Most overrated "broken" things?

[The Thayan Menace]

Veritas!

What combos, spells, classes, etc. did you find just didn't live up to the hype?

Shilsen

-Samir

 

[shilsen]

Shilsen

-Samir

Hey!

 

[Felon]

You do realize that the barbarian also gets BAB and saves as a fighter and 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, and a special ability at every level too, right?

Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

do you think the class features of the warblade balance with the barbarian? If so, you wouldn't mind going toe to toe with one, right?

The barbarian has many more options available to him that a warblade simply doesen't have (archery)

The point is the warblade is dead meat without his maneuvers and stances. with his maneuvers or stances, the war blade is a bit stronger then the barbarian, but the barbarian still out damages him.

*edit*

 

[Venator]

I don't understand how the spiked chain could ruin someone's entire gaming experience.

If you have such a problem with it, then you really arn't in any position to comment on whether it's broken or not, since your opinion will clearly be bias because of your non-nonsensical hatred of the weapon.

I mean really, you just need to chill out.

Anyhoo, one of my players ran a spiked chain fgt/swsh build in a campaign i ran once. He was a machine, and the player loved running him. Everyone just called him "Chains." Regardless, in response, i did what any good DM would do, i adjusted the difficulty.

Thats the thing about "broken" characters. If you are a good DM, you can adjust the campaign to fit the characters needs, and to provide them with a decent challenge. Maybe I'm just not one to whine over things there's no need to whine over.

It can ruin an entire groups gaming experience. Adjusting encounters around a chain tripper from levels 1-10ish is absolutely hellish on the group. Right off the bat any medium sized (and most large sized) bipeds are eliminated from the game.... Either the tripper absolutely dominates leaving everyone else wondering why they are even at the table, the chain tripper does next to nothing and the group struggles to make it through the encounter wondering why they always come across monsters no one has ever seen before, or its a crystal clear DM vs PCs (or PC in this case) situation in every encounter.

The spiked chain is hated because it is associated with the mechanicly broken tripping rules, and has reach. Both far worse with an Enlarge Person, commonly found in wands.

 

[AllisterH]

Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.

Well, why don't we try and compare them since they are quite similar (warblades get starting gold as per barbarians NOT fighters which should've tipped people off that warblades are designed in context of the barbarian).

Hp, BAB, Skill points and Saves are the same. Both get uncanny dodge (and the improved version with the warblade being one level behind in receiving this)

Weapon proficiencies - Same except that warblades don't get proficiency in ANY ranged weapons, not even the Xbow.

Armour and Shield proficencies- Exactly the same.

Unique Skills - Barbarians get Handle Animal, Listen, Ride and Survival while Warblades have Balance, Concentration, Diplomacy, Knowledge (history & local), Martial Lore and Tumble. Personally, I think the warblade one is slightly better since some manoeuvers function off of skills, however the barbarian's skills aren't anything to dismiss (both Handle animal and Ride can increase a barbarian's skill/effectiveness in combat while Listen means at least a barbarian won't be surprised as often.

Abilities - Fast movement, Trap sense, Damage Reduction, Indomitable Will vs Weapon Aptitude, Battle Clarity/Ardor/cunning/Skill/Mastery and 4 bonus feats from a pretty tight list. Here's where I think it depends on the starting point total of the game. If you are in a 30 pt game and above, you have enough points for the essential abilities (str, dex and con) but also enough to actually have an Int bonus. 28 and lower, this favours the barbarian as you might not have enough left over to have am INT score that gives you a bonus.
Thus 28 pt and lower game - Barbarian. 30 and higher game - Warblade.

Signature ability - Rage vs manoeuvers. If all you want to measure is damage, then barbarians win this one easily. With less MAD than the warblade, a barbarian can afford a higher starting STR meaning their rage induced STR bonus becomes higher meaning they can afford to use a higher Power Attack value thus giving them more damage per swing. What manoeuvers do is give a warblade more OPTION other than ,"Rage, Charge, Power Attack".

For example, at level 1, a warblade only knoes 3 manouevers and 1 stance, yet of the choices available, not one of them is going to allow a warblade to do more damage. You can repeat this for pretty much every level as none of the manoeuvers will enable a warblade to even come close to a equivalent level raging barbarian

(The two problematic manoeuvers, IHS and WRT are both non-damaging manoeuvers)

Really, warblades stack up pretty nicely with barbarians. Barbarians fight with power while warblades fight with skill.

 

[Felon]

The barbarian has many more options available to him that a warblade simply doesen't have (archery)

This is a canard that is discussed in the DMG, where it discusses building new classes that are better than those in the PHB and rationalizing doing so with the alleged trade-off that they're even worse at things that their archetype doesn't really lend itself to anyway. A sorcerer does not have some huge edge over the wizard just because he's proficient with a lot more weapons. The barbarian can fire a bow while a warblade has to fire a crossbow, but ranged combat not what either class is really about. Warblades and barbarians are front-liners. Evaluate their strengths based on that.

The point is the warblade is dead meat without his maneuvers and stances. with his maneuvers or stances, the war blade is a bit stronger then the barbarian, but the barbarian still out damages him.

So, the warblade is stronger only if he actually utilizes his strengths? Good to know.

 

[FireLance]

Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.

I was disagreeing with the logic, not the conclusion (although I'm not sure that I agree with the conclusion, either ).

The original quote was:

The warblade gets BAB & saves as a fighter AND 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, class and a special ability at every other level? Compared to the other martial classes, yea that seems much more powerful.

There was no explicit mention of maneuvers, just BAB and saves, skill points, hit points and special abilities, so by that logic, the barbarian is also much more powerful than the other martial classes. If the complaint was that the warblade's maneuvers and other special abilities were better than the special abilities of the other martial classes, it wouldn't have triggered my logical flaw detector.

 

[Felon]

Well, why don't we try and compare them since they are quite similar (warblades get starting gold as per barbarians NOT fighters which should've tipped people off that warblades are designed in context of the barbarian).

Maybe so, then maybe again folks miss all the benefits of the barbarian that the warblade matches due to all the benefits of the fighter that it co-opts.

For example, at level 1, a warblade only knoes 3 manouevers and 1 stance, yet of the choices available, not one of them is going to allow a warblade to do more damage. You can repeat this for pretty much every level as none of the manoeuvers will enable a warblade to even come close to a equivalent level raging barbarian.

Remind me, when does a warblade get damage multiples on Power Attacks?

 

[Moon-Lancer]

#177

Felon. The war blade CANT use a crossbow. He cant use any ranged weapons. he gets destroyed with ranged combat if he cant somehow avoid the ranged attacks.

Your assertion is that the barbarian is equal to a warblade without stances and maneuvers. are you still disputing this? I wasent sure, becuse you didendent adress this again. So yeah, a barbarian could back peddle with a bow and save for a maneuver or stance, the warblade doesn't have many options.

is it possible you have not read the warblade description if you think they can use a crossbow? A warblade doesn't do more damage then a barbarian, and this has been shown.

However the warblade has more options, so he may, with creative use of stances and maneuvers, survive in combat (or run away) while the barbarian may not. he wont have as much impact as the barbarian when the barbarian was alive.

*edited to be nicer*