PBMC Compendium (PlzBreakMyCampaign's Thread and Build Compilation)

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Have you any more impressive builds? I see nothing special in any of your recent posts... But as best I can tell (yes I have visited 339's thread on it but it doesn't have entries for this sort of thing) I have several world records in this thread. If anyone disagree all you have to do is post a link. I'll be happy to retract. Without a link, don't bother

If you drop the moon, there will be major seismic consequences - earthquakes, dust clouds, etc. This is because dropping the moon does enough damage to take a significant amount of the planet's HP off. Dropping a house doesn't. Hence, damage from weight is uncapped.

But damage PvP doesn't have any relevance to the Earth's HP. So no 'hence.' Also earthquakes and dust clouds have no consequence PvP to a character who flies and doesn't breathe. Since people seriously cannot let this go and insist on The Hulking Hurler's validity here we go...:

[spoiler]The question becomes whose hulking hurler build to use. The original Hulking Hurler (post #1) actually does less damage than my orcish-centuar build.
It reaches "18788 points of damage in blocks of 4697 damage" which is below mine and requires enemies to play nice and line up for you

But there were more (and more and more and...) builds that reached higher damages. From there they become excessively more stupid. Unlike my outline maximum (reasonable) melee damage, no sane DM would consider the remote possibility of allowing '19330723855637920503551754d6' (#885) thrown damage. Maxing Strength is fine. Maxing carrying capacity is fine. But the rest of the entire d20 system has very little support for this rule loophole. However a charger build seems perfectly acceptable within a normal DnD system - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#spiritedCharge

But abnormality isn't good enough for RAW. For that we need large series of contradictions which disallows a player from considering the build. We then have to consider how 'fantasy' we want our DnD. I like to keep things 'fantasy' which is why I consider running up and poking enemies with sharp objects to be cool. Under this 'fantasy' paradigm I said that the rule needs altered because it didn't seem to fit, since throwing small planetoids might not hurt a air elemental very much more than a regular sling.

But others countered that it need not be fantasy since it fits with reality, or 'common sense.' Okay fine, but that direction also fails:

0) "We're not actually sure if there's any object the Hurler could actually throw that wouldn't undergo gravitational collapse." (#859) [This is because it must be dense enough to support the Hurler's pressure exerted from picking it up]
"1) It's a game, set in a game world with dragons and wizards and demons. Real world physics need not apply to that. If you want to play a game based in real world physics, go play Battlefield 2 or some other hyper-realistic video game.

2) This thread is about magic and the supernatural and abusing the rules. The game has no rules about destroying your muscles and bones by lifting too much, it is simply assumed if a character can't lift something they will stop trying, the amounts they can lift are clearly defined.

3) By the time this guy is lifting the figured load he has been so magically enhanced that it would have to be assume the magic would protect/reinforce his muscles and bones so they can support the weight. It could be assumed that if a spell is printed in one of the WotC books it would be tested by the wizard that created it. I don't think wizards would continue using spells for heavy lifting if there was a chance they'd turn their bones and muscles to pulp.

4) His achilles heel was pointed out many pages ago (not by me, I don't think I'd even found the thread when it was first discussed). One area dispel magic or a mord's disjunction would likely knock off so many magical enhancements he could no longer lift his small planetoid weapon. If cast at the opportune time while the hurler has his weapon lifted over his head ready to throw, he'll be unable to support it and get crushed by it at that time."

My MUCH more piercing (that pun's for you Tytalus) critiques are simply Newton's laws of motion. The only way to 'lift' something is if the normal force of the ground can support it. Really, the lifter and the Earth are two masses suspended in space. If the weight lifted was actually heavier than the Earth (read ground) then instead of lifting the weight, you would actually push the ground away by that amount with your legs.
But is the hurler's weight to throw actually heavier than the earth? First the earth is actually about 13,166,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pounds. But the Hurler throws something 966,536,192,781,896,025,177,587,700 pounds in just a medium example (post #885). This means that the hurler could throw something heavier than the earth at something... But what wait? How could something on the earth possibly throw something heavier than the earth without extreme gravitation effects really screwing up the thrown arc? Furthermore if you use the laws of gravitation, the Hurler would actually be more attracted to the weight than the Earth... this makes the weight the ground and the Earth simply a big nearby ball. But you can't throw the ground at all... since it attracts you greater than use the normal force of another object to 'pick it up'.

Therefore the hulking Hurler can't actually throw what people claim he could - due to 'common sense.'

Finally since people keep pushing the issue, suppose we throw away 'common sense' for a moment and allow such a massive object to be thrown. When it hits the object it is supposed to all of the force of the object would not actually affect its target the way the OVERLY SIMPLISTIC throwing damage supposes. Lets take the example of the moon actually being thrown at an incredible hard (read tough) object. Think in slow motion. The surface tension of the hitting object would shatter along the lines of the tough object. Unless the hit object has the same proportions (read size) as the thrown object (which is impossible due to gravitational collapse) the surrounding matter would continue past and around the hit object.

So really all that you need to do is first make a size comparison and then only count the mass of the wieght at that size (use a density calculation) and then use that as the actual mass (read weight) that hits and hurts the target. Are we seeing now how I said the stupid throwing damage calculation rule was too simplistic? So unless you want to sit down and bust out rough-guess calculations off comparative densities and areas in the direction of the throw no sane DM would ever allow this stupid rule.

So alright you guys... Would getting hit by the moon hurt more than getting hit by say, a long tube cut out from the ground of the entire city of New York? The answer is no. So what will all the silly little parrots say? "But, but The moon is so much bigger and heavier than the moon, so it MUST hurt more!" Duh the moon is bigger but that doesn't mean it would hurt more. You see, this specifically cut section of the ground from New York city (if it were all solid enough to throw) would actually ALL hit a target of its specific dimensions, aside from very, very complex splintering physics. However the moon would only hit the specific dimension of the target - and if its surface tension was enough the moon would actually splinter around the target. This means that the target would actually cut out a very long tube through the moon. And that amount of pulverized matter would be about as massive as the long tube of New York City.[/spoiler]

So there the Hulking Hurler is broken, dead, gone, illogical, stupid, dumb, retarded, not workable, finished. Stop mentioning it. Whether or not you use 'common sense' the build is too riddled with internal contradictions to be a viable build at the scales that outperform my orcish-centaur build.

[NiteCyper]

Beefin Sneak Attack http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=809744
Hope this helps. Is there a world-record for sneak-attack damage?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Thanks for the tip. I had actually seen all the useful elements but I forgot to mention one. I added it. Also I added a note for the 3 loopholes that the thread mentions for unreasonable SA damage. Still more than 50 d6 each hit is pretty absurd.

[Emy]

This is kinda funny since I just made a post about how much rebuking baffles me, but...

10 Extra turning feats over 9 DMM'able pools gives 4*9*9+3*9+9*6=cha -> 405 turns.

How does this character have 9 DMMable pools? As far as I know, that's impossible.

[DetectiveJabsco]

Also, How are you taking Cloistered cleric and Cleric?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

No one else can find a higher record for turn pools. But seriously, I am very careful about classes I choose, where the alignment lies, and whether or not a seperate pool is offered by the class. Any class that requires turning as a prereq and then appears to grant it actually stacks (I have only found 1 iffy exception to this and I meantioned it). Base classes that offer turning obviously can't have a requirement for it and get their own pool (cleric+dread necro is the most commonly known use of this). Then I dip like crazy and apply DMM to feats I have (extend Metamagic and persistent metamagic). Obviously I only use it for divine spells... The build shows which classes and taken and when... all you have to do is look up the classes to see if they should stack (they all do)

And Ahem... check out UA page 49 for the answer to your question Jabsco; multiclassing variants (and non-variants) is allowed. I didn't bother to put this into the build since I thought everyone knew the rule, or atleast would look up the section.

[DetectiveJabsco]

Fair enough but the same rules state that if you are taking two classes that have identical abilities they should stack. Like turning.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

It does not specifically state that the turning should stack (instead of provide a seperate pool). Nor should it because that would be counter intuitive to other 'wholly seperate base classes' and their distinct turning sources like Dread Necro and Cleric.

But I do see where the confusion lays. You might have an argument that since the cloistered is but a variant and usually similar abilities are supposed to stack (unless it is something that you chose differently like 1 rebuke, 1 turn or 2 different favored enemies in a ranger example) so cleric and cloistered cleric's 2 turn or 2 rebuke pools should actually be 1. But that is not the case in my build (nor is it when people usually go turning cleric / rebuking Dread Necro). I took a cleric substitution level that makes the non-variant cleric give something other than turning or rebuking - but it still counts as a pool for DMM  :

[DetectiveJabsco]

Fair enough, Not that I disagree with you but I like to look at all angles of something, If you are taking them as 2 classes would that not mean there spell casting would give you 2 different cleric casting pools.

Example
Cloistered Cleric 1/Cleric 1
would be 1st level cleric casting and 1st level Cloistered Cleric Casting?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Yup, exactly right. Its a good thing that build doesn't rely on the base casting  [remember this is for an evil DM, rather than a PC build]

[Emy]

Yup, exactly right. Its a good thing that build doesn't rely on the base casting  [remember this is for an evil DM, rather than a PC build]

Ah, but they (the various Turn Undead) are abilities with the same name and the same effect, so they shouldn't stack. Barring a more specific rule (such as one that states that levels in seperate classes that grant turn undead stack for purposes of determining turning level), only one turning ability should apply.

I know WotC are known for their inconsistent rulings, but this one comes to mind.

Build 4 [The Way-More-Than-Super-Mount Aquatic Halfling]

(cut for length) Then we take the dragon steed feat. Now we can have our mount be a dragon, but it has to be aquatic. When we look up the subtype in the SRD it says the creature must breathe water and have a swim speed (Yup that sounds aquatic to me!). So when we look on the Draconomicon's chart the only dragon like that is a gold dragon. (cut for length)

Okay you lost me here. How are you getting a gold dragon mount at this point? The Dragon Steed feat specifically gives you a Dragonnel as a mount.

edit: Wait I found that table. It looks like those are for Paladins and Blackguards only though?

Must resist temptation to ask nitpicky things like "how does Devoted Tracker add animal companion abilities to your waverider mount? by RAW, Waveriders do not get the 'Special Mount' ability needed for Devoted Tracker to work".

[Emy]

So I was mulling over a potential TBEG (Tiny Bad Evil Guy) with a big angry mount, so I checked over this "way more than super mount" build to see if there were any feats or other things that could help. Specifically, I was thinking of a simple Petal with LA bought off, going Wizard 5/Zhentarim Skymage 5/Legacy Champion 10. Anyway, I've gotten off track a bit....

This halfling here has some problems.

Build 4 [The Way-More-Than-Super-Mount Aquatic Halfling]

NG Strongheart Halfling with Aquatic template

UA Ranger 1 / Druid 3 / UA Wizard 1 / Wave Runner 1 / Windrider  :blush1 / Halfling Outrider 1-6 / Dragon Rider 1 / Halfling Outrider 7-10 / Arcane Heirophant 1 / Fleshwarper 1

Assuming that the "Wave Runner" mentioned above is Waverider from Savage Species. I have not been able to find any "Wave Runner" class through either flipping through my books, or furious googling.

For clarity, what are the UA variants used above? The wizard one is obviously the one that swaps bonus feats to the fighter list. Is the ranger variant the one that grants wild shape + fast movement?

[Note Bloodlines help absolutely no aspect of this build because none of it has no true calculations, only continued epic advancements and charts. And yes I know there is no Beast Master; at this point a size increase is way cooler than 2 more HD]

Feats (this build has flaws and a legacy weapon): Mounted Combat, Mounted Archery (as the variant wizard's fighter feat), Eschew Materials, Natural Bond, Bonded Familiar, Theurgic Bond, Flesh Grafter (Silthilar), Holy Mount, Winter's Mount, Sanctum Spell [for the arcane heirophant prereq], Devoted Tracker, Theurgic Mount, Dragon Steed

This build does not qualify for the following feats:
Holy Mount, Theurgic Mount (both specifically require a paladin special mount).
Devoted Tracker (requires smite evil)

Have your dragon take the Dutiful Guardian & Constant Guardian feats

Here are the HD boosts:

Animal Companion Boosts
Base Classes = 3
Halfling Outrider=15
natural bond = 3
Hierophant = 1
Theurgic Bond = 3
---------------------
25
&
Mount Class Boosts:
Wave Runner = 20
-20 Full Dragon Mount (check out the draconomicon if you don't believe me)
Halfling Outrider = 10
Holy Mount = 6
Theurgic Mount = 3
---------------------
19

The Dragon Rider allows a dragon cohort my ECL+3

Total Class Advancements:   
Wave Runner (19)   +8HD, +6Nat, +6Str
Windrider         +2HD, +4Nat, +2Str
Dragon Rider      +2HD, +2Nat, +1Str
Animal Comp (24)      +18HD, +18Nat, +9Str, +3Dex, 10 Tricks
   ---------------------
            +30HD, +30Nat, +18Str, +3Dex, 10 Tricks
            total of 53HD, a dozen more than max Gold Dragon
            HD23 Wrymling Prismatic Dragon -> Mature Adult Colossal

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/monsters/dragonAdvanced.htm gives us a:
Great, Great Super-Duper Uber Wrym Gold Dragon (+28 Base Saves)
nat 53
Colossal+
32d10 Fire cone (reflex) or 16 Str Drain (fort) 51DC
SR41 (~19)
300' fly
Str53, con41, int&cha40, Wis41 (-4 it appears), still dex=10
Caster level 41
DR now epic (not down 5 to get that though, right?)
Frightful presence 49 like other advances?

Not going to bother with calculations since the mount doesn't work as advertised.

Lost? Okay, we started with a random familiar and animal companion. Then with windrider we get an aquatic special mount. The devoted tracker feat makes the special mount count as the animal companion. The creature is the mount (an aquatic mount-companion) but it is also the animal companion. Then we take the dragon steed feat. Now we can have our mount be a dragon, but it has to be aquatic. When we look up the subtype in the SRD it says the creature must breathe water and have a swim speed (Yup that sounds aquatic to me!). So when we look on the Draconomicon's chart the only dragon like that is a gold dragon. So we have a weak gold dragon mount companion.

The Dragon Steed feat gives a dragonnel as a mount. The options for true dragons are for paladins or blackguards only. This wouldn't be so much of a problem if the waverider mount were "as paladin" or similar, but it's not. I don't think the entire waverider class description even mentions the word "paladin".

After a level of Dragon Rider we can have a dragon cohort that is older (this puts the max strain on a paladin's mount level).

A Dragon Rider's Dragon Cohort acts like a cohort from Leadership. It's not a special mount. It's not a familiar. It's not an animal companion. It's a cohort.

Now, that said, a level 20 paladin can get a young gold dragon (ECL 20) as a special mount via Dragon Steed. a level 20 (something else, at least 1 level of dragon rider) can get an ECL 23 Dragon Cohort.

I don't see how you could use it to increase the age of the dragon, though. An older dragon gained via Dragon Cohort would be ineligible to be a paladin special mount.

After the arcane heirophant level we ditch our familiar and make our dragon mount that is a companion to be a dragon mount that is a companion familiar. After a level of fleshwarper the HD stackage is complete and the massive HD boosts use the advancing dragons rules to put our gold dragon cohort mount to colossal size. Fleshwarper bumps this up permanently to the largest possible size: Colossal+

Note: some people do not consider the familiar companion to gain this ability due to a technicality of trying to decide want counts as a "familiar"... I say a 'familiar' 'companion' is a type of familiar which allows the fleshwarper targeting but I understand if your DM says "eh" to that. In that case bust out a larger monstrosity on him by reworking the fleshwarper level and going beastmaster for a [drum roll] 55 HD Colossal sized mount. Unfortunately this path has no Colossal+ size so I think of it as subpar

I haven't really thought about the Halfling Outrider/Arcane Heirophant/Fleshwarper bits, because the mount you'd be adding those abilities to doesn't work as described. (If it does, enlighten me. If it doesn't, fix it.)

One last minor nitpick about a feat the build doesn't qualify for anyway: Devoted Tracker improves the mount from the "special mount" class feature; waveriders have the "waverider mount class" feature.

[BowenSilverclaw]

Like the 2 posters above me said *points up*

Hence my first comment in this thread...

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Ah, but they (the various Turn Undead) are abilities with the same name and the same effect, so they shouldn't stack. Barring a more specific rule (such as one that states that levels in seperate classes that grant turn undead stack for purposes of determining turning level), only one turning ability should apply.
...this one comes to mind.

Exactly. The pools don't stack. If they did stack then you would have a Neutral Dread Necro 1 / Cleric 1 with one pool of turning and a Effective Turning Level of 2. This would be the way all those PrCs work that say when they require turning and grant turning, they are stacking for the HD a cleric can turn. Instead however these base classes do not stack they give seperate pools. Really, I'm not the expert on this, I just follow what the pro's say:
"Having that plus Rebuke Undead should give you double the normal number of Turning attempts, letting you get alot more mileage out of Divine Metamagic. Things like Extra Turning would apply to both classes, also." "If you have both Turn Undead AND Rebuke Undead, you should almost certainly get them as separate abilities, with a total of twice the normal number of Turn/Rebuke attempts."

It looks like those are for Paladins and Blackguards only though?

Waveriders have a special mount, because the description calls it one. By the RAI its clear this is mirrored after a pally's mount but a bit worse progression but faster (by ECL instead of class levels) and in exchange for the limitation of being aquatic. By RAW it simply depends on how picky one gets. Each of the sections of text refer to a 'special mount' which allows me to connect the dots. Since it appears it is supposed to work as the rules are intended, going RAW (which no one truly does btw) can be countered by being even more of a grammar nazi. Obviously I prefer not to be straight RAW and ignore the RAI but one could.

Assuming that the "Wave Runner" mentioned above is Waverider from Savage Species.
For clarity, what are the UA variants used above? The wizard one is obviously the one that swaps bonus feats to the fighter list. Is the ranger variant the one that grants wild shape + fast movement?
... This build does not qualify for the following feats:
Holy Mount, Theurgic Mount (both specifically require a paladin special mount).
Devoted Tracker (requires smite evil)
... This wouldn't be so much of a problem if the waverider mount were "as paladin" or similar, but it's not. I don't think the entire waverider class description even mentions the word "paladin".
... A Dragon Rider's Dragon Cohort acts like a cohort from Leadership. It's not a special mount. It's not a familiar. It's not an animal companion. It's a cohort.

I don't see how you could use it to increase the age of the dragon, though. An older dragon gained via Dragon Cohort would be ineligible to be a paladin special mount.
... Devoted Tracker improves the mount from the "special mount" class feature; waveriders have the "waverider mount class" feature.

Oops my typo (must have had other 'runner' PrCs in my head at the time)

When I wrote the UA ranger, yes I meant the nameless UA class feature swap available to a ranger. Otherwise I'd name the variant.

On the Holy Mount and Theurgic Mount, good job. I noticed this too and am noting that the Special Mount class feature is in core the "ability to gain a paladin special mount." No other materials use anything other than core without naming the book specifically. So this is blandly referencing special mount ability is a . I could also invoke the same 'similarly worded rule' in reverse to say that since the aquatic special mount is worded similarly it overlaps with a (non-existent) paladin special mount ability, making the waverider the only class to which the feat can apply. After all, that would mean that classes like Triadic knight wouldn't be able to use something that is exactly in their flavor. Thats sort of like the RAW arguements that devoted tracker doesn't do what it is supposed to (read the RAW carefully, you'll see it) or that a Dread necro can Rebuke but can't actually rebuke any particular creature type (again RAW, but not clearly not what is meant).

Thanks for showing me that I forgot the smite evil. Fixing... (and making it easier to see the whole process)

Concerning the Sidebar not working for a waverider, first look at the feat which has a "special: if you have a special mount (such as from the paladin class feature), this dragonnel replaces your special mount. This part acknowledges that other classes have special mounts but give the paladin class as the example that they will use. To take your argument a bit further lets say other classes can't use the chart where I got the gold dragon from unless they are a Paladin. Well then why would the feat specifically give them a mount from that list and furthermore point to the list? That would be an internal contradiction (you can go to the list for a mount but you can't) which logically points to the reverse interpretation; mine. Sorry to be so long winded.

On the cohort bit, yes the gold dragon is a cohort. And since a character can attract a cohort of that level within 1 alignment step, this is the way mechanically attract such a strong dragon. That said, for windrider all we need to do is ride it (good thing its our cohort). Check. In order to have it as our aquatic mount it must count as aquatic. Check. That makes it an animal companion and then familiar via devoted tracker and the Arcane Heirophant's familiar companion ability. So yes the gold dragon ends up counting for 5 things.

The Age categories are applied after the cohort is ridden and counted as our special mount. At the time of becoming a special mount it is a legal target. After that it receives the bonuses which bump it up in age categories (since HD is the method for advancing dragons)

the "if you have the special mount class feature" part is fulfilled by the text of the class feature "Mount: A waverider can call a special aquatic mount" aka your mount class feature allows you to have a special mount that is aquatic. That sounds like it works to me.

And Bowen, that last to posters were Emy and me. And we think this is worth while (inferred from emy's careful analysis). If you have nothing nearly this interesting to say I'm sorry that you lack the intelligence to create what I have. Even in a bit of a fluster Emy has done a closer read than you seem ever capable of. Go away you heckler. Go join the rest of the people sitting on the sidelines and QQ. "*Points up*" I'll take my comment back as long as this thread stays nice when you show you've done this many interesting builds.

[Emy]

This post ended up being a lot longer than I expected, but here you go.

Exactly. The pools don't stack. If they did stack then you would have a Neutral Dread Necro 1 / Cleric 1 with one pool of turning and a Effective Turning Level of 2. This would be the way all those PrCs work that say when they require turning and grant turning, they are stacking for the HD a cleric can turn. Instead however these base classes do not stack they give seperate pools. Really, I'm not the expert on this, I just follow what the pro's say:
"Having that plus Rebuke Undead should give you double the normal number of Turning attempts, letting you get alot more mileage out of Divine Metamagic. Things like Extra Turning would apply to both classes, also." "If you have both Turn Undead AND Rebuke Undead, you should almost certainly get them as separate abilities, with a total of twice the normal number of Turn/Rebuke attempts."

The difference here is that taking a class that grants Turn Undead and a class that grants Rebuke Undead gives you two different abilities, with different names, and different benefits.

Perhaps I was unclear, but the idea I was trying to communicate here was not "multiple copies of the Turn Undead ability don't stack for HD a cleric can turn," but rather "multiple copies of the Turn Undead ability don't stack in any way; you can only benefit from one of them."

The comparison to the Monk AC bonus ruling is imperfect, but it's the only rule I can think of that's comparable.

Waveriders have a special mount, because the description calls it one. By the RAI its clear this is mirrored after a pally's mount but a bit worse progression but faster (by ECL instead of class levels) and in exchange for the limitation of being aquatic. By RAW it simply depends on how picky one gets. Each of the sections of text refer to a 'special mount' which allows me to connect the dots. Since it appears it is supposed to work as the rules are intended, going RAW (which no one truly does btw) can be countered by being even more of a grammar nazi. Obviously I prefer not to be straight RAW and ignore the RAI but one could.

While it is clearly modeled after the paladin special mount, it's usually called "the mount", "her mount", or "waverider's mount" in the text.

By the same token, a blackguard's fiendish servant is clearly based on a paladin's special mount. Does that mean they should be able to choose from the paladin special mount list?

Oops my typo (must have had other 'runner' PrCs in my head at the time)

When I wrote the UA ranger, yes I meant the nameless UA class feature swap available to a ranger. Otherwise I'd name the variant.

On the Holy Mount and Theurgic Mount, good job. I noticed this too and am noting that the Special Mount class feature is in core the "ability to gain a paladin special mount." No other materials use anything other than core without naming the book specifically. So this is blandly referencing special mount ability is a . I could also invoke the same 'similarly worded rule' in reverse to say that since the aquatic special mount is worded similarly it overlaps with a (non-existent) paladin special mount ability, making the waverider the only class to which the feat can apply. After all, that would mean that classes like Triadic knight wouldn't be able to use something that is exactly in their flavor. Thats sort of like the RAW arguements that devoted tracker doesn't do what it is supposed to (read the RAW carefully, you'll see it) or that a Dread necro can Rebuke but can't actually rebuke any particular creature type (again RAW, but not clearly not what is meant).

Actually, the triadic knight ability has the same name and type as the paladin ability. It also says, rather than describing the ability in full, "see the paladin class feature, page 44 of the Player's Handbook." This very clearly means that with the exception of stacking with other classes that have Special Mount (Sp) ability, it is precisely identical to the paladin ability of the same name.

What is this 'similarly worded rule'?

As for Devoted Tracker* and Dread Necromancer's Rebuke Undead possibly not working as intended: I'm well aware that the rules as written are flawed, but there's quite a difference between "this class feature, as written, does not do what it claims to do; let's fix it," and "this class feature is similar to a paladin's special mount; let's make it count as being the same for."

I doubt I'll ever agree with you on the Waverider Mount/Holy Mount/Theurgic Mount, though, so I'll try not to bother you about it too much beyond this post.

*I would actually argue that Devoted Tracker does work as intended, RAW. It specifically allows you to do something that, in the general case, is not allowed by the rules. I'm reasonably certain that specific rules supercede general ones, so it should work fine.

Concerning the Sidebar not working for a waverider, first look at the feat which has a "special: if you have a special mount (such as from the paladin class feature), this dragonnel replaces your special mount. This part acknowledges that other classes have special mounts but give the paladin class as the example that they will use. To take your argument a bit further lets say other classes can't use the chart where I got the gold dragon from unless they are a Paladin. Well then why would the feat specifically give them a mount from that list and furthermore point to the list? That would be an internal contradiction (you can go to the list for a mount but you can't) which logically points to the reverse interpretation; mine. Sorry to be so long winded.

As far as I know, there aren't classes that grant a special mount (a "special mount", not a chosen mount, or a waverider's mount) without referencing the paladin ability. If there are, I'd like to hear them, but otherwise...

This internal contradiction only occurs when you count mounts granted through other abilities such as waverider mount as "special mounts." Therefore, the logical interpretation is that a waverider's mount does not qualify as a special mount (for the Dragon Steed feat, at least, if not generally).

On the cohort bit, yes the gold dragon is a cohort. And since a character can attract a cohort of that level within 1 alignment step, this is the way mechanically attract such a strong dragon. That said, for windrider all we need to do is ride it (good thing its our cohort). Check. In order to have it as our aquatic mount it must count as aquatic. Check. That makes it an animal companion and then familiar via devoted tracker and the Arcane Heirophant's familiar companion ability. So yes the gold dragon ends up counting for 5 things.

The windrider bonuses are, as you said, very easy to give to any mount.

Assuming that a waverider can choose a mount from the paladin special mount list, I'm pretty sure that they can't normally select something from off of that list (by not being a generic young gold dragon, your dragon cohort is not on the Dragon Steed paladin mount list). I don't see how the dragon cohort qualifies as your waverider mount.

Now, there might be a way around this, given on page 200 of the DMG. It says that at the DM's option, a paladin or similar could combine a cohort and a special mount. It also gives this a minimum level adjustment of +2 for the cohort mount. I think this would work, but I'm not exactly sure. (It's 5AM here).

The Age categories are applied after the cohort is ridden and counted as our special mount. At the time of becoming a special mount it is a legal target. After that it receives the bonuses which bump it up in age categories (since HD is the method for advancing dragons)

The dragon doesn't gain age categories or size from bonus hit dice. You seem to enjoy making inferences, so I'll let you go ahead and do that with the below text.

An animal companion doesn't get bigger when it adds extra Hit Dice for the master's levels. The advancement entries for creatures, and the rules for advancing monsters, refer to unusually powerful specimens that are simply tougher (and perhaps bigger) than normal for their kinds.

From a different perspective, hit dice are based on age, not vice versa. Age categories are very clearly based on how many years the dragon has been alive.

the "if you have the special mount class feature" part is fulfilled by the text of the class feature "Mount: A waverider can call a special aquatic mount" aka your mount class feature allows you to have a special mount that is aquatic. That sounds like it works to me.

And Bowen, that last to posters were Emy and me. And we think this is worth while (inferred from emy's careful analysis). If you have nothing nearly this interesting to say I'm sorry that you lack the intelligence to create what I have. Even in a bit of a fluster Emy has done a closer read than you seem ever capable of. Go away you heckler. Go join the rest of the people sitting on the sidelines and QQ. "*Points up*" I'll take my comment back when you show you've done this many interesting and record-holding builds.

Fluster, eh?

edit: the Celestial Creature template with LA buyoff can give Smite Evil to qualify for Devoted Tracker.

[BowenSilverclaw]

You wanted feedback? Fine 

Don't expect it to be anything more than a point by point summary though, too busy for anything more ATM. I'll just mention the things that stood out to me after another quick glance.

1) Centaur Charger:

-Centaur + Mounted Combat doesn't work, you know that. So a lot of this build is based on a false assumption.
-An 'Orcish Centaur'? Really? Now where would the rules for that be? The only thing that comes to mind is the Tauric Template. Centaurs are a race, not a templated creature.
-As for the 1-HD Lycanthrope, that 1 HD DOES add to ECL, nowhere in the Lycanthrope entry is it mentioned that a 1 HD Lycanthrope can replace his animal HD with class levels. Further more they are treated much like the character MULTICLASSED, so not as racial HD, and they are never the creature's first HD, unlike racial HD.
-Swarm Favored Enemy, another house-rule.
-Custom Bloodline, I guess you needed to make up even more stuff to make it work.
-The character isn't completed until well into Epic level, while normal CO/TO builds are generally made within the course of 20 levels.
-You think something ToB is overpowered? Really? After extensive houseruling to come up with a simple charger you deem something that might prevent it from acting first as overpowered? God forbid you face a character with Celerity, or just a damn good Initiative score...
-Girallon's Blessing and Girallon Arms don't increase the base damage of your natural weapons.


2) CoDzilla

-What are you going to Persist? Level 1 spells? How is this guy a useful contribution to the party?
-You explicitely need an expensive item to make the Wild Shape abilities of the build function.
-Trappings of the Beast Item Combo only advance the Wild Shape Class Feature.
--> MoMF doesn't grant Wild Shape, it just stacks with existing Wild Shape for purposes of max. HD and duration. So you won't gain any extra MoMF forms or abilities by using items.
--> It's very debatable to actually call Wild Shape granted by an Item a Class Feature, so a lot of the Wild Shaping hinges on DM fiat.
-You're talking about using a Custom Miracle Item. Well, in that case I'm sure you don't mind everyone goes Wish-farming, right?
-Requires a Deck of Many things, and a custom variant as well. How you gonna prevent the deck from handing you crappy cards? Need more custom items for that?


3) Sneak Attack:

-Deadly Precision weapon enhancement is +1d6, not +2d6
-Martial Stance feat needs to be taken twice if you want Assassin's Stance, since you can only pick a first level stance as your first stance.
-How do you intend to hit with such a crappy BAB?


4) Halfling Mount

-There is no ECL given for Dragons, so it's impossibleto determine the level of your Cohort mount, assuming this build even functions properly, which it doesn't.
-Dragons only grow to Colossal plus, no larger.
-The base character pretty much sucks, you'd be playing a mount with some excess baggage tagging along.
-The Waveriders mount class ability is explicitely called Waverider Mount, that is something completely different from Special Mount, which means it doesn't qualify for a lot of the feats and class abilities you use to increase your mounts HD.
-The use of a Dragon as a Special Mount is explicitely stated to be only useable by Paladins, your build doesn't get a Special Mount as a Paladin.
-The table for Dragon mounts only goes up to Young Gold Dragons, there is nothing mentioned about Great Wyrm Colossal plus size Gold Dragons.


5) Triple 9

-Been done to death, and in more elegant ways to boot.
-Your build requires an expensive Magical Item, again, and at a relatively early level.
-The use of Reincarnate. The result is completely random, and a Beholder is not listed as one of the options. Your only hope here would be to roll that 100 and DM fiat/fellatio.


6) Eldrith Blast

-Waddayaknow, it actually works as advertised, that's a first 
-Been done to death, and with 9th level spells too boot, don't try to sell it as your own exclusive discovery, or any of this stuff for that matter.
-Before you call something a world record, first check the actual world record, and make sure your stuff actually follows the rules, like any other CO-build.



That's about it for now, hope you're happy I took the time to point out the obvious.

~Bowen

[Bozwevial]

I have to agree with Bowen and Emy. A lot of this leans very heavily on stuff that is house-ruled--you actually have a build that depends on a custom item of Miracle, for heaven's sake. Admittedly, you claim that that build is only for DMs, but if you're that intent on screwing the PCs, there are easier methods.

Also, it rather irks me that you're hyping your own shaky builds so greatly and then belittling anyone who dares to point out the flaws in them.

As a final point, when it was pointed out to you that the Hulking Hurler is more potent than your build, you claim that the HH is something "no sane DM would consider." Is it just me, or does this strike anyone else as a tad hypocritical, given that most of your builds here involve such things as expensive items granting potent class features before it would be appropriate to even see such a thing, let alone own it, use of the Reincarnate spell for an outcome that's very improbable at best, and artifacts (and ones that are risky to use, at that)?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Thanks for finally having a worth-while critique bowen. I'll get back to you after work. Emy gets first crack because she has been patient, but Boz only deserves this:

Oddly enough the custom item is the more RAW allowable than some of the things that make more sense like an Orcish centuar. Just goes to show how really weird RAW is... And yes there are easier but what makes CoDzilla funny is that it is the same methods as the players - being overbuilt. My hype is actually my strange brand of humor so I don't expect you to understand that, but I definitely don't belittle those who point out flaws. I'll be the first to agree that I did some pretty crazy, theoretical shit, all I want honest commentary. Actually I love the fact that Emy will closely read what I wrote. Its unfortunate that you didn't for my 'why the hulking hurler doesn't work' sblock because it simply won't work due the way gravity works. And no the no sane DM part is actually from my CoDzilla build, not HH, which doesn't work after the mass from what you throw exceeds the earth's, making both the earth and you now attracted to it and makes it the unthrowable ground.

Meanwhile as long as you buy into the 'pointy things jabbed into people really hard do lots of damage' my tad hypothetical charger build still basically works. And yes I did flag that the item shenanigans in the tripple 9 build would not necessarily have to work, only that it could. And you don't have to own, only have access to or borrow to those two items. Yes the reincarnation is improbable, it is only supposed to be possible; added. Lastly, I don't remember any artifacts involved in any of the builds...

multiple copies of the Turn Undead ability don't stack in any way; you can only benefit from one of them

By the same token, a blackguard's fiendish servant is clearly based on a paladin's special mount. Does that mean they should be able to choose from the paladin special mount list?

there's quite a difference between "this class feature, as written, does not do what it claims to do; let's fix it," and "this class feature is similar to a paladin's special mount; let's make it count as being the same for."

As far as I know, there aren't classes that grant a special mount (a "special mount", not a chosen mount, or a waverider's mount) without referencing the paladin ability. If there are, I'd like to hear them, but otherwise...

This internal contradiction only occurs when you count mounts granted through other abilities such as waverider mount as "special mounts." Therefore, the logical interpretation is that a waverider's mount does not qualify as a special mount (for the Dragon Steed feat, at least, if not generally).

...by not being a generic young gold dragon, your dragon cohort is not on the Dragon Steed paladin mount list. I don't see how the dragon cohort qualifies as your waverider mount.

on page 200 of the DMG. It says that at the DM's option, a paladin or similar could combine a cohort and a special mount. It also gives this a minimum level adjustment of +2 for the cohort mount.

An animal companion doesn't get bigger when it adds extra Hit Dice for the master's levels. The advancement entries for creatures, and the rules for advancing monsters, refer to unusually powerful specimens that are simply tougher (and perhaps bigger) than normal for their kinds.

That makes no sense with the many PrCs that grant turn undead if you don't have it and stack with it if it does. Some go as far as to forget to call attention to the difference and simply grant turn undead, leaving the player to figure out if that ability should stack or not (which depends on if it were a prereq). If they never stack, why would the one's that don't specifically say they stack, but require it as a prereq put it in as a class ability at all? By your interpretation they should never stack meaning it's always a null class ability. It's pretty clear that the turn pool mechanic can get quite confusing but I think I'm following a pretty consistent interpretation. Now when things go ghestalt I don't touch them with a 10' pole...

If the alignment matches correctly, and the blackgaurd is not dealt with differently specifically (such as in the draconomicon), then yes. It even seems that, aside from alignment retrictions a blackgaurd's fiendish servant and a paladin's special mount (perhaps a paladin of tyranny?) could be the same pony or horse. I never really considered this path as I was optimizing HD and this build doesn't.

Very true, but I don't see it as much of a stretch. I see the waverunner as a rather specifically themed Paladin. If a DM disagrees with the flavor, then by all means RAW supports the grammar Nazism. I wouldn't make a good lawyer because I tend to follow the spirit of the law in addition to what it says. I'll put a note of this flavory assumption though.

Nope there are others like the Skylord that have non-paladin referencing special flavored mounts.

Well you took a different solution to the potential paradox but since either can work, neither of our answers are definitive.

On the generic-ness of the paladin mount I don't recall anything in the Draconomicon about that.

Yup I know of the cohort to mount normal rules. That is what got me thinking about using the Dragon Rider cohort to attract a more powerful than usual dragon. The PrC is more specific than the DMG option so it takes precedent.

I'm aware of the FAQ on normal animal companions. However dragons have more specific advancement so I'll address the "From a different perspective, hit dice are based on age, not vice versa. Age categories are very clearly based on how many years the dragon has been alive" part. Yup I am aware of that too. The advancement on the dragons is really not needed. I don't follow it completely (notice the spellcasting) nor do I agree with the epic rules on them either. That part was more for fun but I can still see an argument for the physical elements advancing per HD. It is a tomato, tomatoe thing but notice I try to straddle the middle.

and thank you on the Celestial Creature template with LA buyoff part for Smite Evil! That's what I forgot...

[Emy]

Words incoming.

Thanks for finally having a worth-while critique bowen. I'll get back to you after work. Emy gets first crack because she has been patient, but Boz only deserves this:

Oddly enough the custom item is the more RAW allowable than some of the things that make more sense like an Orcish centuar. Just goes to show how really weird RAW is... And yes there are easier but what makes CoDzilla funny is that it is the same methods as the players - being overbuilt. My hype is actually my strange brand of humor so I don't expect you to understand that, but I definitely don't belittle those who point out flaws. I'll be the first to agree that I did some pretty crazy, theoretical shit, all I want honest commentary. Actually I love the fact that Emy will closely read what I wrote. Its unfortunate that you didn't for my 'why the hulking hurler doesn't work' sblock because it simply won't work due the way gravity works. And no the no sane DM part is actually from my CoDzilla build, not HH, which doesn't work after the mass from what you throw exceeds the earth's, making both the earth and you now attracted to it and makes it the unthrowable ground.

The above is sized for emphasis. I'll come back to this.

Meanwhile as long as you buy into the 'pointy things jabbed into people really hard do lots of damage' my tad hypothetical charger build still basically works. And yes I did flag that the item shenanigans in the tripple 9 build would not necessarily have to work, only that it could. And you don't have to own, only have access to or borrow to those two items. Yes the reincarnation is improbable, it is only supposed to be possible; added. Lastly, I don't remember any artifacts involved in any of the builds...

Aside: the non-word "tripple" irks me irrationally.

I think "improbable" is a bit of an understatement on the chances of being reincarnated into one specific race out of all those in D&D, after you've rolled double 0s on your percentile dice.

As for artifacts, there's this one (bold and maroon cuts added by me):

Build 2 [A FULL CODZILLA BUILD for your evil, evil DM]

(cut for length)

This build is built around the use of the variant deck of many things here http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060614a. It allows a character to rebuild levels (not a problem due to the 'buffer' level of barbarian at level 1), gain templates (which do not apply since class abilities rely on staying neutral - the neutral one can be temporarily gained by borrowing an item) and changing skill points and feats. Basically by drawing enough this character can set these things to exactly what he wants (except the few that are one way only and no longer apply).

(cut for length)

The Deck of Many Things is an artifact. Since there aren't rules for when players should acquire artifacts (they don't have gold piece values), that means that the build is dependent upon DM fiat. (Moreso than it already was, requiring also a caster level 1, 1/day item of Miracle. A commoner could take over the world with one of those.)

That makes no sense with the many PrCs that grant turn undead if you don't have it and stack with it if it does. Some go as far as to forget to call attention to the difference and simply grant turn undead, leaving the player to figure out if that ability should stack or not (which depends on if it were a prereq). If they never stack, why would the one's that don't specifically say they stack, but require it as a prereq put it in as a class ability at all? By your interpretation they should never stack meaning it's always a null class ability. It's pretty clear that the turn pool mechanic can get quite confusing but I think I'm following a pretty consistent interpretation. Now when things go ghestalt I don't touch them with a 10' pole...

I'll admit I might be wrong about the stacking. Still, that's not the only questionable thing in this build.

If the alignment matches correctly, and the blackgaurd is not dealt with differently specifically (such as in the draconomicon), then yes. It even seems that, aside from alignment retrictions a blackgaurd's fiendish servant and a paladin's special mount (perhaps a paladin of tyranny?) could be the same pony or horse. I never really considered this path as I was optimizing HD and this build doesn't.

As fun as exploring the consequences of allowing people to choose mounts from other classes' lists would be, I'm not going to do it here, because the aforementioned allowance is a house rule.

Very true, but I don't see it as much of a stretch. I see the waverunner as a rather specifically themed Paladin. If a DM disagrees with the flavor, then by all means RAW supports the grammar Nazism. I wouldn't make a good lawyer because I tend to follow the spirit of the law in addition to what it says. I'll put a note of this flavory assumption though.

Nope there are others like the Skylord that have non-paladin referencing special flavored mounts.

Well you took a different solution to the potential paradox but since either can work, neither of our answers are definitive.

On the generic-ness of the paladin mount I don't recall anything in the Draconomicon about that.

Yup I know of the cohort to mount normal rules. That is what got me thinking about using the Dragon Rider cohort to attract a more powerful than usual dragon. The PrC is more specific than the DMG option so it takes precedent.

I'm aware of the FAQ on normal animal companions. However dragons have more specific advancement so I'll address the "From a different perspective, hit dice are based on age, not vice versa. Age categories are very clearly based on how many years the dragon has been alive" part. Yup I am aware of that too. The advancement on the dragons is really not needed. I don't follow it completely (notice the spellcasting) nor do I agree with the epic rules on them either. That part was more for fun but I can still see an argument for the physical elements advancing per HD. It is a tomato, tomatoe thing but notice I try to straddle the middle.

Even if stating this is "grammar Nazism" (hello, Godwin) on my part, doing the above does not fall within the written rules of the game. Making a waverider mount qualify for special mount feats is a houserule. Making the waverider able to choose a mount from a paladin list is a houserule. Making the dragon cohort qualify as a mount from the paladin list without giving it any level adjustment is a houserule. Making bonus Hit Dice advance a dragon's age is also a houserule.

and thank you on the Celestial Creature template with LA buyoff part for Smite Evil! That's what I forgot...

You're welcome.

I think this finishes off my reply to that specific post.


My hope is that the following will tie into a coherent statement that concludes my involvement with this thread:

Many of these builds use various house ruled abilities or races (the orcish centaur, for example). You have yourself stated that you're doing "crazy, theoretical shit", or in other words, theoretical optimization. To define this easily, I'll take an old quote from the now-defunct Theoretical Optimization boards at WotC.

Optimization has 2 functions- 1) to make optimized characters designed for play and 2) to see how powerful you can get while still staying within the rules.

This board is for the latter.

While your builds are clearly designed to reach maximum power, it's the last part there that bothers me. "... while still staying within the rules." Your builds don't stick to "rules as written". You include many modifications to them. While these are fine for a real game, these builds aren't made for real games. They're theoretical exercises. The goal here, I think, is to work within the rules exactly as they're written... often to a completely absurd extreme.

As an example of inconsistency, I'd like to point to your first build. You ignore certain parts of the rules as written "Also please no complaints about RAW requirements for the riding skill and mounted combat feats". But at other times... "The above uses a RAW but cheesy use of the Kesnei variant". These are in the same build. It seems a little silly, honestly. I don't think that's the primary problem people have with it, though.

Now, the posting guidelines ask people to list, among other things, any relevant house rules. These are mostly aimed towards newbies that don't know what to include when they ask "halp me with monk plees." However, they're also applicable here.

Your builds rely heavily on house-ruled material, as Bozwevial said. That's not entirely awful, but the builds don't state clearly that they only work with certain house rules. This is very deceptive, especially when you repeatedly refer others to your builds in a discussion of another game that likely does not use your house rules.

For example:

Hehe, I disagree. After all neutrality is the path to the (non-contested) world record for most turning pools. I could also edit it further for the world record for DMMable turn/rebuke uses. The proof is in my side note in my "Full CoDzilla build for your evil, evil DM" (build #2) at the link in my sig.

The discussion was about player characters. The build you referred to is both not designed for players, and requires the DM handing out a specific variant artifact, among other items. The discussion involved a limited number of books; this number is certainly less than your build #2 uses. Your post was a reply to my suggesting an evil Dread Necromancer, and really had nothing to do with the thread at all. It seems to have just been posting for the sake of indiscriminately disseminating links to your builds.

Here's my final point:

• It is disingenuous to refer to builds that rely upon house-rules or DM fiat as being "world records" (or even to recommend them to other people) if you don't make it very clear that your builds do not use the same set of rules as everyone else's.

In fact, I'm going to take one phrase of the preceding sentence, and turn it into a statement in its own right.

• Your builds do not use the same set of rules as everyone else's.

[Bozwevial]

My response is spoiler blocked to save space.

[spoiler=Response.]

Oddly enough the custom item is the more RAW allowable than some of the things that make more sense like an Orcish centuar. Just goes to show how really weird RAW is...

Yes, but there's the rub, isn't it? RAW, there is no such thing as an orcish centaur. RAW, you can't craft an item with a CL lower than is necessary to cast it, the notable exception being the artificer, who can craft items as though he were two levels higher, but not 16 levels higher. (Level-dependent effects go by his actual level, but that's neither here nor there.)

And yes there are easier but what makes CoDzilla funny is that it is the same methods as the players - being overbuilt.

Last I checked, most people don't go to that length when optimizing a character.

My hype is actually my strange brand of humor so I don't expect you to understand that, but I definitely don't belittle those who point out flaws.

*coughBowencough*

I'll be the first to agree that I did some pretty crazy, theoretical shit, all I want honest commentary. Actually I love the fact that Emy will closely read what I wrote. Its unfortunate that you didn't for my 'why the hulking hurler doesn't work' sblock because it simply won't work due the way gravity works.

Oh, I read it. And you know what? By the RAW (which you seem to be so fond of), there is nothing to prevent the Hulking Hurler from doing what he does best. No, it doesn't make sense, but there you have it.

And no the no sane DM part is actually from my CoDzilla build, not HH, which doesn't work after the mass from what you throw exceeds the earth's, making both the earth and you now attracted to it and makes it the unthrowable ground.

Every time someone brings physics into a discussion on D&D, a catgirl dies. Besides, it seems a bit hypocritical to call the Hulking Hurler imbalanced when we have a custom item of Miracle, CL 1 in said CoDzilla build. I quoted from your CoDzilla post in reference to the HH because it shows inconsistency.

Meanwhile as long as you buy into the 'pointy things jabbed into people really hard do lots of damage' my tad hypothetical charger build still basically works.

Orcish centaurs, the aforementioned Mounted Combat/centaur thing simply not working, ignoring Hit Dice, custom bloodlines, and eight feats from items. That's not a "tad theoretical", that's flat out silly.

And yes I did flag that the item shenanigans in the tripple 9 build would not necessarily have to work, only that it could. And you don't have to own, only have access to or borrow to those two items. Yes the reincarnation is improbable, it is only supposed to be possible; added. Lastly, I don't remember any artifacts involved in any of the builds...

The aforementioned items come from all over the place, not just the one build you mentioned. There's the legacy armor, legacy weapon, and eight feat granting items from your charger, the item of Miracle, CL 1 from your CoDzilla build, another legacy weapon for your supermount build...You see?

Yes, it's possible that you might be able to get Reincarnate to work. And it's possible that if I conjured several dozen gallons of black lotus poison over someone's head, they might make all their saves. Or that I could draw nothing but good cards from a Deck of Many Things (which, by the way, is the artifact in your build), or roll nothing but natural twenties over the course of my entire campaign. It's just not very likely, and all I'm saying is that basing an entire character around an event that has, at best, a 1% chance of happening is probably a waste of time. [/spoiler]

Emy probably summed this up better than I could, but I'll give it a shot. What you are doing is tantamount to mounting a jetpack on your back and then claiming you've won the world record for the 100-meter dash. You're not following the same standards everyone else is--it's arguable you're not even playing the same game.