Archers vs outsiders split from unfairly powerful monsters

[lord_khaine]

Just so that we are clear, I feel this entire discussion is a mistake. It began with Jormengand making a claim that Level 20 fighter could not defeat a Pit fiend and was liberally interpreted as an optimised fighter against a stock pit fiend played as a mannequin. What I am sure of, is that the OP really meant a Pit Fiend played like a Pit fiend. If you look at my post history in this thread this is precisely what I have adhered to. With that in mind, this entire exercise to my eyes is a strawman.

The MM makes it pretty clear how a Pit Fiend usually fight, so no, there isnt any mannequins here.
But is this then agreement on that a optimised fighter can indeed defeat a pit fiend?

[logic_error]

The MM makes it pretty clear how a Pit Fiend usually fight, so no, there isnt any mannequins here.
But is this then agreement on that a optimised fighter can indeed defeat a pit fiend?

a) PF *usually* fight. That's right. They can fight unusually too without being the stage mannequins they are in the MM.
b) Sure. I had never a doubt of that especially since an Optimised commoner can too. If you go back and check what the original contention that leads to this debate was, you will find that it had nothing to do with Pit fiends.

[Florian]

Just so that we are clear, I feel this entire discussion is a mistake. It began with Jormengand making a claim that Level 20 fighter could not defeat a Pit fiend and was liberally interpreted as an optimised fighter against a stock pit fiend played as a mannequin. What I am sure of, is that the OP really meant a Pit Fiend played like a Pit fiend. If you look at my post history in this thread this is precisely what I have adhered to. With that in mind, this entire exercise to my eyes is a strawman.

Thing is, when is a PF played like a PF? When following the MM tactics or when using it for full effect? Personally, I see a bit of a problem here because the later means playing the spells for full effect, not the actual monster. That´s something to discuss, but I´m perfectly fine either way.

Second is boundary conditions. First, do we handle this like a PvP Deathmatch or like a regular PvE Encounter. This will modify whether the x5 modifier comes in, as well as what kind of knowledge both sides possesses and how prep should be judged and weighted in, and so on. Later more, off to a meeting.

[Anthrowhale]

The DMG is way more clear that a monster casting spells is not "significant home court advantage" if we were fighting on the plane of fire, that would be one thing, but "you walk into a dungeon, since you are walking therefore automatically everything has to be lower CR" is not in the rules.

I'm AFB right now, will review when I get a chance.

Yes, and the two ways to do that are:

1) You can't hide while attacking, because the sniping rules don't say you can, and the other rule is a general summary of penalties, not a specific rule statement.

No, this is inconsistent with sentence 4 of hide.

or

2) You can hide while attacking, because that's apparently a rule in sentence 2, so you can just hide while making a full attack action and get off all your attacks.

Sentence 2 is:

You can move up to one-half your normal speed and hide at no penalty.

I have no idea how you manage to interpret this as "you can hide while attacking".

I too like to edit people's arguments out of their quotes when I'm lying about the rules to try to get custom 3.0 splatbook items into it because my character can't compete in core.

Citation needed. What rule are you talking about?

[Beheld]

Second is boundary conditions. First, do we handle this like a PvP Deathmatch or like a regular PvE Encounter. This will modify whether the x5 modifier comes in, as well as what kind of knowledge both sides possesses and how prep should be judged and weighted in, and so on. Later more, off to a meeting.

Why would it? A PvP deathmatch is a one shot, so the x5 modifier applies. A single PvE encounter is a one shot, so the x5 modifier applies.

I mean, at this point, as every single pro fighter person has taken seemingly every opportunity to reject the one shot rules at every turn for fighting a single enemy on one day. I will point out that the example fighter goes from an AC of 32, hit on a 2 by the Pit Fiend's claws, and a 4 on his secondary attacks, to an AC of 52 and the Pit Fiend requires a 20 to hit, based entirely on the usage of 5 potions and oils at Caster Level 20, 20, 20, 18, and 12 (This isn't counting GMW on his bow, which he also probably does), that, built without using the one shot rules, he has one single usage of each. (GMW on defending spikes he actually has 5, but under one shot rules, he'd probably use the one he can afford on his Bow. Magic Vestment he has 2, but he needs one for his shield and one for his shirt.)

So if this fighter were to walk around for a day after applying his oils and drinking the Barkskin potion and not run into the Pit Fiend, and then Run into the Pit Fiend on the second day, he would have spent 15k gold and not even encountered anything, then he would fight with an AC one entire RNG lower the next day without all those consumables.

It's almost like that repeated insistence and demand that the one shot consumables rules not apply to a one shot fight are based on something besides a rules grounding, perhaps a practical acknowledgment that this character literally doesn't function if you use the rules. Seemingly, just like he doesn't function without a 3.0 splatbook rule.

No, this is inconsistent with sentence 4 of hide.

I just explained how that is consistent with sentence four, because in the words you just quoted I explained that sentence four is a general summary of penalties, not a specifically outlined statement of what you can do.

It's either that, or you claim that Sentence 4 is a specific claim as to what you can do, in which case you can hide while full attacking even adjacent to the enemy without using the sniping rules, by just using Sentence 4.

Citation needed. What rule are you talking about?

You are insisting that you must be allowed to use a 3.0 Splatbook rule from Arms and Equipment to make a custom item that doesn't exist in 3.5 Core. That's basically admitting that your character doesn't function as a 3.5 Core character.

[emeraldstreak]

One thing I've noticed in challenges/gauntlets/etc, if one side is indeed stronger, it doesn't need the setup favoring it to handily win.

J's initial statement was a blank statement for all 3.5 Fighters. So far it's been reduced to the little corner of Core only, no UMD, and even there the Pit Fiend needs favorable circumstances to be a challenge.

[Beheld]

and even there the Pit Fiend needs favorable circumstances to be a challenge.

The favorable circumstances of letting a pit fiend exist for more than one round and thus gain access to the environmental manipulation it possesses in its own abilities are pretty much the exact same circumstances that allow wizards to prepare spells.

How often do you whine about wizards preparing spells needing the favorable circumstances of preparing spells?

[emeraldstreak]

The favorable circumstances of ... environmental manipulation

Yes, you want the favorable circumstance of "defender". In reality the Fighter is just as worthy to be the "defender", or both can randomly run into each other.

[Cosi]

Yes, you want the favorable circumstance of "defender". In reality the Fighter is just as worthy to be the "defender", or both can randomly run into each other.

Yeah, let's have the Fighter defend.

He can't hold territory he's not personally in, because the Pit Fiend has teleport and he doesn't. He doesn't have any real ability to interdict teleport either, because he can't cast spells.

So presumably, he's sitting somewhere, waiting for the Pit Fiend to show up. At this point, all the Pit Fiend has to do is slowly wear down the Fighter's defenses with its ability to summon other devils or create undead minions. The Fighter can't go out and get him, because if he does we either end up with the Pit Fiend back on D (which it wins) or it just teleports to whatever the Fighter was defending.

So yeah, this gets even worse if you put the Fighter on the defensive.

Think before you talk.

[emeraldstreak]

Yeah, let's have the Fighter defend.

He can't hold territory he's not personally in, because the Pit Fiend has teleport and he doesn't. He doesn't have any real ability to interdict teleport either, because he can't cast spells.

So presumably, he's sitting somewhere, waiting for the Pit Fiend to show up. At this point, all the Pit Fiend has to do is slowly wear down the Fighter's defenses with its ability to summon other devils or create undead minions. The Fighter can't go out and get him, because if he does we either end up with the Pit Fiend back on D (which it wins) or it just teleports to whatever the Fighter was defending.

So yeah, this gets even worse if you put the Fighter on the defensive.

Think before you talk.

Are you for real thinking a lvl 20 PC will lose a minionmancy competition?

The Fighter takes Leadership. The end.


PS. If your best argument for the Pit Fiend is "summon other devils/mummies", it really is over.

[Cosi]

Are you for real thinking a lvl 20 PC will lose a minionmancy competition?

I think if a class with no minionmancy abilities beats a monster that does have minionmancy abilities, you have ceased to argue about the class on any meaningful level.

The Fighter takes Leadership. The end.

Do you not realize that Pit Fiends also have feats? It even has wish, so it can do the Dark Chaos Shuffle if you really want to force it to start from the MM (interesting that this doesn't count as demanding an advantage).

PS. If your best argument for the Pit Fiend is "summon other devils/mummies", it really is over.

Wat? An infinite stream of minions is basically the perfect response to a location defended by a force with finite resources. It's like saying "if you have to use dispel magic against someone with buffs, you should just give up".

Since you don't have any way to force the Pit Fiend to battle, either you fight on its terms or you lose it its minions. Your call.

[emeraldstreak]

Do you not realize that Pit Fiends also have feats?

Too bad its feats don't list Leadership.

It even has wish, so blah blah

I suggest you go back and reread my definitive post on what happens when a Pit Fiend gets into Wish competition with a lvl 20 PC.

[Zanos]

The Pit Fiend still cannot control any of the undead it can create. Or teleport them.

[Cosi]

Too bad its feats don't list Leadership.

Not changing the Pit Fiends statblock seems like an advantage you're demanding for the Fighter. Isn't that exactly what you said made the Pit Fiend look bad?

I suggest you go back and reread my definitive post on what happens when a Pit Fiend gets into Wish competition with a lvl 20 PC.

You're awfully arrogant for someone who didn't bother to spend five minutes to think about how a Pit Fiend attacks a Fighter.

But again, if you're argument is that a 20th level PC with no native access to wish beats a monster with wish at wish abuse, you have ceased to argue about the actual class. Yes, WBL can win the game. That doesn't make Fighters good. Now go away until you have arguments that are even loosely based on abilities the Fighter has.

[Beheld]

The Pit Fiend still cannot control any of the undead it can create. Or teleport them.

he can teleport small corpses and then turn them into mummies in the general vicinity of the place the Fighter is supposed to be defending.

I'm totally down for the plan where the Fighter has to defend someplace, and I just spam Ice Devils at the guy with no healing until this is over. But I think the most reflective of real play is that the Pit Fiend is in a place, and the Fighter wants something from that place, or that place, or the Pit Fiend to leave and not come back, or some other common adventurer motive.

[emeraldstreak]

Not changing the Pit Fiends statblock seems like an advantage you're demanding for the Fighter.

No, using a monster as written isn't an advantage for the Fighter.

But again, if you're argument is that a 20th level PC with no native access to wish beats a monster with wish at wish abuse, you have ceased to argue about the actual class. Yes, WBL can win the game. That doesn't make Fighters good. Now go away until you have arguments that are even loosely based on abilities the Fighter has.

Thing is, I don't remember J saying "The Fighter beats the Pit Fiend due to his general lvl 20 PC abilities." If that were the case, I'd be inclined to agree.

Instead, it was a blank "The Pit Fiend wins", without any qualifications that the Pit Fiend would be different from MM, using different tactics from MM, or any limitations to the PC tapping all 1st party at the very least, if not all 1st+3rd party materials.

[Cosi]

No, using a monster as written isn't an advantage for the Fighter.

And yet, no one will use the Fighter presented in the DMG. Hmm...

Instead, it was a blank "The Pit Fiend wins", without any qualifications that the Pit Fiend would be different from MM, using different tactics from MM, or any limitations to the PC tapping all 1st party at the very least, if not all 1st+3rd party materials.

It's interesting that, to you, "Pit Fiend" implies "only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend stat block following only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend tactics without using any of its other abilities" but "Fighter" implies "any cahracter I can make with anything related to 3e as long as the class is Fighter".

[Jormengand]

J's initial statement was a blank statement for all 3.5 Fighters. So far it's been reduced to the little corner of Core only, no UMD, and even there the Pit Fiend needs favorable circumstances to be a challenge.

You'll notice that the "Initial statement" that was quoted was after I had already established standard optimisation and core, because most groups don't have access to every source ever and the system mastery that comes with being a forumite for ages. The majority of 20th-level fighters that have ever actually been played would lose to a pit fiend, whether the stock MM one or any other one.

[emeraldstreak]

And yet, no one will use the Fighter presented in the DMG. Hmm...



It's interesting that, to you, "Pit Fiend" implies "only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend stat block following only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend tactics without using any of its other abilities" but "Fighter" implies "any cahracter I can make with anything related to 3e as long as the class is Fighter".

The Fighter in the DMG is a NPC. NPCs are considerably weaker than PCs, if for the lower WBL only.

And yes, PCs can be built however the heck they want. It's good to be PC.


As for unique Pit Fiends, sure, they exist. You can build any you like - with Leadership, specialized treasure, specialized tactics, Orcus on speed dial, whatever - but the moment you do that they CR goes above 20 and they start fighting some Epic PCs that aren't the focus of this exercise.

[Jormengand]

Okay, new question: can evil dragons melt steel fighters?

They don't have listed tactics or even listed feats, so Cosi will just have to make them up and we can stop arguing that he's not allowed to.

[Cosi]

The Fighter in the DMG is a NPC. NPCs are considerably weaker than PCs, if for the lower WBL only.

All right, give him the extra WBL. As long as you buy all the stuff it tells you to, that's fine.

As for unique Pit Fiends, sure, they exist. You can build any you like - with Leadership, specialized treasure, specialized tactics, Orcus on speed dial, whatever - but the moment you do that they CR goes above 20 and they start fighting some Epic PCs that aren't the focus of this exercise.

Dragons pretty clearly demonstrate that feat selection doesn't change CR.

If your argument is that a Fighter can't beat a Pit Fiend if it gets to use its abilities or pick its feats, it seems pretty clear you're the one looking for special treatment.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Okay, new question: can evil dragons melt steel fighters?

Only if they have a fire breath weapon or the right spells.

[Beheld]

It's interesting that, to you, "Pit Fiend" implies "only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend stat block following only and exactly the MM Pit Fiend tactics without using any of its other abilities" but "Fighter" implies "any cahracter I can make with anything related to 3e as long as the class is Fighter".

Technically, he actually means the MM Pit Fiend, but without some of the things the MM says he has because **** the Pit Fiend.

If your argument is that a Fighter can't beat a Pit Fiend if it gets to use its abilities or pick its feats, it seems pretty clear you're the one looking for special treatment.

Everyone knows that if you cast monster with at will spell like abilities uses one of it's spell like abilities, that raises the CR. That's why sometimes you fight Babaus who are CR 99 because they used too many SLAs.

[Cosi]

So let's talk about scenarios for Fighter v Pit Fiend:

1. Fighter and Pit Fiend both spawn in opposite corners of featureless 20ft x 20ft room. Neither side has used any abilities or items. Neither side can leave the room.
2. Pit Fiend spawns in 20ft x 20ft room. Fighter spawns in 10ft x 20ft hallway outside. Neither side has used any abilities or items, but both can use them. Initiative is rolled when Fighter stops buffing and opens door. Neither side can leave the combined room + hallway area.
3. Fighter spawns just inside of dungeon complex controlled by Pit Fiend. Neither side has used any abilities or items. Combat starts when Fighter detects Pit Fiend inside the complex (ideally, a random dungeon of some kind). Neither party can leave the complex.
4. Fighter and Pit Fiend spawn at random locations in a small city (per DMG sizes). Each is told to find and kill the other. Neither can leave the city. Inhabitants are neutral or absent.
5. Either 2 or 3, but with roles reversed.

Mitigating Circumstances:

1. Is Pit Fiend forced to use MM tactics?
2. Is Pit Fiend forced to use MM build?
3. Does Pit Fiend get to use its treasure?
4. Are participants allowed to use non-core resources?

After each round, run again with a Commoner emulating the Fighters build and tactics to maximum possible degree. If it wins, Fighter is probably doing something shady.

How much of this seems reasonable/fair to people?

[Florian]

Okay, new question: can evil dragons melt steel fighters?

RIP 3E Fighter, no discussion needed.

Edit: Or, to put it bluntly, a Dragon is not just a Dragon, but also in cases a full-blown Sorcerer and/or Cleric, same as a Solar being not only a Solar but also a full-blown Cleric.

[Jormengand]

RIP 3E Fighter, no discussion needed.

Edit: Or, to put it bluntly, a Dragon is not just a Dragon, but also in cases a full-blown Sorcerer and/or Cleric, same as a Solar being not only a Solar but also a full-blown Cleric.

An Old Red is a CL 11 theurge-wannabe. Hardly full-blown.

[Florian]

An Old Red is a CL 11 theurge-wannabe. Hardly full-blown.

Don´t forget: You can reasonable prep to deal with enemies with a limited amount of options, but anything with full caster options? No. Even a Lich or Vampire full caster is harder than a PF or Balor.

[Beheld]

Don´t forget: You can reasonable prep to deal with enemies with a limited amount of options, but anything with full caster options? No. Even a Lich or Vampire full caster is harder than a PF or Balor.

I'm not sure how people are supposed to be prepping for things they don't know what they are. Unless Fighters have an ability I missed somewhere:

Metagame (Ex): The DM is required to give you a complete list of all enemies and the order you will face them in advance.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Metagame (Ex): The DM is required to give you a complete list of all enemies and the order you will face them in advance.

Nah, that's called bribing the DM with cash, so he shares his campaign notes.

Edit: Or food maybe.

[Beheld]

Nah, that's called bribing the DM with cash, so he shares his campaign notes.

Edit: Or food maybe.

I suppose he could always see a Pit Fiend before the ambush and the figure out all the abilities of a Pit Fiend from his voluminous 0 ranks in trained only Knowledge Arcana.