Post/Author/DateTime	Post
enlightened 06-18-07, 03:14 AM	I welcome any correction on this, but it seems to me that whenever the terms "balanced" or "broken" are used, they are refering to how well something fares in combat. So, my question is this: Is there anything in D&D that is widely considered broken that doesn't directly relate to combat? For example, are there any feats dealing with finding/removing traps or tracking, etc. (in other words, things not directly related to combat) that are generally accepted as being "broken"? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I just can't think of anything. Everything I think of ends up being related to combat in the end.
IceFractal 06-18-07, 04:11 AM	A couple examples right off the bat: Diplomancy - The ability to automatically succeed at even a rushed Diplomacy check to go from Hostile -> Helpful, or Hostile -> Fanatic in the advanced builds. Can cancel a large proportion of encounters at the very least, and potentially turn every BBEG into a loyal minion. Breaking the Economic System - Using a variety of methods to end up with gold far in excess of a normal character at the same level. With some tricks, you can end up with millions or even billions of gold pieces. While many uses of this money end up in combat (buying lots of magic items), you can also do things like buy yourself a town or a private army.
enlightened 06-18-07, 04:18 AM	Ah, yeah, the diplomacy thing is a good one. I can't believe that one didn't pop into my head. I did, however, think about the money thing, but I (perhaps too hastily) dismissed it as being related to combat because how do characters use money if not to buy better weapons, etc. I know it's much deeper than that though.
claypigeons 06-18-07, 04:24 AM	Well... most people don't try to break non-combat situations because, in most cases, confrontations end up in combat anyway. If it's an RP scenario, it's the players' ability to think on their feet and say what needs to be said that gets the job done. There is no mechanical representation of the player being able to do something. However, as already stated, you can break the economy of a given world fairly easily. Buy iron pots. Break them up and sell the scrap iron. You get more back than you paid. Or, buy a bunch of ladders, break them appart and sell them as two ten-foot poles. Also, diplomacy and bluff can be used fairly well outside of combat. But generally, they are used only in such a way the players will be able to bypass combat, or find their way into combat faster. Also, the folks that frequent the CharOp boards have made a character that, by level 20, ends up with like +250 to its diplomacy check. (As written, that would make the universe your ally...)
OneWinged4ngel 06-18-07, 05:53 AM	I welcome any correction on this, but it seems to me that whenever the terms "balanced" or "broken" are used, they are refering to how well something fares in combat. That would be a largely inaccurate statement. Many of the things that are considered broken are considered so for out of combat utility. You know what's up there on the list of "Complete Campaign Smashers" right up there next to Pun-Pun? The list of stuff that even the most hardcore powergamer wouldn't want to allow in his game because it instantly breaks it? It's a diplomacy build. In any case, things like Wall of Iron and FABRICATE are often considered horribly broken.
Optimized_Commoner 06-18-07, 06:07 AM	So, my question is this: Is there anything in D&D that is widely considered broken that doesn't directly relate to combat? Better question. Is there anything in D&D that doesn't directly relate to combat? I love D&D but the rules really do center on "Can I wack him with my piece of sharpened metal or not?". Everything else flows from that question.
RogerWilco 06-18-07, 12:09 PM	Better question. Is there anything in D&D that doesn't directly relate to combat? I love D&D but the rules really do center on "Can I wack him with my piece of sharpened metal or not?". Everything else flows from that question. I have the feeling that it's becomming more and more like that. In 2nd edition I had less of a combat oriented feel.Still 3rd ed. has much clearer rules, and it's mainly how you play. I don't like some of the errata though, in how they eliminate non-combat options from certain spells (polymorph e.g.), because they might be a problem in combat.
Downtym 06-18-07, 01:58 PM	I welcome any correction on this, but it seems to me that whenever the terms "balanced" or "broken" are used, they are refering to how well something fares in combat. So, my question is this: Is there anything in D&D that is widely considered broken that doesn't directly relate to combat? For example, are there any feats dealing with finding/removing traps or tracking, etc. (in other words, things not directly related to combat) that are generally accepted as being "broken"? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I just can't think of anything. Everything I think of ends up being related to combat in the end. A number of the skills are opposed by other skills which are generally not wielded at any proficiency by a number of the other classes. For example, Disguise, Forgery, and Bluff. A Bard with a high Bluff skill that kicks on glibness could probably convince you to buy an air conditioner in Antartica. Likewise, with Forgery, a Bard or Rogue could cause a mass amount of confusion by signing fake orders from the king and stapling them up all over the place. And when the fighters which compose the king's guard showed up to arrest the offender, they would find the perpetrator disguised - using the Disguise skill - as the king in such a convincing way that the world would turn upside down for them. Want to get rich without firing a shot? Combine Bluff, Disguise, and Forgery together and make yourself emperor of the world. The ultimate flaw with these three skills is that there are not enough classes with the necessary skills on their class list to oppose them. Diplomacy, as others have pointed out, is another sticking point.
stoicfaux 06-18-07, 02:37 PM	Want to get rich without firing a shot? Combine Bluff, Disguise, and Forgery together and make yourself emperor of the world. The ultimate flaw with these three skills is that there are not enough classes with the necessary skills on their class list to oppose them. Diplomacy, as others have pointed out, is another sticking point. The DM can always say "no." Unless you're an extreme fan of KoDT[1] Hackmaster[2] then D&D is a role-playing game and not an inflexible legal document used to run numerical min-maxing simulations. [1] KoDT == Knights of the Dinner Table. KoDT is to RPGs what Dilbert is to corporations. [2] Where the rules are inviolate. Where half the rules contradict the other half. Where all published material is considered canon (including the Hungarian versions of HackJournal (aka Dungeon/Dragon.) Where DMs and Players are unionized...
CCS 06-18-07, 03:21 PM	A couple examples right off the bat: Diplomancy - The ability to automatically succeed at even a rushed Diplomacy check to go from Hostile -> Helpful, or Hostile -> Fanatic in the advanced builds. Can cancel a large proportion of encounters at the very least, and potentially turn every BBEG into a loyal minion. Breaking the Economic System - Using a variety of methods to end up with gold far in excess of a normal character at the same level. With some tricks, you can end up with millions or even billions of gold pieces. While many uses of this money end up in combat (buying lots of magic items), you can also do things like buy yourself a town or a private army. Yeah, sure. How's this ever played out for you during a real game. Because in the real world you can't simply hold up a book/chart/equation and say "I do ___ & automatically get ___". Be it through a diplomacy check, an interesting accounting trick or something else. Well, you can, but then it's my turn as the DM to respond. And guess what. As a non-hypnotized/non-lobotomized DM I have [b]EVERYTHING[b/] to say about wether your action has any effect.
Pangeon 06-18-07, 06:44 PM	Glibness, anyone? ;)