Why are Warforged so bad?

[Victim]

Not at all. I think the point is that Warforge nullify poison period and at low levels where poison is most effective. Then they also nullify a whole range of other aspects of the game.

The arguments I have seen in favor of the warforged revolve around his lack of good healing, which is a weak argument. PCs expect to be in combat and know they will need healing. I doubt someone would play a warforged in a game without a cleric or artificer. All the "he doesn't heal normally" comments are missing the issue. Combat is a part of the game. I have not yet met a player who will not make sure that they have access to some type of healing. Poison, disease etc are usually great to enhance the plot of a game because they are not standard, so the warforged directly and negatively impact a GM via railroading.

It's not that the character won't have access to some type of healing. It's that A) he burns up cure charges at twice the normal rate out of combat or needs a special item that doesn't heal everybody else, and B) those major heals in combat are far less effective for him. In tough fights, he's going to need heals - and since time is a major issue in fights, those heals need to be big. With a warforged, they aren't going to be.

 

[Numion]

It's not that the character won't have access to some type of healing. It's that A) he burns up cure charges at twice the normal rate out of combat or needs a special item that doesn't heal everybody else, and B) those major heals in combat are far less effective for him. In tough fights, he's going to need heals - and since time is a major issue in fights, those heals need to be big. With a warforged, they aren't going to be.

Yeah, I've noticed that even in normal use the cures lack 'oomph' to be worth it in middle of combat most of the time - its usually tactically more advantageous for the cleric to spend the round smiting the enemy rather than healing companions (due to 3e's nature of monsters dishing out much more damage than a cleric can heal, and cleric usually being able to dish out massive amounts himself). Incidentally, we don't play medic-clerics in our group, but rather of the 'smite thee infidels' variety

That is doubly true in the case of warforged. He's bound to be in more difficult spots than others. Another natural effect of this is that he'll eat the cure wands at double the rate others are. The true disadvantage of this depends on whether the group has a policy of party owned wands of cure lights, or if everyone is required to buy their own wands.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Nobody in my campaigns has ever bothered to get light fortification... I did see someone get full fortification once, for a specific adventure. Overall players in my game wouldn't take the feat. But I can see games where people would.

Foritification is very potent in my games mainly because of the number of classed humanoids I use, namely for sneak attack and death attack. I had to up the cost of fortification because of the potency that my games give it due to this. I will concede that looking back at it, it isn't nearly as powerful in a game in which most encounters center around monsters with a 20/x2 critial on their attacks and have no sneak attacks. This ability made my jaw drop when I first read it because of the way our games are run.

Here we totally agree. Although apparently because you think the feat is too good and I think that it's a specific cost that the game designers built in. Of course, since I think that it's a liability, I'd say that change would boost the overall power of the warforged.

The irony is not lost on me.
Part of the power of the ability is giving the warforged better odds at surviving until those high levels. This will depend on the lethality of one's game, I'm sure.

 

[ARandomGod]

Foritification is very potent in my games mainly because of the number of classed humanoids I use, namely for sneak attack and death attack. I had to up the cost of fortification because of the potency that my games give it due to this. I will concede that looking back at it, it isn't nearly as powerful in a game in which most encounters center around monsters with a 20/x2 critial on their attacks and have no sneak attacks. This ability made my jaw drop when I first read it because of the way our games are run.

Yes... it is a pretty well known fact in my campaigns as well that a group of low level rogues can easily take out a group of humanoids (suseptible to sneak) of much higher level. That sneak attack is nassty. Still I've never seen anyone get that on armor unless they pay for the full fortification. Which the forged can only get at the cost of yet another feat.

The irony is not lost on me.
Part of the power of the ability is giving the warforged better odds at surviving until those high levels. This will depend on the lethality of one's game, I'm sure.

I have to admit... playing a warforged level one, the race is at least one effective level higher than others, if played to it's strength. But that dissipates soon, and then inverts at higher levels. So that by level ten the class is effectively ECL -1. Since I rarely play in games that don't go to at least level 15, and I like to plan on them going to 20, the race is definitly subpar. However in a game where you aren't going to get above level six, the warforged is just awesomely good. And a "level one" warforged is easily equal to a well buffed level two character.

 

[MerricB]

I have to admit... playing a warforged level one, the race is at least one effective level higher than others, if played to it's strength. But that dissipates soon, and then inverts at higher levels. So that by level ten the class is effectively ECL -1. Since I rarely play in games that don't go to at least level 15, and I like to plan on them going to 20, the race is definitly subpar. However in a game where you aren't going to get above level six, the warforged is just awesomely good. And a "level one" warforged is easily equal to a well buffed level two character.

Well, it depends. I just ran a Eberron adventure for my group, which had two half-orcs (cleric and barbarian); and played in another that had three warforged (fighter, barbarian, wizard).

The Warforged basically had better defense than offense; the Half-Orcs had better offense than defense. The Half-Orcs were more effective at actually taking down the enemy. Much more effective.

Cheers!

 

[ARandomGod]

Well, it depends. I just ran a Eberron adventure for my group, which had two half-orcs (cleric and barbarian); and played in another that had three warforged (fighter, barbarian, wizard).

The Warforged basically had better defense than offense; the Half-Orcs had better offense than defense. The Half-Orcs were more effective at actually taking down the enemy. Much more effective.

Cheers!

And defense quickly becomes less effective... the game in general encourages offense over defense, mechanics wise.

On the other hand, that adamantine body with a 12 dex and a tower shield made for on almost completely unhitable character. Sure, the character also didn't hit as often as the other characters, but he didn't go down either.

PS, clearly, at lower levels, half-orcs are ECL+1 too!

O_O

 

[MerricB]

And defense quickly becomes less effective... the game in general encourages offense over defense, mechanics wise.

Indeed. Interestingly, although the adamantine defense become less effective as the warforged goes up in levels, the Con bonus gets more effective (through hit points). Probably not quite enough to make up for everything, but useful.

PS, clearly, at lower levels, half-orcs are ECL+1 too!

I hear a lot of talk about how half-orcs are underpowered... but they're very popular around here.

Cheers!

 

[I'm A Banana]

For whats it worth, I do use poison in my campaigns, but no plot hinges on it. Clerics are immune to it anyway past certain level.

Not for FREE they ain't.

Introduce poison into even a high level game, and it sucks up PC rescources. The higher the level, the more varied and plentiful these rescources, but they are not infinite. Except, of course, the resources of the Warforged, who are immune to it and a host of other illnesses WITH NO COST.

Spells, magical items, feats, class levels -- all these things require the spending of rescources. Spending a rescource creates drama and tension, especially when that rescource begins to run low (as even in a campaign focused on poison, poison-protection items will begin to run low). Choosing your race (at LA +0) is different because you are not spending a limited rescource. You're not spending magic, gold, experience, or feat slots. This creates no tension, this creates no drama. It removes it. Entirely.

For what goal? To have the Warforged mesh closely with the Construct RAW? Pheh. I'd trade a theoretically infinite number of moster rules to have a race that worked well as a race instead of a race that works like nothing else out there, when you're making the monster into a character.

This is why no food and water and disease immunity and a host of other things are OK as class abilities (though still not ideal), but not so OK as racial abilities UNLESS THAT RACE HAS A COST.

Healing and specific vulnerabilities are not a cost. They don't cost the warforged anything. The character becomes immune to a broad base of powers at no cost. Elves offend, but as is evidenced by my list above, sleep and ghouls come into play on average a lot less often than disease, poison, and energy drain.

It's akin to pointing to one character and going "everybody make a save except you," over and over again over the course of a campaign. And to handicap their healing as an awkward reach-around to backhandedly balance them is just exacerbating the problem that the immunities present in the first place: the need to give special attention to the Warforged that no other race demands to that degree.

I have to admit... playing a warforged level one, the race is at least one effective level higher than others, if played to it's strength. But that dissipates soon, and then inverts at higher levels. So that by level ten the class is effectively ECL -1. Since I rarely play in games that don't go to at least level 15, and I like to plan on them going to 20, the race is definitly subpar. However in a game where you aren't going to get above level six, the warforged is just awesomely good. And a "level one" warforged is easily equal to a well buffed level two character.

I'll agree with this insight 110%. The warforged should have a minor cost for this -- maybe no quadruple skill points at LV1? Maybe no feat at LV1? And in exchange they should get back their full healing and not be so obnoxious to run.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Healing and specific vulnerabilities are not a cost. They don't cost the warforged anything.

Again, I've seen Warforged in play multiple times. It sure as hell is a cost. In fact, its MUCH MUCH more of a cost than casting a spell to resist poison, because of the fact that it takes TWICE as much to heal the Warforged.

So, instead of a 1 for 1 with poison resisting, its 2 for 1 with trying to heal a Warforged. That is a serious cost being downplayed far too much here. How do I know its serious? Well, I'll say it again...I've SEEN it happen in games. Games. Plural. Different groups with very different play styles, but it was the major problem they had, having to 'waste' spells on the Warforged or just let him go in a weak state.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Different groups with very different play styles, but it was the major problem they had, having to 'waste' spells on the Warforged or just let him go in a weak state.

CLARIFICATIONL: It's not a cost for the warforged, it's a cost for everyone else in the party. The other examples are all costs for individual players: XP, GP, Class Levels, Feats...all are paid for by you for you. Half healing displaces the cost of the warforged onto the rest of the party.