• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a 3.5 fighter?

StreamOfTheSky

Adventurer
And you don't even need immunity, no holly berry will ever do more than d8 +20 damage, really. Resist Energy is a level 2 spell that conveniently has the exact same duration and by the time you can cast Fire Seeds at all, is already granting resistance 30. :) Just saying.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Eldritch_Lord

Adventurer
I freely admit though, in any random circumstance that any class can be equally as effective/more effective than any other class. : )

Actually, most classes have a low end and a high end of optimization, for people who have absolutely no idea what they're doing and experienced optimizers, respectively. Druids and clerics have a higher "low end" than most classes, because you can access all spells on your list and thus can't screw yourself on spell selection like a sorcerer, you have a fairly good chassis so you can survive combat even if you're not using spells well, and in the case of the druid you have an animal companion that can protect you and attack even if you don't pick the best one for your level.

By contrast, a fighter with poorly-chosen feats can be completely and absolutely ineffectual in combat. So I would contest your assertion that any class can be as effective in the same circumstance--built well, perhaps, but throw a random druid and a random fighter at the problem and the druid will probably do better.

At any rate, my pasted out of context point was a rebuttal to a suggestion by a previous poster that the majority of broken stuff was in the SRD. I simply was arguing that taken in total proportion there is a vastly larger list of "broken" stuff in available supplements than in the SRD. And that "stuff" can produce some completely game breaking things - but the key thing is if and only if the DM allows it and/or does not modify it for their game and style.

Looking at just spells for a moment, Dandu already put up a list of arguably broken spells in core. Looking outside of core, the broken spells mostly consist of:
Celerity
Arcane Fusion
Consumptive Field
Shivering Touch
Maw of Chaos
Ray of Stupidity
Venomfire

Even if you double the length of that list because you feel I'm missing some spells, the number of broken spells from every single splatbook combined are still around the number of broken spells in Core. Broken PrCs tend to be outside of core (because core only has a dozen or so), but even then most of the characters with broken PrCs are relying on broken spells.

Eldritch Lord, thanks for your response. I want to say how much i've learned from you also.
I assume, despite the detail of your response, that you know that i was only talking about a few possible answers to the OP. I agree with you on nearly every minor detail you countered. {roll=diplomacy}1d20+34{/roll}

In fact I did not, and I apologize if I seemed to be attacking you. Your tone started out a bit adversarial, talking about how you wouldn't like to game with Dandu, so when you gave suggestions for keeping casters in line I assumed you meant you actually implemented all of those (and more!) in your own games. Sadly, I have seen DMs who do that sort of thing, and with the tonelessness of the internet....
 

StreamOfTheSky

Adventurer
If you don't mind me adding/modding the list...
Celerity
Arcane Fusion
Consumptive Field
Shivering Touch
Maw of Chaos
Ray of Stupidity
Venomfire

Maw of Chaos isn't broken. Arcane Fusion is very strong, but not broken. Not sure what venomfire does. (Greater) Consumptive Field is broken, but only with "bag of rats" tricks. I'd add...

Power Word Pain (RotD): At low levels (it's a level 1 spell), this spell is autodeath, no save.
Dance of Ruin (BoVD): The damage and area are obscene.
Wraithstrike (SpC): Getting a single touch attack in a round is ok, IMO. Getting to do a full attack series of touch attacks (with full power attack, of course)? HELL NO!
Wings of Cover (RotD?): Level 2 immediate action to get total cover and basically automatically negate any non-area attack. It actually gets BETTER with level, because it always beats everything!
Wings of Flurry (RotD?): Level 4 1d6/level area spell that a) does force damage, b) distinguishes between allies and enemies, c) has a secondary effect on a failed save (dazed for 1 round I think), and d) as written has no damage cap!
 

CuRoi

First Post
Two things right off the bat:
1. I never said you could not balance things by changing how they work, but the fact that you have to rebalanced them in the first place means that they are broken as written.

Bad assumption on my part - This thread is pretty huge so I am most definitely missing any constructive suggestions for how to "fix" the perceived problems with the fighter. As I've stated though, there is no rebalance required IMO and I haven't seen the need to do so - again I suppose mileage definitely varies. The game is all about imagination and there are quite many ways to play.

2. It is the general consensus among people in Charop that most of the broken stuff in DnD is in fact in core. This opinion is based on extensive experience.

Could you please Quanitfy "general consensus" and "extensive experience"?

Heh, just kidding.

That's a fine opinion but I'll have to completely disagree with the "general consensus". I've run a campaign based mostly on SRD and home brew material for quite some time and the only time I've had to be picky about PCs is when they bring in some outside the Core Feat / Prestige Class / Spell or combo. Most of the -really- "broken" PCs I've seen come from cherry picking The Complete "Whatever" books and other various supplements and creating some sort of silly combination.
 

CuRoi

First Post
Actually, most classes have a low end and a high end of optimization, for people who have absolutely no idea what they're doing and experienced optimizers, respectively. Druids and clerics have a higher "low end" than most classes, because you can access all spells on your list and thus can't screw yourself on spell selection like a sorcerer, you have a fairly good chassis so you can survive combat even if you're not using spells well, and in the case of the druid you have an animal companion that can protect you and attack even if you don't pick the best one for your level.

True, but of course also consider for people that have no idea of what they are doing, Clerics and Druids are overwhelming. Picking through the entire spell list and memorizing the right spell is definitely for experienced players. Sorcerers on the other hand - you pick your one-trick pony and stick with it. Yeah, low level any character with a "pet" is at an advantage in a mano y mano. Fighters do get Handle Animal if they want one, heh.

By contrast, a fighter with poorly-chosen feats can be completely and absolutely ineffectual in combat. So I would contest your assertion that any class can be as effective in the same circumstance--built well, perhaps, but throw a random druid and a random fighter at the problem and the druid will probably do better.

Well, all those "feats" are the Fighter's bread and butter. For the Caster classes its the spells. So I'd argue a fighter with poorly chosen feats is probably in the same boat as a Druid with poorly chosen spells on any given day. : ) Can the Druid learn from their mistakes and change their spells the next day? Sure. Can a DM allow a new player to learn from their mistakes and change their Feats - absolutely. Yeah, I realize it doesn't say in the rules "Fighters can change feats every x levels", but any DM that doesn't let a completely inexperienced player change up some really poor feat choices which makes their character worthless probably shouldn't be running a game.

Looking at just spells for a moment...

Yeah...odd how I don't think I ever said most of the broken "spells" were outside the core, but suddenly that has become the focus. Probably its easier to pick apart that way? Anyway, my contention was the majority of the broken "stuff" was outside the SRD. Its getting way outside the subject of the thread and I don't expect people to start enumerating lists and I'm sure (even though I am new here) that the topic has been thoroughly beaten to death elsewhere.

I freely concede that there are some core spells/feats etc which are "broken" or simply need a bit of a adjustment...for me though that's just a campaign/DM decision and should have little bearing on whether to play a Fighter or not (Well...unless said "broken" spells/feats etc are the source for the campaigns obsolesence of a viable class and they are not handled properly...)
 
Last edited:

Jeffrie

First Post
In fact I did not, and I apologize if I seemed to be attacking you. Your tone started out a bit adversarial, talking about how you wouldn't like to game with Dandu, so when you gave suggestions for keeping casters in line I assumed you meant you actually implemented all of those (and more!) in your own games. Sadly, I have seen DMs who do that sort of thing, and with the tonelessness of the internet....

What i meant with Dandu, and hope he understood, was that i was sure the black mage could beat anything i could think up. Therefore 'hate to be his dm'.
 

Eldritch_Lord

Adventurer
Maw of Chaos isn't broken.

I don't personally consider it broken, but it shows up on a lot of lists of broken spells on BG and GitP, so I threw it in there.

Arcane Fusion is very strong, but not broken.

It's broken more for its abusability factor; combining it with Sanctum Spell or Arcane Thesis or other metamagic tricks can result in very easy infinite spell loops.

Dance of Ruin (BoVD): The damage and area are obscene.

Hmm. While it's quite powerful, I wouldn't call it broken--it deals typeless damage in a wide area, so you're unlikely to avoid affecting your allies, and PCs are rarely demons. Have a party of one caster plus all Ref-focused Evasion-using characters or a party polymorphed into demons and it'd be broken, but without that sort of effort the TK factor is too high to call it truly broken, I think.

True, but of course also consider for people that have no idea of what they are doing, Clerics and Druids are overwhelming. Picking through the entire spell list and memorizing the right spell is definitely for experienced players. Sorcerers on the other hand - you pick your one-trick pony and stick with it.

Other way around, I'd say. A completely-overwhelmed cleric decides to memorize inflict light wounds one day, and if he finds he's too squishy to make use of touch spells, he can memorize something different the next day. A completely-overwhelmed sorcerer decides to learn shocking grasp, and if he finds he's too squishy to make use of touch spells...oh well, he's stuck for at least two levels. Divine casters can figure out good spell allotments by trial and error--most spells are still adequate if not amazing, so they're unlikely to be completely useless on any given day--and if all else fails they can fall back on spontaneous healing or spontaneous summoning, which a sorcerer can't.

Well, all those "feats" are the Fighter's bread and butter. For the Caster classes its the spells. So I'd argue a fighter with poorly chosen feats is probably in the same boat as a Druid with poorly chosen spells on any given day. : ) Can the Druid learn from their mistakes and change their spells the next day? Sure. Can a DM allow a new player to learn from their mistakes and change their Feats - absolutely. Yeah, I realize it doesn't say in the rules "Fighters can change feats every x levels", but any DM that doesn't let a completely inexperienced player change up some really poor feat choices which makes their character worthless probably shouldn't be running a game.

That's exactly the point: the rules give divine casters the opportunity to swap out their spells every day, while they don't give the fighter the opportunity to swap out feats ever unless PHB2 retraining is in play. Yes, a good DM can compensate for any number of bad rules, but (A) that's invoking the invalid "I can fix it, so it isn't broken" argument and (B) balancing a system around an excellent DM rather than a merely average one doesn't work.

Yeah...odd how I don't think I ever said most of the broken "spells" were outside the core, but suddenly that has become the focus. Probably its easier to pick apart that way? Anyway, my contention was the majority of the broken "stuff" was outside the SRD. Its getting way outside the subject of the thread and I don't expect people to start enumerating lists and I'm sure (even though I am new here) that the topic has been thoroughly beaten to death elsewhere.

You'll note I mentioned PrCs as well, only using spells because we already had a list of spells from core. The fact of the matter is that spells are going to be the major source of brokenness--broken monsters can be summoned, called, or transformed into with core spells, planar shepherds are going to be using core wild shape and summoning spells to abuse their PrC abilities, and so forth.

The other major area of brokenness is feats, and the kinds of feats that are broken are...metamagic feats and their reducers, which modify said broken spells. Really, the broken feats are few and far between--Persistent Spell only when combined with metamagic reducers, Arcane Thesis, Divine Metamagic, and similar--and none of them are broken on their own, they require spells to modify. There might be a few others that one could consider broken (but that I don't) such as Dragonwrought minus the early Epic feats cheese, Alternate Source Spell and other early-entry stuff, and so on, but again, those are few and far between compared to spells.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top