Impact of "fixing" the MAD classes?

[Plane Sailing]

So, PHB2 has decided that the way to go is for all classes to have one ability which is used for all their attacks, and a choice of secondary abilities which can provide modifiers to the attacks.

But what about the poor PHB1 classes that are lumbered with half their powers depending upon one ability and half upon another?

Well, one option would be for the Cleric to say "Choose either Str or Wis to use as the basis for all your attacks". Another option would be to say "Use Wis for all your attacks". Paladins could be either "Choose either Str or Cha to use as the basis for all your attacks" or "Use Cha for all your attacks". same for Warlocks with their Con or Cha power choice.

I think what I would be tempted to do is

a) Clerics use Wis for all their attacks
b) Paladins use Cha for all their attacks
c) Infernal warlocks use Con for all their attacks
d) Fey warlocks use Cha for all their attacks
e) Star warlocks choose at chargen time whether to use Con or Cha for all their attacks.

Rangers... their selection of "Str with a melee weapon, Dex with a ranged weapon" for a lot of their powers (and then with some melee only and some ranged only) works OK for me at the moment.

Downsides to doing this? Fighter/Cleric and Fighter/Paladin multiclasses look less attractive.

Other than that, how does it look? Workable? Good/bad/indifferent (and why)?

Cheers

 

[Garthanos]

So, PHB2 has decided that the way to go is for all classes to have one ability which is used for all their attacks, and a choice of secondary abilities which can provide modifiers to the attacks.

But what about the poor PHB1 classes that are lumbered with half their powers depending upon one ability and half upon another?

Well, one option would be for the Cleric to say "Choose either Str or Wis to use as the basis for all your attacks". Another option would be to say "Use Wis for all your attacks". Paladins could be either "Choose either Str or Cha to use as the basis for all your attacks" or "Use Cha for all your attacks". same for Warlocks with their Con or Cha power choice.

I think what I would be tempted to do is

a) Clerics use Wis for all their attacks
b) Paladins use Cha for all their attacks
c) Infernal warlocks use Con for all their attacks
d) Fey warlocks use Cha for all their attacks
e) Star warlocks choose at chargen time whether to use Con or Cha for all their attacks.

Rangers... their selection of "Str with a melee weapon, Dex with a ranged weapon" for a lot of their powers (and then with some melee only and some ranged only) works OK for me at the moment.

Downsides to doing this? Fighter/Cleric and Fighter/Paladin multiclasses look less attractive.

Other than that, how does it look? Workable? Good/bad/indifferent (and why)?

Cheers

I've found myself pulled kicking and screaming down the same alley ;-), in other words workable with over tones of head shaking I would rather have balanced MAD, but that seems an unattainable ;-)

 

[Starfox]

I looked at replacing either stat on the Cleric, and I found no way to do it that preserves flavor. My first idea was to replace the Str powers with Wiz powers, making any secondary effects of these powers dependent on Str. The Str attacks generally have secondary bonuses that grant healing, and Str-based healing stretched´s my credibility.

The paladin looks a little better. I'd make the paladin Str-based, giving all formerly Cha powers Cha-based secondary effects. The odd man out here are the ranged powers, which seem jarring being Str-based. I suppose these could use either Wis or Cha at the pally's option.

This creates a Str sclass with wiz and cha as secondary attributes. I prefer this to a purely Cha paladin, and the side effects of the Str powers didn't convert as neatly to Cha (as as a secondary) as the Cha powers did to Str (as a secondary).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The question in my mind continues to be "is MAD bad"? Are any of these classes really weakened, to a point where they're not as playable as SAD classes? In other words is something actually broken. Or are there compensating advantages. It seems to me like I am looking at (for example) the 3 Warlock pacts as being virtually separate classes. You pick a build and that choice determines which powers you LIKELY to use, plus you have access to the powers optimum for the other 2 pacts which you can always dabble in. If a starlock happens to find a particular feylock power to be to his liking then he can use it. Maybe not as well as a feylock can, but it works, and it may work pretty well depending on exactly how his secondary attributes were distributed.

I don't think that MAD is the real problem. The problem seems to be first and foremost the whole way the game insists on forcing attribute boosts to be mandatory just to keep up. The point buy system at the beginning also fails to take into account the variable utility of different stats to the character buying them. I really think THAT whole issue is what should be addressed. Adjust things such that increasing your secondary attributes is just as valuable as increasing the primary one, and the whole problem goes away, universally for all classes.

Now I don't know exactly how you would relax the 'bonus treadmill'. Hitting is so important that it is hard to see how to balance primary vs secondary stat advantage, but it could be done in the initial point buy to some extent. That would help. Buying primary stat points should simply be more expensive than buying secondary stat points or points in your 'dump' stats. Just something to think about.

 

[Obryn]

I've thought down the same lines... I think, basically, that the designers decided after 4e had been out for a while that the A-type classes were just a better class design. For what it's worth, I agree.

Still, I also have to ask, "Are the PHB1 classes playable?" and I think the answer is definitely Yes. About the only problem with the V-type classes, IMHO, is that they're basically two classes sharing similar class features. That is, if you focus down one of the two branches, you're probably doing just fine; you just have a little less choice at each new level about what power you'll take. All in all, I've decided I'm pretty okay with that - that is, I'm okay enough that I'd rather accept it than quit using the Character Builder for those classes.

-O

 

[Nahat Anoj]

c) Infernal warlocks use Con for all their attacks
d) Fey warlocks use Cha for all their attacks
e) Star warlocks choose at chargen time whether to use Con or Cha for all their attacks.

Well, I think you'd still have the same problems with V-type classes. They way I'd do it is make Con the primary stat for warlocks, Int for infernal locks, con for star locks, and either Int or a combo of Int/Cha for fey locks (kinda like a resourceful warlord).

Rangers... their selection of "Str with a melee weapon, Dex with a ranged weapon" for a lot of their powers (and then with some melee only and some ranged only) works OK for me at the moment.

I want to make rangers Dex primary, with melee rangers using Str secondary and ranged rangers uses Wis secondary.

I All in all, I've decided I'm pretty okay with that - that is, I'm okay enough that I'd rather accept it than quit using the Character Builder for those classes.

I also agree that the V-shaped classes are still playable enough, and I also agree that continued use of the Builder is a HUGE incentive to keep using them. For me the big problem is that V-shaped classes don't have a clear, distinct theme (IMO), and the human's racial abilities (particularly the floating +2) aren't as good here. If all classes were V-shaped, it wouldn't be as much of a problem to me.

For most V-shaped classes, it's easy to specialize in one path and do well. But if you ever want to branch out and dip your toes in the other path's abilities, you won't have the same advantages that A-shaped classes do. Weirdly, IMO, you could be more effective multiclassing than staying in your class. Personally, I don't think it should be that way.

Now, I don't think we're going to see an update to all A-shaped any time soon, if ever. Not only are there tons of powers to sift through and make changes, but there's a lot of product out there (Martial, Divine, Arcane Power books, and the official power cards) that would be rendered obsolete by it. I'd love to have the ability to upload these powers to the Builder, but the coding for custom powers is probably brutal.

 

[Greg K]

A similar thread came up at WOTC boards and someone had an interesting perspective on this topic. He suggested that the problem was that people are looking at the Cleric, Paladin and Warlock abilities as a single group of class abilities to mix and match when the current set up is really giving you multiple classes under each of those classes rather than splitting each up into multiple classes. The result created a psychological desire for access to all of the abilities.

Several people that were suggesting MAD was a problem thought he might be on to something with one person saying that unequal access to interesting powers for builds at some levels was a contributing factor . I haven't revisited the thread so I don't know if they still planned on fixing the issue. However, since it was the same topic and raised an interesting perspective, I thought that I would pass it along for consideration.

 

[Garthanos]

The question in my mind continues to be "is MAD bad"? Are any of these classes really weakened, to a point where they're not as playable as SAD classes? In other words is something actually broken. Or are there compensating advantages. It seems to me like I am looking at (for example) the 3 Warlock pacts as being virtually separate classes. You pick a build and that choice determines which powers you LIKELY to use, plus you have access to the powers optimum for the other 2 pacts which you can always dabble in. If a starlock happens to find a particular feylock power to be to his liking then he can use it. Maybe not as well as a feylock can, but it works, and it may work pretty well depending on exactly how his secondary attributes were distributed.

I don't think that MAD is the real problem. The problem seems to be first and foremost the whole way the game insists on forcing attribute boosts to be mandatory just to keep up. The point buy system at the beginning also fails to take into account the variable utility of different stats to the character buying them. I really think THAT whole issue is what should be addressed. Adjust things such that increasing your secondary attributes is just as valuable as increasing the primary one, and the whole problem goes away, universally for all classes.

Wow, cool you haven't given up yet! ... My ideal of making well all stats useful "under the right conditions" and for accomplishing the elements of your goal for any archetype. ... seems overwhelmed by the model of the winner adapting there best methods to whatever is at hand.

 

[Nymrohd]

I very much don't mind Rangers and Clerics being V classes as the recent article names them. The two builts are very different and a cleric or ranger of one built would rarely choose a power of the other anyway. In fact I am tempted to give Devoted Clerics some way to use Cha for AC instead of Dex or Int so they can get even closer to the cloistered cleric which for me they represent. I cannot say I mind it for warlocks other than starlocks either since warlocks promote distinct builts as well. But with both Starlocks and Paladins I do have an issue. For paladins I'd go with changing Strength attacks to Charisma attacks (with Charisma modifier for damage), but would make former Strength attacks that use Wisdom for a secondary effect use Strength in its place. Starlocks I'd just change them all to Con with Int secondary.

 

[Garthanos]

Several people that were suggesting MAD was a problem thought he might be on to something with one person saying that unequal access to interesting powers for builds at some levels was a contributing factor .

I recall that .. at certain levels no powers are even available that plays to the strengths of a build, its the power list is basically insisting that you have to broaden your emphasis... the above is somebody being forced out of there stereotype instead of seduced ;-). The idea of balanced cross the board MAD, is to make enhancing secondary and tertiaries more attractive... to make conditions under which that primary doesn't do its thing as well but a secondary would.