The Gaming Den

I need TGD's typical punchiness and adeptness at nomenclature for this phenomenon. So help a Lagoman out. At any rate, what I want is a term akin to Stormwind Fallacy or Applestacking to describe these effects:

[*] The first one involves the 4E D&D Warlord. A properly built 4E D&D Warlord is completely dominating in terms of party utility; it's like having an extra party member. However, they create much less jealousy than other overpowered classes like the Ranger. That said, I've recently had the surreal experience of having a friend who runs a 4E D&D game having their players complain that the Warlord was too effective; that so-and-so was handing out so many extra attacks that people started to realize that their characters were gimped without the Warlord. I don't know how much this anecdote relates to the broader point, so ignore it if you'd like.

[*] The second one involves the 3E D&D cleric. People whined their ass off about the CoDzilla (and successor builds such as the Summoner Synthesist) to the point where Pathfinder targeted the classes with conspicuous nerfs. On the other hand, Pathfinder has been steadily buffing the pure caster cleric -- even though a Blaster Cleric is more powerful than CoDzilla, especially in Pathfinder. People speculate that this is because CoDzilla makes people feel small in the pants in a specific way and because the blaster cleric makes people feel small in the pants in a general way.

What's more, you line up these two observations side-by-side like this, it feels like they're stemming from the same player id. And it really feels like this aspect of character balance should be labelled.

For the first one:

Manager of the Year? World's Best Boss? You could do something along those lines, I think.

For the second:

It's a little tougher. I have suppose could name it after a character. Since I don't have anything remotely good, you could call it Angus, after a cleric that my players will be encountering eventually. It's a good name for a hardass go-getting cleric.

(And no. The confrontation will be largely social/political. They will not be partnered up with this invincible Church Marine or having to fight him whatever).

On Warlord effectiveness realization, I think you're basically looking at the same thing that made the CoDZilla eventually be a memetic thing. People are remarkably good at denying that balance issues exist in cooperative games, but given time it will eventually penetrate. And the more "apples to apples" the comparisons are, the faster that penetration is. I mean, you're still looking at four to five years for everyone to agree that a melee cleric was unambiguously better than a fighter. And I don't think we ever got people to universally agree that a summoner or enchanter Wizard was also universally better than a Fighter - even though they totally are.

I don't know how much the Warlord's "I provide your attacks twice" shtick is the kind of "in frame" apples to apples comparison that the mouth breathers would actually notice is a genuine game balance issue, but it easily might be.

-Username17

The blaster cleric is just power creep rearing its head; you have more options as a blaster cleric than a cleric archer because you have all the options. But it isn't exactly stepping on the toes of an entire category of class, so it's cool. Except when it's not. The warlord is so good that it can do one set of classes shtick, but it doesn't have to. So if you're a lazylord (or just not a Bravelord), it's cool. Except when it's not.

If the problem is based on the classes not stepping on anyone's toes and still causing jealousy, then I would call it the MVP's Dilemma. If the problem is that they can do damn near anything and excel, then the Omnicharacter Problem.

The old testament is rich in blaster clerics. Referring to a blaster-cleric as a Jericho build or an Elijah taps into images of fireballs and shockwaves.

The Warlord in the first example is basically wellfare for a shitty party. Thus, I feel it should be referred to as Gub'mint Cheese, as it's all about the leading party handing out cheese to everyone.

The later seems to be a symptom of people feeling that the front-line should be DMF-only, and casters should go to the back of the bus party WHERE THEY BELONG!

So I'd call it Sister Rosa Parks, or something, as it comes from people telling clerics to get in the back and make room for DMF shitbags.

Let's not do what Prak says on this one, because it's shitty to minorities. I mean seriously, equating Clerics not frontlining to Rosa fucking Parks? At least you had the sense not to call the other party members in the first example welfare queens.

Yeah, ok, that was shitty.

What about "Church and Barracks" to describe the segregation of clergy characters and martial characters people apparently want to exist?

Call the Warlord the Pokemaster, the rest of his party are his pokemon, in the sense that sure it is them fighting but it's at the command of the Pokemaster.

call the blaster cleric a Divine Wizard, as it will offend people who play wizards to shoot magic missiles.

Are you asking for names for the character types (I like Lazylord), or for the general response and outrage and all that? It sounds more like you don't want a nickname for "The Blaster Cleric that is better than you at things", but a shorthand for when people notice and complain about it.

I dunno, I did rather like the "Gub'ment Cheese" idea.
It should at least be a build, or a character name.


Would people noticing be KHAAAAAN?

How about something related to "disaster relief fund" rather than welfare allusions? I know, it doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely, but we're talking about something that basket weaver parties DO need, being the walking disaster they are.

Because FEMA doesn't actually do anything and it'd be difficult to actually come up with a single term that alludes to the private funds that do actually help?

Hmm... though "Disaster Relief Warlord" could work.

I do still prefer Gub'ment Cheese for the fact that it also refers to handing out cheese in the form of rules exploitation (except that it's not really cheese when it's the bare minimum for being effective).

It is just the basic fighter dilemma.

how to play a fighter wrote:Make friends with any spellcasters in the party. You will need the healing and defensive magic of the cleric as well as the buff spells of the wizard. Try to work with them, D&D is a team game.

As long as you can deny your won sucktitude by pretending those buffs just make you awesome, you'll do so.
'Till you don't get the buffs (because the wiz/warlord was not there or doing something better) and you'll feel gimped.
Or the cleric smashes faces and still can summon angels, while you only have a bmx (but then you'll just boot them from the table).

If you want to tie it directly to the Warlord's version of it, "More-lord" seems pithy enough.

"Invisible Hand" speaks to a pun on the way the action economy gets played with for a great deal of characters who would fall under this concept while also being kind of literal; every single time I've seen this idea play out in actual play, if they aren't deliberately keeping track of who actually accomplished what, people at the table have trouble observing which characters were deciding combats and which ones were glorified pets.

A person who blasts thing effectively, but is also a skilled thief and lorekeeper? How about The Kirisame?