Author Topic: Balancing 3.5  (Read 188274 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #500 on: August 22, 2008, 06:37:47 PM »
 :clap

Thank you gentlemen.
thats 3.

Malconvoker, Dread witch, and Palemaster. I'm sure there are more but thats just off hand.
All of which lose a caster level all of which are worth it without being broken.

Excellent argument Jaronk.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 06:41:55 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #501 on: August 22, 2008, 06:44:43 PM »
Ok. Now how many lose a single CL and either are broken, or don't have anything to make them worth the loss?
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]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #502 on: August 22, 2008, 06:52:14 PM »
Tons.  But, that's true whether you miss one or you don't.  Most PrCs should have been released in the book "Complete Rubbish" and the broken ones are broken if you miss a level at level 1 or not, so I don't think it relates.  I mean really Shining Blade of Heironeous would have been lame even if it got 4 more levels of casting progression, for example.

JaronK

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #503 on: August 22, 2008, 06:57:46 PM »
Tons.  But, that's true whether you miss one or you don't.  Most PrCs should have been released in the book "Complete Rubbish" and the broken ones are broken if you miss a level at level 1 or not, so I don't think it relates.  I mean really Shining Blade of Heironeous would have been lame even if it got 4 more levels of casting progression, for example.

JaronK
Exactly, and that why were here isn't it. Balancing takes into account things like this. I mean they didn't consider how much some prcs suck ... because they didn't playtest so some of it is indeed just trash. Thats not to say that the concept of Prc's suck, just because they make you lose CL. It just has to be something worth while. . .
Further there are examples of Prcs that actually do just that. . .
 
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 07:00:57 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #504 on: August 22, 2008, 06:58:48 PM »
My point was to illuminate whether it was just dumb luck, or a reproducible outcome.
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]

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #505 on: August 22, 2008, 07:01:14 PM »
Quote
In order to do better than a level of spell progression you need to receive something broken in return, because nothing balanced is better than a spell level.  Which means the 'all PrCs lose a spell level' is a broken metric for making PrCs - either they're useless and never taken or broken (which we're trying to avoid).  You'd have to redo the entire casting mechanic to fix this problem.  Its inherent to the way Vancian casting works.

Lets try a different tactic - propose a PrC that would be worth losing a CL for which wasn't broken.

I disagree, and point to the relationship between Dread Necromancers and Pale Masters as proof.  Dread Necromancer 20 vs Dread Necromancer 10/Palemaster 10 vs Dread Necromancer 18/Palemaster 2 is a hard decision to make.  PM loses a caster level at level 1, but gives you component free Animate Dead at level 2, which is extremely useful for a necromancer who has as many undead available as a DN.  It also gives you some characterful abilities that are a lot of fun (punch someone so hard they die and raise again as a zombie).  But none of those options are broken... it just depends, flavor wise, on what you really want to do.    I think it's totally balanceable.  And that's actually how it is right now.

I've actually never seen a DN in play.  Seriously.  By the time it was out my group was already tinkering with the rules so much we didn't want to deal with new probably poorly balanced base classes.  And for the sake of argument I'm not going to go review it in great detail now, so I'll conceed that one, but its a somewhat empty concession.  I'm guessing the DN 9th level spell list must really suck (I suppose I could go check).

Quote
And for an easy fix, all PrCs fail to advance casting at level 1.  If they already didn't advance at some level (but did at level 1), they now gain casting at the first level after level 1 where they wouldn't have had it (so, for example, Mindbender would advance at 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 instead of the current 1, 3, 5, 7, 9).  Classes that would advance at all levels now advance on 2+.  Of course, this does nerf the Mystic Theurge, which is a crying shame.  Not sure what to do about that other than say "go play an Archivist."  Still, this means PrCs for casters are far less of a no brainer, including on Sorcerers that otherwise would always PrC out without question.  It also slows down the crazy dip classes like Mindbender.  Mindbender would still be worthwhile... 100ft telepathy and ability to use Mindsight is awesome for a Beguiler.  Is it worth losing a caster level?  Well, that depends if you wanted to be a stealth/scouting Beguiler or something else.  So, it's now a character flavor decision instead of a raw power decision.  Give up your general ability for a great specific ability.  Isn't that what PrCs should be?

Mindbender's problem is not that its a good PrC.  Its an awful PrC.  But its an amazing 1-level dip.  The fix is to rebuild the entire PrC with abilities a caster might actually care about, and move telepathy to 5th level - which may well be the capstone ability (5-level PrC).  If it lost a CL on top of that it would be crap.

I think you'll find most PrCs are underpowered if you do this.  Seriously underpowered.

Consider this, you are delaying every future spell level by one level.  You are losing out on about 4 new spells/day *right now*.  You are decreasing the effectiveness of all your spells *right now*.  And you expect some class feature to be worth that?

-----------------

Suggestion: Maybe we should separate Caster Level from Spell Progression.  I'm actually a big fan of defining CL = character level.  This makes multiclassing work, at least somewhat, for caster/non-caster base class pairs.

(Also, every instance of 'class level' redefined as character level or character level/2 as appropriate).

--------------

Re: Dread Witch
Ok, here's an ability by ability analysis, cause I actually own that book and its only a 5-level PrC.

Qualifying: Will +4, 3 ranks Kno(Arc), Cause Fear, Scare: Entry as a 4th level wizard or sorceror, probably sorceror..
Must have failed a save against a fear effect: What the fuck is this - hey cleric, cast a fear spell on me so I can qualify!  

Favored will, crappy BAB, par for the course.
Spellcasting: 4/5

Master of Terror: +2 intimidate, whatever, you're a wizard, that means absolutely nothing...
...+1 DC fear spells.  So, if you blow two feats on SF:Necro you can get +3 to save DCs for a very small number of spells with generally unexciting effects - wouldn't you rather be casting Glitterdust?...
...and +bane +doom to 2nd level spell list.  Those two spells are marginally useful...  Except you don't *know* them, you just add them to your spell list.  Ie, mildly inconvenient if you're a wizard, never used if you're a sorceror (and I'm having a hard time convincing myself the wizard bothers to learn them).

Unnatural Will: Cha to fear saves... lets just ignore the fact that *Protection from X* makes you totally immune to fear effects because they're mind-effecting why don't we... :eh

Absorb Fear: So, if you're lucky enough to get something to use a fear effect on you, you get bonus caster levels.  Sorry, correction, you get your party mate to cast a fear effect on you (to which you're immune because of Prot from X), and always get +3 CLs... Um... broken?  Can you say Blasphemy abuse?

Fearful Empowerment: Hey, you actually get to use that +fear DC ability on something... But 1/day (-> 2/day at 5th level), seriously?  Ugg... I hate that mechanic.  Almost cool.  This PrC might actually be good if it made all your spells have the fear descriptor (or all spells with a "visible manifestation").

Delay Fear: Why god why?

Greater Master of Terror: Another +1 Fear saves... ho hum.  And effect creatures normally immune to fear.  Hey, that's almost cool, if fear did anything you even remotely care about at mid-high levels...

Horrific Aura: Seriously, effects creatures of 6 or fewer HD?  DC 10 + 5 (Class level) + cha mod?  Crap.

Reflective Fear: Useless.  You never make saves vs. fear - you're immune.  Even when you do get to use it - Will is favored for virtually everything that causes a fear effect.  You also don't get to use your +2 DC for fear stuff on this, because its not your effect.

 :eh  I don't understand why it lost the caster level.  Except for the CL shenanigans part, that leads to crazy town with spells as they are at present.  Seriously: You, a wizard cohort, and an Ioun Stone get to Blasphemy stun-lock everything not immune starting at 13th level.  Congratulations, you broke D+D.  Of course, you were already chain-binding efreeti before that, and so forth... and lets not talk about the artificer...

I'm sure there's some utterly amazing Fear spell in some splatbook that I'm overlooking.  Its probably too good anyway, so we're going to nerf it or delete it from existence.  And that makes me care about this PrC even less.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #506 on: August 22, 2008, 07:05:47 PM »
My point was to illuminate whether it was just dumb luck, or a reproducible outcome.
Ahh... I see.
Well, Both,
 It is a reproducible outcome, however when they did it, it was dumb luck or a case of a very few designers actually having sytem master, I mean actually sitting down playing the game and analyzing the results.
I ... I don't think they do what we've done so there are many problems we've discovered. Many, many of which we've found soulutions for. Doing so, without altering any major structure of the game for the most part.

edit: SQL STOP NINJAING ME!!! LOL
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #507 on: August 22, 2008, 07:10:55 PM »
Sigh, Palemaster is worth the CL loss for one specific caster at best.  No wizard is going to take it and be happy.  And hell no for a sorceror.

Ok, where's this Malconvoker...?

Edit: Have we noted yet that the premise behind DN/PM is bad for game balance?  Seriously - army of undead makes every non-caster completely replaceable.  This isn't really PM being overpowered, this is just DN not being balanced for a balance point that makes non-casters not suck.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 07:18:48 PM by Squirrelloid »
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #508 on: August 22, 2008, 07:11:32 PM »
Complete Scoundrel I think.
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]

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #509 on: August 22, 2008, 07:17:15 PM »
Complete Scoundrel I think.

Last book I bought seems to be Complete Mage, so I won't be able to look at that one.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #510 on: August 22, 2008, 07:31:49 PM »
I think all 5 level Prc's are for a specific purpose this one is probbably a PRC made for sorcerors. Despite your scathing analysis its a useful prc its leads to builds like this.

Quote
Quote
And effect creatures normally immune to fear.  Hey, that's almost cool, if fear did anything you even remotely care about at mid-high levels...
Seriously You're supposed to make things cower, which is in essence: dead. Further affecting, things with the immune to mind altering status with fear is great because the tend to have no lower will save than anything else.
.... you know what though. . .

Based on what your analysis you could easily make it worth it, and not broken.
So make the changes you suggested. You then have a working class and thats the point. You start making sweeping changes to prc, without even considering that, while some of the concepts are better than others
the system isn't what's broken. Its a lack of effort that makes wildly disproportionate prcs.

 
Quote
Blasphemy abuse?

Seriously, blasphemy is what's broken not that PRC. The whole blasphemy juggle game is bullshit, and was so from the jump. So I think thats a non viable argument as if we get to parsing down spells we should probbbly have "The WORD" on that list.
...
Quote
Palemaster is worth the CL loss for one specific caster at best.
*Slow Exhale...*Which is why Prc's exist right? Specific things instead of general things.
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #511 on: August 22, 2008, 07:46:50 PM »
I think all 5 level Prc's are for a specific purpose this one is probbably a PRC made for sorcerors. Despite your scathing analysis its a useful prc its leads to builds like this.

Quote
Quote
And effect creatures normally immune to fear.  Hey, that's almost cool, if fear did anything you even remotely care about at mid-high levels...
Seriously You're supposed to make things cower, which is in essence: dead. Further affecting, things with the immune to mind altering status with fear is great because the tend to have no lower will save than anything else.

Yes yes, release enough splatbooks and everything becomes good.  Ok, except fighters.  They can't have nice things.  So it was another PrC instead of an uber spell I was missing out of a splatbook.

Quote
.... you know what though. . .

Based on what your analysis you could easily make it worth it, and not broken.
So make the changes you suggested. You then have a working class and thats the point. You start making sweeping changes to prc, without even considering that, while some of the concepts are better than others
the system isn't what's broken. Its a lack of effort that makes wildly disproportionate prcs.

Oh, I agree I could probably make a version I think would rate as a PrC.  I'm not convinced it should lose a CL though.

Really, we need to know what the spell lists look like before we can seriously deal with PrCs, because a spell level could be hugely powerful or not nearly so exciting depending on what kinds of spells you have to look forward to.  And that's a problem.  Currently the scale is exponential by spell quality with a geometric multiplier via caster level, which means nothing is worth delaying spell-advancement.  If it approaches linear or possibly pure geometric we can start talking.

Quote
Quote
Blasphemy abuse?

Seriously, blasphemy is what's broken not that PRC. The whole blasphemy juggle game is bullshit, and was so from the jump. So I think thats a non viable argument as if we get to parsing down spells we should probbbly have "The WORD" on that list.

Can't agree more.  Lets start with the spell list then, shall we?  Otherwise we have no idea what abilities are going to combo into.

Quote
Quote
Palemaster is worth the CL loss for one specific caster at best.
*Slow Exhale...*Which is why Prc's exist right? Specific things instead of general things.

I think I edit-ninjaed you, let me copy my edit:

"Edit: Have we noted yet that the premise behind DN/PM is bad for game balance?  Seriously - army of undead makes every non-caster completely replaceable.  This isn't really PM being overpowered, this is just DN not being balanced for a balance point that makes non-casters not suck."
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #512 on: August 22, 2008, 07:56:37 PM »
Some general suggestions:

(1) Caster Level = character level.  As does manifester level, ToB-whatever-you-call-it-level, and so forth.  This determines level dependent effects of the powers, not the rate that you gain access to them (Spell progression, power point acquisition, etc... are separate).  Xth level characters should do things like other Xth level characters.  More spell progression means you have more awesome spells, not necessarily that you're better at casting the ones your buddy bob also knows.  (Better at casting would generally be higher casting stat = better DCs).

Fixes: Removes geometric multiplier from the goodness of spell progression, because everyone's spell-use (assuming they have any) improves.
Fixes: Gishes aren't easy-dispel bait.

(2) All DCs are 10 + 1/2 character level + stat mod.  No more crazy-ass class specific formulae that only work for the duration of the PrC.  No more needing to remember five different formulae to calculate all your save DCs.  One formula, just need to note the proper attribute.

Also, keeps save DCs more constant across levels from all abilities.

Thoughts?
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #513 on: August 22, 2008, 08:24:03 PM »
Some general suggestions:

(1) Caster Level = character level.  As does manifester level, ToB-whatever-you-call-it-level, and so forth.  This determines level dependent effects of the powers, not the rate that you gain access to them (Spell progression, power point acquisition, etc... are separate).  Xth level characters should do things like other Xth level characters.  More spell progression means you have more awesome spells, not necessarily that you're better at casting the ones your buddy bob also knows.  (Better at casting would generally be higher casting stat = better DCs).

Fixes: Removes geometric multiplier from the goodness of spell progression, because everyone's spell-use (assuming they have any) improves.
Fixes: Gishes aren't easy-dispel bait.

(2) All DCs are 10 + 1/2 character level + stat mod.  No more crazy-ass class specific formulae that only work for the duration of the PrC.  No more needing to remember five different formulae to calculate all your save DCs.  One formula, just need to note the proper attribute.

Also, keeps save DCs more constant across levels from all abilities.

Thoughts?

I'd go caster = 1/2 level, just as BAB = 1/2 progression for arcane casters.  Fighters and Barbs should have suck for caster level.  But at least something will stack as they go forwards.

Getting rid of spell DC's by level would take it back towards 1and 2E, where spells were spells.  However, instead of making it easier to save against spells, it would simply elevate the saves on a uniform level.  Sleep from an Archmage/20 is as viable as finger of death?  Not sure how to address that...it sounds okay, low level slots will again be useful...it will reduce the importance of high level spells if low level ones always have kick to em, which makes having access to them less important.

I'd like to throw another bone into the ring...no more progressing accelerated spell progression classes with other classes.  Leads to way too much rampant abuse.  Sublime Chord, Ur Priest, I'm looking at  you.  If you want that spell progression, you stick with that class.  Otherwise, it simply doesn't progress, too bad, so sad.  Make your choice and live with it!

---
I agree that the best way to address PrC balance is to simply have class features and have the PrC replace them, perhaps with a capstone that would offset an early 'cost' (and a real one!) to get into the class.  Otherwise, I have to say, just give the basic casters a few more feats by level, and make the PrC's feat trees.  They swap in and out evenly, and nobody will really be able to point imbalance if I choose to spend my feats on a feat tree.  Just name the feat tree after the PrC and you're golden...that's basically what they do in 4E and Modern.

Expectancy of PrC'ing can be built into the model, but shouldn't be if the Core Classes are good and flexible enough.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #514 on: August 22, 2008, 08:30:46 PM »
Some general suggestions:

(1) Caster Level = character level.  As does manifester level, ToB-whatever-you-call-it-level, and so forth.  This determines level dependent effects of the powers, not the rate that you gain access to them (Spell progression, power point acquisition, etc... are separate).  Xth level characters should do things like other Xth level characters.  More spell progression means you have more awesome spells, not necessarily that you're better at casting the ones your buddy bob also knows.  (Better at casting would generally be higher casting stat = better DCs).

Fixes: Removes geometric multiplier from the goodness of spell progression, because everyone's spell-use (assuming they have any) improves.
Fixes: Gishes aren't easy-dispel bait.

(2) All DCs are 10 + 1/2 character level + stat mod.  No more crazy-ass class specific formulae that only work for the duration of the PrC.  No more needing to remember five different formulae to calculate all your save DCs.  One formula, just need to note the proper attribute.

Also, keeps save DCs more constant across levels from all abilities.

Thoughts?

I'd go caster = 1/2 level, just as BAB = 1/2 progression for arcane casters.  Fighters and Barbs should have suck for caster level.  But at least something will stack as they go forwards.

Except this utterly fails to make gishing viable.  Honestly, I wouldn't object to everyone getting full BAB, but then we have to give melee characters something.

BAB = spell progression in terms of its current role in class abilities.  Caster Level shouldn't be hamstrung because gishing already hamstrings you by denying higher level spells.  Double-penalizing gish builds is bad game design if you want classes to be modularly combinable (which 3e seems to vaguely want).

Quote
Getting rid of spell DC's by level would take it back towards 1and 2E, where spells were spells.  However, instead of making it easier to save against spells, it would simply elevate the saves on a uniform level.  Sleep from an Archmage/20 is as viable as finger of death?  Not sure how to address that...it sounds okay, low level slots will again be useful...it will reduce the importance of high level spells if low level ones always have kick to em, which makes having access to them less important.

I don't think Sleep is going to survive the spell lobotomy.  But yes, it makes spell progression ultimately less important except for endurance and improvements in effects and AoE and things like that.  Ie, easier to balance things against spell progression. 

This also makes things like MT losing a caster level more palatable, if we want to nail MT's casting progression.

Quote
I'd like to throw another bone into the ring...no more progressing accelerated spell progression classes with other classes.  Leads to way too much rampant abuse.  Sublime Chord, Ur Priest, I'm looking at  you.  If you want that spell progression, you stick with that class.  Otherwise, it simply doesn't progress, too bad, so sad.  Make your choice and live with it!

How about "no accelerated spell progression, period."  Seriously.  Its a broken mechanic that needs to die.  And the above fixes remove any real need for having such PrCs, if you could say there was a need at all.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 08:35:00 PM by Squirrelloid »
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Prime32

  • Administrator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 7534
  • Modding since 03/12/10
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #515 on: August 22, 2008, 08:33:08 PM »
I'd go caster = 1/2 level, just as BAB = 1/2 progression for arcane casters.  Fighters and Barbs should have suck for caster level.  But at least something will stack as they go forwards.
You mean a wizard 10/fighter 10 would have a caster level of 15?

I believe this is what the Magic Rating variant is for.
My work
The tier system in a nutshell:
[spoiler]Tier 6: A cartographer.
Tier 5: An expert cartographer or a decent marksman.
Tier 4: An expert marksman.
Tier 3: An expert marksman, cartographer and chef who can tie strong knots and is trained in hostage negotiation or a marksman so good he can shoot down every bullet fired by a minigun while armed with a rusted single-shot pistol that veers to the left.
Tier 2: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything, or the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.
Tier 1: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything and the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.[/spoiler]

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #516 on: August 22, 2008, 08:35:24 PM »
Hey Robby, I know you wanted some comment on changes to yoru classes, but I'm not an expert on the Hexblade, and I'm good with changes on the Paladin and whatnot.

In the interest of cutting down on the number of classes presented, any thought on just making Duskblades and Hexers the same class chassis , but with access to slightly different powers and spell lists?  One follows the road of magic, the other of curses...

Just a thought.

Das Bier!

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #517 on: August 22, 2008, 08:39:58 PM »
Some general suggestions:

(1) Caster Level = character level.  As does manifester level, ToB-whatever-you-call-it-level, and so forth.  This determines level dependent effects of the powers, not the rate that you gain access to them (Spell progression, power point acquisition, etc... are separate).  Xth level characters should do things like other Xth level characters.  More spell progression means you have more awesome spells, not necessarily that you're better at casting the ones your buddy bob also knows.  (Better at casting would generally be higher casting stat = better DCs).

Fixes: Removes geometric multiplier from the goodness of spell progression, because everyone's spell-use (assuming they have any) improves.
Fixes: Gishes aren't easy-dispel bait.

(2) All DCs are 10 + 1/2 character level + stat mod.  No more crazy-ass class specific formulae that only work for the duration of the PrC.  No more needing to remember five different formulae to calculate all your save DCs.  One formula, just need to note the proper attribute.

Also, keeps save DCs more constant across levels from all abilities.

Thoughts?

I'd go caster = 1/2 level, just as BAB = 1/2 progression for arcane casters.  Fighters and Barbs should have suck for caster level.  But at least something will stack as they go forwards.

Except this utterly fails to make gishing viable.  Honestly, I wouldn't object to everyone getting full BAB, but then we have to give melee characters something.

BAB = spell progression in terms of its current role in class abilities.  Caster Level shouldn't be hamstrung because gishing already hamstrings you by denying higher level spells.  Double-penalizing gish builds is bad game design if you want classes to be modularly combinable (which 3e seems to vaguely want).

Quote
Getting rid of spell DC's by level would take it back towards 1and 2E, where spells were spells.  However, instead of making it easier to save against spells, it would simply elevate the saves on a uniform level.  Sleep from an Archmage/20 is as viable as finger of death?  Not sure how to address that...it sounds okay, low level slots will again be useful...it will reduce the importance of high level spells if low level ones always have kick to em, which makes having access to them less important.

I don't think Sleep is going to survive the spell lobotomy.  But yes, it makes spell progression ultimately less important except for endurance and improvements in effects and AoE and things like that.  Ie, easier to balance things against spell progression. 

This also makes things like MT losing a caster level more palatable, if we want to nail MT's casting progression.

Quote
I'd like to throw another bone into the ring...no more progressing accelerated spell progression classes with other classes.  Leads to way too much rampant abuse.  Sublime Chord, Ur Priest, I'm looking at  you.  If you want that spell progression, you stick with that class.  Otherwise, it simply doesn't progress, too bad, so sad.  Make your choice and live with it!

How about "no accelerated spell progression, period."  Seriously.  Its a broken mechanic that needs to die.  And the above fixes remove any real need for having such PrCs, if you could say there was a need at all.
1) Well, that is what Practiced Spellcaster/Manifester is for.  Splitting your attention among diametically opposed disciplines should have some cost, right?  I see your point...I just don't agree with it.  The power a gish build brings to melee with just lower level buffs and spells really outweighs the idea that they even NEED high level slots or casting ability.

2) I think a standardized DC for spells, ignoring spell level, might indeed be a good thing.  IT really would make low level spells more useful.

The point of the Mystic Theurge would absolutely explode in power because of all those spell slots, low level and otherwise, now having the exact same save...a nice upgrade.  The key point...do you still want to include Stats as part of the save, or have it be pure caster level?

3) i could live with no accelerated progresions.  Yessirree, I could live without them at all.

Das Bier!

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #518 on: August 22, 2008, 08:50:21 PM »
Snipping for sanity...

1) Well, that is what Practiced Spellcaster/Manifester is for.  Splitting your attention among diametically opposed disciplines should have some cost, right?  I see your point...I just don't agree with it.  The power a gish build brings to melee with just lower level buffs and spells really outweighs the idea that they even NEED high level slots or casting ability.

Yeah, except all those buffs just go poof when hit by dispel magic, and now the gish is out of a substantial resource investment for the day - and *that* is a problem.

This also leads to pure casters being able to out-melee fighters and even gishes because they can out-buff them for longer periods of time (better durations).  Which is frankly counterintuitive.

Also, this is a simplistic example, but I don't think the classic gish should be discouraged like it is in 3e.  And by classic I mean opens up with a fireball and then closes to melee.  Gishing in 2nd edition wasn't about buffing, it was about DD and melee in one character.  I don't see the problem if a Fighter 5/Wizard 5 can throw a 10d6 fireball.  If he's only throwing 7d6 fireballs he might as well save himself the wizard levels and get a wizard cohort.  That's just crappy game design.  What the F5/W5 isn't doing, even in CL=10 world, is throwing Evard's Black Tentacles, Teleport, or Magic Jar around.  So the W10 still has a casting advantage over him, they just both cast level 1-3 spells mostly the same (the W10 probably still has a better DC).

Quote
2) I think a standardized DC for spells, ignoring spell level, might indeed be a good thing.  IT really would make low level spells more useful.

The point of the Mystic Theurge would absolutely explode in power because of all those spell slots, low level and otherwise, now having the exact same save...a nice upgrade.  The key point...do you still want to include Stats as part of the save, or have it be pure caster level?

Well, all monster non-spell DCs are 10 + 1/2 HD + stat mod, so making all saves the same would be nice for system uniformity and balance expectations.  Even better would be to make that 10 + 1/2 CR + stat mod, so we'd have a model of saves by level.  Having the players operate under the same rules as the monsters is ultimately a good thing for balance purposes, as a Wizard N is a CR N monster already.

Mystic Theurge probably needs some toning down with this modification, but it wouldn't be impossible to balance.  Halve spell progression in the second class, or more missed spell progression with full CL progression are ways of dealing with this.  Ultimately, the MT should feel like they gained variety but lost depth.  The mechanical changes above make that palatable.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #519 on: August 22, 2008, 09:05:41 PM »
Hey Robby, I know you wanted some comment on changes to yoru classes, but I'm not an expert on the Hexblade, and I'm good with changes on the Paladin and whatnot.

In the interest of cutting down on the number of classes presented, any thought on just making Duskblades and Hexers the same class chassis , but with access to slightly different powers and spell lists?  One follows the road of magic, the other of curses...

Just a thought.

Das Bier!
That is ... indeed an interesting concept.  I'm pretty intune with my hexblade knowledge, so the fix seems easy. Per encounter etc... but. . .
What you say has merit. Can you elaborate a bit about the "chasis" please?
-------
So NO accelerated spell casting. . . ever... Hmmm...
That wouldn't affect things like the blackguard switch at 11th/or uhm... like Nar demonbinder which kinda go together. . .

Sadly after reading that analysis again I tend to think that maybe just maybe the prc thing could go either way.  SQL maybe be right.
I do agree with the formula thing though...

Quote
Also, this is a simplistic example, but I don't think the classic gish should be discouraged like it is in 3e.  And by classic I mean opens up with a fireball and then closes to melee.  Gishing in 2nd edition wasn't about buffing, it was about DD and melee in one character.
RIght well I don't think we should go back to second edtion really either. Thing is one should not start talking about what a gish is "supposed" to be because even if you reference a previous edition we end up just saying "This is what I want a gish to be" I mean I feel you but the Direct damage bit is out. Buffing and utility are in. . . editions change, and the strategy that you describe isnt the one thats going to be most effective really. You're a F5/W5 doesn't really work for other reasons.
You kinda have to decide what you want out of gishing really just like you have to decide what you want from prc'ing.
Like do you want to be a Fighter who uses magic for utility? Or a wizard who's willing to gimp himself (by your estimate of the importance of caster levels) for the visceral quality of using a sword.... no... wait.  I think its more someone who wants to be able to fight even when you turn the anti magic field on them. Like in the duskblade flavor text.
Quote
  by classic I mean opens up with a fireball and then closes to melee
God thats so bad. . . even then the problem isn't that tactic the problem is firebal(and most direct damage evocation) sucks.
I've played a couple of gish. One good, one not so good, but got good later. What I'd do at 10 level is quicken ray of enfeeblement on the fighter looking type, and Evards... Finish by summoning allips into it. The sword was just for clean up.
Thing is the Gish is WHATEVER you come up with Cause its defined by your spell list and fighting ability. Hell False LIfe greater or whatever hitpoint boost you need. Then fight... no nod should be given for nostaligia.
The way to fix that stratagem is fix fireball and fix fighting
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 09:37:25 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"