Archers vs outsiders split from unfairly powerful monsters

[Anthrowhale]

Your quote doesn't support your claim. An encounter where every monster is summoned yields zero XP yet has a nonzero Encounter Level according to the rules. XP is not gained based on Encounter Level.

Yeah, the Pit Find VS Fighter scenario, that's what we're testing.

We're stuck for now in advancing that. Do you want to take over the Pit Fiend?

So, if the Pit Fiend uses its SLAs to get back up, the Fighter loses. Is that what you're saying?

No. I'm saying that if you want to prove that a Fighter is an inadequate class, then you need to use encounters that should be routinely feasible according to the game rather than encounters where the Fighter is supposed to lose.

Edit: Since when is a CR 21 encounter too much for a level 20 character? 3+ the party's EL is considered a boss fight, isn't it?

Party's don't have an EL so I'm not sure what you are saying. An EL 21 encounter (note EL, not CR) is 5 over the norm for a single ECL 20 character.

Why? That's how Diplomacy works RAW, and if the DM wants the Mummies to team up with the Pit Fiend, that's what's going to happen.

Diplomacy is to over-strong by RAW. In real games, a Bard who passes every encounter with a full round action (rushed diplomacy check resulting in automatic indifference) is almost sure to get nerfed. Anyways, I'm not against the use of diplomacy so long as we accept that Mummies are raising the Encounter Level.

Why would you need to change your alignment? As I said earlier, there are legitimate reasons the Planetar might fight a good-aligned character.

And that would be a very unusual encounter. If you want to argue based on unusual encounters it's not particularly convincing.

I'm not ignoring them, I'm saying that they're not reliable. How many fights begin with you entering a room and stumbling across a pack of monsters?

Approximately zero when first peering around the door with a high spot seeing invisible, ethereal, and illusions while hiding in the cover the door provides.

They have spells, for offense, defense, healing, and buffing. Waves of Exhaustion alone is pretty devastating, and once your HP is too low, it'll use Power Word Stun.

Power Word Stun is "magic that usually impairs movement", hence Freedom of Movement should negate it.

It seems important to settle whether the text of Dust of Disappearance "nor can they be detected by magical means" wins over the text of True Seeing "sees invisible creatures or objects normally". These are directly contradictory statements so the only resolution is by which rule is more specialized. Plausibly that's Dust of Disappearance but I could see a DM going either way.

[Menzath]

Power Word Stun is "magic that usually impairs movement", hence Freedom of Movement should negate it.

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the
influence of magic that usually impedes
movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow,
and web. The subject automatically suc-
ceeds on any grapple check made to resist
a grapple attempt, as well as on grapple
checks or Escape Artist checks made to
escape a grapple or a pin.
The spell also allows the subject to move
and attack normally while underwater,
even with slashing weapons such as axes
and swords or with bludgeoning weapons
such as flails, hammers, and maces,
provided that the weapon is wielded in the
hand rather than hurled. The freedom of
movement spell does not, however, allow
water breathing.
Material Component: A leather thong,
bound around the arm or a similar
appendage.

stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take
actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his
Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

So. That's not a paralysis. And it doesn't specifically hinder movement. Just like being charmed won't directly hinder movement. Stunned just prevents you from acting at all, and not covered under freedom of movement immunity.

[Beheld]

I really love that in addition to continuously lying about the rules that have already been cited, Anthrowhale is now implying that no one is willing to run the Pit Fiend, when it's actually just that he refuses to play any scenarios unless someone agrees to all his completely nonsense rules interpretations including the ones based on his deliberate refusal to read the actual rules about undead created by Create Undead or Animate Dead, or Constructs created by Animate Object.

Now he's even arguing that when the Pit Fiend summons that increases the EL. If there's any limit to what he's willing to lie about, I doubt we will find it.

And then he lies about Stun and FoM, then he deliberately omits the relevant text of Dust of Disappearance because he knows it undermines his claim.

[Anthrowhale]

So. That's not a paralysis. And it doesn't specifically hinder movement. Just like being charmed won't directly hinder movement. Stunned just prevents you from acting at all,

I agree with all of this.

and not covered under freedom of movement immunity.

But this does not follow. "not a paralysis" is irrelevant because paralysis is just an example of "magic that usually impedes movement". Furthermore "specifically hinder movement" is not the test---instead it's "magic that usually impedes movement". And Charm impedes movement in no way so Freedom of Movement doesn't activate.

A stunned character cannot move, and hence it has movement impeded. Freedom of Movement therefore activates and allows the character to instead "move and attack normally".

[nolongerchaos]

A stunned character cannot move, and hence it has movement impeded. Freedom of Movement therefore activates and allows the character to instead "move and attack normally".

A dead Wail of the Banshee'd character's Movement is just as impeded as a stunned character. So is a Flesh to Stone's character. Wow, Freedom of Movement is pretty sweet at Anthro's table.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Your quote doesn't support your claim. An encounter where every monster is summoned yields zero XP yet has a nonzero Encounter Level according to the rules. XP is not gained based on Encounter Level.

Monsters that give 0 XP aren't considered challenging enough to be a threat.

The Fighter should be able to handle then if he's a viable class.

We're stuck for now in advancing that. Do you want to take over the Pit Fiend?

Not really.

No. I'm saying that if you want to prove that a Fighter is an inadequate class, then you need to use encounters that should be routinely feasible according to the game rather than encounters where the Fighter is supposed to lose.

Then as far as I'm concerned, the Pit Fiend wins.

Party's don't have an EL so I'm not sure what you are saying. An EL 21 encounter (note EL, not CR) is 5 over the norm for a single ECL 20 character.

Parties have an average level. Their average level + 3 is supposed to be a boss fight.

Diplomacy is to over-strong by RAW. In real games, a Bard who passes every encounter with a full round action (rushed diplomacy check resulting in automatic indifference) is almost sure to get nerfed. Anyways, I'm not against the use of diplomacy so long as we accept that Mummies are raising the Encounter Level.

Those mummies were created by the Pit Fiend, and are part of the encounter. If the Fighter can't handle that, he sucks.

And that would be a very unusual encounter. If you want to argue based on unusual encounters it's not particularly convincing.

If the Fighter can't handle an atypical situation, that doesn't bode well for his viability as a class.

Approximately zero when first peering around the door with a high spot seeing invisible, ethereal, and illusions while hiding in the cover the door provides.

The door is closed/locked. Now what?

Power Word Stun is "magic that usually impairs movement", hence Freedom of Movement should negate it.

You already conceded this, so I'll move on.

It seems important to settle whether the text of Dust of Disappearance "nor can they be detected by magical means" wins over the text of True Seeing "sees invisible creatures or objects normally". These are directly contradictory statements so the only resolution is by which rule is more specialized. Plausibly that's Dust of Disappearance but I could see a DM going either way.

It's moot, Dust of Disappearance doesn't last long enough to be viable.

[Pleh]

The door is closed/locked. Now what?

In a battle with a pit fiend to establish balance, why are we assuming there even is a door? Or cover?

I would have guessed this to be a fair game arena fight.

[ColorBlindNinja]

In a battle with a pit fiend to establish balance, why are we assuming there even is a door? Or cover?

Anthrowhale was talking about getting a suprise round, that's why I mentioned doors.

I would have guessed this to be a fair game arena fight.

We're aiming for something more organic than an arena fight.

[Pleh]

Anthrowhale was talking about getting a suprise round, that's why I mentioned doors.

We're aiming for something more organic than an arena fight.

Seems messy. Then you have to consider:

Is the pit fiend hiding? More generally, what is it doing? Would its activity cause it to be distracted, or more alert?

Maybe not hiding, but is the fiend visible from the doorway?

What else even is in the room?

What other (if any) exits does the room have?

Who's home turf is it? Material or infernal/abyssal plane?

The fighter uses the door as cover, so how open is the door? Peeking through the crack? Sticking his head around the door?

Fighters are not known for moving silently. More likely to be wearing armor that makes him more noticeable (audibly, if not also visually).

Are they on the same level, or is the fiend above or below the fighter's footing?

Seems messy.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Just going to add that a lvl. 20 Warblade with access to only Core and ToB material could easily solo the Pit Fiend. Same is true of a Psychic Warrior with just Core and XPH.

[Beheld]

Just going to add that a lvl. 20 Warblade with access to only Core and ToB material could easily solo the Pit Fiend. Same is true of a Psychic Warrior with just Core and XPH.

If you are open to it, I'll be happy to run the scenarios I already have for the fighter for such a character once actualized.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Seems messy. Then you have to consider:

Is the pit fiend hiding? More generally, what is it doing? Would its activity cause it to be distracted, or more alert?

Maybe not hiding, but is the fiend visible from the doorway?

What else even is in the room?

What other (if any) exits does the room have?

Who's home turf is it? Material or infernal/abyssal plane?

The fighter uses the door as cover, so how open is the door? Peeking through the crack? Sticking his head around the door?

Fighters are not known for moving silently. More likely to be wearing armor that makes him more noticeable (audibly, if not also visually).

Are they on the same level, or is the fiend above or below the fighter's footing?

Seems messy.

I'd like to make this little contest as neutral as possible, but Anthro seems to think the Pit Fiend using its SLAs to get back up invalidates the entire premise. That's not something I can agree to.

You're definitely right though; this is exceedingly messy.

[Pleh]

I'd like to make this little contest as neutral as possible, but Anthro seems to think the Pit Fiend using its SLAs to get back up invalidates the entire premise. That's not something I can agree to.

Nor should you. If the fighter could pick himself back up (maybe as an Ex ability), we wouldn't whine that it isn't fair to the pit fiend to let him use what was given to him from the start.

The need to apply "organic" conditions in order to level the playing field is practically an admission that the fighter doesn't have a reasonable chance in a neutral and fair fight.

We can argue til we're blue in the face that players rarely are expected to fight fairly in real game scenarios, but that is essentially the same as the oberoni fallacy.

Just because real games would balance it to give the PC fighter a chance doesn't mean the fighter is a balanced fight with the pit fiend.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Nor should you. If the fighter could pick himself back up (maybe as an Ex ability), we wouldn't whine that it isn't fair to the pit fiend to let him use what was given to him from the start.

Leadership would be the easiest way, but very few people play with that feat.

The need to apply "organic" conditions in order to level the playing field is practically an admission that the fighter doesn't have a reasonable chance in a neutral and fair fight.

That's one way of looking at it, I think the organic conditions bit was an attempt to avoid contrived scenarios.

We can argue til we're blue in the face that players rarely are expected to fight fairly in real game scenarios, but that is essentially the same as the oberoni fallacy.

I think the intent was to look at a more commonplace optimization level.

Just because real games would balance it to give the PC fighter a chance doesn't mean the fighter is a balanced fight with the pit fiend.

Agreed, claiming that Fighters can excel in X, Y or Z game is anecdotal evidence.

[Anthrowhale]

Monsters that give 0 XP aren't considered challenging enough to be a threat.

The Fighter should be able to handle then if he's a viable class.

You seem to be ignoring the rules related to encounter level?

Let's make this more extreme so I can understand your interpretation. If a level 1 wizard encounters a summoned Ice Devil and dies, does that mean the wizard is not a viable class?

Then as far as I'm concerned, the Pit Fiend wins.

Sounds bogus---an argument about how to make an argument (how do you show a fighter sucks) doesn't prove or disprove an argument (whether or not a fighter sucks).

Parties have an average level. Their average level + 3 is supposed to be a boss fight.

Do you have a rules quote?

Those mummies were created by the Pit Fiend, and are part of the encounter. If the Fighter can't handle that, he sucks.

I'm a little vague on the scenario. Is the claim that the encounter comes with an extra 1000 mummies? And are you trying to pack them all into a cage match?

The door is closed/locked. Now what?

Hide and wait until it opens is one possibility. Open and move back is another. Open and charge in seems unlikely.

You already conceded this, so I'll move on.

No idea what you are referring to.

It's moot, Dust of Disappearance doesn't last long enough to be viable.

That seems unclear without going through an actual encounter.

[ColorBlindNinja]

You seem to be ignoring the rules related to encounter level?

I'm ignoring them because they're wrong; plenty of classes can handle a CR 20 monster that summons back up.

Edit: You would also seem to be mistaken about that, see my edited response below.

Let's make this more extreme so I can understand your interpretation. If a level 1 wizard encounters a summoned Ice Devil and dies, does that mean the wizard is not a viable class?

That's a strawman; a level 1 character should be able to fight a CR 1 monster that summons help.

Sounds bogus---an argument about how to make an argument (how do you show a fighter sucks) doesn't prove or disprove an argument (whether or not a fighter sucks).

So can the Fighter win if the Pit Fiend summons/animates help?

Do you have a rules quote?

15% Very difficult EL 1–4 higher than party level
5% Overpowering EL 5+ higher than party level

That seems to indicate that the PCs should be able to handle a fight with a monster that's 3-4 CR higher than their EL.

Edit: This also should mean a level 20 character can fight a CR 21-24 monster.

I'm a little vague on the scenario. Is the claim that the encounter comes with an extra 1000 mummies? And are you trying to pack them all into a cage match?

That's also a strawman:

Regardless of the type of undead you create with this spell, you can’t create more HD of undead than twice your caster level with a single casting of animate dead.

Create Undead inherits from Animate Undead, so the Pit Fiend can't have more than four Mummies. Edit: Nevermind, that's only with a single casting. My point still stands, as I never purposed a 1000 mummies.

Hide and wait until it opens is one possibility. Open and move back is another. Open and charge in seems unlikely.

What you will do if the door never opens, or you have to stop the Pit Fiend before it's evil plan comes to fruition?

No idea what you are referring to.

You said that Freedom of Movement won't help VS Power Word Stun.

That seems unclear without going through an actual encounter.

It lasts 2d6 rounds, that's 12 at best, 7 on average. The Pit Fiend can easily evade you if you choose to use it in combat, and it doesn't last long enough for you to get a surprise round (since you won't know when to use it).

[Tainted_Scholar]

You seem to be ignoring the rules related to encounter level?

Let's make this more extreme so I can understand your interpretation. If a level 1 wizard encounters a summoned Ice Devil and dies, does that mean the wizard is not a viable class?

In what contrived scenario would a level one wizard fight a summoned Ice Devil?

I also find the mention of Wizards funny, since a lvl. 15 Wizard could easily defeat a Pit Fiend.

[Beheld]

Edit: This also should mean a level 20 character can fight a CR 21-24 monster.

No it doesn't. A level 20 character is Party level of 16. So he should have 50% chance against a fair set of EL 20s, but should lost most of the time to EL 21 and up, and all the time to EL 24.

Let's make this more extreme so I can understand your interpretation. If a level 1 wizard encounters a summoned Ice Devil and dies, does that mean the wizard is not a viable class?

As ColorBlindNinja correctly points out. If an EL 1 encounter has the ability to summon an Ice Devil, then the Wizard losing means it wasn't up to snuff against that encounter. If 100% of all possible PC builds lose to an EL 1 encounter, then it's probably fair to say that EL 1 encounter, or some monster in it, is mis-CRed.

But since no EL 1 enouncter involves summoning an Ice Devil, that's not an issue we have.

If a PC loses to a summoned Ice Devil, then in effect, they lost to the EL of whatever summoned it. So that level 1 Wizard probably lost to like, and Ice Devil, or a Pit Fiend. Hard to fault them for that.

[ColorBlindNinja]

No it doesn't. A level 20 character is Party level of 16. So he should have 50% chance against a fair set of EL 20s, but should lost most of the time to EL 21 and up, and all the time to EL 24.

Can you point me to the relevant rules in the DMG?

Edit: The SRD Encounter Calculator says that a single level 20 character VS a CR 21 monster is overwhelming, so it would seem you're correct.

That still isn't true of many classes, though.

[Beheld]

Can you point me to the relevant rules in the DMG?

If you look at table 3-2 about encounter difficulty level, it refers ELs to Party Level.

While specific rules don't exist, the rules do say in a couple places

"Parties with five or more members can often take on monsters
with higher CRs, and parties of three or fewer are challenged by
monsters with lower CRs. The game rules account for these facts
by dividing the XP earned by the number of characters in the
party (see Rewards, page 36)" Pg 48

"Generally, a party of characters should adventure in areas
whose level matches their party level (though large groups can handle
tougher areas and small groups might need to stay in easier areas)" Pg 77

But the comparison is that monsters operate on a Log function, So a party of 4 level 16 PCs can handle either one level 20 at 50%, or 2 18s, or 4 16s, or 8 14s or 16 12s.

So then if you look at those numbers, you can see that a party of say, 2 level 16 PCs can handle one 18, 2 16s, 4 14s, or 8 12s with comparable 50% chances.

[ColorBlindNinja]

If you look at table 3-2 about encounter difficulty level, it refers ELs to Party Level.

While specific rules don't exist, the rules do say in a couple places

"Parties with five or more members can often take on monsters
with higher CRs, and parties of three or fewer are challenged by
monsters with lower CRs. The game rules account for these facts
by dividing the XP earned by the number of characters in the
party (see Rewards, page 36)" Pg 48

"Generally, a party of characters should adventure in areas
whose level matches their party level (though large groups can handle
tougher areas and small groups might need to stay in easier areas)" Pg 77

But the comparison is that monsters operate on a Log function, So a party of 4 level 16 PCs can handle either one level 20 at 50%, or 2 18s, or 4 16s, or 8 14s or 16 12s.

So then if you look at those numbers, you can see that a party of say, 2 level 16 PCs can handle one 18, 2 16s, 4 14s, or 8 12s with comparable 50% chances.

Ah, OK, thanks for explaining that.

[Tainted_Scholar]

If you look at table 3-2 about encounter difficulty level, it refers ELs to Party Level.

While specific rules don't exist, the rules do say in a couple places

"Parties with five or more members can often take on monsters
with higher CRs, and parties of three or fewer are challenged by
monsters with lower CRs. The game rules account for these facts
by dividing the XP earned by the number of characters in the
party (see Rewards, page 36)" Pg 48

"Generally, a party of characters should adventure in areas
whose level matches their party level (though large groups can handle
tougher areas and small groups might need to stay in easier areas)" Pg 77

But the comparison is that monsters operate on a Log function, So a party of 4 level 16 PCs can handle either one level 20 at 50%, or 2 18s, or 4 16s, or 8 14s or 16 12s.

So then if you look at those numbers, you can see that a party of say, 2 level 16 PCs can handle one 18, 2 16s, 4 14s, or 8 12s with comparable 50% chances.

Unfortunately, this simply isn't true. A level 15 Wizard could easily defeat the Pit Fiend.

[Beheld]

Unfortunately, this simply isn't true. A level 15 Wizard could easily defeat the Pit Fiend.

I am speaking purely about the CR and EL rules. Certainly, anyone capable of casting even just Planar Binding can vastly outperform CR, because you can just Planar Bind 50 Glabrezu's to do all your fighting for you. But that's a criticism of Planar Binding (and Greater, and Gate) not so much of the concept of logarithmic EL rules.

Just like the Adamntium Horror is more a criticism of the adamntium horror, than of the CR rules.

[ColorBlindNinja]

I am speaking purely about the CR and EL rules. Certainly, anyone capable of casting even just Planar Binding can vastly outperform CR, because you can just Planar Bind 50 Glabrezu's to do all your fighting for you. But that's a criticism of Planar Binding (and Greater, and Gate) not so much of the concept of logarithmic EL rules.

I don't think you even need to go that far, I suspect the Wizard could win with a well chosen set of Core spells.

Just like the Adamntium Horror is more a criticism of the adamntium horror, than of the CR rules.

The Clockwork Horrors are far from the only monsters that are too tough for their CR (or not tough enough).

[Tainted_Scholar]

I am speaking purely about the CR and EL rules. Certainly, anyone capable of casting even just Planar Binding can vastly outperform CR, because you can just Planar Bind 50 Glabrezu's to do all your fighting for you. But that's a criticism of Planar Binding (and Greater, and Gate) not so much of the concept of logarithmic EL rules.

You don't even need to do that. Even with cheesey shenanigans a Wizard could still easily beat the Pit Fiend.

[Pleh]

Can you point me to the relevant rules in the DMG?

Did it change when they made PF? The rules I'm looking at in pfsrd *look* right for DMG 3.5 rules (with maybe some differences in nomenclature, but probably not formulas).

I would note that Encounter Level does change with favorable circumstances/environment. I don't care *how* the fighter gets the surprise round; if they are given a surprise round, that should effectively lower the CR (which I suppose is more or less the point).

Understand that I'm not saying I would dock my party XP for ambushing an enemy instead of charging if it were a real game. It would have to be a pretty cheesy and uninspired ambush to make it worthy of an xp reduction in a real game.

I'm only saying that, in the case of a thought experiment where we are considering a set of statistical permutations of a given scenario, if we try to consider only permutations where the fighter has the benefit of surprise, then we ought to effectively reduce the CR, because we aren't giving much thought to how the fighter would win without the benefit of surprise.

Therefore, we're giving the fighter a mechanical benefit: a boost in action economy. You could easily DM fiat grant the fighter a magic item for free that gives the same benefit (a single round of unimpeded action economy his enemy does not share), but then we exceed WBL.

[Beheld]

I would note that Encounter Level does change with favorable circumstances/environment. I don't care *how* the fighter gets the surprise round; if they are given a surprise round, that should effectively lower the CR (which I suppose is more or less the point).

Understand that I'm not saying I would dock my party XP for ambushing an enemy instead of charging if it were a real game. It would have to be a pretty cheesy and uninspired ambush to make it worthy of an xp reduction in a real game.

I'm only saying that, in the case of a thought experiment where we are considering a set of statistical permutations of a given scenario, if we try to consider only permutations where the fighter has the benefit of surprise, then we ought to effectively reduce the CR, because we aren't giving much thought to how the fighter would win without the benefit of surprise.

Therefore, we're giving the fighter a mechanical benefit: a boost in action economy. You could easily DM fiat grant the fighter a magic item for free that gives the same benefit (a single round of unimpeded action economy his enemy does not share), but then we exceed WBL.

Nah, if the Fighter actually had the ability to get surprise, that would be fine.

There are tons of ambush monsters in the MM, you don't give them increased EL because they ambush like they are described as doing.

The problem is that in this case, the fighter doesn't have any actually effective way at creating the surprise round. He just relies on 3.0 supplement items to boost his Hide and MS, cross class ranks, and then claiming that he has cover or concealment from all directions at all times. (Or else that he has magic abilities to know where all the enemies are at all times, to make sure he has cover while sneaking up on enemies he literally doesn't know exist yet.)

It's not a favorable circumstance if you create the surprise round with your abilities any more than it's a favorable circumstance that the monster takes damage if you hit his AC with a weapon that penetrates DR.

[Pleh]

There are tons of ambush monsters in the MM, you don't give them increased EL because they ambush like they are described as doing.

Unless it's included in their printed CR, but I get your point.

[Anthrowhale]

I'm ignoring them because they're wrong; plenty of classes can handle a CR 20 monster that summons back up.

Edit: You would also seem to be mistaken about that, see my edited response below.

Ignoring the rules because they are wrong is a rather striking statement. You're also confusing the rules for a party of 4 (the default) with the rules for a party of 1.

That's a strawman; a level 1 character should be able to fight a CR 1 monster that summons help.

Nevertheless, "Wizard sucks because it can't deal with a summoned ice devil" is a consequence of your rules interpretation, correct?

So can the Fighter win if the Pit Fiend summons/animates help?

You'll have to be explicit about strategies. Likely yes, but it depends.

That seems to indicate that the PCs should be able to handle a fight with a monster that's 3-4 CR higher than their EL.

Edit: This also should mean a level 20 character can fight a CR 21-24 monster.

No, this is what happens with a party of 4. Do you want to run things with 4 fighters?

Create Undead inherits from Animate Undead, so the Pit Fiend can't have more than four Mummies. Edit: Nevermind, that's only with a single casting. My point still stands, as I never purposed a 1000 mummies.

Correct, but you seem to assert that an unbounded number of mummies can be used without affecting encounter level? Anyways, I can't answer in the abstract.

What you will do if the door never opens, or you have to stop the Pit Fiend before it's evil plan comes to fruition?

Circumstances vary. Sometimes surprise would be lost.

You said that Freedom of Movement won't help VS Power Word Stun.

That is correct and I do never withdrew that.

It lasts 2d6 rounds, that's 12 at best, 7 on average. The Pit Fiend can easily evade you if you choose to use it in combat, and it doesn't last long enough for you to get a surprise round (since you won't know when to use it).

You are switching back to a Pit Fiend from a Planetar now?

Anyways, a Pit Fiend would not even know if the dust of disappearance was used if it was used while the character was invisible... and the Pit Fiend is one full attack away from death so 7 rounds is more than adequate.

[Anthrowhale]

Just going to add that a lvl. 20 Warblade with access to only Core and ToB material could easily solo the Pit Fiend. Same is true of a Psychic Warrior with just Core and XPH.

While that may be true, these materials also make the Fighter potentially much more powerful. For example, Martial Study[White Raven Tactics] allows the fighter to about double damage output in an alpha strike.