Post/Author/DateTime	Post
StruckingFuggle 12-21-07, 01:26 AM	I was tinkering some (okay, a lot) with the Swashbuckler class, and I was thinking of beefing it up, 'cause even I can tell, it's missing a lot. But then I thought, "at the higher levels, other than class features in general, what is it missing?" ...And I couldn't answer. Thus my question to the people more experienced with high-level DnD, especially for the "casters rule" people: What are melee characters expected to be able to do to be somewhat competitive in a game where they have to compete with intelligence - but not twinked? - mages.
runestar 12-21-07, 02:27 AM	As it is now, the class is really good only for a 3-lv dip (though I think a feat in one of the new splatbooks changes this dramatically). The rest of the higher lv abilities are pretty much dead wood. Consider ToB. The diamond mind discipline perhaps come closest to the swashbuckling concept, so you may want to compare your newly revised swashbuckler to a warblade of the same lv, or a warblade10/eternal blade10 at lv11+ and see that their capabilities are more or less equal.:)
StruckingFuggle 12-21-07, 02:37 AM	I think you missed my point. Or maybe I didn't finish it out enough. From tinkering with the Swashbuckler and not knowing what to do with it at high levels came the general question of what characters in the higher levels (say 9-20) in general, especially melee-ers, should be able to do and also to defend against?
NineInchNall 12-21-07, 09:16 AM	Well, a character of level X should be able to take on a host of EL X challenges by himself at something around a 50% success rate. Which means that you're actually going to have to run some numbers in order to come up with something good. People don't want to do this, however, because it's time consuming and hard. Which is why hardly anything ends up balanced. So look at a bunch of CR 10 challenges (traps, monsters, social, etc.) and give the class stuff that lets a Swb 10 handle those challenges. Then do the same for a Swb 15. Then for Swb 20. Don't even worry about whether the class ends up "balanced" with other classes, since that's a very poor methodology. Concern yourself with making a class that actually adheres to the CR system, since most classes don't.
runestar 12-21-07, 09:24 AM	Well, a character of level X should be able to take on a host of EL X challenges by himself at something around a 50% success rate. Which means that you're actually going to have to run some numbers in order to come up with something good. It is also darn inaccurate. Fighters for example, cannot readily access flight, and so would be helpless against challenges which require that he fly. That does not necessarily mean he is entirely useless, as it is assumed that there will be someone in the party who can supply him with flight. In the same vein, rogues are useless against undead or constructs. It doesn't mean anything. I still don't get the OP's question. You mean as in what sort of role fighters should be able to fulfill (such as damage dealer, tank, battlefield controller etc?) or the sort of stats they should have to be able to work (such as being able to hit ACX at lvY, have so much hp or that sort of thing?):confused:
NineInchNall 12-21-07, 09:11 PM	It is also darn inaccurate. Fighters for example, cannot readily access flight, and so would be helpless against challenges which require that he fly. That does not necessarily mean he is entirely useless, as it is assumed that there will be someone in the party who can supply him with flight. In the same vein, rogues are useless against undead or constructs. It doesn't mean anything. First, Rogues are not useless against undead or constructs. They simply can't use sneak attack against them when restricted to core. :eek: Rogues have UMD and all sorts of other abilities that help take on level-appropriate challenges. You're right, though, it doesn't make the Fighter totally useless; what it does is create an inherent imbalance. The Fighter is underpowered, not useless. Consider the CW Samurai: it is quite possibly the weakest base class ever published in a WotC book, but is it entirely useless? No, it contributes, but it doesn't do so in a way commensurate with the way the CR system works. Srsly.
togapika 12-21-07, 10:44 PM	The main problem is the simple things that hamper a melee character without using magic, like say a giant chasm with no bridge and no way across but to fly.
Leress 12-21-07, 11:15 PM	It is also darn inaccurate. Fighters for example, cannot readily access flight, and so would be helpless against challenges which require that he fly. That does not necessarily mean he is entirely useless, as it is assumed that there will be someone in the party who can supply him with flight. In the same vein, rogues are useless against undead or constructs. It doesn't mean anything. I still don't get the OP's question. You mean as in what sort of role fighters should be able to fulfill (such as damage dealer, tank, battlefield controller etc?) or the sort of stats they should have to be able to work (such as being able to hit ACX at lvY, have so much hp or that sort of thing?):confused: Umm...NIN never said "useless" anywhere in the post. Also as NIN said rogues are not useless against undead and constructs, the rogue has skills for a reason. The OP is asking what challenges should one expect in the higher levels of the game like planar hopping, Save or Die/sucks, big creatures, flyers, being invisible, etc. I second NIN suggestion about testing the class.
LoneFlame 12-22-07, 12:32 AM	Hmmm... This is an interesting challenge. It's not my field of expertise, but I'll take a stab at it... What have you got thus far?
Leress 12-22-07, 01:13 AM	Hmmm... This is an interesting challenge. It's not my field of expertise, but I'll take a stab at it... What have you got thus far? Here... ECL 10 A room of traps A Fire Giant A Young Blue Dragon A Bebilith A Vrock 2 Remorhaz 6 Trolls 12 Shadows
runestar 12-22-07, 01:26 AM	Here... ECL 10 * A room of traps * A Fire Giant * A Young Blue Dragon * A Bebilith * A Vrock * 2 Remorhaz * 6 Trolls * 12 Shadows He is going to a die a very horrible death in all the aforementioned scenarios, I am afraid...
Leress 12-22-07, 01:39 AM	He is going to a die a very horrible death in all the aforementioned scenarios, I am afraid... Well than the class needs an improvement to get it up to 50% then.
runestar 12-22-07, 02:01 AM	Well than the class needs an improvement to get it up to 50% then. I am not sure if an improvement alone is enough. Some of the encounters are very 1-sided indeed. For example, unless you have a means of flight or ranged attack, fights with the fliers like the dragon or vrock are TPKs as you cannot reach them. The dragon can just keep strafing you with its breath weapon. The vrock could take the hover feat, stay just out of reach (it has 10-ft reach) and attack you with impunity. It also has mirror image at will, very annoying for a fighter. The horde of shadows will just str-drain you to oblivion. The room with traps is simply a test of endurance. Fire giant fight will be brutal. Can easily swing either way. IMO, you should be seeing how well it can contribute in a standard 4-member party, not testing how well it fares in 1v1 PvPs.
Leress 12-22-07, 02:41 AM	I am not sure if an improvement alone is enough. Some of the encounters are very 1-sided indeed. For example, unless you have a means of flight or ranged attack, fights with the fliers like the dragon or vrock are TPKs as you cannot reach them. The dragon can just keep strafing you with its breath weapon. The vrock could take the hover feat, stay just out of reach (it has 10-ft reach) and attack you with impunity. It also has mirror image at will, very annoying for a fighter. The horde of shadows will just str-drain you to oblivion. The room with traps is simply a test of endurance. Fire giant fight will be brutal. Can easily swing either way. Umm...you use the creature how they are presented in the MM. Vrocks come down to fight you. You don't add feats and whatnot to a creature that messes up the equation. It is really hard to just eyeball it make a character and test it to see how it fairs Here is my train of thought Be able to win 50% of expected encounters at any and most importantly all levels. The basis starts as follows: 1 level X Character is CR X (with NPC wealth) 1 CR X Monster is CR X That much we can assume, since that's what the DMG and MM tell us and most people accept (with a few exceptions this is usually true, there are a few oddball monsters that don't fit into that). Now, 1 level X Character is CR X+1 (if they have PC wealth). Therefore, a PC of any level, should be able to win 50% of all encounters that they would face that have a CR equal to their class levels. So, a level 15 Wizard should beat 50% of all CR 15 encounters. A level 10 Monk should beat 50% of all CR 10 encounters, a level 11 Fighter should be able to face any type of CR 11 encounter and expect to win 50% of them. So, if the level 20 fighter, with level 20 expected wealth cannot face and beat at least 5 out of every 10 CR 20 monsters, then he's not a PC that is CR 20. If he's not a CR 20 creature, then he's not a level appropriate creature. With the PHB and MM written the way they are, having level-appropriate abilities cannot happen. Meaning that at the very core of the game there are massive imbalance issues. IMO, you should be seeing how well it can contribute in a standard 4-member party, not testing how well it fares in 1v1 PvPs. The argument that PCs will never face a monster that is their own 'level' is a non-argument. Very often in written adventures, PCs will have to face a number of creatures whose individual CR is equal to each PCs level.
JaronK 12-22-07, 02:59 AM	When I'm trying to work out power levels for a class, I chose the tier I'm aiming for (in my case, I aim for Tier 2). I also organize classes by Tiers as far as power level is concerned... here's how those work. Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extream DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party. Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer. Tier 2: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 4s in the party much of the time. Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 3s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 5s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well. Examples: Rogue, Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker, Warlock, Warmage Tier 4: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. Has trouble shining in any encounter. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 3 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly. Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja Tier 5: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters. Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner And then there's the Truenamer, which is just broken (as in, the class was improperly made and doesn't function appropriately). Now, obviously these rankings only apply when mechanical abilities are being used... in a more social oriented game where talking is the main way of solving things (without using diplomacy checks), any character can shine. However, when mechanical abilities are being used, it's a bad idea to have parties with more than two tiers of difference. At any rate, I tend to balance my classes for Tier 2. They should be good at something, and preferably shouldn't ever be useless. This is easy for spellcasters... as long as they have a few utility spells they should be good to go. For melees it can be more of a problem, so pay attention to that. When you're done, your class should be weaker than any of the big 5 listed in Tier 1 at pretty much everything, or it might be overpowered. Since you're talking about a melee, it shouldn't be better at damage dealing than a Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker, nor should it outshine any of the ToB classes (though matching them is just about right). Honestly, with a Swordsage I'd recommend letting them use some Iron Heart or Diamond mind moves... that would flesh them out quite a bit and make them a lot more interesting. See my recent ninja for an example of a hybrid ToB/traditional character, though in that case it was a skill monkey hybrid. JaronK
Leress 12-22-07, 03:04 AM	The question is about the challenges at higher levels and what the characters will face.
JaronK 12-22-07, 03:10 AM	The OPs initial question was "What are melee characters expected to be able to do to be somewhat competitive in a game where they have to compete with intelligence - but not twinked? - mages" And my suggestion is "balance off of tier 2 classes like the Crusader, Swordsage, Warblade, etc, and follow what I said abut tier 2 classes, without falling into tier 1 or 3." At least, that's how I'd do it. JaronK
LoneFlame 12-22-07, 01:42 PM	In this case, perhaps we should first analyze the premise of the class being adjusted. Here's what I know about this subject. What does Swashbuckler do: It is a skilled, finesseful warrior, much like Wesly/The Dread Pirate Roberts in the Princess Bride(which is a really good movie, btw), who revolves around skill rather than raw power to defeat enemies. What should you compare this to: Warblade, Battle Dancer(Dragon Magazine Compendium), & This Fighter "Remake" (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a)(Scroll down til you get to it. That one's to use just for simplicity sake & it's officialness). What we should avoid: Supernatural/Mystical abilities(Why: Because I'm tired of making Mystical classes... that, & I legitimately don't see the Swashbuckler as a mystical class)
Leress 12-22-07, 01:52 PM	In this case, perhaps we should first analyze the premise of the class being adjusted. Here's what I know about this subject. What does Swashbuckler do: It is a skilled, finesseful warrior, much like Wesly/The Dread Pirate Roberts in the Princess Bride(which is a really good movie, btw), who revolves around skill rather than raw power to defeat enemies. Okay What should you compare this to: Warblade, Battle Dancer(Dragon Magazine Compendium), & This Fighter "Remake" (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a)(Scroll down til you get to it. That one's to use just for simplicity sake & it's officialness). I can't agree with this since comparing it to classes isn't a good way to gauge the class's power level. I rather compare it to the creatures it will fight in the MMs since they are static while classes have a variety of feats and equipment to consider. Also that "dead level" article is plain crap those abilities don't do anything. The core of the article is good but the execution is laughable at best. So let's not even mention that article at all unless it is in making new NPC classes. What we should avoid: Supernatural/Mystical abilities(Why: Because I'm tired of making Mystical classes... that, & I legitimately don't see the Swashbuckler as a mystical class) Okay, but let's not just disregard them all together.
LoneFlame 12-22-07, 02:00 PM	I'm talking for sake of class generation balance. The classes you compare it too are classes that are(or can be) similar in nature. Now, you can't compare it to just any monsters, since there are some monsters you just can't beat with front-line melee classes(excluding equipment, of course). I'm not saying some monster comparison isn't needed, but it shouldn't be the exclusive comparison. You do need to compare it to like classes, too, for the sake of balance.
Leress 12-22-07, 02:16 PM	I'm talking for sake of class generation balance. The classes you compare it too are classes that are(or can be) similar in nature. Now, you can't compare it to just any monsters, since there are some monsters you just can't beat with front-line melee classes(excluding equipment, of course). I'm not saying some monster comparison isn't needed, but it shouldn't be the exclusive comparison. You do need to compare it to like classes, too, for the sake of balance. The thing is, if we compare it to classes, many of which only overlap or have a completely different system attached to them, it won't really give a good reading of how good the class is at it's niche. It doesn't have to be able to beat all monsters in the test just half of them and with a reliable effectiveness . That is why you take things from a variety of aspect of monster since the numbers can be crunched quicker since you don't have to worry about monster equipment and feats. Test at each level and see where percentage starts to drop and think of ways to bring it back up again.
Ralvuimego 12-22-07, 02:31 PM	A room of traps A Fire Giant A Young Blue Dragon A Bebilith A Vrock 2 Remorhaz 6 Trolls 12 Shadows He is going to a die a very horrible death in all the aforementioned scenarios, I am afraid... Not necessarily. He's a level 10 character, and thus has wealth by level 10 character standards. He can easily invest a little cash into some boots of flying and a ghost touch weapon, to make at least three of these encounters winnable.
LoneFlame 12-22-07, 03:14 PM	Keep in mind that a character is not guaranteed to spend their money on specific gear... Anywayz. Seeing how something stacks up against monsters, while is crucial, is not the only way to gage a class. If you base a character's strength solely off of the monsters, without any regard to how it is in relation other classes, it's too easy to make something that isn't balanced. Balance is important for class design. Never forget that. Also, since a CR is traditionally intended for a party of 4, how and why would an individual have a 50% success rate against a CR of his lv?
Leress 12-22-07, 03:26 PM	Keep in mind that a character is not guaranteed to spend their money on specific gear... I was going to say the same thing Anywayz. Seeing how something stacks up against monsters, while is crucial, is not the only way to gage a class. If you base a character's strength solely off of the monsters, without any regard to how it is in relation other classes, it's too easy to make something that isn't balanced. Balance is important for class design. Never forget that. That is what I have been saying this whole time. That is why you have it have a over arcing concept and have it able to fight the monsters of it's level within said concept. Obviously the Swashbuckler will not be casting spells or flying into rages or turning undead. Also, since a CR is traditionally intended for a party of 4, how and why would an individual have a 50% success rate against a CR of his lv? I have already explained that above in a previous post.
LoneFlame 12-22-07, 03:43 PM	Not following the CR logic... And, no, don't try to explain it to me. Anywayz. We might be getting too wrapped up in theory and could be getting away the point of this exercise. We're remaking a class. First, what's wrong with the Swashbuckler? What makes it a sub-par class?
Leress 12-22-07, 03:58 PM	Not following the CR logic... And, no, don't try to explain it to me. Then how are you going to understand my point of view? Anywayz. We might be getting too wrapped up in theory and could be getting away the point of this exercise. We're remaking a class. well it is important since it is part of the game's system. Classes don't exist in a vacuum. First, what's wrong with the Swashbuckler? What makes it a sub-par class? Well the OP is going have to answer that one since it is the OP topic. For me, most of abilities come too late to make much difference, it has a stealth boost to reflex for some reason, Insightful strike is way too limiting, The Dodge bonus ability is annoying since it has to be designated and only applies to melee.
OneWinged4ngel 12-22-07, 04:19 PM	Well, a character of level X should be able to take on a host of EL X challenges by himself at something around a 50% success rate. Which means that you're actually going to have to run some numbers in order to come up with something good. People don't want to do this, however, because it's time consuming and hard. Which is why hardly anything ends up balanced. So look at a bunch of CR 10 challenges (traps, monsters, social, etc.) and give the class stuff that lets a Swb 10 handle those challenges. Then do the same for a Swb 15. Then for Swb 20. Don't even worry about whether the class ends up "balanced" with other classes, since that's a very poor methodology. Concern yourself with making a class that actually adheres to the CR system, since most classes don't. It looks like you are making an assumption here that MONSTERS adhere to a balanced CR system, while CLASSES do not. Honestly, I don't think monsters are so fantastically well balanced by comparison.
NineInchNall 12-22-07, 11:57 PM	Heh. That is often true. (*cough* dragons *cough*) The monsters are, however, the only real extraclass rubric that we have for determining class efficacy.
LoneFlame 12-23-07, 12:02 AM	CRs of opponents should be based off of classes, not the other way around.
runestar 12-23-07, 01:04 AM	CRs of opponents should be based off of classes, not the other way around. Not true, if I understand what you are trying to say. Unlike classes (and that dumb cr=no.of class lvs rule), monsters are created from scratch, then their cr determined by weighing their abilities and seeing how well they fare against a standard party. Conversely, the whole "npc cr = class lv" rule is obviously very inaccurate (as is the problem with any attempt at a universal 1-size-fits-all template), and really works for only a very narrow range of lvs. For example, you cannot tell me that a fighter20 is cr20, or that a drow wiz1 is cr2. A lv20 party will tear it apart with nary a sweat, and the statistical disparity between it and say, the tarrasque, is all too obvious. It looks like you are making an assumption here that MONSTERS adhere to a balanced CR system, while CLASSES do not. Honestly, I don't think monsters are so fantastically well balanced by comparison. They would be more accurate than classes at any rate.
nireth 12-23-07, 03:06 AM	In my experience with D&D, at high levels, fighter classes cannot hold their own. Fortunately though, with the help of their caster buddies, they provide excellent support and DPS. The goal of high level fighters is to put pressure on enemy spellcasters while your team's caster go to town on them, or to tank and block enemy fighters, preventing them from pressuring your casters. Assuming no twinking anywhere in the game, you will still be able to beat some monsters/NPCs up on a regular basis, but don't try to go toe to toe with high level spellcasters if your DM is a mean kind of guy. The first time they drop Mordenkainen's Magic Disjunction on you (a 9th lvl spell, so only in really high lvl game) you will come to realize the power difference. Focus on providing support to your casters and all should go well. Maybe your campaigns will go differently, but I've playing D&D since I was eight and they only had 2nd ed AD&D. That is my perspective, don't focus on playing mechanics, just play your concept and even if you character isn't as useful as your twinked out buddy, you'll probably have more fun than him.
LoneFlame 12-23-07, 11:53 PM	The CR of monsters is usually based off of whatever classes the creators used to fight the monsters(and guess work... lots of guess work). It is possible to make the monsters, and then make classes based off of the monsters, however, there are more monsters than classes. Which is one of the reasons why it is illogical to make monsters and establish their lv of challenge, without first making the classes & balancing them towards one another first.
runestar 12-24-07, 02:25 AM	The CR of monsters is usually based off of whatever classes the creators used to fight the monsters(and guess work... lots of guess work). It is possible to make the monsters, and then make classes based off of the monsters, however, there are more monsters than classes. Which is one of the reasons why it is illogical to make monsters and establish their lv of challenge, without first making the classes & balancing them towards one another first. But an established guideline already exists, in the form of PHB classes and MM monsters. It makes no sense to argue about the chicken and the egg at this juncture. We are already well past that.:confused: I dunno how the designers resolved this issue, but they apparently did somehow.
LoneFlame 12-24-07, 12:14 PM	The problem lies in the fact that the current CR system doesn't work well(much like how the Lv Adjustment System doesn't). In truth the designers never fixed the problem of balanced. This is illustrated in the weakness of some classes(such as Hexblade). Even when almost completely revising the system, several of the kinks still remained. However, after a while, some WotC guys did realize what classes didn't suck(Druid, Wizard, Barbarian) & started using them as a power basis for comparing new classes. Once you've seen what works and what doesn't, you can start to make more things based off of what does work(and hopefully fix what doesn't).
Archtyrant Terevoth 12-24-07, 02:48 PM	Not necessarily. He's a level 10 character, and thus has wealth by level 10 character standards. He can easily invest a little cash into some boots of flying and a ghost touch weapon, to make at least three of these encounters winnable. Yeah, you have to assume that characters will spend their money. And getting an item of flying is basically essential. Half the problem with character comparisons is that people tend to leave out the effect of magic items. If the fighter has death ward armor, he makes short work of the shadows. If he has boots of flying he can do alright against the flying creatures. Now, if the fighter expects to take on these challenges alone, he's going to invest in items like that, because he has no party members to rely on to cast that stuff on him. And what's the terrain? Melee characters are obviously weaker on wide open fields where mobile creatures can kite them, as opposed to enclosed caverns. First, Rogues are not useless against undead or constructs. They simply can't use sneak attack against them when restricted to core. Rogues have UMD and all sorts of other abilities that help take on level-appropriate challenges. Rogues are among the most over-rated classes out there. Mainly because in theoretical comparisons they've always got the perfect magic item to UMD, but in real games, they've probably spent most of their money on magic armor, magic weapons, rings of protection and so on. So they don't whip out that 5000 gp wand that happens to perfectly fit the situation at hand. The rogue is a case of a class that "can be" awesome, but often ends up just being a sneak attack machine. Once I thought rogues were well-designed, until I actually saw them in high-level play. What they amount to is the most over-specialized combat class out there. It all hinges on whether they can sneak attack something or not. If they can, then they go over there and tear it apart (high-level rogues do phenomenal damage output). If they can't sneak attack, then can barely even scratch the creature and just end up getting wrecked, because the entirety of their damage output is in their sneak attack. Without sneak attack they can't really contribute much at all. The rogue is pretty much an all-or-nothing class.
LoneFlame 12-24-07, 04:27 PM	The Penetrating Strike variant in Dungeonscape is a must have for Rogues because it reduces(though it doesn't remove) the drawbacks to Sneak Attack. Also, it's profoundly stupid to base a class's strength primarily on it's ability to use a skill(such as Use Magic Device), since you can spend a feat to make any skill you want be a class skill(complete with nice +2 to it). On a side note... Characters are not guaranteed to have specific items at each lv. There are so many useful items, it's practically impossible to know what people would definitely pick up(with the except of the obvious universal items, such as magical weapons & armor)