D&D 5E No One Plays High Level?

ECMO3

Hero
You don't need to move silently to hide.

To be effectively stealthy in 3.5E you do.


It's baked into the class.

No it is not, as I pointed out earlier. Those things are options, which you do not have to take.

You get to put in a number of skill points into a skill = to level+3.

This is not true. Your maximum for cross class skills is half the number for class skills. Hide is a cross class skill for fighters, so the maximum is level +3 divided by 2. At 9th level fighter that is (9+3)/2=6.

He's not limited to 7 unless he's purely fighter, and then it's 6, not 7 since 12 points is max and that's 6 ranks.

He is purely fighter and 6+1 for dexterity is 7 ..... like I said.

I've already given several non-exhaustive examples.

Not any that I can do in 1-3 levels and accomplish what I want to accomplish.

Like the one you told me to use as an example. You told me to use the equivalent to Greater Weapon Specialization which requires. 1) Weapon focus, 2) Weapon specialization, 3) Greater Weapon Focus, and 4) level 12. I mean if you didn't want me to use examples like that, why'd you ask me to come up with comparables to it?

What I asked you to do was give me an example that was as good as GWS but required no prerequisites. I didn't ask for example of 6 more feats a character can't take, in addition to GWS.

Your claim is you can take all these great feats without preparing for them at all. Name some if this is true.

GWS is an example of a great feat you can't take. So are the examples you gave. Give me examples that are equal to that in power but don't require prerequisites - either other feats or skill levels.

You will coincidentally qualify for many good feats. You can be more selective if you prepare, but preparation isn't necessary in the least.

Then provide the examples of feats that don't require preparation!

Sorry, but it's not for story if you want it in one night.

It is for story, more importanly as the PC I am the one who decides my story.

This is gatekeeping - you have to make your story this certain way or it isn't real.

Those dervishes who are of the class to actually use it had to train far longer.

Maybe in your story they did, but this is my story.

You're kidding, right? The DMG literally says the DM defines the game. Also, and I'm quoting here, "Good players will always recognize that you have the ultimate authority over the game mechanics, even superseding something in the rulebook."

Players as a whole, not the DM.

DM fiat was part of 3e as it has been in every incarnation of the game.

Reference page number please.

Yeaaaaah, math proves you wrong. It's quite literally impossible for you to be correct.

Nope. Math has nothing at all to do with it.

Average is 12.24 no matter how you try to twist it. You don't get to use poor rolls, because I don't get to use good ones. The instant you are free to use a 9 or a 5, I get to use 15 and 17.

The average array with 4d6d1 is 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15

Absolutely you can use a 15. Presumably you are using it on strength, and then you are using a 13 on Dex (you said he had a 13 Dex on an earlier post). Presumably the 14 is on Constitution. That leaves 9, 10 and 12 and the average of those three rolls is 10.

12 is the only acceptable number for these discussions since stats were rolled and 12 is average for 4d6-L.

No it isn't.

For one thing we are talking about characters I can build, you are saying all these builds are available and then saying I can't actually build a low-intelligence fighter.

It is not like I am trying to build a low-intelligence Wizard or a Figther with a low Strength and Dex.


Math again proves you to be objectively wrong. You're using 3d6, not 4d6-L which was the default rolling method.

No I am not and you do not understand probability.

The chance of rolling 6 numbers all 12 or higher is 5.7% if using 4d6d1

No. That's average. We don't know what will be rolled or where someone might put the various stats, so you can't assume 9 any more than I can assume 15. Average has to be used.

No it is not average when you already have 3 higher stats in your array. If you believe this you do not understand probability or types of averages.

If you roll median roll you will have a 9, and a 15.

I am not assuming anything I am using the actual median array for 4d6d1.

13 has to be there for you to take ranger. If we are assuming 9 or even 12, then you can't multiclass with your 5e character.

There is a 13 on Dex and it is my character. I also gave other options to achieve this besides Ranger (Bard and Rogue).

Yet your whole house of cards is based on this idea I need to put a 12 into my character's intelligence and there is no way I ever wouldn't

You don't get 3 levels, though. You only get 1. You just said this in the post I am quoting here, "I want to grow it in one level. Or at least to effectiveness in 1 level."

Yep and that is what I get, effectiveness in 1 level.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
To be effectively stealthy in 3.5E you do.




No it is not, as I pointed out earlier. Those things are options, which you do not have to take.



This is not true. Your maximum for cross class skills is half the number for class skills. Hide is a cross class skill for fighters, so the maximum is level +3 divided by 2. At 9th level fighter that is (9+3)/2=6.



He is purely fighter and 6+1 for dexterity is 7 ..... like I said.



Not any that I can do in 1-3 levels and accomplish what I want to accomplish.



What I asked you to do was give me an example that was as good as GWS but required no prerequisites. I didn't ask for example of 6 more feats a character can't take, in addition to GWS.

Your claim is you can take all these great feats without preparing for them at all. Name some if this is true.

GWS is an example of a great feat you can't take. So are the examples you gave. Give me examples that are equal to that in power but don't require prerequisites - either other feats or skill levels.



Then provide the examples of feats that don't require preparation!



It is for story, more importanly as the PC I am the one who decides my story.

This is gatekeeping - you have to make your story this certain way or it isn't real.



Maybe in your story they did, but this is my story.



Players as a whole, not the DM.



Reference page number please.



Nope. Math has nothing at all to do with it.



The average array with 4d6d1 is 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15

Absolutely you can use a 15. Presumably you are using it on strength, and then you are using a 13 on Dex (you said he had a 13 Dex on an earlier post). Presumably the 14 is on Constitution. That leaves 9, 10 and 12 and the average of those three rolls is 10.



No it isn't.

For one thing we are talking about characters I can build, you are saying all these builds are available and then saying I can't actually build a low-intelligence fighter.

It is not like I am trying to build a low-intelligence Wizard or a Figther with a low Strength and Dex.




No I am not and you do not understand probability.

The chance of rolling 6 numbers all 12 or higher is 5.7% if using 4d6d1



No it is not average when you already have 3 higher stats in your array. If you believe this you do not understand probability or types of averages.

If you roll median roll you will have a 9, and a 15.

I am not assuming anything I am using the actual median array for 4d6d1.



There is a 13 on Dex and it is my character. I also gave other options to achieve this besides Ranger (Bard and Rogue).

Yet your whole house of cards is based on this idea I need to put a 12 into my character's intelligence and there is no way I ever wouldn't



Yep and that is what I get, effectiveness in 1 level.
I think I'm going to bow out and let you continue to believe that there are somehow more options in 5e than in 3e. :rolleyes:
 

ECMO3

Hero
Finshed my 3rd 1-20 campaign yesterday. I was playing a Monk in this one.

That makes three 1-20 characters I have played to completion at level 20:
Shaddar Kai Fighter (Zhentilar's finest) - Played doomed forgotten realms
Stout Halfling Wizard (Bladesinger) - Played Moonshae Adventures
Dhamphir Monk (Long Death) - Played Spelljammer Shattered Stars

We did not really experience a lot of the problems in the video, and when we did they were not that serious. It is more difficult at high level and you get swings because either saves are unmakable if not proficient or they are fairly easy if you are proficient with little in between. Overall I enjoyed all 3 of those campaigs and the other players did too.

I am playing in another 1-20 Dragonlance campaign currently, I am a level 9 Goblin Enchantment Wizard in that one and everything has been fine so far, but we are not high level yet.

I will start a 5th 1-20 campaign in a few weeks. I am going to play a multiclass in Lairs of Etharis. I am going to start as Drow Eldritch Knight Fighter with a 2-level Undead Warlock dip and Drow High magic and Fey Touched feats. After level 10 I will probably triple class into a Paladin, not sure Wathchers, Devotion or Oathbreaker.

Here is the 1st level character, still working on backstory. Will let you know how this one turns out:

 
Last edited:

Right after the new year we are starting a new campaign. There are major house rules changes and PCs are starting at 11th level. I have NEVER started a campaign at 11th level. Generally speaking that is the point when the vast majority of our campaigns are ending. This is exciting but I wonder if we will crash and burn. We bypassed my favorite tier of play (Tier 2).
 

ECMO3

Hero
Right after the new year we are starting a new campaign. There are major house rules changes and PCs are starting at 11th level. I have NEVER started a campaign at 11th level. Generally speaking that is the point when the vast majority of our campaigns are ending. This is exciting but I wonder if we will crash and burn. We bypassed my favorite tier of play (Tier 2).

High level play is a lot different than low level play IME. Paladins and Monks really take off above level 14 and go from being two of the weaker classes to two of the stronger classes. Wizards and Sorcerers are also extremely powerful.
 

High level play is a lot different than low level play IME. Paladins and Monks really take off above level 14 and go from being two of the weaker classes to two of the stronger classes. Wizards and Sorcerers are also extremely powerful.

I am playing a Clockwork Soul Sorcerer 9/Hexblade Warlock 2. The other PCs are a battlemaster fighter, cleric, eloquence bard and a custom homebrewed class (I think an airbender?).
 

Shaddar Kai Fighter (Zhentilar's finest) - Played doomed forgotten realms
you got to play in the doomed forgotten realms? lucky. that setting looks super cool.
We did not really experience a lot of the problems in the video, and when we did they were not that serious. It is more difficult at high level and you get swings because either saves are unmakable if not proficient or they are fairly easy if you are proficient with little in between.
i think save scaling is one of 5e's biggest math problems, tbh, for exactly the reason you outlined here. the fact that it got past playtesting baffles me, because even some thought and looking at CR charts can get you to that conclusion pretty quickly.
High level play is a lot different than low level play IME. Paladins and Monks really take off above level 14 and go from being two of the weaker classes to two of the stronger classes. Wizards and Sorcerers are also extremely powerful.
wait...you consider paladin one of the weaker classes (before level 14)? how?
 

ECMO3

Hero
wait...you consider paladin one of the weaker classes (before level 14)? how?

In tier 2 I would put Paladin ahead of Barbarian, Fighter and Monk, and behind everything else. Paladins really start to get ahead at level 12 with a 3rd ASI and the extra free smite. I said 14 because that is when the Monk gets all save proficiencies.

The Paladin save bonus is good, probably their best feature. But it can be difficult to leverage for the party effectively, they don't have enough spell slots to compete with full casters and not enough skills to compete with Rogues or Rangers. They are also really MAD and making a high dexterity build is more difficult with a Paladin. A high Charisma is required to get the most of your Paladin abilities, but if you prioritize Charisma your attacks are going to suffer substantially, they also don't have enough skill proficiencies to make use of their high Charisma if they do prioritize it.

Ranger is somewhat MAD too, but they have more workarounds, generally don't suffer as big a drop from having a low Wisdom and can even be played max Wisdom with Wisdom based attacks and an extra skill and expertise to capitalize on it.

To really make a Paladin work excel in Tier 2 you need to take a Hexblade or Undead Warlock level so you can prioritize Charisma easier, but then you are not really a Paladin any more.
 
Last edited:

Zardnaar

Legend
In tier 2 I would put Paladin ahead of Barbarian, Fighter and Monk, and behind everything else. Paladins really start to get ahead at level 12 with a 3rd ASI and the extra free smite. I said 14 because that is when the Monk gets all save proficiencies.

The Paladin save bonus is good, probably their best feature. But it can be difficult to leverage for the party effectively, they don't have enough spell slots to compete with full casters and not enough skills to compete with Rogues or Rangers. They are also really MAD and making a high dexterity build is more difficult with a Paladin. A high Charisma is required to get the most of your Paladin abilities, but if you prioritize Charisma your attacks are going to suffer substantially, they also don't have enough skill proficiencies to make use of their high Charisma if they do prioritize it.

Ranger is somewhat MAD too, but they have more workarounds, generally don't suffer as big a drop from having a low Wisdom and can even be played max Wisdom with Wisdom based attacks and an extra skill and expertise to capitalize on it.

To really make a Paladin work excel in Tier 2 you need to take a Hexblade or Undead Warlock level so you can prioritize Charisma easier, but then you are not really a Paladin any more.

Even +2 aura effect is great. It's just gravy. It's being able to nova or smite when you crit that makes Paladins great. Combined with everything else.
 

ECMO3

Hero
Even +2 aura effect is great. It's just gravy. It's being able to nova or smite when you crit that makes Paladins great. Combined with everything else.

Smiting is good, but it is a very high cost as the damage you do is typically less effective than the effects you would get from a spell from the same level and you don't have a lot of slots. Nice to go Nova like you said, but that is not going to happen often. I mean a Paladin can use a 3rd level slot to do 4d8 to one enemy, or 8d8 on a crit. A Wizard or Sorcerer can use a 3rd level slot to do 8d6 to as many enemies as she can get in it or a Cleric can use Spirit Guardians and do 3d8 a round to everyone in the aura in addition to some move debuffs, even upcasting spiritual weapon will allow a Cleric to do an additional 2d8+Wisdom every round. They get those 3rd level slots 5 levels earlier than a Paladin and those are not even the best spells at that level, something like Fear is even more effective.

The aura is their best ability IME, but the issue with it is a Paladin is usually in melee away from most of the party.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top