Poll: Power creep in 3.5, how significant?

[brehobit]

That Warlock is using Hideous Blow in melee, right? d6 HD means he will need that 7 DR to survive...and 7 isn't that much. Use large sized creatures with high strength and a two handed weapon (4 ogre Rgr2s, for an EL9) and 7 DR doesn't seem very much at all.

Let's see...9000 gp worth of stuff easily nets the ogres Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2 (snicker), a +1 Huge Greatsword (3d6, right?) and some magic spiked armor with magic spikes...we're talking two attacks per round, with 10 reach for both. Add in favored enemy bonuses...It gets really sick.

Maybe throw in a +1 human-bane greatsword that a different group of Barbarian 2 Ogres throw between each other (having delayed so their initiatives are sequential), for maximum pain.

Sure, I can build something that just kills the character. This is true for any character. But A) I'm not into doing that and B) I'm running a module (RHoD) as written. In that module, which I'd call really quite good, there are very few opponents that look anything at all like that. The nastiest HtH baddy has 9 attacks doing an average of around 8 points of damage. He'll just ignore the vast majority of the damage. The rest of the party would die in a round or two.

Believe me, even at level 9, DR 7 is a LOT. Even if your opponents average 20 points of damage per blow (and very few will do that) you are only taking 2/3rds damage. If both the barb and the warlock have 16 CONs the barb has 9 hps/level and the warlock 6/level. Same 2/3rds ratio. A crazy high damage baddy will wipe the floor with him, but it will wipe the floor with anyone it closes with. And a mid-to-high level warlock is mighty hard to close with for long...

The DR suffers from spells and breath weapons. Those are very effective due to his lower-than-a-fighter hit points.

Oh, and do take a look at the 6th and 9th level fey feats. The 6th level one grants disguise self, deep slumber, and charm monster. The 9th level one gives summon monster V (as a standard action I think? <edit>Nope, still full-round</edit>) confusion, and dimension door. Not too shabby. In addition they add to his DR...

Mark

 

[Shadow_Fox26]

I claim that at lower-levels (say 1-10) a core-built fighter-type is much less powerful and generally useful than a swordsage using all the books. This is, IMO, a sign that there is significant power creep. The power-attacking, cleaving barbarian is cool, but very much one trick. And a barbarian 1/swordsage X has pretty much the same tricks. A few less hit points, a lot more damage.

This is a tricky thing to address. On one hand, you can argue powercreep because things are much stronger then the fighter. On the other hand, you can view it as a correction of the melee archetype and an admission that things werent done correctly to begin with.

The rage certainly helps. But ability to do *35* points of damage in a round at 5th level, in pretty much every fight (as long as someone hits him) is gross. Sure it's only one round, but that will take to half any reasonable baddy at that level. The +2 from flanking which pretty much always exists is also big.

Looking over the maneuvers, I can see that the 4d6 fire maneuver you are referring to is Fire Riposte. That maneuver is used as an Immediate Action when someone successfully strikes you. You cannot use it on your turn as an attack. It can only be used when you are successfully hit.

There goes his uber "I one shot you while raging and stacking two maneuvers, which I cant do anyway" trick.

Also, the 2d6, ignores DR, maneuver is Foehammer, a Devoted Spirit maneuver. Swordsages cannot access that style unless they take the Martial Study feat.

He's got 6 maneuvers per fight. *6* We've had one fight where he ran out. When you can do 35 points of damage (on average) in the first round of a fight, fights tend to be rather short. Going through RHoD, I find that CR 7 monsters average around 65 hit points. He will, by himself, do 1/2 that damage in a round against something that should be a *serious* challenge to the party.

How on earth does he have 6 readied maneuvers per fight as a Swordsage 3/Barbarian 1?? Swordsages need to be at least level 5 to ready 6 maneuvers.

One is a boost, so it's swift, so you can.

The two maneuvers you are reffering to are Foehammer, which is a strike, and Fire Riposte, which is a counter. Neither of them are boosts.

It's a standard build. Pure ranger. Core rangers don't have a source of bonus damage. I'm arguing that the swordsage is better than the full-BAB ranger at fighting. By a lot. You seem to agree. I think that's a problem.

Rangers are meant to be brutal against their Favored Enemies and "ok" vs other creatures. They have traded general usefullness for specialized usefullness. Rangers are going to tear apart a Favored Enemy, especialy if dual wielding. By the way, Favored Enemy is a source of bonus damage for the core ranger.

In addition, you are not comparing a ranger to a swordsage. You are comparing a ranger to a swordsage/barbarian with the extra rage feat who is incorrectly using his maneuvers.

Listed above. Ranged combat feats mostly. Pretty much standard issue for a warlock.

Ok. People should be working together more. This raging swordsage or the uber DR warlock should be backing his buddy up by staying near their nuking counterpart. If you leave a range based character to fight on his own, of course hes going to get pounded.

So your argument is that being overpowered at lower levels is fine, because later they aren't so hot?

No, my point is that you and your friends have made some pretty serious errors which has led to a false opinion that the Swordsage is incredibly broken. You have been saying that the swordsage class is overpowered because he is using a barbarian class feature and is stacking two maneuvers (which cant be done). How would a level 5 barbarian with power attack perform in his place?

A high-level sword sage is utterly scary at high levels.

What about Clerics? Druids? Wizards? Sorcerers? A Barbarian with Tireless Rage? Ill even stipulate core only.

Level 12? A swordsage can, once per fight, do 12d6 fire damage to a very carefully selected area that is quite large (ring of fire), all you need is someone to cast expeditious retreat on you and the area is huge. No caster can dish anything like that out *every* fight. And that's just 1 of 3 6th level maneuvers the swordsage can use every fight.

12d6, DC 16 + Wis mod for half. 42 average fire damage on a failed save. 21 average fire damage on a successful save. Anything with evasion or fire resistance is going to hamper this ability (as anything in game has things that can counter it). This maneuver also requires you to enclose the ring of fire. What is the terrain like? How many enemies are there? Are they all spread out? Can you move fast enough to get them all in the ring?

These are all modifiers on the effectiveness of this maneuver. If your DM always bunches the bad guys up in a tight little formation for you, and you are always fighting in wide open areas with no difficult terrain and against fire vulnerable foes, yeah, thats pretty potent.

Wizards have access to Chain Lightning at level 12. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/chainLightning.htm)

1d6 damage/level (max 20d6). It can also jump to one extra target/level (max 20 targets)that are all within 30ft of the primary target. Thats 12d6 damage at level 12 that keeps increasing in power and doesnt require movement. Its much easier to create a devestating Chain Lightning.

Circle of Death, also available at level 12 for Wizards: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/circleOfDeath.htm)

The spell slays 1d4 HD worth of living creatures per caster level (maximum 20d4). Save or die for 12 HD worth of living creatures at level 12.

Disintegrate, again, availble at level 12 for a Wizard: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disintegrate.htm)

You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 40d6).

Potent stuff. Useable as many times per encounter as you have spell slots/staves/scrolls. I wont cover what Clerics and Druids can do at level 12 as this post is already going to be long.

Sure. But can you do a better job with a 5th level ranger using core-only rules? If not, I think the power-creep argument stands.

Again, the tricky debate rears its head. Powercreep? Or an addendum on a mistake that was made in regards to class balance at the beginning of the edition? The ranger's spell list is grossly underpowered in a core only enviornment.

So, what are you debating? A couple of once per encounter maneuvers (that you have been using incorrectly) or the barbarians rage? Again, this sounds to me like you are trying to use rage to justify the brokeness of the Swordsage. Not a sound argument.

Also, it appears that you keep jumping back and forth between level 4 and level 5. What is the exact level spread of this group? If there is a difference in level between characters, this could also go a long way scewing power levels between individual characters, especially at low levels.

At level 5, a ranger's FE spread is +4/+2. Lets give him a 16 STR and the Two Weapon Fighting combat style (dual short swords). On a full attack action, the ranger can deal 2d6+3+1+4+4 damage against his +4 FE. Thats 19 average damage. What is this swordsage doing at level 5? Useing barbarian rage (an ability not inherant to the swordsage!) and incorectly usuing his maneuvers.

If the raging swordsage has a high STR score, power attack, and uses a two handed weapon, he is demonstrating the imbalance between two handed fighting and two weapon fighting. That comparison has nothing to do with the swordsage.

Sure, but we tend to play level 1-11 or so. And from the surveys on these boards, so do most people. If that game isn't balanced there, it isn't balanced. On top of that, I think the swordsage has no problem at all doing very very well at higher levels. Finally, I think the swordsage, using all the "non-core" stuff will CLEARLY wipe the floor with any pure-core PC other than perhaps a druid.

So its the survey's way or the highway eh? If the "surveys" say so it must be right.

So let me get this straight. Your argument is that a tricked out, all access Swordsage is more powerful than a character that is core only? That is the exact opposite of a sound argument! You have deliberately and ostentiously biased the debate in the swordsages favor! Thats preposterous.


EDIT: Corrected a couple of mistakes. That will teach me to debate at 4 AM!

 

[Hussar]

Well, there's a reason I don't see the power creep in 3e. I play the World's Largest Dungeon, which is entirely SRD. Nothing extra. No goodies from splat books or whatever. About as straight up core as you can possibly get.

I allow my players pretty much free reign on whatever they want to take. While I do pay attention to the more egregiously broken stuff, I let pretty much whatever people want to take. Chameleons, Mineral Warriors, Assaathi, whatever.

71 sessions. 22 PC fatalities, most of which were permanent.

If there's power creep in the game then I welcome it with open arms. It would be nice to keep PC's alive a little longer than three sessions.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Or a fix. Low level fighters fight. Thats ALL they do. They contribute nothing else from their class to solving the adventure, as they have poor class skills, few skill points, and no utility magic. Unfortunately, they just arent THAT good at fighting. Replacing the fighter entirely is no loss IMO.

The power-attacking, cleaving barbarian is cool, but very much one trick. And a barbarian 1/swordsage X has pretty much the same tricks. A few less hit points, a lot more damage.

I'm not entirely sure the swordsage gets to use maneuvers while raging. It says they cant use abilities which require concentration or patience, in addition to not being able to use Int, Dex or Cha based skills.

The DR stacks with Warlock DR. So DR is 4.


By 9th level the DR will be DR 7/cold iron. That's darn significant, I don't think there is another mechanism for a 9th level character to have that kind of DR.

A CR 9 frost giant will be doing over 20 points on average per hit, before power attacking. Warlocks arent entirely known for their massive hit points. He should be survivable, but if theres nothing that can scratch him, that wounds like poor adventure design, or at least adventures that focus on certain types of fights too often.

The rage certainly helps. But ability to do *35* points of damage in a round at 5th level, in pretty much every fight (as long as someone hits him) is gross. Sure it's only one round, but that will take to half any reasonable baddy at that level. The +2 from flanking which pretty much always exists is also big.

His damage against fire resistant foes (of which there are plenty) drops dramatically. And again, compare him at 6th level when fighting types get a 2nd attack, and you'll see it drops. A power attacking, leap attacking lance using shock trooper will outdamage him pretty easily, even moreso against fire resistant foes.

It's a standard build. Pure ranger. Core rangers don't have a source of bonus damage. I'm arguing that the swordsage is better than the full-BAB ranger at fighting. By a lot. You seem to agree. I think that's a problem.

Is it a problem that the wu-jen is a better spelllcaster than an adept? That's essentially what you're arguing here. Rangers suck at combat against anything that isnt their species enemy. Rangers that use 2 weapon fighting REALLY suck. Compare the swordsage to a fighter/barbarian MC using PA, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack and you'll see a different story.

So your argument is that being overpowered at lower levels is fine, because later they aren't so hot? A high-level sword sage is utterly scary at high levels. Level 12? A swordsage can, once per fight, do 12d6 fire damage to a very carefully selected area that is quite large (ring of fire), all you need is someone to cast expeditious retreat on you and the area is huge.

Well, expeditious retreat is self only. And again, this is fire only, a common resistant. And you have to hope your buddies arent in the area, and that movement really DOES add up. It takes almost all of a standard swordsage's movement (30' round) to use this on a large creature, and that's assuming they are starting in base to base contact. And they are going to get hit with an AoO unless they want to move at half speed and tumble. Furthermore, if you spend a full round action to do an everage of 42 fire damage (DC 16 + save for half) to a single creature at level 12, you need to brush up on some tactics.

No caster can dish anything like that out *every* fight. And that's just 1 of 3 6th level maneuvers the swordsage can use every fight.

How many times per day can the swordsage teleport the party? Resurrect them from the dead? Scry? Ask another plane for an answer? Swordsages fight. If they are outdamageing as caster EVERY SINGLE ROUND, its a sign that something is balanced in D&D for once. Casters have TONS of utility. I'm glad they are no longer the default "best".

Sure. But can you do a better job with a 5th level ranger using core-only rules? If not, I think the power-creep argument stands.

Rangers suck at fighting things other than their racial enemy. Nothing new here. I'd really suggest upgrading the ranger personally. Let them pick "humanoids" as a blaknet enemy rather than havign to differentiate between gnomes and halflings (are they THAT much more different than a beholder and a chuul?), letting the bonus apply to hit as well as damage, etc. Hybrid spellcasting in general is pretty weak, I've always thought their spells should go to 5th level and let them start with 0th level spells.

 

[Shroomy]

When discussions of class-balance arise, the emphasis is always on combat, probably because it is easily quantifiable. That's disappointing...for example, I would like to see this barbarian/swordsage's tracking ability versus the ranger.

 

[VirgilCaine]

A CR 9 frost giant will be doing over 20 points on average per hit, before power attacking. Warlocks arent entirely known for their massive hit points. He should be survivable, but if theres nothing that can scratch him, that wounds like poor adventure design, or at least adventures that focus on certain types of fights too often.

Exactly what I was going to say.

RHoD does involve Orcs primarily, right? Personally, I'd want to change things up with some ogres or something different than Orcs at some point during the adventure.

 

[Pants]

RHoD does involve Orcs primarily, right? Personally, I'd want to change things up with some ogres or something different than Orcs at some point during the adventure.

Hobgoblins and from what I've read, there's quite a bit of variety of foes in there.

 

[Hjorimir]

Personally, I find the Bo9S to be the freshest thing WotC has put out in quite some time. I start my new campaign tomorrow and it will feature a warblade as one of the PCs; I'm really looking forward to it.

As to the topic: Sure, there has been power creep/adjustments. But I'm not sold that power creep is bad for the game.

 

[MerricB]

Just a note:

Ring of Fire with a 60 ft movement rate (exp. retreat) allows a perimeter of 24 squares. So:
* A rectangle - 7+7+7+7, fills 5x5 squares, 25 squares. (Fireball is 44 squares)
* A circle - encloses 30 squares.

Note, I don't count the spaces you *move* through; although they may be used if a Tumble Check (DC 35+) is made. That seems a bit high.

Ring of Fire actually has less area than a fireball.

Cheers!

 

[brehobit]

Just a note:

Ring of Fire with a 60 ft movement rate (exp. retreat) allows a perimeter of 24 squares. So:
* A rectangle - 7+7+7+7, fills 5x5 squares, 25 squares. (Fireball is 44 squares)
* A circle - encloses 30 squares.

Note, I don't count the spaces you *move* through; although they may be used if a Tumble Check (DC 35+) is made. That seems a bit high.

Ring of Fire actually has less area than a fireball.

Cheers!

Note that it is a full-round action (I think, I'm at work). Nothing stops you from running that I noticed. If so it gets a LOT bigger.

In any case, it's one of 3 6th level manouvers you get at 12th level 12d6 damage isn't too bad for wizard, let alone someone who is quite good in HtH.

Makr

Mark