FR, GH, AU - character power levels

[Darklone]

Hmm. Giant warmain compared to a fighter? I don't see these two balanced. The biggest advantage of the core freaks to AU freaks: I think they would have better and more magic items.

 

[Gez]

Bring Down the Moon affects only your allies...

Of course, you may have two mages, each casting [cite]bring down the moon[/cite] in sequence, so that both are resplenished.

But you (the caster) don't benefit from this spell. You are among its target only as the center of the area, not as a recipient of its effect.

 

[Dinkeldog]

You seriously think that Reactive Counterspell is overpowered? I actually tend to think that RC should have been incorporated as a core rule into the counterspelling rules. As it stands, it is much, much more effective to shut down an opposing spellcaster using a damaging spell (which can either incapacitate the caster entirely, or force a Concentration check with a nice inflated DC) than to counterspell.

Not to turn this into a rules thread, but...

What Reactive Counterspell did in 3.0 (under haste) was allow a countering without a readied action. Then the wizard loses a standard action on his next turn. This wasn't a problem in 3.0 because the hasted wizard got an extra partial action that could then be used to damage the opposing caster. Net effect is that the first wizard with haste up gets to counter the opponent and keep casting. Until haste is up, if they reactive counterspell, they're just throwing away their next round--which is still pretty powerful.

Things change a bit in 3.5, but I still don't have the books at hand, and I'm not in the mood to pull the SRD, so I don't know how.

 

[Estlor]

I'm still reading AU, but what strikes me (and I've had a lot of experience statting and comparing races) is that the races in AU are point-for-point weaker than the ones found in the core rules. The presence of the bonus feat in addition to the one everyone gets at 1st level seems to be more of a balancing effort to keep the AU races in line with the core ones. If you dropped an AU race into the core rules and forced it to play without the bonus feat, it would probably be more in line with the 3e half-elf in power.

As for the classes, I can't rightly comment on them since I haven't read all of them or the magic chapter. It seems to me that the main difference between AU and core in this regard is potential to abuse the rules in AU requires you to work at it more, as the additional choices and altered magic scheme force you to keep a lot more in mind when munchkining.

 

[gariig]

Also, in AU the first real cure spell is second level. So the only way to get a descent amount of low level healing is a greenbond or maybe a champion of life(don't remember if they can). I think AU just scales better then D&D.

Gariig

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Hey folks, do you think an xth level character from one world tends to be more powerful then fellows from another? Are forgotten realms characters tougher then the guys from GH? More magic items or overpowerd spells available? Better stat generation methods? Honest, which is more powerful.

Interesting question. Stat generation methods are not a good basis for comparison IMO because that's the DM's choice as to which one to use. As a general rule, a 25 point buy PC will be outclassed by a 32 point buy PC, who may well be outclassed by a best of 4d6 arrange-as-you-like, especially if no one watches the rolls.

All basic characters from FR, AU, and GH are comparable to each other. Some characters will be more powerful in certain circumstances than others. AU characters will actually be stronger in combat at lower levels, but not as over the top at the upper end of the scale. The FR character will tend to gain an edge over the rest in combat, especially after about L7, due to three factors:

additional PrCs
new magic items
extra spells

All of those are available in a variety of FR supplements that allow powerful combinations with core equipment. IMO if you just ran an FR game from the FRCS, all three would be relatively close. But even there some PrC and spell options do give an edge. The combination of all three of these in an FR PC allows for a strong combat PC, particularly a spellcaster.

AU's setting book The Diamond Throne emphasizes unique items over a huge grab bag, so you might get an interesting combo depending on what the DM allows. But all things being equal with the same amount of gold spent, I still think that the FR character will have a slight edge.

 

[DMScott]

But you (the caster) don't benefit from this spell. You are among its target only as the center of the area, not as a recipient of its effect.

I think it's been established in various rulings that you are your own ally. What's worth noting about Bring Down The Moon is it's fairly restricted on when you can cast it (at night with the moon in the sky), you can only cast it once in a 24 hour period, you have to burn a feat to get the spell (since it's Exotic), and it has both a duration (1 minute per level) and an area of effect in which the spell effects apply. It's a nice buff-up spell before facing a major bad guy, if you defeat his underlings at the right time and in the right location, but it's really not that special compared to wish-type spells.

Ultimately, I think FR has the best set of spells and magic-related feats of the three mentioned. AU has the most fun magic system of the three, which has to count for something . In the end, these sorts of debates are ultimately kind of irrelevant - power level is based largely on the DM and the group rather than the setting.

 

[Hjorimir]

As FR has had the most supplements produced you will find those characters are the most powerful. Each supplement creates rules/power bloat as the respective authors strive to bring something bigger/better/faster/more to entice players and DMs alike to purchase the respective book.

The splat books (Sword and Fist, etc.) are perfect examples of rules bloat in action. Take those and toss in Magic of Faerun and you're off to the races. Rules bloat was so bad that when I converted to 3.5 I used that as a good time to eliminate all non-core material (only allowed material from the three core books) and nothing else.

I should also mention that Dragon magazine is a source of rules bloat (but I have my subscription still as it also provides some good material for DMs to use).

 

[Nightfall]

Nightfall, get over it. The fact is Relics And Rituals does have several broken spells. Other DMs have also voiced displeasure with the product. In fact, I have seen more complaints about Relics And Rituals than any other similar book on the market. At the very least, you need to modify a few of the spells, or outright ban them, to maintain balance.

I'm not disagreeing about that Lu. Hell I'd be the first to step in line to get a few of these spells fixed so that they ARE useable. But what I have a problem with regarding Dink's complain is Sacred Journey. You know the spell. It's one a paladin should be able to use much like any other. Should it be used a lot? No. But I feel it's a perfectly decent spell for its level. Dink's PROBLEM was he didn't figure on how it would affect his game with undead. That's where I have a problem is because of that, he views that spell as bad as opposed to say Illjam fire or Multiplicy(sp).

You are usually quite accurate in your review of books, but you are obviously biased when it comes to material tied to your favorite setting. I am sure that if the book did not have that association, you would be far less defensive or forgiving of it.

Perhaps. But the only thing I'm defensive about is Dink's assertion that Sacred Journey is broken. The other spells I can deal with. I do appreciate you find my reviews at least semi non-biased.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I don't know much about bring down the moon. Strikes me as potentially no more unbalancing than a variety of 'remove from play' items and effects.

My major problem with it is that, if the DM isn't a jerk and allows a player to cast it, they're getting 9th-level spells back for an 8th-level spell.

I think it's been established in various rulings that you are your own ally. What's worth noting about Bring Down The Moon is it's fairly restricted on when you can cast it (at night with the moon in the sky), you can only cast it once in a 24 hour period, you have to burn a feat to get the spell (since it's Exotic), and it has both a duration (1 minute per level) and an area of effect in which the spell effects apply. It's a nice buff-up spell before facing a major bad guy, if you defeat his underlings at the right time and in the right location, but it's really not that special compared to wish-type spells.

Of course it's not as strong as wish - it's 8th-level and doesn't cost 5000 XP.

But Modify Spell seems to me to be very balanced. Keep in mind that, while it is more flexible, if you were using it in 3e you would essentially be getting 1.5 fireballs for the price of 2 fireballs.

My only problem with Modify Spell is that it can break the metacap. An 8th-level magister can dish out 18d8 points of damage with two 4th-level spell slots. Sure, it's expensive, but you can still use it to break the system.

I'm not intending to bash AU here though - these are the only two balance issues that I've seen so far with it, and maybe it's just me

As FR has had the most supplements produced you will find those characters are the most powerful. Each supplement creates rules/power bloat as the respective authors strive to bring something bigger/better/faster/more to entice players and DMs alike to purchase the respective book.

The splat books (Sword and Fist, etc.) are perfect examples of rules bloat in action. Take those and toss in Magic of Faerun and you're off to the races. Rules bloat was so bad that when I converted to 3.5 I used that as a good time to eliminate all non-core material (only allowed material from the three core books) and nothing else.

Hear hear!