D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]

[bkdubs123]

He has poor battlefield control and low damage. High AC is his main edge.

He's playing a Fighter. Since when has a level 6 Fighter ever had anything but poor battlefield control? He does it as best as he can, and with Improved Trip and Shield Guard it is better than a lot of level 6 meleers can boast, but all the while his AC is through the roof. I'm all for Sword and Board having the highest AC for their level ranges, but to push all but the strongest meleers of their level to the misses-on-18-or-lower corner seems a little much to me.

[SKRP]

He's playing a Fighter. Since when has a level 6 Fighter ever had anything but poor battlefield control? He does it as best as he can, and with Improved Trip and Shield Guard it is better than a lot of level 6 meleers can boast, but all the while his AC is through the roof. I'm all for Sword and Board having the highest AC for their level ranges, but to push all but the strongest meleers of their level to the misses-on-18-or-lower corner seems a little much to me.

He could go PA, Leap Attack, Heedless Charge, Shocktrooper and be quite nice damage dealer. High AC is just a different niche.

[bkdubs123]

No, I understand the idea, but I just had a problem with saying low BC AND low damage. Of course he's got poor BC, which was all I wanted to say.

Anyway, I don't have a problem with optimizing your AC, I want to make that clear, but I think he's made it way too easy for the Sword and Boarders. It's not like taking just Power Attack makes you the best damage dealer for your level; this is like the AC equivalent (if you consider them to be equal niches). I also think the level of damage efficiency that PA, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper grants is too much, but that's not what this is about. If the AC capacity granted by Shield Spec was spread into two separate feats I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it.

[RobbyPants]

Since you mentioned playtesting in the feats thread, and we were talking about Shield Spec, let's bring it here, shall we? At the top of this page is a Level 6 Shield Fighter. He has 29 AC. 29 at level 6!! An Ogre can't possibly hit him, a Shambling Mound hits him on an 18, a Troll hits him on a 20, Babau Demon hits on a 17, and the Dragon hits on a 14. Of course, his touch AC is still quite low, because he hasn't got Shield Ward, but he could have it instead of say... Improved Initiative, and be freaking untouchable!

Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

I think the real issue here is in the CR system, and then, the encounters I picked using that system.

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Even with four encounters per day, most non-caster abilities are encounter based, not per day, so only HP and expendable items will change from ecnounter to encounter.  Even then, with cantrips and orisons being unlimited now, that makes Cure Minor Wounds capable of unlimited out-of-combat healing right from level one.  So perhaps I need to come up with some new encounters something along the lines of:

Party     CR
Level
__________________
1         1.5 - 2
6         7 - 8
11        12 - 14
16        17 - 19
20        21 - 23

Now that we've been getting more PCs, I have a better idea what the party will look like.

[RobbyPants]

I added the three PCs.

The cost of the mithril light plate should be over 4,000 gp, though, as the original category of medium.

[bkdubs123]

Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

But I think that's a lot more reasonable than before, don't you?

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Quite right, the play-test iconics used the Elite Array, and were about as optimized as the monsters were, which is why they seemed balanced. Of course with more powerful classes you'll need more powerful monsters. And with more optimized characters you'll want more optimized monsters.

[Kuroimaken]

Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

But I think that's a lot more reasonable than before, don't you?

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Quite right, the play-test iconics used the Elite Array, and were about as optimized as the monsters were, which is why they seemed balanced. Of course with more powerful classes you'll need more powerful monsters. And with more optimized characters you'll want more optimized monsters.

Bkdubs, AGAIN, AC is a worthless stat. He might as well have an ungodly charisma with no ranks in social skills for all the good it'll do him.

[bkdubs123]

Kuroi, you're simply wrong. At 6th level AC is a perfectly good stat. In fact, if AC is so worthless why not get rid of it entirely? Why not make all armors and shields, and dodging and deflection simply give a certain amount of miss chance/concealment? This is becoming a slippery slope here. Obviously Robby doesn't want to get rid of AC, so talking about how it is a worthless stat is really going to get everybody involved nowhere. I'm talking about it as if it were legitimate, because a lot of times it really is, especially at 6th level, and because Robby is treating it like it is legitimate. If there is a feat that grants +11 to AC, and to hit and AC are supposed to be on an equal footing, than there ought to be a feat that grants +11 to hit, shouldn't there? I'm saying that, within the framework of his rebalancing project, a single feat granting +11 to AC isn't balanced against other options.

Dodge: Gain +1 dodge bonus to AC.
Shield Specialization: Gain +1 additional Shield bonus to AC, +1/two Fighter levels.

Hrmm... tough call here...

[Soda]

New weapon focus gives +2 and +4 damage for fighters. So that's +4. I think that's the minimum right there.

Some interaction with combat expertise would be flavorful for shields, but not very good.

I think making it into two feats is a good idea.

[Kuroimaken]

Kuroi, you're simply wrong. At 6th level AC is a perfectly good stat. In fact, if AC is so worthless why not get rid of it entirely? Why not make all armors and shields, and dodging and deflection simply give a certain amount of miss chance/concealment? This is becoming a slippery slope here. Obviously Robby doesn't want to get rid of AC, so talking about how it is a worthless stat is really going to get everybody involved nowhere. I'm talking about it as if it were legitimate, because a lot of times it really is, especially at 6th level, and because Robby is treating it like it is legitimate. If there is a feat that grants +11 to AC, and to hit and AC are supposed to be on an equal footing, than there ought to be a feat that grants +11 to hit, shouldn't there? I'm saying that, within the framework of his rebalancing project, a single feat granting +11 to AC isn't balanced against other options.

Dodge: Gain +1 dodge bonus to AC.
Shield Specialization: Gain +1 additional Shield bonus to AC, +1/two Fighter levels.

Hrmm... tough call here...

Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?

[bkdubs123]

Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?

Is AC relevant or not? When did I say anything about +11 at 6th level?

My points, restated for clarity.

* AC is perfectly relevant at 6th level.
* +11 to AC from a single feat is not balanced against other feats that improve AC.
* If becoming a highly powerful damage dealer takes three to four feats, increasing your AC by an epic level should take more than a single feat.

Another point: +11 Shield bonus is worth 120,000 GP. Just to put that out there.

[AlterFrom]

Just popping in here...

I wouldn't have dared put that fighter at L11, let alone 16/20. At level 6, you just aren't dealing with a constant barrage of spells and AC is something of a viable defence. HOWEVER, I didn't see his high AC being his major "tankiness" at all. If he shoots his shield bonus to an ally (say, one of the squishies) he has simultaneous made himself easier to hit and his ally harder to hit, a very pseudo-sticky thing to do. I gave him tripping as a backup sort of thing so he wasn't entirely one-dimensional to play.

[Kuroimaken]

Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?

Is AC relevant or not? When did I say anything about +11 at 6th level?

My points, restated for clarity.

* AC is perfectly relevant at 6th level.
* +11 to AC from a single feat is not balanced against other feats that improve AC.
* If becoming a highly powerful damage dealer takes three to four feats, increasing your AC by an epic level should take more than a single feat.

Another point: +11 Shield bonus is worth 120,000 GP. Just to put that out there.

But at 6th level, you don't HAVE +11 to your AC. At the point where AC is RELEVANT, you don't have the full benefits of the feat. See where the problem lies? The feat is actually a worthwhile investment throughout the lower levels and a bit halfway through, but not further. Also, +11 to AC costing 120k GP is one of the things that's wrong with the system. Consider this:

-The Fighter's role is supposed to be a tank.
-High AC contributes to it (but is not the be-all end-all way to do it, and in fact, at mid-to-high levels saves are much more important).
-AC being more and more costly at higher levels to NONSPELLCASTERS ONLY is detrimental to the Fighter's role.
-A feat that scales with Fighter levels helps more easily produce the effect of Fighter=Tank.

So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?
Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.

[bkdubs123]

So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.

No, I don't think that's a good thing, but this is Robby's rebalancing, not mine. I have a problem with wealth by level entirely. I have a problem with the fact that AC isn't a relevant defense after a certain level. I have a problem with magic ruling all of the roosts after a certain level, with every character needing to spend money in order to buy magical abilities in order to come remotely close to functioning. But Robby isn't utterly revamping the magic system, it's still more powerful than other options after so many levels, he isn't reworking wealth by level or magic items as far as I know, so +11 to AC is still going to cost a lot of money, and spells are still going to be better ways, not only of getting a high AC, but of producing any of the more relevant defenses.

[Kuroimaken]

So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.

No, I don't think that's a good thing, but this is Robby's rebalancing, not mine. I have a problem with wealth by level entirely. I have a problem with the fact that AC isn't a relevant defense after a certain level. I have a problem with magic ruling all of the roosts after a certain level, with every character needing to spend money in order to buy magical abilities in order to come remotely close to functioning. But Robby isn't utterly revamping the magic system, it's still more powerful than other options after so many levels, he isn't reworking wealth by level or magic items as far as I know, so +11 to AC is still going to cost a lot of money, and spells are still going to be better ways, not only of getting a high AC, but of producing any of the more relevant defenses.

Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?

[Midnight_v]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Yeah probabbly feats should be valued higher. +3 ac from a feat is totally reasonable. Generally you only get 7-8 feats so they should be worthwhile. Generally not if you're a Fighter or psiwar. Even they could get a bit more strength without unbalancing the game.

[bkdubs123]

Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?

You're not looking at the bigger picture. You're treating acting as though nothing else exists except Sword and Board sucking as an option, and this feat to "fix it."

6th level Fighter with Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper, wields a +1 Greatsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. On a charge, if he power attacks for 6 (which he does), he deals 2d6+7+24 damage, avg 39. He has 20 AC (14 after a charge) and 11 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the S&B guy 30% of the time, avg resulting damage of 13.

6th level Fighter with Shield Spec, Shield Ward, and Shield Guard, wields a Longsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. Every hit he deals 1d8+5 damage, avg 9.5. He has 27 AC and 18 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the Charger 65% of the time, or 95% of the time after the Charger charges, avg resulting damage of 6~9.

Now, these two builds seem relatively balanced against each other, however, the first build needs Shock Trooper to deal that much damage. It needs all three feats to do its thing. The second build doesn't need Shield Guard. That feat actually gives him new, unique capability that helps his allies. I come again to the point I made earlier, where if somehow the benefits of Shield Specialization were split into two feats (probably using a different mechanic than just adding the Shield bonus straight up), I would have far less objection to the result.

Something like these?

Shield Specialization
Prerequisites: Shield Proficiency
Benefit: You gain an additional +1 Shield bonus to AC while wielding any shield.
Special: For every five Fighter levels you possess the bonus granted from this feat increases by 1.

Grand Bulwark
Prerequisites: Shield Specialization, Base Attack +6
Benefit: This feat grants you two special combat options, as follows;
Impenetrable Glare - As a swift action you can double your Shield bonus to AC against a single foe for 1 turn.
Defender's Aegis - As long as you wield a shield, as a swift action, you can deny line of effect to a single adjacent ally for 1 turn.

[Kuroimaken]

Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?

You're not looking at the bigger picture. You're treating acting as though nothing else exists except Sword and Board sucking as an option, and this feat to "fix it."

6th level Fighter with Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper, wields a +1 Greatsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. On a charge, if he power attacks for 6 (which he does), he deals 2d6+7+24 damage, avg 39. He has 20 AC (14 after a charge) and 11 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the S&B guy 30% of the time, avg resulting damage of 13.

6th level Fighter with Shield Spec, Shield Ward, and Shield Guard, wields a Longsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. Every hit he deals 1d8+5 damage, avg 9.5. He has 27 AC and 18 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the Charger 65% of the time, or 95% of the time after the Charger charges, avg resulting damage of 6~9.

Now, these two builds seem relatively balanced against each other, however, the first build needs Shock Trooper to deal that much damage. It needs all three feats to do its thing. The second build doesn't need Shield Guard. That feat actually gives him new, unique capability that helps his allies. I come again to the point I made earlier, where if somehow the benefits of Shield Specialization were split into two feats (probably using a different mechanic than just adding the Shield bonus straight up), I would have far less objection to the result.

Something like these?

Shield Specialization
Prerequisites: Shield Proficiency
Benefit: You gain an additional +1 Shield bonus to AC while wielding any shield.
Special: For every five Fighter levels you possess the bonus granted from this feat increases by 1.

Grand Bulwark
Prerequisites: Shield Specialization, Base Attack +6
Benefit: This feat grants you two special combat options, as follows;
Impenetrable Glare - As a swift action you can double your Shield bonus to AC against a single foe for 1 turn.
Defender's Aegis - As long as you wield a shield, as a swift action, you can deny line of effect to a single adjacent ally for 1 turn.

Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Consider this: the charger boy can pretty much use his schtick forever and not be gimped by it. Regardless of what level people are, they'll always have an AC to hit. Sure, the smartest of them will be hiding behind GMI and Invisibility and whatnot but hey, they still have an AC and hitpoints, and as far as magical concealment goes they can always go Mageslayer or something. This is something the S&B fighter can do nothing about - his AC essentially becomes useless after a certain level and there are no feats or magical items to remedy this. So, while his thing is pretty rad and cost-effective at low levels, he sucks so hard later that he could milk a rock. Meanwhile, while charger boy spent more feats, he's actually getting a better mileage out of them. Sorry, but I don't think making Shield Specialization a turkey feat and then adding Greater Bulwark is better. Remember, part of the reason we're using scaling feats here is to avoid turkeys that would never be taken DEAD by themselves.

[bkdubs123]

Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Okay, and now this argument I find to be much more legitimate. The charger can use his schtick forever and not be gimped, this is true. I guess for Robby's rebalanced game it's probably okay, even though the sheer number makes me think it is broken. I mean... since it the AC doesn't matter after a while why not simply make it, "You gain an additional +3 Shield bonus to AC from any shield you wield" and be done with it. I would prefer a game though where AC continued to be just as viable a defense as saving throws, and in such a game I'd need to see something like Shield Spec+Grand Bulwark.

[Kuroimaken]

Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Okay, and now this argument I find to be much more legitimate. The charger can use his schtick forever and not be gimped, this is true. I guess for Robby's rebalanced game it's probably okay, even though the sheer number makes me think it is broken. I mean... since it the AC doesn't matter after a while why not simply make it, "You gain an additional +3 Shield bonus to AC from any shield you wield" and be done with it. I would prefer a game though where AC continued to be just as viable a defense as saving throws, and in such a game I'd need to see something like Shield Spec+Grand Bulwark.

Because the mileage of how long that bonus will actually be useful for can vary. In some campaigns the spell-slinging doesn't close the game and you actually have some use for your AC for quite some time (typically low-magic campaigns). Also, if it's not broken, why fix it?