Still more Threads that make us Laugh, Cry, or Both

[Lago PARANOIA]

Swordsage only hits tier 3 because it is so hard to negate completely. He almost always contributes due to his fat stack of readied maneuvers.

???

Swordmages chew, man. The bulk of power in Bo9S does not come from strikes but from stances and manuevers. The problem is that you'll burn through them like crazy if you use them repeatedly. The swordmage will burn through their manuevers like crazy.

This is in addition to the fact that they get saddled with crap BAB. Even worse, a lot of their really good manuevers are low level. I mean, they have a strike that gives you a full attack + extra attack at a -2 penalty, no questions asked. It's low-level. So a warlord is going to get an appropriate MI, jam it into their arsenal, and never look back.

[Kaelik]

I ranked swordsage higher because rogues are binary. If you can get immunity to SA (say with blur at low levels and fortification armor or veil of undeath at high levels)

So in other words, your rankings are based off of duels?

Fortification Armor: Rare, expensive, useless.

Veil of Undeath: Just plain completely useless. (for SA, very useful for it's other effects.)

Blur: Great, Wizards can spend a standard action and a second level spell to negate SA. Or they could cast glitterdust and negate the entire rogue character.

Anyone who can cast Blur when it actually matters (before the rogue has seven hundred ways to get True Seeing) can also just cast glitterdust.

There are so very fey ways to actually stop a rogue who is trying to get SA from getting SA.

then the rogue is mostly worthless for DPS. There are ways to get around (deathstrike bracers come to mind), but there are more options to block SA than there are to get it.

And the point is that every rogue will have all six things he needs to get SA on every enemy he faces that isn't a level 15 wizard with multiple buffs, or an ooze.

Seriously. Please preset to me any enemy that is not a wizard or an ooze, or using polymorph of some kind, who actually can stop sneak attack.

[Leress]

I ranked swordsage higher because rogues are binary. If you can get immunity to SA (say with blur at low levels and fortification armor or veil of undeath at high levels) then the rogue is mostly worthless for DPS. There are ways to get around (deathstrike bracers come to mind), but there are more options to block SA than there are to get it.

Rogues are good at combat (better than fighters), but not that good.

Swordsage only hits tier 3 because it is so hard to negate completely. He almost always contributes due to his fat stack of readied maneuvers.

Because so many monsters have blur or fortification armor.

Apparently everyone forgot that rogues have skills too, like UMD.

This has the same problems with the other Tier system. It's just a massive broad stroking grouping system. The criteria for a group is very vague and doesn't really see the overall progress from 1st to 20th level.

At low levels (1-5) Artificers aren't that great, Barbarians and Fighters are still good. Adepts are fine, but as the level increase the expiration dates of the classes begin to pop up.

I still haven't figured out what the hell is the point of Tier system, it really can't be used as a measuring stick since even the classes within a tier vary greatly in effectiveness. It sure as hell doesn't tell you how good a class is or even if it's any good at all. All I see is "lot's of options and fewer weaknesses puts you higher on the list."

[Judging__Eagle]

.... wait, so the this while tier system...

I'm not the only one who thinks that it's completely bizarre and stupid?

I mean, it's like comparing the danger of ninjas to the danger or pirates. Given equal opportunity, one is always better than the other.

Also, the 1st lvl wizard that prepares Colour Spreay kills the "tier" system hardcore.

[Psychic Robot]

On a related note, I killed two krenshar that way.

I was so proud of myself.

[ubernoob]

Lago, Leress, and Kaelik: Excellent points. Can't believe I dropped into the duel thinking. Usually I'm better than that. I'll adjust the tiers accordingly.

@Leress: JaronK's idea with the tier system was so that people could make groups where everyone contributed in combat relatively equally. Basically it was a guideline to create moderately balanced parties so ELs would work decently. I'm just trying to correct his placement (because there was a LOT of crap misplaced).

If there are any other glaring errors in my logic do tell. I want that thread to be useful.

[Judging__Eagle]

I watched two wizards and a bard prep 6 troglodytes for slaughter that way once.

Honestly, it doesn't make sense to see why people don't use SoDs. Once you've seen them in action, you know that they just work.

[ckafrica]

Well to play Paizo's advocate (it seems to be the prevalent playing style over there, though not exclusive to them) I think a lot of people want to be playing where fireballs are thrown around and guys are whacking things with swords. Sure the mechanics don't really incourage this but if that's what float people's boats and they derive enjoyment from that play style than who is anybody to tell them not too. Obviously the DM is probably self gimping the monsters so they are not tactically optimal to avoid TPKs and probably fudges his dice, but if that is their idea of fun, and they can make it fun, than who are we or anybody else to tell them that it's wrong to play like that.

Let's face it, most people aren't inclined to dissect the game to figure out how it ticks, it's too much work for what is supposed to be a recreation.

It's not to say that dissecting the game is a bad thing, somebody definitely should be so that hopefully someone will finally make a game that isn't riddled with flaws.

But at the same time it not wrong to play otherwise

[virgil]

When everyone goes by that standard, it's not really wrong. However, strife is created the moment one player starts experimenting with a spellcaster. A perfectly normal game begins to break down as the wizard/druid slowly discovers winning combinations, wholly on accident, but destructive to intra-party balance nonetheless.

Then to top matters off, they'll have no idea why, because they won't think that deeply. You now have a frustrated DM who will attempt fix the problem in a nonproductive manner, because he won't fully understand why it's happening; such as railroading, overpowering the monster in inappropriate ways, house-rules/tactics that actively punish the spellcaster, etc.

[Username17]

80% chance of JaronK posting more fail.

I guess I just don't see how Dread Necromancer and Sorcerer are on the same tier...
What can a Dread Necromancer do to hold a candle to a Sorcerer who just cast Shapechange and gained 20th level Cleric casting (Solar) and then switches to get 17th level Wizard casting (Black Ethergaunt), or Genesis to get his own free Flowing Time plane where time moves 10,000 times faster?

Sigh. You were so right.

Dread Necromancers get frickin Planar Binding. If they want, they can grant themselves wishes, that will do literally any stupid broken thing you want. And they can do it at 12th level rather than 18th. Now, a Sorcerer can do that too, they just have to give up doing anything else level appropriate to do it.

Which gets to the core of the problem: Sorcerers select less spells from a bigger list that has more broken spells on it. Dread Necromancers have more spells from a smaller list that has any broken spells on it. So while all Dread Necromancers are broken in the same way, all Sorcerers could be broken in one of several different ways. But unlike the Wizard or the Cleric, the Sorcerer does actually have to pick his broken trick and run with it rather than preparing a different one each day.

But really this goes to the core of how much failure JaronK's conceptualization of tiering actually is. It's all based essentially on how many ways you can cheat. But that's a meaningless consideration, since the moment you cheat in even one way the game is essentially over and makes little sense. The Dread Necromancer who Chain Binds for More Wishes is no more or less over the top than a Sorcerer who Balor Mines - both essentially force the DM to the negotiating table.

-Username17

[Leress]

Well to play Paizo's advocate (it seems to be the prevalent playing style over there, though not exclusive to them) I think a lot of people want to be playing where fireballs are thrown around and guys are whacking things with swords. Sure the mechanics don't really incourage this but if that's what float people's boats and they derive enjoyment from that play style than who is anybody to tell them not too. Obviously the DM is probably self gimping the monsters so they are not tactically optimal to avoid TPKs and probably fudges his dice, but if that is their idea of fun, and they can make it fun, than who are we or anybody else to tell them that it's wrong to play like that.

Let's face it, most people aren't inclined to dissect the game to figure out how it ticks, it's too much work for what is supposed to be a recreation.

It's not to say that dissecting the game is a bad thing, somebody definitely should be so that hopefully someone will finally make a game that isn't riddled with flaws.

But at the same time it not wrong to play otherwise

*going along with the advocate*

In regards of that statement with the Tiers, it assumes that the player is at least competent in class making (no wizards with 8 INT). Then in that same vein it also assumes that people can have Iajitsu Focus a class skill if they are an Expert. There is also the caveat about if its optimized then it could go up a tier, or down if you make it shitty. Now a DM would have to know pretty much how well a class can be made before really knowing if the player is putting them on a level of the tier, below it, or above it.

So a direct damage throwing wizard is a lower tier ( either 2 or 3), because the definition of what makes a class stay in the initial tier isn't really set.

If your group is having fun then you get the point of the game. Also it really has nothing to do with if the class is any good or not.

Tell me, what does a Rogue have over a Factotum? And remember, Factotums have Iajuitsu Focus for the damage... and no, using a good skill is not crazy optimization for a Factotum. It's exactly what they do. If your listing for Factotums only applies to Factotums that don't use Font of Inspiration and don't use UMD/Iajuitsu Focus/Diplomacy, then it should apply only to Druids that don't use Natural Spell and Wild Shape and Barbarians that don't melee, as well as Wizards that never cast potent spells.

First Iajuitsu Focus argument is bullshit since that complete relies on the DM allowing that skill. So really the Factotums have the Font of inspiration that over shadows the Rogue (if you can call it that). Next its taking the argument from sensible to plain damn stupid (Barbarians not doing melee)

But the focus on only combat is strange, and needs to be in the first post. I know my Tier system is supposed to help for any campaign, whereas yours is only going to apply to kick in the door campaigns. As soon as we get into any intrigue/stealth/military command/mystery solving/dungeon exploring stuff, yours is going right out the window... but DMs need to know, for example, that a Fighter is only good in kick in the door campaigns.

Bullshit, JaronK's Tier doesn't even take that shit into account. When you start taking about Genesis, you have pretty much left the ntrigue/stealth/military command/mystery solving/dungeon exploring stuff and gone into the realm of "Fuck yo campaign"

And by the way, the Swordsage is a melee class that can teleport and turn invisible and break through structures. That's not a one trick pony either.

That is true they are not one trick ponies.

[Username17]

How come Jaron keeps jizzing on Polymorph? Last time I checked, the spell ha been errataed over a half dozen times to varying effects, the current text was splayed out between five sources of uncertain inheritance, and the last printed examples and clarifications were internally inconsistent and unhelpful.

No one knows what that fucking spell does. Having it on your list is not an "I win" button, it's just an argument with your DM and ten minutes of math and cross referencing. And at the end of that exasperation, nobody knows or cares what you'll actually get.

Yeah, I can make a coherent argument that casting alter self gives me the casting of a 7th level Sorcerer (thanks, Sylph), but I can also make a coherent argument that that shouldn't happen. And JaronK is straight lying if he tells you that he's ever seen that consistently applied. Heck, there are no rules for what happens when you pick up the spellcasting ability for 30 minutes at a time - you haven't rested and meditated to fill those spell slots pretty much deifnitionally.

Having spells that very simply and in an easy to explain fashion give you limitless power (Wish, for example) are fine and all, but spells that bury the DM under a mountain of paperwork that in some interpretations give you real ultimate power are worth precious close to nothing at all.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty2]

Honestly, it doesn't make sense to see why people don't use SoDs. Once you've seen them in action, you know that they just work.

Honestly I blame video games. In RPGs like Final Fantasy, you're basically conditioned only to use stuff that does megadamage. Things that inflict status conditions or try to kill in one hit are virtually useless. Either they just use way too much mana against normal monsters that swords would kill anyway, or you find the monster is immune. So anytime you use a SoD power, you end up being disappointed. SoDs tend to be a monster thing, and when PCs use them, they suck.

And as pretty much almost all video game RPGs are like that, eventually people just believe that D&D would be the same way even without fully reading the rules. Really the only game where I've seen SoDs do well is D&D.

[Koumei]

Things that inflict status conditions or try to kill in one hit are virtually useless.

"Wait, what's this? You only have status-inducing spells, Cloud. Why, those SUCK!" - the guide to Random Battles

[Judging__Eagle]

I think that video games don't have powerful status effects b/c they would bone the players if they were effective, since it would be a game of rocket-launcher tag; one of the very problems that we have with SoDs to begin with.

Also, in video games you can't do things like perform a coup de grace on a sleeping monster. It's just your normal attack action.

I'd like to see a game that actually embodies the rules of D&D properly.

I know that in the DDO game that fighters were still considered superior tanks to clerics. Probably all for bullshit reasons too and probably b/c people built bullshit cleric builds; I can't say for certain since I've never played it, but that was the impression that I got reading the boards for the game.

[Leress]

I think that video games don't have powerful status effects b/c they would bone the players if they were effective, since it would be a game of rocket-launcher tag; one of the very problems that we have with SoDs to begin with.

Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga has status that are pretty effective and it reduces the boning of the characters with giving them the ability to nullify them.

Also, in video games you can't do things like perform a coup de grace on a sleeping monster. It's just your normal attack action.

SMT: DDS actually has something like that called Calm Death that will automatically kill any sleeping target.

I'd like to see a game that actually embodies the rules of D&D properly.

I would too.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Honestly, the argument of "I can perform <cheating trick>" so I should be a higher ranked character is completely meaningless. To start with, you have to assume the ranking means anything. Then, assume the cheating means anything (if you are level 20, it doesn't, no one plays at level 20). Finally, rank the characters, now compare the effect your rank has had on the game (hint: none).

Who cares?

[ubernoob]

Thanks guys. I'm passing on these arguments. Should be more effective than if I tried to say the same thing.

[JonSetanta]

Pallies being full-on plate-wearing healers and ressers is fine with me. I was just making fun of the fact that Pallies can "in-combat" heal. Something that Druids are able to do in WoW; albeit with a 20-minute cooldown; Pallies can res as much as they want (as can Shamans and Priest), but not while in combat.

According to my girlfriend (avid WoWer), Pallies may also become indestructible for brief moments.
In D&D terms that's called a'cheatin', but perhaps if used in the right way might bring warriors up a notch.


JaronK's tiers aren't perfect by any means, but they're a good place to start.
I suppose you can't get better without crtitique.
It bugs me, though, that you guys review it here and not over on brilliantgameologists, and yet Elennsar ('sar', J_E?) quotes TGD in return.
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards ... pic=2255.0

I wish we had one big happy D&D forum for everyone to-
Oh wait, nevermind.

[CatharzGodfoot]

I'd like to see a game that actually embodies the rules of D&D properly.

I would too.

The Temple of Elemental Evil. Not a perfect game by any means, but it is pretty much straight-up 3.5e D&D.

[Leress]

Sig: I've critique the Tiers before when they were presented on WOTC.
Also the reason I don't really post much there anymore is I don't really like being on a forum of a Podcast that isn't really that great to begin and host that are very nitpickingly elitist for no real reason except to be so.

Catharz: I've played that game but couldn't get very far due to constant crashing.

Uber: It's better to understanding of why we say these things before you just copy pasta our responses. That way it is easier to clear up misunderstandings or defend your position.

[Judging__Eagle]

Pallies being full-on plate-wearing healers and ressers is fine with me. I was just making fun of the fact that Pallies can "in-combat" heal. Something that Druids are able to do in WoW; albeit with a 20-minute cooldown; Pallies can res as much as they want (as can Shamans and Priest), but not while in combat.

According to my girlfriend (avid WoWer), Pallies may also become indestructible for brief moments.
In D&D terms that's called a'cheatin', but perhaps if used in the right way might bring warriors up a notch.

Eh, Pally bubbles aren't that big of a deal. You just ignore them and go after the non-bubbled targets in pvp; like cloth-wearing casters.

Since fights in WoW take several minutes, and not several dozen seconds (the way they do in D&D), beaing bubbled for 5 minutes only means that you'll die on your own after all of your buddies have been killed (both in PvP and in groups doing instances).

Really, the effectiveness of a pally bubble is equivalent to having a spell caster stand behind a more armoured character.

Both are pretty well safe; but at the expense of all of their allies.

Such powers are usually used when soloing, making them about equivalanet to having better damage, monster avoidance abilities or other forms or crowd control. Other classes get more damage, realistic ranged attacks, binds, pets and fears. Pallies get self or target only defenses since they don't get tons of damage, ranged attacks, fears, a pet or any way to keep people in place.

It sort of evens out.

[ubernoob]

Uber: It's better to understanding of why we say these things before you just copy pasta our responses. That way it is easier to clear up misunderstandings or defend your position.

Exactly. What I was trying to say is that you guys made the points well enough that I could not improve the phrasing. I understand what you guys are saying. If I don't I ask for clarification (just about half my posts here are exactly that).

[Talisman]

Since fights in WoW take several minutes, and not several dozen seconds (the way they do in D&D), beaing bubbled for 5 minutes only means that you'll die on your own after all of your buddies have been killed (both in PvP and in groups doing instances).

Really, the effectiveness of a pally bubble is equivalent to having a spell caster stand behind a more armoured character.

Both are pretty well safe; but at the expense of all of their allies.

True, but for D&D it depends on how this pally bubble activates (I don't play WoW). F'rinstance, if you can use a swift/immediate action to become invulnerable x times per day, that could be a huge asset...assuming the monsters don't have access to your character sheet, you can get in the monster's face, trigger this power, and make them waste a precious action beating your granite-like ass.

Could be interesting.

[JonSetanta]

J_E: I was thinking more of Smash Brothers style "Perfect Block" since an attack is already heading towards your character and the enemy can't stop it, even a melee attack.
The PB is good against 1 attack before a milisecond recoil/cooldown and you're good to go, so it's not like you've presented an untargetable target for your enemies to ignore (believe me, I know how that goes in MMOs and games even if I'm not a WoWer)

The "Shroud" and "Indestructible" creature abilities in Magic cards are the same; creature can't be targeted or hurt with damage, so opponents won't bother. They will go around.
If you have other creatures out without defenses like these, they'll probably be prime targets.. just like WoW party members.

True, but for D&D it depends on how this pally bubble activates (I don't play WoW). F'rinstance, if you can use a swift/immediate action to become invulnerable x times per day, that could be a huge asset...assuming the monsters don't have access to your character sheet, you can get in the monster's face, trigger this power, and make them waste a precious action beating your granite-like ass.

Could be interesting.

This is more like what I was thinking would work in RPGs.
In Magic it's like hold temporary effects (or lasting effects you can play at any time) to slap down if your opponent tries anything. Opponents never know when you'll do it; they only know that you can, at least sometimes.
They can't reconsider their move, and the attack is wasted due to damage prevention, redirected targeting, invalid targeting, and so on.

This concept of limited and temporary prevention may not work against cautious or genius players, but it sure as hell work against foolhardy, desperate, or gambling ones.
The character's not "bubbling" for extended time so it's unpredictable.