Beguilers - too powerful?

[Blue]

My only long-term experience with a beguiler is in an FR campaign that's run so far from 1st to 8th. The beguiler is consistently an effective top performer. But we did go into the campaign knowing that it was startign as secret missions in a war vs. a nation lead by ogre magi - we're more heading with goblinkind, ogres, dopplegangers, and others that aren't immune like undead.

That said, of the six man party I'd say there are probably two stars, and one of them is the beguiler. Useful in and out of combat, and her abilities really lend to her being played with flair and panache. (The other star is a half-orc monk who is our primary damage dealer. The others include a halfling sorcerer doing battlefield control (me), a human archivist jack of all trades, a earth genasi swashbuckler/knight defender, and a aasimir ranger/favored soul archer.)

Combat wise we end up doing ambushes, direct assaults, guarding people, etc. She's very useful in that, usually more in taking care of a large number of mook but can hold her own against a big bad. Out of combat she shines even more, and is our face. (Though the LG monk will sometimes go around her back because she's not too discriminating who she deals with. Like donating an unholy falchion to his church instead of letting her sell it for big profit.)

All in all, it feel well designed. Personally playing the sorcerer with limited spells known I've stayed away from all of hers and it's been a boon to me, for example not having to deal with see invis/glitterdust (did I mention Ogre Magi) or haste or stuff.

Cheers,
=Blue(23)

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I think you have misapplied my statement. My point is for classes like duskblade and beguiler, a lot of being able to do what they do is tied into the abilities they get when they progress as the base class. However, this also functions as a built-in limitation. Their potential for growth via PrCs is not the same.

By default, any base class only grows stronger when you add in more PrCs (assuming you do not choose foolishly.) But this is not the case with Beguiler; the vast majority of PrCs are either unsuitable for it or do not offer enough to make them worth giving up Beguiler levels. Thus when considering actual characters (which are going to have PrCs mixed in, and which is the ultimate level at which things should be balanced) it's fair to compare Beguilers to PrC mixes. Your statement that it is not a fair comparison presupposes that Beguilers could go on to gain from PrCs in the same way that wizards can - and they really can't.

I agree, by default, adding PrC's smartly only adds to power. It's really unavoidable unless you strongly alter the PrC's themselves and the requirements. But we seem to disagree on this one point: I really don't think it's balanced when you need to use a heavily twinked, optimized prestige class-laden character in order to equal a guy that just dropped all his levels in one class with no real forethought or planning. The reason going into prestige classes is so good for most classes, is because the class itself has severely diminishing returns as you level. Beguiler is totally worth it to stick with till the end. It's just plain better. Which is my problem. I'm fine with making base classes more appealing to stick with (I actually really love that about Arcana Unearthed/Evolved. No multiclass restrictions, but upper level class features are so nice, you don't usually want to.). But to do it half-assed, leaving a whole bunch of other classes in the dust, rather than uniformly for only the new guys? No thank you. This is actually my only major complaint with ToB, too. It didn't actually do anything to fix the existing messes. It just created a bunch of new classes that outshine the old ones in every possible way.

 

[RigaMortus2]

The only time I've ever seen one played (check out my story hour ), the player got frustrated with the lack of damage dealing potential after three levels and multi-classed into wizard.

Did your player not read what a Beguiler is all about? If he was concerned with dealing damage, why would he pick a Beguiler? That's like picking a Fighter and being upset with the lack of healing spells...

 

[Zelc]

Beguilers are not that inflexible. I suppose this isn't definitely a bonus in the Beguiler's favor, but one reasonable interpretation of UMD allows them to use Runestaves to increase their spell diversity. Even without Runestaves, here's a list of stuff they can do to contribute in combat vs. mindless opponents:

Level 1: Obscuring Mist, Silent Image
Level 2: Blur, Fog Cloud, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Minor Image, Silence
Level 3: Dispel Magic, Displacement, Haste, Invisibility Sphere, Legion of Sentinels, Major Image, Slow
Level 4: Greater Invisibility, Solid Fog
Level 5: None
Level 6: Greater Dispel Magic, Repulsion
Level 7: Mass Invisibility
Level 8: Mind Blank, Screen
Level 9: None

So especially at low levels, Beguilers have several really good ways to contribute against mindless opponents. Even at higher levels, these old methods age well (Haste and Solid Fog, for instance). Plus, there's the Advanced Learning stuff. Want a strong party buff to use when other options are weak? Heroics is a second level enchantment spell .

That's not to say Beguilers are overpowered. They still don't have access to some of the strongest spells, and they really can't abuse Time Stop very well. Still, they are definitely a strong class.

ETA: @Streamofthesky: Beguilers being better than Bards is pretty much OK, since Bards are a weak base class without Prestige Classing. Also, there are certain skill-monkey builds like The Other Killer Gnome and Swift Hunters that have great damage output (may require a substitution level or Able Learner, though). It's tough to compare Beguilers with these because their focus is so different; to use 4E speak, Beguilers are controllers while those other builds are strikers, and they are each very good at what they do.