The Gaming Den

Nah, the worst attempt would be playing a Commoner "Because they get the earliest Prestige Class access (Survivor, begin at CL 2), and Prestige Classes automatically own the faces of base classes!"

Koumei at [unixtime wrote:1203214854[/unixtime]]Nah, the worst attempt would be playing a Commoner "Because they get the earliest Prestige Class access (Survivor, begin at CL 2), and Prestige Classes automatically own the faces of base classes!"

I thought that was used as a joke, I didn't think anyone was serious when they gave that example.


Fact: Rogue=Respectable combatant

I used that as a monster, once. A goblin Commoner 1/Survivor 3 or something, against a level 2 party. They thought it was hilarious.

"My name is Invincible Glurk the Invincible, who cannot be Vinced!"

He was about to go on and say "To ensure that I remain this way, I would like to surrender and pretend we never met up." (only to return later), but the dragon in the party got sick of his use of the word "Invincible" and attacked.

Five rounds later, they finally managed to bring him down, with minimal damage to themselves because all he was good at was "not being killed as quickly as everyone else."

Leress at [unixtime wrote:1203286682[/unixtime]]

Fact: Rogue=Respectable combatant

It wouldn't be quite so bad if they weren't insisting that the rogue, for some reason, had to sit in the front line and take hits.

The very idea of tactics seems to be beyond them.

Something of a challenge for the Classes board

*facepalm*

Sure, there are many bad game designers, but I prefer a bad game designer that is loyal to the fan base and is willing to accept criticism.

Today's lesson: If you bundle all the first-level class features of almost any class, including new class skills and weapon proficiencies, into a feat, it'll look really powerful.

Damnit Ceilingcat, upon looking at that picture, I can see your point entirely. Unable to think, Schrödinger's cat prevents it...

Here's a gem

Broken Characters Encouraged

My friend is running an "every other weekend weekly" game under the suggestion that players create the most broken characters possible. The party, all level 2, consists currently of a warblade, 2 warlocks(that means NO to any chance of a paladin), a cleric, a fighter, a VoP monk, a bard, and an awakened monkey factotum.

2 warlocks and a fighter. Man.... that's awesome.

Leress at [unixtime wrote:1203305631[/unixtime]] Something of a challenge for the Classes board

*facepalm*

That guy has retard.

I don't even understand the feat-PrCs. What levels is he talking about?

-Crissa

Aelryinth's intent for a "PrC feat track" was noble but the execution was poorly planned or simply lacking in information.

Implementation of a PrC feat series as a replacement for actual classes requires complete removal of PrCs as we know it, an acceptance of the end-result: something shockingly similar to gestalt.
Maybe that's why it would seem overpowered. The rest of the game would have to change to make room for a PrC feat series.

and Ceilingcat: That's quite clever.
But your power of the Quantum does not work on me.
I took a dosage of Commonsensium this morning.

Aelryinth "challenge" just looks like the making of d20 modern all over again.

I look at this and I was thinking..."okay I assume that PrCs were gone and replaced by the [prestige feats] which are more or less like advanced talent trees. Aelryinth use the assumption that class ability=feat, which is not really true. So instead of making feats up to the level of a class ability [for the PHB fighter] there are class abilities are turned into feats and it seems that is suppose to show how [overpowered/underpowered] they are in relation to normal feats. It pretty much a nerfing of caster classes and other that get fewer feats and a slight boost to those that don't caster at all.

It is going at the "problem" at different direction. Now what problem is that, I assume that it might be the that multi-classing makes things overpowered and this method is suppose to show a break down on how a class ability is "overpowered/underpowered".

It is not worth it to me so I really didn't give a shit. Maybe if this was said a couple of years ago, but not now.

Aelryinth is a tool. A couple years ago, I literally argued with him for about a week or so about the use of the skill Iaijutsu Focus from Oriental Adventures.

He asserted that the skill was fine as written because of roleplaying reasons, then kept quoting Legend of the Five Rings novels at me, regardless of the fact that those novels are in fact novels and do not contain any actual rules. It seems that my opinion that the skill could be used in any round you drew your weapon and attack a flat-footed opponent isn't how the skill works, despite the fact that the OA book says that exactly.

That is indeed how it works, Count, but I don't really see it being a problem. Maybe if you get a really good skill bonus at really low levels (let's call it level 3. 6 ranks, +3 Charisma, +3 Skill focus, +1 from "Charismatic", and if you're a human as well, another +1 from "Nymph's Kiss", *maybe* a +1 from a Katana providing a skill bonus). +15 means you'll likely do a bit more than you're meant to, but not that much - especially seeing as they only have the one iaijutsu attack.

I agree that he's still a tool, though.

Leress wrote:I look at this and I was thinking..."okay I assume that PrCs were gone and replaced by the [prestige feats] which are more or less like advanced talent trees. Aelryinth use the assumption that class ability=feat, which is not really true. So instead of making feats up to the level of a class ability [for the PHB fighter] there are class abilities are turned into feats and it seems that is suppose to show how [overpowered/underpowered] they are in relation to normal feats. It pretty much a nerfing of caster classes and other that get fewer feats and a slight boost to those that don't caster at all.

It is going at the "problem" at different direction. Now what problem is that, I assume that it might be the that multi-classing makes things overpowered and this method is suppose to show a break down on how a class ability is "overpowered/underpowered".

His stated purpose is to demonstrate that PrCs are overpowered compared to base classes. He seems to think the Mystic Theurge and Dwarven Defender are the poster children for his argument. And what he's really doing is taking multiple class features, sometimes a few levels worth, and compressing them into one feat. Of course these multiple benefits are going to be powerful compared to other feats, most of which grant only a single benefit, but that doesn't prove that PrCs are overpowered.

And I just noticed that he doesn't realize every class gets Craft as a class skill.

Absentminded_Wizard at [unixtime wrote:1203401756[/unixtime]]Of course these multiple benefits are going to be powerful compared to other feats, most of which grant only a single benefit, but that doesn't prove that PrCs are overpowered.

Other than showing just how bad Fighters are, which we already knew.

And what he's really doing is taking multiple class features, sometimes a few levels worth, and compressing them into one feat. Of course these multiple benefits are going to be powerful compared to other feats, most of which grant only a single benefit, but that doesn't prove that PrCs are overpowered.

The concept is that characters only get a Feat every couple of levels. So if you are getting some kind of class feature every level you are getting stuff much more quickly, regardless of what that stuff happens to be.

The Core of his argument is this: If you take Wizard 8-12, you get a Bonus Feat in the middle. If you take Loremaster 1-5 for your levels 8-12, you get five abilities, some of which you actually care about. Now, you had to set fire to a Feat for Skill Focus: Knowledge Religion, so really you are out more than one feat for your five levels of LoreMaster crap. But whatever.

His examples are worthless because he isn't using PrCs which subject themselves to that kind of analysis readily. Also the basic assumption that the sparsity Feats in both power and frequency isn't the problem in the first place is suspect.

-Username17

And of course, this kind of analysis can only be done with classes that give bonus feats. That would be fighter, wizard, ranger (albeit gimped), and possibly monk for some lower-level-entry PrCs. I'm not sure how this poor guy's going to show us how overpowered PrCs designed for other classes are.

He's like someone with high hopes. His arguments may not be valid at times, but his dedication to proving his argument shows a dissatisfaction with the rules system as is, which I can sort of relate to.
But prestige classes aren't overpowered, only a few (Ur-Priest!) deserve to be called such.

I thought that was the interesting thing. His whipping boys are DMG classes that most people don't want to play.

Absentminded_Wizard at [unixtime wrote:1203472164[/unixtime]]His whipping boys are DMG classes that most people don't want to play.

But I always wanted to play in an all-Commoner game! 37 pages of comments can't be wrong!

Maj at [unixtime wrote:1203476976[/unixtime]]

Edited: It's too good to be true.

Mage of the Nine Swords

Bringing you fail beyond fail.