AU Warmain unbalanced in non-AU campaign?

[William Ronald]

Likewise... the only potential balance issues would be AU Spellcasters vs. D&D Spellcasters. And then only because the D&D casters would be more powerful.

Maybe I should start a thread to address this more directly, but how do you handle the magic system in your game? If you use an AU spellcaster, does he cast spells according to an AU magic system or by the D&D 3.5 magic system? I do agree that the spells in AU are generally weaker then their 3.5 counterparts, although the magic system allows for more flexibility.

I am trying to figure how to use AU with 3.5, and I am a bit puzzled over magic issues.

 

[Voadam]

The warmain out-tanks the fighter, which is IMO the real fighter niche in D&D. The warmain gets d12 hp and all the feats of a fighter, just some of them are predetermined for being a tough melee combatant. So the warmain won't make as good an archer or buff to a swashbuckler multiclass concept but they do a better job as a high AC, high hit point, high damage melee combatant.

The unfettered is the best swashbuckler D&D class out there, better than the Complete warrior version and better than a multiclass fighter rogue or the various duelist prc options.

 

[mmu1]

The Warmain is definitely not quite balanced vs. the fighter if they both use the same XP chart and are played into high levels. It gets a bigger HD and slightly better saves, as well as a number of special abilities, some of which are pretty damn nice, and more than make up for the 5 bonus feats it loses. It might be ok if it uses the AU XP chart, though.

The Unfettered is completely unbalanced compared to the core classes.

They're basically at least as good at everything except finding traps as any fighter/rogue and better at combat than a Fighter/Rogue, Duelist or Swashbuckler - and that's before you factor in their bonus to AC (up to +7 at 20th level) and their Parry ability which lets them add their Int bonus to AC vs. a single opponent - and even that small deficiency can be solved by having them take a level or three of Rogue during their career, allowing them a boost to the skills they need and a better sneak attack in exchange for a handful of HP and 1 point of BAB.

 

[RichGreen]

Hi,

Not sure about the warmain, but my girlfriend plays an Unfettered 4/Rogue 1 in one of my games. It's a good character but I don't think there are significant balance issues.

I'm about to play a magister using only AU/BoEM spells in a non-AU campaign to see how that works. The character's spells seem weaker than a sorceror/wizard but there is lots of flexibility so we'll see.


Cheers


Richard

 

[ruleslawyer]

The warmain out-tanks the fighter, which is IMO the real fighter niche in D&D.

I must disagree with your "O", Voadam. The barbarian beats out the fighter as a tank any day; the fighter's heavy armor use doesn't sufficiently compensate for the reduced hp. Feats? Well, some are good, others not so, and the fact is that feats don't scale the same way that rage or spells do, making the fighter's "tanking" ability weak at mid- to high levels.

The Unfettered is completely unbalanced compared to the core classes.

They're basically at least as good at everything except finding traps as any fighter/rogue and better at combat than a Fighter/Rogue, Duelist or Swashbuckler - and that's before you factor in their bonus to AC (up to +7 at 20th level) and their Parry ability which lets them add their Int bonus to AC vs. a single opponent - and even that small deficiency can be solved by having them take a level or three of Rogue during their career, allowing them a boost to the skills they need and a better sneak attack in exchange for a handful of HP and 1 point of BAB.

You're kidding, right?

The fact that the unfettered is better than a straight fighter/rogue hardly makes it "unbalanced compared to the core classes." The ftr/rog isn't a particularly strong class combination absent particular PrCs (and the 3.5 duelist sucks); a better comparison with the unfettered is the ranger, who gets a free fighting style plus bonus feats (as opposed to the unfettered's bonus feats), better skill points, animal companion evasion, favored enemy, hide in plain sight, and spells - all of which taken in combination, IMHO, are at least equal in utility and power to the unfettered's sneak attack, AC bonus, and magic parry. I'd take a ranger over the unfettered any day, and a straight rogue likewise.

 

[Baron Opal]

AU and 3.5e Magic

Theoretically, if you have both Au and 3.5e magic users in a game they are balance between themselves. In other words, a magister, witch, etc. and a wizard, sorceror, etc. get along together fine. There are some important assumptions, however. Only AU classes use AU spells and magic-related feats, they get the extra feat at 1st level, etc. Only 3.5 classes use 3.5 spells, metamagic feats, etc. The real problem is when you start mixing the two. They can travel in the same party, but each stays to their own book and don't allow multiclassing from different books. Multiclassing with non-magical classes should be fine.

3.5 casters tend to have fewer spells but do more damage. AU casters have more spells, and are far more flexible in what they can cast. As long as you can handle two different magic systems in the game it works fine.

(And, when I mention "two magic systems", they're really the same system. Just different points are tweeked and there are different underlying assumptions.)

Baron Opal

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Out of curiosity, how many people commenting on the "balance" issues of one versus the other have actually had these classes in their games? I've had them in my games. The warmain's a more focused fighter, but has a lot less of the versatility of the D&D fighter. The unfettered is a great swashbuckler, but can't beat a rogue for being a rogue and a fighter for being a fighter.

William Ronald, I would suggest a separate thread for your question. It's a good one that comes up again and again.

 

[mmu1]

You're kidding, right?

The fact that the unfettered is better than a straight fighter/rogue hardly makes it "unbalanced compared to the core classes." The ftr/rog isn't a particularly strong class combination absent particular PrCs (and the 3.5 duelist sucks); a better comparison with the unfettered is the ranger, who gets a free fighting style plus bonus feats (as opposed to the unfettered's bonus feats), better skill points, animal companion evasion, favored enemy, hide in plain sight, and spells - all of which taken in combination, IMHO, are at least equal in utility and power to the unfettered's sneak attack, AC bonus, and magic parry. I'd take a ranger over the unfettered any day, and a straight rogue likewise.

You can argue that the reason the Unfettered is better than any core lightly armored fighter-type is a flaw with the core rules, not with the Unfettered's power level... But the point stands.

I don't think you stopped to look at what it means for a class to potentially have an AC 7 points higher than other lightly-armored classes, in a way they can never duplicate. (or 8-10 points higher vs. single opponents)

And you clearly haven't thought about what happens when you multiclass Unfettered with Rogue or Fighter, or both.

As for the Ranger specifically... If you think having virtual feats, some circumstance-dependent bonuses, an animal companion and a handful of spells beats 5d6 of sneak attack (with a fighter's BAB behind it) and +7 AC, you just don't have a clear idea of how the game mechanics work...

 

[JDJarvis]

If you use an AU spellcaster, does he cast spells according to an AU magic system or by the D&D 3.5 magic system?

I just classified the AU spells and such as Mystic so in my campaign there are Divine spells, Arcane spells and Mystic spells. All the AU casters happen to use the Mystic spells, for now the feats/templates from AU dealing with magic are only going to be open to AU classed charaters but i may change that if i notice any real issues.

Warmain are really just focused tanks and i don't see then totally replacing Fighters for everyone.

 

[ruleslawyer]

As for the Ranger specifically... If you think having virtual feats, some circumstance-dependent bonuses, an animal companion and a handful of spells beats 5d6 of sneak attack (with a fighter's BAB behind it) and +7 AC, you just don't have a clear idea of how the game mechanics work...

Having DM-ed for 20 years, and DM-ed 3e since its inception, I think I do "have a clear idea of how the game mechanics work", actually. The unfettered's AC bonus applies only when the unfettered is using light armor and no shield; unlike the unfettered, a ranger can use a shield, which at 20th level is an easy +7 AC. Moreover, the ranger's TWF virtual feats allow him to use the shield as a weapon while engaging in sword-and-board, so a ranger doesn't really lose out on attack potential while effortlessly matching the UF in AC. A 20th-level ranger also has the ability to maintain a +5 natural armor bonus with barkskin, one of the "handful of spells" you're so quick to dismiss. On average, a ranger is actually quite likely to have a better AC than the UF. Finally, a ranger's favored enemy bonuses, animal companion, and ability to cast summon nature's ally add up to much more extra damage in melee than 5d6 per successful sneak attack. And none of those extra damage potentials are blunted by the traditional sneak attack mitigating factors (concealment, fortification, creature type, etc.)

The 20th-level unfettered gets +5d6 to every attack while flanking? Fine. Compare with the 20th-level ranger flanking with his dire lion companion and his summoned dire ape; that's a lot more than even +20d6 expected SA damage per round. Moreover, the ranger's companion and summoned creature allow him to set up flanking opportunities for the rogue, who's dealing +10d6 damage per SA.

I've got an unfettered fighter running in my current D&D/AU blend campaign, and he's really not that great, despite the fact that the player is one of the better tacticians in the group. On balance, I'd say the AU class to watch for is the magister; while taking out some of the more potent D&D spells blunts the class's raw power a bit, the magister gets really scary the moment that sorcerous blast becomes available.