binder class combo madness [Archive] - Wizards Community

binder class combo madness [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
KoreKore
09-19-06, 06:44 PM ok I have been reading throught the tomb of magic latley, and found myself reading throught the binder abilites, and started to think that this is a wee bit overpowered or at least cool. With certain comboes you can do the job of sneaky, fighter, and damage dealer with a ton of abilites you can do whatever you want. The viritality and ability to change your abilites day to day makes me think a group composed soley of binders could actuall work. So I must ask am I crazy or is there something to this.
Archangel62
09-19-06, 07:05 PM It's not really as powerful as you'd think. Some of it also has to do with how the DM controls the game but in most games the binders are going to be pursued aggressively by almost all churches. Also, the binders abilities make them sort of a secondary fighter but the binder is rather feat intensive to make sure that their base abilities don't render them ineffective (if you lose to some vestiges things can get complicated)
Guroth the Forsaken
09-19-06, 07:23 PM For more info on the Binder, check out the TOME of Magic. Lots of good stuff there.
Fuzzy_Logic
09-19-06, 10:51 PM Versatility is why four binders would probably be a *bad* idea.

I'm not familiar wiht teh class veyr well, but I know its basic mechanics. Everythign I read suggests ot me that it is *not* a good diea to run multiples together.

One of their chief benefits is that their powerz go all day--fine, a little reliable power is nice. But you also want a wizard or somebody who can pull out crazy awesome tricks for when the going gets tough.

Similarly, because they CAN reinvent themselves daily, they cna substitute for a fighter, a rogue, or whatever. This is a nice extra character to pad a gorup and make sure all bases are covered. You never regret having one. Especially fi your player mix changes frequently, it cna be a godsend.

But if you play with all Binders, ti seems likely to be inefficient. Wouldn't youo find one division of labor that worked especially well? I think you'd tend to see a pattern--one binder pretends to be a fighter, the next to be a rogue, the third ot be a wizard.

Wouldn't you rather have a fighter, a rogue, and a wizard than three impersonators?
Comfort_in_Insanity
09-20-06, 12:08 AM It's a bad idea. They're versatile, that's for sure, and it makes the class a great addition to any party, but a party with solely binders is going to get owned pretty hard.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
KoreKore 09-19-06, 06:44 PM	ok I have been reading throught the tomb of magic latley, and found myself reading throught the binder abilites, and started to think that this is a wee bit overpowered or at least cool. With certain comboes you can do the job of sneaky, fighter, and damage dealer with a ton of abilites you can do whatever you want. The viritality and ability to change your abilites day to day makes me think a group composed soley of binders could actuall work. So I must ask am I crazy or is there something to this.
Archangel62 09-19-06, 07:05 PM	It's not really as powerful as you'd think. Some of it also has to do with how the DM controls the game but in most games the binders are going to be pursued aggressively by almost all churches. Also, the binders abilities make them sort of a secondary fighter but the binder is rather feat intensive to make sure that their base abilities don't render them ineffective (if you lose to some vestiges things can get complicated)
Guroth the Forsaken 09-19-06, 07:23 PM	For more info on the Binder, check out the TOME of Magic. Lots of good stuff there.
Fuzzy_Logic 09-19-06, 10:51 PM	Versatility is why four binders would probably be a bad idea. I'm not familiar wiht teh class veyr well, but I know its basic mechanics. Everythign I read suggests ot me that it is not a good diea to run multiples together. One of their chief benefits is that their powerz go all day--fine, a little reliable power is nice. But you also want a wizard or somebody who can pull out crazy awesome tricks for when the going gets tough. Similarly, because they CAN reinvent themselves daily, they cna substitute for a fighter, a rogue, or whatever. This is a nice extra character to pad a gorup and make sure all bases are covered. You never regret having one. Especially fi your player mix changes frequently, it cna be a godsend. But if you play with all Binders, ti seems likely to be inefficient. Wouldn't youo find one division of labor that worked especially well? I think you'd tend to see a pattern--one binder pretends to be a fighter, the next to be a rogue, the third ot be a wizard. Wouldn't you rather have a fighter, a rogue, and a wizard than three impersonators?
Comfort_in_Insanity 09-20-06, 12:08 AM	It's a bad idea. They're versatile, that's for sure, and it makes the class a great addition to any party, but a party with solely binders is going to get owned pretty hard.