I obviously don't understand a wizard's power

[jguy]

Hey, Alchemistmerlin

Spoiler

Show

Defeating monsters, saving kingdoms, and participating in a great story is more fun when you're actually useful for that story.

Here's a story for you:

A fighter and a druid reached a village, where everyone was sad. The fighter tried to talk to people, but they didn't listen. He wanted to try and Intimidate them into talking, but the druid said, "wait, I have Diplomacy as class skill!". The druid talked to the people, and they told him about a huge dragon menacing the countryside. The heroes decided to set out to find the cave of the evil dragon, and to punish him for his crimes and make the countryide safe again. The druid sent his pet wolf to pick upon the dragon's scent. The fighter waited. The druid says "he went that way, toward that forest!", and the fighter followed. They got into a forest. When they got hungry, the druid found some berries for them to eat. Then, he used magic to speak to the plants and animals of the forest. The fighter waited. The druid said "the plants told me the cave is that way!" and the fighter followed. Before they entered the cave, the druid cast all manners of spells on himself, the wolf, and the fighter. The fighter waited. Then the druid changed into a huge Dire Bear, and lead the way. The dragon breathed fire on the group, but this didn't affect them, thanks to the druid's magic. The druid and his wolf rended the dragon's flesh hard, and the fighter helped a bit too, the druid's magic giving him strength. They defeated the dragon and lived happily ever after!

Great story, eh?

Yeah, fighters get the shaft a lot when it comes to things like this. Some people do like the "I hit it with my [insert weapon of choice here]" but sometimes it is not enough.

Though this could be a problem with the DM as well. Just because the fighter doesn't have diplomacy, doesn't mean a villager won't talk to him. Especially if he goes "Why is everyone so sad?" If he is completely ignored and the druid asks the same thing but with a diplomacy roll, I'd be upset at the DM for giving him the relevant plot hook and not me.

I wouldn't mind the druid tracking better then me if I was a fighter. I mean, it is what he does. I'm not a ranger, if I wanted to track I'd roll up a ranger.

[Vladislav]

Ok, the "people not talking to the fighter" part was a bit of a stretch of course. I was just using hyperbole to make a point ...

[jguy]

A lot of it did make sense and I know what you were going for there. Fighters are woefully underpowered in comparison to higher tiers. At most, people take 2 levels of them for the bonus feats for a particular build.

I do remember one time I played a Fighter from level 1 all the way to level 5. He was actually the leader of the group but that is mostly through sheer dint of my own personality. He was a dwarf who specialized in throwing harpoons that were attacked to his full plate armor by that Bat-cable from MM2. He kicked a**.

By the end of the game, he was nearing where he could craft siege weaponry by himself in a few days time. We had to invade a abandoned castle filled with Hobgoblins. Do get through the kill zone in the front, he crafted rolling towershields to give full cover and a bloody Ballista that shot special Harpoons that were a one shot kill. He saved the party several times by going back for downed members and once saved the Rogue who had fallen down a 10 foot pit by throwing his harpoon down at him.

[true_shinken]

Eh. I think most people are not really "into" power gaming. As far as I see it, this discussion, and discussions like it aren't "you are doing it wrong if you aren't playing a wizard!", they are more "these are problems with 3.5 balance, you should watch out for them."

There is so much truth in Eldan's words that the rest of the thread just seems like a lie. It doesn't matter if you're saying the truth, Eldan's words are so true that even stating 'the sky is blue' or 'redheads are sexy' will seem like a lie if next to it.
This thread is now over and Eldan wins everything forever.

[Eldan]

I have to sig that. Mind if I do?

[Firechanter]

Good story Vladislav, sounds _so_ familiar.

I wouldn't mind the druid tracking better then me if I was a fighter. I mean, it is what he does. I'm not a ranger, if I wanted to track I'd roll up a ranger.

Yeah, so you can be upset about the Druid tracking better than you as Ranger. :p

[shadow_archmagi]

You're a bad player if you are less concerned with "Are we defeating monsters, saving kingdoms, and participating in a great story" and more concerned with "The guy 2 chairs over did 2.5916 more damage than me and was 13% more useful! That means I'm losing DKP!"

There's a fine line between "Doing 13% less damage" and "90% of the time I can participate in the game only by adding witty dialogue."

[true_shinken]

I have to sig that. Mind if I do?

I'd be honored. Please do.

There's a fine line between "Doing 13% less damage" and "90% of the time I can participate in the game only by adding witty dialogue"

No, there isn't. There is a huge canyon between those two positions. That was his point.

[nyarlathotep]

By the end of the game, he was nearing where he could craft siege weaponry by himself in a few days time. We had to invade a abandoned castle filled with Hobgoblins. Do get through the kill zone in the front, he crafted rolling towershields to give full cover and a bloody Ballista that shot special Harpoons that were a one shot kill. He saved the party several times by going back for downed members and once saved the Rogue who had fallen down a 10 foot pit by throwing his harpoon down at him.

That is not disproving the tier system in any way. It shows that you have a good DM that compensated for D&D being unbalanced by allowing the fighter these other options that allowed him to consistently contribute.

[true_shinken]

That is not disproving the tier system in any way. It shows that you have a good DM that compensated for D&D being unbalanced by allowing the fighter these other options that allowed him to consistently contribute.

Except that as far as I could tell from the post, everything that Fighter did was RAW.

Of course, this was level 5. You don't really need a lot of tricks to make a melee character contribute at this level.

[nyarlathotep]

Except that as far as I could tell from the post, everything that Fighter did was RAW.

Of course, this was level 5. You don't really need a lot of tricks to make a melee character contribute at this level.

Oh level 5 my bad.

[Boci]

Except that as far as I could tell from the post, everything that Fighter did was RAW.

Crafted special harpoons that were a one shot kill?

[Bang!]

Crafted special harpoons that were a one shot kill?

Ballista: 3d8 damage
Hobgoblin: 1d8+2 HP

I'd call that more of a timesaving handwave than a game-altering houserule.

[Boci]

Ballista: 3d8 damage
Hobgoblin: 1d8+2 HP

I'd call that more of a timesaving handwave than a game-altering houserule.

If the goblins were first level then sure, but then the harpoons aren't special are they?

Plus: Rolling tower shields? What was his mobility like carrying a balista around?

And whilst not breakinh RAW, how much down time did he need to build those (no way is it a few days by RAW)? Did it require extra WBL?

[jguy]

Couple clarifications for everyone.

The ballista was manned by the other members of the party who couldn't go out into the clearing without risk of being peppered to death by arrows. The rules for a ballista bolt is that its just a very big crossbow, so I decided to customize the bolts to be like Harpoons. If you got hit you were skewered to the spot. Some of the hobgoblins had class levels but even then, if they were hit they'd take damage again removing it, so 6d8. That is can even take out a level 5 character if rolled high enough.

The rolling tower shields were made like the ones you see in the Evil Dead: Army of Darkness (yeah, don't know any picture links). Big, reinforced plank of wood held up by a square base with wheels. No weight for us because we didn't carry it. Made several.

Crafting it took only a couple days since I had max ranks in crafting and had help from the towns folk. The cost was almost Nil. We cut down the timber ourselves and we used scrap metal from the loots we took.

[Boci]

Couple clarifications for everyone.

The ballista was manned by the other members of the party who couldn't go out into the clearing without risk of being peppered to death by arrows. The rules for a ballista bolt is that its just a very big crossbow, so I decided to customize the bolts to be like Harpoons. If you got hit you were skewered to the spot. Some of the hobgoblins had class levels but even then, if they were hit they'd take damage again removing it, so 6d8. That is can even take out a level 5 character if rolled high enough.

How were you transporting the ballista?

The rolling tower shields were made like the ones you see in the Evil Dead: Army of Darkness (yeah, don't know any picture links). Big, reinforced plank of wood held up by a square base with wheels. No weight for us because we didn't carry it. Made several.

You still have to pull it, plus how were you attacking if you had full cover?

Crafting it took only a couple days since I had max ranks in crafting and had help from the towns folk. The cost was almost Nil. We cut down the timber ourselves and we used scrap metal from the loots we took.

Yeah...no. I'm a liberal DM, and if a fighter of mine wanted to do something like that they are welcome, but you are not doing it in a couple of day, for no real cost from scraps at level 5, even if you are assisted by a horde of unskilled workers.

I'm glad it turned it worked and was fun for your group, but it doesn't say much about the fighter.

[jguy]

How were you transporting the ballista?



You still have to pull it, plus how were you attacking if you had full cover?



Yeah...no. I'm a liberal DM, and if a fighter of mine wanted to do something like that they are welcome, but you are not doing it in a couple of day, for no real cost from scraps at level 5, even if you are assisted by a horde of unskilled workers.

I'm glad it turned it worked and was fun for your group, but it doesn't say much about the fighter.

1.) We transported it by having it pulled by mules.

2.) We didn't pull it, we pushed it. We weren't attacking from behind it, we used it to get closer to the enemies without being attacked by arrows the whole way. Some goblins came up to us in melee and we attacked from behind it.

3.) I don't know what to say to the last part. The cost to make something is with its materials right? A ballista costs only 500g buy, so crafting it costs 1/3rd of that. It takes longer for my to make a Masterwork Fullplate then a ballista. The scrap metal were masterwork weaponry, which can be sold for half so 150g. All together with an abundance of metal, free wood, and me maxing craft, it took only a few days and was almost free.

[Boci]

1.) We transported it by having it pulled by mules.

And that wasn't a massive limitation?

2.) We didn't pull it, we pushed it.

Point still stands.

We weren't attacking from behind it, we used it to get closer to the enemies without being attacked by arrows the whole way. Some goblins came up to us in melee and we attacked from behind it.

Okay.

and me maxing craft, it took only a few days

8 ranks, 2 int mod, master work tools gives another 2, aid another again, taking a 10. Thats 22. 22 x 22 (I'll assume thats the craft DC needed to make the balista) = 484 silver pices worth of work per week. 3.4 weeks needed to make a balista, so w'll call that 24 days. Even if the townspeople's help halved that time, its still 12 days.

and was almost free.

The ballista probably, but the bolts that deal double damage? I've be less inclined.

I'm not saying you did anything wrong, my main problem is that nothing there has anything to do with being a fighter. Rogue's and wizards have more skillpoints and a higher int mod for the craft checks.

[jguy]

I actually have no idea how much the bolts would cost, but besides all of that, you make a good point. All of this was a Fighters attempt, and success, to do more then just swing a sword or throw a Harpoon in this case. A rogue and wizard could potentially do it better by having a higher int mod but max ranks are max ranks.

I think this thread might have degenerated a little from "Why Wizards are strong" to "Fighters suck"

[true_shinken]

8 ranks, 2 int mod, master work tools gives another 2, aid another again, taking a 10. Thats 22. 22 x 22 (I'll assume thats the craft DC needed to make the balista) = 484 silver pices worth of work per week. 3.4 weeks needed to make a balista, so w'll call that 24 days. Even if the townspeople's help halved that time, its still 12 days.

From Heroes of Battle: "Because siege engines are so expensive, you
measure progress in gold pieces, not silver pieces."

[Boci]

From Heroes of Battle: "Because siege engines are so expensive, you
measure progress in gold pieces, not silver pieces."

Well thats ironic, given that a full plate armour costs more. Still takes over a week, since the HoB rules also suggest that any more than 3 unskilled labourers assisting you does nothing to reduce the time.

[Jallorn]

Here's what I have to contribute:

Fighter: "I can kill a man in a turn."

Cleric: "I can kill a man in half a turn."

Wizard: "I can kill a man before my turn."

Bard: "I can get three psychopaths to kill people for me."

[Kantolin]

The tier system does not say 'X classes are bad'. It's an analysis of overall power levels between various classes, so everyone at a given table is aware of it.

It saves you the trouble of having a cleric of Kord in the party, having him cast divine power and righteous might, and having him then do around double the damage of the barbarian while also having flamestrikes.

It means that you will need a heavy gentleman's agreement to have things work out, all things even.

It doesn't mean 'Sorcerors are lower tier than Wizards, so if you play a sorceror you are wrong'. Nor does it say 'Wizards are too high tier so if you play one you are wrong'. (In fact, if I recall, JaronK who invented the tier system prefers to play the game at tiers 3 and 4). If you would like to play a monk, go nuts! Monks are fun for some people (Not me, however, but I do like Lurks, Shadowcasters, and Hexblades quite a bit, neither of which are very high tier at all, and one of my favorite classes is the fighter).

It's simply alerting you 'Hey, this 'barbarian' guy is tier 4, and there's a druid in the party, so he will probably be able to do a lot more than me'.

It also is particularly helpful to me. I don't mind being underpowered (at all), but a lot of people at my table do, and none of us optimize in the slightest. Summarily, when I played my psychic warrior in a group of underoptimized tier 4s and 5s (And a significantly underoptimized wizard), I made it a point to not take power attack or any similar combat feats - and I was right to avoid doing so. The tier list is a handy way to glance and say 'Well I'm playing a druid and my buddy is a fighter. Maybe now's a good time to try out an underpowered prestige class, or to avoid taking natural spell, or something'.

[jguy]

Or going with the PHB2 variant rules. Druids lose a lot but its like losing out on half of your nuclear arsenal. You still have enough to destroy the world anyway.

[Grommen]

Might want to keep in mind in regards to the tier rankings.

Your mileage will vary. The game is played in different ways, with different DM's and their perceptions of how the world works.

I don't have this problem with wizards in my games. They die fairly well, and they never seem to have the solution to any given problem. It is just our playing style.

This is a good thing. However it is exactly why this particular argument will never find resoulition, and why the tier system is completely full of crap. It assumes that everyone will play the game exactly the same way.

But no one does.

[Tvtyrant]

'redheads are sexy"

Make that female red head; it hasn't done me any good in life.

[RaginChangeling]

Might want to keep in mind in regards to the tier rankings.

Your mileage will vary. The game is played in different ways, with different DM's and their perceptions of how the world works.

I don't have this problem with wizards in my games. They die fairly well, and they never seem to have the solution to any given problem. It is just our playing style.

This is a good thing. However it is exactly why this particular argument will never find resoulition, and why the tier system is completely full of crap. It assumes that everyone will play the game exactly the same way.

But no one does.

No it doesn't assume everyone will be playing the game the same way, in fact it is much the opposite. The point of the tier system is that a Wizard or a Sorcerer can do just about anything, not that they do. If played to an equal level of optimization, a Wizard should be more effective in more situations than a Barbarian for instance.

"But wait!" You say, "In my game I never had any of those problems, Wizards seem to die really fast!" I would question what level of competence the Wizard and the rest of the party were played at. If the Wizard was using all his spell slots to deliver Shocking Grasps and the Barbarian has taken Power Attack, yeah the Barbarian is going to do better because he's being played to a higher level of competence. If the Wizard is instead casting Sleep or Glitterdust or Grease in combat, casting Knock and Ghost Sound and Prestidigitation out of combat well the Barbarian can't really match that because his class only lends itself to hitting people with a stick. The beauty of higher tier classes is while they can just blast, or plink away with direct damage spells, they also have enormous out of combat utility.

Can a Fighter fly? You may argue he can buy or find an item that will allow him to do so, a Wizard need only devote one of his automatic level up spells to learn it. Can a Fighter or Barbarian hit incorporeal creatures? With special and expensive weapons, a Wizard could hit every time if he so chose. And that is what the tier system talks about, not their performance but their capacity.

A Wizard can always be worse than the Fighter, a Fighter cannot always be better than a Wizard.

[Kantolin]

I don't have this problem with wizards in my games. They die fairly well, and they never seem to have the solution to any given problem. It is just our playing style.

That's actually also in the tier system - they assume equivalent optimization.

They even give some nods to this feature. I mean, you can have a vow of peace barbarian who has given up his vicious ways and never swings a weapon, and that would actually be an extremely neat and outrageously unoptimized character.

The tier system measures potential, assuming similar levels of optimization. If that barbarian was teamed up with a wizard who had a chronic habit of eating his familiar and refused to cast spells, they'd both be about on par with each other combat-wise.

If, the next day, the evil lichdragonmindflayer mind controlled both of them and clapped a helm of opposite alignment on them, one orphanage killing and bank robbing later and they both have a chunk of money.

The barbarian can go and do physical damage if the opponent is moderately cooperative.

The wizard can start planar binding in some balors or magic jarring the king or, possibly, do elemental damage if the opponent is moderately cooperative. Or possibly buff the barbarian into an unholy monstrosity who could take out the entire enemy kingdom himself.

If he then selects to 'do elemental damage' because the other things are overpowered, that's acceptable. Although the question then becomes 'how much damage is okay', as many optimized damage builds can be intolerable, but at least the barbarian can also do 'a lot of damage'.

That's what the tier system measures. It doesn't measure ubercharger leap attack nonsense barbarian vs eat-your-familiar wizards, nor does it measure vow of peace no-attacking barbarians vs optimized wizards. It measures 'This class can do a wide array of very potent things' 'This class can do significantly fewer potent things, but they're still really potent'.

It, in fact, encourages you to say 'Well, I'm playing a wizard. Planar binding is probably too strong for our party, as is polymorph nonsense'. It's also super helpful for a DM who has to interact with a new player, or That_Douche (Many groups have That_Douche), or in fact just happenstance - my first 3.5 wizard I was trying to make underpowered, so I didn't take magic missile or fireball since those were obviously the most useful spells, and instead buffed everyone else. I was then mind-boggled at just how useful that was.

If that player is playing a barbarian, they are going to be doing damage. It may be too much damage, and you can analyze there.

If that player is playing a wizard, you probably have to analyze every spell in their spellbook and decide if it's okay. I mean, 'I cast wall of force' is not specifically a game wrecker spell, but can be easily used to divide up a battlefield so it's now your party vs one bad guy at a time. Dominate person is something most optimizers don't like very much due to the various ways of resisting it, but then all of a sudden the king is in your pocket.

Or something! Whatever, the tier system isn't telling you not to play with a wizard and a fighter or that a wizard will always beat all fighters in a duel or something, it's just telling you that this could result in the fighter sitting on his hands. :P I play with wizards and fighters all the time! So do most people!

~~~~~~~

A brief edit: As a note, if you ask me, /my/ problem with the tier system is that ubercharger nonsense builds (And similar) can start on tier 5 fairly easily, and that's waaaaay too highly optimized for my games even if all the barbarian can do is charge and hit something. But that then leans more towards 'D&D tends to be too highly optimized for my tastes', and is not a fault of the tier system at all.

[Sacrieur]

To tease the fighter more.

---

After battling the dragon, the fighter and druid level up to level 8. The Druid gains the ability to shape change into a huge ****ing bear 3/day and access to more spells and adds 6 to his HP. The fighter gets to add 8 HP and gets a bonus feat. He selects weapon specialization, so he gets a whole +1 damage to his attacks.

---

It's hard to accept, I know. I feel as though WotC should nerf the fighter. I mean he does get to add +1 damage to ALL attacks. And technically he can slash his sword all day long. So technically it's like a + infinite bonus to damage! See, the fighter is clearly overpowered.

/Sarcasm

[ericgrau]

Yeah, fighters get the shaft a lot when it comes to things like this. Some people do like the "I hit it with my [insert weapon of choice here]" but sometimes it is not enough.

Though this could be a problem with the DM as well. Just because the fighter doesn't have diplomacy, doesn't mean a villager won't talk to him. Especially if he goes "Why is everyone so sad?" If he is completely ignored and the druid asks the same thing but with a diplomacy roll, I'd be upset at the DM for giving him the relevant plot hook and not me.

I wouldn't mind the druid tracking better then me if I was a fighter. I mean, it is what he does. I'm not a ranger, if I wanted to track I'd roll up a ranger.

Yeah, this. Plus a wolf usually can't make the DC to track a dragon in anything but mud, trail rations are cheap, plants don't have eyes and are pretty bad at finding caves, buffs are generally pretty weak. They also must be cast in a strong voice, alerting others of your presence. So you only want 1 or 2 while most spell slots should go to other spells. Then the fighter hits a lot harder and survives a lot longer than a druid, at least without cheese.

In 90%+ groups that works fine, though boredom is another complaint on less versatile classes even when they have higher numbers. Then you gotta get creative with gear and tactics, especially those dependent on strength or attack bonus, rather than your limited special abilities.