AU Warmain unbalanced in non-AU campaign?

[mmu1]

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.

Sorry, but you're wrong. The class description says nothing about them not being able to use the AC bonus or Parry when using a shield. (In fact, they're proficient with all shields as a class feature). Neither does the AU errata.

And at high level, having an item that provides a +5 Natural armor bonus is basically a given, if you want one - Barkskin is irrelevant.

As for the animals - I seriously doubt either the animal companion or something you might summon (with a full round casting time, something no warrior-type can afford to waste time on in combat) is going to have either the to hit bonus or the ability to penetrate DR to matter in a high-level fight.

I mean, a Dire Lion, at 20th level? We're talking about a 14HD critter with an unaugmented +18 or +19 to hit, an AC in the low 20's and less than 100HP. In a serious 20th level fight, that's just a big easy target you'll have to work hard to keep alive - you can forget about it being of any help.

I'll take the 5d6 of sneak attack damage with a fighter's BAB behind it any day.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Sorry, but you're wrong. The class description says nothing about them not being able to use the AC bonus or Parry when using a shield. (In fact, they're proficient with all shields as a class feature). Neither does the AU errata.

Oops. That's what comes from posting without my book in front of me...

And at high level, having an item that provides a +5 Natural armor bonus is basically a given, if you want one - Barkskin is irrelevant.

Er, maybe. Items of beastskin aren't available in AU, leading me to believe that, in fact, the unfettered cannot acquire such an item.

As for the animals - I seriously doubt either the animal companion or something you might summon (with a full round casting time, something no warrior-type can afford to waste time on in combat) is going to have either the to hit bonus or the ability to penetrate DR to matter in a high-level fight.

I mean, a Dire Lion, at 20th level? We're talking about a 14HD critter with an unaugmented +18 or +19 to hit, an AC in the low 20's and less than 100HP. In a serious 20th level fight, that's just a big easy target you'll have to work hard to keep alive - you can forget about it being of any help.

Not with buffing spells, you don't. Back to barkskin; a +4 to the thing's natural armor will do wonders, as will the druid casting animal growth on it.

Actually, SNY comes up IMC all the time; since the ranger has hide in plain sight, it's a common tactic for him to use the spell while crouching behind a tree or some such, and then provide covering fire (sniping) for the summoned dire ape while his druid buddy casts animal growth on it (and the druid's animal companion, AND the ranger's animal companion; AG is a nice spell!).

I'll take the 5d6 of sneak attack damage with a fighter's BAB behind it any day.

Hmm, maybe. The thing is that sneak attack is an overrated feature anyway; there are just too many ways to prevent SA damage, and the unfettered doesn't have the options that the rogue does to counter counter-SA defenses.

The ranger is probably better used as a ranged combatant rather than a TWF melee fighter anyway; HiPS plus animal companion plus summoning all contributes to better ranged combat potential. Still, I really do think that it's just not so easy to tell which class is better, which tastes of balance to me.

 

[mmu1]

Er, maybe. Items of beastskin aren't available in AU, leading me to believe that, in fact, the unfettered cannot acquire such an item.

Well, maybe - but I was assuming we were using the AU character in a D&D setting, no? If we're just having the Ranger use D&D items and feats, and the Unfettered AU items and feats, things get kind of confused and the discussion become pointless.

Not with buffing spells, you don't. Back to barkskin; a +4 to the thing's natural armor will do wonders, as will the druid casting animal growth on it.

a)Where did the Druid enter this comparison all of a sudden? That's not a Ranger class feature I remember.

b)Animal companion AC is pathetically low for 20th level - that +4 from Barksin means you wasted a spell for almost no benefit - 25 or 26 AC is hard to hit at 6th level, not at 20th. Their saves aren't too hot either.

If the animals are as useful for you as you say, that's got to be more of a quirk of the game you play/run than anything...

 

[Victim]

So the ranger is casting summon nature's ally IV while the enemy is spending a full round beating up the druid, or the ranger's animal companion? Good job. Even though the ranger does have HiPS, his alllies and animal friends probably don't. HiPS is great solo, but rather less effective in a group context. And everything the ranger can summon will probably need natural 20s to hit high level foes.

The only time I'd be worried about the unfettered in regular DnD is if they were allowed to multiclass with Swashbuckler, so they could pick up insightful strike. An unfettered's damage per hit will likely be rather low - a rogue using normal weapons will likely have the same base damage and twice the sneak attack.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I keep AU classes as a seperate culture IMC...they're free to work within themselves, but don't go beyond their own region, or mix with the foriegners...it gives a bit of dimension to the world when not EVERY spontaneous spellcaster has the Sorcerer class...those guys from a accross the world, they're called magisters!

It's worked fine with the PC's picking up occassional levels...they're not extreme into it, but that's because there's fewer AU splatbooks.

 

[Carnifex]

Having actually run a campaign that had an unfettered and a ranger in it, I can say with experience that the unfettered did not prove unbalanced at all.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Well, maybe - but I was assuming we were using the AU character in a D&D setting, no? If we're just having the Ranger use D&D items and feats, and the Unfettered AU items and feats, things get kind of confused and the discussion become pointless.

Actually, Monte recommends keeping this sort of separation, y'know.

a)Where did the Druid enter this comparison all of a sudden? That's not a Ranger class feature I remember.

Fair enough, but we're talking about how the classes actually play out. I can go on about how the D&D fighter is worthless past 10th level, or how the rogue will never survive a combat on his own - but the point is that there are three other folks expected to be around too, no?

b)Animal companion AC is pathetically low for 20th level - that +4 from Barksin means you wasted a spell for almost no benefit - 25 or 26 AC is hard to hit at 6th level, not at 20th. Their saves aren't too hot either. If the animals are as useful for you as you say, that's got to be more of a quirk of the game you play/run than anything...

And 5d6 sneak attack damage is pretty pathetic at 20th level too. My experience is that SA is just too easy to foil; in the situations in which it is NOT, the rogue is a better choice than the unfettered anyway, since, as otherwise noted, the rogue's improved SA damage (TWICE that of the unfettered) easily offsets the lower BAB.

So the ranger is casting summon nature's ally IV while the enemy is spending a full round beating up the druid, or the ranger's animal companion? Good job.

No; he's casting it while hidden, which is a pretty easy task for the ranger given his high Stealth and Perception skill mods, which will allow him to pick out the enemy before the enemy picks him out.

Even though the ranger does have HiPS, his alllies and animal friends probably don't. HiPS is great solo, but rather less effective in a group context. And everything the ranger can summon will probably need natural 20s to hit high level foes.

Probably not with animal growth, actually; certainly, my experience has been otherwise. Moreover, the ranger should be used as a scout; in a toe-to-toe, a straight fighter will be better than the unfettered anyway (and we can do that comparison separately).

I'll also note that you're leaving FE damage out of consideration entirely; an odd thing to do, given that at 20th level, it's MORE likely that the ranger will get to use this class feature than that the unfettered will get to SA.

In any case, my point wasn't to say that the ranger can buckle swash better than the unfettered, or that the unfettered can't scout as well as the ranger; my point was to put out an existing WotC-designed light fighter with which very few people appear to have balance problems, yet which contains similarly attractive class features to the unfettered's. And I wasn't really trying to advocate using animal companions to inflict raw damage, but rather pointing out that they can be used to tactical effect in a manner that's potentially equal or superior to the sheer power inherent in 5d6 SA.

If we're actually talking numbers, I'd just compare the unfettered to a straight fighter, or better still a fighter/standard PrC (since the unfettered only gets all his goodies by sticking to the core class all the way). If it's the raw combat power you're concerned about, mmu1 (and it appears to be, since you're focusing on the unfettered's AC bonus and SA), think about the barbarian:

-Needs to max out only two ability scores, Str and Con (as opposed to at Dexterity, Intelligence, Constitution, and Strength for the unfettered)
-Gets +40 hp over the unfettered, jumping to +120 while raging
-Inflicts an extra +4 damage per attack while raging, all the time, against every opponent
-Can use two-handed weapons to maximize damage potential
-Has DR 5/-

In return, the unfettered gets a +7 AC bonus and +5d6 SA. Great. Lower Str and lighter weapons means that he'll NEED that SA damage, and lower hit points and no DR mean that he'll need the AC bonus. I haven't done the math, but I imagine that the ability to take an extra 120 hp damage and to subtract 5 hp damage from every blow probably more than evens out with the AC bonus.

In short, the UF is a good class, but like the ranger, it'll never match up in toe-to-toe slugfests with the barbarian or heavy fighter. Like the ranger (or, if you will, the rogue), however, it also has a number of nice abilities that aren't directly combat-related, and like the rogue, it is a viable lightly-armored, low-Strength combatant. None of this means that it's overpowered, since these assets are good individually, but don't synergize to make a character that's better than anyone else at what they do.

 

[JoeGKushner]

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.

Had the exact opposite problem. The Magister was so versitile with his spells, (only AU spells mind you), that people thought of him as the mobile platform while they thought the mage limited and weak.

Warmain and Unfettered work pretty well in a standard D&D game. The former is just a specialized fighter while the latter, is in essence, a Fighter/Rogue. In some ways, it's best to leave their skill selections as in AU or you punish the Unfettered who now has to spend points on two skills instead of one.

 

[Nellisir]

I had a warmain for a short period of time in my 14th level campaign; I adjusted the saves to match the fighter (Fort good, Will & Reflex poor) and removed the 2nd level bonus feat. That, to my mind, adequately balanced the warmain and the fighter.

Cheers
Nell.