Jameson Courage - in other words, it's doable by abusing some of the most broken spells in the game - Glitterdust and Grease and Entangle.
Well, you're the one who said it'd obliterate them. I showed that's not necessarily true (using the base assumptions of the game, just like you were talking about). And, you've been talking about the core assumptions of the game recently, right? I mean, wands of CLW are assumed because they're cheap and available according to the DMG? By that token, shouldn't these level 1 & 2 spells be available to level 4 characters?
Your statement wasn't "magic is broken." It has problems, which is why I toned it down in my RPG. Your statement was basically "8 ogres will obliterate a 4th level 3.X party, where that's not the case in earlier editions." I disagreed, and showed why. Passing it off as "well, magic is broken" is true in a sense, but it demonstrates that your point isn't as valid as it was presented.
Note, we're not supposed to be using spells here since we have to save our highest level spells for later.
As I pointed out, if you're picking the right fights, you won't be.
Entangle is a level 1 spell that lasts 4 minutes at level 4, and it uses up a single level 1 spell slot (you have 4 level 1's, and 3 level 2's). So, 1/7 of your spells above level 0. Then, you just ride around on horseback, picking off ogres while skirting the edge of the
Entangle spell.
I talked about the "open a door and there's 8 ogres" to show that's it's possible to not be "obliterated" by your 8 ogres example, even when it's not what you were aiming for (which is picking and choosing your battles).
4th level wizard isn't supposed to need to cast his Glitterdust spell according to some.
Or, to put it another way, get a caster or go home.
It's very much in line with 4e's controller role. While magic is too powerful in 3.X from a game balance perspective (in my opinion), I have no idea how that proves your point (that 3.X is more deadly using base assumptions).
Note, the AD&D party is doing this without a caster. They can take on 8 ogres at any time and can probably do it multiple times per day, so long as their HP hold out.
The one with 7 players and henchmen? I'd trust 7 non-casters to take out 8 ogres on horseback in 3.X. Again, picking and choosing your battles. Pepper them at ranged, focus fire, and keep moving. All out run, stop and shoot, all out run, stop and shoot. Dead ogres.
Oh, and btw, Glitterdust is a 10 foot radius spread. Sure, if 4 of the ogres are standing shoulder to shoulder, then you could get half of them. Never mind that the other 4 are STILL going to obliterate your party.
They'd have to get to you, right? Didn't I mention bottlenecking?
Bottlenecking? Good grief, you just want your fighter to die don't you? I've got reach and you don't. I don't need to get into the doorway to hit the fighter. 2 ogres can attack from 10 feet back and the fighter gets kersplatted.
Blind ogres that are probably prone from
Grease, while the Fighter is sitting back with a Summon Nature's Ally I in between him and them (with him 10 feet behind the summon). I think I addressed all of this in my post.
Once the fighter goes down, everyone else has a serious, serious problem.
But he probably won't go down. If he does, you keep spontaneously casting summons and staying 10 feet behind them. They'll clog the corridor and keep you out of range.
8 Ogres is a CR 9 encounter. If you are regularly doing EL+5 encounters without much difficulty, it's time to brush up on your monster tactics. That or the writers of 3.5 D&D were completely off base when they tried to determine how difficult encounters should be.
I was just pointing out that with proper player tactics, you can do a lot. You seemed to not be able to fathom how. I hope you can see how, now. A
Grease spell will basically immobilize a Frost Giant Jarl at CR 17 (make a DC 10 Balance check at -5). That's a level 1 spell.
No, 3.X wasn't great at placing CR or as good at making out-of-the-gate balanced encounters as 4e is. However, you're basing your assumption that beating higher CR enemies this easily is basically impossible. I'm saying that in 3.X, that may not be the right call to make.
I will agree that 7 PC's make an ENORMOUS difference. Then again, a party of 7 PC's is about +3-4 levels on their effective party level. That makes 8 ogres about a par encounter.
Yeah, we're close to agreement with this. Though, in 3.X it'd be assumed that you're have 5-ish spellcasters out of 7 PCs (if you count paladins and rangers [and rangers get
Entangle, too]).
Edit to add a later thought.
Throughout this thread, I've been told that the reason parties don't need healing is smart play. That they would simply run away from encounter like this and never engage. Yet, when I bring up a virtually overwhelming encounter, the first reaction is to charge right in, blow spells and away we go.
I was specifically countering your "if they fought 8 ogres, they'd be obliterated" comment. And, I hope you can see that it's very possible to blow one
Grease and a summoned monster and run away. And that you could fight them with one
Entangle while pinging them with bows from 300 feet and probably suffer no losses other than ammo and a spell slot. The ogres will only have javelins, and those aren't flying the 300 feet necessary to get to you.
Entangle, focus fire ping, dead. You could even attempt to draw the 8 ogres from that room out if you are prepared for it. You blow maybe 3 level 1 slots from two casters, leaving yourself with 5/8 level 1's and 6/6 level 2's. Load up your saddlebags with ammo and you're good.
And heck, since it's assumed that wands are so cheap, buy a
Wand of Entangle, and
Wand of Grease, and a
Wand of Summon Nature's Ally I. More expensive than a healing wand, sure, but you can do so many more encounters with good tactics and those three wands than bludgeoning your way through. Which, again, I think was the point. With a different type of play, you can bypass, take out, or otherwise overcome challenges using the base assumptions of the game.
You can call foul on 3.X magic and CR calculating, and that's not invalid. However, you're the one who was making the argument that the base assumptions of the game assume the party won't win. I used
very base mechanics to show that it isn't the case.
As always, play what you like
