Why Do People Think That Core is Balanced?

[KillianHawkeye]

Time Travel will be explained in a previous article, which has yet to be written.

Bravo!

[emeraldstreak]

It's not that people think Core is balanced. It's that core is at least a smaller set of unbalanced and it tends to be known and predictable unbalanced. It is easier for at DM to keep track of when they are starting out or with a new group. It's easier to tell if someone is doing something outside what you feel comfortable with the power level or doing something that looks good on paper but actually sucks because they don't know what they are doing.

Some people do actually mean that.


Other people, especially the isolated groups that play on their table with zero contact with the outside community, are - more often than not - bad at optimization.

Many of you might not remember, but when 3.0 was new, the older-older-(older?) Wizards' forums were frequented by a great number of players who didn't understand the Fighter was inferior to the Wizard. Back then moderation was very loose, the arguments were heated and full of insults and hurt egos. After much tears, we bludgeoned them into submission by defeating their delusions time and again and again. There were people who for real thought their sword and board fighter will somehow be a match for my wizard, and had very hard time coping with being defeated in any test.

In other words, even cornerstones of understanding the game like the power of wizards and codzilla were at first vociferously denied.


If it's any consolation, other tabletop games' communities are even worse at understanding the game they play. For example, I once challenged a fairly large community with what can be best approximated in their system to a "Commoner 20" vs any "Wizard 20" they could field against it, and I not only won handily, but even knew beforehand my victory is 100% certain, that's how rudimentary their knowledge of the game was even on the forum. By this measure the 3.x community is very advanced.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Some people do actually mean that.


Other people, especially the isolated groups that play on their table with zero contact with the outside community, are - more often than not - bad at optimization.

Many of you might not remember, but when 3.0 was new, the older-older-(older?) Wizards' forums were frequented by a great number of players who didn't understand the Fighter was inferior to the Wizard. Back then moderation was very loose, the arguments were heated and full of insults and hurt egos. After much tears, we bludgeoned them into submission by defeating their delusions time and again and again. There were people who for real thought their sword and board fighter will somehow be a match for my wizard, and had very hard time coping with being defeated in any test.

In other words, even cornerstones of understanding the game like the power of wizards and codzilla were at first vociferously denied.


If it's any consolation, other tabletop games' communities are even worse at understanding the game they play. For example, I once challenged a fairly large community with what can be best approximated in their system to a "Commoner 20" vs any "Wizard 20" they could field against it, and I not only won handily, but even knew beforehand my victory is 100% certain, that's how rudimentary their knowledge of the game was even on the forum. By this measure the 3.x community is very advanced.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing.

[eggynack]

I think that one major reason people see non-core as less balanced than core is that non-core has all the trappings of overpoweredness. In core, even when you're optimizing really hard, things look mostly normal. Builds tend towards only a few classes, often just one, even counting prestige classes. There aren't too many crazy combinations. You are, practically by definition, not book diving. There are good feats, but most are pretty straightforward, and those straightforward ones hang out in well understood spaces. If you're really optimizing, that often means just taking some really good but well known spells and putting them on your list. These things aren't just simpler. They read as less optimized, because they are (in the sense that less optimization is possible or particularly needed), and less optimized means lower power, or at least that's what people think.

Non-core, meanwhile, is frequently the opposite. The best case scenario might actually be an alternate subsystem like ToB, because optimization in those contexts looks quite a bit like core. But said systems obviously have their own issues in these terms. Otherwise, great melee builds have a million classes, feats and abilities that combine together in sometimes unexpected or wonky ways. Even the most familiar classes often run several different ACFs. Casting builds are still single base class, but a ton of complexity finds its way in anyway. The spells come from way more sources, the feats, an actual build element, comprise more of the power present, there's typically one or more prestige classes, the aforementioned ACFs pop up more often, and things just generally go into really unknown territory. It all reads super optimized, and optimized tends to mean imbalanced.

Of course, amenable to high op stuff doesn't necessarily mean less balanced. It turns out that the former set of upgrades, to the melee classes, probably means more than the latter set, to casters. But it feels otherwise, I think, and that drives some conclusions about the relative balance of the book sets.

[johnbragg]

Some people do actually mean that.


Other people, especially the isolated groups that play on their table with zero contact with the outside community, are - more often than not - bad at optimization.
......
In other words, even cornerstones of understanding the game like the power of wizards and codzilla were at first vociferously denied.

This is true. A couple of years ago, while searching for some old document on my computer, I came across notes I had made around the dawn of 3rd Edition. Overwhelmed by the limitless possibilities opened up by the d20 system, I started to sketch out a complete GURPSification, if you will, a class-less D&D.

Spellcasting and the full BAB/max armor package cost the same number of build points.

We still thought paladins and monks were irritatingly overpowered.

[Hackulator]

because not everybody has spent hundreds of hours trying to mathematically break the system without any DM oversight

[ColorBlindNinja]

because not everybody has spent hundreds of hours trying to mathematically break the system without any DM oversight

That still doesn't explain why people gloss over spells like Gate, Planar Binding, Time Stop and Simulacrum. All of these (core) spells are completely broken.

[Tainted_Scholar]

because not everybody has spent hundreds of hours trying to mathematically break the system without any DM oversight

You know, you don't always have to take the time to attack us dirty optimizers. You can give your opinion without being antagonistic.

[Jay R]

Also, because people forget that when the cleric casts Heal on the fighter, everything that the fighter does for the rest of the game is because the party contains a cleric, not because it contains a fighter.

It's not that they forget; it's that that's not what they're concerned with.

Nobody cares how much the party can do as a whole. If they did, they wouldn't care about balance between PCs. [Since I actually am more concerned about the party, I don't care about PC balance. I routinely offer magic items I'd like for my character to another PC who can use it more effectively.] Every "quadratic wizard / linear fighter" discussion is about what cool stuff "my character" can do vs. what cool stuff "the other character" can do.

They care about rolling for cool stuff. The cleric rolled for points of healing. Boring. The fighter rolled for attacking the dragon. Cool!

The fact that the Fighter couldn't have done it without the healing doesn't change who got to roll against the dragon. This is emotional, not rational, and a rational argument won't help.

[Jay R]

That still doesn't explain why people gloss over spells like Gate, Planar Binding, Time Stop and Simulacrum. All of these (core) spells are completely broken.

Mostly because they are upper level spells. PCs don't get them until level 17, 11, 13, and 17, respectively.

If you don't play at the levels where the game is more broken, then the game is less broken.

[johnbragg]

Small point. The full unbalancing potential of polymorph, wildshaping, summoning, binding, contingency, wall of salt isn't completely obvious. With celerity, craft contingent spell, nerveskitter, ice assassins, dragonwrought kobolds it's what is says on the tin.

And, if you summon monster (core) a fleshraker dinosaur (noncore), is that "broken" because core, or noncore?

[Jormengand]

I also think that the reason that people tend to take the exceptionally weak burning hands instead of the hilariously powerful colour spray, to pick a lower-level spell that's good, is that people have this idea that damaging spells must be better than status effect spells, because the latter don't actually kill the target directly. So they never actually pick any of the spells which are actually good. On the other hand, when more-damaging abilities are released later, they seem overpowered because they are genuinely better than the core evocations, just not any better than the core transmutations or conjurations or illusions.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Mostly because they are upper level spells. PCs don't get them until level 17, 11, 13, and 17, respectively.

Level 11 is not high end.

If you don't play at the levels where the game is more broken, then the game is less broken.

That's just a variation of the oberoni fallacy.

[emeraldstreak]

And, if you summon monster (core) a fleshraker dinosaur (noncore), is that "broken" because core, or noncore?

I'd say Core and here's why...

The developers left an open-ended ability to the Druid, knowing full well they'll be printing new monster manuals, and Faerun monsters, and then-yet-undecided setting's monsters (that was almost OotS!) It was obvious this already powerful ability will scale significantly further, but they didn't care.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Mostly because they are upper level spells. PCs don't get them until level 17, 11, 13, and 17, respectively.

If you don't play at the levels where the game is more broken, then the game is less broken.

You can pick up Lesser Planar Binding at level 9; that nets you a Nightmare with Astral Projection at will. The ever popular Polymorph comes online at level 7.

I also think that the reason that people tend to take the exceptionally weak burning hands instead of the hilariously powerful colour spray, to pick a lower-level spell that's good, is that people have this idea that damaging spells must be better than status effect spells, because the latter don't actually kill the target directly. So they never actually pick any of the spells which are actually good. On the other hand, when more-damaging abilities are released later, they seem overpowered because they are genuinely better than the core evocations, just not any better than the core transmutations or conjurations or illusions.

I suspect that most people don't use status conditions is that such spells tend to be sub-optimal in most video games (Final Fantasy for example).

[nedz]

It depends upon the players. I have one guy who always plays Wizards, but his favourite spells are Magic Missile and Fireball — so, in his hands, Wizard isn't particularly broken.

I have other players however ...

[zergling.exe]

I'd say Core and here's why...

The developers left an open-ended ability to the Druid, knowing full well they'll be printing new monster manuals, and Faerun monsters, and then-yet-undecided setting's monsters (that was almost OotS!) It was obvious this already powerful ability will scale significantly further, but they didn't care.

Well, those have to be added to the list either by the DM, or specifically called out as added (or replacing) to the list like the arrow demon. Most things in the MMs are not called out as valid targets for the summon spells. So then it WOULD be the non-core, because the non-core added it SPECIFICALLY, rather than core being open-ended, since it isn't.

[emeraldstreak]

Well, those have to be added to the list either by the DM, or specifically called out as added (or replacing) to the list like the arrow demon. Most things in the MMs are not called out as valid targets for the summon spells. So then it WOULD be the non-core, because the non-core added it SPECIFICALLY, rather than core being open-ended, since it isn't.

Didn't mean summons, but wild shape/animal companion.

[Coretron03]

Small point. The full unbalancing potential of polymorph, wildshaping, summoning, binding, contingency, wall of salt isn't completely obvious. With celerity, craft contingent spell, nerveskitter, ice assassins, dragonwrought kobolds it's what is says on the tin.

And, if you summon monster (core) a fleshraker dinosaur (noncore), is that "broken" because core, or noncore?

Wait, turning into a bear and killing stuff or selling the (permanent) wall of salt isn't obvious but dragonwrought kobolds (Something heavily debated on these forumns when its brought up) is obvious?

[Zanos]

I also think that the reason that people tend to take the exceptionally weak burning hands instead of the hilariously powerful colour spray, to pick a lower-level spell that's good, is that people have this idea that damaging spells must be better than status effect spells, because the latter don't actually kill the target directly. So they never actually pick any of the spells which are actually good. On the other hand, when more-damaging abilities are released later, they seem overpowered because they are genuinely better than the core evocations, just not any better than the core transmutations or conjurations or illusions.

Both of these spells are pretty bad in my opinion, because they're 15 foot cones and you're a level 1 character without armor and a d4 hit dice, meaning that if you're within move + attack range of something that isn't completely helpless, you are dead.

Burning hands has some niche use in finishing off a couple of how HP targets, but color spray sort of bets your life on your opponents will save. I wouldn't take either honestly.

[zergling.exe]

Didn't mean summons, but wild shape/animal companion.

johnbragg said summons so forgive me for assuming you were talking about the same thing as what you were quoting. Still, things have to be specifically added to the druid's list of eligible animal companions either by the material or the DM, so core isn't creating the problem there. For wild shape you need to be familiar with something to be able to become it, and that's up to the DM if you have ever heard of a creature in-game. And we all know how wild shape was used by the play tester...

[ColorBlindNinja]

Wait, turning into a bear and killing stuff or selling the (permanent) wall of salt isn't obvious but dragonwrought kobolds (Something heavily debated on these forumns when its brought up) is obvious?

Even without stuff like Loredrake, Dragonwrought lets you get +3 to all your mental stats. That's pretty good for almost any non-melee character. Take a Desert Kobold and you still have a +1 to WIS.

[Jormengand]

Both of these spells are pretty bad in my opinion, because they're 15 foot cones and you're a level 1 character without armor and a d4 hit dice, meaning that if you're within move + attack range of something that isn't completely helpless, you are dead.

Burning hands has some niche use in finishing off a couple of how HP targets, but color spray sort of bets your life on your opponents will save. I wouldn't take either honestly.

The fact that colour spray forces probably every opponent to save or lose, and burning hands forces them to save or take... a little bit more damage than they might otherwise have taken, I'll say that colour spray is a lot better.

Especially since you're probably forcing a DC 15 SoL - or even higher than 15 - at level 1, which isn't exactly easy for enemies who might even have will save penalties at level 1.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Both of these spells are pretty bad in my opinion, because they're 15 foot cones and you're a level 1 character without armor and a d4 hit dice, meaning that if you're within move + attack range of something that isn't completely helpless, you are dead.

Burning hands has some niche use in finishing off a couple of how HP targets, but color spray sort of bets your life on your opponents will save. I wouldn't take either honestly.

Yes, but if you're fighting, say an Orc Barbarian then Color Spray will almost certainly down him. But Burning Hands will barely do anything to him.

[emeraldstreak]

johnbragg said summons so forgive me for assuming you were talking about the same thing as what you were quoting. Still, things have to be specifically added to the druid's list of eligible animal companions either by the material or the DM, so core isn't creating the problem there. For wild shape you need to be familiar with something to be able to become it, and that's up to the DM if you have ever heard of a creature in-game. And we all know how wild shape was used by the play tester...

My mistake then because I somehow glossed over "summons".

On "familiarity"...I've always been confused by that. Imagine you are a druid...you can literally look up the sky, see a bird, become that bird, see a stronger bird, become that stronger bird. Fly over the lands as birds do. We don't think about it much, but actually many birds fly a great deal traveling routinely to other continents, and fairly fast too. A druid spending a single year of her life traveling the world as bird (and occasionally as a marine creature) will be knowledgeable of a great amount of animals.

Agreed on animal companions. Still though, imagine you're a writer for DnD, deadline on your ass and every class must get something, you've just written this awesome new dinosaur...will you really not add it to the list and kill two birds with one stone?

[johnbragg]

Wait, turning into a bear and killing stuff

Turning into a bear is obvious. Turning into a fleshraker dinosaur, or a desmodu hunting bat, or not so much. (Although I guess those are non-core, so...)

or selling the (permanent) wall of salt isn't obvious but dragonwrought kobolds (Something heavily debated on these forumns when its brought up) is obvious?

It's obvious if you're using that sourcebook, isn't it?

[emeraldstreak]

Yes, but if you're fighting, say an Orc Barbarian then Color Spray will almost certainly down him. But Burning Hands will barely do anything to him.

All these questions have been resolved in low level arenas.

If you are asking if wizards are dangerous, very much so (and yes, Color Spray is deadly in Core-ish).

If you are asking if wizards are the best, no.


***

As for low level gauntlets with a single PC, wizards are again very good, but again not necessarily the best.

[Tainted_Scholar]

All these questions have been resolved in low level arenas.

If you are asking if wizards are dangerous, very much so (and yes, Color Spray is deadly in Core-ish).

If you are asking if wizards are the best, no.


***

As for low level gauntlets with a single PC, wizards are again very good, but again not necessarily the best.

I was just pointing out that Color Spray is far superior to Burning Hands and very useful in general.

[Coretron03]

Even without stuff like Loredrake, Dragonwrought lets you get +3 to all your mental stats. That's pretty good for almost any non-melee character. Take a Desert Kobold and you still have a +1 to WIS.

Turning into a bear is obvious. Turning into a fleshraker dinosaur, or a desmodu hunting bat, or not so much. (Although I guess those are non-core, so...)



It's obvious if you're using that sourcebook, isn't it?

Sorry, when someone puts a dragonwrought kobold next to something like ice assassin I tend to assume that they mean something high powered like the "get epic feats at level 1" thing they might be able to do, not +3 to mental stats (as thats not anywhere near ice assassin in power). Forgive me for assuming the former. fair point about wildshape but as you mentioned they are non-core, plus bears are perfectly acceptable fighting forms.

Plus, I'm not sure what you mean about Wall of salt. It isn't obvious unless your using the sourcebook, which then it is? I guess that makes sense but it seems to contrdict the previous point and you could say the same thing about everything else thats non-core. Though I'm probably misunderstanding your point.

[Nifft]

Burning hands is better against mindless stuff like a group of skeletons or a swarm of spiders.

Swarms are legitimately scary at low level.

As you move into the mid-levels, I think color spray remains relevant a lot longer than burning hands -- but at lower levels, it is a valid choice for a significant portion of encounters.

(At high levels, neither spell is a good choice.)