WOTC's research on gaming groups

[Arcane Runes Press]

incognito;

Compared to a straight class fighter, a DD is giving up 7 feats.

From an optimization standpoint, Endurance & Toughness (especially Toughness) are just plain bad feats for a tough guy/combat monster fighter to take. It's especially bad if the prospective DD character is run from 1st level - he's going to be sucking up some gimp feats for levels 1-7 while his straight class fighter buddy is happily snapping up any feat he wants. That's part of the balance of many PrCs - sacrifice in the beginning for big payoffs at the end.

Yes, the DD has a lot going for it, but 7 feats is a pretty dang big sacrifice in return. The versatility just isn't there for the DD.


As to the Barbarian:

Defensive Stance is nowhere near as good as Rage, IMO. Primarily because a DD performing a Defensive Stance can't move. So, the battle comes to him or his ability is completely wasted. Meanwhile, the raging barbarian is merrily chasing and cleaving through hordes of ogres.

Beyond that, I don't think the skill list "edge" goes towards the DD at all. Sure, he has Sense Motive and Spot -those are good skills. But the Barbarian has Intimidate and Wilderness Lore, which are also good skills. And the 2 extra skill points per level are a solid bonus as well.

Patrick Y.

 

[incognito]

Arcane Runes Press:

As to the Barbarian:

Defensive Stance is nowhere near as good as Rage, IMO. Primarily because a DD performing a Defensive Stance can't move. So, the battle comes to him or his ability is completely wasted. Meanwhile, the raging barbarian is merrily chasing and cleaving through hordes of ogres.

This is certainly IN YOUR OPINION - the DD does not lose aC, and is allowed ot excecute any actions eh wishes (besides moving), a character who is raging, is not. At least you should aggree that these are the same "type" of bonuses.

Oh, and on the feat tip: yes, three feats is bad. and Endurance is HORRIBLE. Dodge is ok, and a prereq for mroe than one feat chain too. Toughness is what it is: not great, but hey, at least you get something. for a fighter, it may be passable at L1, when HP is scarce.

If you've read my thread though, you'd see that one of my big complaints is that many times, PC do NOT have to start from L1. So the Negative of taking "poor" feats is offset somewhat.

As to your skills opinion - I did not give this to either class - is that not enough of an indicator thatn this could be seen either way? by the way, Wilderness lore is simple not as good. SPOT, always applies to situations. Wild Lore only sometimes. Same with Intimidate.

 

[bret]

incognito, your analysis is pretty good except where you compare a L10 barbarian against a L10 Dwarven Defender.

You can not start DD until level 8, so if you want to compare a Fi7/DD10 against a Barbarian, please compare it against a 17th level one. It is still 6/- vs. 3- in the DD favor, but this does make it much closer.

You need to always keep in mind what was required to get into a PrC.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Arcane Runes Press:

( I'm going to number these for response purposes - ARP)

1) This is certainly IN YOUR OPINION - the DD does not lose aC, and is allowed ot excecute any actions eh wishes (besides moving), a character who is raging, is not. At least you should aggree that these are the same "type" of bonuses.

2) Oh, and on the feat tip: yes, three feats is bad. and Endurance is HORRIBLE. Dodge is ok, and a prereq for mroe than one feat chain too. Toughness is what it is: not great, but hey, at least you get something. for a fighter, it may be passable at L1, when HP is scarce.

If you've read my thread though, you'd see that one of my big complaints is that many times, PC do NOT have to start from L1. So the Negative of taking "poor" feats is offset somewhat.

3) As to your skills opinion - I did not give this to either class - is that not enough of an indicator thatn this could be seen either way? by the way, Wilderness lore is simple not as good. SPOT, always applies to situations. Wild Lore only sometimes. Same with Intimidate.

1) Yes, they are the same type of bonuses, but there's a world of difference in their versatility. The mobility factor is crucial - rage is applicable in far more situations than defensive stance.

2) The complaint about above 1st level starting PCs is a valid one, but it applies equally to core classes and PrCs. A character taken from 1st to 17th level is going to be a completely different animal than one created to be 17th level. An arcane caster built from 1st level is most likely going to have spells that are no longer optimal at 17th level - he might have Color Spray, or Magic Weapon, or Hypnotism, all of which are useful in low level adventures, but aren't great at higher levels. Heck, he might have Toughness since, as you pointed out, it's somewhat useful to very low level characters. Meanwhile, the 17th level caster has the luxury of taking only those spells which come into their own at high levels. Further, he can spend his feat slots grabbing up feats which are useless to lower level characters - He can use his 1st level slot to snap up Maximize Spell, for example, something an actual 1st level caster would almost never do. He's also more likely to have magic items tailor made for his strengths and weaknesses, rather than an odd mix gained over 17 levels of adventuring.

The same applies to the melee types. A 1st - 17th level fighter who wants to use a rapier to maximum effect has to wait and plan for 8 levels to gain access to the feat (Improved Critical) that really makes his weapon shine. Meanwhile, the starting at 17th level character simply has it, no muss and no fuss.

3) You said edge to the DD, that's what I was commenting on. I don't think they do have the edge. At best it's flat even, if you consider Spot to be of critical importance (which many people do). On the other hand, I consider Wilderness Lore to be a very important skill, as the vast majority of campaigns I have been a part of have involved a great deal of wilderness travel/adventure. Likewise, I think the 4 vs 2 skill points per level is a big consideration, as it makes the barbarian less of a 1 trick pony. Of course, I believe that all core classes should have a minimum of 4 skill points per level (with some PrCs having less), as it opens up greater character diversity.

Patrick Y.

 

[incognito]

Bret: I was comparing L20 to L20 to show how multi classing played out for both choices (Fighter/DD,a nd Fighter/Barb)

Arcane Runes Press: Ih the interest of saving space, you don't have to quite my who thread. Here is short rebutt to your rebutt (to my jdavids rebutt?)

1) Again, this in in your opinion. In a dungeon, mobility is not as much of an issue. And AC is always important, as is the ability to choose you actions. There are a varity of things you may not be allowed to do, when raging, depending on the DM. Not so for DD, there is one single thing they cannot do. Also, the defensive stance gives MORE bones (the AC bonus, and +2 to reflex and fort saves above the bonus CON). If you don't concede they are equivalent, we can simply move on - I feel your not being reasonable, if you cannot give this much.

2) PrCs however, tend to be move versatile in covering a character's weak points. Also, since many of the PrC require meeting this type of monster, or being introduced to an orginzation, players can steamroll that requirement, putting it into backstory, rather than earning it in-game.

3) oh, for the love of!!!...What part of:

a wash maybe?
Skills: Barbairan +2 pts a level, DD Spot as a class skill...

...Don't you undestand? I am simply leaning, I did NOT count this toward the DD positives. If your going to debate something, pick something that a poster takes a stand on. I ALREADY said it was a wash...

You and I do agree on something though, classes need mroe skill points. 2 per level is a joke, and 4 per level covers the basics. How they expect bards to get by with 4 is crazy, right?

 

[Ravellion]

incognito, your analysis is pretty good except where you compare a L10 barbarian against a L10 Dwarven Defender.

You can not start DD until level 8, so if you want to compare a Fi7/DD10 against a Barbarian, please compare it against a 17th level one. It is still 6/- vs. 3- in the DD favor, but this does make it much closer.

You need to always keep in mind what was required to get into a PrC.

Which also gives the Barb greater rage, which is superior to defensive stance by a landslide, since he technically isn't really restricted anymore (no longer winded after rage, so just stop and rerage if you really need to do something that requires concentration - which will be rare).

The DD simply does not Mary Sue. It becomes a lot better in stuff that fighters are good at already, except the will save. The feats sacrificed (not just the ones needed the qualify, the ones missed out too) should justify this. I am not saying it isn't powerful, it jsut doesn't Mary Sue.

Rav

 

[drnuncheon]

I was comparing the abilities of a staright 7th level PC, as compared to a muti-class character. Forget about high level - this is mid level DnD, and the muti-class character in this case has a wide variety of abilities that enable him to be good at most things. which is the definition of Mary Sue.

Actually, a Mary Sue is someone who is the best at most things.

It's not really a problem if you can fight, cast spells, and scout if a specialist fighter can fight better, a specialist spellcaster can cast better, and a specialist scout can scout better.

If there were some PrC that let you do all of those things better than the 'masters' of their crafts, then you'd have a point. Fortunately, the PrCs that make that mistake are few and far between - and I definitely don't think the Dwarven Defender is one of them. (Some of the others mentioned I agree on - Arcane Trickster and Hospitaler especially.)

The DD focuses on one aspect of fighting: the defensive. They give up offensive power (in the form of feats), and they give up any chance at controlling the battlefield by losing their mobility.

To respond to some specific things you mentioned:

Mobility isn't important in the dungeon? What good is your defensive stance going to do you when your enemies back off and start throwing javelins/shooting arrows/lobbing spells? If you break your stance to chase them, you become fatigued...Defensive stance is great if you can somehow force your enemies to come to you, but outside of that (generally rare) situation, it limits your options severely.

Dodge is indeed a requirement for multiple feat chains - but they are feat chains that are based on mobility - meaning they don't work well with your DD class powers. You can be using your Mobility & Spring Attack powers or your Defensive Stance, but not both at once. The other feat chain they qualify you for is an archery chain, which again doesn't work well with defensive stance (unless for some reason you have a bow that is stronger than you can normally use, I suppose).

So basically, DDs aren't Mary Sues by any stretch of the imagination - they're even more specialized than a regular fighter.

 

[Piratecat]

Hmmm. I can only judge by my campaign, where a DD is a NPC, but he's definitely not overpowered for his level.

 

[jdavis]

PS Magic Vestments is a L3 cleric spell which give +1 Enhcancement Bonus to armor, per 3 caster levels. At L15, that's +5. It lasts 1 hour/level. Since I states I was not being cheaty, I did not have the casting cleric in question use a "Bead of Karma" form the "Necklace of Prayer Beads" to increase the caster level by 4, which would allow a L11 clercic to grant this +5 bonus. [/B]

Thanks, It was what I thought it was (for some reason I got the impression that you were saying this was a permanent effect, which is totally my fault for misunderstanding). We have never used it though.

I do see where your arguement is going but I still don't agree, I am quite sure that there are some PrC's that are not very well designed and as I have stated can't make a blanket statement as I have not seen every PrC but I still don't believe the PrC's are the problem. Yes the Dwarven Defender (the example being thrown around) does allow for some specialization and does cover some standard fighter weakpoints but the trade offs are so bad I see it as a bad thing. To give up 7 feats is not a small thing, that is a huge major thing, not to mention that you have to take some feats of questionable worth also. And I think that the fact that the DD has to hold his ground is such a horrible trade off that it severly weakens the character to the point I would call it a nearly useless skill. I do not care where you are or in what situation you are in being stuck in one place is bad, you give up all tactical advantage unless you are guarding a bridge or doorway. I mean you can't gloss over just how bad it is to be stuck in one place. In 25 years of gaming I have never been in any kind of D&D (Or any other game) fight ever where the players didn't have to move around. You are stuck in one position, you are hoping that the fight comes to you, what if it doesn't, what if one of the other characters gets in trouble and you need to go help them, what if you are fighting multiple opponents and the Party gets overun, what if your fighting a reoccuring opponent and he knows better to attack you once you get into the defensive stance? I could think of a hundred different situations where being stuck in one place would be a debilitating disadvantage but the only time I can thing of when the Defensive Stance would be good is guarding a doorway or a bridge against a direct attack. Dwarven Defenders are so specialized that they are very limiting, that is the trade off, I don't care if your in a field or in a Dungeon being rooted in one spot is a severe disadvantage, at what the Dwarven Defender does best he is awsome but how often does defending a doorway or a bridge come up, most parties are attacking things not defending forts.

I understand at what you are getting at with the fighter/DD vs the Fighter/Barbarian, but I don't think that that applies, there is always give and take in multiclassing, the only way to truely say that the DD is overpowerful is to compare it to single classes. Is a fighter/DD better than a 20th level Barbarian? How about a 20th level Ranger? We already know you give up way too many feats than a 20th level fighter and I don't think the trade off is that good (see above paragraph on how useless standing with your feet nailed to the ground is). Spot is a good skill but I would not actually count it as making any class more powerful, there are alot of ways to get it and most classes don't give enough skill points for it to be that big a deal when balancing classes out.

There are alot of ways to make killer characters and a million ways to overbalance the game, and every single one of them is the fault of the player making that character, the PrC's are not overbalancing (in general, I'm sure there are some bad ones out there). A player who wants to make a overbalanced character can do it with anything given, he doesn't need a PrC to stretch the rules he can do it with all sorts of different classes. I have yet to see a Prestege Class that offers anything that automatically gives a character overbalanced power, I am sure they exist but I have yet to see one. Specialization is not overbalancing, it is just getting better in a smaller area, It doesn't make you good at everything, just real good in one small area (like defending places, or shooting arrows).

I will agree 100% that making a character at high levels almost always ends up being min/maxed out. Who is going to take any skills or feats (or spells) that will help them at low levels when they never will play at low levels. Even people who truely don't mean to make these type of characters will make a better high level character than one they had raised level by level in gameplay, it just happens, nobody makes a first level character, then adds the points for second level...etc... they make a high level character and buy things in mass, They figure out what feats to make to do exactly what they want and balance their skill scores out to what is necessary at high levels. Who in there right mind would take a low level spell that is effectively useless when making a 10th level wizard, but if they made a first level wizard they might snatch it up because it would be a good spell at lower levels. That is one reason I tend not to like starting a campaign at higher levels.

 

[incognito]

Hello All:

Ok, I think we may have actually reached a consensus. It seems I have been too caught up the Will Save, and the Uncanny Dodge, and Spot as a class skill.

Perhaps I gave these advantages too much weight as compared to the feat losses. In the grand scheme of things, I've see the fighter's will save surpass the wizards in two levels of DD - and that seemed pretty rough. I guess, in the combat's we've faced, the monsters DID often come to attack us, once the melee began, and Thaqt's when the DD used his ability - so the lack of mobility, although not ideal, was less of a deterrent.

On the flip side, I hope some of the things I have illustrated here has given players and DMs pause about the veracity of PrCs being balanced. Forget about Dwarven Defender, just PrCs in general I have seen significant amount of PrC's with mutiple strong saves, of aggressive BAB progression, or "front loaded" abilities that allow characters to gain significant advantages, especially if the pre-reqs are "easy" (Like Holy Liberator: CG, 5 ranks Diplomacy and Iron will).

Jdavis: to answer one question, it's not that we started with a high level campaign, it's that Character death has occured, and the player wanted to bring in a new character, rather than raise the old one. Level 1 is not appropriate

drnuncheon: Actually Mary Sue's have been defined at beign the best at everything, to merely being competent at everything. I split the difference, by saying they are "good" at everything.

In any event, I've defended (dwarvenly, I might add), my position to my contentment, and would liek to thank hong and jdavis for sticking in there with me...and everyone else to took up a position. Maybe I will look with less dislike on PrC in the future.

Thanks guys!