D&D 3e/3.5e/d20The forum for conversations specifically related to the rules and procedures of Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition, 3.5 Edition, or any fantasy game using the d20 system or a variant thereof (commercially published or not).
In one of the games I DM at my real tabletop, this player joined us recently and he's a good friend of mine. The game isn't especially high Op, as people did make efforts in their char creation, but most aren't familiar enough with the game to be entirely too comfortable with it. He presented me his potential build he wanted to make (After I told him I'd houserule the Slayer PrC as being able to select an Arcane enemy if he so wished, too): Psychic Warrior 2/Cleric 1/That Tome of Battle class everyone dips in that I forgot the name 1/Barbarian 1/Ranger 1/Slayer 10/Psychic Warrior +4, which with Practiced Manifester, would make him a 20th level manifester with a decent initiator level. I usually don't mind builds, but he says that 'he can do what he wants to do' with this build. Now, I know he won't overshadow the others with this build, but there still are 4 dips (with the Ranger dip even taking the Favoured Enemy: Arcanists option) which all give him a great benefit, in a certain way. I'd just like to hear you peoples' opinion.
EDIT: My bad, otherwise it was just 19 levels.
Last edited by CardCaptor : 11-17-2012 at 06:29 PM.
Dipping is one of the few ways that a mundane character can customize themselves, and one of the few strengths of the 3.5 class system is that you can multiclass lots of times to salvage awful classes.
Having said that, the proposed build definitely doesn't make him a 20th level manifester. He has ML18 (PW5, Slayer 9, PM 4), but the power points and powers known of a 14th level Psychic Warrior (though he does get bonus PP as an 18th level manifester). He misses out on 68 PP, 6 powers known, and a fat stack of bonus feats.
In exchange, he has IL10 and a handful of crappy low level maneuvers. I wouldn't worry about him being overpowered.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaronK
Frankly, a Wizard can suck even more than a Fighter could ever dream of sucking. A Fighter can stab himself to death, but only a Wizard could Plane Shift to some horrible far realm to be tortured for an eternity of insanity.
In general, let the player do what they want in building, within reason. the goal is fun, after all.
However, note to him that since the other players are realitively new, and that his severe optimization might discurage them from continuing play. As someone that has been in that role, it is no fun when someone else does takes all the glory/combat/etc.
I would simply ask him to limit himself to closer to their power level, as they are still learning.
He actually has 6 levels of Psychic Warrior, which would have a 19th level manifester. But yeah, my bad, Slayer is a 9/10 progression. I'm not worried about him being overpowered in the least, either, it just seems like a lot of class with not much reasoning behind them.
It looks like your player has a solid idea of what they want to play, and if he can really achieve this by dipping a bunch of classes, what's the problem with him doing so?
Out of interest, what level would he be starting at? Having to play through a bunch of the lower levels in that build would certainly be fair payoff for the later power curve.
Also, be aware how Practised Manifester works; it doesn't give you extra Manifesting levels, just increases your... effective manifester level for the powers you do have. Someone else I'm sure will pop along and explain it better I'm sure.
But yeah; if you don't use the favoured class penalties (which this build only really gets with the +4 PsyWar levels), then I can't see why people would regard a dip-heavy build is any 'worse' than being a single-class-only build. Not every character concept neatly fits into one of the classes exactly, taking a bunch of dips doesn't mean you've trained for a year as a rogue, a year as a barbarian, a year as a bard, or whatever, it just means that you occupy some middle space between all of these things.
I'm also aware of how PM works, but since I play with the French books, I don't know the exact equivalent terms in English, honestly, so I used what sounded the most logical. Otherwise, I'm fine with his build, really, but there's nothing that would justify, say, Cloistered Cleric 1 with Knowledge Devotion and Travel devotion. It's not that I mind it, it's that the other players don't even have the slight idea of such a thing existing.
In one of the games I DM at my real tabletop, this player joined us recently and he's a good friend of mine. The game isn't especially high Op, as people did make efforts in their char creation, but most aren't familiar enough with the game to be entirely too comfortable with it. He presented me his potential build he wanted to make (After I told him I'd houserule the Slayer PrC as being able to select an Arcane enemy if he so wished, too): Psychic Warrior 2/Cleric 1/That Tome of Battle class everyone dips in that I forgot the name 1/Barbarian 1/Ranger 1/Slayer 10/Psychic Warrior +4, which with Practiced Manifester, would make him a 20th level manifester with a decent initiator level. I usually don't mind builds, but he says that 'he can do what he wants to do' with this build. Now, I know he won't overshadow the others with this build, but there still are 4 dips (with the Ranger dip even taking the Favoured Enemy: Arcanists option) which all give him a great benefit, in a certain way. I'd just like to hear you peoples' opinion.
EDIT: My bad, otherwise it was just 19 levels.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but dump the ToB dip and the Cleric dip. They add NOTHING to the build. You don't need Travel Devotion when you already have Pounce. With size-stacking available to a PsiWar, plus Bite/Claw of X powers, Knowledge Devotion may be safely skipped.
Barbarian at least brings Pounce to the table, Ranger is required to take Slayer. The rest of the levels should be PsiWar or Slayer.
Practiced Manifester is great, yes, but it doesn't give you additional powers or PP, which is where the true power lies. This nets you 17/20 manifesting, which works out quite well. Pounce is worth not needing to spend a power and PP on Psionic Lion's Pounce. The Ranger dip nets you Track and the skills necessary to qualify for Slayer.
Dips are a cost trade equation... do you get more than you lose out of the deal?
he has a specific charecter he wants to run the only reason to block dipping is if classes have meaningful fluff aspect that prevents a combination (like a setting where gods hate magic would have few wizard clerics) or if it threatens to make him over (or under) powered relative to the rest of the party.
Anyone knows blue is for sarcas'ing in · Use of gray may indicate nitpicking · Green is sincerity · "Take 10 SAN damage from Dark Orchid"
I often hop into threads for just one thing
In terms of the thread title, I don't think there is such a thing as "too much dipping" (from a fluff perspective) when it comes to base classes, as long as the fluff makes sense. In some cases taking just 1 or two levels of a 10 level prestige class can be a bit hard to explain, though in most cases even prestige classes are malleable enough that you can make a coherent character with a bunch of them (Sorcadin comes to mind).
However, in your particular player's case I must agree with Schneeky that I don't see what exactly he gets out of 3/4 of the dips, versus simply progressing Psychic Warrior. Of course, if the rest of the group is not as powerful, him gimping himself may not be such a bad thing. This particular aspect is something only your group can decide.
RSS Feeds: 
How much dipping is too much dipping?
