WOTC's research on gaming groups

[hong]

The Bonus AC from DD is really nice, but some of the higher level monsters are very tough. Last weekend, my 9th level DD was bit for 54 points of damage (in one bite ) from a Dragon. The high AC didn't seem to stop the Dragon's huge attack bonus. Imagine what the Dragons are like that a 17th level DD must fight? The AC and DR of the high level DD will really be inconsequential against the major monsters.

Exactly. When you get up to these levels, being stuck to one spot is the LAST thing you want to do.

In the last few sessions of our high-level (14th+) campaign, our tanks have endured:
- a full attack from a pumped death slaad for 100+ points of damage
- critical hits from a kaiju monster (not saying which one) for much the same
- being chewed up and spit out (literally) by an ancient black dragon
- being swarmed by a horde of wraiths and spectres and drained of half a dozen levels

Melee combat is DANGEROUS. Having the dwarven defender specials doesn't make it any less so.

 

[jdavis]

Hee hee. Nockermensch said it best of all:


=== REPOST ===
From: nockermensch@hotmail.com (Nockermensch)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: 90% of Munchkinism, Loopholes and Broken Rules...
Date: 23 Dec 2002 03:18:58 -0800

Tin Coyote <tincoyote@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<i0d90vc576mqteoep3d5se3h4loasfb51l@4ax.com>...
>
> Many players don't actually think about how appropriate or
> inappropriate any given ability or class change is. They simply add
> the numbers and decide. If players came to me with the arguments that
> Loren and Wayne have, I become more inclined to listen, because it's
> not purely mechanistic.
>
> TC

Hint: It *IS* purely mechinistic. You were deceived by the oldest
powergamer's DM-trap.

See, we powergamers work at a deeper level. We want to play powerful
combat machines, so we add numbers. AFTER we have a veritable monster
created, we then make a game rationale for such behemot. Most
non-powergaming DMs think we're using "roleplaying" arguments when
we're in fact adapting the character story around a killer concept.
For a real example, I bet that our group wasn't the only one who saw a
misterious disappearance of two longsword wielding elves in the
AD&D->3E transition.

Pfft, some people never understand D&D - it's all about the damage.

@ @ Nockermen5ch, or about DC.

=== END REPOST ===

Hey us role play intensive DM's have to take what little victories we can get, it really is all about hitting things but at least somebody put more thought into it than "because it's cool". Besides I view a character that multiclassed 4 times as self handicapped instead of powerful, he's a party of second level characters in one body trying to keep pace with 7th level characters, not to mention if they ever decided to stick to one class they would start taking experience penalties left and right, at 20th level you would end up with something like 5/5/5/5 or 5/5/4/6 which just isn't the same as having 20 levels in one class.

Ever notice that it seems that in general DM's are more role playing oriented and players are power game oriented. I see alot of "why won't my players role play anything out post", you never see any "I wish my players would just get to the fight and stop pretending to be the characters post."

 

[the Jester]

One of the pcs in my campaign is a ranger 1/rogue 2/cleric 7/assassin 2/contemplative 2/monk 1... she's very effective in a sort of chain mail bikini kind of way, but will she ever get to toss a miracle? Not for a long time, if ever. And when the group hits epic levels- well, she'll be waiting a long time for the bonus epic feats, that's for sure. Every three levels, sure.

 

[DDK]

Pfft, some people never understand D&D - it's all about the damage.

ROFL! I love it! That's a classic line if there ever was one

 

[incognito]

Hong: I have played, low (3-7), mid (8-12), and ultra high (18+) 3E. I know all about "options." I also know it's better to hit for d8+4, and have +12 to your will save, than hit for d8+8, and have +6 to your Will save.

Fast move offset by fly? What's stopping you from flying to? Ditto on the boots.

Ambidex and TWF useless? Perhaps your familiar with the "shield expert" feat, and the +1 special ability "bashing." ther are other exmaples, but this one does nicely.

AS for your comments on saves, I'd rather have Stong Fort and Will saves than strong reflex. Generally speaking, reflex saves do damage. And I can heal damage. And if I am a cleric, I can cast endure elements. Fort/Will saves are 1-shot take outs (Poly-Other, and Hold person). Tell me which you'd rather save against at L7, a 7d6 lightning bolt, or Hold Person (both L3 Wizard spells).

Have you actually DMed any adventures past 12th level or so? Most high-level monsters can toy around with melee tanks. It doesn't matter how many hit points you have.

Bull. Our L12 part had a Dwarven Cleric with a 22 CON had 130ish hp. As a Cleric/Paladin with a 16 CON I had under 100. When the Power Word Stun went off he was affected for 2 rounds, while I was out for 6. Isn't haste great?

There were also plenty of time that he took Literally 100 pts of damge in a round, only to cast Heal, the next round. Seems good to me.

Endur, your next!

 

[jmucchiello]

Re: Re: Re: high level feats & Dwarven Defenders

Yes! I hate this and have seriously considered altering the initial favoured save of EVERY class to a +1 instead of +2. Makes far more sense and doesn't shake things up too much whilst fixing the problem.

Try this: When multiclassing (or PrCing) combine like saving throw levels to determine saving throw value: In the example we have Ftr2/Bar2/Rgr1/Clr2. He has 7 levels of good Fort Save. 2 levels of good Will save, 5 levels of bad will save. and 7 levels of bad ref save. Thus he would have FORT +5, REF +2, WILL +4, instead of FORT +11, REF +0, WILL +3.

This is also good with BAB: A Clr5/Rog5 would have 10 levels of average BAB, or +7, instead of +6 for two +3s. And the Clr1/Rog1 would have BAB +1 instead of +0.

In my writing I never use base save bonus for any prerequisites.

 

[incognito]

Endur: How convienent:

Well, yes, the Dwarf still has to wear plate armor. The extra movement from light armor isn't worth it.

DD has to have a dex 13+ (pre-req dodge feat). Assuming point buy build, that means a Dex 14. At 9th level, maybe you have gloves of dex +2 for dex of 16.

If you are wearing a chain shirt, your ac is 4 + 3 dex = +7 + magical bonus.

If you are wearing dwarven plate, your ac is 8 + 3 dex = 11 + magical bonus.

So, the optimal Dwarven Defender wears Dwarven Plate (mithril). Second best armor for a Dwarven Defender would be Adamtine plate.

I find it facinating that while it's imporant for you to maintain parity in the point buy for stat, it's not important for you to maintain in equiptment.

A Chain shirt is 100 GP, while Mithiril Full plate is over 10,000. hmmm - not a very equivalent.

You also missed a step in the Armor: Mithiril Breast Plate (Add's 4,000 GP). So here is my new, $ to $ comparison.

+1 Mith breastplate (5,400) and Gloves of DEX +2 (4,000) = 9, 400 GP

AC: 6 (Armor), and 3 (Dex) = 9

Mith Full plate (10,500), and NO gloves = 10.500 gp

AC: 8 (Armor) and 2 (Dex) = 10

Now that's a little closer isn't it? And with my extra 1,100 GP, I'm picking up a cloak of resistance to my reflex save is now 2 higher than yours!

Finally, let's take things to the n'th degree. Max dex bonus for Mith full plate is +3, and it's +5 for a breastplate, so total protective difference between the two when fully optimized is 1.

Yes, DD's are supposed to be Dwarven Sentries, so they get spot, listen, and sense motive

What, aren't fighters, or wariors sentieries too? Why don't they get spot?

And what does Cleave have to do with movement? For that matter, you seem inclined ALWAYS to be using the DD defensive stance. If it's not appropriate, Don't use it! It not like rage, where you should use it when angry.

And for your Dragon example? A young adult Green dragon (CR 10) has a Attack bonus of 22. Horrifying, I admit. But your AC should've been 30 or higher! (+8 Armor +3 DEX, +3 Shield [+1], +1 ring of protection, +4 defensive stance +1 Dodge). Did you fight defensively? Did you have any cover? It is assinine to try and toe to toe with a dragon at any level, and expect to come out untouched. Still he had a 40% chance of missing you with his primary attack, and 65% chance of missing you with the supplementary attacks! That's pretty good in my book.

I could tell you about the time I went from 100 hp to 0 hp in one round from an improved invisible, sneak attacking Wizard/Rouge, but that ONE combat does not prove a thing.

but it does serve to illustrate my original point. A L2 Dwarven Defender would NOT have been snuck attack by that Wiz/Rouge. Why? Uncanny dodge.

 

[incognito]

jmucchiello: Can you belive my DM thought that method was too powerfull? he said it allowed for Mary Sue's.

Ahh well.

 

[Endur]

We usually fight encounters that have an EL 3-4 higher than the party level.

So instead of young adult dragons for 8th-9th level characters, try adult or mature adult dragons.

And, yes, AC was 30 or higher (+9 armor, +3 shield, +2 dex, +1 dodge, +1 dwarven defender, +1 ring of protection, +4 haste, +4 barkskin). Defensive Stance and cover didn't come into play because we were fighting in the air and I had charged the Dragon (-2 to my ac) before getting bit by an AOO on the way through its reach.

Tom

And for your Dragon example? A young adult Green dragon (CR 10) has a Attack bonus of 22. Horrifying, I admit. But your AC should've been 30 or higher! (+8 Armor +3 DEX, +3 Shield [+1], +1 ring of protection, +4 defensive stance +1 Dodge). Did you fight defensively? Did you have any cover? It is assinine to try and toe to toe with a dragon at any level, and expect to come out untouched. Still he had a 40% chance of missing you with his primary attack, and 65% chance of missing you with the supplementary attacks! That's pretty good in my book.

I could tell you about the time I went from 100 hp to 0 hp in one round from an improved invisible, sneak attacking Wizard/Rouge, but that ONE combat does not prove a thing.

but it does serve to illustrate my original point. A L2 Dwarven Defender would NOT have been snuck attack by that Wiz/Rouge. Why? Uncanny dodge.

 

[incognito]

Endure: Dude, How can you make any ratioanl arguamet about how Dwarven defender is or isn't good when you "CONSISTENTLY" take on EL's 3-4 levels higher than typical.

Sheesh!

Newsflash: to a L3 party, a Troll is horrifying!