Do you think Haste is too powerful as is?

[demadog]

Though this was obviously a trash post, I will reply anyway. Good idea, anyway.

Adding another wizard means that there is another 'soft target' for the enemy that the front-liners must (or should, I guess) protect. Plus, XP gets split even further, as does loot. No, adding new players is remarkably balanced (even NPCs, mercenaries, followers, cohorts, etc.)

-Fletch!

Trash?!?! Sorry, didn't mean offense, I'll try to tone down my sarcasm a bit...just trying to be funny. Also sorry for interjecting into the literature debate.

I'll disagree that adding another "soft target" in an additional PC wizard is more balancing than hasting a single wizard. While guarding a single wizard may be easier, I believe that getting an enemy to split their attacks would be far more successful. Also, having another wizard still provides for a whole host of additional buff and out-of-combat spells that hasted single wizard can't match. Besides, a hasted wizard has a limited duration to deal with and the possibility of being dispelled.

I'll agree though that adding another PC wizard would take away from the XP and loot, but to me these are purely ancillary detractions. I mean, in the large scope of the campaign what’s a few XP and potions going to mean, and won't that additional wizard be able make that up with crafting feats? Also, its likely that you'll plan for the additional player, ratchet up the encounters, and end up handing out the proportionally the same loot and XP.

I also agree with your last point, adding new players is remarkably balanced, but in terms of game as a whole its no more balanced than the Haste spell, possibly even less so. However, my original complaints about the spell still stand. It breaks the combat mechanics of the game and it can create some inter-player derision.

 

[WizarDru]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re

Similar to some of them perhaps. Legolas has been in Middle Earth longer than Gandalf, as far as I can tell, he's at least 4,500 years old. Aragorn is much younger, but is still in his sixties and is the veteran of dozens of engagements, including a stint in the Gondorian army as a youth when the books take place. Boromir, at 40, is one of the youngest members of the Fellowship (two of the hobbits are younger). Clearly there is significant "experience" in this bunch.

Well, let's be fair. The elves aren't even remotely close to balanced to men in Tolkein's world. If rendered in game terms, they'd have to be at a high ECL. The First of the Children of Illuvatar are just plain twinked.

Aragorn, of course, has elvish blood in him, which is why he's still spry and battle-fit, even when being nearly as old as Theoden, King of the Mark.

And Boromir...well, poor ol' Boromir done died.

But in many series, it's also clear that wizards are no more immortal than others, they just have really good skills at intimidation. It's obvoius that in Jordan's 'Wheel of Time' series that Aes Sedai and channelers will die with a knife between their ribs, just like anyone else, if caught unawares. It's the reprisals from her friends that makes them truly terrifying.

 

[Victim]

Most fantasy books don't outfit the warrior protagonists with a cart load of powerful magic items. In high level 3e games, it doesn't really matter that the wizard has haste or fly. Anyone can be hasted or flying or invisible, etc. As often as the One Ring got Bilbo or Frodo into and out of trouble, its main power, besides Plot Hook +10, is a 20k item. A 20th level character can have 39 one rings with his treasure alotment. As much power as spellcasters have, anyone have chunks of that power through artifice. Consider a battle between a 20th wizard and fighter - we'll limit it to a direct area style battle for now. Without items, the fighter needs to kill the wizard in one round after winning initiative, which he probably can't do. With items, the fighter can have SR or Antimagic, along with sufficient mobility boosts to threaten the wizard. It's still an uphill battle for the fighter, but he's still got a decent chance of winning. He's playing the wizard's game afterall.

I think Haste is probably a bit too strong, and would probably work fine at 4th level. However, since 4th level doesn't exactly offer tons of combat spells that scream PICK ME!!! like 3rd level does, haste is probably fine as is.

 

[Storm Raven]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re

Well, let's be fair. The elves aren't even remotely close to balanced to men in Tolkein's world. If rendered in game terms, they'd have to be at a high ECL. The First of the Children of Illuvatar are just plain twinked.

Aragorn, of course, has elvish blood in him, which is why he's still spry and battle-fit, even when being nearly as old as Theoden, King of the Mark.

Given that the question was "do you think any of the members of the Fellowship would be comparable to Gandalf in terms of experience value" and not "do you think elves are a powerful race in Tolkien", I don't see how this is relevant.

The question was: do you think any of the characters in the Fellowship could be comparable in level terms to Gandalf. I assume the implication is in D&D level terms. My answer is yes, Legolas and Aragorn are examples of this.

 

[WizarDru]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re

The question was: do you think any of the characters in the Fellowship could be comparable in level terms to Gandalf. I assume the implication is in D&D level terms. My answer is yes, Legolas and Aragorn are examples of this.

And I would disagree. Gandalf is clearly more powerful, in my eyes. Aragorn is the greatest of men of the 3rd Age, but he's still just a very talented, skilled man. Legolas is one the finest archers of elvendom, but he's no Glorfindel of ages past. Gandalf says as much in Moria, when he warns the Fellowship "Fly! This foe is beyond any of you!" None of the fellowship contend this, and only Gandalf stands in melee with the Balrog. Tolkien makes it clear that only another Maiar could stand against it, or one of the greatest of elvish heroes, before they had diminished so much as they have by the end of the 3rd Age.

Indeed, when he returns, he has become more powerful, while the rest of the Fellowship has stayed the same. He has effectively levelled up. Given that few people can even agree on the levels of characters from the book, or on the appearance of the Balrog, I doubt we'll be able to agree on this. Simply look at Colonel Hardisson's d20 Middle Earth project, and you'll some folks making Aragorn epic levels, and other making him a level 7 ranger. It's all opinion, and there isn't necessarily a right answer.

Regardless, this seems to be a completely differerent argument entirely. Is the problem so folks are having with haste merely that it lets a spellcaster throw two spells per round instead of the normal one? That's something I hardly consider unbalancing. If that's the issue, then you shouldn't change haste, but put a cap on spellcasting in general. Of course, that's punishing the spellcasters, and I'm not sure to a great benefit.

 

[Tzarevitch]

I banned Time Stop. What else did you expect?

I banned it too. Time Stop is actually #2 on my list of what I call "Crack Spells" (i.e. the designers must've been on crack when they drafted the text for these spells).

#1 Harm - along with Heal moved to 8th level in my campaign.
#2 Timestop - outright banned.
#3 Haste - Changed. Extra partial action can only be used for a move-equivalent action. If you want to cast more than one spell, take Quicken Spell.
#4 Any spell in the "shadow magic" series. - Outright banned. These spells never made any sense and still don't in third edition.

Tzarevitch

 

[mkletch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re

Elladan and Elrohir (Elrond's sons) are almost as old as Legolas, and have both been in Middle Earth longer than Gandalf. There are clearly several individuals in the LotR that could easily be as "experienced" as Gandalf, and of them, only Elrond and Galadriel (on the "good guy" side) seem comparable in power, and they are clearly beings with arcane powers.

Yeah, Elrond clocks in at around 7000 years old, Galadriel easily beyond 10000 (hard to tell since the calendars/time-keeping-methods change). But Gandalf is older than the world itself, and clearly is among those who had a hand in its making, albeit in a different incarnation. Don;t even get started with age in RPGs, though; that's a "whole nuther ball uh wax".

The point is that translating character level is more important than translating character class, when converting NPCs from books to stats. Agreed or no? How about a poll on this? Just kidding.

-Fletch

 

[Tzarevitch]

No to balance spellcasters in general you need multiple encounters. Haste isn't the issue, lack of encounters and letting the mage let loose with no consequences is. If you have 1-2 encoutners a day and the spellcasters don't compeltely dominate your games at mid-high levels even without haste, your spellcasters are doing something massively wrong. With haste it just gets worse because they can better cpaitalize upon there ability to let loose in a short period of time.

If the game is run in the way the classes were balanced(multiple encouners per day) then both spellcasters in general and haste in particular don't come out of whack.

So you are saying that arcane casters have to live in a world where they get attacked at least 1-2x per day every day just to balance a single 3rd level spell? I'll respond to that argument by saying you are right, you DO have to attack the casters regularly a couple of times each day to make Haste balanced and that is exactly why it is UNbalanced.

Apparently you envision a universe where there is a Cosmic Haste Monitor that says, "Oh dear, that wizard just learned Haste," and submits his name to the Universal Wandering Monster Guild. That way, the Guild knows to schedule their members to attack him at least 1-2 times a day (as you suggest), every day wherever he is, as the price for his daring to learn an unbalanced spell.

Tzarevitch

 

[Shard O'Glase]

So you are saying that arcane casters have to live in a world where they get attacked at least 1-2x per day every day just to balance a single 3rd level spell? I'll respond to that argument by saying you are right, you DO have to attack the casters regularly a couple of times each day to make Haste balanced and that is exactly why it is UNbalanced.

Apparently you envision a universe where there is a Cosmic Haste Monitor that says, "Oh dear, that wizard just learned Haste," and submits his name to the Universal Wandering Monster Guild. That way, the Guild knows to schedule their members to attack him at least 1-2 times a day (as you suggest), every day wherever he is, as the price for his daring to learn an unbalanced spell.

Tzarevitch

No, agian NO.

Cripes how many times does it have to be said. In order to balance wizards in general they have to be in multiple encoutners that either require or they get through a lot easier through the casting of spells. With or without HASTE a wizard will still dominate a game like every other pure spellcaster if there aren't enough encounters per day.

Again remove haste and this is still a problem. Haste merely magnifes the already existing problem by letting a spellcaster unleash more spells in a shorter time frame. But again even without haste if you are using a couple encoutners per day or less and the pure spellcasters in your game don't absolutely dominate then your pure spellcasters are played so incredibly poorly words can't even desribe it. And if you still can't understand that I'm saying spellcasters in general are unbalanced if you don't use multiple encounters per day words can't describe how poorly I am getting my message across.

And by the way I use the term encoutner as opposed to fight for a reason. A encoutner being anything that does something to diminish the parties resources. Also this assumed the encounter is somewhat challenging. Not hey look a diminshed the parties resources by a GP when they went to the inn to eat.

 

[Stalker0]

The number of encounters isn't necessarily important to balancing magicusers, just the wizards perception of them. If the wizard thinks the day may be filled with constant battle, he's probably going to conserve his spells. Else, he probably won't hold back.

Personally, I think haste makes it easier for a wizard to conserve their spells. You throw a couple of spells in the first few rounds, with a little help from that wand of haste, and then sit back.

As has been explained many times, how quickly you deal damage in the first few rounds can have an expotential effect on the overall damage the party takes. As a wizard, if after a few spells the fighters and whatnot can mop up, I don't need to keep casting. But if the fight gets hairy (because not enough damage was done in teh beginning), then I have to roll up my sleeves and start throwing fireballs.