Thanks, guys, you've ruined Haste for the rest of us.

[The Firstborn]

Actually, I'm not wondering. I really don't care care about home brew items when we are discussing core rules.



It doesn't sound "cool" at all. It sounds like an overpowered item and isn't relevent to a discussion of the core rules.

Also, "command word" activation is not a free action, it takes a standard action to activate.

So activating your boots takes an action, activating the quiver takes an action, and activating the true strike bow takes an action.

You can't activate the bow and the quiver in the same round and still attack.

Best you can do is activate both on one round and get two or three attacks on the next round. Or get two attacks a round while only activating one or the other every round.

Sorry about the homebrew thing I forgot where I was. I really have not had any command word items in my inventory and thought it functioned like speaking in a combat. Speaking is a free action right? I knew about the spell trigger thing though.

Thanks for the correction it will help me to remember these things.

 

[Fenes 2]

Consider this WRT that cone, though: you don't use AoE spells against a single target, not by preference.

At least, not if you're a smart spellcaster.

That is what Chain Lightning is for... Fry the BBEG and a ton of his underlings...

 

[The Firstborn]

You don't even have to try to do that kind of damage. A greatsword with some racked out strength (rage, a bull's strength, a cheap item -- whatever method you like) gets you to an average of 16 points on a hit, 32 on a crit. Add magical weapons, improved critical, divine might, specialization, power attack, reckless attack, etc. Season to flavor.

Your little jabs of "munchkinism" and "powergaming" do little to mask the fact that you don't know how to make a PC that's effective. Or, do you think that the greatsword is "munchkin".

You don't really need to do a proper analysis, because a proper analysis requires a definite opponent -- and there are many ways to get there. It's not that hard. You just need to figure out how to be competent. If you are a 10th level fighter and doing 10 or so points per attack, the DM should bring in a peasant of your level and take you to school.

True -- our group doesn't have a single sword and board guy. If you're a fighter going after AC, you'll never keep up with the cleric, so why bother?

So, was this just a clever ploy to avoid actually saying something on the topic?

OfficeRonin

I am quite capable of making a PC that is effective. What I don't do is build characters that are intended to take advantage of every rule possible in order to insure that I can take down any creature thrown at me in a round or two. If I did the game would become incredibly boring. This is just my opinion. You are correct in the fact that it was a ploy and not a very well hidden ploy for that matter. It was intended to try to bring the topic under control because it seemed to me that it was out of hand.

By the way, I don't think that a fighter that starts off with 20 str is average even if he is a half-orc. When you stop to remember that the average orc only has a 15 str (at least from what I remember it was 15) it would seem that 20 str is a bit too much. Maybe if all the orcs had 22 str or something then 20 wouldn't sound so bad for an average half-orc character. Maybe if the PC's ran into a band of 10th level orc barbarians all with 22 str and 20 constitution weilding +5 greataxes things might be a little fair in these campaigns. But from where I am standing it just all seems a little too lopsided.

I'm just trying to understand the comparison between the wizard and fighter damage. Thanks for hanging me by my feet and flaying me alive.

 

[bret]

That is what Chain Lightning is for... Fry the BBEG and a ton of his underlings...

Nah, Chain Lightning is for use as an 'improved counterspell.' Use it when you have to stop a spellcaster from casting that spell.

Ready an action to Chain Lightning them if they start casting a spell. Few spellcasters can deal with the Concentration check involved in taking 35 or more damage. Bonus because you can usually hit a few apprentices and such at the same time.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Sorry, dudes. I refuse to participate in the smackdown arguments.


I may be in the minority, but after considering it a while I think the argument that Quicken proves Haste is too powerful has real merit.

My experience with Haste is that it doesn't kill the game as a 3rd level spell, but it probably should be a 4th level spell. But my experience is primarily in levels 1-12. The argument I have seen is that high level characters always need Haste or they are doomed seems believable.


I suggest the following "theorem": If Quicken is not more valuable than Haste in a short combat, then Haste is too powerful relative to Quicken.

Let's consider a 3 round combat, 12th level characters.

The Quicken Wizard gets off 6 spells, 3 high level plus 3 low level (2nd or lower).

The Haste Wizard gets off 5 net spells (not counting the Haste itself), 5 spells of any level.

That looks like a strong win for the Haste Wizard to me -- I don't think 3 low level spells (e.g. Magic Missile) are going to be close to the power of 2 high level spells (e.g. Empowered Fireball). It becomes absurd at lower level because Quicken is near useless. I think it also is worse for Quicken at very high levels -- while the Quickened Polymorph Other or Cone of Cold comes into play, the Hasted Wizard could be throwing Gate and Gate again. Powerful items at very high levels argue for Haste as better.

If you do not believe me yet, consider that the Hasted Wizard gets better flexibility. The Quicken Wizard has locked in his choices by spell selection. The Hasted Wizard can perfectly well dig into his lower spell slots if he see a good opportunity.

BTW, it goes without saying that Haste is much better than Quicken in long combats at all levels.

My conclusion: Either Quicken needs to be made much easier or Haste needs to be made less powerful.

Followup conclusion: Weaken Haste because Quicken is balanced relative to Empower and Maximize (both of which I think are reasonable as is).

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Nonsense. A lot of characters are quite properly based off of the use of a few spells or spell combos. If those details change, the character is rendered unviable. Haste was the spell that used to make a lot of class combinations work.

Indeed, for sub-optimal class combinations it made them viable.

For optimal class combinations, it made that character outshine others and reduced their fun.

I'm glad they did what they did.

--Happy Spikey

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I suggest the following "theorem": If Quicken is not more valuable than Haste in a short combat, then Haste is too powerful relative to Quicken.

Let's consider a 3 round combat, 12th level characters.

The Quicken Wizard gets off 6 spells, 3 high level plus 3 low level (2nd or lower).

The Haste Wizard gets off 5 net spells (not counting the Haste itself), 5 spells of any level.

That looks like a strong win for the Haste Wizard to me -- I don't think 3 low level spells (e.g. Magic Missile) are going to be close to the power of 2 high level spells (e.g. Empowered Fireball). It becomes absurd at lower level because Quicken is near useless. I think it also is worse for Quicken at very high levels -- while the Quickened Polymorph Other or Cone of Cold comes into play, the Hasted Wizard could be throwing Gate and Gate again. Powerful items at very high levels argue for Haste as better.

BTW, it goes without saying that Haste is much better than Quicken in long combats at all levels.

My conclusion: Either Quicken needs to be made much easier or Haste needs to be made less powerful.

Followup conclusion: Weaken Haste because Quicken is balanced relative to Empower and Maximize (both of which I think are reasonable as is).

Yes it appears that haste wins the hast/quicken spell fight. Yet, with or without haste, quicken at +4 levels will remain a crappy feat. It isn't even close to balanced with empower or maximize etc. It just sucks, in fact it sucks about as much as haste is overpowered. The best fix for haste I've seen is making it a full round casting time. so in you 3 round fight it would be 4 spells for the haster, and 6 for the quickener I'd still say haste wins out then again I go back to quicken sucking.

 

[Fenes 2]

Not to mention that if haste had a full-round casting time a wizard or sorcerer would not always start with it - sometimes he or she would probably need another spell instead.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

BTW, I play a Transmuter and I am not going to sweat losing the opportunity to cast my favorite spell on myself.

I usually cast Haste on a meatshield anyway. A 3rd level spell slot is a fireball that I would be lucky to hit 3 targets with (average ~100 total damage). My buddy is going to live twice as long (the +4AC makes him get hit about half as often) and he is cranking out another hit that does ~30 damage each round -- we are way ahead by round 3.

I will miss seeing the partial charge + full attack move. I will miss Hasting the cleric -- he kept my meatshields healthy.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Not to mention that if haste had a full-round casting time a wizard or sorcerer would not always start with it - sometimes he or she would probably need another spell instead.

yeppers you frequently don't have time to buff,you need your don't kill me, gah take that etc spell right now.