Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Genghis Cohen 05-12-07, 09:17 PM	With all the threads flying around about what is and isn't broken, I thought that it would be a good idea for people to define it. It seems to me that two people could be in agreement about what is broken, but they would instead come to a disagreement because they never bothered to agree to definitions. What's your definition of "broken?
_metz_ 05-12-07, 10:47 PM	Broken for me is something that invariably changes the balance of the game. e.g: Deepwarden Dwarf: It means fighters only need two stats to cover hitpoints, AC, and Damage, it has beeen the intent to have three stats to do this. another example is the Warlock: Unlimited spells per day kinda breaks all the rules about other spellcasters...
JamesMaissen 05-13-07, 01:11 AM	Broken for me is something that invariably changes the balance of the game. another example is the Warlock: Unlimited spells per day kinda breaks all the rules about other spellcasters... This I disagree with. Broken does not only change the balance of the game, but it leaves little recourse for those affected by it. It is beyond what Radiant Servant does for turning.. it makes it the only game in town bar none. Meanwhile something like warlocks are not broken especially given the context of LG. They give far lesser abilities an unlimited number of times 1/round, but they are abilities that should be below the radar when they come online for the most part. Frankly if permanency were in the game (as imho it should be as a core option) then most of the strength of the class would disappear. It is a class that hits it's peak at lower levels and falls behind in the power curve at levels where LG is looking at retirement. It also is a class that relies on it's ability to UMD which by the wealth guidelines is less optimal in LG. All in all I think that warlock is a class that suffers from it's name in LG more than anything else. In a home campaign where even sorcerers could run of out spells it might find strength in that level of depth, but in LG where sorcerers burn through swift spells like candy and use mid duration spells in place of permanency (ie see invis, etc) it just doesn't come into play. -James
Japangirl 05-13-07, 03:35 AM	A thing, for lack of a better word, is broken if and only if: A) Everyone who is capable of using it uses it AND B) Everyone who is affected by it must spend resources to counter it. So for example, Mage Slayer is broken because every fighter, barbarian, ranger (they get Arrowmind after all), and rogue wants it and would likely get it, while every spell caster must use some sort of resources to make sure they are not completely hosed by it. Most of the other "broken" stuff is not actually broken, it might just be more powerful than it ought to be.
Haro 05-13-07, 04:35 AM	A thing, for lack of a better word, is broken if and only if: A) Everyone who is capable of using it uses it AND B) Everyone who is affected by it must spend resources to counter it. So for example, Mage Slayer is broken because every fighter, barbarian, ranger (they get Arrowmind after all), and rogue wants it and would likely get it, while every spell caster must use some sort of resources to make sure they are not completely hosed by it. Most of the other "broken" stuff is not actually broken, it might just be more powerful than it ought to be. Yup, that's pretty much it. There are a few instances where it can be A) OR B) and not both at the same time though. Think the Marshal's Motivate Dexterity as an example...
Lupo 05-13-07, 01:21 PM	A thing, for lack of a better word, is broken if and only if: A) Everyone who is capable of using it uses it AND B) Everyone who is affected by it must spend resources to counter it. So for example, Mage Slayer is broken because every fighter, barbarian, ranger (they get Arrowmind after all), and rogue wants it and would likely get it, while every spell caster must use some sort of resources to make sure they are not completely hosed by it. Most of the other "broken" stuff is not actually broken, it might just be more powerful than it ought to be. maybe adding a C) compared to every other feat/rules item/prestige class etc. of approximately the same "cost", it hands out grossly overpowered goodies ;) like ruathar, radiant servant of you-name-the-cheese, maybe fatespinner, occult slayer, deep warden :D for the power attack discussion: to me, all the voices that speak in favor of power attack being not broken because frontliners just dearly need it, just prove something: this means not power attack is broken but the hp/damage/ac system in D&D 3.5 is tilted somewhere on its way up to higher levels. IF power attack is so essential to any frontliner, it shouldn't be a feat but a class feature, just like the ability to wear heavy armor and wield martial weapons. just make it a fighter feature and let any other class spend a feat on it :P, have it limited to -5 on BAB and introduce an improved version up to -10 on BAB :) ciao martin m.
katrick 05-13-07, 01:34 PM	For prestige classes; if it takes nothing away from your original abilities. ie spellsword where you only get spells every odd level, stormlord you lose the ability to turn, some lose BAB etc Whereas the Radiant loses nothing but gains class features on top. katrick
ThaiGQ 05-13-07, 04:18 PM	I'd consider anything that effectively removes someone from a combat and has almost 100% chance of success with no almost no way to prevent it from happening to be broken. Forcecage and Otto's Irresistible Dance anyone? :P
Mommy was an Orc 05-13-07, 05:56 PM	The rule option is so powerful that all builds of a certain global group change because of it. Unseen Seer - all Rogues would like to be able to cast Blink, Grave Strike, and Golem Strike. Wizard 1/Unseen Seer 4 not only solves that, it gives +2d6 Sneak, +3 BAB, and the ability to cast False Life. Plus Alertness, too. Let's just ignore crafting and LG and what this means for a Rogue. But what it does mean is that making a non-arcane casting Rogue is likely a mechanically weak decision. That's a really large group of characters.
Haro 05-13-07, 07:06 PM	to me, all the voices that speak in favor of power attack being not broken because frontliners just dearly need it, just prove something: this means not power attack is broken but the hp/damage/ac system in D&D 3.5 is tilted somewhere on its way up to higher levels. IF power attack is so essential to any frontliner, it shouldn't be a feat but a class feature, just like the ability to wear heavy armor and wield martial weapons. just make it a fighter feature and let any other class spend a feat on it :P, have it limited to -5 on BAB and introduce an improved version up to -10 on BAB :) Well yes, that about sums up my opinion on Power Attack.
_metz_ 05-13-07, 09:09 PM	maybe adding a C) compared to every other feat/rules item/prestige class etc. of approximately the same "cost", it hands out grossly overpowered goodies ;) like ruathar, radiant servant of you-name-the-cheese, maybe fatespinner, occult slayer, deep warden :D for the power attack discussion: to me, all the voices that speak in favor of power attack being not broken because frontliners just dearly need it, just prove something: this means not power attack is broken but the hp/damage/ac system in D&D 3.5 is tilted somewhere on its way up to higher levels. IF power attack is so essential to any frontliner, it shouldn't be a feat but a class feature, just like the ability to wear heavy armor and wield martial weapons. just make it a fighter feature and let any other class spend a feat on it :P, have it limited to -5 on BAB and introduce an improved version up to -10 on BAB :) ciao martin m. Good point, I Was about to fire up and ask if anybody here had played high level fighters who didn't power attack - unless they are AC gimps or Battlefeild control, they are pretty useless to the party. NOt to mention recless Rage giving you 6 str for an extra 3/4 points of damage really doesn't cut it when the beastie has 200hps and dishes out a stupid amount each round WITHOUT power attack. But again, its not Power attack that is broken at all. Especially compared to what else is out there - e.g: orbs...
copper_wyrmling 05-13-07, 10:22 PM	Good point, I Was about to fire up and ask if anybody here had played high level fighters who didn't power attack - unless they are AC gimps or Battlefeild control, they are pretty useless to the party. NOt to mention recless Rage giving you 6 str for an extra 3/4 points of damage really doesn't cut it when the beastie has 200hps and dishes out a stupid amount each round WITHOUT power attack. But again, its not Power attack that is broken at all. Especially compared to what else is out there - e.g: orbs... Why do you think the orbs are broken? Power-attacking fighter minions - ahem, valued party members - almost always do more damage / round than the orbs, and don't have a uses/day limit. The scariest spells are not, as a rule, the ones that do d6/CL damage, although being able to do reliable damage is a nice thing for any arcanist since sometimes you do meet monsters that the rest of the party is having trouble with. Oh, I do have a L15 cleric who does a pretty decent fighter imitation when she needs to (such as when soloing CR14 advanced cadaver collectors that should not have been in an APL 10 module - yay for babysitting ;) ), without Power Attack. Her damage / round record is about 300 without crits (would've been ~500 if the stupid crit-immune monster hadn't also been immune to the double-damage fires of purity, grrr), which isn't amazing, but hardly terrible either.
cycloptic_squirrel 05-14-07, 01:22 AM	Something is unbalanced is when it is strictly better than the other options available. Broken an the extreme form of unbalanced. It typically occurs when it grants someone abilities they could not otherwise obtain without sacrificing something else. But the boundaries of when these things occur is blurry and extremely subject to personal interpretation. Example A one level dip into barbarian is unbalanced because it usually a superior choice to an extra level of whatever your primary class is (fighter, ranger, etc.) Extra rage is broken because it grants a major hallmark of a high level barbarian (multiple rages) at the cost of a level and a feat. As far as the orbs go - I think they lie somewhere between unbalanced and broken. It's not the damage or the ability to bypass SR that bothers me. It's that the spell's effect is the prime characteristic of the evocation school. A specialist wizard may choose to ban evocation without much worry about his ability to deal damage.
Madfox11 05-14-07, 04:46 AM	Something is unbalanced is when it is strictly better than the other options available. The definition of what is unbalanced is definitely a bit more complicated than this since now you are making it depend on other options who for all intents and purposes might be too weak. For example, insignia of healing looks very powerful compared to mass cure light wounds, but the last is actually a rather weak 5th level spell. For me something is broken if it breaks the CR system. At is core though something is unbalanced when it ruins the fun of the majority of people involved and that includes the DMs. It is also one of the reasons why it is so difficult to provide an accurate definition since each person has a different opinion on what is fun. To some delay death removes the challenge of death, to others it removes the irritation of dying mid-game in a meaningless battle or the ability to earn money by dieing in a fashion that allows a character to be ressurected with a raise dead at an APL where that 900 gp per person is not much gold at all...
MatteBlack 05-14-07, 12:16 PM	My definition of a broken game feature would be one that makes the game notably less fun to play in a high frequency of situations. This could be something that bogs down play, ruins the challenge of an encounter or consistently renders others at the table useless. I am less concerned with the overall balance of a feature unless it leads to a situation where it is the automatically successful best choice tactic to use it in the majority of situations. Lee PS: I don't have much of a problem with Power Attack because there are times when there is no substitute for what it does and removing it could lead to some scaling issues. It has a down side that can matter and is fairly easy to get. The strength requirement is the only limiter and I have seen folks miss and do no damage because they use it on plenty of occasions.
Japangirl 05-14-07, 01:04 PM	I talked to a few friends about this, and we came up with that there are two kinds of broken. 1) Gamebreaking. See my previous post with the definition for that, it's got two parts to it. 2) Too powerful. These are things that, while not broken, definitely unbalance a game or just make it less fun for people. I would put RSoPs, one-level Marshal dips for Motivate Dex, and one barbarian with Extra Rage in the too-powerful broken category, but not the game-breaking category. I'm not sure about Delay Death, as I don't consider it at all broken but I can see why some people would. Too powerful things should perhaps be toned down, but not banned. Note that just because something is powerful does not make it too-powerful. Ruathars are powerful because of the skills, but they are not too powerful. Unseen Seers are powerful because of how easy it is to get in and the free divination spell, but they are not too-powerful because you do give up rogue progression (well, OK, Unseen Seers are borderline). IMO, Delay Death is powerful but not too-powerful, because while it is an exceptionally useful tool, it will not destroy games by preventing people from dying for multiple rounds. Just my two cents.
solbergb 05-14-07, 01:48 PM	Good point, I Was about to fire up and ask if anybody here had played high level fighters who didn't power attack - unless they are AC gimps or Battlefeild control, they are pretty useless to the party. Raises hand - my monk didn't get power attack until 14, and my archer won't ever get it. All of my TWF builds don't use it either. What these builds have in common is ways to get extra attacks to make up the damage difference, and mechanical problems with lowering their attack rolls any further. If it wasn't for the fact that my monk ALSO does trip/AOO/reach weapon stuff I would have done without power attack to retirement, although occasionally it's mechanically useful to power attack a monk flurry, deadly defense would likely have been a better choice.
Mommy was an Orc 05-14-07, 02:19 PM	Raises hand - my monk didn't get power attack until 14, and my archer won't ever get it. All of my TWF builds don't use it either. My Monk caster is not getting it either - she'll mimic it eventually through Enlightened Fist(Fist of Flame or Electricity), spells(Chill Touch, Critical Strike, GMW), Ascetic Mage, and Arcane Strike. Doing a couple of hundred points of damage in a round isn't impractical for her at high APL. Doing it all day is another story, but for several rounds isn't that hard.
MatteBlack 05-14-07, 03:06 PM	...one-level Marshal dips for Motivate Dex... This one is sort of offset by the fact that everyone in the party gets the bonus. Makes for fewer unhappy faces. Plus not everyone wants to spend points on charisma and lose casting levels or base attack.
Japangirl 05-14-07, 04:11 PM	This one is sort of offset by the fact that everyone in the party gets the bonus. That's why it's so powerful. If it was self-only, though, it wouldn't be worth it most likely. And there are many synergies with one marshal that work well: a paladin/marshal, bard/marshal, paladin/bard/marshal, hexblade/marshal, charisma fighter with all the new feats, etc. For what you give up, what you get is soooo much better if you will have charisma anyways. Going first is incredibly powerful, so the fact that your entire party gets somewhere between +3 and +8 to initiative checks is what I consider too powerful but not game-breaking (because of the caveats you mentioned: lose BAB and/or caster level).
Grantor 05-14-07, 05:56 PM	And there are many synergies with one marshal that work well: a paladin/marshal, bard/marshal, paladin/bard/marshal, hexblade/marshal, charisma fighter with all the new feats, etc. Ironically, one of the synergies you missed, Knight/Marshal, only helps the rest of the party, since the Knight cannot easily make use of winning initiative.
Grantor 05-14-07, 06:06 PM	My definition of "Broken" would be: Adventures have the expectation that characters make use of the 'broken' option. Thus, characters that do not make use of the option are significantly disadvantaged. or, alternately: Players can bypass a challenge or overcome a combat in one round because the adventure did not take into account the range of options that players might bring to bear. All those that did not take the option are challenged, all with the option treat the encounter as a speed bump made of paint (that is to say: flat). By this, Power-attacking warriors are broken at the highest levels, since monsters that can be overcome solely by the fighter would take several rounds for other parties to overcome. Alternately, a dip of barbarian is not broken, since adventures are not based on every warrior constantly raging and other choices are still viable options. At least, that's how I see it. Broken/Not Broken is equally a matter of the impact on a generic combat encounter and specifically how it is treated in the adventures that players actually play.
Japangirl 05-14-07, 06:52 PM	Ironically, one of the synergies you missed, Knight/Marshal, only helps the rest of the party, since the Knight cannot easily make use of winning initiative. Oops, can't believe I missed that one. Thanks for pointing it out!