Cheers,
Cam
That's still easy to powergame: typical wizards I've seen tend to have at least 12 con, so we're talking 4 times a day (or more if they buy amulets of health or started with say 16 con). As the example above shows that extra damage can add up to 30 damage (or more with say cone of cold...and just imagine disintegrate at 20th level: 40d6 + 120 !!). A powergamer will use point buy to up his con just for this (and of course the bonus hp) to something like 16 and then buy an amulet of health +6 to bring his con up to 22. That gives 3+6=9 uses per day.
A typical combat only lasts 3 -5 rounds so your wizard can pretty much be adding that extra 3 damage per die every round (or twice if they have quicken). Sure he doesn't have enough uses to last 4 encounters per day (except possibly the powergaming option mentioned above) but that still allows him to be absolutely dominant in at least one combat. If you have another wizard (say Wiz 5/WoHS 5) in the party then the war mage can be wearing leather armor at no penalty (except possibly to attacks and armor check...neither of which affect fireballs, lightning bolt, cone of cold, magic missile etc.) and be doing far more damage (assuming both use the same number of spells). Not only that but the extra damage will probably shorten combat quite a bit which will only allow the war mage to have uses left in the next combat.
Also, there's a damage cap on spell levels for a reason*. An extra 3 damage per die (an average d6 roll gives 3.5) almost doubles damage from 4 spells per day. 1st level spells become as powerful as 3rd, 3rd as powerful as 5th or 6th etc.
I've been considering changing the prestige class to make it more balanced...say something like Reserves of Strength: stunned for a round each time you use it since you're effectively doing up to double the normal damage in a round.
*(who the heck thought Dalamar's Lightning Lance should be a 4th level spell anyways...at 15th caster level you can do (3+10)d6 damage with each of 3 lances with ranged touch attacks...that's 39d6 which is more than meteor swarm can do and that's a 9th level spell with ranged touch attacks).
So rather than re-hash the problems with the class, let's do something constructive about it.
How would you revise the war mage to make it more balanced?
I think the first thing I would do is revise battle magic to where you add a straight bonus to damaging spells, rather than a +X to each die.
Of course the only real way to know whether a modification is balanced is to playtest it. I know from the one NPC warmage I used that they're quite a bit tougher than the average mage even with +1 battle magic.
Taking Azael example, the Wiz 5 \ War Mage 5. We will also give him an Int 20 (just for max potential excluding silvanesti). The save for this Lightning bolt woul be 18. This character should be fighting characters of an equal level. As already shown the 10th level Monk, Ranger, and Rogue have Evasion as well as having high ref saves (+7 Base) for these characters to take no damage they need to roll an 11 (not including any dex bonuses). Even if the monk (and possibly the Rogue if he has taken improved evasion) fails s\he only takes half. (it can't be maximized as the example cannot yet cast a 7th level spell) so the max possible would be 60 at half if all the dice roll a 6.
The only revision I might make to the class would be to say it can only use this ability on area effect spells.
Dragonhelm, if you added a set amount of damage to the spell you would be treading dangerously close the the Warmage (not War Mage) described in the Complete Aracne that adds his Int bonus to any spell that does damage (there are a few restrictions, but not many).
One thing that makes a difference is the range Meteor Swarm being a Long range and Dalamar’s Lance being a medium range. The second the lance can only target a single creature where as the meteors hit multiple creatures (40-ft radius spread so 80 possible creatures, if every square is occupied which would be 480d6 spread out - 6d6 each creature). Third the lance has you make a ranged touch attack to hit with the lance and if you miss then the target gets nothing. With the meteor if you miss it still lands in the square that you target (you forgo the 2d6 from the impact) but the target still must make a ref save in order to avoid the area damage. Fourth if the target makes his save against the lance he only negates half the damage from the lance (it is a little vague as to whether or not the 3d6 from the impact can be saved against), with meteor swarm if you hit with the meteor then the target gets no save period. And lastly all four of the meteors strike in the round they are summoned the lances however can only be hurled at the rate in which the wizard can make multiple attacks. So he casts the spells and it creates the lance that instant, that is the wizard’s action that round, next round he can hurl it at an opponent (and is instantly granted another lance which he can hurl that same round (his Base Attack Bonus is +7/+2, and on the next round he hurls his last lance. So it takes minimum of three rounds for the wizard to get all of his lances off.
So let’s look at this
Dalamar’s lightning lance
1st Rd – create lance
2nd Rd – hurl 1st lance with RTA (hit = 3d6 +Fort save ½ of 10d6, miss = no dmg), hurl 2nd lance (hit = 3d6 +Fort save ½ of 10d6, miss = no dmg).
3rd Rd – Hurl last lance (hit = 3d6 +Fort save ½ of 10d6, miss = no dmg).
Meteor Swarm
1st Rd – cast spell (target all four meteors at single target with 4 RTA, (hit equal 2d6 impact + 6d6 no save for each meteor, miss = Ref save for ½ 24d6 from area effects)
RD = Round
DMG = Damage
RTA = Ranged Touch Attack
Dragonhelm, if you added a set amount of damage to the spell you would be treading dangerously close the the Warmage (not War Mage) described in the Complete Aracne that adds his Int bonus to any spell that does damage (there are a few restrictions, but not many).
Yeah, but I had the same idea before the Warmage (not War Mage) ever saw print. :P
Are there any war mages out there in any campaigns?
Actually yes, there's one in ours for the KoD. We have a five-member party. One Knight of Solamnia (me), one Cleric of Zivilyn (JudgeIto), one standard rogue (who is very happy for the flaming whip he just picked up), one duel-sword wielding ranger, and one war mage. Encounters have been ramped up in difficulty appropriately, but regardless the damage he does is... disgusting.
What color of robes does he wear?
That sounds like a pretty neat combo, WOHS, Warmage and Archmage! Wow!
What color of robes does he wear?
Mauve. Er.. I mean red. Actually it's more of a maroonish. A brick-red perhaps. Crimson-like. A very very very dark pink.
Are there any sorcerer warmages or knights of the thorn or even white or black robes out there? I have a few renegades in my Huma based game that pop up.
As far as sorcerers go, I think I can answer that. If there ARE any, they are rare and keep themselves hidden, because any kind of non-divine magic is swept up by the Wizards of High Sorcery like a hoover vacuum. My understanding is that anything arcane-magic related needs to be controlled by them because magic is too inherently dangerous for the common person to have it. In the extreme, the WoHS even believe all magic items should be kept by them and carefully parceled out at their sole discretion. So technically the mage in our group (having passed his test) should steal all our magic items and ferret them back to the Tower. But then we'd kill him. :D
So there really aren't any sorcerers of any abundance, and if there were, they'd be short lived. I am assuming there are some white and black robe war mages. It's also my understanding that war mages focus in dealing in war like situations, so their spells and the extra damage they give are great area effect since they are to be used in mass battles. Now a Knight of the Thorn warmage? Hmm.. interesting concept. I wonder if it would be possible to meet the prereqs for both prestige classes...
Cheers,
Cam
Are there any sorcerer warmages or knights of the thorn or even white or black robes out there?
The war mage can be used by sorcerers, Wizards of High Sorcery (White, Red, and Black Robes), renegade wizards, Thorn Knights, Legion Sorcerers, Solamnic Auxiliary Mages, and so on. Thorn Knights especially gain benefit from this class.
The damage spells generally suck from levels 10 and up, a fact which was made abundantly clear to me in a Midnight campaign. I laugh at players who bother to have their sorcerers learn meteor swarm, which is supposed to be the shizzle, when in actuality it's just a fizzle. If I were to cast a purely offensive spell at that level, then it would most likely be wail of the banshee or weird. Not that I'd ever actually do so, because I'd be too busy making use of timestop, shapechange, and shades.
Let's see, Fighter 20: 15,13,14,12,10,8 at level one. Puts none of his level up bonuses into Con. Since the game's balance is based on certain wealth assumptions, let's assume he has spent the paltry 36k for a +6 Con item.
A Fighter 20 with average HP/HD, a base Con of 14, and a +6 enhancement bonus would have 214.5 HP. Save or die spells, walls, cages, and enchantments can all rid you of the threat that the Fighter poses with but a single action. Meteor swarm's average damage is 112. Its maximum damage is 192. Why in the name of all that's optimal would I ever cast that bloody spell? An unheightened charm person has a better chance of taking out the threat than does meteor swarm.
So how much damage would a War Mage 5's meteor swarm do? It would average 208 damage and max out at 288. So still, on average, he's not killing a Fighter 20 with a single action, although he does get close, and the variance is significant enough that he might actually manage it occasionally.
So where's the unbalanced or overpowered part? I certainly don't see it. Maybe it's hiding from me.
My conclusion is that a Sorcerer X/War Mage 5 is balanced, as is a Wizard Y/War Mage 5, as the bonus damage per die simply makes the pure damage spells a viable option at level 20, rather than the red headed step child of everything else that they currently are.
Wizard: for those extra 5 levels of wizard he gets a bonus feat, he casts as level 10 and his familiar (aka roving target) gets slightly better(ie. slightly smarter, a tiny AC increase and the ability to talk to other animals of its kind).
Warmage: 2 bonus feats, caster level goes up the same, gains the ability to wear some armor, gains AC bonus for his allies and does far more damage than the wizard does when using the exact same spells.
Regardless of what example you give for a warmage not being able to take down enemy X by using damage vs. using some other spell the exact same thing can be said for the wizard.
If you're looking for someone who is designed for battle and is balanced it's called an evoker who prepares a bunch of abjuration. For that extra damage: empower spell and maximize spell.
Seriously, though, if both classes were available to me, and I had to choose only one, I'd rather take Incantatrix 5 over War Mage 5. War Mage is nice and all for what it does (make things hurt with iconic blasty spells) but a Wiz 5/Inc 5 blows the Wiz 5/WM 5 out of the water. Yes, compared to the standard Wizard the Wiz/WM is doing more damage, but he had to get two absolutely craptastic feats to do so. Weapon Focus? Bah. Combat Casting? Ewww.
And hold up ... Cold Specialization gives a +2 damage per die bonus to cold spells, and that's just one bloody feat. Combined with Energy Sub. that's +2/die on every one of your damage spells. So again I'm unimpressed by the WM. It still seems pretty balanced to me.
And seriously, don't use the base Wizard or Sorcerer classes as balance arguments. They're pathetically designed. Considering that the Bard has become the favorite gish base over on the CO boards, one would think that this would be common knowledge, but hey.
Oh, and, um, your entire premise of equality among classes is false. It's been stated to be false by Monte Cook. He referred to the fact that some choices are more effective than others as Mastery, and it was intentionally built into third edition. :D So some classes and class combinations will be more powerful than others. The power disparity is generally not large enough for the less powerful option to be unable to hold its own compared to the more powerful one. This holds true with the Wizard vs. Wizard/War Mage situation. While the War Mage is indeed better with damage spells, the normal Wizard is no slouch, he's just better off not using as many damage spells as the War Mage, which is not surprising considering that it takes 5 levels of that PrC to make those spells worth casting.
If some FRCS DM gave me the option of using the War Mage class, I still wouldn't. I'd be too busy playing a killer gnome or any of the several other more interesting options.
If you're looking for someone who is designed for battle and is balanced it's called an evoker who prepares a bunch of abjuration. For that extra damage: empower spell and maximize spell.
But that's the problem. The damage spells are [b]craptastic[/b] normally. They're not balanced past level 9 at all. Absolute sewage material. With 5 levels of War Mage the damage spells can once again become an attractive option rather than a joke.
Considering that the Bard has become the favorite gish base over on the CO boards, one would think that this would be common knowledge, but hey.
I'd just like to say that "gish" is possibly the silliest colloquial term for "fighter-mage" that has ever come out of the fan community. And yes, I know why it's used, but way to make something interesting sound like an ooze.
Cheers,
Cam
So how much damage would a War Mage 5's meteor swarm do? It would average 208 damage and max out at 288. So still, on average, he's not killing a Fighter 20 with a single action, although he does get close, and the variance is significant enough that he might actually manage it occasionally.
Well, given that the power of meteor swarm isn't in how much damage it can do to a single target but to a large number of them, I'm not sure your comparison stands up. Maybe a meter swarm couldn't take down a single fighter 20 in one go, but it might take down three or four fighter 15s. Wizards shouldn't be tossing damaging spells at that high a level against single opponents? Maybe not - but maybe that's not what high level damage spells are typically intended for. They're frighteningly effective crowd control, however, and making them more powerful may not be the best idea.
And, frankly, what Monte Cook has to say about balance really isn't relevant here.
... one would think that this would be common knowledge, but hey.
Provided one frequented the CO boards and was interested in "gish" builds, that is.
Well, given that the power of meteor swarm isn't in how much damage it can do to a single target but to a large number of them, I'm not sure your comparison stands up. Maybe a meter swarm couldn't take down a single fighter 20 in one go, but it might take down three or four fighter 15s. Wizards shouldn't be tossing damaging spells at that high a level against single opponents? Maybe not - but maybe that's not what high level damage spells are typically intended for. They're frighteningly effective crowd control, however, and making them more powerful may not be the best idea.
Hmm. Wouldn't weird or wail of the banshee or mass charm/hold monster still be better - and at taking out a group of Fighter 20s, no less. Meteor swarm might be able to kill a group of Fighter 15s ... Wait, no. No, it can't. Going by the previous example of a base Con of 14, an average Fighter 15 would have 117 hp - 162 with a +6 Con item. Said spell does 112 damage on average to the primary target and 84 to surrounding targets. Meteor swarm is generally just a poor spell.
How about you run the numbers yourself? No, seriously. Go get your spreadsheet and check it out. I'm sure you won't believe me until you do. Compare the damage spells to the rest and you'll see that they fall behind significantly past 10th level. They start lagging behind at this point because the damage progression of the spells was ported over die for die from 2e, wherein characters stopped gaining Con bonus to hp and started getting small fixed hp per level. So in 2e a meteor swarm was a nasty, gnashy spell, whereas in 3e it's a joke.
Go get your spreadsheet and check it out. I'm sure you won't believe me until you do.
I'm not saying I don't believe you, I'm saying I don't necessarily accept that the comparison is apples to apples.
And actually, what Monte says is relevant when he's talking about the design paradigm that 3e uses.
Unless he's designing Dragonlance PrCs, no, it really isn't.
I'm not saying I don't believe you, I'm saying I don't necessarily accept that the comparison is apples to apples.
Look, you were talking about crowd control, and I gave you examples where meteor swarm falls behind even in the field where you say it excels. How much more apples to apples can I get?
Unless he's designing Dragonlance PrCs, no, it really isn't.
Is this 3.x edition? Hmm. Yeah.
Look, you were talking about crowd control, and I gave you examples where meteor swarm falls behind even in the field where you say it excels. How much more apples to apples can I get?
So, 112 pts to the primary target and 84 points of damage to surrounding targets in a single round? That sounds pretty decent to me. More than the typical melee combatant can dish out in a single round.
Is this 3.x edition? Hmm. Yeah.
The design philosophy of Dragonlance PrCs is driven by Sovereign Press writers, not Monte Cook.
So, 112 pts to the primary target and 84 points of damage to surrounding targets in a single round? That sounds pretty decent to me. More than the typical melee combatant can dish out in a single round.
??? I'd disagree about melee combatants' damage, but that's not really the point, now is it? The point is that the damage spells are weak compared to everything else the mage can do past level 10. Damage spells are supposed to be the iconic thing. A Wizard tossing around balls of flame at his enemies is just a cool and archetypal thing. The problem is that they are so inefficient compared to a mage's other options that using them is a truly poor tactical choice, possibly even a dangerous one. I've seen so many encounters easily overcome because the DM was inexperienced and so used horrid wilting when he could have used something far more effective, mass charm monster for example.
Damage. Spells. Bite. Hard.
The design philosophy of Dragonlance PrCs is driven by Sovereign Press writers, not Monte Cook.
But they're using 3.x. Which, for some reason I don't know, uses the 3.x design paradigm. Much like WotC uses the 3.x design paradigm despite not having Monte on its payroll any more.
The design philosophy of Dragonlance PrCs is driven by Sovereign Press writers, not Monte Cook.
Monte is a fine designer, but even he doesn't agree with a lot of the current 3.5 R&D design choices, and he's quite happy doing his own thing with Malhavoc. I'm not keen on elevating any single person into celebrity status when it comes to game design, because there's always going to be some other status symbol fellow on the up-and-up who will come out and say that they're wrong, all that they've ever done is wrong, they don't know how to design their way out of a paper bag, and here's my detailed PDF of fixes to explain why.
So before we get into another shouting match over the merits of one person's 1337 5k177z at d20 design, even if they have an enormous following of fans who'll buy anything they have their name attached to, let me just say that those of us who're writing for Dragonlance do our best to deliver fair, balanced, and flavorful rules. We don't always succeed - we've had to go back and fix things - but I think we do OK.
Now let me tell you about how X is broken and Y is teh r0><><0rz...
Cheers,
Cam
Monte is a fine designer, but even he doesn't agree with a lot of the current 3.5 R&D design choices, and he's quite happy doing his own thing with Malhavoc. I'm not keen on elevating any single person into celebrity status when it comes to game design, because there's always going to be some other status symbol fellow on the up-and-up who will come out and say that they're wrong, all that they've ever done is wrong, they don't know how to design their way out of a paper bag, and here's my detailed PDF of fixes to explain why.
So before we get into another shouting match over the merits of one person's 1337 5k177z at d20 design, even if they have an enormous following of fans who'll buy anything they have their name attached to, let me just say that those of us who're writing for Dragonlance do our best to deliver fair, balanced, and flavorful rules. We don't always succeed - we've had to go back and fix things - but I think we do OK.
Now let me tell you about how X is broken and Y is teh r0><><0rz...
Cheers,
Cam
I :embarrass was just sayin' ... The system was built so that some choices are better than others. *shrug*
Leet speak. Eww!I :embarrass was just sayin' ... The system was built so that some choices are better than others. *shrug*
Correct. You can make a pretty useless character without much effort. But I should note that 3.5 addressed many of these issues in order to even the playing field, and not all of the premier choices are quite as good as they used to be.
This is why I avoid the CO boards like the plague, outside of their weird little nicknames for multiclasses.
Cheers,
Cam
??? I'd disagree about melee combatants' damage, but that's not really the point, now is it?
Perhaps I misunderstood the controversy then. I don't disagree that damage spells are often a poor tactical choice for a high level wizard. I do disagree that they are as useless as you say they are. Perhaps it's a matter of the sort of games we've experienced; in my experience, being able to deliver that much damage to many targets is invaluable.
I know that the melee people in my party would be a lot happier knowing that everyone they're about to wade into battle against is down 80-110 HP right off the top.
But they're using 3.x.
And? I know the people who design classes for Sovereign Press. I do know that balance is a major issue in class design for these designers. It might not be to other designers, but those are other designers.
Perhaps I misunderstood the controversy then. I don't disagree that damage spells are often a poor tactical choice for a high level wizard. I do disagree that they are as useless as you say they are. Perhaps it's a matter of the sort of games we've experienced; in my experience, being able to deliver that much damage to many targets is invaluable.
I know that the melee people in my party would be a lot happier knowing that everyone they're about to wade into battle against is down 80-110 HP right off the top.
Well, hmm. I dunno what to say. IME, taking out half the enemies in a single action is a lot more helpful to the melee boys than dealing a piddling 80-110 damage to all of them. I say this because my friends all know the power of Power Attack, Spirited Charge, and the like. Being down 80-110 hp doesn't make the enemies hit any softer, but being dead sure does, while being the caster's slaves makes them switch sides.
It's gotten to the point that we've implemented and are testing a house rule that increases the damage for those spells. A spell whose primary effect is typed damage does bonus damage equal to the level of the spell times the caster's primary spellcasting score's modifier. So if a Wizard with Int 20 were to cast a caster level 10 fireball, then it would deal 10d6 + 15 damage. If the same Wizard were to cast a caster level 20 meteor swarm, then it would deal (total) 32d6 + 45 damage. We've found that this has brought those spells' use back up, and it's also made the archetype viable and appealing. It's basically brought the fun back into them for a group that had lost all interest in said spells.
*shrug*
Really, though. It is my fervent advice to avoid those bloody spells like the plague at high levels. Other spells can be so much more effective that it's silly.
And? I know the people who design classes for Sovereign Press. I do know that balance is a major issue in class design for these designers. It might not be to other designers, but those are other designers.
*shrug* Well, I can only say that it may be that balance is being misinterpreted, with perfect equality being held up as a sacred cow. I think I'd be a pretty bored player if no matter what choices I made I'd still be as powerful/effective as with any other choices. *shrug* I'll not belabor the point any more, though.
Correct. You can make a pretty useless character without much effort. But I should note that 3.5 addressed many of these issues in order to even the playing field, and not all of the premier choices are quite as good as they used to be.
This is why I avoid the CO boards like the plague, outside of their weird little nicknames for multiclasses.
Cheers,
Cam
You mean except for the Cleric and Druid, right? I seem to remember a Developer article that flat
out said that the Cleric was an overpowered class. 
Blarg. 
Why are Clerics so much better spellcasters than Wizards?! 
Natural Spell as a core feat in the PHB - how freakin' crazy is that?
The powergamer in me says, "Go Cleric. Go Druid. Reign supr3m0rz!!!1!1" I just can't bring myself to play either class, though, no matter how much WotC powers them up. Give me an arcane caster or a melee dude any day.
Well, hmm. I dunno what to say. IME, taking out half the enemies in a single action is a lot more helpful to the melee boys than dealing a piddling 80-110 damage to all of them. I say this because my friends all know the power of Power Attack, Spirited Charge, and the like. Being down 80-110 hp doesn't make the enemies hit any softer, but being dead sure does, while being the caster's slaves makes them switch sides.
I've had varied success with spells like charm - the save DC just doesn't keep pace with the save progression.
Like you said. Hmm. Different games, different tactics, I guess.
I think I'd be a pretty bored player if no matter what choices I made I'd still be as powerful/effective as with any other choices.
Two observations, there: 1) Balance doesn't mean every choice is as effective as every other; some are obviously suboptimal (taking power attack as a wizard is just silly - it's obviously not what it's intended for.) One way to look at balance is that different classes/feats/whatever should provide roughly similar playability (not necessarily combat potenteny). 2) Some players look at character development as something other than an exercise in power optimization, so even though two alternatives may be equal in power, enjoyment can still be found in making the choice.
The powergamer in me says, "Go Cleric. Go Druid. Reign supr3m0rz!!!1!1" I just can't bring myself to play either class, though, no matter how much WotC powers them up. Give me an arcane caster or a melee dude any day.
This might be why they're often thought more powerful than other classes. WoTC has to make them pretty powerful for people to want to bother to play them. ;)
2) Some players look at character development as something other than an exercise in power optimization, so even though two alternatives may be equal in power, enjoyment can still be found in making the choice.
Oh, let's not go down that road, m'kay? We don't need another "role vs. roll" debate. Once we make everything equal, we get dangerously close to pure narrativism, which is decidedly dissimilar to a game. If the only difference is in the names, then there really isn't any difference at all.
DM: There are three orcs brandishing axes before you.
PC1: I hack at the one on the left with my greataxe.
DM: Okay, it takes 6 damage.
PC2: I cast wrath of the heavens on the one on the right.
DM: Okay, it takes 6 damage.
PC3: I Flibberwobble the center one.
DM: Whuh? Okay, since everything's the same, it takes 6 damage.
DM: OrcL stares at PC1. You take 6 damage. OrcR spits at PC2. Take 6 damage. OrcC calls its mother on his cellular scrying stone. Take 6 damage, PC3.
Yeah. Fun. Reeeeeally fun.
This might be why they're often thought more powerful than other classes. WoTC has to make them pretty powerful for people to want to bother to play them. ;)
Yeah, I know that's why they do it, but still. One would think that they could just let them be what they are. As it is, they only get played by those players who would have played them anyway, so nothing's really gained.
If the only difference is in the names, then there really isn't any difference at all....Yeah. Fun. Reeeeeally fun.
I guess I think that true differences can exist that are more than sheer power level. I'm not interested in debating play style either. Different games, different tastes, no argument. But people do find enjoyment in widely varying play styles - some people really do like narrative-driven games.
Oh, let's not go down that road, m'kay? We don't need another "role vs. roll" debate. Once we make everything equal, we get dangerously close to pure narrativism, which is decidedly dissimilar to a game. If the only difference is in the names, then there really isn't any difference at all.
This isn't what Clark is talking about, and I think you probably know that. What he's getting at is that balance in D&D aims to make each player's experience as enjoyable as the next, with the assumption that character choice will not lead one player to hogging more of the spotlight than another. If things work out properly, each player has his moment to shine, gets as much out of the game as the next player, and doesn't feel as if his choices were bad ones simply because he went for something out of the ordinary or more narrative-focused.
This is why the noble remains a viable option in Dragonlance, when it might not otherwise be seen as a good choice in some other D&D settings. Its value is typically greatest outside of combat, although it remains a good support character in any battle.
Cheers,
Cam
Let us assume the elite array of statistics (15,14,13,12,10,8) that the game's balanced on. Let us further assume that the 15 goes into the primary casting stat, and that the player puts all level up bonuses into that stat and also buys or makes an appropriate tome +5 and +6 enhancment item. All of these assumptions are supported by standard wealth and equipment availability. This would give us a spellcaster with a +10 modifier for his spell DCs, for a 9th level spell DC 29 at 20th level.
Let's compare this to a Fighter 20. 15,12,14,13,10,8 seems appropriately generic. (I put the 13 in Int because of the Combat Expertise tree. This can be switched with Dex for the Dodge tree.) Most Fighter will put level up bonuses in Strength, so let's assume that. Let's assume he buys a cloak of resistance +5 and a +6 item for each of the three major saves. This gives him saves of +22,+15, and +14.
For a Fort save the Fighter needs to roll a 7 or better, so that's a 30% chance of death. For Ref saves he needs to roll a 14 or better, which is a 65% chance of death. For Will that's a 15 or better, which is a 70% chance of death.
I think the odds are pretty good, myself. Keep in mind that this is with the basic elite array and not taking into account any other sources of increased spell DCs or save bonuses. It's not as good as it was in 3.0, but it's not crappy by a long shot.
Further, if things are making their saves anyway, then the damage spells are still weak, due to their silly half damage thing.
Just as an exercise, and since I'm procrastinating rather than shoveling the front walk
It's not going to shovel itself, you know.
Cheers,
Cam
This isn't what Clark is talking about, and I think you probably know that. What he's getting at is that balance in D&D aims to make each player's experience as enjoyable as the next, with the assumption that character choice will not lead one player to hogging more of the spotlight than another. If things work out properly, each player has his moment to shine, gets as much out of the game as the next player, and doesn't feel as if his choices were bad ones simply because he went for something out of the ordinary or more narrative-focused.
While we all want each player to have a good time, a point which is inarguable ...
Hmm. Well, I dunno. Sometimes that can be taken too far, methinks. Some things are just poor decisions. If one were to assign an Intelligence of 8 to one's Wizard character - Magic Soldier Louie, for example - then one's choice was objectively bad in terms of the way the game works. And that's okay. I cannot say this fervently enough. Narrative focused is fine, but it inherently implies a rejection of the mechanical aspect's effect. Football's a fun game, and everyone playing should be having a good time and contributing to the success or failure of the whole team, but it is reasonable and good to expect poor results if one places the 180 lb. wideout in the center position. That's just the game. Now, one might have a really interesting backstory for why that guy wants to play center rather than widde receiver, but it doesn't make it any less a willful denial of reality.
This is why the noble remains a viable option in Dragonlance, when it might not otherwise be seen as a good choice in some other D&D settings. Its value is typically greatest outside of combat, although it remains a good support character in any battle.
Wow. Yeah. The Noble. Hoooo boy. I am going to go out on a limb and disagree with you here.
I'd actually contend that the Noble is a poor excuse for a bard. I've replaced it in my game with, and this is goning to sound crazy here, the Noble class from Snarfquest.
Here's why I think that.
- A noble doesn't have to be a Noble.
- The Noble's Inspiration abilities are inferior to the Bard's. Significantly. They also cannot be used for all those wonderful Bardic Music based feats and abilities.
- Coordinate is nice. Heroism(, greater) is better.
- Bonus Class Skill? The Bard already gets a better skill list than the Noble.
- Which brings us to Favor. Wow. I am so underwhelmed by this ability that it's hard to express my underwhelm...ment. First off, the check is too hard. Secondly, narrative focused or not, what Favor does can be had through actual roleplaying by several of the Bard's spells or abilities. Diplomacy, charm, dominate, suggestion, Intimidate, Gather Information, legend lore, detect thoughts, locate object, clairaudience/clairvoyance, glibness, scrying, locate creature, modify memory, speak with plants, and whatever new stuff comes along in supplements can all get you anything that Favor can and more.
- Same BAB
- Same saves.
- The Noble has fewer skill points.
- Oooh, the Noble has a d8 HD. I'm underwhelmed again.
- The Bard is not considered a powerful class, hence if the Bard is greater than the Noble, as we have seen above, then what does that say about the Noble?
The Bard does what the Noble does. The Bard just does it better.
How again is that a decent class? I'd be interested in hearing your take on it, actually, as underpowered classes are one of my favorite topics.
Weird Fort Save Wiz with Intelligence 26 = Fort DC 27
Fighter Base Fort Save (+12), Con 14 & Item +6 to con (+5) = Save of +17 which equals 50-50 chance to save against the damage after the initial Will save.
Medium Range Spell
Wail of the Banshee, again the save Fort save negates. 50-50 chance to survive.
Close Range Spell as well
Mass charm only affects up to double your hit dice so max for a 20th level wizard = 2 (15-20 level fighters). A close range spell, again. Will save this time (better for the Wizard). Even if you charm these creatures it does not mean that you can attack them, if you do you break the spell. It never obeys suicidal so I don’t see how charm helps in this discussion.
Mass hold person. Medium range spell (better), Will save every round however. Of course we do not know exactly how many creatures are affected as this is left out.
Oh and wait let us not forget that these spells (all of them) affect only living creatures!!!!! They would be useless against an army of undead. What a shame, to have a 20th wizard taken out by a 10th level fighter skeleton. HMMMppph! Or maybe a clay golem.
Of course if you had a meteor swarm you would have had no problem taking this guy out from over 1000 feet away, meteor swarm being a long range spell. If you somehow hit with the meteor swarm (all four meteors with ranged touch attacks, no that hard) you do 32d6 (4 balls at 2d6 for impact + 6d6 for fire) = 96 at average damage (no save) it does to the target and 72 to everything within 40 ft of it. If you decide to take the nice little feats SUDDEN MAXIMIZE and SUDDEN EMPOWER in the Complete Arcane (as I would expect any War mage to do) you are now doing 288 (no Save) points of damage to the target and 216 to everything within 40 ft. This discussion did stem from the War Mage right? Wait A minute I knew I was forgeting something else. 5th Level War Mage gets +3 to each hit dice of damage at least 3 times a day (Battle Magic +5) so let's add that in. That's 96 normal for the target and 72 (half with save) to secondary targets and 144 to the target and 108 to secondary with Sudenn Max & Sudden Empower. So we now have 396 (no save to primary target) and 324 (save for half = 162) to all targets within the area of effect.
Oh I almost forgot, the four spheres do not need to be anywhere near each other unlike all the previously mentioned spells. (That’s for Clark’s crowd control). Because in crowd control you do not necessarily want to kill all the people you simply want to frighten them so they will scatter.
Oh I almost forgot, the four spheres do not need to be anywhere near each other unlike all the previously mentioned spells. (That’s for Clark’s crowd control). Because in crowd control you do not necessarily want to kill all the people you simply want to frighten them so they will scatter.
Well, i use the term "crowd control" in a figuritive sense, meaning combating a large number of lower-powered enemies rather than one or two higher-powered ones.
I think I got in this discussion a little late but here goes.
Weird Fort Save Wiz with Intelligence 26 = Fort DC 27
Okay, he should really have a 30-31 Intelligence, so that's a DC 29. It's 15 + 5 + 5 + 6 = 31.
Fighter Base Fort Save (+12), Con 14 & Item +6 to con (+5) = Save of +17 which equals 50-50 chance to save against the damage after the initial Will save.
Medium Range Spell
Again, he really should have a different save there. Go with a +5 resistance item for a total of +22. Weird is a poor choice versus something with a high fort save, but even so, you have a 30% shot of success, which, and here's the kicker, is better than your chances of killing the same guy with a meteor swarm.
Wail of the Banshee, again the save Fort save negates. 50-50 chance to survive.
Close Range Spell as well
Uh-huh. And? It's a single-save spell that you can fire 75 feet away. That's outside most Fighters' charge distance, so what's your point? If the wizard gets the first action, why in god's name is he casting an attack spell?
Mass charm only affects up to double your hit dice so max for a 20th level wizard = 2 (15-20 level fighters). A close range spell, again. Will save this time (better for the Wizard). Even if you charm these creatures it does not mean that you can attack them, if you do you break the spell. It never obeys suicidal so I don’t see how charm helps in this discussion.
Um, because it ends the threat? Wait, you really don't see how charm monster has combat utility?! Dear god!
Why would you attack something that you've just charmed? It's your ally; why attack an ally?Mass hold person. Medium range spell (better), Will save every round however. Of course we do not know exactly how many creatures are affected as this is left out.
Again, um, it frees up actions for you to, I don't know, throw up something truly nasty, gate in a solar or titan, or anything else that you feel like doing.
Oh and wait let us not forget that these spells (all of them) affect only living creatures!!!!! They would be useless against an army of undead. What a shame, to have a 20th wizard taken out by a 10th level fighter skeleton. HMMMppph! Or maybe a clay golem.
Gee, ya think maybe it's okay to use different spells/tactics depending upon the enemy you're facing? For undead you use the various undead related spells, for constructs you summon stuff or use no-SR spells like orb of acid. Control undead is great against undead enemies, as is undeath to death. A simple command undead allows no save for unintelligent undead. But all of this is moot as a high level caster's power is certainly not his immediate offensive capability.
You bring up the nonliving creatures, so fine, I'll bring up things that are immune to various types of elemental damage, say fire for instance. Oh, no, now you've memorized a spell that is totally useless to you. Other spells have versatility going for them. Dominate monster can get you a nigh permanent slave; shades & shapechange can handle hundreds of different situations, from healing to combat to social to item creation; save or dies work regardless of hp totals. Meteor swarm just deals damage and not that much of it. In fact, the only time I can see casting meteor swarm is against an enemy with good Fort and Will saves, but even then I'd prefer to use a different spell, perhaps even a spell combo, that didn't allow a save. Why? Because there's no way a straight meteor swarm is going to kill something of an appropriate CR in one shot.
Of course if you had a meteor swarm you would have had no problem taking this guy out from over 1000 feet away, meteor swarm being a long range spell. If you somehow hit with the meteor swarm (all four meteors with ranged touch attacks, no that hard) you do 32d6 (4 balls at 2d6 for impact + 6d6 for fire) = 96 at average damage (no save) it does to the target and 72 to everything within 40 ft of it. If you decide to take the nice little feats SUDDEN MAXIMIZE and SUDDEN EMPOWER in the Complete Arcane (as I would expect any War mage to do) you are now doing 288 points of damage to the target and 216 to everything within 40 ft
Oy.
- It's actually 112 average damage to the primary and 84 to the rest.
- Maximized and empowered it does 248 average damage to the primary.
- What guy are we talking about? The Fighter 20? Hit him with a freakin' dominate for god's sake! Better yet, a repeated fleshshiver, if in the Realms, getting you two free rounds of whatever.
- Ugh. The Sudden line of feats.
- If he is over 100 feet away, then meteor swarm becomes a total joke, as there's suddenly buff time. Time enough to manage a simple forcecage + cloudkill or reverse gravity + gate. 1000 feet away?
Oh I almost forgot, the four spheres do not need to be anywhere near each other unlike all the previously mentioned spells. (That's for Clark's crowd control). Because in crowd control you do not necessarily want to kill all the people you simply want to frighten them so they will scatter.
Are you joking? If we're talking about enemies that are weak enough to run away after a spread out meteor swarm, then why even bother with actual damage? Just use some scary illusion or any other flashy spell.I am getting rather tired of this discussion, since I'm basically just reiterating through my own arguments, so I refer you to the Character Optimization board. If you really want to read a thorough analysis of the relative utility of different spells, that's the place to post any questions and observations regarding meteor swarm. I guarantee you'll have a fun time. Go on, dude. (Said the spider to the fly.)
Come on, if you post a new thread on this topic over there, I promise I'll post in it. :D
Well, i use the term "crowd control" in a figuritive sense, meaning combating a large number of lower-powered enemies rather than one or two higher-powered ones.
Well yes there is that.
Here is something for that pesky Bard vs. Noble crack.
Yes the BaB and Saves are the same. Bard yes gets more skill points then the Noble and gets all the same skills as the Noble with the exception of Intimidate and of course the selected bonus skill (which the Bard might have if the noble picks a skill on the bard list). The Bard has simple weapons and a few others as well as light armor & shields. The noble however has all simple and martial weapons as well as light armor and shields. And of course the Hit dice: Bard = d6, Noble = d8.
On to the special abilities.
Bard
1. Can cast spells but they must be heard (so no hiding).
2. Bardic Knowledge is cool, but is it every really used (Mainly in narrative type games).
3. Bardic Music. Yes it has some cool goodies but it lasts only as long as the Bard continues to sing (or whatever) there is also a chance to he fails on the attempt (20 %) Last let’s not forget that he cannot use magic while using bardic music. So a fighter walks over and whacks him get and the bonuses are gone (half are exceptions that last for 5 rounds after). All of these abilities draw from the same use per day pool.
That’s it for the Bard.
Now the Noble
1. Favor can circumvent Gather info rolls to get info or can get equipment, something Gather Info can’t. (Of course you can just buy equip or steal it but why.)
2. Inspire confidence: Slightly better bonuses, but less people and shorter duration. Own number of uses per day.
3. Coordinate, no limit on the use per day (or how long it can be used), bonuses increase with levels.
4. Inspire Greatness: Again slightly better bonuses but also it only lasts a short time.
So what is the deciding factor here? I would say noise. The Bard would attempt to use Bardic Music either right before combat or right at the beginning. If he did this at the beginning you would need to listen checks to hear him over the sounds of battle in order to get the bonuses and continue to receive the bonuses. The noble inspires before combat and then wades into combat with his fellows rather than sit back and Cheerlead. IMO the Noble is better at the non-combat side of the house versus the Bard.
Yes the BaB and Saves are the same. Bard yes gets more skill points then the Noble and gets all the same skills as the Noble with the exception of Intimidate and of course the selected bonus skill (which the Bard might have if the noble picks a skill on the bard list). The Bard has simple weapons and a few others as well as light armor & shields. The noble however has all simple and martial weapons as well as light armor and shields. And of course the Hit dice: Bard = d6, Noble = d8.
As has been mentioned before, the hit die difference is negligible. It's an average of one hp more per level, so 20 more total at 20th. Wheee. They get martial weapon profs. Whoopteedoo. Bards get the best one-handed martial weapon in the longsword, and even a Fighter has to take EWP to get the truly useful spiked chain. The Bard also gets more skill points, meaning he'll be a more skilled character overall.
Bard
1. Can cast spells but they must be heard (so no hiding).
2. Bardic Knowledge is cool, but is it every really used (Mainly in narrative type games).
3. Bardic Music. Yes it has some cool goodies but it lasts only as long as the Bard continues to sing (or whatever) there is also a chance to he fails on the attempt (20 %) Last let’s not forget that he cannot use magic while using bardic music. So a fighter walks over and whacks him get and the bonuses are gone (half are exceptions that last for 5 rounds after). All of these abilities draw from the same use per day pool.
Now the Noble
1. Favor can circumvent Gather info rolls to get info or can get equipment, something Gather Info can’t. (Of course you can just buy equip or steal it but why.)
2. Inspire confidence: Slightly better bonuses, but less people and shorter duration. Own number of uses per day.
3. Coordinate, no limit on the use per day (or how long it can be used), bonuses increase with levels.
4. Inspire Greatness: Again slightly better bonuses but also it only lasts a short time.
Okay. You're being inconsistent here. You discount the value of Bardic Knowledge on the grounds of its being most useful in a story driven game, while favoring Favor with a glowing review? The crap?
The Noble's Inspire Confidence and Greatness are strictly inferior to Bardic Music, which has those and more, but with better duration and more uses per day. You cite that the Bard cannot cast spells while using Bardic Music. Fine, but they still last five rounds after the Bard stops singing, so the duration for said abilities is greater than or equal to that of the Noble's cheap knock-offs.
The fact that the Bard's spells all have verbal components makes spellcasting somehow weak? ... No offense, but you're way off base here. First off, there's no reason the Bard can't take Silent Spell. He can further take Subsonics to use his Bardic Music in silence - hey, you're the one who brought in the Complete series. Not that this really matters.
So what is the deciding factor here? I would say noise. The Bard would attempt to use Bardic Music either right before combat or right at the beginning. If he did this at the beginning you would need to listen checks to hear him over the sounds of battle in order to get the bonuses and continue to receive the bonuses.
That's a house rule, if I've ever heard one. Stick to RAW, please. But your main deciding point is sound?
The noble inspires before combat and then wades into combat with his fellows rather than sit back and Cheerlead. IMO the Noble is better at the non-combat side of the house versus the Bard.
HOW?! The brunt of your argument was that the Bard's musical and spellcasting abilities produce sound. You did not in any way address the fact that everything that the Noble does, the Bard can do through greater skills, Bardic Knowledge, spells, or Bardic Music. And more.
Quote:Wail of the Banshee, again the save Fort save negates. 50-50 chance to survive.Close Range Spell as well
Uh-huh. And? It's a single-save spell that you can fire 75 feet away. That's outside most Fighters' charge distance, so what's your point? If the wizard gets the first action, why in god's name is he casting an attack spell?
If the Wizard fires a meteor swarm from up to 1200 feet away he still has time to prepare anything else he wants, like fly or something else to get completely away from the ground-pounder. Oh yeah I thought we were talking about a War Mage here, so yeah he would cast an attack spell at that range because if the fighter is 75 feet away and the wizard casts a defensive spell the fighter can get right up on him next round with a run action putting close enough for Attacks of Opportunity if the wizard does cast a spell.
Quote:
Mass charm only affects up to double your hit dice so max for a 20th level wizard = 2 (15-20 level fighters). A close range spell, again. Will save this time (better for the Wizard). Even if you charm these creatures it does not mean that you can attack them, if you do you break the spell. It never obeys suicidal so I don’t see how charm helps in this discussion.
Um, because it ends the threat? Wait, you really don't see how charm monster has combat utility?! Dear god! Why would you attack something that you've just charmed? It's your ally; why attack an ally?
Yes but we were not talking about negating the threat we were talking about damage and killing. I never said it doesn’t have combat use, I am simply comparing damaging spells.
Quote:
Mass hold person. Medium range spell (better), Will save every round however. Of course we do not know exactly how many creatures are affected as this is left out.
Again, um, it frees up actions for you to, I don't know, throw up something truly nasty, gate in a solar or titan, or anything else that you feel like doing.
Again we were talking about damage not incapacitation. Of course it is easier to incapacitate something rather than destroy it.
Quote:
Oh and wait let us not forget that these spells (all of them) affect only living creatures!!!!! They would be useless against an army of undead. What a shame, to have a 20th wizard taken out by a 10th level fighter skeleton. HMMMppph! Or maybe a clay golem.
Gee, ya think maybe it's okay to use different spells/tactics depending upon the enemy you're facing? For undead you use the various undead related spells, for constructs you summon stuff or use no-SR spells like orb of acid. Control undead is great against undead enemies, as is undeath to death. A simple command undead allows no save for unintelligent undead. But all of this is moot as a high level caster's power is certainly not his immediate offensive capability.
Yes it is a good idea to change tactics when you know your enemy, but the meteor swarm is a hell of a lot more versatile spell in comparison to the spells you put on the boards, as it affects everything (with the rare exception of a single example, fire immunity).
You bring up the nonliving creatures, so fine, I'll bring up things that are immune to various types of elemental damage, say fire for instance. Oh, no, now you've memorized a spell that is totally useless to you. Other spells have versatility going for them. Dominate monster can get you a nigh permanent slave; shades & shapechange can handle hundreds of different situations, from healing to combat to social to item creation; save or dies work regardless of hp totals. Meteor swarm just deals damage and not that much of it. In fact, the only time I can see casting meteor swarm is against an enemy with good Fort and Will saves, but even then I'd prefer to use a different spell, perhaps even a spell combo, that didn't allow a save. Why? Because there's no way a straight meteor swarm is going to kill something of an appropriate CR in one shot.
While Meteor swarm has only got one imunne type (fire), the spells you posted Mass Charm\Hold, Wail of the Banshee, and Weird have multiple exceptions. I was not saying that Meteor swarm is trhe best spell in the book, I was however taking what YOU put on the board as a comparison.
Keep reading for the combo.
Quote:
Of course if you had a meteor swarm you would have had no problem taking this guy out from over 1000 feet away, meteor swarm being a long range spell. If you somehow hit with the meteor swarm (all four meteors with ranged touch attacks, no that hard) you do 32d6 (4 balls at 2d6 for impact + 6d6 for fire) = 96 at average damage (no save) it does to the target and 72 to everything within 40 ft of it. If you decide to take the nice little feats SUDDEN MAXIMIZE and SUDDEN EMPOWER in the Complete Arcane (as I would expect any War mage to do) you are now doing 288 points of damage to the target and 216 to everything within 40 ft
Oy.
A. It's actually 112 average damage to the primary and 84 to the rest.
Alright so I was using only a 3 for average damage versus 3.5 (big whoop)
B. Maximized and empowered it does 248 average damage to the primary.
How do you figure? 32d6 (Maxed = 192) half again for the empower = 16d6 (Maxed = 96), +3 for each hit dice of damage due to the War Mage Battle Magic = 3 x 48 = 144 for a grand total of 432 points of damage with no save. Did we forget what maximized does????
C. What guy are we talking about? The Fighter 20? Hit him with a freakin' dominate for god's sake! Better yet, a repeated fleshshiver, if in the Realms, getting you two free rounds of whatever.
D. Ugh. The Sudden line of feats.
I was just pointing a tactic that I would expect from a War Mage. You know a guy specialized in dealing damage, not necesarily the most versatile spellcaster in the world.
E. If he is over 100 feet away, then meteor swarm becomes a total joke, as there's suddenly buff time. Time enough to manage a simple forcecage + cloudkill or reverse gravity + gate. 1000 feet away?
Again we're talking about a War Mage, who wants to take out as many creatures as quickly as possible without using flash. Sure Gate is nice, except when something comes out of it you don't want.
Quote:
Oh I almost forgot, the four spheres do not need to be anywhere near each other unlike all the previously mentioned spells. (That's for Clark's crowd control). Because in crowd control you do not necessarily want to kill all the people you simply want to frighten them so they will scatter.
Are you joking? If we're talking about enemies that are weak enough to run away after a spread out meteor swarm, then why even bother with actual damage? Just use some scary illusion or any other flashy spell.
Why get flashy, we are talking about a War Mage who deals in damage not flash.
I am getting rather tired of this discussion, since I'm basically just reiterating through my own arguments, so I refer you to the Character Optimization board. If you really want to read a thorough analysis of the relative utility of different spells, that's the place to post any questions and observations regarding meteor swarm. I guarantee you'll have a fun time. Go on, dude. (Said the spider to the fly.)
Yes you are getting tired because you are trying to argue the merits of spells versus Meteor Swarm, when I am trying to tell you why to expect a meteor Swarm from a WAR MAGE who can really do something with it. Remember this thread is not the comparisons of spell vs. spell, but on the War Mage class. (which I of course forgot when I responded to your Bard vs. Noble. But oh well).
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthsylverYes the BaB and Saves are the same. Bard yes gets more skill points then the Noble and gets all the same skills as the Noble with the exception of Intimidate and of course the selected bonus skill (which the Bard might have if the noble picks a skill on the bard list). The Bard has simple weapons and a few others as well as light armor & shields. The noble however has all simple and martial weapons as well as light armor and shields. And of course the Hit dice: Bard = d6, Noble = d8.
As has been mentioned before, the hit die difference is negligible. It's an average of one hp more per level, so 20 more total at 20th. Wheee. They get martial weapon profs. Whoopteedoo. Bards get the best one-handed martial weapon in the longsword, and even a Fighter has to take EWP to get the truly useful spiked chain. The Bard also gets more skill points, meaning he'll be a more skilled character overall.
If you will read the post nowhere in this section does it say that either is better. I was simply giving some basics. And what does spiked chain have to do with anything, Bards are not proficient with it either. They have the whip. And yes the skill point difference was mentioned.
Quote:
Bard 1. Can cast spells but they must be heard (so no hiding). 2. Bardic Knowledge is cool, but is it every really used (Mainly in narrative type games).3. Bardic Music. Yes it has some cool goodies but it lasts only as long as the Bard continues to sing (or whatever) there is also a chance to he fails on the attempt (20 %) Last let’s not forget that he cannot use magic while using bardic music. So a fighter walks over and whacks him get and the bonuses are gone (half are exceptions that last for 5 rounds after). All of these abilities draw from the same use per day pool.Now the Noble1. Favor can circumvent Gather info rolls to get info or can get equipment, something Gather Info can’t. (Of course you can just buy equip or steal it but why.)2. Inspire confidence: Slightly better bonuses, but less people and shorter duration. Own number of uses per day.3. Coordinate, no limit on the use per day (or how long it can be used), bonuses increase with levels.4. Inspire Greatness: Again slightly better bonuses but also it only lasts a short time.
Okay. You're being inconsistent here. You discount the value of Bardic Knowledge on the grounds of its being most useful in a story driven game, while favoring Favor with a glowing review? The crap?
Who said I discounted anything? And how was what I said about Favor a glowing review? All I said was that it could circumvent Gather Info and get equip.
The Noble's Inspire Confidence and Greatness are strictly inferior to Bardic Music, which has those and more, but with better duration and more uses per day. You cite that the Bard cannot cast spells while using Bardic Music. Fine, but they still last five rounds after the Bard stops singing, so the duration for said abilities is greater than or equal to that of the Noble's cheap knock-offs.
I believe I stated that the Inspire Confidence and Greatness have less duration at minimum 1 round less than the Bard’s (depending on Timing). And yes the Bard can make the effects last longer by continuing to perform, which means he must continue to take an action to use the Perform skill, which means he cannot fight back, unlike the Noble. If the Bard stops and defends himself then he and the Noble are about even with the Bard having one round on the Noble for his effects (depending again on timing).
The fact that the Bard's spells all have verbal components makes spellcasting somehow weak? ... No offense, but you're way off base here. First off, there's no reason the Bard can't take Silent Spell. He can further take Subsonics to use his Bardic Music in silence - hey, you're the one who brought in the Complete series. Not that this really matters.
Dude!! Have you even read the Silent Spell metamagic feat, it explicitly states that a Bard's spell's cannot use it. Just to justify your arguement, let's say it could it then makes the Bard's spells full-round casting as Bard is a spon caster, this gives all enemies a full round to whack the Bard in the hope that he will loses the spell. Which is not all that hard.
Quote:
So what is the deciding factor here? I would say noise. The Bard would attempt to use Bardic Music either right before combat or right at the beginning. If he did this at the beginning you would need to listen checks to hear him over the sounds of battle in order to get the bonuses and continue to receive the bonuses.
That's a house rule, if I've ever heard one. Stick to RAW, please. But your main deciding point is sound?
And no it is not a house rulle but at least it makes sense. Have you tried to hear a single person singing in the middle of combat, hell try standing in the middle of a rowdy football game (as a quarterback or center or even in the stands) and try to hear a particular cheerleader on the sidelines. If she was right next you o-kay maybe. But yes, silence the Bard and he loses all special abilities. This is where the Noble passes the Bard slightly, in that miniscule hit point advatnage and the ability to use just about any weapon within reach.
Heal, Spot, Survival, These are the three skills that a Noble could take a s a bonus skill. Now tell me which of them has use in combat.
Quote:
The noble inspires before combat and then wades into combat with his fellows rather than sit back and Cheerlead. IMO the Noble is better at the non-combat side of the house versus the Bard.
HOW?! The brunt of your argument was that the Bard's musical and spellcasting abilities produce sound. You did not in any way address the fact that everything that the Noble does, the Bard can do through greater skills, Bardic Knowledge, spells, or Bardic Music. And more.
Yes. Sorry about that, it was supposed to read "IMO the Noble is better at the combat side of the house versus the Bard." Danger of writing faster than your thoughts can keep up.
To be perfectly honest as fas as I am concerned if played correctly both classes do the same thing for the most part. Yes the bard has more available uses (of bardic music) throughout the day, but how often is he really going to use them, and how often for the same things as the Noble's abilities.
Yes you are getting tired because you are trying to argue the merits of spells versus Meteor Swarm, when I am trying to tell you why to expect a meteor Swarm from a WAR MAGE who can really do something with it. Remember this thread is not the comparisons of spell vs. spell, but on the War Mage class. (which I of course forgot when I responded to your Bard vs. Noble. But oh well).
You've entirely missed the point. I don't say that lightly. The discussion of meteor swarm arose because of the War Mage's damage bonus/die and its impact upon balance. The comparisons between that spell and the other spells presented were to establish the fact that direct damage spells are a tactically weak option at mid-to-high level play, which has been shown numerically by many people, including me, both in terms of raw threat suppresion efficiency and in tactical versatility. As I said before, if you want to debate this particular point any further, bring it over to the CO board, where such numerical and tactical discussions belong.
The reason that establishing the relative weakness of the direct damage spells is relevant is as follows. If the direct damage category of spells is not a strong tactical option, then the improvement that the War Mage PrC provides to that category is not necessarily overpowered. To show finally that the class is not overpowered, we need only substitute the improved damage values in our previous numerical analysis.
So yes, the thread is indeed about spell vs. spell. Specifically, it is about the tactical strength of the War Mage's improved direct damage spells vs. the tactical strength of a standard Wizard's spell selection. To say it once more, if it can be established that the improved damage of a War Mage's spells is comparable in tactical strength to the standard array of tactically strong spells, then the War Mage is a balanced class.
One more time, and then I'm done with this thread: If you want to continue this discussion, move it to where it belongs, the CO board.
To be perfectly honest as fas as I am concerned if played correctly both classes do the same thing for the most part. Yes the bard has more available uses (of bardic music) throughout the day, but how often is he really going to use them, and how often for the same things as the Noble's abilities.
The noble is also specifically designed to fill a role that, because of the nature of the bard's connection to ambient magic in the Dragonlance setting, is not filled by any other character class prior to the Fifth Age. The bard is available only after the Chaos War. Nobles are not spellcasters and therefore continue to provide a useful support role within combat in any era of the game.
The master, from the War of the Lance sourcebook, is another attempt to fill the role of the bard. Masters with the Performer or Sage focus do a fairly good job of representing the bardic role in earlier eras of play, and continue to do so in the current era. Players who wish to duplicate the 2nd edition bard can do so with any combination of master and low-level wizard.
As the noble has proved useful in both the Star Wars d20 game and the Wheel of Time d20 game, the version presented in the DLCS is largely based on those classes.
Cheers,
Cam
If you will read the post nowhere in this section does it say that either is better. I was simply giving some basics. And what does spiked chain have to do with anything, Bards are not proficient with it either. They have the whip. And yes the skill point difference was mentioned.
It was to show that martial weapon proficiency is a rather small difference. The weapons that truly surpass a longsword are exotic weapons.
I believe I stated that the Inspire Confidence and Greatness have less duration at minimum 1 round less than the Bard’s (depending on Timing). And yes the Bard can make the effects last longer by continuing to perform, which means he must continue to take an action to use the Perform skill, which means he cannot fight back, unlike the Noble. If the Bard stops and defends himself then he and the Noble are about even with the Bard having one round on the Noble for his effects (depending again on timing).
Um, yeah. He can defend himself while singing. In fact, he doesn't even have to make a Concentration check, as far as I can tell, to do so.
So the Noble and the Bard are about even ... AFTER the Bard has stopped singing. That's certainly no argument for the Noble's general equality. That's an argument for the Noble's lack of ability.
Dude!! Have you even read the Silent Spell metamagic feat, it explicitly states that a Bard's spell's cannot use it. Just to justify your arguement, let's say it could it then makes the Bard's spells full-round casting as Bard is a spon caster, this gives all enemies a full round to whack the Bard in the hope that he will loses the spell. Which is not all that hard.
Whoops. My bad on the Silent Spell thing. I forget things when I get irritated. :embarrass I don't ever bother taking the Silent Spell feat, myself; I find its utility limited at best. Enemy bards don't want to use it as it can be used against them retributively, which basically leaves enemy clerics, a small portion of the average encounter sampling and one that is hurt almost as much as the Bard by silence.
It seems to me that you aren't clear the metamagic rules. A full round action is not the same as a 1 round casting time. Full round actions are completed within your initiative cycle. My bad on the Silent Spell thing, though.
And no it is not a house rulle but at least it makes sense. Have you tried to hear a single person singing in the middle of combat, hell try standing in the middle of a rowdy football game (as a quarterback or center or even in the stands) and try to hear a particular cheerleader on the sidelines. If she was right next you o-kay maybe. But yes, silence the Bard and he loses all special abilities. This is where the Noble passes the Bard slightly, in that miniscule hit point advatnage and the ability to use just about any weapon within reach.
It is a house rule, and as such it is a non sequitur. How does his weapon proficiency enter in? The Bard still has his longsword, and the HP difference is tiny. Tiny. The silence thing could be said of any spellcaster. You mention this one weakness as if it's super common and happens in every encounter. Yes, it's a weakness, but the way you're using it would require me to say that Wizard is not a stronger class than Noble, which I will never do. It's a weakness, but it's not as significant as you're making it out to be.
Heal, Spot, Survival, These are the three skills that a Noble could take a s a bonus skill. Now tell me which of them has use in combat.
None. Heal is for characters without healing ability. I haven't seen Heal used past level 4 except in really weird situations. Even then, the DCs are so small that a single cross class rank is usually enough to tip the scale.
Yes. Sorry about that, it was supposed to read "IMO the Noble is better at the combat side of the house versus the Bard." Danger of writing faster than your thoughts can keep up.
Which is false. If you were to consider the Noble a variant Bard, then this is what you trade for your d8 HD and full martial weapon proficiency: most of Bardic Music, all spellcasting (0th - 6th level spells), Bardic Knowledge, two skill points per level. That is an unbalanced trade by my account. Yes, the Noble has 1 more HP per HD and can use a greatsword, but the Bard has more options than that, many significantly more powerful, and can use a longsword, which isn't far behind a greatsword.
How can this lead to anything but a class that is less than the Bard?
To be perfectly honest as fas as I am concerned if played correctly both classes do the same thing for the most part. Yes the bard has more available uses (of bardic music) throughout the day, but how often is he really going to use them, and how often for the same things as the Noble's abilities.
Bardic Music has significant versatility advantages over the Noble's Inspiration abilities. It can be used to counter enemy spellcasters, enhance skill checks, distract NPCs outside of combat, mentally control NPCs outside of combat, remove certain negative conditions as though by break enchantment, and that's just core stuff. Adding in supplements we get the ability to give allies DR, cast extra spells, and get his Charisma modifier to his attack rolls, to name a few.
So to answer your question, he will likely use Bardic Music quite often, both inside and outside of combat.
I will not respond to any more posts on this topic - I won't even read them. I've said my piece, and that's all I can do. I presented my comparisons as patiently as I could, and if I keep going, I won't be able to maintain civility, which is a flaw of mine that I have noticed. Do not be offended.
I will not respond to any more posts on this topic - I won't even read them. I've said my piece, and that's all I can do. I presented my comparisons as patiently as I could, and if I keep going, I won't be able to maintain civility, which is a flaw of mine that I have noticed. Do not be offended.
Probably a good idea, yes.
Cheers,
Cam
Quote:
Originally Posted by NineInchNall
I will not respond to any more posts on this topic - I won't even read them. I've said my piece, and that's all I can do. I presented my comparisons as patiently as I could, and if I keep going, I won't be able to maintain civility, which is a flaw of mine that I have noticed. Do not be offended.
Probably a good idea, yes.
Cheers,
Cam
Agreed.
11th level mage casting Cone of Cold:
11d6 - average damage - 38.5
Max Damage: 66
5th level Wizard/5th level War Mage/PrC xxx 1
11d6 - Average damage - 38.5+33 (71.5)
Mage Damage - 99
Not too shabby at 11th level, to an area effect spell (hopefully) hitting multiple enemies.
That said I'm aware of the late-game uses for the class, which are less. Mixing War Mage with Archmage is nice, for the Energy Substitution on the fly. Throwing in Incantrix is great too, nothing like lowering the cost of the Metamagic feats you're going to want to apply to your spells.
The thing with War Mage, that makes it so solid, is that you can get in it at 5th level, suffer no loss of spell-casting, finish it by 10th level, and still finish out a 10 level PrC, if you're so inclined. Though I believe one of the version's I've seen is Wizard 5/War Mage 5/Incantrix 7/Archmage 3, for the maximum amount of fun and destruction out there. It was quite the damage dealer.
I was trying to get my DM to let me play the Warmage from Complete Arcane, go War Mage from DL, and then go War Wizard of Cormyr from Magic of Faerun (Unfortunately we are playing in FR because he knows that World.) It's alright I am DMing a DL campaign that we plan to get back to in Mar-Apr time frame.
If you really want to eke out every bit of damage and silliness, Fantasy Flight Games's Path of Magic has a 10-level PrC, the Force Weaver, that has such silly synergy with War Mage and Argent Savant that it's, well, silly.
Here's the important stuff the class will give you:
- All of your elemental spells can deal force damage at your option.
- All of your force spells (such as a fireball converted to be a forceball) deal a total of +4 damage per die.
Argent Savant's first level gives your force spells +1 damage per die.
War Mage gives +3 damage per die.
That's a total of +3 damage per die to every damage spell and a whopping +8 to your force spells!
Something like Sorcerer 6/War Mage 5/Force Weaver 8/Argent Savant 1 would get you everything you need. Yeah, a meteforce swarm would average 112 + 8*32 damage to the primary target.
how would that combination work out?
I don't know, but I was sure willing to find out. Needless to say the DM didn't go for it.