Brilliant Gameologists Forum
The Thinktank => Min/Max It! => : Kaelik March 19, 2011, 01:43:52 PM
-
There is a lot of talk about how Wizards break the game (and they do) and about how fighters are weak (and they are) but it's become overblown a great deal. The prevalence of knowledge about tricks like Shadow Miracles, or Persisting stuff through method that is not a higher level spell slot or using calling magic at all and breaking the game has filtered backwards, and combined with a habit of playing monsters short to make the bad PCs feel good has resulted in a mentality of
Remember that this advice was also written with the blaster-mage mentality, where a moderately-challenging fight might require 3-4 spells. With a CO-mentality, you can reasonably beat pretty much any expected encounter with 1 spell, which is far fewer than your maximum by 6th level, not to mention 9th.
The fact that multiple encounters can potentially be bypassed by the same spell (overland flight vs. non-flying, non-ranged threats) only amplifies this.
Unless you have Arcane Thesis and Easy Metamagic somewhere on your sheet, you are not going to be beating CR appropriate encounters with a single spell.
So the purpose of this thread, I'm going to try to create a CR encounter arena, in which people can make parties, either as four people, or one person playing four characters, and then I will run them through a set of four CR appropriate encounters, as per the encounter guidelines, that are also at least somehow a likely set of four encounters to hit in the same day, for whatever reason. Each encounter will start with me setting the scene, as PCs are likely to do something, or trying to do something, and they will then face encounters as they run into them.
Basically, you can make your PCs, and try to beat things with one spell (or however else you want, IE team fighters are totally not underpowered can try to prove it with fighters if they want).
Now, obviously, the purpose of this is not to break the game, we all know ways to break the game, but this is to show that an actual party without the super gamebreakers can beat the party.
That said: Here is a short ban list, and if you want to use something on the same line, think about if I'm going to allow it:
1) Incantatrix
2) Tainted Scholar
3) DMM Persist
4) DweomerKeeper
5) Planar Shepard
6) Anything involving calling magic at all, or Dread Warrior.
7) Anything that involves applying a bunch of meta feats to a spell that would normally increase it several levels over your ability to cast, but is instead reduced by a lot of reductions from some combination of Arcane Thesis/Easy Meta/Practical Meta/Class abilities ect.
8) Shadowcraft Mage
9) Ur Priest/Sublime Chord anything, yes there are non game breaking Ur Priest/Sublime Chord builds. Most of them make more sense as Clerics/Sorcerers. Save me the hassle and use the Cleric/Sorcerer.
10) Anything involving the existence of a Thought Bottle.
11) Any claim to having more than WBL through any means at all.
12) Special mention for Faerie Mysteries Innate. Yes, anything that increases your HP by 5-15 HP per level, and increases your casting modifier by 1-2, and gives your more ability points to distribute to other stats is absurd. Also, Kobolds can not be Epic or Loredrakes, or ect.
13) No Leadership, and I might punch you in the face through the internet if you try to tell me what absurd creatures you have Dominated or Animated before this starts. If you want to animate something, it better be readily accessible, and usually travel in packs with a lower EL than your level, so no, your level 5 character cannot have a Fire Giant Skeleton.
14) Dragon Magazine
15) Hulking Hurler
For level, try to build parties that would make sense at every level, because where possible, I'd like to run them against several, but I will take requests for specific levels, sometimes, depending on time, and no, your level 17 9th level spells party is not as interesting to me as a level 5-13 party. And no, your level 1 Fiery Burst for 3d6 damage is also not something that interests me too much either.
32 PB for everyone, no LA buyoff or bloodlines, or anything else that fuzzes the level of your characters, and use average HP.
-
I might want to run a lvl 6 party.
Probably a:
Binder/Something (probably our good friend Anima Mage, entered through Precocious Apprentice and the like)
Idiot Crusader of some description
Song of the White Raven/Dragonfire Inspiration/Words of Creation/Songs of the Heart Bard
Beguiler/Mindbender with Mindsight, and some way to pass on the information.
Question: Are bloodlines allowed, and if so, what interpretation should be used?
-
I'll swing a check on Words of Creation to see if it's another game breaker, as for bloodlines:
Some interpretation that doesn't give you something for nothing, so no, you won't want them.
-
The Buffer: Domain Wizard (Transmutation) 5/War Weaver 5
The BSF: Barbarian 2 (Wolf Totem & Pounce Variants)/Fighter 6 (Dungeon Crasher Varient)/Champion of Gwynharwyf 2
The Skill Junkie: Factotum 10
The Healer/Battlefield Controller: Druid 10
Barring obvious cheese I think that would be a fairly well rounded party setup.
-
Unless I'm missing something, Words of Creation is just a free extend spell on some spells, and increase of Bardic Music. I assume Songs of the Heart is same deal, where is that?
-
I know we have normal WBL, but what about Point Buy/Other stat generating methods?
I assume there are no other restrictions besides what was already listed and, of course, theoretical optimization of anything potential infinite or nigh large. But you missed something as "obvious" and Core as Leadership feat, which I assume is tacitly banned because it's inherently ridiculous. What I'm getting at is, I can assume all I want what I think is banned/not allowed, but I can't possibly know every exception. Dragonwrought Kobold seems like it's approaching #11 but isn't called out.
-
I know we have normal WBL, but what about Point Buy/Other stat generating methods?
Yeah, good point, let's go with 32 PB.
I assume there are no other restrictions besides what was already listed and, of course, theoretical optimization of anything potential infinite or nigh large. But you missed something as "obvious" and Core as Leadership feat, which I assume is tacitly banned because it's inherently ridiculous. What I'm getting at is, I can assume all I want what I think is banned/not allowed, but I can't possibly know every exception. Dragonwrought Kobold seems like it's approaching #11 but isn't called out.
If it's used for +3 to mental stats, it's not a problem. If it's used for absurdities involving being Epic or having the Dragontype and Loredraking, it is. Definitely Leadership not okay.
-
This is kind of futile unless you agree not to screw around with badly rated CRs.
Going up against, say, a cloaker lord or sharn with additional casting levels is going to be death regardless of whether WotC thought it was "CR appropriate"
-
Definitely Leadership not okay.
What if we solo using our thralls minions as our other characters? Or for mounts and such?
-
This is kind of futile unless you agree not to screw around with badly rated CRs.
Going up against, say, a cloaker lord or sharn with additional casting levels is going to be death regardless of whether WotC thought it was "CR appropriate"
Yes, let's just go over all the monsters that are too powerful for their CR (IE, Wizards cannot solo them with a single spell) Anything with the Demon or Devil Subtype. Anything with the angel or Archon subtype. Anything with the Dragon type. Anything with the Outsider type actually. Aboleths, Mindflayers, Beholders. Oh wait, let's just ban the entire type. Ect.
Look, I'm going to let everyone know what the encounters are, it's not like people are going to have to take my word on this. If they think that "An Ice Devil" is too overpowered for a level 12 party to face, that's their problem, because it turns out that it's totally expected that level 12 parties will have to fight Gelugons.
Definitely Leadership not okay.
What if we solo using our thralls minions as our other characters? Or for mounts and such?
You can get mounts through other means, You can if you want take Leadership and then bring in a Cohort, but they will count towards Party level for the purposes of CR, so unless you really have a use for followers, it is unlikely to prove too useful, and you would probably be better off just making a party yourself.
My primary concerns are: Minions bog down play a lotttttt. Leadership is an absurdly broken best feat ever feat that if allowed is pretty much mandatory to everyone.
-
This is kind of futile unless you agree not to screw around with badly rated CRs.
Going up against, say, a cloaker lord or sharn with additional casting levels is going to be death regardless of whether WotC thought it was "CR appropriate"
Yes, let's just go over all the monsters that are too powerful for their CR (IE, Wizards cannot solo them with a single spell) Anything with the Demon or Devil Subtype. Anything with the angel or Archon subtype. Anything with the Dragon type. Anything with the Outsider type actually. Aboleths, Mindflayers, Beholders. Oh wait, let's just ban the entire type. Ect.
Look, I'm going to let everyone know what the encounters are, it's not like people are going to have to take my word on this. If they think that "An Ice Devil" is too overpowered for a level 12 party to face, that's their problem, because it turns out that it's totally expected that level 12 parties will have to fight Gelugons.
The problem with the cloaker lord is that it's a CR7 creature that casts as a 9th-level wizard. And has 9d8 HD. And a bunch of crazy powers. According to WotC this is equal in power to a human 7th-level wizard.
-
This is kind of futile unless you agree not to screw around with badly rated CRs.
Going up against, say, a cloaker lord or sharn with additional casting levels is going to be death regardless of whether WotC thought it was "CR appropriate"
Yes, let's just go over all the monsters that are too powerful for their CR (IE, Wizards cannot solo them with a single spell) Anything with the Demon or Devil Subtype. Anything with the angel or Archon subtype. Anything with the Dragon type. Anything with the Outsider type actually. Aboleths, Mindflayers, Beholders. Oh wait, let's just ban the entire type. Ect.
Look, I'm going to let everyone know what the encounters are, it's not like people are going to have to take my word on this. If they think that "An Ice Devil" is too overpowered for a level 12 party to face, that's their problem, because it turns out that it's totally expected that level 12 parties will have to fight Gelugons.
The problem is that cloaker lords cast as wizards of a higher level than their CR. And also have more HD than their CR.
So do Planetar, except Cleric casting. Still CR monsters. Yes, there are abnormalities that exist, between CR NPCs and Players of level X, but those are usually accounted for by WBL differences between Monsters and NPCs vs PCs. Like I said, I will be presenting the encounters during and/or after the battles, so that anyone can see what the encounter consisted of, and whether they think that's appropriately representative or not.
-
So we're going with the interpretation that you take them as actual levels, but those levels advance each class?
-
Since you are trying to make me miserable, I looked at bloodline, and as I suspected, there is literally nothing there other than a generic bonuses that serve only the purpose of giving something for nothing.
So no, you can't have any bloodlines of anything, and I'm going to use an Aboleth on you as punishment for making me read that pile of crap ruleset that possess no useful qualities whatsoever.
-
So no, you can't have any bloodlines of anything, and I'm going to use an Aboleth on you as punishment for making me read that pile of crap ruleset that possess no useful qualities whatsoever.
Bring on the tentacles.
-
Alright, so I'm going to need to adjust the party up a bit...
Probably going to swap out the Beguiler for a War Weaver of some description...
Do I know beforehand the location, environs, and whether or not the Aboleth has any Skum?
And is the win condition on my part any single character surviving, who is able to resurrect the other characters?
This should be fun.
-
Sorry, but what is your stance on Insane Defiance (character takes 1 wisdom damage, and then redirects a targetted mind-affecting ability to anyone who could be affected by that ability)?
I put it on most of my characters (if it fits), and offers decent protection vs. the Enslave ability...
-
Well, since your party is level 6, the Aboleth is only one fourth of the encounters you will be facing that day, though you can be sure that at least one of them will be EL 5, out of fairness.
Basically, the plan would be that you give me four character sheets, then I come up with my four encounters (or pick them from a really big list and flavor to work together as a single coherent likely day's events) then tell you what situation you are in at the beginning, and you can prepare spells (and in your case, Bind Vestiges) and then you can progress from there based on what you know.
Whether the Aboleth has any skum or not would be something that you figure out based on that.
EDIT: Where is insane defiance from?
Also, win condition (if a standard party of four) is surviving all four encounters with all four party members at the end of the day. If you do that with 3 party members dying every fight, that's still fine. Though, I reserve the right to declare you a loser if your strategy is clearly not repeatable each day, or if it would never result in you leveling up at all, because you expend more XP than you gain.
Remember, solo options are fine too, and will face easier fights because of that.
-
This will be a PbP here on BG, or via PMs?
I'm assuming this is for decent optimizers who want to test their builds/CO skills, right?
Fights only, or can it be any encounter?
DnD 3.5 only?
Party must be "generic" (Meleer, Skillmonkey, Caster, Support) or can be anything (4 Fighters or 4 Wizards)?
-
Hopefully BG, if I get my requested forum whenever Prime next gets on. Otherwise, work something out.
Yes/No. It can certainly be used for that, but a large part of it is to show people how level appropriate encounters are actually not that easy.
It could be "Any encounter" but in practice it will be fights, since at most levels "A trench" is very CR inappropriate, and "A door" is usually only part of something like "Get to X quickly, without alerting Z."
Yes 3.5 only.
Anything if you want. Since part of the point is to prove that a party of four Wizards is actually still challenged by CR appropriate encounters, that's good.
-
and then I will run them through a set of four CR appropriate encounters, as per the encounter guidelines
This means that the encounters will be of different CRs (i.e. 1st CR -2, 2nd CR -1, 3rd CR +0, 4th CR +1) or all will have the same CR? I guess the later but want to be sure.
What about multiple retries? And about one user sending multiple requests/parties?
Encounter will be tailored to the party?
What about solo-ing encounters? One character against either a lower CR encounter (to make it fair) or level appropriate encounter (to make it more challanging :>)
And just to be clear - Your goal is to defeat the party with any means, right? don't forget that advantages increase encounters CR (so an ambushing Ice Devil is more then 13 CR). ;)
It's a very interesting and cool idea BTW. :D
-
This is kind of futile unless you agree not to screw around with badly rated CRs.
Going up against, say, a cloaker lord or sharn with additional casting levels is going to be death regardless of whether WotC thought it was "CR appropriate"
Yes, let's just go over all the monsters that are too powerful for their CR (IE, Wizards cannot solo them with a single spell) Anything with the Demon or Devil Subtype. Anything with the angel or Archon subtype. Anything with the Dragon type. Anything with the Outsider type actually. Aboleths, Mindflayers, Beholders. Oh wait, let's just ban the entire type. Ect.
Look, I'm going to let everyone know what the encounters are, it's not like people are going to have to take my word on this. If they think that "An Ice Devil" is too overpowered for a level 12 party to face, that's their problem, because it turns out that it's totally expected that level 12 parties will have to fight Gelugons.
The problem is that cloaker lords cast as wizards of a higher level than their CR. And also have more HD than their CR.
So do Planetar, except Cleric casting. Still CR monsters. Yes, there are abnormalities that exist, between CR NPCs and Players of level X, but those are usually accounted for by WBL differences between Monsters and NPCs vs PCs. Like I said, I will be presenting the encounters during and/or after the battles, so that anyone can see what the encounter consisted of, and whether they think that's appropriately representative or not.
As long as you choose the encounters before picking the party, I don't have a problem with it, but I would prefer if we were to prove something other than "the CR system is totally broken, and a wizard 12 is considered the same threat as a soulknife 12".
-
As long as you choose the encounters before picking the party, I don't have a problem with it, but I would prefer if we were to prove something other than "the CR system is totally broken, and a wizard 12 is considered the same threat as a soulknife 12".
Very agree TML. The DM can always drop the giant with equal wizard levels of non-associated class levels worth of HD - this method rocks every party at all levels. CR system is actually more abusive than character building IMO.
In addition, situational modifiers change CR, RAW. So if I hamstring myself and don't have an arcane caster or divine caster or all the other factors that say "having this makes the fight easier" - I should expect to face significantly lower CR's. Will that be that case?
-
In addition, situational modifiers change CR, RAW. So if I hamstring myself and don't have an arcane caster or divine caster or all the other factors that say "having this makes the fight easier" - I should expect to face significantly lower CR's. Will that be that case?
That is the most phenomenally retarded thing I have read today. And I just got done arguing with someone who's seriously claiming that using a tower shield to hide you and all your gear (including said tower shield) is less immersion-breaking than opposed skill checks.
Not having a Wizard isn't a situational modifier. Fighting a water elemental underwater is a situational modifier.
-
Things about CRs:
1) I will be using mostly a very low variation for CR. For example, I told one person (you?) that they are facing an Aboleth as a threat. That's a CR 7, but against a party of level 6 characters. So to compensate, at least one encounter will be EL 5 or lower. Though I could argue telling him "Aboleth" beforehand justifies the +1 CR by itself, I'm not going to.
2) For solo members, it may be a single encounter of EL equal to their level, or two encounters of EL equal to level -2, or four of EL equal to their level -4. With the normal variation. You will find this is all according to the Encounter guidelines for reduced party size. Additionally, for parties of four, it is technically within my rights to pit them against a single encounter of EL equal to their party level +4, though if I do so, it will be rare.
3) I am going to be using, for the vast majority of fights, monsters, not NPCs. Some monsters do cast spells, or use SLAs, and they are usually some of the tougher monsters. But I am not trying to abuse the CR system, or use four level 12 wizards going nova from ambushes as a demonstration of the fact that fighters can't face equal CR encounters.
4) All the encounters are made ahead of time, because I have a long list of "generic EL X encounters" that I have made for most levels. If you pick a level I don't actually have prepared (hint anything above 13 falls into this category) then I will be forced to make them then. However, I will definitely have them all finalized before I ask anyone to prepare spells, and hopefully before I look at in depth sheets. That said, it really is within the DMs normal duties and actions to dictate who fights the party based also on their characters, such as not sending Shadow Hit Squads against people with no access to Magic weapons or Ghost Touch effects, and to have plot involved hit squads who have some knowledge of the PCs past tactics, so when I pick challenges that I think are good challenges for the party from my list, that's not good complaining.
5) My goal is not to defeat the party by any means. My goal is to show that high powered characters are actually pretty well balanced against appropriate CR, and that smuck classes are actually weaker than is needed to face them.
So for examples:
a) A party of Fighter/Dragon Shaman/Factotum/Favored Soul, my "goal" would be to defeat them, and make them all look bad. Because those are smuck classes.
b) A party of Wizard/Druid/Wizard/Cleric, my goal would be for them to survive all four encounters, but have had some genuine serious tension in most fights, and generally feel like "Man I don't have another one of those in me" after the fourth one.
c) A party of Wizard/Druid/Cleric/Fighter, my goal would be something like b, but with a strong does of "Jim was not particularly useful, and I kinda wish we had another Bob instead of him."
6) "Situation modifiers" No, an "ambushing" Gelugon is not of higher EL. A Gelugon has at will Persistent Image, amongst other things, and the fact that you might run into a Persistent Image den, and the Gelugon detects you before you detect it does not make it a higher EL. If you can't deal with the abilities of an appropriate CRed monster actually means you can't deal with the abilities of an appropriately CRed monster, not that it's unfair for a Gelugon to use Persistent Image. It's also not unfair for it to fly, because it has fly as an at will SLA.
Likewise, to quote from the blue Dragon combat description: "Typically, blue dragons attack from above or burrow beneath the sands until opponents come within 100 feet. Older dragons use their special abilities, such as hallucinatory terrain, in concert with these tactics to mask the land and improve their chances to surprise the target."
If a Blue Dragon surprises you, it's not a higher EL fight. Because that's what they are expected to try to do.
Also, fighting a monster in it's natural habitat does not increase it's EL either. Fighting an Aboleth or Water Elemental in water is not higher EL than CR X, it's CR X assumes it is in it's natural habitat.
And for double sure choosing to be a party of commoners is not a situational modifier that gives you a pass on fighting level appropriate challenges.
-
What about defeating them by moving them out of their natural habitats?
Like somehow teleporting the Aboleth out of water, where it is incapable of breathing.
-
4) All the encounters are made ahead of time, because I have a long list of "generic EL X encounters" that I have made for most levels. If you pick a level I don't actually have prepared (hint anything above 13 falls into this category) then I will be forced to make them then. 5) My goal is not to defeat the party by any means. My goal is to show that high powered characters are actually pretty well balanced against appropriate CR, and that smuck classes are actually weaker than is needed to face them.
So for examples:
a) A party of Fighter/Dragon Shaman/Factotum/Favored Soul, my "goal" would be to defeat them, and make them all look bad. Because those are smuck classes.
b) A party of Wizard/Druid/Wizard/Cleric, my goal would be for them to survive all four encounters, but have had some genuine serious tension in most fights, and generally feel like "Man I don't have another one of those in me" after the fourth one.
c) A party of Wizard/Druid/Cleric/Fighter, my goal would be something like b, but with a strong does of "Jim was not particularly useful, and I kinda wish we had another Bob instead of him."
So you will be applying a personal bias to the exercise?
-
What about defeating them by moving them out of their natural habitats?
Like somehow teleporting the Aboleth out of water, where it is incapable of breathing.
Depends on the situation, but if you did so, and it died, that would be success for you. And if you planeshift it somewhere so that it dies for some other reason, same thing. On the other hand, if it just walks back into the water, and comes back to eat you, then you obviously didn't win.
So you will be applying a personal bias to the exercise?
No. I will be running the encounters as I would run them for any non cheese party. And if they happen to all result in TPKs every time, no matter what, I will just call you guys all losers, and tell you how you should have built your characters/what you should have done instead. If people manage to vastly outperform my goals (IE, entire party of Wizards, but one guy solo kills every encounter while the others watch, and wait for a tag in that never comes, or party of fighters even manages to survive to victory) then that will obviously be the kind of evidence that proves me wrong.
-
So you will be applying a personal bias to the exercise?
No. I will be running the encounters as I would run them for any non cheese party. And if they happen to all result in TPKs every time, no matter what, I will just call you guys all losers, and tell you how you should have built your characters/what you should have done instead. If people manage to vastly outperform my goals (IE, entire party of Wizards, but one guy solo kills every encounter while the others watch, and wait for a tag in that never comes, or party of fighters even manages to survive to victory) then that will obviously be the kind of evidence that proves me wrong.
Perhaps I came upon the purpose of this exercise incorrectly. But if your goal towards one party is to destroy them while the other is shown favoritism I don't know how you would go about maintaining any proper viability. You could maybe apply the same level of tactics against a both types of groups? I can understand if you even explained it as the monsters (the ones with higher int scores) targeting the weaker members from a pure tactical standpoint. Ideally my concern is if such a hostile bias is implemented we'll be left with a tainted study which leaves us back where we started.
-
Perhaps I came upon the purpose of this exercise incorrectly. But if your goal towards one party is to destroy them while the other is shown favoritism I don't know how you would go about maintaining any proper viability. You could maybe apply the same level of tactics against a both types of groups? I can understand if you even explained it as the monsters (the ones with higher int scores) targeting the weaker members from a pure tactical standpoint. Ideally my concern is if such a hostile bias is implemented we'll be left with a tainted study which leaves us back where we started.
Perhaps you could learn to read? I never said I would show favoritism to any party. I explicitly stated that I would play the monsters just as well against any party combination.
-
Perhaps I came upon the purpose of this exercise incorrectly. But if your goal towards one party is to destroy them while the other is shown favoritism I don't know how you would go about maintaining any proper viability. You could maybe apply the same level of tactics against a both types of groups? I can understand if you even explained it as the monsters (the ones with higher int scores) targeting the weaker members from a pure tactical standpoint. Ideally my concern is if such a hostile bias is implemented we'll be left with a tainted study which leaves us back where we started.
Perhaps you could learn to read? I never said I would show favoritism to any party. I explicitly stated that I would play the monsters just as well against any party combination.
Oh really?
a) A party of Fighter/Dragon Shaman/Factotum/Favored Soul, my "goal" would be to defeat them, and make them all look bad. Because those are smuck classes.
b) A party of Wizard/Druid/Wizard/Cleric, my goal would be for them to survive all four encounters, but have had some genuine serious tension in most fights, and generally feel like "Man I don't have another one of those in me" after the fourth one.
c) A party of Wizard/Druid/Cleric/Fighter, my goal would be something like b, but with a strong does of "Jim was not particularly useful, and I kinda wish we had another Bob instead of him."
I see specific differences in your approach to each party purely made from the party's composition. In fact one goal is to perform a TPK while another is to alienate a specific player within the group.
-
My goal is not the same thing as my tactics. My goal is what I would like the outcome to be. If your claim is that the mere fact of me having a preferred outcome prevents me from treating parties equally, then you are rejecting a priori the ability to ever have a test that accurately measures anything.
-
Listen we can get into the fun of a priori and such but I am just concerned that you'll be unable to separate your goals from the execution of tactics. Maybe it is the way you phrased it. If you were hoping to demonstrate the problems inherit in 'bad classes' by demonstrating how the same monster could provide a challenge for a tier 1 group but devastate the weaker group that is fine. You would be establishing a fair contrast between two subjects.
But from what I can perceive you want to apply a harsher & more hostile approach to the weaker group while going easier on the stronger group. Anything you hope to attain is tainted by such a bias.
-
My goal is not the same thing as my tactics. My goal is what I would like the outcome to be. If your claim is that the mere fact of me having a preferred outcome prevents me from treating parties equally, then you are rejecting a priori the ability to ever have a test that accurately measures anything.
There is such a thing as a blind test or a double blind test.
-
But from what I can perceive you want to apply a harsher & more hostile approach to the weaker group while going easier on the stronger group. Anything you hope to attain is tainted by such a bias.
I'm going to ignore everything you have to say, as you have clearly demonstrated that you have not critically read anything that I have said in this thread, like for example, the very first post, in which I stated the explicit purpose of the thread is to humble those who believe Wizards destroy the CR system, or the post you quoted in which I explicitly said "if someone exceeds my goals, that would be evidence that I am wrong."
Great, you are a fighter fanboi, I don't care. Either make a party, go away, or be silent until some actual unfairness has occurred. But stop whining about how you think the fact that my expectations are not to your liking means that I am incapable of treating parties equally, when I've explicitly stated that is what I am going to do.
My goal is not the same thing as my tactics. My goal is what I would like the outcome to be. If your claim is that the mere fact of me having a preferred outcome prevents me from treating parties equally, then you are rejecting a priori the ability to ever have a test that accurately measures anything.
There is such a thing as a blind test or a double blind test.
Such things cannot be applied to any situation in which a human being must make decisions of tactics on the fly. I can't choose the Aboleths actions without knowing what the PCs actions are, and anyone else choosing the Aboleth's actions would also have expectations of some kind.
-
Oh I'll make a party. I'll make a party so hard... I'll make a party that makes you feel so awkward downstairs.
You'll see the party and only be able to respond, "Oh yeah baby."
-
There is such a thing as a blind test or a double blind test.
Such things cannot be applied to any situation in which a human being must make decisions of tactics on the fly. I can't choose the Aboleths actions without knowing what the PCs actions are, and anyone else choosing the Aboleth's actions would also have expectations of some kind.
True. It might be a good idea to get a third party involved to cut down the meta-knowledge a bit, if possible. While metagaming is an important part of being a good GM, it makes it more difficult to judge the system
-
Oh I'll make a party. I'll make a party so hard... I'll make a party that makes you feel so awkward downstairs.
You'll see the party and only be able to respond, "Oh yeah baby."
I'm sorry, but this is the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Even in context, it makes no sense whatsoever. Bravo, sir.
-
How about gestalt? (With gestalt encounters to match) :smirk
-
Subforum granted. Please continue making parties.
No gestalt, this is about classes and the CR system. The CR system for Gestalt is some vague poorly defined guidelines at it's best.
-
Ok np, that just provides evidence that the CR system doesn't scale well with class features... ;)
-
Oh I'll make a party. I'll make a party so hard... I'll make a party that makes you feel so awkward downstairs.
You'll see the party and only be able to respond, "Oh yeah baby."
I'm sorry, but this is the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Even in context, it makes no sense whatsoever. Bravo, sir.
I have recently been taking levels in Tainted Scholar.
-
Ok np, that just provides evidence that the CR system doesn't scale well with class features... ;)
Gestalt is not a class feature. If there were actual comprehensive rules about gestalt at all in the first place, and comprehensive rules about CR for gestalt, then I might consider it. But as it is, I would have to start by making up my own rules for gestalt, then my own rules for gestalt CR, and then I wouldn't be demonstrating anything about the actual game, I'd be demonstrating something about my houserules, and frankly, I have much better houserules, such that if I wanted to demonstrate something about them, I would not use some gestalt houserules made up in 30 minutes in response to your request.
-
I'm kinda tempted to play that Fighter/Dragon Shaman/Factotum/Favored Soul idea...
-
Y'know, if you synergized that right...
-
In addition, situational modifiers change CR, RAW. So if I hamstring myself and don't have an arcane caster or divine caster or all the other factors that say "having this makes the fight easier" - I should expect to face significantly lower CR's. Will that be that case?
That is the most phenomenally retarded thing I have read today. And I just got done arguing with someone who's seriously claiming that using a tower shield to hide you and all your gear (including said tower shield) is less immersion-breaking than opposed skill checks.
Not having a Wizard isn't a situational modifier. Fighting a water elemental underwater is a situational modifier.
Thanks for calling me retarded. Open your DMG to page 50. Read the entire section called "Difficulty Factors". Yes, perhaps I used the wrong label and instead of "situational modifier" I should have said "Difficulty Factor". That's no excuse for calling someone retarded. Not having certain classes does in fact make fights harder and that's explicitly what the rules say.
-
In addition, situational modifiers change CR, RAW. So if I hamstring myself and don't have an arcane caster or divine caster or all the other factors that say "having this makes the fight easier" - I should expect to face significantly lower CR's. Will that be that case?
That is the most phenomenally retarded thing I have read today. And I just got done arguing with someone who's seriously claiming that using a tower shield to hide you and all your gear (including said tower shield) is less immersion-breaking than opposed skill checks.
Not having a Wizard isn't a situational modifier. Fighting a water elemental underwater is a situational modifier.
Thanks for calling me retarded. Open your DMG to page 50. Read the entire section called "Difficulty Factors". Yes, perhaps I used the wrong label and instead of "situational modifier" I should have said "Difficulty Factor". That's no excuse for calling someone retarded. Not having certain classes does in fact make fights harder and that's explicitly what the rules say.
So making a Party of Wizard/Druid/Beguiler/Wizard should get you way easier fights, because you don't have a Rogue, Fighter, or Cleric.
Or you know, that's rules for making a fun game, and has no bearing on the balance of classes, which is what this is about. Doing that would negate our ability to derive conclusions about class balance from the results.
-
Thanks for calling me retarded. Open your DMG to page 50. Read the entire section called "Difficulty Factors". Yes, perhaps I used the wrong label and instead of "situational modifier" I should have said "Difficulty Factor". That's no excuse for calling someone retarded. Not having certain classes does in fact make fights harder and that's explicitly what the rules say.
Where did I call you retarded? Show me the quote. I said your statement was retarded, which it was. If you can't tell the difference between criticism of your words and personal attacks, that's on you.
Protip: just because you say something stupid doesn't mean you are automatically stupid. It does mean that other people get to call you on your stupid statements when you make them in public.
Just to make things clear, this is what you said:
In addition, situational modifiers change CR, RAW. So if I hamstring myself and don't have an arcane caster or divine caster or all the other factors that say "having this makes the fight easier" - I should expect to face significantly lower CR's. Will that be that case?
Emphasis mine. This is what the DMG, pg 50 says:
None of the above factors should necessarily be taken into account when assigning or modifying Challenge Ratings, but you should keep them in mind when designing encounters.
See the difference?
-
How about long time buffs? Will they be able to be up for all the encounters in case of a 4 encounter per day thingie?
EDIT:
Oh and how about Beholder Mage? ;)
EDIT2:
Spell point system acceptable?
-
How about long time buffs? Will they be able to be up for all the encounters in case of a 4 encounter per day thingie?
EDIT:
Oh and how about Beholder Mage? ;)
EDIT2:
Spell point system acceptable?
Are you allergic to actual D&D or something?
Long term buffs may or may not be up for some number of encounters, depending on the buff durations and the situations.
-
How about long time buffs? Will they be able to be up for all the encounters in case of a 4 encounter per day thingie?
EDIT:
Oh and how about Beholder Mage? ;)
EDIT2:
Spell point system acceptable?
Are you allergic to actual D&D or something?
Long term buffs may or may not be up for some number of encounters, depending on the buff durations and the situations.
So assuming a 20 hour buff to be up all day is allright?
-
So assuming a 20 hour buff to be up all day is allright?
As an assumption you make when building your character, it's a pretty good one, seeing as most situations will result in the PCs facing all four encounters in under 20 hours, barring something weird like getting lost in a maze (I don't intend to make any mazes) or trying to five minute workday everything.
-
So assuming a 20 hour buff to be up all day is allright?
As an assumption you make when building your character, it's a pretty good one, seeing as most situations will result in the PCs facing all four encounters in under 20 hours, barring something weird like getting lost in a maze (I don't intend to make any mazes) or trying to five minute workday everything.
Yeah, and I'd also assume my party slept in a rope trick after 16 hours in a maze anyway.
You say there is no calling spells. Do you mean just Conjuration Calling or all summoning spells as well?
How about Minions? Would a Cleric be able to bring a group of his undead buddies with him? Assuming he's already paid for them.
-
You say there is no calling spells. Do you mean just Conjuration Calling or all summoning spells as well?
I mean Lesser, regular, and Greater Planar Binding, Gate, any variation of Planar Binding, and probably some other stuff, which I'll know when I see it. If there are any calling effects that don't call in creatures, they are probably fine. And if there are summoning effects that act like these, they are probably banned.
Everything but Gate on that list is a hassle for me as the DM, and Gate is absurdly broken.
How about Minions? Would a Cleric be able to bring a group of his undead buddies with him? Assuming he's already paid for them.
People can use Animate Dead, spend some of their WBL on their current crop of minions. Clerics are not allowed to have Rebuked anything, especially not your infinite shadow army.
If you are using any manner of undead gaining besides Animate Dead, I probably won't allow it, and even with Animate Dead, you can only have things that I consider you could realistically killed or otherwise obtained the corpse of. Which will be purely subjective and enforced by DM fiat.
It's mostly about making things easier on me, but I might also demonstrate some of the problems of undead armies that might come up.
-
Ok I'll submit a party that's halfway between 10th and 11th level with experience. Count them as CR 10.5 if you must.
-
And what are you going to use that XP for?
-
I wouldn't mind trying out my psychic warrior build, but it uses item crafting in a big way. http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2926.msg97988#msg97988
-
And what are you going to use that XP for?
Necropolitan, Also because I don't want to waste a feat on tomb tainted soul.
-
I wouldn't mind trying out my psychic warrior build, but it uses item crafting in a big way. http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2926.msg97988#msg97988
You cannot exceed WBL in any way. So you can take a bunch of feats, and tell me how much XP you spent on Psychic Reformation, and crafting items, and you can still not have any items more than anyone else who didn't take those feats or spend that XP.
-
I wouldn't mind trying out my psychic warrior build, but it uses item crafting in a big way. http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2926.msg97988#msg97988
You cannot exceed WBL in any way. So you can take a bunch of feats, and tell me how much XP you spent on Psychic Reformation, and crafting items, and you can still not have any items more than anyone else who didn't take those feats or spend that XP.
Not the best place to use an artificer then. :p
-
I wouldn't mind trying out my psychic warrior build, but it uses item crafting in a big way. http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2926.msg97988#msg97988
You cannot exceed WBL in any way. So you can take a bunch of feats, and tell me how much XP you spent on Psychic Reformation, and crafting items, and you can still not have any items more than anyone else who didn't take those feats or spend that XP.
What if he goes it solo?
Also, I guess I could boost his level a bit, but that'd mean some extra work on my part...
-
Also, what about flaws?
-
I wouldn't mind trying out my psychic warrior build, but it uses item crafting in a big way. http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2926.msg97988#msg97988
You cannot exceed WBL in any way. So you can take a bunch of feats, and tell me how much XP you spent on Psychic Reformation, and crafting items, and you can still not have any items more than anyone else who didn't take those feats or spend that XP.
Not the best place to use an artificer then. :p
That's somewhat intentional. I don't have a way to model the overwhelming wealth expenditure that some kinds of Artificers have as a drawback in a 4 encounter day.
Also, what about flaws?
They are fine. Two, only at level 1, not at weird levels to get higher pre-req feats.
-
Bump for you guys submitting parties already.
-
What was the link to the subforum again?
-
I didn't give it, because no one has a a party yet. As soon as I have a party, I'll create a thread for that party.
-
Remember that this advice was also written with the blaster-mage mentality, where a moderately-challenging fight might require 3-4 spells.
I figure while people are running off and optimizing builds someone should test the naive base case. While it's doubtful I'll survive all 4 encounters, with Kaelik's indulgence, I'd like to quantify how badly my team loses. We know they probably will, the only real question to me is how much.
I'm thinking Human Fighter (Greatsword), Halfling Rogue (TWFing), Dwarven Cleric (Healbot), and Gray Elf Wizard (Blaster). I was going to go core only but I can't bring myself to blast with only core spells. I'm going to limit myself to core+completes+spell compendium, I'll have more details in a while.
-
I'll probably do something like:
Necropolitan Master of Shrouds
Ghost Bard/Warblade
Necropolitan Wizard or Erudite
Druid or Necropolitan Malconvoker
A party themed around summoning the idea is that everyone should synergize with everyone.
-
Oh I'll make a party. I'll make a party so hard... I'll make a party that makes you feel so awkward downstairs.
You'll see the party and only be able to respond, "Oh yeah baby."
Am I invited? :flutter
I'll bring my Green Whisperer/Fochlucan Lyrist and some chips. You bring the rest. :p
-
No seriously, I hate you guys. I go through all the trouble of creating tons of CR encounters, like, literal lists of them, and then none of you can make a party.
I'll probably do something like:
Necropolitan Master of Shrouds
Ghost Bard/Warblade
Necropolitan Wizard or Erudite
Druid or Necropolitan Malconvoker
A party themed around summoning the idea is that everyone should synergize with everyone.
So you looked through my ban list, and realized that while 14 of the 15 items were just straight bans, one of the 15 was just a caution, that encourages you to not use it, because it's a lot of work for me.
And then you said "I'll make a whole party of that, to make it even more work."
I hate you. As a person.
-
No seriously, I hate you guys. I go through all the trouble of creating tons of CR encounters, like, literal lists of them, and then none of you can make a party.
Whoa there kimosabe, I should have my party (ECL 9) finished by Saturday at the latest, I assume there is nothing wrong with what I've outlined.
-
I guess I could make a party of 4 psions.
The fact that I can make them all tier 0 is beside the point.
-
So the purpose of this thread, I'm going to try to create a CR encounter arena, in which people can make parties, either as four people, or one person playing four characters, and then I will run them through a set of four CR appropriate encounters, as per the encounter guidelines, that are also at least somehow a likely set of four encounters to hit in the same day, for whatever reason.
There is a world of difference between one person metagaming a party(super tactics), and a group of players futzing it up(not so super tactics). Half of the reason blaster wizards don't work is friendly fire as an example.
Even 4 experienced players aren't going to have the same tactical advantage as one guy running 4 dudes is what I'm saying. If you want a fair test in game design, designate 4 players or something like that. Frustration at other players is part of the reason why some of us want to run a character who can competently do most things.
-
There is a world of difference between one person metagaming a party(super tactics), and a group of players futzing it up(not so super tactics). Half of the reason blaster wizards don't work is friendly fire as an example.
Even 4 experienced players aren't going to have the same tactical advantage as one guy running 4 dudes is what I'm saying. If you want a fair test in game design, designate 4 players or something like that. Frustration at other players is part of the reason why some of us want to run a character who can competently do most things.
That's true to an extent, and if four people want to create a party, that's fine, but for example, I have one person attempting to show a "standard party" of Greatsword Fighter, Halfing TWFing Rogue, Healer Cleric, Blaster Wizard, and I doubt he's going to find someone to play a Greatsword Fighter only. Likewise I have someone with a largely not good classes set up. Ect. While interparty issues are usually a factor, they aren't always, and I am confident enough that this will pan out how I planned, that I'm not worried.
-
Wasn't the whole point of this thread to show that Tier 1 parties also have trouble handling more than 4 encounters per day?
I was about to create a tier 1 party that can reliably deal with anything that is thrown at them without having to rely on divination to prepare themselves.
But if you just nerf anything that makes tier 1 tier 1, then saying tier 1 can't deal with 4 encounters per day is sort of silly.
Also, I'm confused, you only have 13 guidelines. 4 of which are bans on Metamagic reducers in their various forms. But say that I break number 15? Is it the one about calling magic? Then I deliberately asked you about whether summoning was ok, to which you replied:
I mean Lesser, regular, and Greater Planar Binding, Gate, any variation of Planar Binding, and probably some other stuff, which I'll know when I see it. If there are any calling effects that don't call in creatures, they are probably fine. And if there are summoning effects that act like these, they are probably banned.
Which are the long duration summoning effects. This party would call in their creatures from fight to fight, except for a few gray render skeleton blokes to bring some bodies to the battle.
The party isn't even out of place in a neutral undead themed campaign.
But allright, if you are gonna go all Tourettes on me, good luck with your arena thingie.
-
Fine, how about this:
Human Crusader/Barbarian/Cleric/Ordained Champion/Frenzied Berserker
Human Rogue/Illusionist/Unseen Seer/Swiftblade
Gnome Cleric/Divine Prankster/Shadowcraft Mage/something...
Kobold Wizard/Sorcerer/Mindbender/Ultimate Magus/Archmage
-
On metamagic cost reducers: I was planning on taking a few metamagic rods of various make, are those allowed?
-
Wasn't the whole point of this thread to show that Tier 1 parties also have trouble handling more than 4 encounters per day?
But if you just nerf anything that makes tier 1 tier 1, then saying tier 1 can't deal with 4 encounters per day is sort of silly.
You were mistaken. I never said the word Tier. Because, see the Tier thread. The Tier system is fucking retarded, and that's not what this is about.
I banned the things which break the game. One of those is absurd minions, but I didn't specifically ban it, just generically limit it.
Then you made a whole party of minionmancers, after I specifically requested that be kept to the minimum.
Also, I'm confused, you only have 13 guidelines. 4 of which are bans on Metamagic reducers in their various forms. But say that I break number 15? Is it the one about calling magic? Then I deliberately asked you about whether summoning was ok, to which you replied:
13) No Leadership, and I might punch you in the face through the internet if you try to tell me what absurd creatures you have Dominated or Animated before this starts. If you want to animate something, it better be readily accessible, and usually travel in packs with a lower EL than your level, so no, your level 5 character cannot have a Fire Giant Skeleton.
-
Fine, how about this:
Human Crusader/Barbarian/Cleric/Ordained Champion/Frenzied Berserker
Human Rogue/Illusionist/Unseen Seer/Swiftblade
Gnome Cleric/Divine Prankster/Shadowcraft Mage/something...
Kobold Wizard/Sorcerer/Mindbender/Ultimate Magus/Archmage
Probably not the Shadowcraft Mage, where is Divine Prankster from?
And what level do you imagine them being, because I'm already seeing Archmage, and that on a Ultimate Magus Theurge.
On metamagic cost reducers: I was planning on taking a few metamagic rods of various make, are those allowed?
Fine, as long as you pay for them.
-
How is magic/psionics transparency? Can I use metamagic rods as a psion, orange ioun stones, and so on?
-
Divine prankster sounds gnomish, so I'm guessing races of stone.
I was under the impression you hadn't decided what level range to look at. I've been ill and buried in research, so I haven't really had time to stat up a party.
-
How is magic/psionics transparency? Can I use metamagic rods as a psion, orange ioun stones, and so on?
Orange Ioun Stone yes. Metamagic rods, no, because Psionic Meta is different.
Divine prankster sounds gnomish, so I'm guessing races of stone.
I was under the impression you hadn't decided what level range to look at. I've been ill and buried in research, so I haven't really had time to stat up a party.
I said whatever level you submit, but made clear that I am much less accommodating to level 15 or especially 17 and up parties, than I am of levels people actually play (5-13). (In the sense that I am much less well prepared with encounters, and such).
You can have Archmages if you want, but you know.
-
That's why I wasn't so concerned about what to top off the Cleric build with (probably Earth Dreamer). Honestly, I expect the last few levels of the FB and Swiftblade builds to get chopped off, too.
By the way, the Swiftblade build uses Precise Strike from Dragon #310. By my reading, that feat is effective against targets immune to Sneak Attack damage. It also uses the Illusion Mastery ACF from UA.
As for the Shadowcraft Mage, I don't anticipate it using DMM at all. It has enough uses for it's turn attempts using feats like Domain Spontaneity and a Divine Trickster ability that boosts the Save Disbelief on Figments by 10. That said, it will likely have Heighten Spell, and probably even Earth Spell, but there won't be any Shadow Miracle shenanigans until 17th level.
The Kobold sacrifices a level of Wizard progression in order to get more low level spells, a higher CL, and some free Metamagic. As far as I can tell, Archmage is just the natural cap to that.
-
I would be interested in making a party of 4 Wizard 5/Red Wizard 5. This has the benefit of being simple, core, and powerful. Since you prefer the 1-13 level range I will make them 10th level provided you are willing to let them take leadership for circle magic. If you are not willing to either let me do that (or have other minions contributing spell slots) then I will make them level 13 and use simulacrums.
I plan on using core, the completes, the spell compendium, the magic item compendium, and the stronghold builder's handbook.
One thing that I am specifically not going to do is manipulate my spell slots with circle magic and heighten magic so that I get more spells per day/a bunch of high level spells.
I do plan on using circle magic to give myself a huge CL boost and apply metamagic to some of my spells.
Provided that you have no objections I would be ready and available on Saturday to do this.
-
No, I hate you, go die in a fire.
What the hell is your people's problem? The solution is not to find every single thing that would be banned from a game, and then compare it against my list, and then only do things that are not on my ban list, but would definitely be banned.
Seriously, I make a ban list, and every single fucking post I have to add to it. First Tainted Scholar isn't on it, so someone wants to play that, then Beholder Mage, now Circle Magic.
No, you can't use Circle Magic.
-
Whiny bitchyness, your name is Kaelic.
Anyone remembre when these boards were cool? Before Treantmonk changed system, before Sunic decided to become arrogantinsolent and call everyone a fuckwit? Before Kaelic was whiny? Kuro is still ok, thank god.
Also I don't like Amechra or w/e his name is.
-
Whiny bitchyness, your name is Kaelic.
Anyone remembre when these boards were cool? Before Treantmonk changed system, before Sunic decided to become arrogantinsolent and call everyone a fuckwit? Before Kaelic was whiny? Kuro is still ok, thank god.
Also I don't like Amechra or w/e his name is.
Um? Are you kidding? I have posted on these boards more time in the last month than in the two years preceding it. Also, learn to spell. Or hell, copy paste.
-
No, the solution is to either make a good ban list or give us a better idea of what would be allowed. Providing vague guidelines and unspoken boundaries and then going into a rage whenever anyone crosses the boundaries is very rude. If you want to continue this challenge I suggest banning all spellcasting PRCs rated +2, +1, +0 since a lot of the classes there are stronger than Red Wizards which are rated +0.
Even if you hate the tier system it should give you an idea of what is strong and that you might want to ban.
Here is the tier system for PrCs for your convenience.
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5198.msg173089#msg173089
-
What did I spell incorrectly?
Anyhow, if you want I can make a party of un-optimised of 4 fighters, would you like that?What kind of stuff should I expect? Are they of CR= to level or did you make adjustments for stuff that really hard or easy for the CR? Is Half-Minotaur/Hlaf-Ogre template and Dungeon Crasher allowed? And the Knockback feat from Race of Stones? You see what I'm planning?
-
No, the solution is to either make a good ban list or give us a better idea of what would be allowed. Providing vague guidelines and unspoken boundaries and then going into a rage whenever anyone crosses the boundaries is very rude. If you want to continue this challenge I suggest banning all spellcasting PRCs rated +2, +1, +0 since a lot of the classes there are stronger than Red Wizards which are rated +0.
Even if you hate the tier system it should give you an idea of what is strong and that you might want to ban.
Here is the tier system for PrCs for your convenience.
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5198.msg173089#msg173089
No, the Tier system would not give me an idea of what is strong, because the Tier system doesn't know what is strong. Literally nothing in Complete Arcane is a problem, but Circle Magic instantly negates any semblance of a game. I banned the things that need to be banned, and if someone wants to have an IotSFV or a Fatespinner, or a MotAO, that's fine.
But for starters, if Leadership is on the banned list, and someone says "Hey, I have this bullshit ability that allows me to turn a bunch of level 5 characters into a single level 20 character, can you unban leadership just so that I can do that?" Then yes, that's fucking retarded, and I get to get upset about it.
-
Whiny bitchyness, your name is Kaelic.
Anyone remembre when these boards were cool? Before Treantmonk changed system, before Sunic decided to become arrogantinsolent and call everyone a fuckwit? Before Kaelic was whiny? Kuro is still ok, thank god.
Also I don't like Amechra or w/e his name is.
Kaelik may be a dickhole, but this is his thread, so coming in here and whining about how the boards aren't cool anymore is inappropriate. If you want to call out people you hate on the forum, use Bitch like you have to! (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?board=18.0)
That's not to say I disagree with your assessment.
-
I came here to ask him for help and maybe try out. I just saw this and commented as well as getting distracted...
-
Hi all, lurker delurking for this one.
I figure I'll throw in a level 10 party, if that is alright with you.
Deep Imaskari Wizard5/Anima Mage 5(using the Bind Vestige/Improved Bind Vestige), if this isn't bannable
Human Psion (telepath) 5/anarchic initiate 5
Human Psychic Warrior 10 (sure, I could do a goliath ubercharger, but thats boring).
Human Cleric 2/Warlock 1/Master of Shrouds 7.
These alright with you Kaelik?
-
Yeah, I'm not touching this debacle. People are asking if these things are okay, Kaelic, and you're pitching a fit about it.
Screw the trolls rules. I've got self-respect money.
-
He just needs to increase his ban list, no biggie. I have at least 2 full pages of bans and house rules. At least do the vanilla test with fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue as a baseline to see where this is going. Leadership, which seems to be a contention is flat out always banned in my games (which are E6 pathfinder so you couldn't take it anyway). Everybody would be STUPID not to take leadership + artificer cohort (I get to have my cake and eat it too! STFU DM!)
In actual, IRL play, I find that players lose interest in fighter/rogue/mundane fairly quickly. That is the biggest failing of those classes. That, and they tend to get in the way. I still contend that in order to run a real test, you would need a second brain running the different classes. How many times has your BSF run into the thick of things?
-
Hi all, lurker delurking for this one.
I figure I'll throw in a level 10 party, if that is alright with you.
Deep Imaskari Wizard5/Anima Mage 5(using the Bind Vestige/Improved Bind Vestige), if this isn't bannable
Human Psion (telepath) 5/anarchic initiate 5
Human Psychic Warrior 10 (sure, I could do a goliath ubercharger, but thats boring).
Human Cleric 2/Warlock 1/Master of Shrouds 7.
These alright with you Kaelik?
Everything except Master of Shrouds. There is literally no way for me to prevent you from having an infinite army of incorporeal undead if you take that class, so it falls under ban 13.
No, the solution is to either make a good ban list or give us a better idea of what would be allowed.
I did do that, I have no idea why you guys can't extrapolate from "getting CL 200 is banned, so is getting tons of free metamagic" to "getting CL 200 and tons of free metamagic is banned."
Everything is fine except Master of Shrouds. There is literally no way for me to prevent you from having an infinite undead army if you take that class, so it falls under ban 13.
Leadership, which seems to be a contention is flat out always banned in my games
No, I specifically banned it, people just want me to specifically unban it so they can use Circle Magic to cast CL 200 spells with free metamagic.
Yeah, I'm not touching this debacle. People are asking if these things are okay, Kaelic, and you're pitching a fit about it.
Okay, now I'm genuinely curious, are you fourteen or illiterate?
I've started to notice that a very large portion of BG is either fourteen or illiterate, and it's very odd, like there is something I'm missing, where BG has been putting up fliers in high schools or something.
-
So which one are you?
And you haven't answered my questions:
Copy PASTA!
Anyhow, if you want I can make a party of un-optimised of 4 fighters, would you like that?What kind of stuff should I expect? Are they of CR= to level or did you make adjustments for stuff that really hard or easy for the CR? Is Half-Minotaur/Hlaf-Ogre template and Dungeon Crasher allowed? And the Knockback feat from Race of Stones? You see what I'm planning?
-
So which one are you?
I'm not incompetently misspelling things and/or purposefully doing it because I think it makes me cool. So neither.
Anyhow, if you want I can make a party of un-optimised of 4 fighters, would you like that?What kind of stuff should I expect? Are they of CR= to level or did you make adjustments for stuff that really hard or easy for the CR? Is Half-Minotaur/Hlaf-Ogre template and Dungeon Crasher allowed? And the Knockback feat from Race of Stones? You see what I'm planning?
Which Half Ogre, pretty sure there are like three of those. Half Minotaur falls under 14. Which I assume means you are going to whine about how I'm banning everything.
-
My question is how you are planning not to optimize four fighters with the Half-Minotaur, Half-Ogre templates and Dungeoncrasher features... because that seems like it might be a bit tricky. :p Though looking back it looks like you might have meant the party was unoptimized...
I don't exactly have anything to prove about CR-appropriate encounters, or know what exactly you guys or Kaelik are trying to prove, but if I were to make a party for my personal use right now it would probably be Shaper, Warblade, Beguiler, Cloistered Cleric.
-
So which one are you?
I'm not incompetently misspelling things and/or purposefully doing it because I think it makes me cool. So neither.
And to which misspellings on Lycanthromancer's part were you referring?
-
And to which misspellings on Lycanthromancer's part were you referring?
Okay... Apparently I have to expand to the three possibilities of:
1) 14 year olds.
2) illiterate
3) ALTERNATE DIMENSION!
-
Yeah, I'm not touching this debacle. People are asking if these things are okay, KaelicKaelik, and you're pitching a fit about it.
Screw the trolls rules. I've got self-respect money.
Whiny bitchyness, your name is KaelicKaelik.
Anyone remembre when these boards were cool? Before Treantmonk changed system, before Sunic decided to become arrogantinsolent and call everyone a fuckwit? Before KaelicKaelik was whiny? Kuro is still ok, thank god.
Also I don't like Amechra or w/e his name is.
Good job bitching about someone who's not on this board anymore. -_-
I've seen many offtopic and trollish/spam posts but this...
And Kaelik, drop the bitching because you wont get anything done this way.
-
Yeah, I'm not touching this debacle. People are asking if these things are okay, KaelicKaelik, and you're pitching a fit about it.
Screw the trolls rules. I've got self-respect money.
Whiny bitchyness, your name is KaelicKaelik.
Anyone remembre when these boards were cool? Before Treantmonk changed system, before Sunic decided to become arrogantinsolent and call everyone a fuckwit? Before Kaelic was whiny? Kuro is still ok, thank god.
Also I don't like Amechra or w/e his name is.
Good job bitching about someone who's not on this board anymore. -_-
And Kaelik, drop the bitching because you wont get anything done this way.
Damn I guess I have to remove alternate dimension from the list. Though you missed one in TheEndIsNear's post.
Or, hereafter: ThiIndEsNiar
-
I lol'd at the part where he said he wasn't 14. XD
14 was added afterwards, didn't see that one.
Amechra left?
Not optimised as in they can push stuff into walls and deal damage but not much else. Goliath is ok? Level 4? Goliath barbarian 1 fighter 2? Would that work?
-
I have my level 9 party written up, what's next?
-
Ok im thinking level 12
four kalashtar, binder11, thrallherd1
Thralls will be binder10
They all spam zercyl's (idk if I spelled that right but you know what im talking about...) summoning ability
This is ok Kaelik?
-
I have my level 9 party written up, what's next?
You give me a link to their sheets, preferably without spells memorized, and then I pick some level 9 encounters, and make a thread, with a little intro block, then you ask questions and prepare as you would. (We can work out what preparations you would have already made based on the intro I give you in the thread.) And of course, once you have an intro, you should figure out what spells you have prepared.
Ok im thinking level 12
four kalashtar, binder11, thrallherd1
Thralls will be binder10
They all spam zercyl's (idk if I spelled that right...) summoning ability
Hey, remember when I banned leadership? Yeah, that also applies to stuff that explicitly references leadership.
-
Here's a link to my (very lazy) write-up (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_z8_62f8rYHNjFjMjQxMTMtYzk3NC00N2UwLTlmMGEtZjc4NzA2MWM5Nzk4&hl=en). I haven't listed my magic items yet, I'll do that when I post my spells prepared.
-
ehh, I'll replace the master of shrouds with a cleric 3/Master Inquistor 4/Contemplative 3 (I think you enter that at 7)
I'll have these guys up by next weekend.
-
ehh, I'll replace the master of shrouds with a cleric 3/Master Inquistor 4/Contemplative 3 (I think you enter that at 7)
Contemplative is available at 10th level.
-
Here's a link to my (very lazy) write-up (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_z8_62f8rYHNjFjMjQxMTMtYzk3NC00N2UwLTlmMGEtZjc4NzA2MWM5Nzk4&hl=en). I haven't listed my magic items yet, I'll do that when I post my spells prepared.
You will have to do items before I can give you your prep, since items are not spells prepared, and cannot be switched out easily.
I have, however, rolled out your four encounters, and am synthesizing them into a coherent narrative.
-
Here's the link to my characters with magic items equipped. (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_z8_62f8rYHOGRhNTgwMmMtMjViZi00NzIxLTg2OGUtNDE4ZTdkNzBjZGFi&hl=en&authkey=CIGvsK8I)
-
I'll make a party. I've got a concept I've been meaning to try for ages now, and I'll see how low of level I can make it.
-
Here's the link to my characters with magic items equipped. (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_z8_62f8rYHOGRhNTgwMmMtMjViZi00NzIxLTg2OGUtNDE4ZTdkNzBjZGFi&hl=en&authkey=CIGvsK8I)
Are you familiar with the rules for expendable items and one shots? Did you follow them? Because that is an absurd number of expendables.
EDIT: Tower Shields cannot be made of Darkwood.
I cannot find Oil of Holy Weapon anywhere, and I didn't calculate the Darkwood value of the Tower Shield, because Tower Shields can only be made of Steel. I can't read.
That said, Your Fighter is 18,369gp over your WBL. Primarily because of the many very expensive consumables.
-
Here's the link to my characters with magic items equipped. (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_z8_62f8rYHOGRhNTgwMmMtMjViZi00NzIxLTg2OGUtNDE4ZTdkNzBjZGFi&hl=en&authkey=CIGvsK8I)
EDIT: Tower Shields cannot be made of Darkwood.
... and I didn't calculate the Darkwood value of the Tower Shield, because Tower Shields can only be made of Steel.
From my PHB: Shield, Tower: This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are.
Also, there's specifically a steel tower shield in Races of Stone.
-
The SRD documents from WotC are poorly formatted, and with the d20 srd site down, I had to use them.
Basically, the words wooden and steel wrap down to the next level, and look like headings. But yes.
He is now 18,819 gp over WBL, and I still haven't found oils of holy weapon to add their price into that.
The Fighter, I haven't calculated anyone else, but based on the fact they all carry several 3000gp potions, I'm going to assumes the same is true of all of them.
-
ehh, I'll replace the master of shrouds with a cleric 3/Master Inquistor 4/Contemplative 3 (I think you enter that at 7)
Contemplative is available at 10th level.
Thanks for the catch, afb. Whatever, I'll build some random cleric.
-
The SRD documents from WotC are poorly formatted, and with the d20 srd site down, I had to use them.
Basically, the words wooden and steel wrap down to the next level, and look like headings. But yes.
He is now 18,819 gp over WBL, and I still haven't found oils of holy weapon to add their price into that.
The Fighter, I haven't calculated anyone else, but based on the fact they all carry several 3000gp potions, I'm going to assumes the same is true of all of them.
I erroneously wrote 'potion of Holy Weapon' when I should have wrote 'potion of Bless Weapon' (a Paladin spell). To my knowledge there is no spell called 'Holy Weapon', there is a similar spell called 'Holy Sword' which is similar to 'Bless Weapon' but much more expensive.
My math is different than yours, I don't know where you are getting that I'm 18,819 over, here's my running total:
[spoiler]
+1 Adm Greatsword, 5,375
+1 Sling, 2,300
+1 Fullplate, 2,650
+1 Am.Natural Armour, 2,000
+1 Ring Protection, 2,000
+1 Animated Darkwood Tower Shield, 9,600
+1 Cloak of Resitance, 1,000
+2 Gloves of Strength 4,000
+2 Belt of Constitution 4,000
Total: 32,925
Potions:
1x Cure Moderate, 300
2x Cure Light, 100
2x Silver Sheen, 500 ?
2x Bless Weapon, 200
1x Conviction (CL 6) 300
2x See Invisibility, 600
2x Obscuring Mist, 100
1x Silence, 300
2x Alc Fire, 40
2x Acid 20
Total: 2,460
Grand Total: 35,385
[/spoiler]
With my mundane gear (which I can't be assed to add up) I should be just shy of 36k, which is 9th level WBL.
-
Multiply consumables by 10, per one shot rules. Unless you are seriously tellingme you think an average perty drinks 50 potions a day, every single day.
-
Multiply consumables by 10, per one shot rules. Unless you are seriously tellingme you think an average perty drinks 50 potions a day, every single day.
I'd just have a reusable item. It'd cost less.
I almost never buy consumables anyway.
-
Multiply consumables by 10, per one shot rules. Unless you are seriously tellingme you think an average perty drinks 50 potions a day, every single day.
I've never heard of this rule, could you provide me a cite?
-
Multiply consumables by 10, per one shot rules. Unless you are seriously tellingme you think an average perty drinks 50 potions a day, every single day.
I've never heard of this rule, could you provide me a cite?
It's concocted out of thin air - Kaelik never mentioned it prior to that very post you're replying to.
-
The DMG 199 recommendation for one-shot random dungeons (that is, ones made via the rules on page 77) is
-5x normal price for single-use items
-charged items have a fifth as many charges.
For long-running campaigns, there's an intentional discrepancy between your expected WBL and that wealth you've been awarded up to that point, which is expected to be spent on consumables.
-
Multiply consumables by 10, per one shot rules. Unless you are seriously tellingme you think an average perty drinks 50 potions a day, every single day.
I've never heard of this rule, could you provide me a cite?
It's concocted out of thin air - Kaelik never mentioned it prior to that very post you're replying to.
This is basically what's happened through most of this thread.
-
I flipped through the DMG, there is a rule that potions cost 5x as much and wands have 1/5th as many charges. But you know what, I think it's a bullshit rule, it nerfs the ever loving fuck out of melee classes. I'm not going to rewrite my characters, maybe someone else will come along with a party that Kaelik doesn't nitpick apart but I doubt it. He's made me look the fool for spending the time to write those characters, as slap-dash as they are, for a game he probably has not intent on ever running, I hope I'm the only one here fool enough to waste the time.
-
5x as much instead of 10x, my bad.
Seriously. It's four encounters. If you actually need 12 potions per encounter, then you can't even make back your own wealth.
It doesn't nerf melee characters, it nerfs people who rely on consumables an absurd amount. You are facing four encounter s total. Do you think any party ever has used two potions of obscuring mist per encounter for their entire adventuring career? Then why do you need that many?
The one shot rules exist to account for the increased power of consumables. Just like if you were making an actual party for an actual game, you would not have spent 75% of your WBL on potions, so that you could burn 12 per encounter.
It's not nitpicking you apart to ask you to follow the rules for one shots in a one shot.
-
It doesn't nerf melee characters, it nerfs people who rely on consumables an absurd amount.
Which is pretty much every character who isn't a full spellcaster
-
It doesn't nerf melee characters, it nerfs people who rely on consumables an absurd amount.
Which is pretty much every character who isn't a full spellcaster
No... I have made many non Spellcasters. None of them needed 12 potions per encounter. Ever. For any reason.
-
Kaelik, are you planning too purely run each party through only combat-based encounters? You might find everyone going easier on stock piling consumables and such if you opened up your challenge to simply recreate a very short (but unpredictable) dungeon crawl. Traps and movement based challenges could also gauge a party's relative strength.
But this merely an idea.
-
So just to be clear, I should just write this off and stop actually visiting this forum because no one was doing it to begin with, and now, because some guy got upset about not getting to use 12 potions per encounter, and told everyone that I'm secretly not willing to run it based on the fact that I asked him to use the one shot rules for consumables for a one shot, now anyone who might have done it will not do it.
Is that roughly the state of things?
If this is the case, instead of just reusing the four encounters I had rolled up on the next group to finish, I could just post them, and then leave you people to argue about it.
-
So just to be clear, I should just write this off and stop actually visiting this forum because no one was doing it to begin with, and now, because some guy got upset about not getting to use 12 potions per encounter, and told everyone that I'm secretly not willing to run it based on the fact that I asked him to use the one shot rules for consumables for a one shot, now anyone who might have done it will not do it.
Juton being surprised was a natural reaction to the way the situation was handled. He was working on the vanilla party and you shot him down on potions seemingly from nowhere. You mistakenly said 10x cost making it even harder to find out where you were coming from and then the posts came in quick succession either agreeing or disagreeing with your position.
Is that roughly the state of things?
No, you are justified in using the DMG one shot rules, but don't expect people to be psychic and know that you are using them. Even if you state that you are, and someone messes up, just point it out again politely and ask them to reintroduce their item list.
If this is the case, instead of just reusing the four encounters I had rolled up on the next group to finish, I could just post them, and then leave you people to argue about it.
Don't alienate yourself like that. The frustration from the community that you are experiencing is due to a lack of communication on both sides. Juton is understandably upset because he went through the time to make a party of 4 and you blew up his item list. Players tend to get upset when these things happen. I think that you need to ultimately refine your ban and rules lists to reflect the way this test is going to be run. From the original post, I had the impression that you were going to try to prove that mundanes can be useful and that magics aren't always required. So far, all your alternate rules indicate that you favor magics. This is odd to say the least.
Basically, you should keep going without making things so confrontational. Stop being emotionally involved yourself, but don't expect the same from the test subjects. Being polite to the test subjects also helps. This is step one to making this an actual test in game design.
-
So just to be clear, I should just write this off and stop actually visiting this forum because no one was doing it to begin with, and now, because some guy got upset about not getting to use 12 potions per encounter, and told everyone that I'm secretly not willing to run it based on the fact that I asked him to use the one shot rules for consumables for a one shot, now anyone who might have done it will not do it.
Juton being surprised was a natural reaction to the way the situation was handled. He was working on the vanilla party and you shot him down on potions seemingly from nowhere. You mistakenly said 10x cost making it even harder to find out where you were coming from and then the posts came in quick succession either agreeing or disagreeing with your position.
Is that roughly the state of things?
No, you are justified in using the DMG one shot rules, but don't expect people to be psychic and know that you are using them. Even if you state that you are, and someone messes up, just point it out again politely and ask them to reintroduce their item list.
If this is the case, instead of just reusing the four encounters I had rolled up on the next group to finish, I could just post them, and then leave you people to argue about it.
Don't alienate yourself like that. The frustration from the community that you are experiencing is due to a lack of communication on both sides. Juton is understandably upset because he went through the time to make a party of 4 and you blew up his item list. Players tend to get upset when these things happen. I think that you need to ultimately refine your ban and rules lists to reflect the way this test is going to be run. From the original post, I had the impression that you were going to try to prove that mundanes can be useful and that magics aren't always required. So far, all your alternate rules indicate that you favor magics. This is odd to say the least.
Basically, you should keep going without making things so confrontational. Stop being emotionally involved yourself, but don't expect the same from the test subjects. Being polite to the test subjects also helps. This is step one to making this an actual test in game design.
TL;DR: quit being an asshole. That way people will pay attention to you. People reacted negatively to you because you acted like an asshole first. This may or may not have been intentionnal.
-
Err... TheEndIsNear...
You may want to respell 'intentional,' because apparently a single misspelled word means you are ignorant, illiterate, and unworthy of attention.
-
Ok a party of four binder/ardents that use bloodlines to have really high EBL / ML
The tactic is to spam zercyl and each will have a 9th level power from a mantle
So party level around 10 - 12 after I crunch some numbers
-
How about a level 1 wizard? Feel free to cobble together some CR 50 critters for me to take out, Kaelic.
-
Fair enough, BG has decided to revert to form, and be a bunch of mind numbingly stupid assholes because they are apparently allergic to testing any of their assumptions at all.
Goodbye again, until I stay away long enough to forget that you guys are all fucking retarded.
-
Don't alienate yourself like that. The frustration from the community that you are experiencing is due to a lack of communication on both sides. Juton is understandably upset because he went through the time to make a party of 4 and you blew up his item list. Players tend to get upset when these things happen. I think that you need to ultimately refine your ban and rules lists to reflect the way this test is going to be run. From the original post, I had the impression that you were going to try to prove that mundanes can be useful and that magics aren't always required. So far, all your alternate rules indicate that you favor magics. This is odd to say the least.
Basically, you should keep going without making things so confrontational. Stop being emotionally involved yourself, but don't expect the same from the test subjects. Being polite to the test subjects also helps. This is step one to making this an actual test in game design.
You misunderstand. I was here for the sole purpose of doing this one thing. BG has made it very clear that they are not actually going to do what I spelled out in my first post, and are instead just going to attempt to arbitrarily break the game in any way I haven't specifically banned, and also in ways that I have specifically banned.
They are not interested in testing their assumptions about Wizards being too good for their CR. Fine, whatever. I'm not going to waste my time on people who think 50 potions a day is average, and complain about being nerfed to a mere 20. Nor do I want to deal with people who absolutely refuse to build any character that follows the guidelines I have stated. BG wants to be the ass end of the internet, where everybody just knows things to be true, and doesn't actually have any evidence, I'm not going to waste my time.
-
This is too good of an idea to let die, and at least one party seems ready to roll.
I'm offering myself to run the monster side.
I don't mind consumable spam for a first wave. This is suposed to be a test exercise, and tests must be performed under diferent conditions. If everything goes well, we can try the one-shot rules later.
Mind you, I don't have enough time for actual dungeon crawls, so I'll do a true arena. Closed map, you start in one border, monsters start in other, the only buffs you have pre-hand is something you could keep up all day long. This includes walking around sneaking, so you can start hiding in the arena (monsters will probably do so as well).
So you may have 50 potions, but you'll have to drink them while under direct enemy assault.
Sounds good for all of you?
Kaelik: Hope you don't mind me taking it from here. I think this test could be very helpfull for a lot of people, and I'm willing to ignore the disruptive parts of the discussion for the test's sake.
-
I've been kicking around some ideas for the monster's side as well, just out of curiosity, so if you want to do some actual dungeons then maybe I can get the time to do some co-dming or something.
-
I've been kicking around some ideas for the monster's side as well, just out of curiosity, so if you want to do some actual dungeons then maybe I can get the time to do some co-dming or something.
Some options:
-You do one party's dungeon, I do the other.
-We alternate combats.
-We each bring a CR 7 ecounter and combine them for a CR 9 ecounter. You run your monster, I run mine as if we were a party.
-
TL;DR: quit being an asshole. That way people will pay attention to you. People reacted negatively to you because you acted like an asshole first. This may or may not have been intentionnal.
I just think it's sad that Juton offered to run the vanilla party and the solution to the extra potions was simple:
You run with the extra potions and we see what the encounters are like. The extra potions are either needed or not needed. If they were needed you can offer that up as evidence that this party only succeeded at extra cost. The game expects you to come out on top monetarily.
This would have at least given a control or something similar. After this was run, then there would probably be a bunch of people running parties. Someone had to enter the pool first just to test the waters. I thought it was going to be Juton's standard d&d party and happen over the weekend.
-
Kaelik: I'd like to do this. Here's a short ban list of stuff that should be much longer.
Everyone else: [looks up everything else that isn't on the ban list]
Kaelik: NERDDDDDD RAAAAAAGEEEEEEE
Everyone else: I can haz break ur gamez plz?
Kaelik: NERRRRRRDDDDDD RAAAAAGGGEEEEEE!!!
Everyone else: Common sense is lost on me. I bothered to suggest something incredibly broken to somebody that obviously knows what broken means.
Kaelik: NEERRRRRRRDDDDDDD RAAAAAAGGGGGEEEEEEE!!!!111one1!@!shifteleven
Everyone else: How about X?
Kaelik: I'm too lazy to actually check the rules, so here's some random crap that I will say while I NEEERRRRRRRRDDDDD RRRRRRRAAAAAAGEEEEEEE!!!!!!11!!one!!!shifteleven!!!!111
With that, I think I've summed up this thread nicely. At least it was amusing, for that I give Kaelik +1.
-
Kaelik: I'd like to do this. Here's a short ban list of stuff that should be much longer.
Everyone else: [looks up everything else that isn't on the ban list]
Kaelik: NERDDDDDD RAAAAAAGEEEEEEE
Everyone else: I can haz break ur gamez plz?
Kaelik: NERRRRRRDDDDDD RAAAAAGGGEEEEEE!!!
Everyone else: Common sense is lost on me. I bothered to suggest something incredibly broken to somebody that obviously knows what broken means.
Kaelik: NEERRRRRRRDDDDDDD RAAAAAAGGGGGEEEEEEE!!!!111one1!@!shifteleven
Everyone else: How about X?
Kaelik: I'm too lazy to actually check the rules, so here's some random crap that I will say while I NEEERRRRRRRRDDDDD RRRRRRRAAAAAAGEEEEEEE!!!!!!11!!one!!!shifteleven!!!!111
With that, I think I've summed up this thread nicely. At least it was amusing, for that I give Kaelik +1.
BS living up to his acronym. Nothing I suggested for my party was broken. Common sense is not lost on me, as evidenced by the fact that I posted characters ranging in power from T1 to T3, which is kinda the purpose here, no?
I've been kicking around some ideas for the monster's side as well, just out of curiosity, so if you want to do some actual dungeons then maybe I can get the time to do some co-dming or something.
Some options:
-You do one party's dungeon, I do the other.
-We alternate combats.
-We each bring a CR 7 ecounter and combine them for a CR 9 ecounter. You run your monster, I run mine as if we were a party.
Maybe we can work separately where you can do the straight-up brawling aspects while I do non-combat encounters and encounters where either the party or the monsters gain an edge somehow, and then compare to see how much of an impact that has on the party resources. I think that would be very worthwhile to explore.
-
Kaelik: I'd like to do this. Here's a short ban list of stuff that should be much longer.
Everyone else: [looks up everything else that isn't on the ban list]
Kaelik: NERDDDDDD RAAAAAAGEEEEEEE
Everyone else: I can haz break ur gamez plz?
Kaelik: NERRRRRRDDDDDD RAAAAAGGGEEEEEE!!!
Everyone else: Common sense is lost on me. I bothered to suggest something incredibly broken to somebody that obviously knows what broken means.
Kaelik: NEERRRRRRRDDDDDDD RAAAAAAGGGGGEEEEEEE!!!!111one1!@!shifteleven
Everyone else: How about X?
Kaelik: I'm too lazy to actually check the rules, so here's some random crap that I will say while I NEEERRRRRRRRDDDDD RRRRRRRAAAAAAGEEEEEEE!!!!!!11!!one!!!shifteleven!!!!111
With that, I think I've summed up this thread nicely. At least it was amusing, for that I give Kaelik +1.
BS living up to his acronym. Nothing I suggested for my party was broken. Common sense is not lost on me, as evidenced by the fact that I posted characters ranging in power from T1 to T3, which is kinda the purpose here, no?
I've been kicking around some ideas for the monster's side as well, just out of curiosity, so if you want to do some actual dungeons then maybe I can get the time to do some co-dming or something.
Some options:
-You do one party's dungeon, I do the other.
-We alternate combats.
-We each bring a CR 7 ecounter and combine them for a CR 9 ecounter. You run your monster, I run mine as if we were a party.
Maybe we can work separately where you can do the straight-up brawling aspects while I do non-combat encounters and encounters where either the party or the monsters gain an edge somehow, and then compare to see how much of an impact that has on the party resources. I think that would be very worthwhile to explore.
How dare I not read your builds. Surely I have nothing better to do with my time than examine every single party somebody posted. The nerve of a person to make a joke without reading every single fucking post in an 8 page thread. How awful must I be? Oh the horror.
Cry me a river.
Common sense is definitely lost on you, as evidenced by your indignance exhibited in this post. It's also apparent that humor is lost on you too.
-
"X-Codes why don't you find me funny? You probably didn't even get the joke. Which was great, because I'm really funny. WHY DON'T YOU FIND ME FUNNY!?!?"
-
"X-Codes why don't you find me funny? You probably didn't even get the joke. Which was great, because I'm really funny. WHY DON'T YOU FIND ME FUNNY!?!?"
Hi Welcome
-
"X-Codes why don't you find me funny? You probably didn't even get the joke. Which was great, because I'm really funny. WHY DON'T YOU FIND ME FUNNY!?!?"
Hi Welcome
I'm just joshing with you BS. You seem like a guy with a great sense of humor.
-
It's also apparent that humor is lost on you too.
You made a joke based on the idea that everyone else except you is an idiot, but at the same time you are an idiot. Therefore, the joke isn't funny, it just sounds like an arrogant jerk sounding off his ignorance.
Now, if you're done nerd raging, some of us are actually trying to make this thread into something other than a total failure.
-
It's also apparent that humor is lost on you too.
You made a joke based on the idea that everyone else except you is an idiot, but at the same time you are an idiot. Therefore, the joke isn't funny, it just sounds like an arrogant jerk sounding off his ignorance.
Now, if you're done nerd raging, some of us are actually trying to make this thread into something other than a total failure.
I found the irony of it quite amusing.
But I have a weird sense of humor, so that might be why.
-
someone should make a party from the examples in the PHB...
-
It's also apparent that humor is lost on you too.
You made a joke based on the idea that everyone else except you is an idiot, but at the same time you are an idiot. Therefore, the joke isn't funny, it just sounds like an arrogant jerk sounding off his ignorance.
Based on what? Oh, right, the fact that you don't like me. That hits me right in the heart, I swear.
Now, if you're done nerd raging, some of us are actually trying to make this thread into something other than a total failure.
Nice projection. As long as you keep posting, I don't think this thread will ever make it out of the fail bucket.
-
Guys, calm down. Kaelic xD seems to have calmed down. Or left. Either way it's good.
No need for this crap anymore.
-
I could try for a group of four monks, if that lured Kaelik back ...
- Giacomo
-
Please, please do it.
-
I could try for a group of four monks, if that lured Kaelik back ...
- Giacomo
Well, two capable people have taken over the thread. I wish I could personally offer a challenge, but the Iron Siege is the only one I can competently run for anyone.
-
I could try for a group of four monks, if that lured Kaelik back ...
- Giacomo
are you THE Giacomo? :blink
-
I could try for a group of four monks, if that lured Kaelik back ...
- Giacomo
are you THE Giacomo? :blink
Yes. Yes, he is.
And hijinks ensue.
Also, I wonder if his monks could take on a tribe of kobolds?
-
I've always wanted to play a tribe of kobolds.
-
so is there a new banned list or... ???
-
so is there a new banned list or... ???
I don't know about oslecamo, but I haven't thought that far ahead yet. I have problems with very few feats, spells, and/or PrCs, although expect some review if you start trying to do something sketchy like defending spiked gauntlets with eager, warning armor spikes, or playing a Wizard native to Limbo and getting an obscene number of actions when casting Planar Bubble.
I'm not sure how much time I'll have over the next few weeks to devote to this project, but I generally do D&D stuff to decompress anyway. If you want to run some character concepts/builds by me, then go right ahead. I'm looking to focus on roughly the same level range as Kaelik was: 7-13.
-
Surprised he didnt call people purple dragons.
Anyone remember that guy?
-
Surprised he didnt call people purple dragons.
Anyone remember that guy?
That was fun. Didn't he make a comeback on these forums?
-
Purple Dragons? :twitch
-
What kind of challenges should a group of 4 level 13 characters be able to overcome in your view?
- Giacomo
-
I may or may not have those chars statted up sometime. I'll work on it.
-
What kind of challenges should a group of 4 level 13 characters be able to overcome in your view?
- Giacomo
Kobolds. Barely.
-
so is there a new banned list or... ???
I don't know about oslecamo, but I haven't thought that far ahead yet. I have problems with very few feats, spells, and/or PrCs, although expect some review if you start trying to do something sketchy like defending spiked gauntlets with eager, warning armor spikes, or playing a Wizard native to Limbo and getting an obscene number of actions when casting Planar Bubble.
I'm not sure how much time I'll have over the next few weeks to devote to this project, but I generally do D&D stuff to decompress anyway. If you want to run some character concepts/builds by me, then go right ahead. I'm looking to focus on roughly the same level range as Kaelik was: 7-13.
I was using Kaelik's rules because as already stated I don't have that much free time right now to make new ones and there was already one party made by those rules.
Now , between thread derails and lack of actual character sheets, meh, don't expect me to restart this from scratch when there's clearly so little interest left. I've got like two other campaigns and three projects to run around the net, not to mention RL. I offered my help here because I tought there was still interest and there was one party already ready. But as the creator of said party hasn't apeared again here, Lycan just wants to munchkin the system as much as possible, and the rest of the people are discussing about purple dragons (wich are an actual dragon type from Dragon Magazine).
I'll be watching the thread neverthless. If another level apropriate party does shows up following Kaelik's rules, I'll run a mini-adventure for them.
-
Will my poor english be a big problem?
-
so is there a new banned list or... ???
I don't know about oslecamo, but I haven't thought that far ahead yet. I have problems with very few feats, spells, and/or PrCs, although expect some review if you start trying to do something sketchy like defending spiked gauntlets with eager, warning armor spikes, or playing a Wizard native to Limbo and getting an obscene number of actions when casting Planar Bubble.
I'm not sure how much time I'll have over the next few weeks to devote to this project, but I generally do D&D stuff to decompress anyway. If you want to run some character concepts/builds by me, then go right ahead. I'm looking to focus on roughly the same level range as Kaelik was: 7-13.
I was using Kaelik's rules because as already stated I don't have that much free time right now to make new ones and there was already one party made by those rules.
Now , between thread derails and lack of actual character sheets, meh, don't expect me to restart this from scratch when there's clearly so little interest left. I've got like two other campaigns and three projects to run around the net, not to mention RL. I offered my help here because I tought there was still interest and there was one party already ready. But as the creator of said party hasn't apeared again here, Lycan just wants to munchkin the system as much as possible, and the rest of the people are discussing about purple dragons (wich are an actual dragon type from Dragon Magazine).
I'll be watching the thread neverthless. If another level apropriate party does shows up following Kaelik's rules, I'll run a mini-adventure for them.
Seems you are trying to make us look like bad people. The problem in this thread was kaelik, not lycan nor the other people. I aghve interest in this, I even asked if I could submit a certain party, there was no interest in kaelic, though.
-
What kind of challenges should a group of 4 level 13 characters be able to overcome in your view?
- Giacomo
Defeating CR 13 monsters should be routine, and the party should be able to handle EL 16 encounters. All locks, non-magical traps, and misc. non-magical obstacles should be non-events. Magical obstacles of about 5th level and lower should be handled with similar ease, although it might require some use of resources. All non-epic magical obstacles should be able to be handled, such as AMFs, traps casting 9th-level spells, and any of the multitude of effects that block planar travel. While it's not a non-event, Death should be handled in a somewhat routine fashion.
Another thing I'd like to note is that I'll accept parties varying in size from 3-6 people. The challenges you face will be more numerous with a larger party size.
-
Will my poor english be a big problem?
No, I'm no grammar nazi.
TheEndIsNear: Less throwing blame around, more party building please. Seems like your party idea was goliath team, and I see no problem with that.
-
Will you actually take over this?
If so, how does level ECL 8 sound?
-
Sounds good.
-
So uh, point buy and all?
-
I know we have normal WBL, but what about Point Buy/Other stat generating methods?
Yeah, good point, let's go with 32 PB.
There.
-
Okay oslecamo. you can start working on a 7 CR-ish encounter for my 7th level party. I'm still thinking on the builds but here are my initial concepts:
The Meleer - Warblade 5/Lion Totem Barbarian 1/Fighter 1 (I may replace Fighter with more Warblade or Frienzied Berserker) - classical two-handed weapon charger.
The Skillmonkey - Beguiler 6/Mindbender 1 - scout/trapmonkey and magical support. Will most probably have Mindsight (duh).
The Caster - Monk 1/Sorcerer 6 - err... Ascetic Mage... I have nothing more to say. :P
The Support - Cleric or Druid or... something - yeah... will fill whatever there is to fill with the above builds.
-
But as the creator of said party hasn't apeared again here, Lycan just wants to munchkin the system as much as possible, and the rest of the people are discussing about purple dragons (wich are an actual dragon type from Dragon Magazine).
For reference: No Purple Dragons/Loophole Abuse, (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoPurpleDragons) the actual thread. (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19865406/Unbroken_D38;D_Banlist?pg=1)
-
This could be quite fun. Will you allow a MoS, A ghost bard, a Malconvoker and a druid?
-
This could be quite fun. Will you allow a MoS, A ghost bard, a Malconvoker and a druid?
-MoS is what again?
-You must take full LA for ghost, no just diping the monster class.
-Malkovonker and druid ok as long as you don't use anything on the banned list on the 1st post.
-By the text of Scry spell, "familiar" implies more than simply having heard/seen a subject. Aka you can only wildshape on animals either you meet during the adventure itself, you can summon directly with SNA, or your own animal companion.
-
This could be quite fun. Will you allow a MoS, A ghost bard, a Malconvoker and a druid?
-MoS is what again?
-You must take full LA for ghost, no just diping the monster class.
-Malkovonker and druid ok as long as you don't use anything on the banned list on the 1st post.
-By the text of Scry spell, "familiar" implies more than simply having heard/seen a subject. Aka you can only wildshape on animals either you meet during the adventure itself, you can summon directly with SNA, or your own animal companion.
Ok the bard probably wont be a ghost again.
MoS is Master of Shrouds: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041015b
A class with abilities to summon Incorporeal undead and go to town with them.
Oh, and the banned list just has the calling spells, right?
-
Ok the bard probably wont be a ghost again.
MoS is Master of Shrouds: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041015b
A class with abilities to summon Incorporeal undead and go to town with them.
Ah, that one. Allowed, but I'm removing your summons ability to create spanws under the "no calling spells/leadership/free minions" clause.
Oh, and the banned list just has the calling spells, right?
And any infinite loop/WBL increasing trick.
-
What kind of challenges should a group of 4 level 13 characters be able to overcome in your view?
- Giacomo
Defeating CR 13 monsters should be routine, and the party should be able to handle EL 16 encounters. All locks, non-magical traps, and misc. non-magical obstacles should be non-events. Magical obstacles of about 5th level and lower should be handled with similar ease, although it might require some use of resources. All non-epic magical obstacles should be able to be handled, such as AMFs, traps casting 9th-level spells, and any of the multitude of effects that block planar travel. While it's not a non-event, Death should be handled in a somewhat routine fashion.
Another thing I'd like to note is that I'll accept parties varying in size from 3-6 people. The challenges you face will be more numerous with a larger party size.
Sounds reasonable (at least a bit more specific than the kobold idea... ;) )
Is this view being shared by more posters?
- Giacomo
-
What kind of challenges should a group of 4 level 13 characters be able to overcome in your view?
- Giacomo
Defeating CR 13 monsters should be routine, and the party should be able to handle EL 16 encounters. All locks, non-magical traps, and misc. non-magical obstacles should be non-events. Magical obstacles of about 5th level and lower should be handled with similar ease, although it might require some use of resources. All non-epic magical obstacles should be able to be handled, such as AMFs, traps casting 9th-level spells, and any of the multitude of effects that block planar travel. While it's not a non-event, Death should be handled in a somewhat routine fashion.
Another thing I'd like to note is that I'll accept parties varying in size from 3-6 people. The challenges you face will be more numerous with a larger party size.
Sounds reasonable (at least a bit more specific than the kobold idea... ;) )
Is this view being shared by more posters?
- Giacomo
Yeah, that's what I'd say as well.
Ah, that one. Allowed, but I'm removing your summons ability to create spanws under the "no calling spells/leadership/free minions" clause.
Off course.
What about clerics that Rebuke or Use Animate Dead? Can I have some undead minions with me if I could reasonably easily have defeated them and if I pay the Material component from my WBL? Or is it the same deal as that?
-
What about clerics that Rebuke or Use Animate Dead? Can I have some undead minions with me if I could reasonably easily have defeated them and if I pay the Material component from my WBL? Or is it the same deal as that?
If you pay the onyx from the cleric's pocket and it's undeads of something that was below your current level before being animated, yes. Like said on the OP, no fire giant skeletons if you're lv7, even if you try to argue you could've easily defeated them.
-
What's your take on the Mystic Theurge-Precocious Apprentice cheese?
Oh, and Ultimate Magus-Practiced Spellcaster one?
Is it too cheezy?
-
What's your take on the Mystic Theurge-Precocious Apprentice cheese?
Oh, and Ultimate Magus-Practiced Spellcaster one?
Is it too cheezy?
...cheezy? If you don't, you wind up 3-4 levels behind in your primary spellcasting class. If you're a Wizard/Archivist, then that drops you to at least tier 2 and maybe tier 3.
-
What about clerics that Rebuke or Use Animate Dead? Can I have some undead minions with me if I could reasonably easily have defeated them and if I pay the Material component from my WBL? Or is it the same deal as that?
If you pay the onyx from the cleric's pocket and it's undeads of something that was below your current level before being animated, yes. Like said on the OP, no fire giant skeletons if you're lv7, even if you try to argue you could've easily defeated them.
Feral Tyrannosauri (CR9 and very easy to kill for a master of shrouds or a wizard) good enough for you? How about a Hydra with the appropriate amount of heads? Or what about Legendary Bears?
-
What's your take on the Mystic Theurge-Precocious Apprentice cheese?
Oh, and Ultimate Magus-Practiced Spellcaster one?
Is it too cheezy?
...cheezy? If you don't, you wind up 3-4 levels behind in your primary spellcasting class. If you're a Wizard/Archivist, then that drops you to at least tier 2 and maybe tier 3.
Which would be better for (de)buffing then: Beguiler 1/Wizard 4/Ultimate Magus 2 or Wizard 1/Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 3?
If this will work (this team that I'm creating will somehow win the encounter), I'm going to advance those PCs to 13th level and try again.
If they lose, I will rearenge feats, levels, spells and items and try again. Hope oslecamo will not mind.
-
What's your take on the Mystic Theurge-Precocious Apprentice cheese?
Oh, and Ultimate Magus-Practiced Spellcaster one?
Is it too cheezy?
...cheezy? If you don't, you wind up 3-4 levels behind in your primary spellcasting class. If you're a Wizard/Archivist, then that drops you to at least tier 2 and maybe tier 3.
Which would be better for (de)buffing then: Beguiler 1/Wizard 4/Ultimate Magus 2 or Wizard 1/Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 3?
If this will work (this team that I'm creating will somehow win the encounter), I'm going to advance those PCs to 13th level and try again.
If they lose, I will rearenge feats, levels, spells and items and try again. Hope oslecamo will not mind.
A little on the extreme side but allowed.
Mixster: Refreshing you on the OP
If you want to animate something, it better be readily accessible, and usually travel in packs with a lower EL than your level, so no, your level 5 character cannot have a Fire Giant Skeleton.
Aka no, rare specimens like templated creatures, hydras with just the right number of heads and legendary beings are not ok for you to start with. Even if you choose them specifically because they're vulnerable to your tricks.