Please rate the Archmage

[Mal Malenkirk]

But again the point is...every player doesnt think that way.

Oh, and what are you going to do when you play an archmage to avoid becoming an abusively powerful character? You won't take those powerful high arcana?

You don't have to be an abusive player, these are abusive concepts.

 

[Caliban]

And your missing the point. and forgetting that, everything in the game has counters and foils.

No, I'm not missing that at all. You are missing the point: It's much harder to acquire the things that can counter the archmage than it is for the archmage to get his DC's up that high.

Do you think it's reasonable that every single opponent your archmage faces has Improved Evasion, a +30 Reflex save, a Ring of Spell-Turning, and a Scarab of Protection?

Because if they don't, then they aren't a challenge because you can kill them in one round.

Is it fun when the bad guys either have to be immune to your abilities, or they can't fight you? Their either a push-over or nearly impossible to affect?

A little of that is to be expected, but when the archmage is throwing around 39+ DC's, then everything the DM does has to be set up to deal with the archmage. The rest of the party is incidental until the archmage runs into something that is effectively immune to his spells.

But again the point is...every player doesnt think that way. And I believe that the designers are no longer worrying a great deal about those that do..and why should they?

Because it makes the game less fun for the DM when the player has the insta-kill mage who's spells can't be resisted.

And it makes it less fun for the other players if all the NPC mages are built the way the archmage character is, just so they can be a challenge to him.

This isnt Magic:The Gathering. its not the job of the designers to try studiosly to avoid instant-win combos because DnD isnt a win or lose game...its not about winning or doing the most damage or having the highest save DCs or the best magic weapons. its about telling stories, and enjoying oneself.

And if you are playing the insta-kill mage, the stories are very short and abrupt. You may enjoy yourself, but the DM and the other players usually aren't. And to make it last long enough that their characters get to shine, the DM either has to kill your character or shut him down completely.

The game is designed for those who realize that...and if some people want to use it differently..."break" or abuse it as so many here say so many people do...well then thats there issue.

Unfortunately it's not just their issue. The game is not played in a vacuum, there are other people involved who may not enjoy sitting around while the one player with the overpowered character takes out everything. Or when the DM pulls the same stunt and kills half the party with one Wail of the Banshee with a DC 40 Fort save.

High level D&D has a big enough problem with save or die stuff. Or even just "Die, no Save" stuff. (A hasted Cleric with Divine Power and Divine favor up casting Harm and Inflict Critical in the same round will kill nearly anyone, regardless of their saves.) The Archmage makes it even worse, because they can do area-effect save or die spells that are nearly unresistible.

What it comes down to is that it makes the game less enjoyable. I've played this type of character, and I've DM'd this type of character. It's just less fun.

 

[gfunk]

What it comes down to is that it makes the game less enjoyable. I've played this type of character, and I've DM'd this type of character. It's just less fun.

I agree 100%. Not to mention the amount of extra work the DM has to do just to adjust his monsters so that they are a challenge to the Archmage.

The "counter-foil" argument, IMO, is a weak one because no matter how outrageously powerful something is there *ALWAYS* exists a mechanic to counter it. However that counter mechanic may be very rare or hard to come by, so it's pretty silly to use it over and over again just b/c one of your players has spells with absurdly high DCs.

You could argue that nothing is broken, b/c you could always introduce a deity with the SLA Life and Death. PC dies, no save, no SR.

 

[Merlion]

All of this again based on the idea that every player is going to try and create the most powerful character possible. And yes, you are totaly, completely, missing my point. But since I've made it 5 or 6 times in this thread, I'm not going to make it again.
Although I will say that others have posted here who have also played and/or DMed such characters and not found it fun. And you actualy defeated your own arguements since as you said a DM has to put quite a lot of work into a high level campaign anyway because by defintion your dealing with a lot of powerful things and people.
However for the record, if my sorcerer gets to be played long enough, heres what I will most likely take as an archmage. Probably 2 slots spent on spellpower. Definitly Arcane Fire at some point since it fits in with his magic use theme, and his personal prefernces as far as abilities and attack types he likes to develop. Probably a spell like ability of a force type spell(he thinks of such things as manfiestations of pure magic). And probably mastery of shaping or elements eventualy..although neither will really be that great for him because he's not going to be using a lot of elemental spells...he focuses on Force, and many of them are targeted effects so neither ability will apply much to a lot of his favorite stuff...although he will be taking some elemtnal stuff etc for vareity...his a Mystran and very into exploring various applications of the Art.

 

[Gumby]

Merlion, nobody in this thread cares about your character. They care about the powerful optional abilities of the Archmage prestige class.

If you have deliberately chosen to not take advantage of the Archmage's powers and abilities, that's fine. But to tell others that the Archmage prestige class is balanced because there's a possibility that a player might not take the more powerful abilities available to him, is comparable to saying "Hitler's rearming? That's perfectly fine, as we don't know if he's planning on invading Poland or not."

When we evaluate a prestige class, every broken ability, and every available opportunity for munchkiny power has to be considered. To ignore them, saying that "oh, well the player might not decide to use that ability to his best advantage" isn't really evaluating anything. I could say, "The Cleric class is completely useless! A player in my campaign is playing a cleric with a wisdom of six, and he can't cast any spells! Clerics suck! When will Monte Cook make a variant Cleric class?" and I'd have just as much logical credibility to my argument as you have had throughout this thread.

 

[Merlion]

Well first let me say I am considering reporting you to a moderator as I think you went a little to far into the realm of intentionaly insulting...but to address your points...a couple people in the thread HAVE asked about my character...more importantly your arguement works both ways. No, you shouldnt assume a character is going to make minimal use of a classes powers...but by the same token you shouldnt judge a class based on the most extreme munckinism possible, since thats not how everyone plays. The game is designed to cater to ALL styles of play. Everyone is saying, I played with an archamge with +6 spell power and it made all my threats irrelevant...pretty much the same as your 6 Wis cleric.
If you dont like powergaming, dont play with powergamers. Although its odd many people here decry prestige classes and say there inbalanced, badly designed and shouldnt have been published because people can powergame with them...but there all aparently in powergaming campaigns..sort of contradictory.

 

[Caliban]

All of this again based on the idea that every player is going to try and create the most powerful character possible.

No, it's not based on that idea at all. It's based on the idea that all it takes is one player in the group to do this to make it less fun for everyone else. A good game of D&D gives all the PC's a chance to shine in their own way.

And yes, you are totaly, completely, missing my point. But since I've made it 5 or 6 times in this thread, I'm not going to make it again.

Your point is that since not every player is going to select every possible broken feat or ability, it's OK to have those broken abilities in the game?

I get it, but I disagree with it.

Although I will say that others have posted here who have also played and/or DMed such characters and not found it fun.

That's pretty much my point right there.

And you actualy defeated your own arguements since as you said a DM has to put quite a lot of work into a high level campaign anyway because by defintion your dealing with a lot of powerful things and people.

Yeah, so adding even more work for the DM makes it better? That doesn't make any sense Merlion.

However for the record, if my sorcerer gets to be played long enough, heres what I will most likely take as an archmage. Probably 2 slots spent on spellpower. Definitly Arcane Fire at some point since it fits in with his magic use theme, and his personal prefernces as far as abilities and attack types he likes to develop. Probably a spell like ability of a force type spell(he thinks of such things as manfiestations of pure magic). And probably mastery of shaping or elements eventualy..although neither will really be that great for him because he's not going to be using a lot of elemental spells...he focuses on Force, and many of them are targeted effects so neither ability will apply much to a lot of his favorite stuff...although he will be taking some elemtnal stuff etc for vareity...his a Mystran and very into exploring various applications of the Art.

And thus your character has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion on how broken high save DC's are.

I said that the Archmage class itself is perfectly fine. I love the concept and the nifty abilities.

It's the Spell Power ability that's broken, not the class.

 

[Merlion]

And many who have played it disagree and think spell power is actualy not as good as some of the other abilities...which brings us to my point that its all really a matter of opnion, and use. The designers have stoped worrying about "broken" stuff, because everyone has there own defintion of broken, and its up to each group do decide what that is.
Although I think most of us would agree that a prestige class that involves becoming a great gold wyrm at character level 15 would be a bit much

 

[Caliban]

And many who have played it disagree and think spell power is actualy not as good as some of the other abilities...which brings us to my point that its all really a matter of opnion, and use. The designers have stoped worrying about "broken" stuff, because everyone has there own defintion of broken, and its up to each group do decide what that is.

I don't see how you can say that the designers have stopped worrying about "broken" stuff when they are revising the entire rule-set, and are specifically going to be fixing certain "broken" spells: Harm, Haste, and Shield.

They are indeed concerned about "broken" stuff, and are taking steps to make sure that the core rules are balanced. Stuff for specific campaign settings may be balanced differently. (The Forgotten Realms is supposed to be a high magic setting with powerful wizards, for example. )

But the point at which the wizard can make the rest of the party irrelevent (which is what happens when they can cast Save or Die spells that 90% of your opponents have no chance against), then that's the point at which you can safely say that particular combination of abilities is overpowered.

The simplest solution is to remove some of the many methods of increasing the Spell DC's.

 

[Gumby]

Well first let me say I am considering reporting you to a moderator as I think you went a little to far into the realm of intentionaly insulting...

Well, which is it? Are you or aren't you? Don't keep me in suspense here.

but to address your points...a couple people in the thread HAVE asked about my character...more importantly your arguement works both ways. No, you shouldnt assume a character is going to make minimal use of a classes powers...but by the same token you shouldnt judge a class based on the most extreme munckinism possible, since thats not how everyone plays.

Okay, specifically, I don't care about your character. And when I say that, I don't mean that I think your character concept sucks eggs, or that you're a lousy person, or that you're somehow unskilled in devising characters.

What I mean is that your personal choices as to character concept and planning are irrelevant to the discussion currently going on, which asks, "is the Archmage prestige class, as written in the FRCS, a balanced prestige class?" Sure, it's fine if you don't take the Spell Power abilities. Or if some house rules are added. Or if you're using Sean K Reynolds' original plan for it.

But we here on the boards cannot take into account player decisions and DM's house rules. If we tried, we'd get nowhere, and any actual logical discussion would be useless. Do you really want everyone on the boards having to take into account every possible house rule or character build decision before we could make a statement? Because that's the only logical, objective way we could discuss game power and still satisfy you, according to what you've been saying.