The Gaming Den

What you get from losing 2 caster levels has to be at least as powerful as a spell level higher than you can currently cast. It also has to be that powerful at levels 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, and forever. If the ability you gain ISN'T as powerful as a 9th level spell (at a level when you would get 9th level spells), it isn't worth it.

Keep in mind, though, that a character should be twice as powerful as someone two levels down. You're an even match for two people who are each (your level-2). Trading a feat for some guy who is half as cool as you are isn't really that big a deal.

Trading in two CLs or MLs for random abilities that aren't equal in power to your entire ability to cast spells, though, is a huge deal. +2 CL really is as good as all your spellcasting up to that point. A level 8 wizard can either get a second level 8 wizard to be his buddy, or be level 10, and either way he is just as powerful.

Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1188851500[/unixtime]]I undestand your point, but if one loses, say, 2 MLs through 20 levels, does the character become unable to contribute? Especially because the PrC abilities could (and should, of course) be level-appropriate. What I'd advance as fair-trade examples are the slayer (for a psion), the constructor, and the Complete Nerf's ebon saint (for a lurk).

But rest assured, I prefer classes having actual abilities instead of spellcasting; then one doesn't have to do this, which's quite silly anyway.

What a minute. Your example of a "balanced" class is one in which you can get to 10th level and instead of having 5th level powers, a Mindflayer has to make a DC 17 Will Save before it can eat your brain?

It doesn't actually get you out of the grapple even - you're still dead even if the Ilithid (Will Save +9 or better) fails the save. Doesn't that actually prove my point?

-Username17

Yeah, Slayer level one sucks. So does level zero, for that matter. Track?

BUT, once you're in, it's a better Psion forever. Seriously, it's like being an eldritch knight, but you can wear adamantine full plate. Also, you get more skill points, spot and listen, +4 against mind-afecting, and eventually, an SR debuff.

I think trading a level of psy-powers for some armor, weapons, BAB, skills, and class features is, if not optimal, not suicidal either.

Fuzzy_logic at [unixtime wrote:1188862783[/unixtime]]Yeah, Slayer level one sucks. So does level zero, for that matter. Track?

BUT, once you're in, it's a better Psion forever. Seriously, it's like being an eldritch knight, but you can wear adamantine full plate. Also, you get more skill points, spot and listen, +4 against mind-afecting, and eventually, an SR debuff.

I think trading a level of psy-powers for some armor, weapons, BAB, skills, and class features is, if not optimal, not suicidal either.

But you already took 8 levels of a Bad BAB class. You literally are -4 BAB from what a level appropriate combatant could do. The class gives no melee combat abilities and you start at a huge deficit when it comes to combat. By level 16 you'll have the melee capabilities of an aristocrat of your level.

That isn't "balanced", that's insulting.

-Username17

Jacob_Orlove at [unixtime wrote:1188857840[/unixtime]]Keep in mind, though, that a character should be twice as powerful as someone two levels down. You're an even match for two people who are each (your level-2). Trading a feat for some guy who is half as cool as you are isn't really that big a deal.

Um. If an entity of (your level -2) is half as good as you, then adding such an entity to yourself should be roughly equal to going up a level. Because if you added two of them, you would be effectively two levels higher.

If a feat, which is only part of going up a level, gives an equivalent benefit to going up a level by itself, it is an overpowered feat.

He's referring to how Fighters only get a feat every other level.

Actually, I was referring to the Leadership feat, which people were talking about at the bottom of the previous page.

And he's right in terms of the math. The leadership feat brings up your character's CR by about 1. That's pretty good.

Why the fuck are you people talking about the slayer (read: eldritch knight) for full casters?! If your going to take slayer, you pad yourself with whatever number of levels of ranger for track and whatever fuck, and suddenly, YOUR NOT TALKING ABOUT BEING A FULL CASTER ANYMORE.

That was a really ass comparison.

Constructor was alot better, since you get the ability "Your summons become even more awesome." and it is actually level appropriate, since your a fucking shaper, and your entire repertoire is based on summoning.

As someone who's played a Constructor, i can say that losing that first ML really hurt. Okay, nifty abilities, but less PPs, can't augment. Didn't make it to lvl15, so i can't say about that last level loss.

KauTZ- track is a feat. You don't need to waste anything on a ranger level. So its just the 1 ML loss from the class. Not great, but I can see why people would be tempted.

KauTZ at [unixtime wrote:1188874343[/unixtime]]Why the fuck are you people talking about the slayer (read: eldritch knight) for full casters?! If your going to take slayer, you pad yourself with whatever number of levels of ranger for track and whatever fuck, and suddenly, YOUR NOT TALKING ABOUT BEING A FULL CASTER ANYMORE.

Dude, chill out, there's no need to be all angry and shit.

You are partially correct, we aren't talking about being a full caster, that's the whole point. Spellcasting is so good, that if you're not a full spellcaster, you're basically wasting your time.

The Count is correct.

Also, Track is such a shitty feat that could be spent on so many other things that it really is a tough choice whether to flush a feat or a level down the drain.

Oh wait, no it isn't. Just don't take levels in the class.

Basically, it's easy to give a full caster progressing PrCl extra abilities - because next to the spell casting, they aren't really worth anything. So you have the choice between "No-one takes a caster PrCl without fucking themselves with a rake, so all casters are the same build" and "Casters take PrCls that grant a few unimportant benefits onto their normal abilities, just like everyone else".

Also, the "detect mind flayers" ability is really dumb. You can detect them at that range normally by watching your allies start spasming and collapsing (or by doing it yourself).

People are STILL talking about taking levels in goddamn Eldritch Knight?

I think this is the biggest proof for my arguement that 3.5E has gotten so fucking bloated that people can't keep up with what's going on anymore.

Incidentally, here's something that's a lot smarter than fucking taking levels in Eldritch Knight and requires fewer levels.

Buy Complete Divine.

Pick up the feat of Arcane Spellcasting. Pick any domain that has Divine Power as a domain spell. If you have NO OTHER BOOKS then pick the War Domain.

When you get to 7th level, cast frickin' divine power.

BUT WAIT, LAGO! I can hear you all bitching. Divine power costs a spell slot and... and it's not permanent! What if the DM catches you... BY SURPRISE?

That's why they made a spell called contingency, you dopes. You need to be caster level 12 to get your divine power going on--big deal! You get the spell at character level 11. So that shouldn't be a big hurdle.

BUT LAGO! I can hear you crying. What about all of those levels in between? You can get Eldritch Knight levels by character level 7!

Right, but you see my troubled little friends, you've been taking bad BAB levels for at least 5 levels already. Even if you take nothing but good BAB levels from then on... it'll take you until character level 10 until you match the BAB of an average person and you'll only pull ahead by character level 11.

If you're playing in this perilous region, might I suggest taking levels in the Bard class instead? I mean, you're character level 10, you've got 4th level spells...the bard is character level 10, he's got 4th level spells...

Incidentally, if you really want to play an arcane gish, why bother with Eldritch Knight (or any PrC that sets fire to spellcaster levels) at all?

Eldritch Knights get such pathetic BAB that they don't get a second attack until character level 9. They have martial weapon proficiency, but a feat and some bracers of archery will give any character class as much martial proficiency as they need...

If we want to get into the realm of cheese, there's a 2nd (or was it 3rd?) level spell in Spell Compendium that doesn't do anything but give you FIGHTER BONUS FEATS. It lasts for 10 minutes/level, too and is stackable.

If you simply MUST have arcane spells, be a cleric of Mystra. They get anyspell, greater anyspell, and limited wish as domain spells. Plus if you pick up the Initiate of Mystra feat in the FRCS book or the spontaneous domain casting feat in Complete Divine you can make all of your spells like that.

If what you want is spell tjeese, abuse the difference engine (or just pay for/get a imbue with spell ability) and be a level 1 cleric / level 1 (3) wizard / level X Mystic Theurge. You'll still be able to cast divine power. And it opens the way for cheese like, say, Divine Metamagic.

And for the serious cheesehead there's always the incantatrix PrC. Pick up persistent spell and ranged spell and with a spellcraft check every spell in your arsenal becomes persistable. Yes, your BAB is shot to hell but when you have one of the few persistent polymorphs going in the game who the hell cares?

Oh, believe me, Lago, I know that stuff exists. But we're talking about psionics here, and the only reason I can think of one would use psionics is precisely to rule out that kind of crazyness.

and Frank --

Aristocrat BAB is also Psychic Warrior BAB. I was pretty sure that Psychic Warrior was considered a balanced class here, on par with Rogue. A 16th level Slayer has the BAB of a psychic Warrior, but with 8th level powers instead of 6th. What's the problem?

Psychic Warrior isn't on par with a well played Rogue.

Jesus Tittyfucking Christ not this again.

Okay, for everyone out there defending PsyWarriors... let me ask you this...

Why the fuck aren't you playing Bards?

Seriously, look at the PsyWar's power list, especially the high end powers. They suck balls, don't they? They don't even get that many. They learn like, what, 20 powers over the course of their lifetimes? Bards get 29, not counting cantrips.

No, bards don't get as many fighter feats as the PsiWarrior. In return, they get more sourcebook support (which means better feats and spells) and better skills and saves. I mean, bards can still take levels in goddamn Folouchan Lyrist (if they want raw BAB) if they pay for a ring of evasion and imbue with spell ability (or take a level of cleric/druid) ... or take levels of Sublime Chord and get the ballin' ass ability to cast Shapechange and tell any non-spellcaster frontline fighter to go fuck themselves.


So seriously, what gives? What is with the PsyWarrior? Why not just go bard? If you cheese bard it's more satisfying in the long run, anyway.

Lago_AM3P at [unixtime wrote:1188929395[/unixtime]]

So seriously, what gives? What is with the PsyWarrior? Why not just go bard? If you cheese bard it's more satisfying in the long run, anyway.

Nah, the psywarrior's strength isn't his high level powers, it's his low level augmented powers.

Basically the psywarrior is a buff whore. You've got vigor to give you around 80 temp hp, combat buffs to damage, expansion to make you bigger, psionic lion's charge to get pounce (and more with the augment), plus abilities like hustle to give you free move actions.

The psywarrior really can't do much aside from buffs and combat stuff, but he's very good at combat abilities. His buffs also last in durations of minutes/level, meaning at high levels you're getting multiple combats with your buffs. And he has a buff for AC, temp hp, attack, damage and saves, so you can get pretty good numbers at higher levels. Of course because his buffs scale, that also means that at low levels, you suck ass, because you're getting a +1 to attack rolls for 1 minute as a standard action. At high levels, you're getting a +6 or so for 18 minutes.

Still, I think overall a psion/illithid slayer is a better character, but the psywarrior is still alright power wise. He's got better numbers than a cleric, but still lacks overall versatility.

Basically the psywarrior is a buff whore. You've got vigor to give you around 80 temp hp, combat buffs to damage, expansion to make you bigger, psionic lion's charge to get pounce (and more with the augment), plus abilities like hustle to give you free move actions.

The psywarrior really can't do much aside from buffs and combat stuff, but he's very good at combat abilities. His buffs also last in durations of minutes/level, meaning at high levels you're getting multiple combats with your buffs.

Or you could just be a bard that took up Arcane Strike and arcane disciple: Archeon/War/Competition/Spell. If you pick up Arcane Disciple: Spell then you get that stupid spell from Spell Compendium that hands out fighter bonus feats. Then later you can cast Polymorph.



Or better yet, you can be a Chameleon. In fact, if you want to play a PsyWarrior, I can't think of a serious reason why you wouldn't.

Lago_AM3P at [unixtime wrote:1188931115[/unixtime]]
Or you could just be a bard that took up Arcane Strike and arcane disciple: Archeon/War/Competition/Spell. If you pick up Arcane Disciple: Spell then you get that stupid spell from Spell Compendium that hands out fighter bonus feats. Then later you can cast Polymorph.

Well, the psywarrior tends to have an edge in durability.

He has d8 hit dice versus the bard's d6. He gets a polymorph too (metamorphosis) and he's also got some buffs that divine doesn't get, like vigor and a bunch of ways to get insight bonuses to attack rolls.

While the bard probably doens't have any armor while in polymorphed form, any form the psywarrior turns into can still benefit from inertial armor and force screen.

The bard is much more of a glass cannon, while the psywarrior is actually a true party tank.

He has d8 hit dice versus the bard's d6. He gets a polymorph too (metamorphosis) and he's also got some buffs that divine doesn't get, like vigor and a bunch of ways to get insight bonuses to attack rolls.

While the bard probably doens't have any armor while in polymorphed form, any form the psywarrior turns into can still benefit from inertial armor and force screen.

RC, at this point in the game and considering how bloated 3.5E is, you should never use the words 'can't' or 'doesn't have' in relation to an arcane spellcaster. Even a lowly bard.

Lago_AM3P at [unixtime wrote:1188932172[/unixtime]]

RC, at this point in the game and considering how bloated 3.5E is, you should never use the words 'can't' or 'doesn't have' in relation to an arcane spellcaster. Even a lowly bard.

Well yeah, I suppose that's true. But I generally limit stuff to just core + spell compendium for spells to keep things sane.

I don't even really follow the new books much. I know the complete series prior to complete mage, the PHB2, spell compendium, and a few setting books. Never really bothered to read the "races of my ass" or the "It's totally broken outside" series.

Frank wrote:What a minute. Your example of a "balanced" class is one in which you can get to 10th level and instead of having 5th level powers, a Mindflayer has to make a DC 17 Will Save before it can eat your brain?

It doesn't actually get you out of the grapple even - you're still dead even if the Ilithid (Will Save +9 or better) fails the save. Doesn't that actually prove my point?

I don't even care that much about the class abilities - I more or less meant that 1 ML ~ 5 BAB; but, the point where I'd fall is that the class sucker-punches you at level 1 and only finishes paying at 10 - that's indeed a problem, and I rectify my previous statement by saying the class should, say, give an actually decent enemy sense (one that works beyond typical surprise-attack range, such as a simple 70 ft.); that is, something to care about. Then, I'd pretty happy with being a 1-level-delayed egoist (aristocrat melee capability my rear) for eventually getting 5 BAB.

MrWaesel wrote:I've always though that a problem with leadership, in that it's too powerful a feat.

angelfromanotherpin wrote:If a feat, which is only part of going up a level, gives an equivalent benefit to going up a level by itself, it is an overpowered feat.

Jacob Orlove wrote:And he's right in terms of the math. The leadership feat brings up your character's CR by about 1. That's pretty good.

Anyone up for proving Waesel's wrong (that is, that getting CR+1 from just the feat instead of the entire level's somehow not too much)?

Count Arioch wrote:You are partially correct, we aren't talking about being a full caster, that's the whole point. Spellcasting is so good, that if you're not a full spellcaster, you're basically wasting your time.

Actually, we're talking about a really-close-to-full-manifester (Straight question: does anybody in this thread think that not caring about retarded character-rewriting stuff such as divine power make me retarded? IIRC, Frank has already used it as example of bad design - in that it makes irrelevant what classes you took prior to getting it; I know that's sorta pulling an Oberoni, but so what?).

Koumei wrote:You can detect them at that range normally by watching your allies start spasming and collapsing (or by doing it yourself).

So true - hence me saying a better level 1 would go a long way towards making it feel OK.

Lago wrote:I think this is the biggest proof for my arguement that 3.5E has gotten so fucking bloated that people can't keep up with what's going on anymore.

3.5 psionics, actually, is composed of 2 books (since the standard comparisons are between official material, I'll ignore the fact that Dreamscarred Press' material's better than Complete Nerf for the sake of this discussion); the problem with trying to have the same discussion about magic is that the latter's crack that anybody has to take for all their lives if they ever did, as there's absolutely damn nothing in D&D that compares to full spellcasting (seriously, I'd really like to see someone claim that any Tome class is a cleric/wizard's equal); the only things that compare against spells are, well, other spells.

Lago wrote:BUT WAIT, LAGO! I can hear you all bitching. Divine power costs a spell slot and... and it's not permanent! What if the DM catches you... BY SURPRISE?

That's why they made a spell called contingency, you dopes. You need to be caster level 12 to get your divine power going on--big deal! You get the spell at character level 11. So that shouldn't be a big hurdle.

BUT LAGO! I can hear you crying. What about all of those levels in between? You can get Eldritch Knight levels by character level 7!

No, you can't hear any of this idiocy from me - and please hold back on gratuitous insult. What you'll hear is the existance of divine power's bad design, and thus I don't feel obliged to take it into consideration in a discusion about how stuff could/should look like (remember, the point of mine that started this was simply "one could make a class that loses MLs, maybe even CLs, and keeps level-appropriateness"; it wasn't even that such things necessarily exist now, but that they could exist).

Lago wrote:If you're playing in this perilous region, might I suggest taking levels in the Bard class instead? I mean, you're character level 10, you've got 4th level spells...the bard is character level 10, he's got 4th level spells...

I'm not sure whether that'd be an honest suggestion, or some attempt at duping me into what you consider a retarded choice, but anyway: yes, you can, and I can answer "What if I want to have a powerset that isn't that of the bard, but that of the psion?"

Lago wrote:Incidentally, if you really want to play an arcane gish, why bother with Eldritch Knight (or any PrC that sets fire to spellcaster levels) at all?

Eldritch Knights get such pathetic BAB that they don't get a second attack until character level 9. They have martial weapon proficiency, but a feat and some bracers of archery will give any character class as much martial proficiency as they need...

If we want to get into the realm of cheese, there's a 2nd (or was it 3rd?) level spell in Spell Compendium that doesn't do anything but give you FIGHTER BONUS FEATS. It lasts for 10 minutes/level, too and is stackable.

If you simply MUST have arcane spells, be a cleric of Mystra. They get anyspell, greater anyspell, and limited wish as domain spells. Plus if you pick up the Initiate of Mystra feat in the FRCS book or the spontaneous domain casting feat in Complete Divine you can make all of your spells like that.

If what you want is spell tjeese, abuse the difference engine (or just pay for/get a imbue with spell ability) and be a level 1 cleric / level 1 (3) wizard / level X Mystic Theurge. You'll still be able to cast divine power. And it opens the way for cheese like, say, Divine Metamagic.

And for the serious cheesehead there's always the incantatrix PrC. Pick up persistent spell and ranged spell and with a spellcraft check every spell in your arsenal becomes persistable. Yes, your BAB is shot to hell but when you have one of the few persistent polymorphs going in the game who the hell cares?

Thanks for what I'm not looking for - the opportunity to smell like rotten milk. Also, that's not even serious cheese, as I'd have been able to do all that for myself - wanna hand me Pun-Pun too? More specifically, I tend to avoid talking about magic's balance because I don't think there's much of it at all, and I think the first person to say "eldritch knight" (wizard-based) instead of "slayer" (psion-based) was you; certainly, it wasn't me when talking with Frank bout surrendering MLs, or with Koumei about the supposed merits/flaws of psionics.

Calibron wrote:Psychic Warrior isn't on par with a well played Rogue.

I happen to agree, and that's why I consider the egoist slayer (who's a psychic warrior for all I care, except better) is actually well-balanced (except for the "pay now, receive later" problem, which I don't think's so hard to fix), and why I made the arsenalist a better psychic warrior too; in fact, I'll have to examine Voss' claim of it now being too good at some levels.