Brilliant Gameologists Forum
The Thinktank => Min/Max It! => : Nameless Void February 25, 2011, 12:40:45 AM
-
My question comes from a thread in which I am discussing the failings of those characters that are not God. I'll not go into that but the question I have is: Why does the Optimisation Community create these high powered builds to peak at levels 18-20?
Should there be a thread group devoted to creating characters who peak at 10th level but that can easily continue to build in power from level 10 to level 20?
Lastly, does anyone have a character that fits this? A character that is useful and efficient, possibly even high-powered at the lower goal of 10th level?
-
Everyone doesn't create builds like that. And there are threads devoted to lower level characters. Here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1444.0) is one, for example. I usually build characters focused on the levels I expect whatever game I'm making the character for to actually be played at.
-
With a few exceptions, my builds tend to be useful from level 1 on.
-
There are some builds that are just made for theorycrafting, I think those are at level 20 just to see what you can do with non-epic levels.
-
Most of my games are mid level PbPs, so many of the builds I use are focused there. "Charging Smiteadin" and "Swift Hunter" are two of the staple 6th level characters I've played. Starting level 8-9 the Smitadin is out of style but Abjurant Champions start to come into their own.
It really depends on starting level and how many levels you expect to gain over the course of the campaign.
-
Lastly, does anyone have a character that fits this? A character that is useful and efficient, possibly even high-powered at the lower goal of 10th level?
Yes.
Honestly, though, other than ur-priest shenanigans, I'd be hard-pressed to find a build that was good at 20 that wasn't also good at 10.
-
Sublime Chords as well.
-
Lastly, does anyone have a character that fits this? A character that is useful and efficient, possibly even high-powered at the lower goal of 10th level?
Yes.
Honestly, though, other than ur-priest shenanigans, I'd be hard-pressed to find a build that was good at 20 that wasn't also good at 10.
Warsnake build. Your argument is invalid.
-
Lastly, does anyone have a character that fits this? A character that is useful and efficient, possibly even high-powered at the lower goal of 10th level?
Yes.
Honestly, though, other than ur-priest shenanigans, I'd be hard-pressed to find a build that was good at 20 that wasn't also good at 10.
Warsnake build. Your argument is invalid.
Comes online at level 11 if you're doing it right. Given that I didn't say that no such builds existed (rather, that such builds were very uncommon), I don't really see the point of your overly-argumentative tone.
-
Warsnakes come online at 11. Shadow Pouncers are hard pressed to come online before 10. Dual spellcasting builds...
That's really about it.
-
whats the warsnake build? enlighten me please.
i agree that it would be nice to have a 10th level build thread. iv actually suggested it afew times. I think the only reason one hasent taken off is because there isnt as many possibilities for awesome schenanigans with a 10th level pc
-
Warmage into Rainbow Servant. Casts entire Cleric list spontaneously.
-
Better with dread necromancer, though. The domains shore up the more glaring weaknesses of the class (oh look, magic circle + planar binding), and you have rebuke attempts to fuel DMM or what have you.
-
Better with dread necromancer, though. The domains shore up the more glaring weaknesses of the class (oh look, magic circle + planar binding), and you have rebuke attempts to fuel DMM or what have you.
A dread necromancer who decides the whole black-and-white thing is out of style and wants to brighten his wardrobe with all the colors of the rainbow! :lol
-
11th assumes early entry tricks, that are likely to be banned, and still results in a fail character until 11.
Yes, there is a big Arena Fallacy going on. How can you tell if your build is subject to Arena Fallacy? Assume they are 1 level lower. Are they completely nonfunctional? If so, yes they are invoking the Arena Fallacy, in which builds only work at x level (or higher) because that's what they are designed for, when x is a number higher than 1.
The builds that have practical value are usable 1-20.
-
Not necessarily. If you start playing at level, say, seven, it doesn't really matter if your character would suck at level five.
-
The builds that have practical value are usable 1-20.
I agree with Tshern. It's more accurate to say that a practical build is usable from starting level-ending level. Some games only run from 1st to 3rd level. Who cares if you can't deliver at level 12? Some games only run from 14-18th level, who cares if you were gimped at level 7?
-
The builds that have practical value are usable 1-20.
I agree with Tshern. It's more accurate to say that a practical build is usable from starting level-ending level. Some games only run from 1st to 3rd level. Who cares if you can't deliver at level 12? Some games only run from 14-18th level, who cares if you were gimped at level 7?
Completely agree.
A build needs to be viable at the levels it's supposed to be played at.
-
Heck, with some builds they even fall dramatically behind after 8th level or so, they're playable in low level games.
-
With a few exceptions, my builds tend to be useful from level 1 on.
Out of curiosity, how would you replace a whirl-pounce barbarian 2/fighter 4 (shock trooper feat chain, leap attack, combat reflexes and spiked chain prof) with a psychic warrior build useful from level 6 till level 12?
-
"Theorycrafting" is fun.
That's just what we (all) do, to some degree.
But turning the question upside down ...
Full casters are the standard from level 20 on down.
You could say level 4 spells, are the "end" (beginning)
of Tier 1 total dominance, or Tier 2 partial dominance.
That's class level 7.
Class level 6 has an obvious superior choice
of Leadership feat, with a very few exceptions.
So, level 5 ... and down ...
-
Out of curiosity, how would you replace a whirl-pounce barbarian 2/fighter 4 (shock trooper feat chain, leap attack, combat reflexes and spiked chain prof) with a psychic warrior build useful from level 6 till level 12?
It's not a direct analogue, mind, but how about:
Monk 2/psywar 10 with Tashalatora (psychic warrior), Linked Power, Power Attack, Improved Trip (as a bonus feat), Combat Reflexes, expansion, strength of my enemy, and either hustle or psionic lion's charge. Use a guisarme as a reach weapon, and your monk's Improved Unarmed Strike for covering adjacent spaces. And CR for long-range AoOs.
Relies on Str, Wis, and a bit of Dex.
Use Linked Power to buff, psionic lion's charge or hustle to get in range for a flurrying attack, Expansion for size, and strength of my enemy on Improved Trip's touch attack and the follow-up attack to drain Strength. Since your initial attack is a touch attack and followup attacks are at +6 (for a charge and against a prone foe), and you're wielding your guisarme 2-handed, that's a nice little bonus without sacrificing much on your attack bonus.
Deals decent damage, as well.
Cover whatever other bases you like with the rest of your feats and powers, as you like.
-
With a few exceptions, my builds tend to be useful from level 1 on.
That's my position as well. My exceptions are templated guys (mineral warrior and such)
-
Builds only need to be good for the levels they're actually going to be played... and remember, most games don't even make it to level 10. As such, while I tend to write out my builds for 20 levels, they're perfectly viable from level 1 on unless the person asking for it specifically names a level they want it played at. Really, there's only some strong builds that have trouble maturing in time... Supermounts, Ur Priests, Mystic Theurges, Sublime Chords, etc all have that issue.
If someone specifies a level, I'll give them that. If they don't, I'll give them something going all the way up. Either way, if you don't want a 20th level build, say so. Name the level you actually want it played at and the advice will be appropriate for it.
Also, the Arena Fallacy is committed when someone judges a class based on a specific set of parameters that aren't going to come up in play... the most common one being "Class X sucks because it can't beat class Y in a one on one PvP arena." Since one on one PvP fights in an arena almost never come up in real play, that's silly. But it has no bearing on individual build levels... a game that starts at a specific level other than 1 is a VERY common occurrence indeed, and there's absolutely no need to judge a build designed for a game that starts at level 12 by the fact that it works poorly at level 11. In fact, judging it that way would be an arena fallacy in that context, as you're now judging it by something that will never come up in play.
JaronK
-
Builds only need to be good for the levels they're actually going to be played.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I feel that a character sheet is a story in itself. I usually play through an imaginary D&D game in my head (think REALLY fast theorycrafting for character vs mobs at given levels) to see if the character is playable at all levels. The character lived through those levels, even if the player didn't play it then.
-
Builds only need to be good for the levels they're actually going to be played.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I feel that a character sheet is a story in itself. I usually play through an imaginary D&D game in my head (think REALLY fast theorycrafting for character vs mobs at given levels) to see if the character is playable at all levels. The character lived through those levels, even if the player didn't play it then.
The one barely playable at earlier levels is more humble, while the one kicking ass the whole time is an arrogant prick. Easy enough to roleplay, should you choose.
-
Builds only need to be good for the levels they're actually going to be played.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I feel that a character sheet is a story in itself. I usually play through an imaginary D&D game in my head (think REALLY fast theorycrafting for character vs mobs at given levels) to see if the character is playable at all levels. The character lived through those levels, even if the player didn't play it then.
The one barely playable at earlier levels is more humble, while the one kicking ass the whole time is an arrogant prick. Easy enough to roleplay, should you choose.
So any build that is inept at lower levels is a skin-of-your-teeth survivor by default? That does not appeal to me at all.
It's purely a matter of opinion of course. To each his own, etc etc.
-
Naw, but having known weakness tends to add depth to the character, theres many ways this can manifest.
-
Naw, but having known weakness tends to add depth to the character, theres many ways this can manifest.
I agree with you there. My Gish used to fight in a 2-man formation with his brother, so now he has a -4 AC vs attacks of opportunity because he always leaves that flank open. (actually a flaw from Dragon)
-
It's usually possible to retune a build designed for high levels to your starting level. For example, a lot of my Sublime Chords have had Dragonfire Inspiration. Not that I planned on using it much at high levels, but that it gives a reason for a party to feed the character the experience it needs to develop. You do sacrifice some power later...but you sacrifice more imho if you're failing your team.
-
I'm with JaronK on this one. Though I don't say it, many of my builds are designed for the range I like to DM, levels 8-12. As long as the DM is upfront (as I am) at using every excuse to curb-stomp nerf casters while letting the non-casters get away with some fromage, it feels exactly right to me. Everyone can do cool stuff while the encounters can easily be throttled up or down. I do understand though, that without vigilance, its easier to just lower the ECL range.
-
But it has no bearing on individual build levels... a game that starts at a specific level other than 1 is a VERY common occurrence indeed, and there's absolutely no need to judge a build designed for a game that starts at level 12 by the fact that it works poorly at level 11. In fact, judging it that way would be an arena fallacy in that context, as you're now judging it by something that will never come up in play.
Not entirely accurate. Lost levels from energy drain and being brought back after a fatality are sad facts of adventuring life, sometimes. Sunic will probably run in trolling about how if you lose once, you lose always, blah blah made-up fallacy, final destination, nonsense words. But the truth is an otherwise viable character may well find itself operating at a lower level than that at which it started, in play. If a single lost level can make a build fall apart completely, you probably should redesign it to be more robust.
Judging something by how it hypothetically might have functioned 10 levels ago is fallacious, though, I agree there.
-
But it has no bearing on individual build levels... a game that starts at a specific level other than 1 is a VERY common occurrence indeed, and there's absolutely no need to judge a build designed for a game that starts at level 12 by the fact that it works poorly at level 11. In fact, judging it that way would be an arena fallacy in that context, as you're now judging it by something that will never come up in play.
Not entirely accurate. Lost levels from energy drain and being brought back after a fatality are sad facts of adventuring life, sometimes. Sunic will probably run in trolling about how if you lose once, you lose always, blah blah made-up fallacy, final destination, nonsense words. But the truth is an otherwise viable character may well find itself operating at a lower level than that at which it started, in play. If a single lost level can make a build fall apart completely, you probably should redesign it to be more robust.
Judging something by how it hypothetically might have functioned 10 levels ago is fallacious, though, I agree there.
Hi Welcome
Straw man less.
Care to try again, this time with less Fail, or were you just lying about me so that this thread would be engulfed in flames?
-
Hi Welcome
Explain.
-
Explain.
Sunic will probably run in trolling about how if you lose once, you lose always, blah blah made-up fallacy, final destination, nonsense words. But the truth is an otherwise viable character may well find itself operating at a lower level than that at which it started, in play.
This is a strawman argument. You're refuting a claim which was never made. Hi Welcome is his way of insulting you for making a fallacious and passive aggressive comment.
-
Builds only need to be good for the levels they're actually going to be played.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I feel that a character sheet is a story in itself. I usually play through an imaginary D&D game in my head (think REALLY fast theorycrafting for character vs mobs at given levels) to see if the character is playable at all levels. The character lived through those levels, even if the player didn't play it then.
I've had characters that simply didn't have to 'play' through lower levels.
Take my level 14 strongheart halfling (refluffed human) necrocarnum kineticist/thrallherd, for instance. He's a little boy that his wizard adopted father found wandering on the positive energy plane, who showed incredibly powerful magical abilities and the ability to raise armies of undead but didn't have the ability to turn any of it off. His powers went loco when his life was in danger, and they destroyed everything around in a massive explosion, including his own father. Now his father's spirit follows him around, inhabiting the necrocarnum zombies spawned from his necrocarnum circlet soulmeld, and it directs the undead thralls that crawl to him of their own volition to protect him from A.) getting killed, B.) getting overwhelmed by the crawling horror, and C.) getting corrupted by his own power.
This character was an incredibly powerful creature, but it was all fluffed as racial abilities.
No in-game XP necessary.
But that's just one example.
-
Explain.
Sunic will probably run in trolling about how if you lose once, you lose always, blah blah made-up fallacy, final destination, nonsense words. But the truth is an otherwise viable character may well find itself operating at a lower level than that at which it started, in play.
This is a strawman argument. You're refuting a claim which was never made. Hi Welcome is his way of insulting you for making a fallacious and passive aggressive comment.
Well him, not you, as it wasn't Talore that was the target but yes. Plus Fucking One.
Now if he had simply stuck to saying that you might be leveled down, he'd be right, but he had to drag me into it.
-
Leveling down happens, but it's pretty rare unless you're playing a very high lethality game. Certainly, leveling down more than once in a group is extremely unlikely. As such, if the game starts at 12 I see no reason to worry about how a build might play at level 9, and it's unlikely to even need to worry about how it'll play at 11. Certainly, there are few builds that actually have a massive dramatic difference from one level to the next right before entrance into the game... perhaps a supermount type build might (due to losing Devoted Tracker) but that's quite rare, and is a short term issue should it ever come up at all.
Point being, how a build plays in the game you're playing is important, but how it plays in levels you never will (either because you bypassed them or because you're not going to play that high) is irrelevant. Frankly, I'd rather just refluff unplayed levels than worry about them much.
JaronK
-
So what people are saying is:
The common (well not so common really but you know what I mean) 20th level builds are Theorycrafting and not often used in games.
And that:
Most commonly, builds are created to suit the game they are in and are generally made to work at those levels, but not necessarily before that level.
Perhaps, as has been suggested, there should be a thread dedicated to pre-15th level character builds that can be used in games as opposed to Theorycrafting?
And thank you PhaedrusXY for the link to your own personal thread.
-
That's what Phaedrus's thread is. :psyduck And most, if not all, handbooks assume play at any given level and address the issue.
-
Part of the problem is simply that lots of people present Ur-Priest Sublime Chord builds. But people also Present Wizard 20 builds.
The problem comes up in that if you are talking about a Wizard 20 build, you stat it to 20 in generic, because from a 20 build, you can see all level 1-19 stuff, as it is part of the build. So sometimes people presenting builds good at every level can be perceived as level 20 builds, just because Shapechange exists.
-
I used to see more of this problem, but it's not as big as it used to be. The big place I still see it now and then is in the occasional fixation on "9 by 20" - focusing more on whether you're still getting level 9 spells at level 20 than what you'll need in the range where the build is to be used.
-
PsyRef at level 7 allows a continual fix-it, from that point on.
You might not suck too, before level 7.
Lurk and Divine Mind have so few options available.
Class 4 or 3 / Bloodline 3 / Trickster 2 / Legacy Champ 2
And you're all done. While this is levels 10 or 11,
you're talking about only mildly interesting stuff before then.
Plus hey, who needs Epic when you've got the CO-board ??
-
Oh and ... Warforged 1 + any Psi fester class, 1 or 2 flaws, the Psiforged feat,
and Azure Talent and (?) Psycarnum Infusion feats from Magic of Incarnum,
is the earliest psi-recharge set-up.
No real need to optimize further, but do need to discuss definitions of borkny with DM, though.
-
I used to see more of this problem, but it's not as big as it used to be. The big place I still see it now and then is in the occasional fixation on "9 by 20" - focusing more on whether you're still getting level 9 spells at level 20 than what you'll need in the range where the build is to be used.
To be clear, the problem with 9 by 20 is that people think it's okay, as long as you have level 9 spells by level 20, to present a bunch of builds that suck for 14 levels.
If your build doesn't get level 9 spells by level 20, (and it is a spellcasting build) it is in fact a terrible build, because it also didn't get level 4 spells by 7, or level 5 spells by 9.
-
Plus ... epic is boring as hell.
There's epic spells, the dire tortoise, and everything else.
I mean even if you're trying to play a Weak sauce game,
you get silliness like Divine Mind 30 with epic "spells" (finally),
one good aura and some free action cheese.
And why wait til level 30?
-
To be clear, the problem with 9 by 20 is that people think it's okay, as long as you have level 9 spells by level 20, to present a bunch of builds that suck for 14 levels.
If your build doesn't get level 9 spells by level 20, (and it is a spellcasting build) it is in fact a terrible build, because it also didn't get level 4 spells by 7, or level 5 spells by 9.
Mostly agreed - I've seen gish builds get chewed out for not having 9 by 20 when they're getting rather acceptable tradeoffs for it given their goals and play style. As a general rule I agree, though.
(I also think it's okay to be a level behind your spells if you're getting something good enough for it - I like Pale Master for necromancers in situations where other free-undead shenanigans are off the table, although I'm aware I'm in the minority on that.)
-
Honestly, I've never seen the huge deal with making sure your build has 9th level spells. 8th level is more than powerful enough and even having 7th level spells is unecessary for most encounters.
-
Honestly, I've never seen the huge deal with making sure your build has 9th level spells. 8th level is more than powerful enough and even having 7th level spells is unecessary for most encounters.
If you make a choice because it makes you more powerful, but the result is you lose a spell level, in general you probably didn't achieve your goal (more power). If more power wasn't your goal, then it's fine (for example, maybe you wanted something more characterful, or simply don't want ridiculous power).
JaronK
-
Honestly, I've never seen the huge deal with making sure your build has 9th level spells. 8th level is more than powerful enough and even having 7th level spells is unecessary for most encounters.
Five words: Time Stop, Shapechange, True Resurrection.
For everything else, there's Lesser Spells(TM).
-
Honestly, I've never seen the huge deal with making sure your build has 9th level spells. 8th level is more than powerful enough and even having 7th level spells is unecessary for most encounters.
Five words: Time Stop, Shapechange, True Resurrectiongenesis.
For everything else, there's Lesser Spells(TM).
ftfy. Plenty of things make it hard/impossible to true res. Getting into a sealed demi-plane aint so easy for mere mortals.
-
DMM:Persist and Revivify/Revenance (whatever that combo is) mean that only Clerics with Animal/Transmutation domain get the maximum benefit of 9th level spells (though you still want an un-buffed caster level equal to your hit dice, via Illumian/Practiced Spellcaster).
So really, Clerics at least can safely lose 4 casters most of the time if they just take a single feat.
-
ftfy. Plenty of things make it hard/impossible to true res. Getting into a sealed demi-plane aint so easy for mere mortals.
Nah, you broke it. Now it's not five words anymore. Told you Genesis was broken, it even breaks English!
JaronK