Bending Classes Playtesting Analysis

[Lakoda]

True... but the complication might be worth the faster healing and all. Also, that might be a reason to give a little less vit.

[Xiagu]

Okay, I'm going to step in and give my slightly biased opinion, after my quick defeat:
Firebenders need a better BAB.

Look at our character sheets; I have a puny final attack bonus of +25/+20/+15, while Tataraus has +33/+28/+23/+18, and Partysan has +36/+31/+26/+21! Something's wrong when other classes can get attack bonuses higher than your armor class. Upping Firebender's BAB wouldn't fix this, but it would give them a fighting chance...

All the benders are plauged by their measly 'average' BAB, which goes up to +15. Even with a big Dexterity score, it probably won't even go above +20. Without magical enhancements, you may need to roll a 16 or higher just to hit someone. Couple that with the Ocean Sentinel and this is what you get... *shudder*

Reducing Blast Damage
I support it, but I'd almost rather see all blasts deal d6's (yes, I know that I was the one who gave Waterbenders d4 damage dice in the first place, but I've changed my mind ) but the progressions vary. I like +1d6 at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 for Waterbenders and Earthbenders, and perhaps +1d6 at levels 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 for Firebenders. That way, Waterbenders and Earthbenders cap off at 5d6 and Firebenders cap off at 7d6, still a respectable total but not quite so powerful. Remember that dealing damage is pretty much all Firebenders have going for them, so they should stay pretty powerful in this regard.

This looks okay with me; it also keeps Firebenders where they should be in damage progression, at the top. Currently, they're kind of lacking in the attack department... Giving them a good BAB will balance them with the slightly nerfed earthbender, and all the blast damage will be nerfed anyways, so it won't be a big damage increase.

But until us Firebenders have more interesting seeds, direct damage is going to be all we've got, and why shouldn't we be the best at it? Besides, fluff-wise fire is one of the 'fast' elements.

[Lord Tataraus]

I think the benders need to up the class defense and I would agree with firebenders getting full BAB, but only if they get the same damage as the other benders. Though, part of your problem Xiagu was attacking an OS in melee, never attack a counter build. A bender's strength is in range.

[Xiagu]

Psssh, if I had a higher BAB I would have gotten the following:

Spoiler

Show

Attack Rolls: (hitting attacks in red)
Sword #1 Attack 1 - (1d20+28)[11](39)
Sword #1 Attack 2 - (1d20+23)[9](32)
Sword #1 Attack 3 - (1d20+18)[12](30)
Sword #2 Attack 1 - (1d20+28)[19](47)
Sword #2 Attack 2 - (1d20+23)[7](30)
Sword #2 Attack 3 - (1d20+18)[9](27)

Damage Rolls: (1d6 sword + 9d6 Fire Blast + sword extra damage, so DR applies to the first roll + extra damage) (missed rolls & die rolls removed)
Sword #1 Damage 1 - (10d6+5)(41)
Sword #1 Damage 2 - (10d6+5)(48)
Sword #2 Damage 1 - (10d6+4)(43)

Sum, including DR and that crit I got, is:
41 - 7 = 34 damage
48 - 7 = 41
50 - 7 = 43 damage
Sum is 118 damage. Consider yourself pwnt!

You would have been at 2 hp. No, I think my problem was attacking an OS in melee and not rolling well enough to kill him before he acted.

@V: True, but you still can't go above +21 as your ranged BAB with only an 'average' BAB.

[GryffonDurime]

Zen Archery is a golden feat for Benders.

[Attilargh]

Zen Archery is a trap, as 'Benders need Dexterity for AC, Reflex Saves, Tumble and Balance. With a high point buy, one's Wisdom will be only marginally better than one's Dexterity, and the feat won't pay itself off.

Of course, the other feats that actually help 'Benders aren't that much better.

[Partysan]

I don't think any bender should have full BAB.
While I understand your tactics it WAS a critical thing to go into melee with a dedicated melee class while beeing lets call it a gish yourself. He has full BAB because he can't do anything else but fight. You can bend.
Bzt I raelly think that fierbenders should get some additional Seeds. Maybe I'll try to be creative.

[Mephibosheth]

I agree that we shouldn't give benders full BAB. I think one of the main reasons benders (esp. Firebenders) were having such a hard time hitting anything was that, (iirc) for the purposes of the playtesting battles, class defense bonus and AC bonuses from armor stacked. The class defense bonus system wasn't balanced to accommodate stacking armor bonuses and class defense bonuses, which combined with the large amounts of gold to result in pretty ridiculous armor classes.

[Partysan]

Yes, hitting is difficult. But that actually fits the avatar feeling quite well, as in the series benders of equal level fighting each other would not hit each other very often.
However I would not let the masterwork bonus give an automatical AC bonus, that's just too much. The stacking of AC bonus and armor is not so much the problem but the masterwork triples the AC bonus of the armor atm.

[Attilargh]

Doesn't work all that well, as not hitting just draws combats to absurd lengths. I don't care if an episode is 20 minutes long, I do not want to roll dice all that time. Besides, we must remember that neither hit nor vitality points measure the amount of blood you can lose or ribs you can get broken. While not-hitting someone with a fireball for 3d6 points of damage might (and does) feel a bit absurd, hitting someone with that same fireball would get so ugly we'd have to move Avatar into a late-night timeslot way off Nick.

With the current gear rules, the ACs have gotten pumped so high that my Firebender can not hit the opposing Wind Warrior without rolling natural 20. Which is of course not a problem for him, because he can splunk the money on über-masterwork fans that utterly negate any bonuses my armour might give me. The problem is not with the 'Benders' medium BAB, it's the absurdly divine gear that is way out of place in a setting where the main characters steal their threads off some poor guy's clothesline.

[Rogue 7]

Agreed. There was significant confusion (at least on my part) about the way the mastercrafting system and whatnot worked, combined with the stacking, made for crazy stuff. I don't hit Darkbane on anything but a 17+, I think. If I was running the system (not that Lord T's not doing a good job), I'd just use the straight-up D&D system for armor, instead of the variants most of us haven't worked with before.

[Lord Tataraus]

And all of the above is why I keep trying to balance the masterwork system. I've recently added this rule:

In the avatar world, all weapons, armor and tools can gain up to 5 levels of masterwork. This levels are as follows in order: Item of... Masterwork, Renown, Fame, Glory, Legend. All bonuses that the masterwork quality applies are multiplied by the level of masterwork of the item. Additional levels of masterwork cannot be gained, only created as such. Masterwork levels grant armor and shields a +1 bonus to AC per level and grant weapons a +1 to hit per level. The base cost of masterwork applied to armor and shields is now 300gp. You must meet the prerequisite level to benefit from a certain level of masterwork as shown by the table below.

{table=head]Character Level|Maximum Masterwork Level

1-3

|

1

4-7

|

2

8-11

|

3

12-16

|

4

17-20

|

5

[/table]

Emphasis mine.

[ErrantX]

Well, having gone over the playtests and read people's responses, this is my weigh in on things.

Bender damage needs to be pulled back a little, as Meph said here:

Reducing Blast Damage
I support it, but I'd almost rather see all blasts deal d6's (yes, I know that I was the one who gave Waterbenders d4 damage dice in the first place, but I've changed my mind ) but the progressions vary. I like +1d6 at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 for Waterbenders and Earthbenders, and perhaps +1d6 at levels 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 for Firebenders. That way, Waterbenders and Earthbenders cap off at 5d6 and Firebenders cap off at 7d6, still a respectable total but not quite so powerful. Remember that dealing damage is pretty much all Firebenders have going for them, so they should stay pretty powerful in this regard.

I think that's fair and workable still, bender's blasts are a lot like a warlock's eldritch blast and they can only do that once per round. I'd consider increasing those damage die pools by 1d6 each, so at level 1 it's 2d6 and so on. Also, I agree that the DCs for rendering something helpless should be increased by at least +15, if not more. Being the victim of a coup de grace in round 2 fighting an Earthbender or Waterbender would suck. The Earthbender nerfs are also acceptable.

As much as I want to say that the mastercraft stuff is viable, it may not be in the end. Especially with the Armor as DR rule and Class Defense bonus. Either we need to pick either normal AC rules and use Mastercraft like you've designed Tataraus, or we need to drop it back (or at the very least scale it differently) and use the RAW so unless the AC bonus (half of the Armor's listed bonus mind you, the other half is DR) is higher than your Class Defense total bonus, you get diddly squat from it except for DR. And I'm fine with that, personally. But the stacking has got to stop.

Meph said it best when he said we should allow DM's to use either HP or V/W, though I will still stubbornly insist that V/W is the better option for our setting.

Also, as Martial Artists get full BAB, are they just out and out replacing fighter? If not, I'd suggest putting Martial Artist down to 3/4 BAB and not completely rob the fighter of all of his dignity. The vast array of powers that the Martial Artist gets are overall better than fighter bonus feats if they have full BAB. If the consensus has been reached that fighter is gone, then whatever I guess. But I don't think fighter should go away, and to help balance out the vast cheese-factor capability of the Martial Artist (as we've seen in playtest), I'd say ramp back their BAB. The fighter needs to have something to be worthwhile, especially with Martial Artists being able to take fighter only feats (which I'd remove as well).

-X

[Ceiling009]

I think the general consensus on the Martial Artist (at least the point) was to replace the Fighter, and in fact even the Ranger. The only close combat classes not replaced are the Rogue and the Barbarian; As Rogues have more than just a striker role, and Barbarians are quite different enough that they can stay.

About Armor and Class Defense Bonus; I do like choose one or the other more; with the condition that you can at least take a feat or some class ability that allows for at least half the Armor Class Value to stack with Class bonus. It makes for a more costly investment than the armor cost, cause really in this setting, (well according to canon) many people don't wear armor, and many of the best fighting individuals we've seen never wear armor, and if they do; it's light at best (maybe medium for a few).

[Lord Tataraus]

First off, the Martial Artist is meant to replace all melee classes (rogue doesn't count as melee). The fighter is crap and I've never liked it so above all else, fighter is gone. Though Eighth Seraph is making another class(es) to be a variant to the Martial Artist. Of course the Martial Artist will be balanced based on the cheese presented in the playtest.

As for the AC issue, I am thinking of removing the stacking or having armor grant only DR and you get your class defense bonus as the only AC boost. If the latter option is chosen, then the masterwork levels will not grant AC boost (obviously).

Any comment on the above?

Edit: The MA doesn't replace Barb either, though I don't know if it fits in the setting.

[Rogue 7]

Stand Still has made it difficult for me to do anything against the Ocean Sentinel, and he closed before I could make a move. This may be a function of the arena, but the fact that benders are useless close in, combined with stand still's ability to keep them close, is more than a little annoying. I can't judge whether or not it's overpowered, though.

[ErrantX]

Good to know about the dropping of fighter. I don't agree with it, but I can go with it just the same. I know a lot of people have no love for fighter (I don't understand why, I love fighter ) and either give it nifty new things to spruce it up or replace them all together with martial disciples from ToB.

I'm glad we're in agreement on the AC thing and armor thing, and yeah, the MW bonuses would just add DR and reduce penalties. Works for me.

@Ceiling009:

I don't know if I'd want to have a feat or class feature that would allow the stacking, that's really powerful at any level. That and everyone would take it. It's too good not to.

-X

[Lord Tataraus]

Stand Still has made it difficult for me to do anything against the Ocean Sentinel, and he closed before I could make a move. This may be a function of the arena, but the fact that benders are useless close in, combined with stand still's ability to keep them close, is more than a little annoying. I can't judge whether or not it's overpowered, though.

Because your playing the bender wrong against a melee class. A bender's strength is control and range. That's how I killed the Firebender so fast, he went into melee, however, if he kept his distance and blasted with fewer attacks from range, he would have killed me faster than I killed him.

[Darkbane]

Also, tripping is very effective against benders. I haven't pulled it off yet, but if I do, Galon gets a -10 to bending, a -4 to AC, and he can't get up without provoking another AoO.

Edit: And the reason he's in melee is because I used my first action to run all the way across the arena to close with him.

[Lord Tataraus]

Also, tripping is very effective against benders. I haven't pulled it off yet, but if I do, Galon gets a -10 to bending, a -4 to AC, and he can't get up without provoking another AoO.

Edit: And the reason he's in melee is because I used my first action to run all the way across the arena to close with him.

True, that's why he should strategize with his melee team mate to help him retreat, then have the melee-er keep you from advancing and he can provide support.

[Ceiling009]

I know it's really good, and everyone would take it, but then that's at a cost of feat that they could go elsewhere. Since fighters are gone, most classes only have 8 feats to choose from, and granting that everyone chooses that feat, then only 7. You play a bender, you have to choose skill focus or you're rather useless, so now only 6. The problem may now lie with the style focus of the MA, where you choose a style and you basically replace a lot of feats with those styles; so as they level along they can choose other feats that may enhance their current style set or be a complete set of other abilities, like being ranged proficient; while being a MBF. Which in Standard DND is a lot harder than it seems.

[Partysan]

1. About Armor, I'll repeat: The stacking of armor and Defense Bonus is not the problem. The problem is, that the armor does have not +3 but +8 AC due to the mastercrafting. That's why I'd say just remove the automatic AC bonus from the mastercraft and you're fine.

2. I support the MA replacing the fighter, however we could try to make a style that gets some bonus feats, if all people want so. (though the MA gets already 3 of them)

[Archangel Yuki]

I might of missed this, but when I was looking at ves. 1.0, it listed lesser, normal, and greater seeds, while the 2.0 post shows no such things. Were they done away with?

[Darkbane]

V. 1 had specific bending forms, each of which did something special, modeled after the warlock. V. 2.0 moves away from the warlock, replacing the forms with combinable seeds, all of which is governed by a skill check.

[Lord Tataraus]

As for the AC issue, I am thinking of removing the stacking or having armor grant only DR and you get your class defense bonus as the only AC boost. If the latter option is chosen, then the masterwork levels will not grant AC boost (obviously).

Any comment on the above?

I would really like some input on the quoted proposals. Thoughts?

Also, remember that this is a thread to discuss benders only, not MA. If you do have questions/comments/whatever please post them in the Martial Artist thread to prevent derailment of this thread.
Thank you.

[ErrantX]

I second it. Remove the stacking and I say no stacking feat.

-X

[Uthug]

I third it. Give some thought to the poor airbender. His dodge bonus is supposed to be an advantage for him in addition to his class bonus, but now, almost every other bender can have armor that gives much more AC than the Airbender's dodge bonus. At almost every level.

Edit: And they lose it once they're flat-footed, as demonstrated in the Lightweight battle 1, while the rest sit there laughing in their masterworked armor.

[Lord Tataraus]

Just to clarify, X and Uthug, you are agreeing to the removing the stacking, but not to removing the AC bonus from armors, correct?

[Uthug]

Well yes. I'm quite sure that it'd probably balence out quite nicely, so that Earthbenders can wear their masterworked full plates and lose their class defence bonus while the airbender can have his class defence bonus and dodge bonuses. This also works quite well with your level limit for stacking levels of masterwork, though I'm not sure how that would work in campaigns as masterwork weapons have to be created that way. It would be just funny to have players dump their weapons every couple of levels.

[ErrantX]

Just to clarify, X and Uthug, you are agreeing to the removing the stacking, but not to removing the AC bonus from armors, correct?

Stacking is bad, and I'd remove the MW AC bonus from armor (just adding it to the overall DR) and keep it on shields (as it's a shield bonus).

-X