Are warriors & rogues required at high level?

[Jolly Giant]

As has been said repeatedly, the DM is not doing his job here! He's the one planning the encounters, and if they all play out the same way the game must surely be boring for everybody...

On the other hand, it sounds like you're not using all the options available to you either, Grishnak... A ranger/shadow dancer is not the same as a fighter! You can do so much more than just hit things with your sword...

For instance, you were very quick to write off your ability to summon shadows. Remember that they only need to make touch attacks to deal their quite nasty STR damage! You say they can't take much damage and that's true, but keep in mind that they're incorporeal. You need magic to damage them, and even then there's a 50% miss chance!

If you're equally quick to dismiss your skills and other capabilities and just stick to hitting monsters with swords it's no wonder you're bored. Don't play your character like fighter if he isn't one. Use his full potential!

Reading this, I see I've come on to you somewhat harder than I meant to. I still feel the main fault is with the DM, but that's already been pointed out so many times, so I wanted to draw some attention to what you can do to rectify the situation. I'm sorry if I sound to harsh...

 

[S'mon]

Hi all!

Another aspect of this situation is that spellcasting characters are universally about 10% stronger than non-spellcasting characters prior to epic levels (wherein this imbalance inverts itself).

So a 16th-level Cleric is about equal to an 18th-level Fighter.

I think the Cleric is the only spellcaster who's _universally_ stronger than non-spellcasters, and that was probably more severe in 3.0 than 3.5. Whether a Wizard with book-value magic is stronger than a Fighter or Rogue with book-value magic really depends on the circumstances. In a lengthy dungeon-crawl without opportunities to rest, the Fighter is probably stronger (but not as strong as the Cleric). In a targetted strike with pre-planning against a single objective*, a Wizard with a good spell book is vastly the most powerful class at high levels.

*eg Ulfius & Clarendon's attack on Castle Albrecht IMC.

 

[SimonMoon5]

Well, in my experience (in a group of PCs that made it up to 16th-18th level in 3.0), the min-maxed archer (fighter/rogue/deepwoods sniper/initiate of the order of the bow/ with one level of cleric) was far and away the most useful member of the party, and sometimes the *only* useful member of the party.

My moderately min-maxed wizard character (plane-touched wizard/incantatrix with one level of monk, often polymorphed into marilith form) simply couldn't compete when it came to combat. With difficulties like spell immunity (golems or even undead against certain spells), spell resistance, elemental damage immunity or resistance, and saving throws, spells were rarely able to do a whole lot. The *only* thing this character had going for him was his insanely high AC, which meant that he could distract a monster by meeting it in melee combat, while the archer did all the damage from a distance.

The group's monk/rogue was totally and utterly useless after about 8th level. Traps were no big deal; the group's dwarf could just go ahead and set off every trap and not die.

The group's cleric wasn't really min-maxed, so he never stood out, but healing spells were always handy... just not as flashy as anybody else. Blade Barriers and Flame Strikes were nice... but not as nice as 4 arrows a round, doing 50 points of damage each (or even more on a crit, critting on a 17).

I did make a cleric-archer for another campaign when my original character was screwed over by the DM. He rocked, but I didn't get to play him long. However, the wizard in that game was useless in combat too (good for teleports for escape purposes but little else).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi S'mon!

I think the Cleric is the only spellcaster who's _universally_ stronger than non-spellcasters, and that was probably more severe in 3.0 than 3.5. Whether a Wizard with book-value magic is stronger than a Fighter or Rogue with book-value magic really depends on the circumstances. In a lengthy dungeon-crawl without opportunities to rest, the Fighter is probably stronger (but not as strong as the Cleric). In a targetted strike with pre-planning against a single objective*, a Wizard with a good spell book is vastly the most powerful class at high levels.

*eg Ulfius & Clarendon's attack on Castle Albrecht IMC.

Perhaps that was far too hasty a generalism on my part...

Here are the core class breakdowns (CR per level with equipment) as accurately as I can I rate them:

Barbarian: 1.106
Bard: 1.046
Cleric: 1.161
Druid: 1.181
Fighter: 1.006
Monk: 1.136
Paladin: 1.049
Ranger: 1.089
Rogue: 1.011
Sorceror: 1.046
Wizard: 1.091

Top 5:

1st: Druid
2nd: Cleric
3rd: Monk
4th: Barbarian
5th: Wizard

From Epic Levels:

Barbarian: 1.056
Bard: 0.906
Cleric: 0.906
Druid: 0.926
Fighter: 0.966
Monk: 1.016
Paladin: 0.926
Ranger: 0.956
Rogue: 0.966
Sorceror: 0.736
Wizard: 0.736

Top 5

1st: Barbarian
2nd: Monk
3rd: Fighter & Rogue
5th: Ranger

However the major difference the above figures do not yet allow for is the far greater reliance on equipment of Fighter types over Spellcasters - notably with regards attacking (rather than defending).

 

[Grishnak]

As has been said repeatedly, the DM is not doing his job here! He's the one planning the encounters, and if they all play out the same way the game must surely be boring for everybody...

On the other hand, it sounds like you're not using all the options available to you either, Grishnak... A ranger/shadow dancer is not the same as a fighter! You can do so much more than just hit things with your sword...

For instance, you were very quick to write off your ability to summon shadows. Remember that they only need to make touch attacks to deal their quite nasty STR damage! You say they can't take much damage and that's true, but keep in mind that they're incorporeal. You need magic to damage them, and even then there's a 50% miss chance!

If you're equally quick to dismiss your skills and other capabilities and just stick to hitting monsters with swords it's no wonder you're bored. Don't play your character like fighter if he isn't one. Use his full potential!

Reading this, I see I've come on to you somewhat harder than I meant to. I still feel the main fault is with the DM, but that's already been pointed out so many times, so I wanted to draw some attention to what you can do to rectify the situation. I'm sorry if I sound to harsh...

It's quite ok, I am able to take criticism and may just try employing the shadow and see how it goes. Our game is a high combat game and I've noticed that casters are dominating nigh on all combats.
Again though I'm not trying to get a hate mob for the dm as I think he is a very sound dm and has done a great job over the years but as was stated in a previous post that he hasn't dm'd at high level for a while and could be rusty. Just hope he talks to me after this thread

 

[Victim]

Hi S'mon!



Perhaps that was far too hasty a generalism on my part...

Here are the core class breakdowns (CR per level with equipment) as accurately as I can I rate them:

Top 5:

1st: Druid
2nd: Cleric
3rd: Monk
4th: Barbarian
5th: Wizard

From Epic Levels:
Top 5

1st: Barbarian
2nd: Monk
3rd: Fighter & Rogue
5th: Ranger

However the major difference the above figures do not yet allow for is the far greater reliance on equipment of Fighter types over Spellcasters - notably with regards attacking (rather than defending).

LoL. Dangerous Monks.

These are 3.5 figures, right?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Victim!

LoL. Dangerous Monks.

These are 3.5 figures, right?

Yep.

 

[Bauglir]

How did you generate these ratings?

Barbarian: 1.106
Bard: 1.046
Cleric: 1.161
Druid: 1.181
Fighter: 1.006
Monk: 1.136
Paladin: 1.049
Ranger: 1.089
Rogue: 1.011
Sorceror: 1.046
Wizard: 1.091

Top 5:

1st: Druid
2nd: Cleric
3rd: Monk
4th: Barbarian
5th: Wizard

From Epic Levels:

Barbarian: 1.056
Bard: 0.906
Cleric: 0.906
Druid: 0.926
Fighter: 0.966
Monk: 1.016
Paladin: 0.926
Ranger: 0.956
Rogue: 0.966
Sorceror: 0.736
Wizard: 0.736

Top 5

1st: Barbarian
2nd: Monk
3rd: Fighter & Rogue
5th: Ranger

 

[CerebralAssassin]

Grishnak: While I realize that the DM said "Play what you want," if you know what the other PCs are in terms of class/race, general capabilities, etc., as well as gaming style (combat over roleplay, or vice versa), then I've found that you should consider not just what would be fun, but what will be useful.

For Example:
In a high level campaign (levels 14-18) I was playing in, we were given an opportunity to modify our characters as 3.5 came out. Up to this point, the campaign had been a good mix of roleplaying and combat. However, I knew that the climatic showdown between the PCs and the BBEG was coming right after. I chose to build the character based on the mix. In the series of combats, I found myself being useful primarily against the minions we fought, but in the last battle, I was relatively useless (Dungeon Master, this isn't a slam on you, but an illustration of how a lack of foresight can produce frustration for the player ).

However, I also think if the DM says "Play what you want," then the DM has a responsibilty to make sure you shine, provided you make effective use of your abilities.

Anywhoo, I hope things improve as I went two years without playing because I moved and was a little burned out and not playing sucks.

Nathan

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Bauglir!

How did you generate these ratings?

Its been an ongoing parallel project I have been working on for over a year now.

- Ability Score Increases:

+1/4 Levels CR +0.025

- Base Attack Bonus:

As Fighter CR +0.2
As Cleric CR +0.15
As Wizard CR +0.1

- Class Features:

Determined case by case.

A single feat adds +0.2, so you try and contrast all class features in this way.

ie.
Is the class feature an existing feat? (If so +0.2)
Is the class feature less powerful than similar feats? (If so take it as a fraction of the closest feat)
Is the class feature more powerful than similar feats? (If so take it as a multiple of the closest feat)

Spellcasting rates as follows:

Level of Sorceror/Wizard Spells = +0.35
Level of Cleric Spells = +0.3
Level of Druid Spells = +0.25
Level of Bard Spells = +0.15
Level of Paladin/Ranger Spells = +0.075

- Equipment adds:

+0.2/Level of PC valued equipment
+0.125/Level of NPC valued equipment

- Feats Progression:

+1/3 Levels = CR +0.066

- Hit Points:

d4 = CR +0.125
d6 = CR +0.175
d8 = CR +0.225
d10 = CR +0.275
d12 = CR +0.325

- Saving Throws:

Each Good save = CR +0.06
Each Poor save = CR +0.03

- Skill Points:

Int + 8 = CR +0.08
Int + 6 = CR +0.06
Int + 4 = CR +0.04
Int + 2 = CR +0.02

eg. Fighter Class Level (Deconstruction)

Ability Scores = CR +0.025
BAB (As Fighter) = CR +0.2
Class Features: +11 Feats/20 Levels = CR +0.11
Feats (+1/3 Levels) = CR +0.066
Hit Dice (d10) = CR +0.275
Saves (one good) = CR +0.12
Skills (Int + 2) = CR +0.02
Each Fighter Level = CR +0.806 (+1.006 with PC equipment)

Edit: had to reformat a bit.