Sultans of a lesser Smack

[Corran]

Reapersaurus is correct in his assumption, if those are your requirements. It is a built in balance factor in D&D that high level Fighters, Rogues and so on will have access to magic items. The power of those classes does not come purely from within the abilities they have, but what they can do in conjuction with those abilities and powerful magic items.

If you take away magic items, and restrict them, you are giving class that have an inherent "magic" a huge advantage. Sorcerers, Monks and Clerics in particular. In a campaign with, say, no access to flying equipment and barely any magic weapons, no Fighter or Rogue would be a match for a Sorcerer, for example.

The Sorcerer could simply cast Protection From Arrows, Fly, and bombard his enemies from above. And they would not be able to do anything about it. Magic items are built into the game, as part of the balance. If you take that away, the classes with inherent magical abilities become far more powerful than those without them.

I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion about (the lack of) balance in D&D. But as far as I'm concerned the argument is not valid. All classes get magic items and they all get better at what they do. Rings of Intelligence, etc. are more dangerous than any cape of flying or whatever.

Fact is that unless a party is prepared for the eventuality a wizard casting Fly, Haste and Improved Invisibility will be able to kill an entire party without breaking a sweat. Precisely the reason I rule zeroed Haste and Improved Invisibility.

A last remark: D&D is still a group game (even if NWN might want to let us believe differently ;-) It's the party that has to overcome the opponents, they have to cooperate and use all their skills. In a one on one combat a 15th level wizard will always win against a 15th level fighter, if they have no magic items or both have items worth 200,000 gp. D&D just isn't balanced that way.

 

[AvarielAvenger]

I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion about (the lack of) balance in D&D. But as far as I'm concerned the argument is not valid. All classes get magic items and they all get better at what they do. Rings of Intelligence, etc. are more dangerous than any cape of flying or whatever.

Fact is that unless a party is prepared for the eventuality a wizard casting Fly, Haste and Improved Invisibility will be able to kill an entire party without breaking a sweat. Precisely the reason I rule zeroed Haste and Improved Invisibility.

A last remark: D&D is still a group game (even if NWN might want to let us believe differently ;-) It's the party that has to overcome the opponents, they have to cooperate and use all their skills. In a one on one combat a 15th level wizard will always win against a 15th level fighter, if they have no magic items or both have items worth 200,000 gp. D&D just isn't balanced that way.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. That's 2E thinking. All classes get magical items, but all classes don't rely on them to be effective. A Wizard facing a creature with DR +3 doesn't need magic items to effect it. A Fighter facing the same creature with a +2 weapon, on the other hand, is now severely handicapped since he doesn't have the appropiate amount of magic for his level.

That is just a basic example. Fighter and Rogue types are far more reliant on outside magic than Wizards or other classes.

Also, Haste and Improved Invisibilty aren't even neccessary to do what I showed, so I don't see the point of bringing that up.

And, so what if D&D is a group game? Are you telling me that, if I have four players, all of whom want to play a Fighter type, I have to tell them "Sorry, you can't do that, because Wizards will spank you. Because I don't give out magical items according to the DMG, of course."?

That I have to make players have a certain number of each class in the game? That I can't let it be freeform and not have the party horribly die because "they didn't pick the right classes"?

Every class in 3E was designed so that any combination of classes can survive and be successful against any kind of foe. And that's for a good reason. You shouldn't have to have a "balanced" party in order to succeed.

PS

By the way, a 15th level Fighter in 3E, with appropiate magic items, can spank a 15th level Wizard with little to no difficulty.

 

[Corran]

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. That's 2E thinking. All classes get magical items, but all classes don't rely on them to be effective. A Wizard facing a creature with DR +3 doesn't need magic items to effect it. A Fighter facing the same creature with a +2 weapon, on the other hand, is now severely handicapped since he doesn't have the appropiate amount of magic for his level.

So? That's tough luck. Than he shouldn't have gone to wherever that monster was. If they can't handle a monster they should run away. Same thing as a 1st level character walking into a Old Wyrm's lair.

That is just a basic example. Fighter and Rogue types are far more reliant on outside magic than Wizards or other classes.

Gee, tough luck, again. That's a shame. Guess they should just run into the town and buy their swag at The Magic Emporium (tm). Ain't gonna happen. Are you really suggesting a DM should place certain magical treasure because 'otherwise they can't win from creature X'. Not in my campaign, if they bite off more than they can chew, that's the brakes. You lose, please play again.

And, so what if D&D is a group game? Are you telling me that, if I have four players, all of whom want to play a Fighter type, I have to tell them "Sorry, you can't do that, because Wizards will spank you. Because I don't give out magical items according to the DMG, of course."?

Not at all. They are free to play 4 fighter or 4 wizards or 4 experts for all I care. They just need to be more careful in such circumstances. I don't run a campaign where everything is tailormade for the players. There are dangers of any level everywhere in the world. They should just be careful what fights they pick. It's so silly when a world only has opposition of just about the same level as the party, that's what I call unrealistic. In my campaign 10th level characters get held up by 3rd level robbers (not for long usually ;-) If you have a dragon lair nearby, is the ocupying dragon always of a CR the party can beat? That's just so lame.

That I have to make players have a certain number of each class in the game? That I can't let it be freeform and not have the party horribly die because "they didn't pick the right classes"?

See above. If they do foolish things they die horribly, gee just like the real world. I believe in a rich, living, dynamic campaign, not a sandbox for the players.

Every class in 3E was designed so that any combination of classes can survive and be successful against any kind of foe. And that's for a good reason. You shouldn't have to have a "balanced" party in order to succeed.

That's just not true. Take out your copy of the MM and browse it a little. There are creatures in there more suited against wizards and others more suited against fighters, it's called variety. Sure anyone can beat any creature as long as it isn't to tough. And Í won't even go into the horribly broken CR system.

PS

By the way, a 15th level Fighter in 3E, with appropiate magic items, can spank a 15th level Wizard with little to no difficulty.

Sure...

Perhaps a tricked out fighter would be able to once in a while win a fight. But he would be a one trick pony, with all his items just chosen to beat wizards. Case in point: take the iconic characters, put Tordek up against Mialee, good luck, you'll need it.


And with this I suggest we return to the thread topic, low level smackdowns. ;-)

 

[Berk]

Ok, this is my first attempt at this.
Using the High Powered Character option for generating ability scores. Roll 5d6 six times throwing out the lowest 2. I got;
18
12
18
15
16
14

Oh, btw I'm going for high damage and ac.

race will be dwarf
arrange abilities like so (with racial modifiers and lvl adjustments)str 18
dex 18
con 16int 15
wis 15
cha 10

the char will be
1/1/1/1/6 wizard/cleric/monk/dwarven defender/fighter

ac is as follows
base 10
+4 dex
+4 wis
+4 mage armor
+7 shield spell (from a scroll)
+5 expertise feat
+4 dwarven defender
+1 dodge feat (one opponent only)
+2 shield of faith
which equals a 41 ac
would have put mobolity in there but then again mobility only works while moving against AoO which just cancels and replaces the dwarven defender ac mod since dwarven defenders only get the ac mod while being stationary.

now for the to hit and damage part
this particular character has the destruction and strength domains
this is also assuming the char isn't using the expertise feat for defending
to hit is
+7 BaB
+1 weapon focus (great sword)
+20 true strike (one attack)
+4 smite from destruction domain
+6 strength mod (+2str from dwarven defender)
+1 magic weapon (the spell)
-7 power attack
total of +30/+5feel like I'm still missing something but oh well, first hit is basically a guaranteed at lvl 10 and the +5 isn't all that "bad" at lvl 10

now for the damage
2d6 17-20/x2 (improved crit)
+9 str (+2str from dwarven defender and 2-handed)
+7 power attack
+1 magic weapon (the spell)
+1 smite (from destruction domain)+2 weapon spec
total of +19 to the damage roll
so on average each hit will do 26 damage (3.5*2+19) that's on average if both attacks hit 52 points a round
if this char crits, 52 damage a hit for a total of 104 a round

so whatcha think for my first try on getting both of the defense and damage spectrums?

 

[Corran]

so whatcha think for my first try on getting both of the defense and damage spectrums?

Interesting concept.

But casting a shield spell from a scroll? Don't forget the duration of Shield is very short, to say the least. Although if it's the last spell you cast it''s up for 10 rounds, that's usually plenty of time for one combat.

True Strike is a one shot deal, I'd save it for when it's really needed and not use it on the first round of combat.

The domains are always the same aren't they? ;-)

They have good domain powers, I'm just not sure what (Dwarven) god would grant these 2 domains.

Nice idea, I just hope that there are DM's who would allow this kind of multi classing (even if it is by the rules).

I just realised, the character doesn't live up to 2 of the requirements for the Dwarven Defender PrC:

Base Attack Bonus: +7.
Feats: Dodge, Endurance, Toughness.

Nice try however. ;-)

 

[AvarielAvenger]

So? That's tough luck. Than he shouldn't have gone to wherever that monster was. If they can't handle a monster they should run away. Same thing as a 1st level character walking into a Old Wyrm's lair.

Except, in the instance I used, let's say the Fighter needed to defeat that creature to finish x quest. Well, tough, guess he should've been a Wizard, Sorcerer or Monk in your campaign.

Gee, tough luck, again. That's a shame. Guess they should just run into the town and buy their swag at The Magic Emporium (tm). Ain't gonna happen. Are you really suggesting a DM should place certain magical treasure because 'otherwise they can't win from creature X'. Not in my campaign, if they bite off more than they can chew, that's the brakes. You lose, please play again.

Personally, I don't understand this obsession some DMs seem to have with not allowing players to buy magic items at a shop. It's a commodity like any other, and if there is a profit in it, it will be traded in. In fact, one of my favorite things about 3E is it encourages this kind of shop to exist.

Now, unlike in 2E, you no longer have the pile of useless +1 Swords that for some reason no one will ever buy, sitting around in your keep/tower collecting dust.

Not at all. They are free to play 4 fighter or 4 wizards or 4 experts for all I care. They just need to be more careful in such circumstances. I don't run a campaign where everything is tailormade for the players. There are dangers of any level everywhere in the world. They should just be careful what fights they pick. It's so silly when a world only has opposition of just about the same level as the party, that's what I call unrealistic. In my campaign 10th level characters get held up by 3rd level robbers (not for long usually ;-) If you have a dragon lair nearby, is the ocupying dragon always of a CR the party can beat? That's just so lame.

Excuse me? Do you think I never use opponents that have power that exceeds or is lower than my parties simply because I recognize the need for balance in a game? It's just so lame to make a faulty assumption like that.

See above. If they do foolish things they die horribly, gee just like the real world. I believe in a rich, living, dynamic campaign, not a sandbox for the players.

What does having balance have to do with that? I think it lessens the fun of the game if certain classes are "better" than others, and in a world like yours, that's what's going to happen.

That's just not true. Take out your copy of the MM and browse it a little. There are creatures in there more suited against wizards and others more suited against fighters, it's called variety. Sure anyone can beat any creature as long as it isn't to tough. And Í won't even go into the horribly broken CR system.

But, every class is close enough in power that they can fight a creature that doesn't play to their strengths, which is what I like. And lessening the amount of magical items changes that, which I dissaprove of. Also, the CR system has it's problems, but I vastly prefer it to the "this looks good, I'll throw it at the party" system of 2E.

Sure...

Perhaps a tricked out fighter would be able to once in a while win a fight. But he would be a one trick pony, with all his items just chosen to beat wizards. Case in point: take the iconic characters, put Tordek up against Mialee, good luck, you'll need it.

Oh really? I'd love to fight you with Tordek, and you controlling Mialee, to prove you wrong. You don't need to be a "tricked out fighter" to defeat a Wizard. You can make one that is supreme at it, and very hard for any Wizard to beat, but it's hardly neccessary to traverse that path of development to be able to defeat Wizards.

Wizards are too weak to survive even one FRA from a Fighter, and a properly built Fighter (and this includes Tordek) will be able to get close to deliver that FRA. This is not 2E, as I said before. Wizards are not the gods of one on one combat anymore, nor is any other class. All have a relatively equal chance to beat the others in combat.

And with this I suggest we return to the thread topic, low level smackdowns. ;-)

Sure. If you want to continue the discussion, go ahead and post a topic in the General RPG Forum.

 

[novyet]

Ok, this is my first attempt at this.
Using the High Powered Character option for generating ability scores. Roll 5d6 six times throwing out the lowest 2. I got;
18
12
18
15
16
14

Oh, btw I'm going for high damage and ac.

race will be dwarf
arrange abilities like so (with racial modifiers and lvl adjustments)str 18
dex 18
con 16int 15
wis 15
cha 10

the char will be
1/1/1/1/6 wizard/cleric/monk/dwarven defender/fighter

ac is as follows
base 10
+4 dex
+4 wis
+4 mage armor
+7 shield spell (from a scroll)
+5 expertise feat
+4 dwarven defender
+1 dodge feat (one opponent only)
+2 shield of faith
which equals a 41 ac
would have put mobolity in there but then again mobility only works while moving against AoO which just cancels and replaces the dwarven defender ac mod since dwarven defenders only get the ac mod while being stationary.

now for the to hit and damage part
this particular character has the destruction and strength domains
this is also assuming the char isn't using the expertise feat for defending
to hit is
+7 BaB
+1 weapon focus (great sword)
+20 true strike (one attack)
+4 smite from destruction domain
+6 strength mod (+2str from dwarven defender)
+1 magic weapon (the spell)
-7 power attack
total of +30/+5feel like I'm still missing something but oh well, first hit is basically a guaranteed at lvl 10 and the +5 isn't all that "bad" at lvl 10

now for the damage
2d6 17-20/x2 (improved crit)
+9 str (+2str from dwarven defender and 2-handed)
+7 power attack
+1 magic weapon (the spell)
+1 smite (from destruction domain)+2 weapon spec
total of +19 to the damage roll
so on average each hit will do 26 damage (3.5*2+19) that's on average if both attacks hit 52 points a round
if this char crits, 52 damage a hit for a total of 104 a round

so whatcha think for my first try on getting both of the defense and damage spectrums?

Okay a couple things, one improved critical has a prerequisite of BAB +8 so you don't actually qualify for it. Next you list a +4 wis modifier to AC, which would require a wisdom of 18-19 and you have a 15 which would reduce your ac by 2, oh and don't forget that dwarven defenders get a +1 to their AC at 1st level.

Just one other thing shouldn't the attack bonus for attack one be +32? 7 (BAB) +1 (Weapon Focus) +20 (True Strike) +4 (Smite) +7 (Str) +1 (Magic Weapon) -7 (Power Attack) -5 (Expertise) = 28.

The second attack should be at 7 (BAB) +1 (Weapon Focus) +7 (Str) +1 (Magic Weapon) -7 (Power Attack) -5 (Expertise) - 5 (Second Attack) = 4.

I think the damage is close but off by a point, it should be
Greatsword 2d6 + 7 (Modified Str 20 while in defensive stance, 2 handed weapon) + 7 (Power Attack) + 1 (Smite) + 1 (Magic Weapon) +2 (Weapon Specialization) = 2d6+18 (20-30 damage per hit, average damage 25, critical damage 4d6+36 (40-60 damage), average damage 50)

Btw I like the mix of classes personally, it's unusual but very cool.

Later

 

[Corran]

One more reply. ;-)

Except, in the instance I used, let's say the Fighter needed to defeat that creature to finish x quest. Well, tough, guess he should've been a Wizard, Sorcerer or Monk in your campaign.

Yup, there could always be quests that can't be finished. But first they should look for alternative options. Usually there are other options.

Personally, I don't understand this obsession some DMs seem to have with not allowing players to buy magic items at a shop. It's a commodity like any other, and if there is a profit in it, it will be traded in. In fact, one of my favorite things about 3E is it encourages this kind of shop to exist.

Now, unlike in 2E, you no longer have the pile of useless +1 Swords that for some reason no one will ever buy, sitting around in your keep/tower collecting dust.

For one, in most places the local authorities, will want to keep a monopoly of sorts on magic weapons (adventurers carrying them is one thing, but people buying them off the streets is usually a no no). Just like most countries don't allow their citizens to buy guns (there are always countries that aren't so enlightened, that's true. ;-)

Excuse me? Do you think I never use opponents that have power that exceeds or is lower than my parties simply because I recognize the need for balance in a game? It's just so lame to make a faulty assumption like that.

Not at all, I never assumed anything about you in particular. I don't know anything about how you DM, nor would I make any assumptions about that. Reread what I wrote, it wasn't a comment about you.

What does having balance have to do with that? I think it lessens the fun of the game if certain classes are "better" than others, and in a world like yours, that's what's going to happen.

That hasn't happened. Of the five characters there is only one wizard nor are the other players all gagging to play a wizard. Nor is the wizard more powerful than the others. The paladin for instance is capable of doing over 100 points of damage in a round, something the wizard isn't even close to doing.

But, every class is close enough in power that they can fight a creature that doesn't play to their strengths, which is what I like. And lessening the amount of magical items changes that, which I dissaprove of.

That's a strange theory. Your first sentence disproves the second. If the characters can fight creatures that are comparable in strength to them, than it would follow that the only thing that changes when the characters aren't equipt with loads of items is the 'powerlevel' of the creatures they can fight. So they can't fight creature X, but they can fight creature Y, no problem then, they still have enemies to fight.

Now if not having magic items would make fighting any creature impossible you would be right. The added benefit is that low level creatures are still useful without giving them levels / extra hit die.

Wizards are too weak to survive even one FRA from a Fighter, and a properly built Fighter (and this includes Tordek) will be able to get close to deliver that FRA. This is not 2E, as I said before. Wizards are not the gods of one on one combat anymore, nor is any other class. All have a relatively equal chance to beat the others in combat.

Well, a good wizard won't let the fighter get near him. ;-)

So in your campaign the fighters only need to get next to the wizard and do a full round attack to kill him? Somehow I don't think so. (But then I don't know anything about your campaign.)

Sure. If you want to continue the discussion, go ahead and post a topic in the General RPG Forum.

Nah, just mail me if you want to continue this into perpetuity. ;-)

 

[Plane Sailing]

In a (probably vain) effort to hoik this thread back on topic (interesting discussion guys, it really deserves a thread of its own so that it can be fully appreciated by people who wouldn't look for it here )

I propose a little idea for maximising the amount of damage which could possibly be caused by one individual - albeit not against a single target.

I'm not claiming this is an optimum way of doing this of course - fireball is more effective! - just a possibly unexpected action.

Take a 7th human rogue, with 13 Str, and the following feats: Power Attack, Cleave, Exotic Weapon(spiked chain), Great Cleave

Upon seeing a large group of goblins he tumbles into their midst, sneak attacks one (2d4+1+4d6), kills it, cleaves onto a neighbour and gets the sneak attack again, etc. etc. etc. If he gets lucky with his spiked chain and hits every time he could theoretically kill the 8 orcs immediately around him and all the ones out to 10ft reach too... for a potential total of 24 goblins. If he stumbles on the surprise attack, he'd better hope that he wins initiative so he can smack them again with his sneak attack bonus helping him to cleave through them... otherwise... better get tumbling outta there (or pick up Combat Reflexes at 9th level and hold them at bay with your chain!)

Potential for causing 24x2d4 + 24 + 24x4d6

= 48d4 + 96d6 + 24 damage (average 480 damage). Not bad for someone potentially using 5pt point buy without any magic support

Cheers

 

[Corran]

In a (probably vain) effort to hoik this thread back on topic (interesting discussion guys, it really deserves a thread of its own so that it can be fully appreciated by people who wouldn't look for it here )

I propose a little idea for maximising the amount of damage which could possibly be caused by one individual - albeit not against a single target.

I'm not claiming this is an optimum way of doing this of course - fireball is more effective! - just a possibly unexpected action.

Take a 7th human rogue, with 13 Str, and the following feats: Power Attack, Cleave, Exotic Weapon(spiked chain), Great Cleave

Upon seeing a large group of goblins he tumbles into their midst, sneak attacks one (2d4+1+4d6), kills it, cleaves onto a neighbour and gets the sneak attack again, etc. etc. etc. If he gets lucky with his spiked chain and hits every time he could theoretically kill the 8 orcs immediately around him and all the ones out to 10ft reach too... for a potential total of 24 goblins. If he stumbles on the surprise attack, he'd better hope that he wins initiative so he can smack them again with his sneak attack bonus helping him to cleave through them... otherwise... better get tumbling outta there (or pick up Combat Reflexes at 9th level and hold them at bay with your chain!)

Potential for causing 24x2d4 + 24 + 24x4d6

= 48d4 + 96d6 + 24 damage (average 480 damage). Not bad for someone potentially using 5pt point buy without any magic support

Cheers

Very nice one, I knew I could count on you to come up with an interesting example.

The only possible flaw I can see here is that sooner or later the rogue is going to roll a 1 (let's hope it's later rather than sooner. ;-)

And talking about unexpected how do you like this one:

In my campaign one of the rogues fell down of a ramshackle bridge into the water 80 or so feet below. In the water there was a huge octopus waiting for a snack. ;-)

The wizard had no really useful spells left for this occurence, so what did he do?

He cast: Mount.

Yup, Mount!

Getting a horse dropped onto you from 80 feet or so, hurts. ;-)

Plus against most animal opponents; they might very well grapple and eat the horse instead of the previous target (more flesh, less resistance ;-)

We were all pretty flabbergasted when the wizard pulled that one on us. ;-)