Truenamer - underpowered?

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

In this thread, there is some discussion of the Shadowcaster - whether the class is underpowered relative to the mean.

I seem to remember that when Tome of Magic came out, folks expressed dismay at the Truenamer.

Why so? What's wrong with the truenamer? Can it be fixed, as perhaps the shadowcaster has been? Is it okay as is?

 

[Cadfan]

The truenamer is basically ok, but requires the DM to be careful about allocating equipment.

If you use items only found in the Tome of Magic and the DMG, and start with a 16 int, you begin succeeding your truespeak checks versus an equal CR target on a roll of a 7 at level 1. You end at level 20 with basically exactly the same thing.

That's a better chance of success than most spellcasters will have casting spells versus their targets. So that's a positive. Your buff spells have failure rates, which is a negative. On the other hand, you have more uses per day than anyone else in the game, which is a positive.

One out of combat utterance can typically be used 8 times or so per day, because you don't care about the failure rate until it becomes completely impossible to use.

Because all utterances scale the way they do, a level 1 attack utterance like a reversed Inertia Surge is still viable at level 20 if its what you really want to do. And it just may be, a lot of utterances are generically useful.

Some people don't like the need for equipment to buff the truespeak check, but its built into the system. If you remove it, the "succeeds on a 7 at all times" mark is a good way to judge whether your "fix" is a good idea.

Level 1
16 int, 4 ranks, skill focus, = +10 versus DC 17. Succeed on 7.

Level 20
21 int, +5 int inherent bonus, +6 int enhancement bonus, 23 ranks, +10 truespeach amulet, +3 skill focus, +47 vs DC 55.

Luck Stone grants +1, Pale Green Ioun stone grants +1.

Succeed on 6.

I personally think its fine. Sure, a tricked out cleric can probably beat it, but... who cares. It contributes interestingly to a party and holds its own.

 

[demiurge1138]

Fairly underpowered, yes. I like the idea of a skill-based caster, but the implementation is sorely lacking. Making truespeak checks is more difficult than it should be, especially at higher levels, and there's some weird disparities (like damaging magical vs. mundane items).

It's also a little sad that the coolest implementation of the truespeaking rules is a PrC that has nothing to do with the actual truenamer class. That fiend-binding class is really cool, and has reasonably DCs, to boot!.

Demiurge out.

 

[JustKim]

I find it unusable. Many of the utterances are barely worth taking a standard action to use, even those that don't allow saving throws, but it gets much worse. The Truespeak check is on top of saving throws and SR, and the DCs outscale your ability to buy ranks even with constant magical assistance, making it very difficult for mid- to high-level characters to.. emulate low-level spells. At close range only. Wow.

I voted that it could be fixed, but the system would need to be completely rewritten.

 

[Soel]

I was one of the ones that didn't like the fact that it was so item based. I'm mostly past that now.

I still don't like it being tied to target's CR (enforces metagame knowledge, two CR 3's can be wildly different challenges.) Also not liking the speaking of truenames being a skill check, but that's not the worst thing to deal with.

I have some disconnects with flavor-wise as well. I feel there should be more offensive/impeding capability in the system. Speaking utterances ought to be move-actions, with more carefully intoned speaking giving higher bonuses (standard +2, full-round +4.)I also think the effects should not be magic (i.e. dispellable or supressable.) These of course, are radical changes to make, and I would like to try them out in a playtest session or two.