Results 511 to 540 of 825
-
2010-10-21, 08:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
"of course the fighter is balanced and has options, he just has to emulate other classes to do so!"
Giacomo agrees that the fighter has no option other then ask other classes to give him options.
he just won't admit it.
think about it this way:
you're given responsibility of a project at work. your job, and that of everyone involved in the project, is on the line. if you pull it off, however, you'll reap the benefits. the main problem is that you will be required to do more then just a single task, and the list of potential setback is staggering.
do you...
A) want a guy who's really good at one thing and virtually helpless without help of the other team members
B) want a guy who's skilled in multiple areas and can adapt to the situation on his own
now change "your job, and that of everyone involved in the project, is on the line." to "if you fail, you will likely be killed by things with sharp claws and pointy, pointy teeth while possibly on fire".
it's one thing to cooperate with another character to get a job done. it's another to be entirely reliant on other characters so you can keep up.
-
2010-10-21, 09:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- In the T.A.R.D.I.S.
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
How friggin true is this. As an engineer, with engineer buddies, we get stuck with the 'fighter' all. the. friggin. time. Engineers are like wizards, with all of our skill ranks pumped into one Knowledge skill or another. (According to somebody's sig, we also turn caffiene into drawings. Which is true, by the way.)
Last edited by dsmiles; 2010-10-21 at 09:06 AM.
Originally Posted by The Doctor
-
2010-10-21, 09:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- Michigan
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
So a fighter has +38 to hit, and does 58 damage a hit. wizard likely has has a Core AC of 55(caster boost to pit fiend, +4 from amulet, deflection, and mage armor, and +3 from dex boost) which puts the fighter at hitting the wizard 15% of the time. The wizard has 17*(2.5+3+2), so 118 hp. Fighters full attack does 58*(.15+.15+.5+.5+.5) damage. So about 27hp a round. The wizard can take 4 rounds of the fighters beat down before adding in things like miss chances or a slightly higher AC.
The wizards attack is +21/21/16/16/16/16 before adding any buffs to it. Divine power would take it to 33/33/25/25/25/25 for an attack routine of
2 claws(2d8+16) and 2 wings (2d6+8) and bite (4d6+8 plus poison plus disease) and tail slap (2d8+8)
50+ 60*.75 for about 95hp damage a round to a fighter with about 170hp.
I'm sure they can both go further but I'm not sure I really care.
-
2010-10-21, 09:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Answering this will probably also answer oxybe's concerns, plus some already posted in this thread...
A link, please. And do not get me wrong - adding non-core material for fluff reasons is nice. But it can get imbalanced quickly, simply because more options are made available for caster classes.
It's not impossible, though, to add non-core material and keep everyting roughly balanced, I guess. But adding plenty of such material ends up in class imbalance.
I feel, however awkwardly, done, that this sentence tacitly confirms that my example fighter feats at level 17 show how the fighter can contribute equally to combat (or even better, since he can do it 24/7).
Well, first of all I'd definitely say combat is quite a powerful way to affect a plot.
And outside the combat minigame, it is mostly roleplaying first and use of abilities such as you outlined second.
Then, a fighter is not exactly a complete loss in these areas (again, abstracting from leadership), for levels 1-20:
- information gathering: intimidate skill (possibly boost with feats)
- scouting: magic items (but this is the roguge's forte in the iconic group), or possibly get the tracking feat (with some survival cross-class...)
- restoration: magic items (but this is the cleric's forte in the iconic group)
- negotiation: intimidate skill (see above)
- travel: riding skill
- permanent resource management: what the heck is that supposed to mean?
So, disproven with just a few lines the "fighter can't do anything outside combat" fallacy.
But it does, since it is the total of things that count, not just some nit-picking out of the whole range of things a character gets. A commoner could not have done what I have outlined for lack of feats and BAB.
Er...which "many"? I do not see unsurmountable trouble for the core CR 17 ones, for instance. The fighter could focus his attacks on one opponent, tripping first and do around 300 damage.
I'll have a look at this thread that apparently deals with a non-core aspect of the game (the crusader class) and see whether it can apply here.
Yup, he should be - the crusader is more powerful than the fighter core class.
...Wait, your argument is that all classes using magic items are useless except the wizard because he made them? Er...and the wizard is actually useless because a commoner made the food he ate until he rose to such high levels? And the materials/pages/items he needs for his spells and spellbooks? Well...
*Tries to keep from laughing at facepalm*
Again, a typical example of the "I take different aspects of the classes at random and compare them separately instead of using all the pc gets to conclude that some are underpowered" fallacy.
Sigh. Diplomacy is yet another example of things that are allegedly broken in core. But...all that skill does is change the attitude of an npc UNTIL SOMETHING CHANGES THAT WOULD AGAIN CHANGE THE BEHAVIOUR OF THAT NPC. And that can happen immediately, even in the same round, or a week later. It is yet another example of a player rulespart entering DM territory, with quite clear rulings on that.
Example of what I mean:
Diplomancer PC with rushed diplomacy check: "Wait, do not attack me - I am your friend and could help you."
BBEG: (changes from hostile to neutral, thinking to stop his attack)"why is that?"
THING THAT CHANGES IN THE ENVIRONMENT
BBEG's minion: "But sire, this rogue is the only thing between you and victory - why do you hesitate?"
BBEG: "That's right, thank you for reminding me." (continues attack)
Because the wizard survived at low levels because of the fighter? Because the fighter can buy rings from someone else? Or get PaO from an npc cleric?
Nope. See above the "commoner can do everything as well without feats and BAB and hero wbl" fallacy. It is so obvious that I just don't understand why people keep bringing this up.
I'll wait now for a while and see whether and what more reactions come up before posting again.
- Giacomo
EDIT/PS: and please no "but I could build a wizard to just smash that example fighter of yours" posts. Read my disclaimer in my post as to why (and also think exactly what your wizard would need to have as items to do this thing 4 times/day...)Last edited by Sir Giacomo; 2010-10-21 at 09:15 AM.
-
2010-10-21, 09:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Because the wizard survived at low levels because of the fighter?
You know, that argument would work a lot better if...
1) All games spanned 1-20
2) You always played the same single character throughout the length of any given campaign.
3) Other people couldn't provide survivability to the party besides a Fighter (indeed, quite possibly better than he could, with fun things like scouting, Solid Fog, Dispel Magic, Shield Other, or animal companions).
4) It was okay for only half of your party to be relevant at any given level.
Wait, your argument is that all classes using magic items are useless except the wizard because he made them?
You did, however, rather explicitly say that the Fighter class contributes meaningfully to out of combat situations because he can wield a magic item that absolutely anyone else can use at least as effectively.
We're not talking about something like a Magic Sword where the Fighter actually gets some ability to use it better than some other guy. You're talking about items where if the Fighter handed it to someone else in the party, it'd be equally (or more!) effective.Last edited by Godless_Paladin; 2010-10-21 at 09:44 AM.
-
2010-10-21, 09:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Grad. School
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
I personally think fighters (and probably any full BAB class really) should just start the game with Improved Trip, the TWF tree, Improved Grapple, Improved Sunder, Improved Disarm etc. etc.
A generalist wizard can cast a spell from any school to do pretty much anything he wants. Zero feat investment. Why does a melee class have to spend so many of its feats just to be able to do what it is supposed to?
-
2010-10-21, 09:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
honestly why even bother arguing with him he has repeated the same arguments hundreds of times on different threads and when someone points out a flaw in the argument he ignores it and says the argument again.
-
2010-10-21, 09:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
so the fighter can fight... and what else?
that's what the main point of contention: the fighter can fight. bravo. does he want a cookie and milk too for getting the same gold star everyone got?
all classes can fight. the main problem is when we ask "what else can he do" without the aid of casters (in one form or another: either through being buffed by spells or requesting an item being created that emulates a caster's spells or whatnot) the answer "not much".
-
2010-10-21, 09:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
In fact, it doesn't even have to be "without the aid of casters." For example, the fact that, say, an Artificer can use a wand better than some other guy actually counts for something. But the ability to carry around an Everburning Torch just as well as the next guy doesn't say anything for your class at all.
To use a bit of Sir Giacomo's straw man response, it's totally okay if the Wizard didn't make the paper that his spellbook is written on. If he handed over his spellbook to a commoner, the commoner couldn't use it to prepare Suggestion. Or Time Stop. This is because it is the Wizard's class features that enable the item to function.
By contrast, the magic items Sir Giacomo is talking about for giving a Fighter out of combat utility are things that anyone else could wield equally effectively, and do not draw any aspect of their functionality from the fact that the Fighter is the guy holding said items. If you killed the Fighter, took his stuff, and gave it to someone else, you would not have lost that utility. By contrast, if you killed the Wizard, took his spellbook, and handed it off to the Barbarian, the spellbook becomes a worthless pile of unintelligible scribbles.Last edited by Godless_Paladin; 2010-10-21 at 09:43 AM.
-
2010-10-21, 10:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Yes, fighters have so much room to spend skill points on cross-class skills, what with their 2+int skill points per level.
If you want to invest in Intimidation and Ride, you're already out of points if you want to keep both skills maxed. You could stop pumping Ride after a while, since most of the DCs are set, but you'll still get pitifully low investment on Survival - all the moreso since the fighter has no reason to pump wisdom except to improve his cross-class skills that he can't really afford.
Unless your fighter has a whole lot of Intelligence, he's certainly not going to be able to put any points into Spot or Listen after that.
Also, when the answer to "What can a fighter do in this situation?" is "Anything a commoner with the same wealth could do," it doesn't speak well to the fighter class. At least magic items for combat can be used with feats and BAB... the examples you gave above of the fighter using magic items are something any other class could do with the same item. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement for bringing a fighter along for the ride.
I can find absolutely nothing in the core rules to support that interpretation. Unless the minion is also using the Diplomacy skill, there is no reason to think that (according to the rules) the BBEG would attack his newfound buddy.
If you could cite the page number, or the SRD page, where you found this information, I would be most appreciative. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume you're making stuff up.SpoilerOriginally Posted by JaronKOriginally Posted by TyndmyrOriginally Posted by Zaq
-
2010-10-21, 10:40 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Maryland
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
I am ok with same game tests and the like, anyhow. If you assume that killing mobs is a better test of a class than killing the opposing character, which is a legitimate pov.
And yeah, the inevitible rules arguments that drag on until someone gets bored do suck. It's unfortunate. Pbp has a relatively low survival rate.
Susano, the fact that buffs can be put on the fighter as well does not make the fighter equal. He is not the dispenser of those buffs, the cleric is.
The arena does indeed have a list of rules. The recruitment thread has em. They are mostly pretty balanced, and ban the usual infinite loops and the like.
Giamoco, I have no idea what you're even talking about any more. Commoners trump wizards because they make food? What? Why are commoners better at making food than wizards? The argument makes no sense.
-
2010-10-21, 11:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- In the T.A.R.D.I.S.
- Gender
-
2010-10-21, 11:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
The idea is that how useful a class is is entirely independent from how dependent it is on other classes. People eat food harvested by commoners, but that doesn't reflect on their class power, just like the fighter receiving buffs doesn't make him less useful even though he relies on a caster to do it.
There is some truth to this argument, although Giacomo drastically overstates it. It's true that a fighter with a whole mess of cleric buffs (some of which are going to have to come from a Ring of Spell Storing, since they're personal) is going to fight better than a cleric, "fight" here being defined as "hit things until they die." It's true that a fighter who has been Polymorphed is going to be a better combatant than a wizard who has been Polymorphed.
All this really proves, though, is two things. One, that teamwork is always going to produce something greater than the sum of its parts; and two, that fighters are capable of participating meaningfully in combat. I don't think anyone would contest either of those two points. The issue is that when you are trying to decide who to bring on your big adventure, the fighter is almost never going to be the best choice. Assuming nothing but core classes, the fighter isn't a particularly appealing choice until you have someone to cover practically every skill, someone capable of healing, someone capable of battlefield control at range, and someone capable of buffing. Then it's probably worth your while to pick up someone who does nothing but kill stuff more efficiently. Since the other classes can kill stuff, albeit not as well as a buffed fighter, while the fighter can't contribute to any of the other roles outlined above, the fighter is a far less desirable class to bring along.SpoilerOriginally Posted by JaronKOriginally Posted by TyndmyrOriginally Posted by Zaq
-
2010-10-21, 11:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2007
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
So the arena thread is nice but what size is this mythical arena and the starting points? Thats increadibly important Also we should use standard rules, a.k.a. standard point buy and no unearthed arcana. And since this is supposed to be core... core only.
Giamoco, I have no idea what you're even talking about any more. Commoners trump wizards because they make food? What? Why are commoners better at making food than wizards? The argument makes no sense.
So the fact that the wizard can cast astral projection means little. A fighter can hire a wizard to cast it for slightly more. The fact that a wizard can get a long lasting PaO (and I disagree with the interpertation that allows for permanent anything), means little since the wizard has no trouble handing it out.
Also wizards are obliterated by nightmare until they get mind blank. More DMs should use nightmare.
-
2010-10-21, 11:44 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Not just overcoming mobs, but overcoming level appropriate challenges of various flavors. And "killing" is an overrated solution to problems. For example, the bad guy just regenerates from his phylactery or has one of his Clones come out and comes back to visit next week.
But the thing is, that's not even what Giacomo was talking about. He was talking about how a Fighter contributes out of combat in a meaningful way (as opposed to anyone else) because he can use a Ring of Out of Combat Utility Spell Effect. Except that absolutely anyone else can use a Ring of Out of Combat Utility Spell Effect at least as effectively as the Fighter. We're not even talking about a claim like "A Fighter can put a magic sword to better use."Last edited by Godless_Paladin; 2010-10-21 at 11:49 AM.
-
2010-10-21, 11:47 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Which is why I said he overstated it. His posts do contain some valid points - like how a commoner with WBL still won't be as good as a fighter in combat - and some completely ridiculous points - like how anyone with a magic item won't be as good as a fighter out-of-combat.
He's wrong, on the whole, but he does say some things that are true. And it's true that a fighter with full combat buffs will be better at fighting than a wizard with full combat buffs (again, "fighting" here defined as "hitting stuff").
There are some people on this board so eager to prove that wizards are better than fighters that they resort to hyperbole, and all that really does is lend the illusion of rationality to Giacomo's arguments.SpoilerOriginally Posted by JaronKOriginally Posted by TyndmyrOriginally Posted by Zaq
-
2010-10-21, 11:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Except that they're not actually meaningful points of argument because those points aren't actually being made against anyone (even though he acts as if they are). They're straw man arguments and he wasn't replying to anyone holding an opposing position to those ideas to begin with. It's like arguing "Oh yeah, well Fighter is a class." Sure, it's true, but it's not making a point to anyone.
The argument he was actually replying to was that a commoner could use a Ring of Out Of Combat Utility Spell could be utilized just as easily by a commoner as by anyone else. Essentially, that the Fighter wasn't contributing to the Ring's power in any fashion (by contrast, when wielding a magic sword, the Fighter is in fact contributing to the effectiveness of said sword. But no one was talking about that). If the Fighter had just handed over said Ring to any other member of the party, it would have been just as effective. If not more, since some classes actually have class features that make you better at using such things.Last edited by Godless_Paladin; 2010-10-21 at 12:02 PM.
-
2010-10-21, 11:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Maryland
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Fair enough. The arena thread lists a variety of possible arenas. Personally, I would suggest randomly rolling one after the characters are built. This avoids the issue of building characters specifically for limited circumstances, which is generally not helpful to wider balance issues.
I believe traditional same game tests do have non-combat encounters too. I've got no issue with that, if it's the preferred route.Last edited by Tyndmyr; 2010-10-21 at 11:58 AM.
-
2010-10-21, 12:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
I think it's worthwhile to point out where he says true things, even when they're essentially responses to a phantom debater, if only so that he can't keep restating them as though they are counterarguments.
If we just focus on the points we're actually making, it's easier to keep talking past us. If we acknowledge the points we aren't making, then he can't act like we are making them. Clarifying the discussion may seem like a waste of time, but hopefully it'll prevent more useless back-and-forth on issues no one is actually discussing.
Or maybe not, but that was the theory.SpoilerOriginally Posted by JaronKOriginally Posted by TyndmyrOriginally Posted by Zaq
-
2010-10-21, 03:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Technically the fighter only survived low levels because the wizard spammed Sleep and Color Spray.
For a detailed perspective, see the link in my sig.Last edited by BeholderSlayer; 2010-10-21 at 03:02 PM.
-
2010-10-21, 03:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
{Scrubbed}
End of the day - if you think fighter blows, nobody is making you play it.
Stick with wizard and cleric combinations, continue finding flaws in RAW to exploit game mechanics out of the spirit of the game, and let it lie.
Some peeps (I know this is going to sound crazy) just enjoy playing the game for it's RP elements with friends and don't mind some of the flawed combat mechanics/balance issues.
{scrubbed}Last edited by The Glyphstone; 2010-10-21 at 05:16 PM.
-
2010-10-21, 03:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Maryland
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
The point WAS those balance issues you don't mind.
-
2010-10-21, 03:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
-
2010-10-21, 03:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- The Land of Angles
-
2010-10-21, 03:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
-
2010-10-21, 04:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Tacoma, WA
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
This.
When discussing balance, people tend to cite examples of things. Class features, feats, spells, tactics, etc.
Then people provide counter examples.
This is invaribly followed quickly by dual challenges.
So, to recap:
1. Balance discussion
2. Examples/counter examples
3. Duals
4. ???
5. ProfitI will NOT succumb to evil!...Unless she's cute._____________
Avatar by Miss Nobody
-
2010-10-21, 04:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2007
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Fair enough. The arena thread lists a variety of possible arenas. Personally, I would suggest randomly rolling one after the characters are built. This avoids the issue of building characters specifically for limited circumstances, which is generally not helpful to wider balance issues.
I believe traditional same game tests do have non-combat encounters too. I've got no issue with that, if it's the preferred route.
Also when does the spell picking happen? I would say for this at the same time the builds go up, since spells are such a major part of a casters build.
Also I do concede that core is bad non-core is better, but the fighter (well melee type) is very good at dishing out enough damage to kill something dead. And doing it all day. (No HP is not a limit.)
-
2010-10-21, 04:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
{Scrubbed}
Last edited by averagejoe; 2010-10-21 at 10:56 PM.
-
2010-10-21, 04:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
You can RP in any system. Might as well do so in a well designed one, and flawed combat mechanics and balance issues are a sign of poor design. In this particular case, the point of the thread is to understand why D&D is flawed in the way it is, as better understanding of mechanical function in RPGs allows one both to pick out better RPGs, and to tweak RPGs to their parameters better. RP is completely irrelevant to this discussion, and as such, it isn't brought up.
Lets draw an analogy. If people are discussing recipes and cooking for good tasting or healthy food, someone coming in wailing about how, believe it or not, some people just enjoy cooking for the experience of cooking isn't going to help. Its a discussion about cooking, everyone in it likes to cook, and as that is understood, it doesn't need to be brought up every five seconds.I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.
I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that. -- ChubbyRain
Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.
-
2010-10-21, 04:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Meridianville AL
- Gender
Re: [3.P] We know core is broken, but what breaks it, when, and how?
Only because Druid > Fighter is so trivially obvious as to be boring and Cleric > Fighter doesn't hinge on whether the cleric is better, but rather on whether he's SO MUCH better that Cleric + Cleric > Cleric + Fighter even at the Fighter's alleged Schtick.
Wizard > Fighter at least makes for an argument since filling the fighter role pretty well EXACTLY hits the Wizard's weakest points, sadly the argument STILL devolves to people claiming that they can make a fighter into a third rate wizard so he can actually fill the fighter role...