On Class Balance: The Abjurant Champion

[Reinboom]

Because of how derailed... sort of... the errata thread is, as well as the minor rail scratching going on the in the broken prestige classes thread... I decided to make this one to focus on the abjurant champion itself.

Quoted topics from errata...

AC remains important to a melee character (and to a lesser degree any other character) all the way to level 20.

Let's do a basic setup for a defensively minded abjurant champion, level 11.

Base 10
+8 natural armor, alter self to tren
+5 enhancement natural armor, dragonskin spell (SpC)
+2 deflection, ring of protection +2 (8000 gp)
+1 insight, dusty rose ioun stone (5000 gp)
+1 luck, robe of the vagabond (CCha, 6000 gp)
+9 shield, shield spell
+6 armor, greater mage armor spell (SpC)
+3 Dex, assisted by +2 Dex item (4000 gp)

= AC 45

Most of the spells can be cast before combat. Casting shield is swift action for an abjurant champion. Polymorph or outsider alter self would push the AC even higher. So would feats like Combat Expertise, Carmendine Monk (ChaVal) or Ascetic Mage (CAdv). There are other ways if you really want to focus on AC.

So yes, another +5 armor bonus from mage armor on top of AC 45 could be a non-factor, but that's because most opponents only hit on a natural 20 anyway...

But then he's hit by one of the no-attack-roll save-or-dies that most high level monsters are able to produce. Or he's hit by a touch attack.

Those aren't just cheesy answers either, they're how the game works past level 11 or 12.

Whether or not you can actually avoid getting hit, AC is still very important at high levels. It won't matter to a a lot of high-level monsters whether your AC is 35 or 45 for the purposes of hitting, but it does mean they can't use Power Attack as much.

And it's a misconception that you'll always be hit at higher levels. It's pretty easy to get your AC up to a point where a balor will have trouble hitting you. Those enemies have other attack options, of course, but they also use melee attacks. It's not worth focusing exclusively on AC, but it also shouldn't be ignored, or else everything with Power Attack will cheerfully mutilate you.

Errata looks pretty standard; the Abjurant Champion clear-up is the only really important one. I've always considered the swift-action casting of abjurations to be its best class feature, not the AC boost, so it doesn't seem to have significantly impacted the class.

So what's the thinking here? "A high AC character isn't invulnerable to all attacks, so AC is useless"?

Plain ol' melee damage remains a primary threat at high levels, especially if you put yourself in harm's way on purpose. (Melee character.) No-attack-roll save-or-dies are not as common as you make them out to be, and the save DC is often quite manageable.

It's not useless, of course, but if you have magic to defend yourself with (like if you're an Abjurant Champion..) you've got better options. Make yourself invisible. Stack miss chances with spells like Blur and Displacement. Cast Mirror Image. Use Stoneskin and its like to get DR. These options protect against more than just standard physical attacks.

Those are not better options. They are additional options. High AC is a basic no frills defense that protects you without the need to spend the majority of the battle buffing.

Yes, a high level abjurant champion has spells like (improved) blink, greater mirror image (PHBII) and heart of earth (CMag) available to him, but that's hardly a reason to make him more powerful by giving him unhittable AC on top of everything else.

Just the first half of that statement, a 45 AC doesn't make a character invincible.

A high AC is the same thing as the Mindblank spell: you remove a number of the offensive options that can be used against you, but there are still plenty to worry about.

Except that apparently you do need to spend half of combat buffing, according to the previous AC build (Or you cast the miss chances before battle, just like you did with Abjurant Champion.)

As for the build itself. Note the first entry, Alter Self. Ignoring for a moment the brokenness of that, if you are an Abjurant Champion at that level, guess what, you can fly. Do that and make it meaningless.

Having spells with a long duration is a big deal for a buff-based character.
Alter self is a standard, low-level core spell. Disregarding it in a balance discussion is like insisting on balancing fighters based on the assumption that they'll have to fight with overripe fruit because you think greatswords are broken. And you'll notice that even with -8 AC the character would still have a solid AC.

Except.. it's part of the polymorph line. Y'know, one of the few things that wizards has actually used errata to change for power reasons.
There's a major difference between greatsword and alter self.

And fly? You think fly will make it impossible for high level opponents to hit you? In narrow dungeon corridors? As a melee character?!

...Where does it say that an abjurant champion has to be melee? Personally, as a major spellcaster... I prefer my abjurant champion as a back line, heavy archery focused character.

[Iku Rex]

Except.. it's part of the polymorph line. Y'know, one of the few things that wizards has actually used errata to change for power reasons.

Alter self has not been changed beyond the addition of a (polymorph) subschool tag. There are no changes to its power level.

...Where does it say that an abjurant champion has to be melee? Personally, as a major spellcaster... I prefer my abjurant champion as a back line, heavy archery focused character.

You want to give the class a massive "free" AC boost on the assumption that no one will ever use it? Yes, you can make an archer AC. Or a blaster AC. Or a batman AC. But you don't give it heaps of AC, or +100 to all melee damage, or invulnerability to melee attacks, on the assumption that he'll never use it anyway.

[Zincorium]

Alright, here's how I view it:

The main benefits of the abjurant champion don't matter much to spellcasters, so while it's a good prestige class, it's no better than a lot of others. Which generally have laxer requirements or more useful abilities.

Melee characters have several problems: tendency towards low casting stats and loss of BAB from dipping into a spellcasting class to begin with, restrictions on armor due to spellcasting failure, and duskblades and hexblades lack the shield spell and so have to dip out to use the arguably best class feature.

Just in general, gish characters, which the abjurant champion is pretty much the epitome of, have it a bit harder than either casters or straight combat characters, and the versatility matters a lot less in a party situation where the other role is likely to be present to some degree.

To sum up, it's good at what it does, but what it does isn't all that good.

[deadseashoals]

I'll bite.

A gish can easily get his saves to the point where he needs to roll a 1 to fail with his buffs. Just like his armor class.

Superior resistance, greater heroism for +10 to all saves. And if he's got a cleric buddy, recitation and conviction will give him an easy +17 or +18. On top of whatever ability score modifiers and spiked up multiclass base saving throws he's got. Despite what the people on this board might say about wizards, saving throws are a LOT easier to min-max than save DCs.

That AC could stand to be a little higher... How about greater luminous armor? That's an abjuration spell, ohno, how about +13 instead of +6! You just earned yourself another +7 AC.

Touch attacks? Ray deflection, greater mirror image, greater blink.

Gishes are awesome sauce. Melee combat isn't completely invalidated at high levels either, as you have plenty of tools at hand to ensure that you do get a full attack, like quickened dimension leap, hustle (psi-gishes), boots of quicksilver motion, and the like.

[deadseashoals]

Just in general, gish characters, which the abjurant champion is pretty much the epitome of, have it a bit harder than either casters or straight combat characters, and the versatility matters a lot less in a party situation where the other role is likely to be present to some degree.

To sum up, it's good at what it does, but what it does isn't all that good.

That'd be the opposite of my point. Once they get to a reasonable enough level to where their abilities come together in a neat little package, multiclass PrC-based gish characters are in every way superior to melee characters without magic. They beat the melees at their own game, which is something even Batman can't do pre-shapechange. Abjurant champion puts them way over the top, giving them a completely inappropriate power boost for no reason at all.

Let's say there was a prestige class for the Druid, a class that is widely acknowledged to outdo melee fighters at melee, and still have spellcasting and other class features. Now, let's say that class had no meaningful prerequisites, continued to advance the Druid's wild shape, but also gave it full BAB, the ability to cast Druid buff spells as swift actions, and an AC bonus equal to its level in the PrC times 2. Broken, you say? But that's exactly what the Abjurant Champion does:

1) It builds on a character archetype that already threatens game balance by making it better.
2) It can be obtained for virtually no cost.
3) It gives an AC bonus equal to your level in the PrC times 2, in essence (shield and greater luminous armor).
4) It allows you to cast those precious buff spells as swift actions.

[Temp]

They beat the melees at their own game,

...And it doesn't matter because full spellcasters still come out on top.

Now, let's say that class had no meaningful prerequisites, continued to advance the Druid's wild shape, but also gave it full BAB, the ability to cast Druid buff spells as swift actions, and an AC bonus equal to its level in the PrC times 2. Broken, you say? But that's exactly what the Abjurant Champion does:

If the prerequisites meant that only multiclass members of an inferior archetype could gain use of it at relatively low levels while straight-classed Druids only gain access to it once its abilities are par for the spellcasting course, No, I wouldn't think it broken.

1) It builds on a character archetype that already threatens game balance by making it better.
2) It can be obtained for virtually no cost.
3) It gives an AC bonus equal to your level in the PrC times 2, in essence (shield and greater luminous armor).
4) It allows you to cast those precious buff spells as swift actions.

1. The archetype it really improves is the Competent Fighter-type
3.BoED's balance is notorious. It's like saying Polymorph has relevance in a game

[deadseashoals]

...And it doesn't matter because full spellcasters still come out on top.

A gish can easily run with the rest of the broken characters. It'd be one of those "who cares" situations if it came down to fisticuffs between a gish and a CoDZilla. And they're what, one or two levels behind a wizard, and zero or one levels behind a sorcerer? Big deal.

[Iku Rex]

3) It gives an AC bonus equal to your level in the PrC times 2, in essence (shield and greater luminous armor).

IMO greater luminous armor isn't that big a deal since it's rather obscure, requires a sacrifice (1d3 Str) and arguably requires you to "utterly devote yourself to good". Still, it would have been better game design to make the AC ability specific to shield or shield bonuses.

[deadseashoals]

...And it doesn't matter because full spellcasters still come out on top.


If the prerequisites meant that only multiclass members of an inferior archetype could gain use of it at relatively low levels while straight-classed Druids only gain access to it once its abilities are par for the spellcasting course, No, I wouldn't think it broken.

Spellcasting course? What do you suppose Druids do in combat? Battlefield control and save or sucks are for the Wizard. Sure, they might toss around the occasional finger of death, sunbeam, or heal here and there, but Druids don't have Wild Shape so they can sit in the back lines.

[Temp]

Spellcasting course? What do you suppose Druids do in combat? Battlefield control and save or sucks are for the Wizard. Sure, they might toss around the occasional finger of death, sunbeam, or heal here and there, but Druids don't have Wild Shape so they can sit in the back lines.

I suppose Druids cast Quickened low-level buff spells on themselves and on their Animal Companions while they tear their enemies apart in melee.

If only there were some way a non-Full-Spellcaster could do the same, he might actually be able to keep up with the Cleric or Druid...

[Iku Rex]

...And it doesn't matter because full spellcasters still come out on top.

That's a terrible argument. Melee characters should be balanced compared to other melee characters. If the barbarian can't match the effectiveness of high level spellcasting that's actually not the big deal people make it out to be. Different characters have different roles in a party and as long as they can shine at their thing most players don't mind some power differences. But if the barbarian can't match the wizard in head-on melee combat you have a real balance problem.

[Zincorium]

That'd be the opposite of my point. Once they get to a reasonable enough level to where their abilities come together in a neat little package, multiclass PrC-based gish characters are in every way superior to melee characters without magic. They beat the melees at their own game, which is something even Batman can't do pre-shapechange. Abjurant champion puts them way over the top, giving them a completely inappropriate power boost for no reason at all.

I like Gish type characters, but as far as armor they either A. wear it but fail at spellcasting occasionally B. Must depend on the same AC sources as mages, but have fewer spells to spend on them and are in combat more

They have a lot less durability than a properly made melee character, any buffs take actions which are the most valuable resource any character has, and when out of spells for the day they are a second-rate meleer by anyone's standard. And this tends to happen fairly early in the day.

Let's say there was a prestige class for the Druid, a class that is widely acknowledged to outdo melee fighters at melee, and still have spellcasting and other class features.

If you're going to bring in CoDzilla, you're already off on a massive tangent. They are overpowered because they are full spellcasters, something that a gish character has serious, serious problems being. They're lucky if they ever get 9th level spells, and it takes multiple prestige classes to get there.

A druid just has to make logical choices, like natural spell. They can cast in full armor (dragonhide or ironwood), most of their buffs affect their animal companion equally through share spell, and they have a healing role they can fall back on. They are overpowered especially compared to gish types, because they don't have a single effing drawback.

Now, let's say that class had no meaningful prerequisites, continued to advance the Druid's wild shape, but also gave it full BAB, the ability to cast Druid buff spells as swift actions, and an AC bonus equal to its level in the PrC times 2. Broken, you say? But that's exactly what the Abjurant Champion does:

1) It builds on a character archetype that already threatens game balance by making it better.
2) It can be obtained for virtually no cost.
3) It gives an AC bonus equal to your level in the PrC times 2, in essence (shield and greater luminous armor).
4) It allows you to cast those precious buff spells as swift actions.

Right. It makes the Gish archetype function in the first place, by removing the weaknesses I mentioned. And those ARE serious drawbacks I've felt everytime I play a gish. If you go down because you lost several levels of d10 hit dice for d4's and can't wear much more than a mithril shirt, it doesn't matter that you still had spells left. If you spend two rounds of a three round fight buffing while someone else gets smashed up, it doesn't matter that you were slightly better than them that third round.

[Quietus]

...And it doesn't matter because full spellcasters still come out on top.

Saying that full casters (Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer, whatever) are more powerful than a gish isn't exactly helpful when discussing whether Abjurant Champion is balanced. The strongest indication of balance is when you can look at something from a purely mechanical perspective and see absolutely NO reason NOT to take it. Really, the biggest downside to taking Abjurant Champion is A) Loss of a point of BAB, and B) the Combat Casting requirement, which really, if you're going to pick up spellcasting in the first place, isn't a HORRIBLE choice - sure, Skill Focus is better, but still.

Even looking at things from a purely melee perspective. If I have the option of making an 11th level character, would I rather make a level 11 Fighter, or dip one of those levels into a casting class and throw in five levels of Abjurant Champion? Give up feats, sure, but let's assume that I've chosen to run with Wizard levels - I now have third-level spells, which conveniently is the same level of spells I can automatically quicken via my Swift Abjuration ability. I've given up what, three feats, in exchange for being able to buff myself in combat - which, ultimately, is going to be FAR more helpful. Why WOULDN'T I do that?

That's the best way to look at balance - if it's so strong that it elicits a response of "Duh!" when you're considering it, it's too much. Back it down until you find the point where you'd never have anyone take it, and then meet the two in the middle. That hesitation that's now felt when you consider the class? That's balance.

[Reinboom]

Saying that full casters (Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer, whatever) are more powerful than a gish isn't exactly helpful when discussing whether Abjurant Champion is balanced. The strongest indication of balance is when you can look at something from a purely mechanical perspective and see absolutely NO reason NOT to take it. Really, the biggest downside to taking Abjurant Champion is A) Loss of a point of BAB, and B) the Combat Casting requirement, which really, if you're going to pick up spellcasting in the first place, isn't a HORRIBLE choice - sure, Skill Focus is better, but still.

Even looking at things from a purely melee perspective. If I have the option of making an 11th level character, would I rather make a level 11 Fighter, or dip one of those levels into a casting class and throw in five levels of Abjurant Champion? Give up feats, sure, but let's assume that I've chosen to run with Wizard levels - I now have third-level spells, which conveniently is the same level of spells I can automatically quicken via my Swift Abjuration ability. I've given up what, three feats, in exchange for being able to buff myself in combat - which, ultimately, is going to be FAR more helpful. Why WOULDN'T I do that?

That's the best way to look at balance - if it's so strong that it elicits a response of "Duh!" when you're considering it, it's too much. Back it down until you find the point where you'd never have anyone take it, and then meet the two in the middle. That hesitation that's now felt when you consider the class? That's balance.

I do not believe the fighter is a fair argument here, given the extreme weakness of the fighter. A better example would be the barbarian (or, say, the warblade). Why would I take 11 of fighter? 11 of barbarian would most surely fit most of the roles better. 5 Barbarian, 1 Wizard, 5 Abjurant Champion? I'm losing quite a bit here... but for a completely different character type.

Also, abjurant champion can only swift up to level 2 spells, not 3. It's half abjurant champion level rounded down - and there's only 5 levels of Abjurant Champion.

[Iku Rex]

Also, abjurant champion can only swift up to level 2 spells, not 3. It's half abjurant champion level rounded down - and there's only 5 levels of Abjurant Champion.

Complete Mage page 50:

Swift Abjuration (Su): Beginning at 2nd level, you can cast abjuration spells as a swift action, as if you had applied the Quicken Spell feat to them (but without any change in level). The maximum level of spell you can quicken in this way is equal to 1/2 your class level (rounded up).

[Reinboom]

Complete Mage page 50:

Oh wow, now I feel foolish. Thank you for the correction. I guess I assumed this for way too long.
Well, that gives a significant power boost to this class.

[Quietus]

I do not believe the fighter is a fair argument here, given the extreme weakness of the fighter. A better example would be the barbarian (or, say, the warblade). Why would I take 11 of fighter? 11 of barbarian would most surely fit most of the roles better. 5 Barbarian, 1 Wizard, 5 Abjurant Champion? I'm losing quite a bit here... but for a completely different character type.

Also, abjurant champion can only swift up to level 2 spells, not 3. It's half abjurant champion level rounded down - and there's only 5 levels of Abjurant Champion.

Perhaps the build you're going for doesn't involve raging? The reason I chose not to include Barbarian is because his signature ability, Rage, specifically disallows spellcasting during its duration. Admittedly, you'd lose some nice benefits - DR 2/-, an extra rage per day, and Greater Rage (which is really just +2 str/con, and +1 will save, which you'd more than make up the will save and can self-buff with a gish). The extra rage per day doesn't change the fact that you can't rage or cast at the same time, the benefit of Greater Rage is mitigated by your ability to cast spells to buff yourself before initiating that rage - that DR is the biggest loss.

I chose Fighter because the common builds for melee characters around these boards are A) Power Attack Leap Monkey, which uses Barbarian for the extra strength and B) Battlefield Control Chain Weilder. As mentioned, I didn't use Barbarian because gishing a barbarian is a bad idea (barring Rage Mage, which really, is a weak class anyhow - though it might be interesting to see a Barb/Abjchamp/Ragemage). Which means that we're looking at a battlefield control build, typically, which is feat-heavy, suggesting Fighter levels. Five levels of Fighter before dipping Wizard or Sorcerer and then going into Abjurant Champion will put you three feats ahead of the crowd, enough to run the Improved Trip combos people love so much.

Alternatively, we can look at the Paladin - what's better, an extra smite per day, remove disease 2/week, and a magic horse, or third level spellcasting, which you can use via swift actions? Of course, you can always stick to your Paladin spellcasting, but really, third level arcane spells will put many of your Paladin spells to shame - particularly when you can cast those arcane spells as a swift action.


Really, the strongest argument against taking Abjurant Champion levels is Barbarian, and not necessarily because of what you'd lose from the class, but rather, because you can't use your Abjurant Champion abilities while using your Barbarian ones.

[Temp]

That's a terrible argument. Melee characters should be balanced compared to other melee characters. If the barbarian can't match the effectiveness of high level spellcasting that's actually not the big deal people make it out to be. Different characters have different roles in a party and as long as they can shine at their thing most players don't mind some power differences. But if the barbarian can't match the wizard in head-on melee combat you have a real balance problem.

We do have those balance problems. A gish build does have to keep up with Clerics and Druids who can match a Barbarian in head-on melee combat and cast high-level spells

Saying that full casters (Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer, whatever) are more powerful than a gish isn't exactly helpful when discussing whether Abjurant Champion is balanced.

Why not? The Druid and Cleric set the power level that a Gish has to match starting a bit before level 10--about the time a character can gain entrance to the Abjurant Champion. It matches their combat, casting low-level spells as quickly as they do and maintaining a higher base attack, but it can't match their actual spellcasting power.

The strongest indication of balance is when you can look at something from a purely mechanical perspective and see absolutely NO reason NOT to take it. Really, the biggest downside to taking Abjurant Champion is A) Loss of a point of BAB, and B) the Combat Casting requirement, which really, if you're going to pick up spellcasting in the first place, isn't a HORRIBLE choice - sure, Skill Focus is better, but still.

We already know that imbalance is there. We already know the flaws of the Fighter class. Abjurant Champion is a "no-brainer" for a Fighter and there's no reason it shouldn't be. Spellcaster power erupts slightly after the Fighter qualifies for the class. Either he becomes a weak spellcaster with the ability to buff himself as quickly as the Cleric or he falls behind the CoDzilla. With Abjurant Champion or not, the Cleric will outcast the Fighter. AbjChamp just allows the Fighter to adapt to the caster-centric high level game.

[deadseashoals]

We do have those balance problems. A gish build does have to keep up with Clerics and Druids who can match a Barbarian in head-on melee combat and cast high-level spells

Why not? The Druid and Cleric set the power level that a Gish has to match starting a bit before level 10--about the time a character can gain entrance to the Abjurant Champion. It matches their combat, casting low-level spells as quickly as they do and maintaining a higher base attack, but it can't match their actual spellcasting power.



We already know that imbalance is there. We already know the flaws of the Fighter class. Abjurant Champion is a "no-brainer" for a Fighter and there's no reason it shouldn't be. Spellcaster power erupts slightly after the Fighter qualifies for the class. Either he becomes a weak spellcaster with the ability to buff himself as quickly as the Cleric or he falls behind the CoDzilla. With Abjurant Champion or not, the Cleric will outcast the Fighter. AbjChamp just allows the Fighter to adapt to the caster-centric high level game.

Or, instead of participating in the death spiral, you could get rid of the things that make CoDZilla what it is, and get rid of things like the Abjurant Champion.

BTW, the gishes I have played have had no problems with armor or anything else like that. The only thing that has been weaker than a normal melee character is the hit points, and the extra defenses like mirror image make up for it and more.

It's also a terrible idea to make a gish that casts more than one or two buffs at the beginning of combat. You can easily make a perfectly good gish that outshines any nonmagical melee character using nothing but 24 hour, 1 hr/lvl, and 10 min/lvl buffs (plus anything you can quick cast) with maybe one 1 round/lvl buff if at all. If you want to cast 1 min/lvl buffs, you can cast one during combat, forgo it, or cast it as you're kicking in the door.

[Temp]

It's also a terrible idea to make a gish that casts more than one or two buffs at the beginning of combat. You can easily make a perfectly good gish that outshines any nonmagical melee character using nothing but 24 hour, 1 hr/lvl, and 10 min/lvl buffs (plus anything you can quick cast) with maybe one 1 round/lvl buff if at all. If you want to cast 1 min/lvl buffs, you can cast one during combat, forgo it, or cast it as you're kicking in the door.

I'm not denying this.

Or, instead of participating in the death spiral, you could get rid of the things that make CoDZilla what it is, and get rid of things like the Abjurant Champion.

And I'm not saying this is a bad call, but it would be a houserule that wouldn't relate to discussion of the 3.5 system.

It's hard to out-fight the Cleric, so anything can and does with weaker overall spellcasting seems to be a step toward a better-balanced game.

[Saph]

1) It builds on a character archetype that already threatens game balance by making it better.
2) It can be obtained for virtually no cost.
3) It gives an AC bonus equal to your level in the PrC times 2, in essence (shield and greater luminous armor).
4) It allows you to cast those precious buff spells as swift actions.

I'd agree with deadsea, especially this point. The real reason the Abjurant Champion is so fantastic is not just that its class features are good, but that it costs nothing at all to enter. Heck, I've got a straight wizard/loremaster who's going to be taking Abjurant Champion after the next level. She's not a gish, in fact she's a hopeless melee fighter, but Abjurant Champion is the best PrC for her anyway, because it's just that good. When even a straight arcanist benefits from taking the class, you know it's a overpowered.

I mean, you get full spellcasting AND full BAB AND a d10 hit dice AND some great class features too. (Automatically extend your abjurations? Cast Shield for +9 AC as a swift action? Yes please.) And all you lose in exchange is having to take the Combat Casting feat, which, while less than amazing, isn't a total waste either.

The only reason Abjurant Champion isn't taken more often (IMO) is that gishes are a relatively uncommon character type. In that sense the Abjurant Champion isn't really a problem, because so few people play the type of PC it's designed for, and it works best for all-round characters rather than hyper-specialised ones. So I wouldn't feel guilty about recommending it to anyone the way I'd feel guilty for recommending, say, Planar Shepherd (which is just horrible and should never have existed.) But it's still overpowered, no doubt about it.

- Saph

[Starbuck_II]

I like Gish type characters, but as far as armor they either A. wear it but fail at spellcasting occasionally B. Must depend on the same AC sources as mages, but have fewer spells to spend on them and are in combat more

A. Mithral Twilight Chain Shirt vis good armor and doesn't fail at sprllcasting. ASF 0%.

B. Depends on gish.

[Crow]

A. Mithral Twilight Chain Shirt vis good armor and doesn't fail at sprllcasting. ASF 0%.

B. Depends on gish.

A. Or by the time you master Abjurant Champion, you usually qualify for Spellsword which gets you another free -10% ASF.

[Azerian Kelimon]

Seeing this debate, I'd like to point out a few things:

1) Every debater here is a knowledgeable D&D player, who owns a reasonable number of splatbooks, and because of that has an idea of possible combos, right?

2) We all know fighters, barbs, pallies, and the like can only be efficient if they become one trick ponies, and, as such, are not top tier, right?


3) Then, why not compare the AC to the upper echelon of melee classes, like a Swordsage of most kinds (Example: The Time Stands Still abuser who gets an obscene number of attacks), a lady's gambit crusader, or some version of warblade? It would help put things in perspective.

[Crow]

A well-built gish will still probably beat out the melee set just due to his access to celerity, and higher-level arcane spells, but that argument could go round and round forever.

I agree that there is no real reason to not take AbChamp, and that does seem to be a problem.

[Reinboom]

The grounds I have gotten to with this are:
Abjurant Champions are slightly overpowered in the sense of "why not?", that is, characters with no holds on progression. (IE: A full caster even - I'm actually doing this in a campaign I'm playing in...)
They are relatively a well worked class in the areas of their intent - gish builds.
How to fix this, without really 'nerfing' the class:
More tough intro requirements. Such as requiring light armor proficiency and/or something else martial related.

[Kaelik]

More tough intro requirements. Such as requiring light armor proficiency and/or something else martial related.

The problem is that all Gish characters will still take it, and only Full casters won't. And honestly, full casters shouldn't anyways, they have Fate Spinner/IotSFV/Incantrix and many other better choices.

[Reinboom]

The problem is that all Gish characters will still take it, and only Full casters won't. And honestly, full casters shouldn't anyways, they have Fate Spinner/IotSFV/Incantrix and many other better choices.

Spell Focus (Abjuration), and proficiency with light armor...?

[Saph]

The problem is that all Gish characters will still take it, and only Full casters won't. And honestly, full casters shouldn't anyways, they have Fate Spinner/IotSFV/Incantrix and many other better choices.

Fatespinner is nice, but not absolutely amazing, and it's only four levels.

IotSV is overpowered and does not make for a fun game.

Incantatrix is Faerun-specific and can very easily backfire if you don't know what you're doing (very high Spellcraft DCs, and you lose yet another school of magic).

Even a full caster does great with Abjurant Champion, since it boosts their BAB and defences significantly.

- Saph

[Azerian Kelimon]

Hmm...would the requirement of proficiency with ALL martial weapons be a deterrent for casters? Gishes mostly have full martial.