Author Topic: Balancing 3.5  (Read 188271 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #280 on: August 19, 2008, 02:31:10 AM »
Incorrect. He is not the best warrior against evil. He gets a limited number of attacks that add Cha to his to hit, and paladin level to damage. That number is... what? 1-5 a day? And those only work against evil targets. Well first off, he has a lower base to hit since he needs more stats high and therefore has a lower Strength. So while he might put a little something extra in those 1-5 attacks, the rest are weaker. End result is the average is the same or lower.

 
 
He may not be the 'best' warrior against evil... if best is viwed as 'most mechanicly compotent'... however the Paladin *IS* the only base class I can think of specificly designed to BE a warrior against evil... with both crunch and fluff dedicated to that end. The whole purpass of a Paladin is to be noble, decent and good... and fearless facedown evil wherever it may be.
 
You can play almost any charcter class with the same ideals... but the Paladin is the only one MADE for those ideals.

Exactly.  And if the Paladin isn't as good at his job as some think he needs to be...all the reason more to buff the Paladin with the other Melees!  Both the Paizo build adn the linked one above are very good alternates...strikingly similar too!

Das Bier!

Shadowhowler

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 149
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #281 on: August 19, 2008, 02:31:35 AM »

Let's compare casters real quick. Druid? Get a bajillion class abilities. Wizard? Bonus feats. Cleric? Turning?!  Seriously, read the undead of CR 8+. The amount of resources it takes to make turning viable is sickening. Add to that, getting DMM Persist costs 3 feats and Wizards get 5 free feats. We're talking about an 8 feat disparity. Wizards get 5 bonus feats, clerics have to spend 3. That in and of itself is a limiting factor.  DMM is not unbalanced, even if you allow it to break the level limit (which is the whole purpose of the feat). The sole purpose is to allow a cleric to do something with those turn attempts.  DMM Persisted spells, guess what, are still subject to a simple dispel magic. It's a minor time saver that costs 3 feats and makes use out of an otherwise uselss (imo) class feature.

 
 
I'm not going to say your wrong... because frankly, I don't have much experince with DMM. However... I do disagree with the 'Poor Clerics!' tone of the above statment. Clerics get full 9th level spellcasting, Heavy Armour, good weapons, two good saves, d8 hp, a pretty good spell-list (some say AWESOME spell list) and turning... which dispite your thinking it's useless, I have seen put to VERY good use in games I've been a part of.
 
So an argument for DMM being 'Clerics need something' just dosn't sound right to me.
 
As for Druids... well, yeah, Druids ARE over the top. I use the Shapeshift Varriant in PHB2 as my fix.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 02:36:31 AM by Shadowhowler »

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #282 on: August 19, 2008, 02:41:30 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #283 on: August 19, 2008, 02:42:05 AM »
If it disappears after the first hit, it is discharged.
Well, if it's not persistable because of that, then I still accomplished what I wanted.


I've also been wanting to talk to all of you psionics veterans.  I have the XPH but not the Complete Psionic (nor do I plan on buying it).  I like what I've read.  I like the PP cap per manifester level.  I like the way psionic focus works with so many feats.  I like how there are relatively few full manifesting PrCs.  Sadly, I've only ever had two player run psionic PCs in my games (both ran straight-up blasters), and I've never played in a game where psionics were allowed.  So, I have very little parctical experience with psionics.

  • How well does it fit balance-wise. 
  • Are there any powers that really need to be pulled back? 
  • I know the psion is listed at tier 2 by JaronK.  What would pull it back?  Fixing a few powers?
  • Is the soulknife worth fixing?  I know BlainTog made a popular fix several years back.

A psion is a variant spellcaster.  All the problems you can get with high level spellcasting apply to the SPellcaster.  the restriction on PSP's that a psion gets vs an arcane caster, and the fact arcane casters get auto dmg increases, are balanced against the ability to spend ALL PsP's aon high level abilities, and an easier time of going Nova on demand, because all of your options are always at your fingertips.

On the whole, because the selection of Psi Powers is far, far more narrow then the spells out there, and tend to be better written/balanced then spells, Psis are more balanced.  They are still level 9 casters, so...

Look at the balance of effects, especially Shape Changing, size growth, uber versatile spells.  The psi boards will probably tell you the most broken feats/combos to look out for (and,heh, so will Pun Pun...).  When you see something buffwise that grants bonuses beyond what items give, you need the nerf hammer to stop the intrusion effect.  Most of these will directly mirror spell effects, so they aren't hard to pick out.

Psy Warrior makes a fine gish...I think I mentioned him earlier in the thread.  I tend to get irked with his full manifester level, and believe he should have fewer combat feats.  And of course, some of his powers simply have to be slammed, particularly the size increase and overbuffing ones that exceed what you can get with items.  In short, however, he's probably the model for a balanced gish build.

(If he had healing powers, I'd probably nerf the cleric down to his level, but that's me)

The Soulblade is...well, meh.  More fun as a PrC.  20 level class? Probably not.  It used to be an alternate choice for the Psi Warrior, and probably should still be.  I don't know why they made it a main class, and I can't comment much beyond this.  I just don't see the need for it except as a PrC for Psi Warriors.

Das Bier!

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #284 on: August 19, 2008, 02:44:14 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.
I'm convinced.  You're right AC.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #285 on: August 19, 2008, 02:54:17 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.

Um?  Behind a mage by 8 feats?  What?

Medium Armor Prof, Heavy Armor Prof, Shields, Domain One Power (= a feat, sometimes IS a feat), Domain One Spells (+9 extra, free spec caster?), Domain Two Power, domain two spells (+9 extras, free double spec???), turn mem spells into Cures (at least equal to a feat)...and then you get Turning, which is a scaling benefit by a stat, which forms a fuel point for some very potent feats.

Looks like the cleric is 2 feats up on the wizard?

Clerics don't get less feats then wizards do (and I'm ignoring the BAB, HIt Die and saves, of course)...they get them all UP FRONT.  So, they get nothing for cleric levels...except that they advance clerical casting levels as their class specialty.

Ergo, any deviation from cleric levels should result in loss of caster levels, just like with a sorceror.  It should NEVER be an automatic choice for a cleric to PrC.  neverevernever.

Clerics are FREAKING STRONG.  Anybody who says wizards gets the stronger class list? Ehhhh.  Clerics know all their spells.  Wizards and sorcs still are restricted.  That makes up for any weakness in the list, and proper spell selection takes care of the rest.  Add in the better chassis, two domains, profs...yeah, can't really say a wizard is up on feats over them priesty guys.  Matter of fact, you could probably pull the armor profs out, drop the HD, and they'd still be fairly equal classes.

making all day buff available at levels where they aren't supposed to be is as bad as making uberbuffs available at lower levels then they are made to be...they break the level/challenge limit of the game, cause a forcible imbalance, and are usually used to immediately take over the shtick of another character...historically, the melee guy, because the cleric either no longer had to spend time buffing to go to melee, or could get such uber buffs the melee was irrelevant.

The talk about forcing an investment in feats and gear is a smokescreen.  What you get out of it is 2-3 extra effects that cannot be duplicated by magical items, all day.  You get to pick the uberest spells you can cast and wear them all the time.  The money you pay for the benefits is far and away less then the money you'd spend trying to get the same level of buffage off of items!

That's why clerics do this.  It's not only worth the feat investment, it's a no brainer to do this!  +3 TH/Dmg, all day, luck bonus.  What's that worth, cash wise?  Up to +5 BAB, +6 Str?  That's worth, wow, 100's of thousands of GP.  Size increase, DR x/alignment?  Permanent?  More tens of thousands of GP.  Stat investment?  HAH, Cha is cheap for the taking.  The money spent on upping turning you get back ten times and more over in constant benefits.

Heck, let's play conservative and give Persistent Mass Vigor.  Fast healing/1 to the whole party.  Don't need you for out of combat healing anymore.  1 5th level slot, and the only cure spell you'll ever cast will be in the direst emergency.  the party will ALWAYS enter combat with full hit points.  What's that worth in gold?  90K a person?  What's it worth for you to never have to cast cures again? Tons of free spell slots...

yeah, enforce the metacap.  you get the benefit at the level you are supposed to, no sooner.  If that means you have to find something else useful to do with your Turns in the meantime, then find something else useful.  The DMM persist CoDzilla is enshrined on CO.  He doesn't work nearly as well with Quicken, and with the metacap barely works at all.  Anything that can stop 'shtick intrusion' is a step in the right direction, and waaay too much stuff breaks down when you blow the metacap off, and not just with DMM.

Das Bier!
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 03:19:15 AM by Bier »

Shadowhowler

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 149
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #286 on: August 19, 2008, 02:57:21 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.

 
 
Fair enough.
 
As I said, I have very little experince with DMM, and NO experince with Nightsticks... so it is very hard for me to say how balanced the whole bag o worms may or maynot be. However, I have PLENTLY of experince with Clerics, and I have NEVER found them lacking in power. :)

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #287 on: August 19, 2008, 03:04:22 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.

 
 
Fair enough.
 
As I said, I have very little experince with DMM, and NO experince with Nightsticks... so it is very hard for me to say how balanced the whole bag o worms may or maynot be. However, I have PLENTLY of experince with Clerics, and I have NEVER found them lacking in power. :)

Char Opt will tell you its very broken, and acquiring huge amounts of Turns by level 10 is not difficult at all.  jaronK is particularly good at this, can fit it into budget, and you should see the broken stuff he can start cranking out.

Just getting an all day Divine Favor at level 6 can give a DM conniptions, becuase it only gets worse as the cleric levels to Divine Power and then Righteous Might...all day...and the Melee guy wonders why he hangs around anymore.

Das Bier!

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #288 on: August 19, 2008, 03:24:27 AM »
Um?  Behind a mage by 8 feats?  What?
Yes. 8 Feats. Let's go over feats real quick. You get 1 at first level and 1 at 3rd and every 3 levels (3,6,9,12,15,18). Total? Seven. Seven feats. Now lets take those 7 and get DMM Persist with a cleric. How many feats is that? 3. So now we're down to 4 available feats. Let's take a wizard. What do they get? Same seven plus scribe scroll plus 4 more at level 5 and every 5 levels. Now they're total is what? 7+5=12. 12 is 8 more than 4. Are we on the same page? Good.
Quote
Medium Armor Prof, Heavy Armor Prof, Shields,
<snip> Proficiencies, may, in your mind, be feats. But technically they aren't. They're proficiencies.
Quote
Domain One Power (= a feat, sometimes IS a feat),
Yes, a feat is a feat. Not all domain powers are feats. But lets say you are in an anything goes game where you can cherry pick domains and you pick one with a bonus feat you need. What's the count? Still up by 7? Okay.
Quote
Domain One Spells (+9 extra, free spec caster?),
Yes, you get more spells. I agree, that is a powerful option. Is it a feat? No.  Is it equal to specialization? Not at all, since you don't get those nice bonuses specialists do.
Quote
Domain Two Power, domain two spells (+9 extras, free double spec???),
Okay, giving you a cherry picked second domain, wizard is still up by 6 feats.
Quote
turn mem spells into Cures (at least equal to a feat)...
Spontaneous casting of cure and/or inflict wounds is a terrible ability. Let's not debate here, because that's not the point, but it's generally accepted that in combat healing (which is when you need spontaneous curing) is subpar. It is better to kill the opponent before he acts again, then to waste an action healing.  You might disagree, and that's fine, we'll drop it here, please.
Quote
and then you get Turning, which is a scaling benefit by a stat, which forms a fuel point for some very potent feats.
Turning, as I stated, is a weak class feature. At ~CR 8 or above, the turn resistance on undead (who have much higher HD) becomes unreal. Turning, without a disgusting investment of feats and monetary resources is not a viable tactic when you compare it to other viable standard actions that a competent cleric could be doing.
Quote
Looks like the cleric is 2 feats up on the wizard?
Nope. Actually last I checked they're still 6 up. Still with me? Good.
Quote
Clerics don't get less feats then wizards do (and I'm ignoring the BAB, HIt Die and saves, of course)...they get them all UP FRONT.  So, they get nothing for cleric levels...except that they advance clerical casting levels as their class specialty.
And advance turning. So they get to advance spell casting and turning (which I already stated I feel is weak) while wizards get to advance casting and get feats.  It still seems like wizards are ahead.
Quote

Ergo, any deviation from cleric levels should result in loss of caster levels, just like with a sorceror.  It should NEVER be an automatic choice for a cleric to PrC.  neverevernever.
It never is an automatic choice to PrC for clerics. I like playing cleric 20. It's fun and a solid choice. It seems like you are saying that any deviation (re: multiclassing) should cause casters a loss of caster level. That's an interesting thought, but not part of my point/argument, so I'll skip over this.
Quote

Clerics are FREAKING STRONG.  Anybody who says wizards gets the stronger class list? Ehhhh.
Like I said, I agree. And it's debatable, sounds like we're still going well. :D This is fun.
Quote
  Clerics know all their spells.  Wizards and sorcs still are restricted.
Sorcs are subpar, that's my opinion. Wizards are not, They can easily get all the spells they'd ever need. And their list, if not stronger, is larger, so yeah, this still has nothing to do with DMM, so let's keep moving.
Quote
  That makes up for any weakness in the list, and proper spell selection takes care of the rest.  Add in the better chassis, two domains, profs...yeah, can't really say a wizard is up on feats over them priesty guys.  Matter of fact, you could probably pull the armor profs out, drop the HD, and they'd still be fairly equal classes.
Actually, I can. And just did. Wizards are still up on feats. Mind you, I mean feats. Not proficiences that come with a class, but something you choose for your character. A choice you get to make. FEATS.
Quote

making all day buff available at levels where they aren't supposed to be is as bad as making uberbuffs available at lower levels then they are made to be...they break the level/challenge limit of the game, cause a forcible imbalance, and are usually used to immediately take over the shtick of another character...historically, the melee guy, because the cleric either no longer had to spend time buffing to go to melee, or could get such uber buffs the melee was irrelevant.
I disagree. And that's the point of this. Dispel is a what level spell? 3rd? Yes. Third level spell. Meaning Dispel is viable and often a staple long before anything even remotely called an "uberbuff" enters into the equation. Also, just as a matter of opinion, unless the melee guy doesn't exist, my clerics tend to choose group buffs (like mass lesser vigor) to persist. That's one spell I get to persist, which, at low level, is all I get. Like I already showed. Doesn't sound like I'm destroying the challenge limit. Is it possible to? Yes. But who really wants to enter an arms race with their DM? (rhetorical question, by the way).
Quote

yeah, enforce the metacap.  you get the benefit at the level you are supposed to, no sooner.  If that means you have to find something else useful to do with your Turns in the meantime, then find something else useful.
I disagree. However, I challenge you to defend your point. What other useful thing is there for a turn attempt that doesn't require a massive investment of limited resources? Please explain, I'd like to know.
Quote
  The DMM persist CoDzilla is enshrined on CO.
This is actually not true. While I enshrine it, not everyone agrees with me. I've had plenty of debates about it both here and on WotC CO board.
Quote
  He doesn't work nearly as well with Quicken, and with the metacap barely works at all.
This statement is wrong, Bier. I'm sorry, but it is. I've been shown countless times how DMM works WONDERFULLY with quicken.

Well I think that covers it all. :D
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #289 on: August 19, 2008, 04:17:47 AM »
Just to talk about Clerics and Turning for a bit.

First off, Turn Undead by itself is underrated.  By reducing the effective HD of undead before you turn them, you can easily rebuke/turn very potent undead.  Remember, they have to have half your HD (assuming you gain turning at all levels) to do anything really cool.  This is easily done with some gear (Rod of Defiance + Lyre of the Restful Soul = -8 HD to all nearby undead for purposes of turn undead).  Better yet, use a temporary undead control spell, then hand them enough Holy Arrows to reduce their HD to 1 (yes, this works, see the text on negative levels).  Now Rebuke them.  Now remove the arrows.  Rebuking is only checked at the moment you actually do the rebuking (this is never stated directly, but it's strongly implied many times), so now you can have up to your HD in undead controlled via Rebuke Undead, and each one can be as strong as you can find.  That's seriously potent.  Note that for Rebuking, Charisma doesn't matter... you'll probably have plenty of attempts anyway, and no matter what your Charisma is you can always control anything of half your Cleric level in HD.  So go nuts with your brand new Necropolitan Army of Doom.

Second, getting lots of turn attempts is easy.  Want to persist 4 spells?  Nightstick + Reliquary Holy Symbol + Divine Metamagic + Cha 16 is enough for 12 turn attempts.  Cast Eagle's Splendor, and now you temporarily have 14.  Now cast Extended W and X, where W and X are two persistant spells you wanted.  They'll last 48 hours (remember, metamagic is always applied in whatever order you want, so you set them to 24 hours, then extend).  Tomorrow, do the same thing, only cast Extended Y and Z.  Congratulations, that's 4 persistant spells, and it didn't break the bank at all (though you did need a respectable charisma score).  Notice, we didn't have to double up Nightsticks.

And of course you could have used those turn attempts for DMM:Quicken, which is underrated but very potent.  Doesn't fit my style, as I like to cast at the beginning and have long term results, but it's certainly got kick.

JaronK

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #290 on: August 19, 2008, 04:25:46 AM »
Oh, don't get me wrong, Anything with 9th level casting is strong. I agree. And clerics are not weak. Far from it. I also agree with that. However, turning is a relatively weak class feature when compared to 5 bonus feats (wizard) or the shit-ton druids get. Their spell list is amazing, but it's debatable whether wizards get a better spell list or not.  That's not the purpose of my post.

My point is to look at the point/purpose behind DMM. A) it costs you 2-3 feats, depending on Quicken vs Persist. It also causes you to waste either precious stats (into Cha) or other resources (feats, etc).  When you compare it to Wizards, who get 5 bonus feats, they're ahead by 8 feats. If they want the same metamagic, they're only ahead by 6-7.  :rolleyes  When you make a heavy investment of 3 feats, you deserve something worthwhile. Without Nightsticks, even an optimized cleric (aasimar, LA buyoff, high PB) is going to have 3 + (20Cha +6 item +4 tome) 10 turn attempts. Without items that can't even persist 2 spells. Add in a couple items (none of which should stack with copies of themselves) and you MAYBE are able to get to 20. Still not enough to persist 3 spells.  Breaking the level cap is not a big deal, honestly.

 
 
Fair enough.
 
As I said, I have very little experince with DMM, and NO experince with Nightsticks... so it is very hard for me to say how balanced the whole bag o worms may or maynot be. However, I have PLENTLY of experince with Clerics, and I have NEVER found them lacking in power. :)
I have a Dread Necromancer//Cleric gestalt in one of my games. That is dual Turning pools, with a Cha based casting stat as his main focus (Cleric is secondary). So, his Cha is in the region of 24 (only level 10, mind; 18 base + 2 level, + 4 item = 24). Assume his domains are Planning and Undeath. Base Turn/Rebuke attempts is 10 each. Add 4 to each because of Extra Turning and you have 14 attempts each.

Now, lets go with bare basic equipment:

+1 Spell Storing club (8k)
+4 Cha item (16k)
+4 Wis item (16k)
Mithril BP (4k)
Total: 44k, 5k free

That does not even cover the cost of 1 Nightstick. Now, if we were to double it to 98k starting gold, which is the equivalent to the wealth of a level 12 character, he can buy 7x Nightsticks if he sinks all of his remaining gold into it. That is 28 Turn attempts. Let's assume Nightsticks stack.

You get 14+28 Turn attempts = 42 and 14 Rebuke attempts. You get 8 spells to persist (16 if you use Extend).

This is absolute worse case scenario: gestalt, two classes that give two pools of attempts, Nightstick stacking, Cha focused casting, free domain choosing, double starting gold, 18 starting stat, etc.

Now, if you think about it, in your ten levels, you have:

- used 2 of 4 feats (of 5 if human)
- put an 18 into Cha (in PB, this would cripple your other casting stat and/or Con/Dex, even with 36 PB)
- spent 52.5k out of 98k gp on Nightsticks
- used up both domains you have available


These are not trivial resource expenditures. And after all that, you are still vulnerable to a Dispel Magic at any time during your day. So, no, I don't find DMM overpowered. With a normal wealth game, with a more normal PB of 28, no gestalt, etc., you get 1, maybe 2 spells (2 or 4 respectively with Extend). It is not game breaking in any manner.

The main gripe that people have with DMM is that it allows the Cleric to take the place of the Fighter, which I personally do not believe is a valid argument against DMM.

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #291 on: August 19, 2008, 04:34:57 AM »

Um?  Behind a mage by 8 feats?  What?
Yes. 8 Feats. Let's go over feats real quick. You get 1 at first level and 1 at 3rd and every 3 levels (3,6,9,12,15,18). Total? Seven. Seven feats. Now lets take those 7 and get DMM Persist with a cleric. How many feats is that? 3. So now we're down to 4 available feats. Let's take a wizard. What do they get? Same seven plus scribe scroll plus 4 more at level 5 and every 5 levels. Now they're total is what? 7+5=12. 12 is 8 more than 4. Are we on the same page? Good.

You seem to be missing a few feats...

Quote
Medium Armor Prof, Heavy Armor Prof, Shields,
<snip> Proficiencies, may, in your mind, be feats. But technically they aren't. They're proficiencies.

Here's Three of them.  While they may be proficiencies that come with the class, all three will require a wizard to spend feats to pick them up.  Thus, they are feats...and you picked the cleric so you wouldn't have to spend feats to get these proficiencies.

Quote
Domain One Power (= a feat, sometimes IS a feat),

Yes, a feat is a feat. Not all domain powers are feats. But lets say you are in an anything goes game where you can cherry pick domains and you pick one with a bonus feat you need. What's the count? Still up by 7? Okay.
Quote
Domain One Spells (+9 extra, free spec caster?),
Yes, you get more spells. I agree, that is a powerful option. Is it a feat? No.  Is it equal to specialization? Not at all, since you don't get those nice bonuses specialists do.

Actually, I believe you are mistaken.  Does it not take a feat for an arcane caster to get access to a Domain, and then above and beyond for domain spells?  I would also hazard that the simple benefit of getting 9 extra spells castable/day is equal to NINE feats, since extra spell only gives you access to 1...but that's, as you say, a specialization benefit.  Kindly note the cleric gets the equivalent of specialization without having to give up a school of magic...I think we can thus agree that we are talking feat-equivalents, yes?

Quote
Domain Two Power, domain two spells (+9 extras, free double spec???),
Okay, giving you a cherry picked second domain, wizard is still up by 6 feats.
Quote
turn mem spells into Cures (at least equal to a feat)...
Spontaneous casting of cure and/or inflict wounds is a terrible ability. Let's not debate here, because that's not the point, but it's generally accepted that in combat healing (which is when you need spontaneous curing) is subpar. It is better to kill the opponent before he acts again, then to waste an action healing.  You might disagree, and that's fine, we'll drop it here, please.

I'm not disputing that as an action/emergency, but what it does is free up spell slots.  You don't ever have to memorize cures for in OR out of combat healing.  In short, you get to memorize key spells, that you know will be needed, without ever having to actually memorize them.  In or out of combat, it's superflous.  From a Feat standpoint, this is actually equivalent to the Signature Spell feat, Five Times! (Or Spontaneous Cures, the real feat equiv)

Quote
and then you get Turning, which is a scaling benefit by a stat, which forms a fuel point for some very potent feats.
Turning, as I stated, is a weak class feature. At ~CR 8 or above, the turn resistance on undead (who have much higher HD) becomes unreal. Turning, without a disgusting investment of feats and monetary resources is not a viable tactic when you compare it to other viable standard actions that a competent cleric could be doing.
Quote
Looks like the cleric is 2 feats up on the wizard?
Nope. Actually last I checked they're still 6 up. Still with me? Good.

No, I'm actually around the cleric being ahead at this point...way ahead, depending on how you feat-match Spontaneous Curing (lol).


Quote
Clerics don't get less feats then wizards do (and I'm ignoring the BAB, HIt Die and saves, of course)...they get them all UP FRONT.  So, they get nothing for cleric levels...except that they advance clerical casting levels as their class specialty.

And advance turning. So they get to advance spell casting and turning (which I already stated I feel is weak) while wizards get to advance casting and get feats.  It still seems like wizards are ahead.

Well, clerics are ahead on feats and equivs, and I'll agree that the normal effect of turning is quite superfluous except in an undead heavy campaign...or as fuel for divine feats, which means stat dependence is more important then level.
Quote
Ergo, any deviation from cleric levels should result in loss of caster levels, just like with a sorceror.  It should NEVER be an automatic choice for a cleric to PrC.  neverevernever.

It never is an automatic choice to PrC for clerics. I like playing cleric 20. It's fun and a solid choice. It seems like you are saying that any deviation (re: multiclassing) should cause casters a loss of caster level. That's an interesting thought, but not part of my point/argument, so I'll skip over this.

It's more along the lines of "Well, this PrC grants full casting plus ten benefits, but you don't advance your Turning level."   "Gee, thats a tough choice to make for my cleric using his turns to fuel DMM..."

Quote
Clerics are FREAKING STRONG.  Anybody who says wizards gets the stronger class list? Ehhhh.

Like I said, I agree. And it's debatable, sounds like we're still going well. :D This is fun.

I think we're differing on our definitions of feats and equivs, but o well.

Quote
  Clerics know all their spells.  Wizards and sorcs still are restricted.

Sorcs are subpar, that's my opinion. Wizards are not, They can easily get all the spells they'd ever need. And their list, if not stronger, is larger, so yeah, this still has nothing to do with DMM, so let's keep moving.

Quote
  That makes up for any weakness in the list, and proper spell selection takes care of the rest.  Add in the better chassis, two domains, profs...yeah, can't really say a wizard is up on feats over them priesty guys.  Matter of fact, you could probably pull the armor profs out, drop the HD, and they'd still be fairly equal classes.

Actually, I can. And just did. Wizards are still up on feats. Mind you, I mean feats. Not proficiences that come with a class, but something you choose for your character. A choice you get to make. FEATS.

Well, you make the choice to play a character, and those are among the benefits they get.  To replicate those benefits, the wizard would start having to spend feats.  I think that qualifies as feats and feat equivs.  Ignoring the incredible front end loading of the cleric, and the free spec benefits of their domains, because they don't have some extra lines in their class features table over 20 levels seems kind of narrow...

So, we're going to have to agree to disagree on feat counts, because to get what the cleric does, the mage is going to have to spend more bonus feats then he's got.


Quote

making all day buff available at levels where they aren't supposed to be is as bad as making uberbuffs available at lower levels then they are made to be...they break the level/challenge limit of the game, cause a forcible imbalance, and are usually used to immediately take over the shtick of another character...historically, the melee guy, because the cleric either no longer had to spend time buffing to go to melee, or could get such uber buffs the melee was irrelevant.

I disagree. And that's the point of this. Dispel is a what level spell? 3rd? Yes. Third level spell. Meaning Dispel is viable and often a staple long before anything even remotely called an "uberbuff" enters into the equation. Also, just as a matter of opinion, unless the melee guy doesn't exist, my clerics tend to choose group buffs (like mass lesser vigor) to persist. That's one spell I get to persist, which, at low level, is all I get. Like I already showed. Doesn't sound like I'm destroying the challenge limit. Is it possible to? Yes. But who really wants to enter an arms race with their DM? (rhetorical question, by the way).


Ah, well, everytime I bring up dispel to a DMM monkey, I get shouted back at with 'caster level increases are cheap' and 'bead of karma' and Ring of Counterspells and Spellswords, and so on.  I'd have to direct you to JaronK for some of the real abuse you can get with DMM Persist, and all for pretty cheap, too.  I'd also note that giving everyone fast healing/1 all day replicates the effect of a 90K magic item...for each of them.  It also saves you every single slot you might use to cure them, because you never need to heal out of combat.

That's a huge, huge benefit for the party healer.  Well worth the investment!

As for arms race with the DM...don't look at me, I've got more sense then that!  But some people, by how they post, you'd think they think that everything goes in every campaign that's out there, and their DM will permit ANYTHING.  I think my Lockdown build pretty well summed up my attitude on THAT...so generic and easy, any DM should accept it.


Quote

yeah, enforce the metacap.  you get the benefit at the level you are supposed to, no sooner.  If that means you have to find something else useful to do with your Turns in the meantime, then find something else useful.

I disagree. However, I challenge you to defend your point. What other useful thing is there for a turn attempt that doesn't require a massive investment of limited resources? Please explain, I'd like to know.

My first reply would be "Other, more balanced Divine Feats".  Which there are a bunch of.  The problems with borking the metacap and allowing it to persist are just too much not allow it.  Vs. Undead? Mostly you'd need some gold for Turn booster items.  People would rather spend the gold on # of Turns, rather then level therof...the payoff is much, much higher in terms of relative gold/cost/benefit.
I mean, really, there's a divine feat where you blow a Turn Attempt to give your allies some fast healing for a few rounds.  Or, you blow six Turns and give them fast healing all day...which is worth more?  Which is more balanced?


Quote
  The DMM persist CoDzilla is enshrined on CO.

This is actually not true. While I enshrine it, not everyone agrees with me. I've had plenty of debates about it both here and on WotC CO board.

Ahhhhh!?!  REally?  Because every single Uber Cleric build I've ever seen from the fanatics who espouse Codzilla use this combo if they've any choice at all.  JaronK thrives on it, and he's particularly obsessive about squeaking out every advantage he can from a build...(and yeah, I'll admit I don't even like the guy, but eeesh, can he squeak the numbers!)

Quote
  He doesn't work nearly as well with Quicken, and with the metacap barely works at all.

This statement is wrong, Bier. I'm sorry, but it is. I've been shown countless times how DMM works WONDERFULLY with quicken.

I've seen Quicken DM cleric builds.  They have some instantaneous versatility, but in no way do they compare to the all day power of getting up buffs of some of the CoDzilla builds.  Every Cleric Optimizer I've seen would far, far rather have persist then Quicken (heh, 6 level vs 4 level cost should be the key indicator of the value of the feats!), and they devolve to Quicken ONLY if they can't get Persist.  Really, having to Quicken the same spell 2-3 times vs having it on all day?  Spending action outside of combat where you can buff up your caster level, vs having to spend a swift action before combat/after initiative for a temporary benefit at lower casting level?

Quicken is not NEARLY as abusive as Persistent, which is why I say the CoDzilla builds start falling down.  Sure, you can make a nice cleric build!  Never said no.  But a CoDzilla build?  Can't say I've seen one...which means when I say it's not nearly as good, does not mean it's BAD.  It means just that...it's not nearly as Uber.


Well I think that covers it all. :D

Okie dokie.

Das Bier!

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #292 on: August 19, 2008, 04:43:21 AM »
Just to talk about Clerics and Turning for a bit.

First off, Turn Undead by itself is underrated.  By reducing the effective HD of undead before you turn them, you can easily rebuke/turn very potent undead.  Remember, they have to have half your HD (assuming you gain turning at all levels) to do anything really cool.  This is easily done with some gear (Rod of Defiance + Lyre of the Restful Soul = -8 HD to all nearby undead for purposes of turn undead).  Better yet, use a temporary undead control spell, then hand them enough Holy Arrows to reduce their HD to 1 (yes, this works, see the text on negative levels).  Now Rebuke them.  Now remove the arrows.  Rebuking is only checked at the moment you actually do the rebuking (this is never stated directly, but it's strongly implied many times), so now you can have up to your HD in undead controlled via Rebuke Undead, and each one can be as strong as you can find.  That's seriously potent.  Note that for Rebuking, Charisma doesn't matter... you'll probably have plenty of attempts anyway, and no matter what your Charisma is you can always control anything of half your Cleric level in HD.  So go nuts with your brand new Necropolitan Army of Doom.

Second, getting lots of turn attempts is easy.  Want to persist 4 spells?  Nightstick + Reliquary Holy Symbol + Divine Metamagic + Cha 16 is enough for 12 turn attempts.  Cast Eagle's Splendor, and now you temporarily have 14.  Now cast Extended W and X, where W and X are two persistant spells you wanted.  They'll last 48 hours (remember, metamagic is always applied in whatever order you want, so you set them to 24 hours, then extend).  Tomorrow, do the same thing, only cast Extended Y and Z.  Congratulations, that's 4 persistant spells, and it didn't break the bank at all (though you did need a respectable charisma score).  Notice, we didn't have to double up Nightsticks.

And of course you could have used those turn attempts for DMM:Quicken, which is underrated but very potent.  Doesn't fit my style, as I like to cast at the beginning and have long term results, but it's certainly got kick.

JaronK

This is the standard sort of thing you see with CoDzilla builds.  I think the standard 4 spells are Mass Lesser Vigor, divine Favor, Divine Power and Righteous Might, but I'm sure Jaron has a couple better ones.  I believe he'll also invest in a bead of karma and orange ioun stone for the bonus at the time he casts them (leaving out consumptive field or other such stuff) to make it nigh impossible to easily dispel against casters of the same level.  (Inquisitors, unite!).

This is also the kind of thing where we start arguing, as he'll bring up a rule like the one above that breaks your HD control limit, I'll say show where it says it, he'll bring up something which might imply it, I'll disagree, and off we go.  It's how all the tangent flames started.  Heh!

But!  He'll supply you with absolute tons of Persist abuse if you need more examples.

Metacap.  Stick with the metacap, and you can't go wrong.

Das Bier!

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #293 on: August 19, 2008, 04:54:03 AM »
Just to talk about Clerics and Turning for a bit.

First off, Turn Undead by itself is underrated.  By reducing the effective HD of undead before you turn them, you can easily rebuke/turn very potent undead.  Remember, they have to have half your HD (assuming you gain turning at all levels) to do anything really cool.  This is easily done with some gear (Rod of Defiance + Lyre of the Restful Soul = -8 HD to all nearby undead for purposes of turn undead).  Better yet, use a temporary undead control spell, then hand them enough Holy Arrows to reduce their HD to 1 (yes, this works, see the text on negative levels).  Now Rebuke them.  Now remove the arrows.  Rebuking is only checked at the moment you actually do the rebuking (this is never stated directly, but it's strongly implied many times), so now you can have up to your HD in undead controlled via Rebuke Undead, and each one can be as strong as you can find.  That's seriously potent.  Note that for Rebuking, Charisma doesn't matter... you'll probably have plenty of attempts anyway, and no matter what your Charisma is you can always control anything of half your Cleric level in HD.  So go nuts with your brand new Necropolitan Army of Doom.

Second, getting lots of turn attempts is easy.  Want to persist 4 spells?  Nightstick + Reliquary Holy Symbol + Divine Metamagic + Cha 16 is enough for 12 turn attempts.  Cast Eagle's Splendor, and now you temporarily have 14.  Now cast Extended W and X, where W and X are two persistant spells you wanted.  They'll last 48 hours (remember, metamagic is always applied in whatever order you want, so you set them to 24 hours, then extend).  Tomorrow, do the same thing, only cast Extended Y and Z.  Congratulations, that's 4 persistant spells, and it didn't break the bank at all (though you did need a respectable charisma score).  Notice, we didn't have to double up Nightsticks.

And of course you could have used those turn attempts for DMM:Quicken, which is underrated but very potent.  Doesn't fit my style, as I like to cast at the beginning and have long term results, but it's certainly got kick.

JaronK

I somewhat disagree, but I don't want to get sucked into an argument that serves no point.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #294 on: August 19, 2008, 05:25:02 AM »
Not sure which you disagree with.

As to the Turn/Rebuke check time, it's never stated either way (I said as much) but certain feats and rules clearly assume it... the Necromantic Might line, for example, only works if you only check at the time of the Rebuke (otherwise, the +4 turn resistance causes you to lose control of your own undead).  Furthermore, Bolster Undead doesn't work at all if Rebuke Undead is dynamically checked... Bolstering your own undead would cause them to all suddenly go uncontrolled.   Since the rules don't make any sense at all if they're dynamically checking, but do if they're static, the only option that makes sense is static.  Since the rules don't explicitly state it one way or the other, the implication is all we have, but it's a strong implication and nothing in the rules that I've found suggests the other way.  Asking me where it says it directly when I've just stated it doesn't is, well, rather silly.  Rule it as you will in whatever games you play, but be aware that ruling for dynamic creates a whole host of problems, Bolster Undead being the most obvious.

As for beads of kharma and orange Ioun stones...  they're really expensive, so that doesn't show up in my builds until around level 12 (at which point I wouldn't use the spells listed... Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, Recitation and Vigorous Circle would be the obvious spells to use).

JaronK

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #295 on: August 19, 2008, 05:26:30 AM »
You seem to be missing a few feats...
I did the math for you. I'm not. ;)

Quote
Here's Three of them.  While they may be proficiencies that come with the class, all three will require a wizard to spend feats to pick them up.  Thus, they are feats...and you picked the cleric so you wouldn't have to spend feats to get these proficiencies.
You are correct that all three will require a wizard to spend feats to get them, however you are incorrect for a different reason. They are not feats. It's not a debatable issue. They're proficiencies, not feats. Also, you are incorrect in saying that someone picks a cleric based on proficiencies. While not impossible, that is highly unlikely, and I, for one, choose clerics for their spell lists, regardless of their proficiencies.

Quote
Actually, I believe you are mistaken.  Does it not take a feat for an arcane caster to get access to a Domain, and then above and beyond for domain spells?
Yes, it does take one feat for an arcane caster to get access to a domain, but no it does not take above and beyond for domain spells. When they take that feat they get the domain power and access to the domain spells.

Quote
I would also hazard that the simple benefit of getting 9 extra spells castable/day is equal to NINE feats, since extra spell only gives you access to 1...but that's, as you say, a specialization benefit.  Kindly note the cleric gets the equivalent of specialization without having to give up a school of magic...I think we can thus agree that we are talking feat-equivalents, yes?
No. The cleric does not, as I pointed out, get the extra bonuses of specialization that a wizard gets. And once again, No. We are talking feats. Cold, hard feats. Not feat-equivalents. I have stated the range of our discussion, please stick to it. :D

Quote
I'm not disputing that as an action/emergency, but what it does is free up spell slots.  You don't ever have to memorize cures for in OR out of combat healing.  In short, you get to memorize key spells, that you know will be needed, without ever having to actually memorize them.  In or out of combat, it's superflous.  From a Feat standpoint, this is actually equivalent to the Signature Spell feat, Five Times! (Or Spontaneous Cures, the real feat equiv)
Actually, while this is somewhat valid, it depends on our framework. I am not assuming core only. Once we add in Spell Compendium, this becomes irrelevant. Vigor spells replace cure spells and cannot be cast spontaneously. So using that framework, which I apologize for not specifying before, spontaneous curing is sub-par. It's not feat-equivalent, but again, as we're talking feats only, it's not a valid point either way.

Quote
No, I'm actually around the cleric being ahead at this point...way ahead, depending on how you feat-match Spontaneous Curing (lol).
Care to show me your math?  I mean, honestly, lay it out in simpleton terms for me here. I did the math and showed 8 more feats starting. I'll give you Domain powers 2xs. That's 6 up still. I can even give you specialization as a feat, even twice. That's 4 up. Even if I gave you spontaneous curing, that's 3 up. Even with proficiencies we're only breaking even. Mind you the last 6 aren't feats, so we're throwing them back out. Wizard is up by 6 feats. Please, if you can lay out the math with feats not feat-equivalents, I'm all ears.

Quote
Well, clerics are ahead on feats and equivs, and I'll agree that the normal effect of turning is quite superfluous except in an undead heavy campaign...or as fuel for divine feats, which means stat dependence is more important then level.
So you're agreeing that turning is useless in your average game without a heavy investment? Awesome. I'm glad we agree on something :D

Quote
It's more along the lines of "Well, this PrC grants full casting plus ten benefits, but you don't advance your Turning level."   "Gee, thats a tough choice to make for my cleric using his turns to fuel DMM..."
I see your point, and I'm not going to refute it, as this discussion is about DMM breaking the level cap, not about PrCs.

Quote
I think we're differing on our definitions of feats and equivs, but o well.
I agree. Under your 'feat-equivalent' system they're just beginning to break even, but going on feats alone, they're behind. (This is already assuming in both cases that a cleric takes DMM Persist.)  Thankfully, I've (at least I hope) clarified that I'm talking in choosable feats only. So let's work in that framework.

Quote
Well, you make the choice to play a character, and those are among the benefits they get.  To replicate those benefits, the wizard would start having to spend feats.  I think that qualifies as feats and feat equivs.  Ignoring the incredible front end loading of the cleric, and the free spec benefits of their domains, because they don't have some extra lines in their class features table over 20 levels seems kind of narrow...

So, we're going to have to agree to disagree on feat counts, because to get what the cleric does, the mage is going to have to spend more bonus feats then he's got.
I think we got separated here, Bier. I'm not saying let's make the cleric = wizard. That would be a bad idea, in my opinion, and clearly (at least in my mind) goes against the ideal that schticks should not be intruded on. You seem to be a big proponent of that (I hope I'm not mistaken in that statement). I don't want to make them equal, and I agree that the front loading is not necessarily the best way to handle it.  However, I am stating that the investment a cleric makes to use DMM is a hefty one, especially considering the number of extra choices other classes gain. When a character makes that hefty of an investment, there should be some reward for it. Breaking the metamagic limit is that reward and truly does not throw things out of balance.

Quote
Ah, well, everytime I bring up dispel to a DMM monkey, I get shouted back at with 'caster level increases are cheap' and 'bead of karma' and Ring of Counterspells and Spellswords, and so on.  I'd have to direct you to JaronK for some of the real abuse you can get with DMM Persist, and all for pretty cheap, too.  I'd also note that giving everyone fast healing/1 all day replicates the effect of a 90K magic item...for each of them.  It also saves you every single slot you might use to cure them, because you never need to heal out of combat.
No need to direct me to others, I know well how to increase CL, just as well I know that decent mages have those same increases and, since CR works the way it does, it is much easier for enemies to be able to dispel better than a cleric can increase his CL, at least in my experience that has been the case. Your miles might vary. Yes, fast healing 1 is powerful. Is it game breaking? Hardly. Yes, it saves a cleric from wasting other spells on healing, but, honestly, what other class would have to waste precious daily resources to keep people that aren't him at full health? Again, healing from a cleric is subpar in my opinion, but that's neither here nor there, so let's drop it.

Quote
My first reply would be "Other, more balanced Divine Feats".  Which there are a bunch of.  The problems with borking the metacap and allowing it to persist are just too much not allow it.  Vs. Undead? Mostly you'd need some gold for Turn booster items.  People would rather spend the gold on # of Turns, rather then level therof...the payoff is much, much higher in terms of relative gold/cost/benefit.
I mean, really, there's a divine feat where you blow a Turn Attempt to give your allies some fast healing for a few rounds.  Or, you blow six Turns and give them fast healing all day...which is worth more?  Which is more balanced?
Honestly, you haven't defended your point. Well, not completely. I'll give you that feat to grant fast healing. And you know what, the problem with that feat is that it doesn't scale well. At low levels it's too good, at high levels it's terrible.  But it is a valid point. So one feat alternative. Anything else? There, unfortunately, aren't all that many "more balanced Divine Feats."  The ones that I can think of actually make the cleric intrude further into the melee roll, which I think we want to avoid, right? So once again, prove me wrong, cite stone cold examples, please. :D

Quote
Ahhhhh!?!  REally?  Because every single Uber Cleric build I've ever seen from the fanatics who espouse Codzilla use this combo if they've any choice at all.  JaronK thrives on it, and he's particularly obsessive about squeaking out every advantage he can from a build...(and yeah, I'll admit I don't even like the guy, but eeesh, can he squeak the numbers!)
Wow. Seriously? Please stop mentioning JaronK. We're having a discussion between you and I here. Let's keep it simple. I've seen what he can do and some of it is impressive, others not so much.  I humbly request you not mention other people, because, basically, anything from someone else at this point is hearsay, which isn't fact. Let's stick to the facts. :D  As to answer your question, though, yes. Really. I had an Uber Cleric over on the old WotC boards that dueled a gatling gun-style archer and won using only DMM Quicken. Persist is arguably better, but not the only option, and certainly not the most commonly viewed to be superior.

Quote
I've seen Quicken DM cleric builds.  They have some instantaneous versatility, but in no way do they compare to the all day power of getting up buffs of some of the CoDzilla builds.  Every Cleric Optimizer I've seen would far, far rather have persist then Quicken (heh, 6 level vs 4 level cost should be the key indicator of the value of the feats!), and they devolve to Quicken ONLY if they can't get Persist.  Really, having to Quicken the same spell 2-3 times vs having it on all day?  Spending action outside of combat where you can buff up your caster level, vs having to spend a swift action before combat/after initiative for a temporary benefit at lower casting level?

Quicken is not NEARLY as abusive as Persistent, which is why I say the CoDzilla builds start falling down.  Sure, you can make a nice cleric build!  Never said no.  But a CoDzilla build?  Can't say I've seen one...which means when I say it's not nearly as good, does not mean it's BAD.  It means just that...it's not nearly as Uber.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, and while that may have been all you've seen, I can assure you it is not the case. As I stated above, I've build a perfectly viable 'Uber Cleric' with DMM Quicken.  I've actually seen a rash, recently, or people who state they prefer quicken to persist. It's really all subjective.
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #296 on: August 19, 2008, 10:26:57 AM »
If you try to apply the metacap, you just get yet another garbage feat tree as it isn't worth devoting nearly half your character resources just to get at most 4 low level spells on all day.

Again, DMM in any form is fine since barring Nightstick abuse you are greatly limited in the number of spells you can apply and really, you're only getting 4 if you can use Extend to stagger 48 hour buffs 2/day. Give Nightsticks a 24 hour attunement, and say they grant the Turn Undead feat which does not stack with itself. Then you can have 1 Nightstick to save you a feat, and that's it.

Next point! Let's discuss all the garbage in the books that is advocated as feats but no sane person would ever regard as such, much less take them.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 10:34:21 AM by Sunic_Flames »
Smiting Imbeciles since 1985.

If you hear this music, run.

And don't forget:


There is no greater contribution than Hi Welcome.

Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.

IP proofing and avoiding being CAPed OR - how to make characters relevant in the long term.

Friends don't let friends be Short Bus Hobos.

[spoiler]
Sunic may be more abrasive than sandpaper coated in chainsaws (not that its a bad thing, he really does know what he's talking about), but just posting in this thread without warning and telling him he's an asshole which, if you knew his past experiences on WotC and Paizo is flat-out uncalled for. Never mind the insults (which are clearly 4Chan-level childish). You say people like Sunic are the bane of the internet? Try looking at your own post and telling me you are better than him.

Here's a fun fact: You aren't. By a few leagues.
[/spoiler]

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #297 on: August 19, 2008, 10:54:19 AM »
Quote
How well does it fit balance-wise.

Its far more balanced than casting, yet it still throw melee in the mud pool.
That's the impression I got.

Quote
Are there any powers that really need to be pulled back?

Afinity field, Bestow Power, the equivalent to Shapechange (whatever its called), True Mind Switch.
I'll take a closer look at those.  Thanks for pointing them out.

Quote
I know the psion is listed at tier 2 by JaronK.  What would pull it back?  Fixing a few powers?

The system is solid. To put it back, tweak the powers.
That was what I figured would work.  Similar to casters, the chasis of the class isn't impressive (well, other than the druid), but it's the individual spells that give them all the power.

Quote
Is the soulknife worth fixing?  I know BlainTog made a popular fix several years back.

Soulknife, as bad as it seems, should be a feat tree IMO.
I've thought of that.  I also wonder how it would fare to make it a simple level 1 Psychic Warrior power, similar to Claws of the Beast.  With augments, it could do more damage.  A few feats to be able to throw, split, or do other tricks with the mind blade could make it work very well.  I'll put a bit of thought into it and see if I can post something later.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #298 on: August 19, 2008, 01:47:26 PM »
They did do exacly that its called the soul-bound weapon feature and its one of my favorite things they ever did for the game.
Gimme a sec, I'll post the link...


Another link I'll post on rebuking. Rebuking doesnt' work as we think it does and etc Link

Oh and....
Quote
Fighter

As for the fighter, my favorite quick fix I've seen so far was Midnight_V's where you fill in the nine dead levels with a maneuver each, and give the fighter full initiator level.  Another option I've thought of is adding the Weapon Aptitude ability, to allow him to switch weapon-specific feats with some quick training.  If that seems to be too much, another option is to remove the bonus feat at 1st level, and force it to be Weapon Focus.  Of course, that makes Fighter 1 a lot less dip-tastic (both good and bad I suppose).
 
Thanks alot Robbypants! but 2 things....
1st. Thats really bad.  Really really bad. Wepon focus? I build many fighters I never use the supremacy tree hell many people think fighters should get that for free. Swordsages actually get W.focus for free. Along with manuevers and stances. So basically thats a net loss for fighters,  Fighters should remain dipable, dipping is valid and many people take a level of fighter or 2 is fine but if we give them manuevers at 3 and your fighter level gets full initiator? Well people will dip till 3, and then "well... i could use one more feat"
... its a trap. I knew it when I posted that. "Spash enough of a color and your playing that color" -MtG players.
2nd. I said 2 manuevers on the off levels. Thats because the fighter has no recovery mechanic.
the important part is that he gets to choose manuevers from any school he wants to be a part of.
Alternitavely he could gain all non-stance manuevers in whatever school he chooses at each odd level starting at 3.
He's behind in progression and lacks a recovery mechanic but still has his Stunts (We miss you Szatanty!!!) So he's really balanced and he reflects versatility still.
  Either way he any individual fighter should be able to individualize himself so again, the important part is that he gets to choose manuevers from any school he wants to be a part of.
 
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 02:05:23 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #299 on: August 19, 2008, 02:01:35 PM »
The link... Expanded Psiwar to replace the soulknife IMHO
The stuff...

Soulbound Weapon

You can summon a specific weapon to your hand that is bound to your very soul.
Level: 1st and 2nd.
Replaces: You lose your 2nd-level bonus feat.
Benefit: You must choose a soulbound weapon at 1st level and you gain the Weapon Focus feat with this weapon. Also, the first power you learn must be call weaponry. You can summon your chosen soulbound weapon to your hand using call weaponry.

At 2nd level, you gain the soulbound weaponclass ability, and the weapon you summon using call weaponry is of the same type as you chose at 1st level. Its physical appearance slowly changes, growing in power as you do. You must manifest the power call weaponry to obtain your soulbound weapon; you retain the weapon for the duration of the power. You may still use the call weaponry power as normal if you wish. This is a specific weapon every time you summon it, and it automatically gains a weapon enhancement at the following levels:

4th +1 weapon
8th +2 weapon
12th +3 weapon
16th +4 weapon
20th +5 weapon

Also, add the following augmentation to your call weaponry power:

Augmentation: When you manifest your soulbound weapon, for each additional 5 power points you spend, you may add a weapon enhancement of +1 value to the weapon. For example, if you spend an additional 10 power points, you could add two +1 weapon enhancements or a single +2 weapon enhancement
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"