A second look at PHB2 [Archive] - Wizards Community

A second look at PHB2 [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FriendlyBiscuit
09-26-06, 10:50 AM Now that the furor has died down, what are people's opinions of the PHB2 material? "OMG, new mechanics are broken!" seems to be the response to pretty much anything that's new and unusual, but actual play experience and cooler heads tend to disagree. I'm sure we all remember the screamers who denounced Scouts and Warlocks as broken. Or, conversely, we have people initially ignoring the Crusader because it doesn't have a lot of shiny class features; playtesters later return to affirm that the Crusader's recovery mechanic, combined with an amazing ability to juggle DR, delayed damage pools, temporary hit points, and self-healing strikes, makes them nigh-unstoppable... and more so than the paladin!

Anyway, there is a thing in the PHB2 that still bugs me... spontaneous casters who use Int as their bonus stat. Oddjob spellcasting-on-the-side prestige classes that do the same thing (Assassin, Telflammar Shadowlord) are one thing; they cost prereqs and tend to have a small amount of low-level spells. Duskblades and Beguilers, on the other hand, are up there with bards and dread necros as unusual casters, but serious casters nonetheless. Personally, I would feel more comfortable increasing their skill points by 2 and making them use Charisma like all the other spontaneous casters have been doing, but I don't want to judge too hastily. I can't get any of my players to play either class, and I'm very attached to both of my current characters. How awesome is it to get Int-based spont casting, and how bad could it really be to use Cha (possibly with extra skillpoints) instead? How do you feel about the reactive old-timer response of "It ain't done this way! Yer breakin me rules an' it's gonna make Cecilia cry!"? Are the classes overpowered, fair, or underpowered? If you could change a thing or two about em, what would you change?

Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts! Hopefully the discussion stays civil. :rolleyes: Also, if you disagree with something in my preamble regarding other classes, feel free to say so, but stick in your 2 cents on Beguilers and Duskblades while you're at it, please.
Wire
09-26-06, 11:14 AM Right out of the box, the Beguiler is already the most versatile and potent of the "super-specialist" primary spellcasters (warmage, dread necro, etc.). His spell list is FANTASTIC and you don't see anybody whining about the narrowness of selection like you do the other two.

Initially, some people had issues with the Beguiler's ability to affect creatureres that were immune to mind-affecting illusions and enchantments. But as has been shown in a number of threads (including the Beguiler Handbook from what I recall), the Beguiler has other potent combat options at his disposal for such circumstances or can PrC-out to grab even more versatility.

Now ... once you start adding PrCs to Beguiler, you got Shadowmage insanity just right around the corner. 100%+ "shadowy" Silent Images of damage spells take the Beguiler to a whole new level.
Board_Rider
09-26-06, 11:16 AM I think the PHB2 has been one of my best purchases.

Having read through it, I have found that the Dragon Shamans auras and the "re-spec" options are the only things that I do not really like.

As far as the Duskblade goes...it works. Currently one of my players has a 7th level Duskblade and it isn't all that earth shattering. I allow all things WoTC and this guy is a *powergamer* and its fine.
Alienfreak
09-26-06, 11:51 AM A Duskblade is not earth shattering when compared to your fighter!?

Wow ... he must really be a cool powergamer ;)
MerlintheTuna
09-26-06, 12:06 PM Now that the furor has died down, what are people's opinions of the PHB2 material? "OMG, new mechanics are broken!" seems to be the response to pretty much anything that's new and unusual, but actual play experience and cooler heads tend to disagree.

I don't think anyone that knew what the hell they were talking about really ever reacted like that to the PHB 2. Mostly those are the kind of things I saw out of people on other boards that use the infamous line, "Go to the CO Boards and look at all the love (class) is getting." Almost without fail, these people have never actually BEEN to the CO boards. Things like that were most pronounced with the Duskblade -- you wouldn't believe how many "Go to the CO Boards to see how ZOMG BORKEN Duskblades are!11!" The CO board's response was, at the time, pretty much a lukewarm "Well, it's a gish, but I've already got one that attacks almost as well and casts three times better. I'll pass."

With that out of the way... I like all of the classes from the PHB 2 quite a bit. The flavor-->mechanics transition of the Dragon Enthusiast is shaky at best, but all of the classes do a specific shtick, with the exception of the Duskblade, none of these types of characters would normally be an option before the book came out. I mean, was there really any way to make a defensive melee specialist prior to the Knight? The closest you could manage would probably be a Dwarven Defender with a Spike Chain... and frankly, that still works, but it works FAR BETTER with the Knight, and he can control the field in more ways that gratuitious trip attacks, too. Most of the classes get something new at just about every level, too, which makes multiclassing a bit more difficult a decision -- I love that.

The Duskblade might as well have INT based casting -- I don't really care one way or another here, and I do like to depart from the "All spontaneous = CHA" idea. In fact, the Warmage probably ought to, as well. (Int for casting, Cha for edge probably makes more sense anyway.) The Beguiler on the other hand, seems like it almost assuredly should ave gotten Charisma-based casting. I mean, if I were playing a Beguiler I'd probably keep my Cha just as high almost on principle, but the fact that it's pretty much a Bardic spellcaster on steroids makes me think Cha would've been more appropriate. But then again, maybe it is slightly more MAD this way, and I do like to see MADdening casters.
Board_Rider
09-26-06, 12:22 PM A Duskblade is not earth shattering when compared to your fighter!?

Wow ... he must really be a cool powergamer ;)
He is the fighter. The other player, a Barbaria/Dragon Shaman, is the type of player who just shows up and doesn't try to optimize so his PC is average compared to some of the others.

The Duskblade is doling out the damage but his PC gets hit....a lot.
Prominence
09-26-06, 12:27 PM The Duskblade is doling out the damage but his PC gets hit....a lot.
Strange, the only people in D&D who seem to consistently not get hit are clerics with their insane buff spells and armor, and wizards with the 'you're incapacitated, asleep, exhausted, nauseated. i'm invisisble, concealed, half-in reality, contingencied to get away, behind 3 meatshields and summoning 5 more for free, undetectable, mind blanked, ...., and in a fortress on the negative energy plane' thing going on.
It's almost as if less HP makes wizards feel the need to compensate.
Anyway, wait till the duskblade hits level 13 and goes into chameleon or something.

My old response, and new response, to the book is 'wow, not unbalanced!' Really, I could see some good, useful stuff but nothing struck me as 'well, pun-pun just got a new build/uber trick' (though he did something amusing with Knight 20 ability). The beguiler looks awesome, but the wizard has the better 'list'. The duskblade's list is small and to do anything interesting people have spent all their feats expanding the spell list. The variant classes are interesting: Sorcerer became playable, medium paladins lost a lesser used ability. About the strongest thing to come out of PHB2 was Celerity. Heck, Cleric 3 / Knight 2 is now a great lead in to Prestige Paladin.
FriendlyBiscuit
09-27-06, 04:57 PM Thanks for your input, folks. I think I will discuss making the beguiler Cha-based, but 8 + Int skills with my players. Sounds like the duskblade is fine. If I get any experience as to how the old or new beguiler, or the duskblade play out, I'll contribute a bit mo to the discussion here.
Prominence
09-27-06, 05:13 PM Thanks for your input, folks. I think I will discuss making the beguiler Cha-based, but 8 + Int skills with my players. Sounds like the duskblade is fine. If I get any experience as to how the old or new beguiler, or the duskblade play out, I'll contribute a bit mo to the discussion here.
Not that that would hurt the beguiler, but I don't think it would do anything except lower their overall skill points and make someone play a wizard/rogue gish instead.

The beguiler is fine as written. Otherwise, Rogue 1 / Wizard 5 / Daggerspell Mage 10 or Arcane Trickster 10 is just better.
Todd
09-27-06, 08:01 PM I personally like the Beguiler as a Cha based caster instead of Int. YMMV.
Hanniball
09-27-06, 08:27 PM Duskblades and Beguilers, on the other hand, are up there with bards and dread necros as unusual casters, but serious casters nonetheless.

Personally, I do not see the Duskblade as a serious caster. It's spell list is far too limited to be anything more than supplimentary.

Otherwise, I generally agree with what's already been said here. Neither of the classes are broken or need any type of serious revision. The beguiler was given Int-based casting to offset their healthy dose of Cha-based skills/abilities. Creating MAD is a great way to balance a class, IMO.

The only thing that slightly concerns me is the Duskblade's Arcane Channeling (full attack) ability. Again, this is downplayed by their spell list, but the potential for abuse it striking when Extra Spell is thrown into the mix.

However, one interpretation of the ability only allows it to affect a target once/round. If this interpretation is used, there is no problem in my eyes.

Either way...just my 2 cp
A_Wizard_for_Breakfast
09-27-06, 08:40 PM I like the Beguiler as intelligence based. They do end up with more skill points, but to play the party face they need that charisma. It does a good job of giving them a bit of MAD.
xanadu
09-27-06, 09:20 PM Personally, I do not see the Duskblade as a serious caster. It's spell list is far too limited to be anything more than supplimentary.

Otherwise, I generally agree with what's already been said here. Neither of the classes are broken or need any type of serious revision. The beguiler was given Int-based casting to offset their healthy dose of Cha-based skills/abilities. Creating MAD is a great way to balance a class, IMO.

This is well said.

I think a lot of thought was placed into the base classes and the only one I find lacking is the Dragon Shaman. It is ok pre level 10 - and I mean just ok - but its breathe weapon is woeful (especially since it allows for a save) and its melee capability is hampered by 3/4 BAB. The ideas behind the class I find appealing, the final product is too conservative for effective execution.
Fatalis_902
09-27-06, 09:50 PM On a quasi-related subject still on-topic, I rather enjoy the Dragon Shaman, but I do have one fair problem. The draconic adaptation part. Personally, I would have granted the standard ability at 3rd level, and then an additional ability of a similar type (i.e. Sp, or Ex) at 13th, instead of the sharing w/ allies bit. The only other problem is that prestiging/ multiclassing for more than one level seriously hurts you, as it denies you some great abilities, like your wings, and your final aura bonus. Speaking of the auras, they are quite fun to use, especially in conjunction with a martial. Also, they are one of the few abilities that are truly useful at rediculously low levels.
PonTelon
09-28-06, 12:16 AM On a quasi-related subject still on-topic, I rather enjoy the Dragon Shaman, but I do have one fair problem. The draconic adaptation part. Personally, I would have granted the standard ability at 3rd level, and then an additional ability of a similar type (i.e. Sp, or Ex) at 13th, instead of the sharing w/ allies bit. The only other problem is that prestiging/ multiclassing for more than one level seriously hurts you, as it denies you some great abilities, like your wings, and your final aura bonus. Speaking of the auras, they are quite fun to use, especially in conjunction with a martial. Also, they are one of the few abilities that are truly useful at rediculously low levels.
Except now with Dragon Magic, Marshal can learn Dracconic Auras as one of their Major Auras. Oh, and there is a feat to get 2 Dracconic Auras running at once. The only aura that Marshal cannot get is the Fast Healing one(If I remember correctly).
X-Codes
09-28-06, 05:22 AM Except now with Dragon Magic, Marshal can learn Dracconic Auras as one of their Major Auras. Oh, and there is a feat to get 2 Dracconic Auras running at once. The only aura that Marshal cannot get is the Fast Healing one(If I remember correctly).
Well heck, other than the Vigor aura, only the Energy Shield is worthwile for a Marshal to get. The rest of their auras are *better* than the Dragon Shaman auras.

The more I look at it, the more I think that the Dragon Shaman is just not a worthwile full 20 class.
jameswilliamogle
09-28-06, 09:57 AM I think the book has underpowered stuff for players compared w/ core. Its also kind of flavorless compared w/ other recent base class additions (ToM, ToB, MoI, Dragon Shaman is cool but weak).
Timlagor
09-28-06, 10:41 AM Dagon Shaman: Awesome to dip; not so sure about building around it. I think it was a mistake to give so many auras at first level.

Beguiler: I love the flavour. Is Grease supposed to be on the spell list (it's mentioned in the tactics). I'm going to come down in favour of Cha-based casting here because as it stands the Beguiler doesn't really need Charisma at all -it's certainly nice but the attribute gets swamped by the ranks anyway.
I'm also far from impressed by the whole feinting thing since they aren't robust enough to want to be that close.

Duskblades: meh

Knight looks pretty cool.

Wizard variant: YIAOWZA! That Conjuration thing is comepletely gross!

Sorceror variant: well I can't see any reason not to play a Metamagic Specialist if it's available but I don't think it's really overpowered.
WombleHunter
09-28-06, 01:22 PM I don't think the Duskblade is powerful enough to warrant the slight depowering that Cha-based casting would be. Besides, it works really, really well as a generic gish-type character concept, a warrior-scholar with all Knowledge skills and the melee might to stick it out. Kind of like an arcane warrior Archivist...

I was surprised that the Beguiler uses Int instead of Charisma, given that, spells aside, if you wanted to beguile someone in D&D you'd use a Cha-based skill. It's odd that Cha can be a dump stat for these characters, though I don't agree that, if you want a social character, the skill ranks make your Cha modifier irrelevant.

The thing that worries me is that there are too many places a Beguiler is useless. Undead or Constructs negate most of their spells, which makes their other class ability (Suprise Casting) worthless.
Prominence
09-28-06, 01:37 PM I don't think the Duskblade is powerful enough to warrant the slight depowering that Cha-based casting would be. Besides, it works really, really well as a generic gish-type character concept, a warrior-scholar with all Knowledge skills and the melee might to stick it out. Kind of like an arcane warrior Archivist...
Umm... cha casting would just make the duskblade stronger. Charisma is the most abusable stat in the game usually. You'll start seeing Duskblade 13 / Paladin 4 / Hexblade 3 / Bone Knight 1 / Knight 2 stuff pop up or something crazier.

edit: Bard 1 / Duskblade 13 / Sublime Chord 2 / etc
Duskblade 13 / Divine Crusader 1 / etc
FriendlyFrog
09-28-06, 02:05 PM The thing that worries me is that there are too many places a Beguiler is useless. Undead or Constructs negate most of their spells, which makes their other class ability (Suprise Casting) worthless.
Most of the illusions still work against undead and constructs, so it's basically only the other half of their spells that do not work. And at higher levels everyone else tends to be immune to mind affecting effects too.

And it's not exactly as if Rogues are any better against those opponents, even if illusions wouldn't work. IMO Beguilers are a very good substitute to Rogues, they tend to have more skill points (thanks to high intelligence), and are much more adaptable and versatile in combat (sneak attack is very situational).
Dirty Dan the Laundry Man
09-28-06, 02:48 PM Over the years, the CO Forum has had a bunch of threads on how to deal with undead and constructs using just figment spells. Constructs are especially easy to deal with since many of them are incapable of cognitively interacting with said figments. Meaning they are especially susceptible to creatively-applied figments that operate successfully outside the original programming parameters (decided by the creator) of a given construct.

People need to stop getting so hung up on the incorrect notion that illusions are all of the "mind-affecting" category.
PonTelon
09-28-06, 03:18 PM People need to stop getting so hung up on the incorrect notion that illusions are all of the "mind-affecting" category.
Quoted for Truth.

Illusions are wonderful in that, unlike Enchantments, they aren't 99% mind-effecting.

Besides, that is what your extra learning is for. Grab Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration. Then you should never have a problem.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FriendlyBiscuit 09-26-06, 10:50 AM	Now that the furor has died down, what are people's opinions of the PHB2 material? "OMG, new mechanics are broken!" seems to be the response to pretty much anything that's new and unusual, but actual play experience and cooler heads tend to disagree. I'm sure we all remember the screamers who denounced Scouts and Warlocks as broken. Or, conversely, we have people initially ignoring the Crusader because it doesn't have a lot of shiny class features; playtesters later return to affirm that the Crusader's recovery mechanic, combined with an amazing ability to juggle DR, delayed damage pools, temporary hit points, and self-healing strikes, makes them nigh-unstoppable... and more so than the paladin! Anyway, there is a thing in the PHB2 that still bugs me... spontaneous casters who use Int as their bonus stat. Oddjob spellcasting-on-the-side prestige classes that do the same thing (Assassin, Telflammar Shadowlord) are one thing; they cost prereqs and tend to have a small amount of low-level spells. Duskblades and Beguilers, on the other hand, are up there with bards and dread necros as unusual casters, but serious casters nonetheless. Personally, I would feel more comfortable increasing their skill points by 2 and making them use Charisma like all the other spontaneous casters have been doing, but I don't want to judge too hastily. I can't get any of my players to play either class, and I'm very attached to both of my current characters. How awesome is it to get Int-based spont casting, and how bad could it really be to use Cha (possibly with extra skillpoints) instead? How do you feel about the reactive old-timer response of "It ain't done this way! Yer breakin me rules an' it's gonna make Cecilia cry!"? Are the classes overpowered, fair, or underpowered? If you could change a thing or two about em, what would you change? Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts! Hopefully the discussion stays civil. :rolleyes: Also, if you disagree with something in my preamble regarding other classes, feel free to say so, but stick in your 2 cents on Beguilers and Duskblades while you're at it, please.
Wire 09-26-06, 11:14 AM	Right out of the box, the Beguiler is already the most versatile and potent of the "super-specialist" primary spellcasters (warmage, dread necro, etc.). His spell list is FANTASTIC and you don't see anybody whining about the narrowness of selection like you do the other two. Initially, some people had issues with the Beguiler's ability to affect creatureres that were immune to mind-affecting illusions and enchantments. But as has been shown in a number of threads (including the Beguiler Handbook from what I recall), the Beguiler has other potent combat options at his disposal for such circumstances or can PrC-out to grab even more versatility. Now ... once you start adding PrCs to Beguiler, you got Shadowmage insanity just right around the corner. 100%+ "shadowy" Silent Images of damage spells take the Beguiler to a whole new level.
Board_Rider 09-26-06, 11:16 AM	I think the PHB2 has been one of my best purchases. Having read through it, I have found that the Dragon Shamans auras and the "re-spec" options are the only things that I do not really like. As far as the Duskblade goes...it works. Currently one of my players has a 7th level Duskblade and it isn't all that earth shattering. I allow all things WoTC and this guy is a powergamer and its fine.
Alienfreak 09-26-06, 11:51 AM	A Duskblade is not earth shattering when compared to your fighter!? Wow ... he must really be a cool powergamer ;)
MerlintheTuna 09-26-06, 12:06 PM	Now that the furor has died down, what are people's opinions of the PHB2 material? "OMG, new mechanics are broken!" seems to be the response to pretty much anything that's new and unusual, but actual play experience and cooler heads tend to disagree. I don't think anyone that knew what the hell they were talking about really ever reacted like that to the PHB 2. Mostly those are the kind of things I saw out of people on other boards that use the infamous line, "Go to the CO Boards and look at all the love (class) is getting." Almost without fail, these people have never actually BEEN to the CO boards. Things like that were most pronounced with the Duskblade -- you wouldn't believe how many "Go to the CO Boards to see how ZOMG BORKEN Duskblades are!11!" The CO board's response was, at the time, pretty much a lukewarm "Well, it's a gish, but I've already got one that attacks almost as well and casts three times better. I'll pass." With that out of the way... I like all of the classes from the PHB 2 quite a bit. The flavor-->mechanics transition of the Dragon Enthusiast is shaky at best, but all of the classes do a specific shtick, with the exception of the Duskblade, none of these types of characters would normally be an option before the book came out. I mean, was there really any way to make a defensive melee specialist prior to the Knight? The closest you could manage would probably be a Dwarven Defender with a Spike Chain... and frankly, that still works, but it works FAR BETTER with the Knight, and he can control the field in more ways that gratuitious trip attacks, too. Most of the classes get something new at just about every level, too, which makes multiclassing a bit more difficult a decision -- I love that. The Duskblade might as well have INT based casting -- I don't really care one way or another here, and I do like to depart from the "All spontaneous = CHA" idea. In fact, the Warmage probably ought to, as well. (Int for casting, Cha for edge probably makes more sense anyway.) The Beguiler on the other hand, seems like it almost assuredly should ave gotten Charisma-based casting. I mean, if I were playing a Beguiler I'd probably keep my Cha just as high almost on principle, but the fact that it's pretty much a Bardic spellcaster on steroids makes me think Cha would've been more appropriate. But then again, maybe it is slightly more MAD this way, and I do like to see MADdening casters.
Board_Rider 09-26-06, 12:22 PM	A Duskblade is not earth shattering when compared to your fighter!? Wow ... he must really be a cool powergamer ;) He is the fighter. The other player, a Barbaria/Dragon Shaman, is the type of player who just shows up and doesn't try to optimize so his PC is average compared to some of the others. The Duskblade is doling out the damage but his PC gets hit....a lot.
Prominence 09-26-06, 12:27 PM	The Duskblade is doling out the damage but his PC gets hit....a lot. Strange, the only people in D&D who seem to consistently not get hit are clerics with their insane buff spells and armor, and wizards with the 'you're incapacitated, asleep, exhausted, nauseated. i'm invisisble, concealed, half-in reality, contingencied to get away, behind 3 meatshields and summoning 5 more for free, undetectable, mind blanked, ...., and in a fortress on the negative energy plane' thing going on. It's almost as if less HP makes wizards feel the need to compensate. Anyway, wait till the duskblade hits level 13 and goes into chameleon or something. My old response, and new response, to the book is 'wow, not unbalanced!' Really, I could see some good, useful stuff but nothing struck me as 'well, pun-pun just got a new build/uber trick' (though he did something amusing with Knight 20 ability). The beguiler looks awesome, but the wizard has the better 'list'. The duskblade's list is small and to do anything interesting people have spent all their feats expanding the spell list. The variant classes are interesting: Sorcerer became playable, medium paladins lost a lesser used ability. About the strongest thing to come out of PHB2 was Celerity. Heck, Cleric 3 / Knight 2 is now a great lead in to Prestige Paladin.
FriendlyBiscuit 09-27-06, 04:57 PM	Thanks for your input, folks. I think I will discuss making the beguiler Cha-based, but 8 + Int skills with my players. Sounds like the duskblade is fine. If I get any experience as to how the old or new beguiler, or the duskblade play out, I'll contribute a bit mo to the discussion here.
Prominence 09-27-06, 05:13 PM	Thanks for your input, folks. I think I will discuss making the beguiler Cha-based, but 8 + Int skills with my players. Sounds like the duskblade is fine. If I get any experience as to how the old or new beguiler, or the duskblade play out, I'll contribute a bit mo to the discussion here. Not that that would hurt the beguiler, but I don't think it would do anything except lower their overall skill points and make someone play a wizard/rogue gish instead. The beguiler is fine as written. Otherwise, Rogue 1 / Wizard 5 / Daggerspell Mage 10 or Arcane Trickster 10 is just better.
Todd 09-27-06, 08:01 PM	I personally like the Beguiler as a Cha based caster instead of Int. YMMV.
Hanniball 09-27-06, 08:27 PM	Duskblades and Beguilers, on the other hand, are up there with bards and dread necros as unusual casters, but serious casters nonetheless. Personally, I do not see the Duskblade as a serious caster. It's spell list is far too limited to be anything more than supplimentary. Otherwise, I generally agree with what's already been said here. Neither of the classes are broken or need any type of serious revision. The beguiler was given Int-based casting to offset their healthy dose of Cha-based skills/abilities. Creating MAD is a great way to balance a class, IMO. The only thing that slightly concerns me is the Duskblade's Arcane Channeling (full attack) ability. Again, this is downplayed by their spell list, but the potential for abuse it striking when Extra Spell is thrown into the mix. However, one interpretation of the ability only allows it to affect a target once/round. If this interpretation is used, there is no problem in my eyes. Either way...just my 2 cp
A_Wizard_for_Breakfast 09-27-06, 08:40 PM	I like the Beguiler as intelligence based. They do end up with more skill points, but to play the party face they need that charisma. It does a good job of giving them a bit of MAD.
xanadu 09-27-06, 09:20 PM	Personally, I do not see the Duskblade as a serious caster. It's spell list is far too limited to be anything more than supplimentary. Otherwise, I generally agree with what's already been said here. Neither of the classes are broken or need any type of serious revision. The beguiler was given Int-based casting to offset their healthy dose of Cha-based skills/abilities. Creating MAD is a great way to balance a class, IMO. This is well said. I think a lot of thought was placed into the base classes and the only one I find lacking is the Dragon Shaman. It is ok pre level 10 - and I mean just ok - but its breathe weapon is woeful (especially since it allows for a save) and its melee capability is hampered by 3/4 BAB. The ideas behind the class I find appealing, the final product is too conservative for effective execution.
Fatalis_902 09-27-06, 09:50 PM	On a quasi-related subject still on-topic, I rather enjoy the Dragon Shaman, but I do have one fair problem. The draconic adaptation part. Personally, I would have granted the standard ability at 3rd level, and then an additional ability of a similar type (i.e. Sp, or Ex) at 13th, instead of the sharing w/ allies bit. The only other problem is that prestiging/ multiclassing for more than one level seriously hurts you, as it denies you some great abilities, like your wings, and your final aura bonus. Speaking of the auras, they are quite fun to use, especially in conjunction with a martial. Also, they are one of the few abilities that are truly useful at rediculously low levels.
PonTelon 09-28-06, 12:16 AM	On a quasi-related subject still on-topic, I rather enjoy the Dragon Shaman, but I do have one fair problem. The draconic adaptation part. Personally, I would have granted the standard ability at 3rd level, and then an additional ability of a similar type (i.e. Sp, or Ex) at 13th, instead of the sharing w/ allies bit. The only other problem is that prestiging/ multiclassing for more than one level seriously hurts you, as it denies you some great abilities, like your wings, and your final aura bonus. Speaking of the auras, they are quite fun to use, especially in conjunction with a martial. Also, they are one of the few abilities that are truly useful at rediculously low levels. Except now with Dragon Magic, Marshal can learn Dracconic Auras as one of their Major Auras. Oh, and there is a feat to get 2 Dracconic Auras running at once. The only aura that Marshal cannot get is the Fast Healing one(If I remember correctly).
X-Codes 09-28-06, 05:22 AM	Except now with Dragon Magic, Marshal can learn Dracconic Auras as one of their Major Auras. Oh, and there is a feat to get 2 Dracconic Auras running at once. The only aura that Marshal cannot get is the Fast Healing one(If I remember correctly). Well heck, other than the Vigor aura, only the Energy Shield is worthwile for a Marshal to get. The rest of their auras are better than the Dragon Shaman auras. The more I look at it, the more I think that the Dragon Shaman is just not a worthwile full 20 class.
jameswilliamogle 09-28-06, 09:57 AM	I think the book has underpowered stuff for players compared w/ core. Its also kind of flavorless compared w/ other recent base class additions (ToM, ToB, MoI, Dragon Shaman is cool but weak).
Timlagor 09-28-06, 10:41 AM	Dagon Shaman: Awesome to dip; not so sure about building around it. I think it was a mistake to give so many auras at first level. Beguiler: I love the flavour. Is Grease supposed to be on the spell list (it's mentioned in the tactics). I'm going to come down in favour of Cha-based casting here because as it stands the Beguiler doesn't really need Charisma at all -it's certainly nice but the attribute gets swamped by the ranks anyway. I'm also far from impressed by the whole feinting thing since they aren't robust enough to want to be that close. Duskblades: meh Knight looks pretty cool. Wizard variant: YIAOWZA! That Conjuration thing is comepletely gross! Sorceror variant: well I can't see any reason not to play a Metamagic Specialist if it's available but I don't think it's really overpowered.
WombleHunter 09-28-06, 01:22 PM	I don't think the Duskblade is powerful enough to warrant the slight depowering that Cha-based casting would be. Besides, it works really, really well as a generic gish-type character concept, a warrior-scholar with all Knowledge skills and the melee might to stick it out. Kind of like an arcane warrior Archivist... I was surprised that the Beguiler uses Int instead of Charisma, given that, spells aside, if you wanted to beguile someone in D&D you'd use a Cha-based skill. It's odd that Cha can be a dump stat for these characters, though I don't agree that, if you want a social character, the skill ranks make your Cha modifier irrelevant. The thing that worries me is that there are too many places a Beguiler is useless. Undead or Constructs negate most of their spells, which makes their other class ability (Suprise Casting) worthless.
Prominence 09-28-06, 01:37 PM	I don't think the Duskblade is powerful enough to warrant the slight depowering that Cha-based casting would be. Besides, it works really, really well as a generic gish-type character concept, a warrior-scholar with all Knowledge skills and the melee might to stick it out. Kind of like an arcane warrior Archivist... Umm... cha casting would just make the duskblade stronger. Charisma is the most abusable stat in the game usually. You'll start seeing Duskblade 13 / Paladin 4 / Hexblade 3 / Bone Knight 1 / Knight 2 stuff pop up or something crazier. edit: Bard 1 / Duskblade 13 / Sublime Chord 2 / etc Duskblade 13 / Divine Crusader 1 / etc
FriendlyFrog 09-28-06, 02:05 PM	The thing that worries me is that there are too many places a Beguiler is useless. Undead or Constructs negate most of their spells, which makes their other class ability (Suprise Casting) worthless. Most of the illusions still work against undead and constructs, so it's basically only the other half of their spells that do not work. And at higher levels everyone else tends to be immune to mind affecting effects too. And it's not exactly as if Rogues are any better against those opponents, even if illusions wouldn't work. IMO Beguilers are a very good substitute to Rogues, they tend to have more skill points (thanks to high intelligence), and are much more adaptable and versatile in combat (sneak attack is very situational).
Dirty Dan the Laundry Man 09-28-06, 02:48 PM	Over the years, the CO Forum has had a bunch of threads on how to deal with undead and constructs using just figment spells. Constructs are especially easy to deal with since many of them are incapable of cognitively interacting with said figments. Meaning they are especially susceptible to creatively-applied figments that operate successfully outside the original programming parameters (decided by the creator) of a given construct. People need to stop getting so hung up on the incorrect notion that illusions are all of the "mind-affecting" category.
PonTelon 09-28-06, 03:18 PM	People need to stop getting so hung up on the incorrect notion that illusions are all of the "mind-affecting" category. Quoted for Truth. Illusions are wonderful in that, unlike Enchantments, they aren't 99% mind-effecting. Besides, that is what your extra learning is for. Grab Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration. Then you should never have a problem.