Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendant (3.5)

Storminator said:
Beyond your quibbles about specific mechanics about the example, we can all agree this is a wizard made with 3e rules, right? And he's devastatingly effective.

Sure. I don't think anyone here would argue that 3e wizards can be very effective if they're well designed. And from your description of the character, it would probably be quite hard to make a wizard more effective than he is. (Although, I wouldn't call the damage from the arcs of a chain lightning spell a "quibble." If you were giving them full damage instead of half, then the example doesn't work at all).

However, I think it's possible to make an equally effective (at least in as far as the example was rules-compliant) fighter-type character in 3e--and probably in 3.5e too. I don't think that it will be possible to make a wizard character even close to that effective under 3.5e.

And you know, if you think my comment was rude, go back and read yours. And the second one where you tried to appear to apologize without really apologizing, and tossing out a couple more insults along the way.

I'll admit I've been pretty thin-skinned and abrasive on this thread. I tell myself it's reacting to a hostile environment.

The fact remains, you didn't know what you were talking about, but you threw out insults anyway. Sorry I called you on it.

Hmmm. I actually think I was right about the example being applicable to your home game but not the realm of D&D core rules balance although I could certainly have said so with less hyperbole.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dinkeldog said:
/mod hat on: One of the things I like about EN World is how nice we are to each other. :rolleyes:

When people stop telling me that they've never heard anything stupider (than what I said) in their lives, I'll stop speculating about what they've actually had the opportunity to hear.

If the fighter requires the mage or cleric to craft wondrous item the gauntlets of ogre power +6, then I'd say they're still working as a team.

However, you have to admit that, at the very least, this places the cooperation one step further removed from the battlefield than the 3e buffs did. And that PC crafting is probably going to be a far less common feature of play than PC buffing was since NPCs can pick up the crafting slack but very rarely did any buffing.

Whether or not the changes are good, they do cut back on the amount and immediacy of teamwork necessary, advantageous, and possible in the game.
 

Elder-Basilisk said:


I'll admit I've been pretty thin-skinned and abrasive on this thread. I tell myself it's reacting to a hostile environment.

Fair enough. I didn't read the whole thread. Perhaps I should have. :)

And from my end, with nearly 25 years of D&D under my belt, my current DM is the best I've ever played with. So I'm a little defensive of his game.

No hard feelings all around?

PS
 

I can understand that (although I'm still curious about the chain lightning). And from the sound of things, there was a lot more going on than simply an extremely effective hit and run raid on your part. It was set up well in advance, etc. That the DM let all of that work instead of saying "my NPCs are dying. . . . must. . . . rule-0" says something good about the quality of his DMing.

So, forgiveness, apologies, and no holding of grudges on this end.

Storminator said:
Fair enough. I didn't read the whole thread. Perhaps I should have. :)

And from my end, with nearly 25 years of D&D under my belt, my current DM is the best I've ever played with. So I'm a little defensive of his game.

No hard feelings all around?

PS
 

20% Rule of Thumb.

I'm going to ask folks to look at the "nerfing" of spells with regard to the "20% Rule of Thumb."

Remember, a group of 4 characters of Level N should have 20% of their resources used up in an encounter with a creature of CR N.

What resources, exactly, does the typical party of a wizard, cleric, rogue, and fighter have?

Well, let's look at, say, a 10th-level party (whips out Jamis Buck's Generator)
=========
Thamiust, male half-elf Wiz10: CR 10; Size M (5 ft., 4 in. tall); HD 10d4; hp 34; Init +2 (+2 Dex); Spd 30 ft.; AC 12 (+2 Dex); Attack +6 melee, or +7 ranged; SV Fort +3, Ref +7, Will +7; AL NE; Str 12, Dex 15, Con 10, Int 16, Wis 11, Cha 10.

Feats: Brew potion, Craft rod, Extend spell, Heighten spell, Lightning reflexes, Maximize spell, Scribe scroll.

Wizard Spells Known (4/5/5/4/3/2): 0th -- Arcane Mark, Dancing Lights, Daze, Detect Magic, Detect Poison, Disrupt Undead, Flare, Ghost Sound, Light, Mage Hand, Mending, Open/Close, Prestidigitation, Ray of Frost, Read Magic, Resistance. 1st -- Color Spray, Expeditious Retreat, Identify, Mage Armor, Magic Missile, Protection from Good, Reduce, Sleep. 2nd -- Blur, Continual Flame, Invisibility, Knock, Levitate, Minor Image, Mirror Image, See Invisibility, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Web. 3rd -- Fly, Haste, Invisibility Sphere, Lightning Bolt, Slow, Tongues. 4th -- Dimensional Anchor, Enervation, Fire Trap, Wall of Fire. 5th -- Cone of Cold, Hold Monster, Summon Monster V, Teleport, Transmute Mud to Rock, Wall of Stone.
==========
Garret, male halfling (lightfoot) Ftr10: CR 10; Size S (3 ft., 3 in. tall); HD 10d10+30; hp 84; Init +8 (+4 Dex, +4 Improved initiative); Spd 20 ft.; AC 15 (+4 Dex, +1 Size); Attack +14/+9 melee, or +15/+10 ranged; SV Fort +11, Ref +8, Will +6; AL LE; Str 17, Dex 18, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 16.

Feats: Ambidexterity, Dodge, Endurance, Improved Critical (warhammer), Improved initiative, Power attack, Quick draw, Two-weapon fighting, Weapon focus (warhammer), Weapon specialization (warhammer).
==========
Roman, male human Rog10: CR 10; Size M (5 ft., 6 in. tall); HD 10d6+10; hp 50; Init +4 (+4 Dex); Spd 30 ft.; AC 14 (+4 Dex); Attack +7/+2 melee, or +11/+6 ranged; SV Fort +4, Ref +13, Will +5; AL NE; Str 10, Dex 19, Con 12, Int 15, Wis 11, Cha 8.

Skills and feats: Decipher script +12, Disguise +10, Escape artist +16, Hide +17, Intimidate +11, Jump +12, Listen +15, Move silently +16, Perform +11, Profession +13, Search +12, Spot +2, Use rope +17; Alertness, Combat reflexes, Iron will, Lightning reflexes, Weapon finesse (dagger).
==========
Olga, female half-elf Clr10: CR 10; Size M (5 ft., 3 in. tall); HD 10d8; hp 49; Init +0; Spd 30 ft.; AC 10; Attack +9/+4 melee, or +7/+2 ranged; SV Fort +7, Ref +3, Will +10; AL LE; Str 15, Dex 11, Con 11, Int 4, Wis 17, Cha 12.

Feats: Combat casting, Heighten spell, Quicken spell, Still spell.

Cleric Domains: Sun, Evil.
Cleric Spells Per Day: 6/5+1/5+1/4+1/3+1/2+1.
===========

That's your party. You may use only PHB/DMG (core) equipment to outfit them; each of them gets 16,000 gp worth of equipment.

Let's now pull out a CR 10 foe... for the "iconic D&D" feel, let's get a dragon... (whips out the online Netbook of Creatures)

Dragon, Adult Black
Large Dragon ( Water )

Hit Dice: 19d12+76
Initiative: 0
Speed: 60 ft., fly 150 ft.(poor), swim 60 ft.
AC: 27 (-1 size, +18 natural)
Att: Bite +24 melee, 2 claws +19 melee, 2 wings +19 melee, tail slap +19 melee
Dmg: Bite 2d6+6, claw 1d8+3, wing 1d6+3, tail slap 1d8+9
Face/Reach: 5 ft. by 10 ft./10 ft.
Special Attacks: Breath weapon (Line of acid, 12d4, save DC 23), spells
Special Qualities: Acid immunity, water breathing, frightful prescence (Will DC 20), SR 18
Saving Throws: Fort +15, Ref +11, Will +12
Abilities: Str 23, Dex 10, Con 19, Int 12, Wis 13, Cha 12
Skills: Listen +20, Search +20, Spellcraft +20, Spot +20, and 76 more skill points
Feats: 5 feats
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate/Terrain: Any marsh and underground
Organization: Solitary, pair, or family (1-2 and 2-5 offspring)
CR: 10
Treasure: Double Standard
Alignment: Chaotic Evil
Advancement Range: 20-21 HD (Huge)

Your task?

Run the PCs above against the dragon and see if they actually DO use up 20% of their resources. (Preferably do it multiple times and take the average). This means (to me, anyway) that they should, on average, lose about 20% of their hp, 20% of spells, 20% of the value of their equipment (including use of charges from items, potions, etc).

There. We all have a "core" standard to work from, let's see if, on average, the heroes do in fact have to use 20% of their resources. Specifically, I think it means you should see:

The Wizard forced to use one 4th or 5th level spell AND one 3rd level spell AND three 1st and 2nd level spells, and probably several charges from a wand.
The Fighter forced to act as a "meatwall" and use more than 20% of his hp (he's taking up the hp slack of other characters). Possible sundering of a weapon.
The Rogue using up several temporary magic items, and probably some hp damage.
The Cleric using up at least one spell of each level 1-5 plus another spell of about level 2. Probably takes some hp damage too.

If it doesn't take you AT LEAST that much to knock out the dragon, you're not at the right balance. IOW, it should take a Finger of Death, or maybe a Flame Strike, a Cone of Cold, a Lightning Bolt, three or four buff spells, a Magic Missile or two, maybe a Cause Serious Wounds (or a timely cure or two) - plus some shots from temporary magic items like a wand of fireballs - just to bring down ONE dragon (218-ish hp)... plus of course the fighter banging on the dragon with his hammer.

Then repeat the experiment, substituting a cleric for the wizard. Or another wizard for the rogue. Etc.

If you find that substituting CLASS X for another class consistently lowers the required expenditure on the part of the party, that class is overpowered.

My guess... and it is just that... is that adding another wizard will, more often than not, lower the average expenditure of resources... which makes them overpowered and in need of nerfing.

--The Sigil
 
Last edited:

An interesting idea. The dragon is a pretty well balanced opponent who is tough in all areas and may not favor any PC in general.

That said, I suspect that you will probably find that:
Fighter, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric
Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Cleric
are the combos that use the least of their resources.

I suspect that:
Wizard, rogue, cleric wizard
Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Wizard
are the combos most likely to be shredded like toilet paper.

If someone actually does the experiment, I'd be very interested to know the results.

The Sigil said:
Then repeat the experiment, substituting a cleric for the wizard. Or another wizard for the rogue. Etc.

If you find that substituting CLASS X for another class consistently lowers the required expenditure on the part of the party, that class is overpowered.

My guess... and it is just that... is that adding another wizard will, more often than not, lower the average expenditure of resources... which makes them overpowered and in need of nerfing.

--The Sigil
 

I've noticed that all these changes are to the three core books.
But yet, everyone uses feats, PrC's, weapons, core classes, etc from all kinds of other sources.
So WotC is going for the "No more instant kill" bit, and adjusting the spells to be less deadly or "nerfed", well, honestly, so what?
With the OGL out there, there are spellbooks you can get that will still contain the "Save or Die, BWAH-HA-HA!" spells.

I think the biggest complaint I'm seeing, is that WotC has decided something is too powerful, based on complaints they have recieved, so they are reacting to those complaints.
Complain the other way. Write to the developers, tell them how strongly you feel about the changes.

Or, buy 3rd party products.

My $1.50, since two copper pennies won't buy you a smack across the head.
 


Elder-Basilisk said:
I can understand that (although I'm still curious about the chain lightning). And from the sound of things, there was a lot more going on than simply an extremely effective hit and run raid on your part. It was set up well in advance, etc. That the DM let all of that work instead of saying "my NPCs are dying. . . . must. . . . rule-0" says something good about the quality of his DMing.

So, forgiveness, apologies, and no holding of grudges on this end.


My DM is really good about making his NPCs ahead of time and letting the dice fall where they may.

One of the things I really dislike about message boards is that when I distill 6 months into 10 lines of text, someone always jumps up and says it's stupid gaming, lame, etc. Naturally they don't have all the details I left out (did you want me to start that story at 13th level? :D) So you stepped into one of my pet peeves and I let fly.

PS
 

Wanders into thread... Reads beginning to end... Rub my sore and bleeding eyes... Ponders 3.5 Spell changes...

Well, I know that I heavily nerfed casters in my own game already. Given the results, I'll be more than happy to incorporate the 3.5 changes without hesitation or worry. Indeed, the Spell changes, combined with the beefing up of Monsters, has me far more excited about the 3.5 revision than I was about 3E to begin with.

Wanders back out of thread whistling Dixie...
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top