_Lord
2008-12-16, 08:21 PM
Sure... a couple of times a day. A Specialist Wizard with 20 Int (18 base +2 racial) gets four Level 1 spells per day - that's one Color Spray per encounter in the standard four-encounter day. If one or more opponents do make their saves, and the Wizard has to use more spell slots on a single encounter, then he's looking at facing the last encounter(s) of the day without his big guns; at level 1 he can't just Rope Trick out for eight hours whenever he needs a break. The Barbarian, on the other hand - or any other physical attacker - may have a lesser chance of hitting with each attack, but he can keep making attacks until he's killed or disabled.

Wizards are powerful, yes; but not overwhelmingly so at level 1. Overstating your case does not make it stronger.

Except 1) So what, I'm just pointing out how stupid it is to measure power in who can one shot who, since at level 1 the answer is everyone everyone.

2) If they make their saves, then they can kill him in a round. Similarly, if the Barbarian misses his attack, they can kill him in one round.

3) No one said the Wizard was alone, he could have a Druid, a Cleric, and a Wizard also in the party, to kill it.

4) I never claimed that Wizards are overwhelmingly powerful (though they are) I pointed out that a Wizard is better at the criteria used to praise Barbarians then Barbarians are.

Zen Master
2008-12-17, 04:42 AM
Except 1) So what, I'm just pointing out how stupid it is to measure power in who can one shot who, since at level 1 the answer is everyone everyone.

2) If they make their saves, then they can kill him in a round. Similarly, if the Barbarian misses his attack, they can kill him in one round.

3) No one said the Wizard was alone, he could have a Druid, a Cleric, and a Wizard also in the party, to kill it.

4) I never claimed that Wizards are overwhelmingly powerful (though they are) I pointed out that a Wizard is better at the criteria used to praise Barbarians then Barbarians are.

Looking at it this way, it just gets bogged down in who has initiative, who can possibly gain surprise, can the barbarian interrupt the wizards casting, and so on and so forth.

The barbarian can easily one-shot a 2 or 3 hitdice monster - and that is something the level 1 wizard is very hard pressed to do. His feeble coup de grace will only wake the monster, and end his life.

The barbarian is very much a one-trick pony - but it really IS a powerful trick. Much more so than the wizards.

Of course all that changes with the introduction of splatbook nonsense. But then I never claimed any different.

Muad'dib
2008-12-17, 05:05 AM
Looking at it this way, it just gets bogged down in who has initiative, who can possibly gain surprise, can the barbarian interrupt the wizards casting, and so on and so forth.

The barbarian can easily one-shot a 2 or 3 hitdice monster - and that is something the level 1 wizard is very hard pressed to do. His feeble coup de grace will only wake the monster, and end his life.

The barbarian is very much a one-trick pony - but it really IS a powerful trick. Much more so than the wizards.

Of course all that changes with the introduction of splatbook nonsense. But then I never claimed any different.

How does one shotting a mob if you hit on a charge trump one shotting multiple mobs if they fail their weak save from a distance?

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-17, 08:35 AM
Looking at it this way, it just gets bogged down in who has initiative, who can possibly gain surprise, can the barbarian interrupt the wizards casting, and so on and so forth.

The barbarian can easily one-shot a 2 or 3 hitdice monster - and that is something the level 1 wizard is very hard pressed to do. His feeble coup de grace will only wake the monster, and end his life.

The barbarian is very much a one-trick pony - but it really IS a powerful trick. Much more so than the wizards.

Of course all that changes with the introduction of splatbook nonsense. But then I never claimed any different.

Scythe Coup>>>>Dagger. The Wizard would carry a scythe for use with Sleep and Color Spray, as 4(2d4+Str) is better than 2(1d4+Str).

kamikasei
2008-12-17, 08:41 AM
Scythe Coup>>>>Dagger. The Wizard would carry a scythe for use with Sleep and Color Spray, as 4(2d4+Str) is better than 2(1d4+Str).

I don't know, this is one of those bits of optimization advice that have always struck me as fairly ridiculous. By no means would every wizard carry a scythe around to coup-de-grace fallen foes; scythes are big and bulky and not very wizardly. Granted, it's a failure of the system that you need a scythe because you can't reliably cut someone's throat with a dagger after rendering them unconscious...

woodenbandman
2008-12-17, 08:54 AM
I'll throw in Warmage, Erudite, Beguiler, and Dread Necro.

Those 3 are powerful because they can get the entire cleric spell list at will via the lovely Rainbow Servant prestige class. Without that they suck hard.

Note I said that those 3 referring to beguiler, warmage, and dread necro are powerful because of the rainbow servant prestige class. This is because said class grants them the entire cleric spell list at will. So, in reality, they're actually better than clerics, because they can easily pick up turn undead and rock out at will. This is only at levels 17 plus, though.

Oslecamo
2008-12-17, 09:02 AM
I don't know, this is one of those bits of optimization advice that have always struck me as fairly ridiculous. By no means would every wizard carry a scythe around to coup-de-grace fallen foes; scythes are big and bulky and not very wizardly. Granted, it's a failure of the system that you need a scythe because you can't reliably cut someone's throat with a dagger after rendering them unconscious...

Except that cuting someone's throat doesn't instantly kills them. It just makes them bleed to death, wich stills takes some time.

Now slicing someone's head with a scythe, that's probably instant kill.

Inhuman Bot
2008-12-17, 09:28 AM
Didn't we have one for Monks too?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704

Zen Master
2008-12-17, 09:34 AM
How does one shotting a mob if you hit on a charge trump one shotting multiple mobs if they fail their weak save from a distance?

Did I say that? Well - let me hone the razor edge of my argument then.

This is what I intend to say:

Yes, colorspray is potentially powerful. However ...

It can be interupted. It can be saved. It can - barring the scythe thing which is so hideously cheesy it honestly hadn't occurred to me - be survived.

And at any rate, so what? Color spray can be powerful. So can the barbarian charge. And the barbarian charge works - always. Color spray also works, it's a question of what it takes to impress you. But at level 1, you'll not get me to agree with you that wizards are overpowered. They are pathetically fragile. Barbarians have a weakness - will save - but are otherwise horrendous powerhouses.

KIDS
2008-12-17, 09:35 AM
I agree that Scythe coup-de-gracing-wizards are kinda ridiculous. It's a piece of theorethical optimization that would probably get chairs flung at you over the gaming table if it ever saw reality.

On the other hand, a dagger crit with minimal rolls still produces a solid DC, and you can always use a crossbow (or if an elf, bow) for 2d8 or 3d8 increase to the DC and a lot of dmg.

Muad'dib
2008-12-17, 10:09 AM
I agree that Scythe coup-de-gracing-wizards are kinda ridiculous. It's a piece of theorethical optimization that would probably get chairs flung at you over the gaming table if it ever saw reality.

On the other hand, a dagger crit with minimal rolls still produces a solid DC, and you can always use a crossbow (or if an elf, bow) for 2d8 or 3d8 increase to the DC and a lot of dmg.

Why? People use weapons they're not proficient with all the time in all sorts of fantasy media, what makes it impossible to swallow for DnD? We're talking about the geniuses of every DnD setting here. There are few people more likely to understand the working of the universe than wizards, so how is it so out of place for a wizard to realize he'd probably have an easier time killing that unconscious baddy over there with a scythe than with a dagger?

Muad'dib
2008-12-17, 10:17 AM
Did I say that? Well - let me hone the razor edge of my argument then.

This is what I intend to say:

Yes, colorspray is potentially powerful. However ...

It can be interupted. It can be saved. It can - barring the scythe thing which is so hideously cheesy it honestly hadn't occurred to me - be survived.

Concentration DCs are pathetically easy and scythes make sense, remember wizards are generally smarter than everyone.


And at any rate, so what? Color spray can be powerful. So can the barbarian charge. And the barbarian charge works - always. Color spray also works, it's a question of what it takes to impress you. But at level 1, you'll not get me to agree with you that wizards are overpowered. They are pathetically fragile. Barbarians have a weakness - will save - but are otherwise horrendous powerhouses.

Barbarians have no range. Their charge tactic gets destroyed by difficult terrain. Flight stops all hope of charging working. And reach can stop a charging barb in his tracks with one well placed combat maneuver. Charging is only overpowered when all encounters take place in flat featureless planes. Wizards have the benefit of range, flexibility and aoes even at first level, which means they don't care if they're fragile, because they don't need to be up in your face to stop you in your tracks. A well played wizard, in level appropriate encounters, against opponents that actually use terrain to their advantage, has a great advantage over barbarians due to the flexibility of his strategy and the range afforded by his spells.

Trizap
2008-12-17, 10:30 AM
y'know, the name "wizard" is such a misnomer, I always thought WoTC
should rename it "reality warper"

also I'm surprised everyone forgot Pun-Pun.

kamikasei
2008-12-17, 10:30 AM
Why? People use weapons they're not proficient with all the time in all sorts of fantasy media, what makes it impossible to swallow for DnD? We're talking about the geniuses of every DnD setting here. There are few people more likely to understand the working of the universe than wizards, so how is it so out of place for a wizard to realize he'd probably have an easier time killing that unconscious baddy over there with a scythe than with a dagger?

I'm going to channel Matthew.

- Yes, within the game rules a wizard would be well served to carry a scythe to deliver killing blows.
- However, it is visually and thematically ridiculous for a wizard to be carting around a big honking scythe - it might work for one character, but shouldn't be standard. It is simply not how wizards should be - carrying around a farming implement as large as they are, just to follow through on their subtle mental magics? The idea of what wizards should be, and the game-mechanical fact of how hit points and weapons work, are conflicting.
- This is a flaw in the game. We should not bow to it but work around it. Ideally, we do that by coming up with a good houserule for how dispatching helpless foes should work. If you can render someone unconscious with a word, you should be able to finish with a knife.

Oslecamo
2008-12-17, 10:32 AM
A well played wizard, in level appropriate encounters, against opponents that actually use terrain to their advantage, has a great advantage over barbarians due to the flexibility of his strategy and the range afforded by his spells.

Untill those kobolds pull out those crossbows and peper the low AC low HP wizard with arrows, while the barbarian has the endurance and AC to take some shots and then close in for the kill.

Heck, the barbarian also has jump as class skill and the skill points to take it to jump over obstacles and get to them.

Plus color spray has a very short range. If the enemy is out of melee reach, he can just as easily get behind color spray reach, and then it's time for the barbarian to pull out his javelins.

Eldariel
2008-12-17, 10:57 AM
- However, it is visually and thematically ridiculous for a wizard to be carting around a big honking scythe - it might work for one character, but shouldn't be standard. It is simply not how wizards should be - carrying around a farming implement as large as they are, just to follow through on their subtle mental magics? The idea of what wizards should be, and the game-mechanical fact of how hit points and weapons work, are conflicting.

My first Wizard was a clear Death-impersonation and did just fine in that regard. I coulda called him Magus, I guess. I did take the proficiency though. But Wizard already has the black robes. Adding a scythe just adds to the impression. Bonemask is a bonus.

kamikasei
2008-12-17, 11:02 AM
My first Wizard was a clear Death-impersonation and did just fine in that regard. I coulda called him Magus, I guess. I did take the proficiency though. But Wizard already has the black robes. Adding a scythe just adds to the impression. Bonemask is a bonus.

"It might work for one character, but shouldn't be standard".

Do you think all wizards should be played like this character?

Eldariel
2008-12-17, 11:03 AM
"It might work for one character, but shouldn't be standard".

Do you think all wizards should be played like this character?

It's definitely available for more than one character :P

kamikasei
2008-12-17, 11:11 AM
It's definitely available for more than one character :P

...

If you're willing to say that the "carry a scythe to deliver coup-de-grace" tactic should not be a standard trick employed by all wizards, but only something done by death-themed wizards pulling a grim reaper impersonation, I have no argument with that.

If you're saying that the fact that you played one character for whom the tactic is thematically justified, and that the same justification could be copied by others, means that it's a perfectly reasonable standard trick for any wizard to use regardless of his style or character, then I don't think you're being serious, so I won't bother arguing with that.

Zen Master
2008-12-17, 12:26 PM
Concentration DCs are pathetically easy and scythes make sense, remember wizards are generally smarter than everyone.

No. Just no. You may want to justify it by any means possible - but no one drags a large farm implement around for the purpose of slaughtering unconcious enemies. Nuff said.


Barbarians have no range. Their charge tactic gets destroyed by difficult terrain. Flight stops all hope of charging working. And reach can stop a charging barb in his tracks with one well placed combat maneuver. Charging is only overpowered when all encounters take place in flat featureless planes. Wizards have the benefit of range, flexibility and aoes even at first level, which means they don't care if they're fragile, because they don't need to be up in your face to stop you in your tracks. A well played wizard, in level appropriate encounters, against opponents that actually use terrain to their advantage, has a great advantage over barbarians due to the flexibility of his strategy and the range afforded by his spells.

Most of your objections are entirely irrelevant for the level in question, and I can dish out a similar list of objections for why wizards have loads of limitations - but as I stated in an earlier post, I'm not going to. I'm sure you can make your own, if you want one.

Wizards, as I have already affirmed, have advantages in certain sets of circumstances. Barbarians have in others. But five single hitdie critters played with any sense will splatter your powerful wizard, while my barbarian will splatter them.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 12:54 PM
1) Kobolds can't even hit the Wizard. The Wizard can kill one Kobold a round at no cost of spells, or several in one round using a spell, better then the Barbarian.

2) Yes, Wizard's can carry around scythes. Yes it makes sense. Seriously, you people need to have a definition of cheese that doesn't include every important module NPC ever made.

3) Stop with the weird arguments, it's not a farm implement, it is a weapon best suited to killing an unconscious foe. It's a freaking Martial Weapon for god sakes. Not a Farm implement.

Eldariel
2008-12-17, 01:42 PM
then I don't think you're being serious, so I won't bother arguing with that.

Yes indeed.

Oslecamo
2008-12-17, 02:31 PM
1) Kobolds can't even hit the Wizard. The Wizard can kill one Kobold a round at no cost of spells, or several in one round using a spell, better then the Barbarian.


It's level one. No invisibility/blink/polymorph or even alter self. The wizard himself has three lv 1 spells per day, tops- Crossbows have 80 feet range and kobolds warriors have +3 to hit, minimum. Wizard probably has 13 AC.

So how exactly is the wizard avoiding the kobold arrows?

kamikasei
2008-12-17, 02:38 PM
2) Yes, Wizard's can carry around scythes. Yes it makes sense. Seriously, you people need to have a definition of cheese that doesn't include every important module NPC ever made.

3) Stop with the weird arguments, it's not a farm implement, it is a weapon best suited to killing an unconscious foe. It's a freaking Martial Weapon for god sakes. Not a Farm implement.

I never called it cheese, I said it was absurd. Wearing a turnip as a hat is absurd, but unless CharOp has spawned some new horror it's hardly cheesy.

And of course it's a farm implement. It's a farm implement that can be weaponized, but it is a farm implement. Granted, the scythe you'd buy as a weapon probably wouldn't be much use on the farm, but...

HolderofSecrets
2008-12-17, 02:43 PM
It's level one. No invisibility/blink/polymorph or even alter self. The wizard himself has three lv 1 spells per day, tops- Crossbows have 80 feet range and kobolds warriors have +3 to hit, minimum. Wizard probably has 13 AC.

So how exactly is the wizard avoiding the kobold arrows?

The wizard gets cover from hiding behind the Huge Barbarian.

Artanis
2008-12-17, 02:43 PM
I never called it cheese, I said it was absurd. Wearing a turnip as a hat is absurd, but unless CharOp has spawned some new horror it's hardly cheesy.
There has to be some way of abusing a hat that you can squeeze blood out of :smalltongue:

Zen Master
2008-12-17, 03:43 PM
1) Kobolds can't even hit the Wizard. The Wizard can kill one Kobold a round at no cost of spells, or several in one round using a spell, better then the Barbarian.

2) Yes, Wizard's can carry around scythes. Yes it makes sense. Seriously, you people need to have a definition of cheese that doesn't include every important module NPC ever made.

3) Stop with the weird arguments, it's not a farm implement, it is a weapon best suited to killing an unconscious foe. It's a freaking Martial Weapon for god sakes. Not a Farm implement.

1) Show me where I mentioned kobolds? Also, sure they can hit him, he'll be something akin to AC 15-18 at best, and they are pretty handy with agility based weapons. No sweat at all.

2) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scythe - it's a farm implement. No one in the history of the world has EVER used a scythe for a weapon if they had anything else to hand. Your clever wizard should know this - and abusable game mechanics be damned!

3) Oh - they can. It's possible. A skinny, feeble, bookish wizard may well decide the thing he needs the most on his travels is a large and heavy ****** harvest tool. But it's cheesy, lame, idiotic in every way - and no argument you can conjure up will change that.

But I'm doing what I've stated twice I will not do. Any argument you can come up with, I can counter - and vice-versa. You want to, you insist on playing that way. Ok fine. Do so. I insist on not playing that way.

For what it's worth, I don't mind - long as I don't get invited. But making the game work the way you want *requires* you to seek out flaws in the game.

I can play just to have fun with friends.

(edit: Oh - swap 2 and 3 for more sense)

Voyager_I
2008-12-17, 04:22 PM
I'm gonna say Monks. Definitely Monks. And you might have been referring to the guide in my signature, too.

Low-level Wizards are powerful, and capable of ending small encounters with a single spell. However, they can't yet do so reliably, have serious issues with stamina, and cannot adequately defend themselves. In other words, everyone's pretty well balanced until you start hitting mid-ish levels, unless somebody's really trying to mess up your campaign.

PS: RIP to Solo and Love, who have apparently been banned while I was on hiatus.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 04:35 PM
It's level one. No invisibility/blink/polymorph or even alter self. The wizard himself has three lv 1 spells per day, tops- Crossbows have 80 feet range and kobolds warriors have +3 to hit, minimum. Wizard probably has 13 AC.

So how exactly is the wizard avoiding the kobold arrows?

Well first he could not have the minimum AC, secondly he could use his Crossbow and higher attack bonus to kill the 2 hp Kobolds at 1 a round, Yes, against the worst possible encounter for a level 1 Wizard, he can still contribute as much to the party as a Barbarian. Can we please stop pretending this is a solo game?


I never called it cheese, I said it was absurd. Wearing a turnip as a hat is absurd, but unless CharOp has spawned some new horror it's hardly cheesy.

And of course it's a farm implement. It's a farm implement that can be weaponized, but it is a farm implement. Granted, the scythe you'd buy as a weapon probably wouldn't be much use on the farm, but...

1) They were general points directed at different people. Other people did call it cheese, and I am decrying their definition of cheese.

2) You are confusing D&D with the real world. It's a Martial Weapon used by Crit Fetish characters. It's a Martial Weapon, a Weapon used in a military form by people who's job is chopping people's head off. It's a weapon based on a farm implement, but it is a weapon, and not a farm implement.


1) Show me where I mentioned kobolds? Also, sure they can hit him, he'll be something akin to AC 15-18 at best, and they are pretty handy with agility based weapons. No sweat at all.

They were general comments at everyone in the thread, Kobolds was a reference to the people talking about Kobolds.

They can indeed hit him on a 12-15 (or higher), but in the mean time, he's used his higher attack bonus to kill some of them.


2) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scythe - it's a farm implement. No one in the history of the world has EVER used a scythe for a weapon if they had anything else to hand. Your clever wizard should know this - and abusable game mechanics be damned!

You are confusing the real world with D&D. In D&D, martial weapons are weapons, not farm implements. No one in the entire history of the world has cast a spell that puts enemies to sleep with a colorful burst of light either.

A clever Wizard will know that it is very common for people to use Scythes as weapons, and that it is the most oft used weapon for executions because of the increased chance of a clean kill.


3) Oh - they can. It's possible. A skinny, feeble, bookish wizard may well decide the thing he needs the most on his travels is a large and heavy ****** harvest tool. But it's cheesy, lame, idiotic in every way - and no argument you can conjure up will change that.

The thing he will decide is that when presented with a chance to kill things that are sleeping in front of him, he should choose the weapons best known for efficiently killing helpless creatures. And Scythes are that weapon.

Zen Master
2008-12-17, 04:50 PM
The thing he will decide is that when presented with a chance to kill things that are sleeping in front of him, he should choose the weapons best known for efficiently killing helpless creatures. And Scythes are that weapon.

Are you aware of what I'm telling you?

I'll repeat the important parts of my previous post, for added clarity:

I will not argue in this way.

You will play the game in the way you desire. I consider you to wilfully be in occlusion of the obvious - and you likely thing the same of me. This is fine.

Further: Farm implements were never used for weapons because they are impractical in that function. That some game designer included them for style reasons, and gave them anything but abysmally poor stats isn't my problem, and not anythign I ever have to contend with.

Also, for the purposes of deciding that class is most overpowered, this is, indeed, a solo game. Relying on others is not overpowered.

Yukitsu
2008-12-17, 04:54 PM
I ran a solo wizard from 1 to 6 (at 6 I broke the game to the point of rendering the rest moot) by clever use of items and low level spells. They can indeed hack it at low levels.

Kris Strife
2008-12-17, 04:58 PM
Whatever Tippy happens to be playing at the moment.

Oslecamo
2008-12-17, 05:01 PM
I ran a solo wizard from 1 to 6 (at 6 I broke the game to the point of rendering the rest moot) by clever use of items and low level spells. They can indeed hack it at low levels.

Sooo, you played a joker monk? Please, even a commoner could have done that:smalltongue:

Aneantir
2008-12-17, 05:03 PM
Sooo, you played a joker monk? Please, even a commoner could have done that:smalltongue:

Of course he didn't play a joker monk. Wizards can actually use said magic items reliably.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 05:05 PM
Further: Farm implements were never used for weapons because they are impractical in that function. That some game designer included them for style reasons, and gave them anything but abysmally poor stats isn't my problem, and not anythign I ever have to contend with.

It is your problem if you have any intention of the world modeling the rules. So either you have to change the stats for Scythes, or you have to accept that Scythes are the best Execution weapons, and people who intend to do a lot of executing are going to have them.

Godna
2008-12-17, 05:06 PM
1. The Secret Bonus Base Class*
2. DMPC's
* Now that 4e is out, I can tell you how to get the SBBC. Get a brand new copy of the PHB, now, read each page at a time, spending approx 1 minute per page until page 16, at which point you MUST go and get a sandwhich. Now, while eating your sandwhich, go to the following pages in this order, 14, 72, 23,01, 21. After reading page 21 in full, finish your sandwhich. Now, roll a D20 until you get a prime number. Add the number of rolls you made to the prime number and open the PHB to that page. There you will find the Secret Bonus Base Class (AKA, Knight of Gygax), it has Heavy Armor Proficiency, Proficiency with all weapons, Monk saves, a Druids animal companion, fighter bonus feats, sneak attack, Full Spontaneous Arcane Casting (without ASF and accsess to all spells on the sor/wiz spell list), Full Divine Casting (Spontaneous, accsess to entire list), and D20 HD. That page also has a sidebar which describes a simplified Grapple system.


That would be worth doing strictly for the simplified grapple system

DM Raven
2008-12-17, 05:18 PM
1) Wizard
2) Cleric
3) Druid

At high level, everything else is just fluff.

Yukitsu
2008-12-17, 05:31 PM
Sooo, you played a joker monk? Please, even a commoner could have done that:smalltongue:

Nah, the wizard had to use much more mundane things, and then capitolize on magical resources resources. A monk would have been broke before I got half the gear I needed if you include spells cast. For instance, casting unseen servant, giving it a ball with a particularly rank blanket over it, and a torch to carry will trick about 80% of the not very intelligent monsters that frequintly occur at level 1. He gets ambushed, you throw alchemy at whatever it is until it dies, and continue on your merry way. A monk would average 100 GP per encounter, simply because he can't craft his own stuff.

BillyJimBoBob
2008-12-17, 07:35 PM
1) Fighter
2) Ranger

All other classes are equally inferior to those two.


:smallwink::smallwink::smallwink:

Kurald Galain
2008-12-17, 07:38 PM
Whether or not a scythe is cheesy is up to personal taste, but it is definitely metagaming for a wizard to carry one (barring the rare death-obsessed necromancer).

That is because it is (for most wizards) impossible to explain in character why they're carrying it, and that is because the "killing sleeping people" rule is based on mechanics rather than reality. In real life, it's easier to kill a sleeping person with a knife than with a big honking scythe. Go ahead, google up statistics on knife murders and on scythe murders. Which do you think happens more often?

chiasaur11
2008-12-17, 07:38 PM
1) Fighter
2) Ranger

All other classes are equally inferior to those two.


:smallwink::smallwink::smallwink:

Lies and slander against the greatness of truenamers, and we both know it.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 07:48 PM
Whether or not a scythe is cheesy is up to personal taste, but it is definitely metagaming for a wizard to carry one (barring the rare death-obsessed necromancer).

That is because it is (for most wizards) impossible to explain in character why they're carrying it, and that is because the "killing sleeping people" rule is based on mechanics rather than reality. In real life, it's easier to kill a sleeping person with a knife than with a big honking scythe. Go ahead, google up statistics on knife murders and on scythe murders. Which do you think happens more often?

You are confusing reality with the game as well.

It's very easy to to explain why they are carrying it, "I (the character) am carrying it because it is the best weapon for executing helpless people (as is common knowledge to all adventurers/executioners/ect. in the game world)."

In the D&D verse your character grew up in, Scythes are easier to kill helpless people with, and are known for that.

It takes metagaming to claim that daggers are easier to kill sleeping people with, because while that may be true outside the game, people in the game only know that Scythes are the best at it.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-17, 07:51 PM
It's very easy to to explain why they are carrying it, "I am carrying it because it is the best weapon for executing helpless people."
That's metagaming.


In the D&D verse your character grew up in, Scythes are easier to kill helpless people with, and are known for that.
That's also metagaming.

In both cases you're basing a decision upon the game rules, rather than upon in-world logic. Hence, meta.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 07:51 PM
That's metagaming.


That's also metagaming.

In both cases you're basing a decision upon the game rules, rather than upon in-world logic. Hence, meta.

No, it's based on in world logic, in the D&D world, Scythes are better killers, and everyone in the world would know that.

Grimholdt
2008-12-17, 08:00 PM
No, it's based on in world logic, in the D&D world, Scythes are better killers, and everyone in the world would know that.

Even accepting your slightly twisted logic, you're going to get some odd looks from the NPCs in your world if you go around saying scythes are REALLY GOOD at slicing off the heads of helpless people.

True perhaps, but from an RP standpoint it makes you crazy.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-17, 08:02 PM
No, it's based on in world logic, in the D&D world, Scythes are better killers, and everyone in the world would know that.

Only if everybody in the world were aware of the rules by which the world works, which means that everybody in the world was metagaming.

Artanis
2008-12-17, 08:14 PM
Only if everybody in the world were aware of the rules by which the world works, which means that everybody in the world was metagaming.
That's not true. If scythes are the best weapons for killing sleeping people, then the people in the world will see that with their own eyes. They don't need to know the rules because they will see scythes doing a better job than knives. When they see that something is the case, when EVERYBODY sees that something is the case, then how is it metagaming to state what they see with their own two eyes?

HolderofSecrets
2008-12-17, 08:30 PM
No, it's based on in world logic, in the D&D world, Scythes are better killers, and everyone in the world would know that.

Your building the character instead of playing the character. Your reason would only work when your character is some form of Evil or maybe Chaotic Neutral. Now if your character was a necromancer or wears a black hooded Robe then they could claim that "I thought it completed the look". Which might come off as your character having style instead of you playing off the mechanics of the weapon.

Kroy
2008-12-17, 08:32 PM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704

Good times, good times. I believe that thread got a lot of people banned (just look at the first four posters after the OP!).

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-17, 09:01 PM
Your building the character instead of playing the character. Your reason would only work when your character is some form of Evil or maybe Chaotic Neutral. Now if your character was a necromancer or wears a black hooded Robe then they could claim that "I thought it completed the look". Which might come off as your character having style instead of you playing off the mechanics of the weapon.

Uhh, WRONG. Unless I'm mistaken, no weapon in the PHB equipment section has alignment requirements. As such, your response requires more metagaming. If you said that to me, in game my character would reply something along the lines of "where is this 'America', and why should I care what they think about scythes".

HolderofSecrets
2008-12-17, 09:18 PM
Uhh, WRONG. Unless I'm mistaken, no weapon in the PHB equipment section has alignment requirements. As such, your response requires more metagaming. If you said that to me, in game my character would reply something along the lines of "where is this 'America', and why should I care what they think about scythes".

I am fairly certain you read what I posted wrong. My reasoning had nothing to do with the mechanics of the game other then that his characters reasoning for having the weapon would only work well with those alignments. I also finished off my statement by adding some other possibly excuses completely unrelated to the mechanics of the game for him having the weapon. I have nothing against him using the weapon even as a low level wizard and if I was his DM I would of given him the same advice I gave him before in game and recommend he roleplays his character in that direction unless he wants to play the son of a farmer which would also work as a reason for having the weapon.

OneFamiliarFace
2008-12-17, 09:22 PM
When they see that something is the case, when EVERYBODY sees that something is the case, then how is it metagaming to state what they see with their own two eyes?

This would require a lot of experimentation in cutting people's heads off with scythes. What you're talking about here would require at least 23+ people each in an experiment group (scythe) and a control group (dagger). Then you would have to measure the results and use complicated statistical analyses, and you might see a statistically significant difference. Or, if they didn't want to get scientific, they would at least have to attempt to kill two people of equal fortitude (one with a knife, one with a scythe) and judge for themselves.

I might also add that if people know that much about the game world, then they would use greataxes, and not picks, for mining, since picks can't even overcome the Hardness of most rock. That one is even easier with your own two eyes, because picks pretty much never work, unless you have a 2-hand pick and a strength of 16+, in which case, it works in about 1 out of 8 times to make a tiny nick on the surface.

Draco Dracul
2008-12-17, 09:39 PM
Whether or not a scythe is cheesy is up to personal taste, but it is definitely metagaming for a wizard to carry one (barring the rare death-obsessed necromancer).

That is because it is (for most wizards) impossible to explain in character why they're carrying it, and that is because the "killing sleeping people" rule is based on mechanics rather than reality. In real life, it's easier to kill a sleeping person with a knife than with a big honking scythe. Go ahead, google up statistics on knife murders and on scythe murders. Which do you think happens more often?

My father was a farmer who grew the best grain in the land and this was his lucky scythe.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-17, 09:58 PM
I am fairly certain you read what I posted wrong. My reasoning had nothing to do with the mechanics of the game other then that his characters reasoning for having the weapon would only work well with those alignments. I also finished off my statement by adding some other possibly excuses completely unrelated to the mechanics of the game for him having the weapon. I have nothing against him using the weapon even as a low level wizard and if I was his DM I would of given him the same advice I gave him before in game and recommend he roleplays his character in that direction unless he wants to play the son of a farmer which would also work as a reason for having the weapon.

And why would you object to my character being intelligent and havign the motivation:

"I would intend to have the weapon known for being the best at killing helpless people."

I mean, ask anyone with Martial Weapon Proficiency and they will tell you, oh yeah, this one is the best for that job.

Severedevil
2008-12-17, 10:14 PM
It's certainly not metagaming to know that a scythe is devastating against helpless opponents. You could just look at it. (Or ask someone who would know, as Blood_Lord suggested.)

However, I don't think a nonproficient weapon is legitimate for a coup de grace. Unless your wizard knows how to use the scythe, I wouldn't let him know how to use it perfectly when the opponent is down.

tyckspoon
2008-12-17, 10:29 PM
It's certainly not metagaming to know that a scythe is devastating against helpless opponents. You could just look at it. (Or ask someone who would know, as Blood_Lord suggested.)

However, I don't think a nonproficient weapon is legitimate for a coup de grace. Unless your wizard knows how to use the scythe, I wouldn't let him know how to use it perfectly when the opponent is down.

.. you use it by lining up the point on somebody's forehead and swinging it down as hard as you can. "Put the pointy end in the other guy" still applies. If anything, making a coup de grace is the one situation where using a non-proficient weapon makes sense: the target isn't trying to evade your blow or strike back, you don't have to worry that your improper grip means you swing wrong and telegraph too much. You just put the weapon in place and shove it in. Takes far less martial talent than trying to actually fight somebody with it.

Voyager_I
2008-12-17, 11:43 PM
Only if everybody in the world were aware of the rules by which the world works, which means that everybody in the world was metagaming.

That's open to some interpretation, really. For example, does anyone with 121 or more HP know that they're physically incapable of dying from a fall?

Wouldn't only it make sense for characters to know how the weapons work in their own world? We can't really apply our own real-world knowledge to their perspective, because they in fact live under an entirely different set of rules that only resemble our reality to varying degrees of closeness. I'm sure every warrior knows that Axes crit harder than Longswords and Longswords crit more often than Axes (even if they wouldn't articulate it quite like that), and knowing that Scythes are a good finishing weapon works with the same logic.

Artanis
2008-12-18, 01:38 AM
This would require a lot of experimentation in cutting people's heads off with scythes. What you're talking about here would require at least 23+ people each in an experiment group (scythe) and a control group (dagger). Then you would have to measure the results and use complicated statistical analyses, and you might see a statistically significant difference. Or, if they didn't want to get scientific, they would at least have to attempt to kill two people of equal fortitude (one with a knife, one with a scythe) and judge for themselves.
It wouldn't take a big scientific to-do, just enough helpless people being stabbed in the normal course of combat over however many years the setting is going.



I might also add that if people know that much about the game world, then they would use greataxes, and not picks, for mining, since picks can't even overcome the Hardness of most rock. That one is even easier with your own two eyes, because picks pretty much never work, unless you have a 2-hand pick and a strength of 16+, in which case, it works in about 1 out of 8 times to make a tiny nick on the surface.
Exactly. If the NPCs see an axe working better than a pick, then they'll know that an axe works better than a pick. They don't have to know anything about STR mods, material hardness, damage dice, and attack rolls to see "hey, that pick ain't doing a whole lot while the axe is."

Zen Master
2008-12-18, 03:26 AM
It is your problem if you have any intention of the world modeling the rules. So either you have to change the stats for Scythes, or you have to accept that Scythes are the best Execution weapons, and people who intend to do a lot of executing are going to have them.

No - see, that's where you are very accurately mistaken.

No one I've ever played with - no one person in more than twenty years, no matter what level, class or style they played - no one has ever dragged daddys harvest tool with them out to save/doom the world.

I've said this before, I'll repeat myself again for added clarity: You play that game. I play a different game. In the game I play, there is no need to drag every last tiny bit of bang for the buck out of how the rules are written. And no one does.

Your game? I don't play your game, and I totally fail to see the appeal. But thats ok - no one said we have to enjoy the same thing.

kamikasei
2008-12-18, 03:57 AM
That is because it is (for most wizards) impossible to explain in character why they're carrying it, and that is because the "killing sleeping people" rule is based on mechanics rather than reality. In real life, it's easier to kill a sleeping person with a knife than with a big honking scythe. Go ahead, google up statistics on knife murders and on scythe murders. Which do you think happens more often?


In the D&D verse your character grew up in, Scythes are easier to kill helpless people with, and are known for that.

This is the division, I think. I agree with Kurald, that the fact that scythes are so much better than daggers for killing a helpless foe is a flaw in the game and should be recognized as such rather than treated as "how things work in the game world".

The rules cannot be read so literally that they lead to absurdity.


I might also add that if people know that much about the game world, then they would use greataxes, and not picks, for mining, since picks can't even overcome the Hardness of most rock.

A good example of what I'm talking about.


Exactly. If the NPCs see an axe working better than a pick, then they'll know that an axe works better than a pick. They don't have to know anything about STR mods, material hardness, damage dice, and attack rolls to see "hey, that pick ain't doing a whole lot while the axe is."

But do you really want "people mine with axes rather than picks" to be a fact of the game world? You don't see this consequence as a sign that there's something wrong with the rules?

Zen Master
2008-12-18, 05:36 AM
My father was a farmer who grew the best grain in the land and this was his lucky scythe.

You - the wizard son - chose to bring along your fathers scythe? How, dear friend, is your father bringing in his harvest? Was this the most obvious thing for you to take with you, as you set out on adventures? With you doubtlessly having the thinnest biceps in the family, do you do well at wielding a heavy scythe?

In fact, let me just ask the player and not the character: Have you ever held a scythe? Do you have any shred of clue how heavy, clumsy and unwieldy it is?

Traditionally, when you leave the farm, dad will give you a firm handshake and tell you how you'll be back as soon as you realise how harsh a place the world really is. And mum will give you an oilskin bag containing some bread and sausage, and the almanac.

You brought a scythe. Which was lucky. Yay.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-18, 05:45 AM
This is the division, I think. I agree with Kurald, that the fact that scythes are so much better than daggers for killing a helpless foe is a flaw in the game and should be recognized as such rather than treated as "how things work in the game world".Then fix it, but unless you're houseruling and tell me that, I'll expect my character's perception of the world to reflect the rules. He knows that if you are tough enough, you can fall from orbit and not be hurt, because a Dwarf Barbarian did it, and he was weak enough to die against a Purple Worm later on. If you are houseruling CDG, then my Wizard will carry a Dagger and whatever weapon you make most useful for killing helpless foes, because that's all he plans to use the weapon for. If it's a Scythe, then he'll use a Scythe, because he knows by word of mouth that the Scythe is much better at cutting people's heads off than a Dagger.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-18, 05:53 AM
Then fix it, but unless you're houseruling and tell me that, I'll expect my character's perception of the world to reflect the rules.
That's precisely the point. I expect the rules to reflect perception of the world, not the other way around.

OOTS is funny because, among others, their world is explicitly based on the Rules, even (and especially) in those instances where that doesn't make sense. If I want a serious campaign world, that method doesn't fit; I don't want characters who discuss their build options in character.

HolderofSecrets
2008-12-18, 06:26 AM
And why would you object to my character being intelligent and havign the motivation:

"I would intend to have the weapon known for being the best at killing helpless people."

I mean, ask anyone with Martial Weapon Proficiency and they will tell you, oh yeah, this one is the best for that job.

So your character is approached by the city guard about the weapon carrying and your character is going to tell them that your carry around a weapon you aren't skilled with because its the best weapon you found for killing the helpless. If you do that then they will probably arrest your character for being an idiot for saying that out loud but there excuse will be is that they are investigating some murders that have been occurring around the city. That would be like you going up to your local cop and telling them that you carry your gun around to kill the helpless and not to defend yourself.

So in short while your character's reason might be honest your going to at least need something to say to the city guard that won't get you thrown in jail. That is why I gave you all those excuses.

Zen Master
2008-12-18, 10:42 AM
It's very easy to to explain why they are carrying it, "I (the character) am carrying it because it is the best weapon for executing helpless people (as is common knowledge to all adventurers/executioners/ect. in the game world)."

Besides all the technical stuff about the rules, I also find it thought-provoking that you'd roleplay, by default, someone who habitually murders his defenceless opponents. And plans on that tactic to the extent of dragging along an instrument that is useless to him in all other ways.

Anyways - as regards the rules, I think I'd just decree that you cannot use a weapon you are inproficient with for a coup de grace. That makes meleers better at that sort of thing than those who specialize in perusing magical texts - which makes perfect sense to me.

And should someone actually invest in a feat, just to be able to kill defenceless foes with a scythe, I'd ... dunno, just kill the character I guess. Or tell the player that there are many other groups out there.

You'd likely call that heavy-handed. I'd call it superflous, because the situation will never arise. Like I said - we don't play that game, it's just an example.

Eldariel
2008-12-18, 02:58 PM
So your character is approached by the city guard about the weapon carrying and your character is going to tell them that your carry around a weapon you aren't skilled with because its the best weapon you found for killing the helpless.

How is carrying a weapon you're not proficient with any different from a Fighter carrying a Longsword or whatever when a city guard approaches?

Artanis
2008-12-18, 03:50 PM
This is the division, I think. I agree with Kurald, that the fact that scythes are so much better than daggers for killing a helpless foe is a flaw in the game and should be recognized as such rather than treated as "how things work in the game world".

The rules cannot be read so literally that they lead to absurdity.
Kurald has been saying that the NPCs recognizing the superiority of scythes is metagaming. Which it isn't, because no matter how things work, NPCs will know how things work. If knives were better than scythes, then Kurald's arguement would be that it's metagaming for the NPCs to know that.


But do you really want "people mine with axes rather than picks" to be a fact of the game world? You don't see this consequence as a sign that there's something wrong with the rules?
I never said I want that because yes, it's stupid for axes to be better mining tools than picks. I said that no matter how stupid it is, if axes are better, then it's not metagaming for the NPCs to realize it.

BillyJimBoBob
2008-12-18, 04:44 PM
1. The Secret Bonus Base Class*
2. DMPC's
* Now that 4e is out, I can tell you how to get the SBBC. Get a brand new copy of the PHB, now, read each page at a time, spending approx 1 minute per page until page 16, at which point you MUST go and get a sandwhich. Now, while eating your sandwhich, go to the following pages in this order, 14, 72, 23,01, 21. After reading page 21 in full, finish your sandwhich. Now, roll a D20 until you get a prime number. Add the number of rolls you made to the prime number and open the PHB to that page. There you will find the Secret Bonus Base Class (AKA, Knight of Gygax), it has Heavy Armor Proficiency, Proficiency with all weapons, Monk saves, a Druids animal companion, fighter bonus feats, sneak attack, Full Spontaneous Arcane Casting (without ASF and accsess to all spells on the sor/wiz spell list), Full Divine Casting (Spontaneous, accsess to entire list), and D20 HD. That page also has a sidebar which describes a simplified Grapple system.

*Dispatches the legion of Joker-Bards with orders to croak, not capture*
*sadly mumbles to self "If he only hadn't revealed the secret of the sandwich, we might have been able to rehabilitate him...*

BillyJimBoBob
2008-12-18, 04:50 PM
No one I've ever played with - no one person in more than twenty years, no matter what level, class or style they played - no one has ever dragged daddys harvest tool with them out to save/doom the world.
Um, are you aware that historically this is exactly what happened, in nearly every culture and time period? The peasants didn't have access to long swords, those were typically illegal for peasants to own. So they used what was available. Farming implements, mostly looking like a blade on a stick, which is exactly what a scythe is, when they went out to save the world.

Object to people taking scythes as power gaming if you like, but don't object to the use of harvest tools in combat. Because the peasants who were forced to use such tools in real life were not power gaming.

Voyager_I
2008-12-18, 04:55 PM
But do you really want "people mine with axes rather than picks" to be a fact of the game world? You don't see this consequence as a sign that there's something wrong with the rules?

The difference here is in execution. It's okay for NPC miners to use picks instead of axes, even though mechanically it doesn't work, because you're never actually going to roll for it. It's very likely that your characters will never encounter an active mine or a miner over the course of any given campaign, and even if they did they would merely be background fluff. The mechanical viability of their actions doesn't matter. However, if your PC's want to knock down a stone wall (maybe because the door is Adamantium?), you can bet your ass that Trogdok the Crushinator isn't going to put away his +3 Greataxe to go get a pick from the cart, and I'm sure you wouldn't call him out for being "unrealistic" either.

Here's another one; In our world, lava kills you instantly. In D&D, high-level characters can take a quick bath in the stuff and come out okay. Is the Paladin metagaming if he knows he can just take off his armor, walk through the waist-high river of Lava, grab the Sword o' Legend, and walk back?

Blood_Lord
2008-12-18, 05:27 PM
So your character is approached by the city guard about the weapon carrying and your character is going to tell them that your carry around a weapon you aren't skilled with because its the best weapon you found for killing the helpless. If you do that then they will probably arrest your character for being an idiot for saying that out loud but there excuse will be is that they are investigating some murders that have been occurring around the city. That would be like you going up to your local cop and telling them that you carry your gun around to kill the helpless and not to defend yourself.

So in short while your character's reason might be honest your going to at least need something to say to the city guard that won't get you thrown in jail. That is why I gave you all those excuses.

No, you are confused. If the DM asked me why my character carries a Scythe I will tell him honestly my characters motivation.

If a guard asks for no reason, I will tell him that I need some weapon to defend myself, and it's none of his business why I have this particular one.

If he presses the issue, I'll tell him it magically allows me to go without sleep.

City guards don't care what weapon I carry. They may care that I carry a weapon, but only may, and should recognize my adventurer status and not bother me about it.


Besides all the technical stuff about the rules, I also find it thought-provoking that you'd roleplay, by default, someone who habitually murders his defenceless opponents. And plans on that tactic to the extent of dragging along an instrument that is useless to him in all other ways.

Yes, I often play characters that kill helpless opponents. Mostly because in 2d4 rounds they won't be helpless anymore, they will be perfectly capable of stabbing my face, something to be avoided.

Besides the use of a Scythe as a walking stick, I also carry around chalk for use writing directions in dungeons, even though I almost never do that. I carry a lot of things around for their eventual uses.


Anyways - as regards the rules, I think I'd just decree that you cannot use a weapon you are inproficient with for a coup de grace. That makes meleers better at that sort of thing than those who specialize in perusing magical texts - which makes perfect sense to me.

Yes, and if you changed the rules to that, I would let someone else coup de grace my enemies. But what you might personally change the rules to has no bearing on what types of characters make perfect sense under the rules, are not cheesy, and what Wizards are likely to use to coup de grace people.

Also, melee types are already better at it, because they can Power attack. But Wizards should be able to kill an unconscious person with ease, because seriously, anyone can do that without any training.


And should someone actually invest in a feat, just to be able to kill defenceless foes with a scythe, I'd ... dunno, just kill the character I guess. Or tell the player that there are many other groups out there.

I would not call that heavy handed. I would call that retarded. If someone invests precious resources in order to play a specific character, you kill their character. That is the worst idea I have ever heard in my entire life.

Also, I would just be an outsider, and thus gain proficiency that way, also get Polymorph benefits.

kamikasei
2008-12-19, 02:25 AM
I've been too busy to keep up with all the responses to what was supposed to be an offhand comment, so I won't be replying to anything here. I figure this issue is both fairly involved and highly off-topic, so I'll organize my thoughts and create a new thread for it in a day or two.

Zen Master
2008-12-19, 03:17 AM
But what you might personally change the rules to has no bearing on what types of characters make perfect sense under the rules, are not cheesy, and what Wizards are likely to use to coup de grace people.

It's cheesy, stupid and senseless. But ... and I believe I've mentioned this already ... you want to play that way, and I'm not in fact trying to stop you. Go right ahead - have fun. What I'm doing is voicing the opinion that your style of play reeks of joyless rules mongery, and I'd rather die from acid bath than play with you. Same goes for every player I ever knew, except one. Who was a retard.


I would not call that heavy handed. I would call that retarded.

And look: We call different things retarded. This isn't surprising. I play with people who enjoy the same style of play I do. The one time I happened to meet a guy who enjoyed the thing you do - he left. Bye bye.


Also, I would just be an outsider, and thus gain proficiency that way, also get Polymorph benefits.

You wouldn't, tho. Not in any game I was ever a part of. Oh but hey - that guy I mentioned? He wanted to play .... let's see .... warlock halfdragon with no ECL, and ... no, sorry, I don't remember how he claimed to be able to become an outsider too. But that was what he wanted to play.

You don't live in Copenhagen, do you?

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 04:21 AM
From the ages old "RPG stereotypes" list (QFM),

"Real Men wield a twohander.
Real Roleplayers wield a rapier and main gauche.
Loonies wield a nerf bat.
Munchkins wield whatever gives the most pluses."


So in other words, there are several kinds of players (and not just these four, and the kinds overlap, etc) that each have different definitions of what makes the game fun. That should not come as a great surprise. But can we at least lay off on calling the other groups "retarded"?

GoodbyeSoberDay
2008-12-19, 05:20 AM
I agree that the rules should reflect the logic of the game world. Let's look at the scythe rules.

Scythe 18 gp 1d6 2d4 ×4 — 10 lb. Piercing or slashing

Those rules seem to reflect a game world where scythes are meant as weapons in battle, don't they? What farmer is going to spend 18 gp for a simple cutting tool? He could just craft a blade on a stick himself.

Maybe it's just me, but I imagine the creators of 3e connecting the 'grim reaper' theme of the scythe and the mechanics of the scythe. There's at least a chance they were aware of the scythe's mechanical advantage as a coup-de-grace weapon and did it intentionally to reflect a world where scythes actually are used to kill the helpless, in order to establish the grim reaper theme. But this assumes the 3e creators knew what they were doing, so I'm probably wrong.

Either way, if you don't like wizards walking around with scythes all the time, it seems like you have to solve the problem at the source and fix/houserule the scythe, not just look at the game in a different way. Assuming the conflict here is "rules define the game world" versus "game world defines the rules," neither side's viewpoint can tolerate an obvious disconnect between the two. It's just that the former generally leads to worlds some might consider absurd (wizards who carry around scythes) and the latter leads to GMs closing their eyes, plugging their ears and shouting "NA NA NA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" whenever the rules blatantly slap his world in the face.

As a small side note, my wizard characters, like most potential killers in our world, would carry a knife instead of a scythe because it's cheaper and much more subtle, not for some deluded idea that a knife is an effective execution device.

kamikasei
2008-12-19, 05:33 AM
I said I wouldn't post further here, but I do want to clear up one thing: a scythe is a farming implement. The scythe listed on the weapons table is a weapon which is based on a farming implement. I did not mean to imply that farmers use 18gp war weapons to harvest their grain. I referred to wizards "carting around a farming implement bigger than they are" to be derisive, not as a serious argument.

Okay?

GoodbyeSoberDay
2008-12-19, 05:46 AM
I said I wouldn't post further here, but I do want to clear up one thing: a scythe is a farming implement. The scythe listed on the weapons table is a weapon which is based on a farming implement. I did not mean to imply that farmers use 18gp war weapons to harvest their grain. I referred to wizards "carting around a farming implement bigger than they are" to be derisive, not as a serious argument.

Okay?Unless you speak for at least three other people in this thread I think the discussion is ongoing, but you do bring up what is likely a major disconnect in the argument. I wonder if there would even be an argument if, instead of a scythe, wizards used a weapon of war called the "ehtycs," a tall polearm with a curved blade and the exact same stats.

Job
2008-12-19, 05:49 AM
The scythe listed on the weapons table is a weapon which is based on a farming implement.

^This^

If you spent any time over on the old Wizards 3.5 ‘equipment’ forums you would hear debates on exactly this topic about as frequently as thread concerning katanas (And ending just as poorly).

SparkMandriller
2008-12-19, 06:10 AM
It's cheesy, stupid and senseless. But ... and I believe I've mentioned this already ... you want to play that way, and I'm not in fact trying to stop you. Go right ahead - have fun. What I'm doing is voicing the opinion that your style of play reeks of joyless rules mongery, and I'd rather die from acid bath than play with you.

See, if you'd just realised that people play joyless rules monger wizards before going ahead and claiming there was no way for them to do something, we could have avoided all this argument.


But it's okay, I like watching people get all worked up over the internet anyway.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 06:45 AM
^This^

If you spent any time over on the old Wizards 3.5 ‘equipment’ forums you would hear debates on exactly this topic about as frequently as thread concerning katanas (And ending just as poorly).

And don't forget the disconnect between the Dennis-The-Menace sling and the military sling, and the apparent fact that at least one 3.0 designer was unaware of the existence of the latter...

Eldariel
2008-12-19, 06:52 AM
I've been too busy to keep up with all the responses to what was supposed to be an offhand comment, so I won't be replying to anything here. I figure this issue is both fairly involved and highly off-topic, so I'll organize my thoughts and create a new thread for it in a day or two.

I'll summarize them for you:

"Bla bla bla Wizards bla."

"Bla bla bla bull**** bla."

"Bla bla bla?!"

"BLAA!"

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-19, 06:52 AM
And don't forget the disconnect between the Dennis-The-Menace sling and the military sling, and the apparent fact that at least one 3.0 designer was unaware of the existence of the latter...

Curiosity: you refer to? (not the designer, i mean what brings you to this statement).

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 07:40 AM
Curiosity: you refer to? (not the designer, i mean what brings you to this statement).
Slings in third edition do a very low amount of damage, whereas historically it has been a rather effective weapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_(weapon)); a lead bullet to the face tends to hurt. Apparently this was done because the designer in question had never heard of that, and based the damage on the similarly named child's toy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot).

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-19, 07:46 AM
Slings in third edition do a very low amount of damage, whereas historically it has been a rather effective weapon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_(weapon)); a lead bullet to the face tends to hurt. Apparently this was done because the designer in question had never heard of that, and based the damage on the similarly named child's toy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot).

Actually, when I was a child, first basic D&D sessions, I thoght that the sling was the child catapult :smalltongue:

Zen Master
2008-12-19, 08:20 AM
Um, are you aware that historically this is exactly what happened, in nearly every culture and time period? The peasants didn't have access to long swords, those were typically illegal for peasants to own. So they used what was available. Farming implements, mostly looking like a blade on a stick, which is exactly what a scythe is, when they went out to save the world.

Object to people taking scythes as power gaming if you like, but don't object to the use of harvest tools in combat. Because the peasants who were forced to use such tools in real life were not power gaming.

See - that's wrong.

Yes - there may well be examples of peasant rebellions wielding pitchforks and flails (that's actually another farm implement - but one the is useful as a weapon).

But no - there is not any example of the implement in question being used as a military weapon. I asked earlier: Do you know anything at all about what sort of tool it is we're discussin here? Have you held one? Can you give even something bordering on a haphazard estimate on the swing radius of the thing? And what that would mean in a packed unit of infantry?

If you wanted to use scytheblades for weapons, you beat the things into bardiches.

Really. Stop. Scythes are NOT weapons. They are so hidiously poor a choice that they should be banned from the damn books.

BobVosh
2008-12-19, 08:27 AM
Scythe. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythe)
War Scythe. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe)


As a pole weapon, the war scythe is characterised by long range (in melee combat), and powerful force (due to leverage): there are documented examples where a scythe has cut through a metal helmet.
Sounds like x4 crit modifier to me...

Anyway, there is a fairly big difference between a scythe and war scythe. I choose to believe the scythe on the list is a war one, hence Daddy wasn't farming with it.

That said, can we stop worrying and trying to take acid baths?

Yes, he actually gave a decent reason for why a character would use said weapon. Yes, this is goofy from a real-world stance. Solution: houserule.
I would like to point out that if a wizard is doing his job, people are butchering helpless people all the time.

Zen Master
2008-12-19, 08:28 AM
See, if you'd just realised that people play joyless rules monger wizards before going ahead and claiming there was no way for them to do something, we could have avoided all this argument.

But it's okay, I like watching people get all worked up over the internet anyway.

Oh I know that - I've know since about the day I first entered these boards. I just don't understand it, and I refuse to accept their arguments of why this is good, reasonable, fun or even bordering on sane.

This game that we're discussion is a social occasion - it's like a bloody birthday party. It is NOT a competition, and it is NOT about getting the bigger numbers. You do NOT win by outdoing the others in your group, nor the GM.

You win by having fun. If you only have fun doing all of the NOT's above, by all means do. Please - I really have no objection. I'll just not play along, and I don't understand it's appeal.

SparkMandriller
2008-12-19, 08:29 AM
If you ban all the unrealistic stuff in DnD, you're not gonna have much of a game left. :/

BobVosh
2008-12-19, 08:49 AM
If you banchange all the unrealistic stuff in DnD, you're not gonna have much of a game left from the original rules. :/

Just changing things to suit us ;)

Zen Master
2008-12-19, 09:34 AM
Scythe. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythe)
War Scythe. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe)


Sounds like x4 crit modifier to me...

Anyway, there is a fairly big difference between a scythe and war scythe. I choose to believe the scythe on the list is a war one, hence Daddy wasn't farming with it.

That said, can we stop worrying and trying to take acid baths?

Yes, he actually gave a decent reason for why a character would use said weapon. Yes, this is goofy from a real-world stance. Solution: houserule.
I would like to point out that if a wizard is doing his job, people are butchering helpless people all the time.

The weapon you describe is a polearm. There are plenty of polearms in the books - the scythe isn't one of them. Also, what is called a warscythe here goes by many names - all of which I fail to remember at this time.

brb

BillyJimBoBob
2008-12-19, 11:24 AM
See - that's wrong.

Yes - there may well be examples of peasant rebellions wielding pitchforks and flails (that's actually another farm implement - but one the is useful as a weapon).
Not "may well be". Are.

And I'm not arguing about the scythe, per se. I'm simply pointing out that people used what weapons were available to them, and that was in many cases tools, harvesting or otherwise. Those that were more successful went through the "weaponization" process of history. I have no doubt at all that a scythe was used on many occasions as a weapon of war, simply because it was the best weapon at hand at the time for the person wielding it. But I am also not claiming that there were ever any formal troops all armed with scythes.

Edit: I've not only seen a scythe, I've used one to cut grass. Very long grass in a very large field. Swung from the waist, step forward, swing again, it's slow and sweaty work. The scythe I used could not be confused at all with the scythe pictured in D&D images, being much smaller and lighter. I wouldn't like to use one in a fight (either the one I used to cut grass or the one pictured in D&D images), but if it was the scythe or empty hands, I'd take the scythe.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 11:25 AM
Not "may well be". Are.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/wikipedian_protester.png

BillyJimBoBob
2008-12-19, 11:34 AM
I'm not sure why your ignorance should necessitate my research...

But here:

"Thanks to trade, the nearness of China as well as the Shaolin monks and nuns who helped them, the Okinawans developed a means of self-protection by using common farm implements for weapons."

http://www.essortment.com/all/japaneseweapon_raap.htm

2 minutes on Google got me this. Yes, it doesn't specifically state that they used them to fight in uprisings or whatnot. Whatever, that's the extent of me doing your work for you. Do your own reading, you might find that you enjoy learning new things.

Edit: It occurred to me that "citation needed" is a Wikipedia thing. So, from that source, obviously the most accurate and unimpeachable research site available, right? (that's sarcasm, in case there is any doubt)

"Pole weapons are relatively simple to make, and they were fairly easy for most people to use effectively as they were often derived from hunting or agricultural tools."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polearms

I'll argue that no one would derive a weapon from a tool unless it had been proven to be effective in other uses such as killing a man. That's not supported by citation, but by reason.

Also:

"The scythe, a farming tool could be easily transformed into an effective infantry weapon.

They were a popular weapon of choice and opportunity of many peasant uprisings throughout history."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe

kalt
2008-12-19, 01:39 PM
Having grown up on a small farm for a decent amount of my childhood I suppose I should throw in. A scythe is certainly capable of killing an unconcious person with extremely little difficulty. True they are cumbersome, but with extremely limited wood working skill and some ingenuity, which most people tend to posess to atleast some degree if you grew up in a rural area, you could cut off a couplle handles and turn it into a rather effective weapon. So i'm not entierly unsure of how unrealistic or metagame like it would be if the wizard decided to wield one that would double as a walking stick.

ChaosDefender24
2008-12-19, 01:41 PM
1. lightning warrior
2. planar shepherd
3. dweomerkeeper
4. wizard
5. commoner (if warforged basketweaver)

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 01:49 PM
5. commoner (if warforged basketweaver)

Oh, I completely agree. I have always banned commoners from my campaign, and thankfully so far no player has ever dared to suggest that he play a commoner.

ChaosDefender24
2008-12-19, 02:00 PM
No.


The warforged basketweaver works by weaving baskets until its adversaries die of old age.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-19, 02:19 PM
The warforged basketweaver works by weaving baskets until its adversaries die of old age.

Yes, I'm aware of that. I still ban them from my games, anyway.

Artanis
2008-12-19, 02:26 PM
I'm not sure why your ignorance should necessitate my research...
Because you're the one who said it. As such, it's up to you to support it.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-19, 02:53 PM
It's cheesy, stupid and senseless. But ... and I believe I've mentioned this already ... you want to play that way, and I'm not in fact trying to stop you. Go right ahead - have fun. What I'm doing is voicing the opinion that your style of play reeks of joyless rules mongery, and I'd rather die from acid bath than play with you. Same goes for every player I ever knew, except one. Who was a retard.

1) It is not cheesy. It is not stupid. It makes perfect sense. What makes no sense is your strange insistence that characters in your world should all be stupid and have no idea what weapons work best for what task.

2) Your last sentence comes off differently then you intended I believe. It sounds like you'd rather die in an acid bath then play with any player you've ever known, save one retard. I believe you meant any player you've ever known would rather die in an acid bath, which is a silly thing to say, because you patently have no idea what I play like, as evidenced later by your inability to separate this one disagreement from every other thing you've ever not liked.

3) Since ignoring it several times now has not made my point. I will explain myself a bit. Yes I know you aren't hunting me down to stop me from playing my way. I don't care. No matter how many times you say that it will have no effect on me talking back, and in fact was never the source of this discussion. I am posting my opinion because I enjoy talking about these things, stop saying, "Go right ahead - have fun. But I disagree with you." I'm not going stop talking about this, because I already know that you can't stop me. This is not news to me, please stop telling it to me.


And look: We call different things retarded. This isn't surprising. I play with people who enjoy the same style of play I do. The one time I happened to meet a guy who enjoyed the thing you do - he left. Bye bye.

You have no idea whether you have met multiple people who enjoy the same things I do. Let me explain this. Despite you completely ignoring what I have actually said. What I enjoy is for the rules to reflect the world, or for the world to reflect the rules. Either one of those.

I will go so far as to say that those two choices are objectively superior to any other related options. Whether you want to change the rules to reflect the world, or build a world that reflects the rules is up to you, but both of those are objectively better then having a conflict between the two.

As such, when I am talking about the actual rules, I am going to assume a world that conforms to them. We've gathered that Scythes being weapons of war is so inherently offensive to your very existence that you want to personally hunt down and kill whomever put them in the PHB, but that aside, in the D&D world, the one we can all see, described by the rules, Scythes are clearly actual weapons of war, and some people do use them as such. That is why they are martial weapons.

Maybe those scythes, if transported to this world would be called bardiches, or war scythes, or whatever, the point is that in D&D, those weapons that are used for war and executions are called scythes by the inhabitants.


You wouldn't, tho. Not in any game I was ever a part of. Oh but hey - that guy I mentioned? He wanted to play .... let's see .... warlock halfdragon with no ECL, and ... no, sorry, I don't remember how he claimed to be able to become an outsider too. But that was what he wanted to play.

Obviously I wouldn't play with you if you would kill my character for taking a feat. And also, you mistakenly assume that in this hypothetical situation you are the DM, if we are both players, then you can't force the DM to abide by your prejudices.

Now as for the player in question:

1) Breaking the rules is the thing I most object to, so as I said earlier, he is nothing like me, you obviously don't understand me as well as you think you do for assuming he is me. Changing the rules is okay, but requires agreement between all parties.

2) I see nothing about a Half Dragon Warlock that is either optimal or requires being an outsider, so you seem to be entirely confused about what outsiders actually are. Or you are missing the part where you explain that he claimed to be an outsider as well.

3) I see no description of race, after adding the Half Dragon type he would be a Dragon not an outsider, but he might not know that, and therefore his race might have been an outsider, like Tiefling/Aisimarr/Star Elf, assuming he did actually claim to be an outsider. Or he might have taken the Otherworldly feat.

4) I would have let the poor sap be a Half Dragon Warlock with no LA. Seeing as he's not getting any real benefits from it. That he wouldn't get from Dragonborn anyway. Well, maybe if he was going to be a Glaivelock.

5) I think this player is the biggest contender for rather bathing in an acid bath then playing with me. I'd make him feel small in the pants, and judging by his desire to play a Half Dragon, he really doesn't like that feeling.

6) You could be totally wrong about that player though, as given by your inability to understand others here on this forum, and willingness to make a huge deal out of your inability to understand the rules.

Maybe he just wanted to be a Star Elf Dragonborn Warlock and you didn't understand. He still wouldn't have been an outsider, but he would have been following the rules just fine and not being any kind of evil Munchkin.

Andras
2008-12-19, 03:25 PM
It seems the problem with this is that Wizards put "scythe" in the name field, and not "bardiche" or something not a farm implement. To be fair, having used one a few times, a scythe is kind of silly as a weapon, it's very ungainly even for its intended purpose.

My solution? Open up your PHB, cross out the name "scythe", put in "bardiche". Or, if you'd like, put in whatever you really want it to be, whatever fits the idea of 2d4 damage with a x4 critical modifier in your mind. Because as far as D&D goes, it's more or less just the weapon that fits the x4 critical modifier for the two-handed category.

I mean, you can still take your acid bath if you really want to, more power to you, but I think that's an easier solution, personally.

Thurbane
2008-12-19, 10:18 PM
Because you're the one who said it. As such, it's up to you to support it.
Indeed. It's a little concept called burden of proof (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Onus+of+proof).

Blood_Lord
2008-12-19, 11:48 PM
You guys do know that he gave tons of examples in the post you are mocking right?

Zen Master
2008-12-20, 04:18 AM
6) You could be totally wrong about that player though, as given by your inability to understand others here on this forum, and willingness to make a huge deal out of your inability to understand the rules.

What the hell? You are incapable of saying anything I do not understand.

You also seem incapable of saying anything I can in any way agree with.

Keep your opinions of my ability to understand to yourself, since you obviously consider disagreeing with you stupid. That tells more about you than it does about me.

Zen Master
2008-12-20, 04:28 AM
1) It is not cheesy. It is not stupid. It makes perfect sense. What makes no sense is your strange insistence that characters in your world should all be stupid and have no idea what weapons work best for what task.

As long as all you want to concern yourself is the framework of the rules, and how you benefit the most from them, it makes sense. Sure. As soon as you take anything else into consideration, it fails completely.

I do not want to play a game that is intended to reflect how the rules can be abused to the greatest effect. That is not fun. When I want to compete, I do sports.


Obviously I wouldn't play with you if you would kill my character for taking a feat. And also, you mistakenly assume that in this hypothetical situation you are the DM, if we are both players, then you can't force the DM to abide by your prejudices.

I wouldn't kill the character for the feat, but for the playstyle. You know - send a message: 'Optimizing is fine - just not in this group. Learn to like it, or play with someone else.'

And like I said before, I wouldn't need to be the GM - no one I've ever played with would tolerate your approach. Sorry. And naturally, were you the GM, I'd politely excuse myself, and play with someone else.

Hm. I really can't think of any reason to go on.

Zen Master
2008-12-20, 04:36 AM
Not "may well be". Are.

And I'm not arguing about the scythe, per se. I'm simply pointing out that people used what weapons were available to them, and that was in many cases tools, harvesting or otherwise. Those that were more successful went through the "weaponization" process of history. I have no doubt at all that a scythe was used on many occasions as a weapon of war, simply because it was the best weapon at hand at the time for the person wielding it. But I am also not claiming that there were ever any formal troops all armed with scythes.

Edit: I've not only seen a scythe, I've used one to cut grass. Very long grass in a very large field. Swung from the waist, step forward, swing again, it's slow and sweaty work. The scythe I used could not be confused at all with the scythe pictured in D&D images, being much smaller and lighter. I wouldn't like to use one in a fight (either the one I used to cut grass or the one pictured in D&D images), but if it was the scythe or empty hands, I'd take the scythe.

Thing is, when you remove the blade form the scythe, and mount it on a pole to make a more effective weapon (and historically, this is what those peasant rebels did), it's no longer a scythe. It's a scythe blade on a pole, and it's called a fouchard. Or a bardiche. Or some third thing - from what sources I've found, the experts don't quite agree what the different variants of polearm should be called.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-20, 04:47 AM
As long as all you want to concern yourself is the framework of the rules, and how you benefit the most from them, it makes sense. Sure. As soon as you take anything else into consideration, it fails completely.How would you handle the following situation? There are 2 casters in a party, Dread(a Dread Necromancer) who wields a scythe for thematic reasons, and BG(a Beguiler) who wields a dagger for encumbrance reasons. Both have Str 10. They're facing a Juvenile Black Dragon and his Kobold Warrior 8 followers. BG just hit the Dragon and 1 of his followers with a Chained Hold Monster. Dread and BG attempted CDG, Dread cutting off the Dragon's head and BG failing to kill the Kobold with his dagger. One of them needs to kill the Kobold, while the other goes to help Barb and Ban-Dade deal with the rest of the Kobolds. Who should kill the remaining Kobold, in your opinion?

Edit:A Scythe head mounted with the sharp edge parallel to the long pole was the War Scythe he posted. Do you have any reason to think that that is not what the D&D designers meant by "Scythe" on the weapons table?

Heliomance
2008-12-20, 08:38 AM
It seems the problem with this is that Wizards put "scythe" in the name field, and not "bardiche" or something not a farm implement. To be fair, having used one a few times, a scythe is kind of silly as a weapon, it's very ungainly even for its intended purpose.


I believe that the beginner finds it so, yes. To one skilled it its use, I hear that it's actually very effective. If it didn't work well, they wouldn't have kept using it for hundreds of years.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-12-20, 08:49 AM
Play a Necromancer.

Problem solved, your scythe is thematically appropriate.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-20, 08:59 AM
Play a Necromancer.

Problem solved, your scythe is thematically appropriate.

Bring a fighter along.

Problem solved, your party members are happy to cooperate in killing the enemies once you've stunned them. That's themetically appropriate in a team game :smallbiggrin:

Nerd-o-rama
2008-12-20, 09:01 AM
Wizards, bothering to play on a team? In D&D 3.5? It may happen, but certainly not in hypothetical situations on the internet!

Kurald Galain
2008-12-20, 09:28 AM
Wizards, bothering to play on a team? In D&D 3.5? It may happen, but certainly not in hypothetical situations on the internet!

Ah, but hypothetically, couldn't it happen in a hypothetical situation?

Nerd-o-rama
2008-12-20, 09:29 AM
I...meta...but...recursion...too...

Magnor Criol
2008-12-20, 11:55 AM
I...meta...but...recursion...too...

Since linking XKCD comics trend for this thread... (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/hypotheticals.pnhas been the g)

Boci
2008-12-20, 12:40 PM
As long as all you want to concern yourself is the framework of the rules, and how you benefit the most from them, it makes sense. Sure. As soon as you take anything else into consideration, it fails completely.

No no no. I thought all those people who equated low power to rping had been stamped out by some heroic individuals of these forums. Looks like some slipped through the nets.


I do not want to play a game that is intended to reflect how the rules can be abused to the greatest effect. That is not fun. When I want to compete, I do sports.

Pun-pun. The planar Shepard gaining 10 action per round and granting his allies the same bonus. This is unacceptable, baring a very specific and probably rather humorous campaign.

Playing a character who has some abilities to synergies however is called common sense. And yes, evidently the name is misleading. It isn't at all common.

The things being described to you are nothing. Shock trooper hasn’t even been brought up. Good thing too, you’d probably have a seizure from from.


I wouldn't kill the character for the feat, but for the playstyle. You know - send a message: 'Optimizing is fine - just not in this group. Learn to like it, or play with someone else.'

Notice how optimizing is very similar to optimistic or optimal. All these words have a good or positive connotation. What have you got against players making decent characters? Do you think its better to have abilities that fit together rather chunkily?


And like I said before, I wouldn't need to be the GM - no one I've ever played with would tolerate your approach. Sorry. And naturally, were you the GM, I'd politely excuse myself, and play with someone else.

You left yourself open to this: you play with yourself right? Because I cannot imagine you meeting many people who disapprove of optimizing. Power gaming, yes. But we're not discussing power gaming. D&D clearly isn't for you with this attitude.


Hm. I really can't think of any reason to go on.

Please don't. Your silence is a blessing after the things you've been saying.

Aneantir
2008-12-20, 12:59 PM
Notice how optimizing is very similar to optimistic or optimal. All these words have a good or positive connotation. What have you got against players making decent characters? Do you think its better to have abilities that fit together rather chunkily?

Monks for everyone! Huzzah!

ericgrau
2008-12-20, 01:05 PM
I think it's perfectly fine to let wizards carry 10 pound scythes for Cdg's. Especially when their carrying capacity is often 25-40 lbs and basic survival gear, spell component pouch and spell book takes another 15-20lbs. For a 2 round killing tactic that doesn't work in a lot of situations. Or they could, y'know, let a party member handle it with a "lesser" weapon and still get nigh-certain success. Especially since it probably doesn't need to be done until after the battle anyway. Heck, you could even do the heroic thing and take the monster/bandit alive (now everyone knows I must be crazy).

Realistically speaking I don't think anyone has a problem shoving a weapon into an immobile creature's heart/lungs/liver/neck/head/etc., even if they've never even seen the weapon before. Think about it: Could you pull it off? I bet you could. Worst case scenario it still has a gaping hole in its chest and probably dies anyway.

Roland St. Jude
2008-12-20, 01:15 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: Thread locked for review. I've got a busy day ahead of me so it may be a while.