Are iconics balanced but classes/races not?

shilsen said:
Giants are effectively the top melee monster for their CR. Comparing them against just a fighter (or any other melee-oriented class) won't tell you much. Against a well-rounded party, however, it's a different story.

Consider a hill giant (CR 7), for example, with its Ref +3 and Will +4. A 7th lvl wizard with 16 Int casting a 4th lvl spell gives the giant only a 40% chance of saving against it if it's a Will save (35% if Ref). Throw in Spell Focus and an 18 Int, and that's down to 30% and 25%.

A party with spellcasters can take out a giant of the same CR as the party average level quite easily, which is precisely what their CR says that they should be able to.

A +4 Will save is actually pretty good for a CR7 non-caster monster, and the fact it's not a humanoid and has a ton of hit dice means that a 7th level wizard isn't exactly going to be overwhelmed with options when it comes to useful Will-save based spells. Level 4 spells do include some nice choices, but it's no guarantee that he actually would have any of those in his spellbook, if you're playing by the RAW. (he's only guaranteed 2 4th level spells known, after all, and scribing new ones is hellishly expensive)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sejs said:
What about the second-tier iconics?

Regdar, Human Fighter
Nebin, Gnome Illusionist
Devis, the previous Iconic Bard
Naull, Human Wizard
Eberk, Dwarf Cleric
Kerwyn, Human Rogue
(etc)

How do those fit into the picture? We see again a broad spread of humans. Interestingly, we see a very strong (albeit traditional) race/class combo with Eberk. Two old iconics, the old gnome and the guy he replaced. Also ... no halflings or half orcs doing ... anything other than their single FC.

I am less well versed in who is represented here. But, except for the Dwarf Cleric, you have a lot of humans (plus a half-elf). The anomoly, in my opion, is Redgar because the Dwarf Fighter combination is so much better than the Human Fighter combination.

But I was just wondering if these pairing could help explain some elements of the game.

In particular, the Half-Elf Druid and the Dwarf Fighter stand out as exceptionally playable characters despite my general feeling of discontent with both Hlaf-Elves and Fighters.
 

Victim said:
Err, compared to what other core dieties? Strength and Sun are both strong domains, and the good domain is required to make Holy weapons.

I (perhaps incorrectly) generally assume that Flarlaghn, Olidammara, Wee-Jas and Boccob (utility clerics) or Kord, Hieronous, St Cuthbert (Melee clerics) offer more competitive domains. I seem to get more out of Obad-Hai in terms of cool turning options compared to Sun.

Pelor isn't a terrible choice but he sure isn't optimized. The most amazing combinations with clerics, in my opinion, involve poaching tricks from the arcanes and his domains don't do that.


Victim said:
Only if you assume that other class race combinations weren't playtested. Only trying out a mere double handful of builds hardly even merits the word the word playtest anyway.

Moreover, the 3.0 - 3.5 switch allowed further "play-testing" which seems to have been at least partially ignored. Druids and Dwarves only became stronger after more play, despite being good before. Half elves were throw a few scraps but had no significant changes made despite complaints.

It is possible that the Druid needed one of several boosts as compared to the cleric. One of: better animal companion, spontaneous summoning, better whildshape and natural spell would have done it nicely. Adding all four was a bit over the top. :confused:

The Druid is also awkwardly balanced. In core a poor spell list balances out the high level Druid (it gets many good spells a level later then other classes and surprisingly weak spells overall). Bu this seems to be the favorite thing for people to fix in "splatbooks" -- let's give the Druid some decent spells that are nature themed. Often this goes over the top completely --> look at the pre-errata Miasma and Quill Blast in the Complete Divine which are the best combat spells of their level. But in general this balancing feature is rapidly forgotten and, as a result, the Druid ends up really good as you add material.

Yes -- improving the spell list was option 5 for balancing the Druid and they manage to include it indirectly as well. :\


As for the Half-Elf -- that was the worst fix I can imagine. Ensure that one "suboptimal mechanic" (Diplomacy) can be wildly broken by the race. Make every other element of the race worse than a default human. I love Half-Elves but you play them because being a Half-Elf is fun not because the mechanics are rewarding.


In terms of the Dwarf, I have no idea what they were thinking which is why I hypothesize about the iconics. It's just so good for so little that I honestly do not understand. :( The slow movement == highly annoying but any class that wears heavy armor is not penalized at all! :confused:

Why would anybody play anything other than a Dwarf Fighter except for flavor?
 

shilsen said:
A party with spellcasters can take out a giant of the same CR as the party average level quite easily, which is precisely what their CR says that they should be able to.
This is probably true. A "back of the envelope" calculation with an 8th-level dwarf fighter and an 8th-level wizard (only) using just one damage-dealing spell of each level from 4th to 1st (empowered scorching ray, fireball, scorching ray, magic missile), assuming expected damage and very stupid tactics on the party of the giant (always attack the fighter) indicated that the stone giant should be defeated in 4 rounds. I'm curious to see how it would work out with a fighter of another race, and if the stone giant tried to attack the wizard instead.
 

Hedgemage said:
Well, gnomes were turned into bards simply to give bards a boost and gnomes a better favored class than Illusion Specialist Wizard. There was no basis for it in any D&D edition, campaign setting, or other source material. I would love to be proven wrong, but I think the gnome/bard pairing was done solely for 'marketing' (for lack of a better word) to make the race and class more interesting.

I think it was also a question of turf. Two of the core races essentially had wizard as the favored class in 3.0. Now, they're all different.
 

Votan said:
I (perhaps incorrectly) generally assume that Flarlaghn, Olidammara, Wee-Jas and Boccob (utility clerics) or Kord, Hieronous, St Cuthbert (Melee clerics) offer more competitive domains. I seem to get more out of Obad-Hai in terms of cool turning options compared to Sun.

Pelor isn't a terrible choice but he sure isn't optimized. The most amazing combinations with clerics, in my opinion, involve poaching tricks from the arcanes and his domains don't do that.

Yeah, they do. Sun has Fireshield and Fire Seeds. Screw that turning stuff. Fire shield is sweet on a fairly melee oriented class like the cleric, since you don't mind being up in someone's face trading hits. It's a great addition to a melee self bufffing cleric. Fire Seeds is a high power druid only attack spell that allows for precasting and distribution (pass acorn nukes to rogue, rogue opens with Xd8 +sneak on a touch attack). Strength has Enlarge Person, plus the Bigby spells.

Heironeous seems clearly weaker even in the melee role.

It is possible that the Druid needed one of several boosts as compared to the cleric. One of: better animal companion, spontaneous summoning, better whildshape and natural spell would have done it nicely. Adding all four was a bit over the top. :confused:

The Druid is also awkwardly balanced. In core a poor spell list balances out the high level Druid (it gets many good spells a level later then other classes and surprisingly weak spells overall). Bu this seems to be the favorite thing for people to fix in "splatbooks" -- let's give the Druid some decent spells that are nature themed. Often this goes over the top completely --> look at the pre-errata Miasma and Quill Blast in the Complete Divine which are the best combat spells of their level. But in general this balancing feature is rapidly forgotten and, as a result, the Druid ends up really good as you add material.

Yes -- improving the spell list was option 5 for balancing the Druid and they manage to include it indirectly as well. :\

The problem is that Druid spells like level 4 Flamestrike, Firestorm, and Fire seeds were taken as the baseline for splatbook offensive spells, when they clearly aren't the baseline for core druid spells (instead they're the standout spells).

Why would anybody play anything other than a Dwarf Fighter except for flavor?

Do you mean why shouldn't all fighters be dwarves, or why shouldn't all dwarves be fighters? The later is easy enough to answer, but the former is tough. Half Orc makes a more offensively focused fighter type (having the big strength at low levels makes a huge difference), Humans can jump start feat intensive builds but will lose steam later on so their value depends on level ranges and feat demand, and other races might be better with non tank fighters.

Really, as long as we're talking out favored class, the 3.5 change had it backwards. Elves should favor Bards since they're interested in songs, spells, and swordplay. Thus Gnomes get upgraded to normal wizard.
 

Votan said:
It is my understanding that the playtesting was based on iconic characters. These iconic characters are specific class and race combinations. I am thinking that maybe part of the balance issues are that the combination is balanced but the individual elements are not.

...

Some interesting patterns emerge. The strongest race (Dwarf) is paired with a class often thought to be the weakest (Fighter). On the other hand, the weakest race (Half-Elf) is paired with what is often considered to be the strongest class (Druid).

Humans are the race with the broadest range of classes: Cleric, Monk, Paladin and Sorcerer. Notice that the cleric is a cleric of Pelor as that is almost the worst choice from a power-gaming perspective.

Half-Orc is often thought to be a weak race but the 4 skill points per level of the Barbarian probably compensate for the -2 INT of the Half Orc when compared to the Fighter.

What do people think? Could this explain some of the paradoxes in D&D 3.5 in terms of class and race balance?

Interesting observations.

But honestly I think that the choice of race makes a difference only at very low levels, and becomes mostly irrelevant later on...
 

Victim said:
Do you mean why shouldn't all fighters be dwarves, or why shouldn't all dwarves be fighters? The later is easy enough to answer, but the former is tough. Half Orc makes a more offensively focused fighter type (having the big strength at low levels makes a huge difference), Humans can jump start feat intensive builds but will lose steam later on so their value depends on level ranges and feat demand, and other races might be better with non tank fighters.

I meant why are all fighters not dwarves. There are some niche cases, I admit, but I generally think that the Dwarf does better overall. The Half Orc is the only competitor (with the High Strength) but the INT costs makes Expertise hard and it is a very valuable Fighter option.

Obviously Dwarf clerics also exist and solid arguments for other Dwarf combinations do as well.

Victim said:
Really, as long as we're talking out favored class, the 3.5 change had it backwards. Elves should favor Bards since they're interested in songs, spells, and swordplay. Thus Gnomes get upgraded to normal wizard.

Strong argeement. Bard fits the pretty people motif as well. It's a much tighter fit with Elf than Gnome and there is a lot more synergy.
 

Regarding half-elves, in 1E, they (and humans) were the only races that could be bards. Furthermore, the only races that had unlimited advancement as druids were humans and half-elves.

So it makes sense that they stuck with those archetypes.
 

Remove ads

Top