Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jokey665 04-22-07, 10:51 AM	Background: I'm playing an Elan Kineticist 7/Wizard 3/Cerebremancer 2 in an Age of Worms campaign. he's a Human Bard 14. We're just entered the Spire of Long Shadows or w/e it's called. Kyuss' place. He thinks my character is too strong, and I'm almost positive it's his first dealing with psionics. We had a short talk about the subject, but basically I just linked him to the myth topic that's stickied here. This is his response. I'd like to get some opinions on his argument. I already answered him, but I figured the all-knowing WotC boards know much more than I, and can at least point out something stupid I said or mistake I made. Hrmm, did you notice that under the heading "Elan's are Overpowered" that the guy actually gives advice for how to bring them "back in line?" Seems kind of strange to me. Also, I don't much care what the guy has to say, any one on one match between any other PC class and a Psion it will result in a Psion victory-- You have done much bragging on this yourself *MY NAME EDITED OUT*. When comparing Psions to Wizards for there total damage capacity it is also worth while to note that while the numbers Eventually work out to be the same that the Psion can deal out the damage much faster then wizard can. This is useful against anything with hardness or damage reduction, and further gives the opponent less time to recover or react offencively-- This alone can save you from sustaining much damage. Whist the poor battle weary wizard has to scrape the bottom of the berrel for his last Acid Splash, the Psion has long since been done and is sipping his martini on the beach. Also, with the Fighter base class, the guy totally admits that the Psion whips the snot out of him. He claims that it is commonly known that the fighter is underpowered, so rather than try to keep things balanced he would rather leave the Fighter class behind and continue making OP Classes. This does not work for me. In a Psion you have the damage potential of a Wizard. The effective healing of a cleric (via the use of vigor (Temp. HP)) and more adaptability and customization than in any other class. Add to this certian actions that can be taken even on enemy turns (like saving throw boosts and damage negation) and you've got a winning combo. Also, I would like to point out that while the feats you have to expend to something to help balance things out (a little) that it really doesn't matter a hill of beans when the Psion can change their feats out for new ones. Sure it costs a little EXP, but that's still a Hella' lot more than the other classes can do. Sorry *MY NAME EDITED OUT*, I'm just not convinced. I will admit however that I am not a Psion expert so maybe I have some mechanics wrong, but whatever the case I am looking at character balance from a diffrent view point then the man who wrote that article. Two characters of equal level should be of equal threat when pitted against each other. Sure, there is some Rock, Paper, Scissors matching going on and one class might really have another classes number, but when Psions are involved---I'm sorry, your numbers up. My response to him The Elan's ability to soak damage is so ineffective without the racial feat that it's usually not worth it. You'll be out of power points so fast it's disgusting. Any other class? No. Any other class that happens to be in our party? Yes. I believe I've stated this a good number of times, actually: A good Wizard 20, Druid 20, Cleric 20, Archivist 20, etc. can quite easily trounce a Psion 20, actually. As long as they are built well and played well, that is. The thing is, it's easier to build a very effective Psion than it is most other classes, but those classes have much more potential than the Psion does if you really know what you're doing. Throw prestige classes into the mix and it gets disgusting, what with the ****** support for Psionics and the **** like Abjurant Champion that they throw out there (First level spell giving +9 AC? Yes please.). If you happen to be playing in Eberron or the Realms it's ****ing ridiculous how good Wizard and Druid can get, what with Incantatrix and Planar Shepherd. Also, As much as I hate to admit it, a clever 5th level Wizard can kill a 20th level Psion, but that involves so much cheese that the mice are gathering at the mention of it. As for Wizard damage vs Psion damage; Yes, Psions do more damage. The problem is, at most levels, save or die effects are much more effective than damage. Psions have very few save or dies, and sadly... they aren't very good. Wizards have gobs of them, starting at what? 4th level spells? 1st if you include low level ****overs like Sleep, Web, and Grease. Also remember, that third level fireball will always take a third level slot, even at 10th level doing 10d6. Something like energy ray? It's the equivalent of a 5.5th level power in cost for 10d6. Fighter sucks. Deal with it. That's what Warblade/Swordsage/Crusader from the Tome of Battle are for. The book was written to bring "martial" classes up to the level of the full-casting classes. While they still aren't quite to at the level of casters yet, it's a very welcome improvement. A Warblade1/Wizard5/Abjurant Champion5/Spellsword1/Eldritch Knight 8 is ****ing amazing btw. Anyone who takes more than two levels of fighter is a fool. Also, he was comparing Psychic warrior to fighter, I believe. Not psion. Psychic warrior is actually generally regarded as one of the best-balanced classes in D&D, by the way. Healing is only to self, remember. Also, it's not retroactive. You have to know it's coming. You can't actually heal yourself, only prevent damage. Granted, Psions do have one healing power, it isn't very good. Third level, heals 1d12. At that level, a cleric can throw down 3d8+5. Much better. Psychic warriors get it as a 2nd level power, but they have a much more limited pool of power points, as well as powers known. They also gain powers at a slower schedule than Psions. It's actually the same as the bards, capping at 6th level. Yeah, Psychic Reformation is good. I'll give you that. But: There are official retraining rules in the Player's Handbook 2 detailing how any character can retrain feats and skillpoints. Also, Bards can even retrain their spells just by levelling up, right? :p I'd hardly call it "a little XP" by the way. Retraining all the way back to first level would cost me 600 experience. 1/10 of what we earned in the session. Immediate actions? There have actually been an increased number of spells with Immediate action casting time in recent splatbooks. Also, going back to Tome of battle, they have an entire set of martial maneuvers that are Immediate Actions. As for match-ups, 90% of the time, a full casting/manifesting/whatever class is going to utterly dominate any non-full casting/manifesting/whatever class at an even level (Unless it's a monk. Those guys are anti-caster to the core). This only gets worse with level. It's still terrible at first level though: If that fighter fails his save against sleep, the wizard gets a CDG for an instant death. By the way, I'm sure you didn't miss the part about where he talks about the "Four encounters a day" guideline, right? It's from the DMG, I believe. A Psion of any level will not make it past the second unless he is the most efficient Psion ever crafted. Even then, he'll be spending turns in full defense to conserve his power. Hell, I've done the full defense thing before on the first encounter of the day, even when we weren't expecting any more. Remember the wizard build I put up there involving Warblade? That guy can go all day and never run out of steam, really. He's got all the goodness of a martial class mixed with 18th level casting. BAB high enough for 4 iterative attacks, amazing fort and will saves, and generally able to whoop ass on anything it needs to, whenever it needs to. Suffers a little from Multi-ability dependence syndrome, but really... who doesn't?
Part-Human2 04-22-07, 12:30 PM	If he's not the DM, does it really matter what he thinks? Isn't the game about having fun? Shouldn't you be allowed to have fun playing the character you want using official rules? Is being "too strong" ruining the fun for everyone? Can't everyone have fun role-playing their characters instead of being jealous?
daggeroflath 04-22-07, 12:43 PM	he's a Human Bard 14. 'nuff said.
Tempest Stormwind 04-22-07, 12:52 PM	He's playing a *bard*. You're playing a *kineticist*. He's complaining that you deal more *damage* than he does. That is friggin' stupid. He also complains that a full caster (psion) is better than the Fighter. He's reaching there -- everything except perhaps the soulknife, the samurai, and the healer is better than the fighter. Your analysis on damage is skewed, by the way -- wizards easily outdamage psions if they try. The reason the myth persists that psions deal more damage is because it takes less effort to hit the psion's peak damage output, and there are fewer ways to cheese it higher (i.e. once you've thrown five feats into being able to use two metapsionic feats every two rounds, you can't possibly tweak more metapsionic effects in there). The other reason it persists is, of course, that direct damage is such a bad option, particularly past level 7-9 (depending on what class we're talking about), that any wizard worth his INT score has switched to save-or-dies, which psions completely lack, or save-or-lose effects, which psions have inferior choices on (exception: There are a couple good 8th and 9th level debilitation powers, and a few lower-level ones on discipline lists (Ectoplasmic Cocoon comes to mind from an early level), but they're few and far between compared to the glut of wizard effects). It sounds like your full-caster (who gave up three manifester levels!) outperformed a *bard* in combat and he's getting jealous as a result. That's really all this is, judging from the diversity of his replies. If he's a member here, have him come in and we can address his concerns directly. (For the record, Bacris' original statement on varying the elan ability was written back in '04 with the original Myth thread, back when the elan was the hot topic of psionic balance (you should *really* look through the myth threads, particularly for Polaris' arguments -- he's an intelligent person who tends to know what he's talking about, and even he was wrong on the elan). Years of playing with them later and we've seen there really isn't a problem there, ESPECIALLY since every book with spells since the XPH has had at least one immediate-action effect in it, and the ToB adds immediate actions to the warrior-type repotoire as well. The "fix" suggested there is not required.)
jokey665 04-22-07, 01:23 PM	I know he's a bard... He is rather helpful, though. But that really is besides the point, as he's comparing Psion to Wizard, not Bard. Also, I do have both Practiced Caster and Practiced Manifester. It does matter, I should have mentioned it. Sadly, he doesn't have an account here, to my knowledge.
Dragonteuthis 04-22-07, 02:01 PM	Unfortunately, your friend is correct; Elans are definitely too powerful. Almost no race has abilities that scale with level like theirs does; thus even an LA wouldn't be an appropriate mechanic. However, aside from that. Your friend is completely wrong about a Psion being able to match a Wizard's damage and versatility. While a Psion can manifest any of his known powers spontaneously, the Wizard can expand his repertoire of spells almost infinitely. Yes, the Psion *can* beat the wizard in a spur-of-the-moment encounter, especially one near a safe location where the players can recover quickly. But in any kind of extended dungeon delve, the Wizard will easily outlast the Psion. Also, note where the malcontent is coming from. he's playing a Bard. He's probably one of those players who likes gimping themselves to make a tragic or sympathetic figure, and now he's complaining that you've made an effective character. How dare you! (though I will say, the Elan is a cheesy move. But still). Tell the player he should make a Half-Orc Fighter next time, give him a box of tissues and ignore him. He's clearly whining, and will ignore any actual discussion you bring to your defense.
Scion of Coldshard 04-22-07, 02:10 PM	Unfortunately, your friend is correct; Elans are definitely too powerful. The elan? Ew. ;/ I would rather have most any other race personally. Their main abilities only suck power away from your actual class and for that you get other penalties as well. They are decent at staying alive on the short term if you work it properly and that is it. For overall surviveability the award goes to a few other core races and they do not even take extra resources to get there! A lot of the arguement of the anti-psi guy though is just plain wrong. Some of it is misinterpretation or choosing to view something in the best light possible while ignoring all downsides. I mean come on, vigor makes the psion as good of a healer as a cleric?? The mental gyrations necissary to come to that conclusion should have made his head explode. See if he will come on here and we can walk him through some stuff. Ask him to ignore any of the over zealous bits as people here have been through the same material so many times over that it is tough to not just jump on people who show up with the same old arguements. Convincing that they are not overpowered is generally impossible, that is just what some people choose to believe. But showing the costs that come with such things along with comparisons with what is already out there might help some.
saidin0111 04-22-07, 03:33 PM	yeah, the elan, while one of my favorite races, is definitely not overpowered, as a race, they have 2 pp, that means using 2 of their racial abilities per day, or 1 if they spend 2 pp on preventing damage, any inflation of those abilities simply arises from synergy with their selected class or from taking feats, but are not racial traits, therefore anything beyond 2 pp should be considered similar to manifesting a power, though they don't seem to have a pp limit, but that just means your robbing yourself of potential to fulfill your class's role in the party, sure a 20th level elan psion can spend their 345+pp to prevent 690+ damage, but that would be all they could do, for the whole day, without any real combat skills, they'd be useless without their pp, in fact, they'd become a liability
jokey665 04-22-07, 03:38 PM	The nice thing is, I usually never even fall below 20pp(max 126, mind you) before an encounter is over, and we do our darndest to stick to one encounter per day. Well, at least I do. I know how bad that second encounter will be for me. That is part of why I went Cerebremancer, though. I get things like Rope Trick. :) Also, I could prevent 1380 damage with that 345pp, thank you very much. Racial Feat from CPsi.
TikiMan 04-22-07, 03:52 PM	I am in no way trying to present this as scientifically valid data, but this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=369436) is a link to a poll (actually a collection of polls) ranking D&D classes on a power scale of 1 to 10. Wizards and Psions both have a generally agreed upon power level; Wizards are 8.6, Psions are 8.1. I'd like to add that in a similar poll, Psions were voted 'more fun' to play (Psion-6.9, wizard 6.0). :w00t: The important thing to note about this is that, by many people's standards, most pure caster classes are 'overpowered'. In truth, the psion does have several balance issues simply because you can't build a perfect system. He generally has fewer than the wizard though, especially if you reach into non-core material. Other notes; D&D classes were not designed with 1 vs. 1 arena duals in mind. Any caster class vs. any non-caster class is an easy win for the caster. Any caster vs. caster fight hinges 100% on initiative and who botches their save first, unless the wizard gets to know about the fight ahead of time (divination) in which case the wizard just casts the spells that makes the peoples fall down, no questions asked. He's even got the best +init spells around too. I am looking at character balance from a diffrent view point then the man who wrote that article. Two characters of equal level should be of equal threat when pitted against each other. Sure, there is some Rock, Paper, Scissors matching going on and one class might really have another classes number, Uh, no, that's World of Warcraft. Seriously, D&D characters are not balanced with PvP in mind. A D&D class is balanced based upon the assumption that he, and 3 companions, will encounter 4 challenges per day, each assumed to consume ~20% of their resources. It's more like FFXI where everyone is balanced based on their contribution to the group, not their contribution to the damage pool. Bards in that game were 'teh shiznit'. ;) I'd really like to hammer home the idea that he's got game balance all wrong. He seems to be coming from a MMO angle, and D&D isn't balanced like that. 1 vs 1 duals in D&D haven't been balanced since 1st edition. This comes up in practically every game balance debate, and is unanimously countered with 'D&D is not balanced for 1-on-1 arena combat'. Pitting people of the same/similar class against eachother can be entertaining, and has a background in the fantasy genre (mageduals and gladiator pits). But if you mix casters and non-casters, the non-caster just get WTFP0wNzoRed!!1!1!!one! and we do our darndest to stick to one encounter per day. Well, at least I do. All classes were based on the idea of 4 encounters per day, psions included. Psions are capable of abusing this a bit more then other classes, though they hardly have a monopoly on it. I'd like to point you towards a variant rule in Complete Psionic that reduces NPC PPs by 50% because they only have to worry about 1 encounter a day. You should seriously consider only using 50% of your PP in any given encounter, otherwise you're abusing the system and giving Psionics a very bad name. Psionic characters aren't broken. Your psionic character in your game is broken due to houserules though.
Tempest Stormwind 04-22-07, 04:02 PM	The nice thing is, I usually never even fall below 20pp(max 126, mind you) before an encounter is over, and we do our darndest to stick to one encounter per day. Well, at least I do. I know how bad that second encounter will be for me. That is part of why I went Cerebremancer, though. I get things like Rope Trick. :) Also, I could prevent 1380 damage with that 345pp, thank you very much. Racial Feat from CPsi. 1) You're spending 100 power points per combat and then ducking out of combat for the rest of the day? No wonder people think you're strong. Show some restraint, nova boy -- either that or get the DM to throw more encounters at you regardless, as the DMG recommends. 2) You actually wasted a feat on Elan Resilience? (It looks good, but in general I wouldn't say it's worth it.)
PhaedrusXY 04-22-07, 04:22 PM	If you're only facing one encounter per day, you probably are a bit overpowered. Spellcasters of all flavors come off as a bit overpowered in a game where they can burn their entire spell allotment on every encounter, and psions can do that more easily than any of the other spellcasting classes.
Red12 04-22-07, 04:39 PM	yeah, the elan, while one of my favorite races, is definitely not overpowered, as a race, they have 2 pp, that means using 2 of their racial abilities per day, or 1 if they spend 2 pp on preventing damage, any inflation of those abilities simply arises from synergy with their selected class or from taking feats, but are not racial traits, therefore anything beyond 2 pp should be considered similar to manifesting a power, though they don't seem to have a pp limit, but that just means your robbing yourself of potential to fulfill your class's role in the party, sure a 20th level elan psion can spend their 345+pp to prevent 690+ damage, but that would be all they could do, for the whole day, without any real combat skills, they'd be useless without their pp, in fact, they'd become a liability This is all quite true. Consider elans to always have access to a few 1st level spells. They are able to use them once or twice a day on their own, but if their wizards- they get to prepare/use them like normal. Class-synergy =/= imbalance.
saidin0111 04-22-07, 05:41 PM	between psions and wizards you can kind of think of their % contribution balance like this, the psion is an arced arrow, and the wizard is rolling down a gentle hill A, 1st encounter, they are fairly even B, 2nd encounter, the psion is pulling ahead C, 3rd encounter, the psion is about as ahead as at B D, 4th encounter, the psion is now about even with wizard again E, 5th encounter, the wizard is now ahead, since the psion is mostly burnt out F, 6th encounter, the wizard may have a few spells left, the psion is definitely out of resources G, 7th encounter, caster-types are done, they are relegated to cowering in a dark corner unless directly threatened, exception is cleric/druid-types of course encounters 5, 6, and 7 are not recommended by the DMG psion _____ \_ \ \ \ \ \ ____________|______ A B C D E F G wizard __ \__ \__ \_ \_ \_ \ _______________\___ A B C D E F G yeah, crappy illustrations, but you get the idea
PhaedrusXY 04-22-07, 05:53 PM	Nice illustration... except that it isn't true. I'm not sure why you think a psion gets more powerful in the second encounter than he was in the first. Psions are basically either at full power, or useless. (Unless you're saying he only puts up his long duration buffs during the first encounter, which doesn't make alot of sense...) The wizard illustration is mostly accurate, assuming the wizard automatically burns all his highest level spells in each encounter. However, the wizard's lower level spell slots are worth more than the psions. If the psion wants a 10d6 "fireball", he has to pump power points equal to a 5th level "spell slot" into it. The wizard just casts it, and it is automatically "fully augmented", but he only effectively pays about half the price that the psion did. So in reality, the wizard has substantially more "staying power". If you play a psion in exactly the same way as a wizard (i.e. using fully augmented powers every time you manifest), the psion will run out of power points long before the wizard is at the end of his usefulness. There are some exceptions to my argument that the high level wizard's first level spells are worth more than the psion's first level powers. Some of the powers augment in ways that really does make them the equivalent of higher level powers. But as far as the cost in "spell slots" used, they are higher level powers, and so should give that kind of benefit if you pump them up that much. The ones that don't augment well are generally not worth taking up a "power known" slot (which the wizard doesn't even have to worry about, as he has an unlimited amount of these). So... yeah, in general, I agree completely with the consensus that a wizard is overall a bit more powerful and useful to the party than a psion is, at all levels. Psions are alot easier to play, however. The effectiveness of a wizard character is really based on the player's intelligence (well... knowledge of the rules, at least), not the character's. :D
saidin0111 04-22-07, 06:44 PM	well, I was thinking that the wizard isn't worried a whole lot about conservation in the first encounter, and neither is the psion, so about even, in the following encounters, the wizard is starting to take care to keep some high level spells back, so his usefulness in the encounters is slowly declining, after the fourth encounter, the high level spells are usually used up, but he can still do something with mid level spells, in highly extended days, the wizard finally runs out of spells that are worth anything and must pretty much hide the psion can use everything at max power until he runs out of pp, so he doesn't have to conserve specific slots for later, allowing the psions flexibility to shine as the day goes on, but eventually the limited number of pp catches up to the psion, bringing his usefulness to an abrupt end the problem that occured when I did the illustrations is that with the psion I was thinking in terms of a wizard baseline, but when I added the varying wizard illus. I didn't go back and adjust the psion EDIT: okay, I adjusted the psion illus. to adhere to the same baseline as the wizard, now they should be a fair comparison
saidin0111 04-22-07, 07:01 PM	of course an elan psion making liberal use of racial abilities would look something like this elan psion _ \_ \ \ \ \ \ ________\__________ A B C D E F G
jokey665 04-22-07, 09:49 PM	1) You're spending 100 power points per combat and then ducking out of combat for the rest of the day? No wonder people think you're strong. Show some restraint, nova boy -- either that or get the DM to throw more encounters at you regardless, as the DMG recommends. 2) You actually wasted a feat on Elan Resilience? (It looks good, but in general I wouldn't say it's worth it.) 1. Well, you see, spending 100pp in an encounter is pretty much neccessary for me, most of the time. We're playing Age of Worms, which is pretty danged hard. Not only that, everyone other than the Bard is very underlevelled for the part of the adventure that we are at. (Average party level 11.75 vs EL14+ encounters? freaking great. heck, our last battle only had three of us, making it even worse.) 2. I know it isn't amazing, but it has been rather helpful. It's definitely saved my ass a few times. Particularly before I decided to be smart and Reform for Vigor, but even then it's been useful. If you're only facing one encounter per day, you probably are a bit overpowered. Spellcasters of all flavors come off as a bit overpowered in a game where they can burn their entire spell allotment on every encounter, and psions can do that more easily than any of the other spellcasting classes. Usually everyone needs to rest after our first encounter. See #1 above. Everyone is usually drained of, well, everything. HP, spells, and for me, pp. Though my HP is almost always fully intact.
Azoriel 04-23-07, 01:51 AM	Psionic characters aren't broken. Your psionic character in your game is broken due to houserules though. Should he really feel it necessary to play down just because the situation favors his class? Personally, I don't feel its right to pressure him to do this for two reasons: (1) Age of Worms is an infamously difficult adventure series to play in, with frequent TPK reports from past players; to not play to his full potential would mean a significant risk to his own well-being, as well as the well-being of his fellow party members. And, when the rest of his party members need to rest after the first encounter, and he doesn't because he held back, what is the rest of the party going to say? "You didn't really do much in that last fight, so you obviously don't need any sleep like the rest of us; I think everyone else will agree with me that you just volunteered yourself for guard duty the whole night. In the morning, we'll re-evaluate how much of the treasure you should be getting." (This assume a relatively civil exchange.) (2) Do you ever see anyone telling wizards that they should cast less spells because they make the fighters feel useless during fights? Or rogues to put more ranks in craft (basketweaving) and less ranks in skills they actually use because they're outclassing everyone else in those person-to-person interactions? Why not tell clerics to refuse to cast any more healing spells after doing so a certain number of times in the day, just because the druid can't do it as well as they can? IMHO, expecting someone to handicap themselves just because a situation is playing up to their strengths is just plain ridiculous. Different classes are stronger in different situations; mitigating that defeats the purpose of having different classes to begin with. Of course, there's also the issue with the bard player who thinks psionics is so much more effective than traditional spellcasting (but not enough to actually play a psionic character); does anyone really think that fighting at half-strength would do anything to change this perception? Even if the original poster checks his strength in play, the bard player will simply assume that the only thing balancing psionics is the artificial strength checking, and continue to believe that psionics by the RAW is overpowered and in need of some serious castration.
TikiMan 04-23-07, 11:56 AM	I've never played in an Age of Worms game, and have never actually heard much about them. Don't think I've ever actually met anyone who has played in one either, or at least they never spoke of it. If the entire party is exhausting all of their resources then it would only be natural for jokey665 to do the same. I made the assumption that this game was working like any other game I've ever had experience with, but it wasn't and I was wrong. Guess that's what I get for assuming. :embarrass Though, now I'm kind of curious about if jokey665's character is the highest level in the group or not. If he is, then it's only natural that the highest level caster would be wooping the most monster butt. I have groups where we regularly tell caster types how many spells/PP they should expect to use each encounter. Instead of asking the player to metagame and whatnot I do it for him. Between the XPH and the ToB I've finally gotten an entirely /encounter party, and my players unanimously respond well to it. Nobody sees it as handicapping themselves; they see it as realizing that their character was made on a 4/day system while most of the games we play prefer a /encounter system. I've had a couple of regular caster players who have said they enjoy not having to metagame about the number of encounters they're going to be facing. It's also really nice to be able to throw a CR+2 boss fight at them any time and have it be a serious challenge, instead of having to wear the players down first or threaten them with after-boss fights. Oh, and putting a cleric in an undead heavy game is playing to his strength. Putting a druid in a nature heavy game is playing to his strength. IMO, informing players that they will be having 1 encounter per day instead of 4 is more metagaming then playing to anyone's strength. The first two are examples of playing D&D with a particular flavor, while the last is an example of a 'houerule' that mauls game balance. Again, this is in my opinion. My players enjoy not having to meta-think about resource management. None of them seem to have any problems with three clerics in the party because the DM said it would be undead centric. the bard player will simply assume that the only thing balancing psionics is the artificial strength checking, But this is the only thing balancing expendable resource classes. They were balanced with the idea that you'd have to worry about 4 resource consuming encounters per day (or the equivalent). The books assume you'll use ~20% of your resources to handle a CR=lvl encounter, so if you're using more then that you're pretty much abusing the fact that your DM doesn't throw/threaten as many encounters as the game is based upon. Non-casters simply cannot take (appreciable) advantage of only having one encounter per day, so playing that way seriously skews game balance in favor of caster types. The only way to balance this out of character problem is with out of character solutions like holding back as if though you were going to have 4 encounters per day. Back on topic though, I'm still mostly favoring the idea that the OP's friend is used to MMO class balance, and D&D simply doesn't follow that model. Compare Cleric vs. any non-caster at level 3+ for an easy lesson in this. *crosses fingers and hopes he hasn't derailed the thread*:shifty:
jokey665 04-23-07, 12:39 PM	I'm second highest of 4, btw. 14 Bard, me at 12 with the build I posted in the original post, 11 Rogue4/Fighter2/Swash3/Invisible Blade2, 10 Cleric5/paladin5.
Tempest Stormwind 04-23-07, 12:59 PM	I'm second highest of 4, btw. 14 Bard, me at 12 with the build I posted in the original post, 11 Rogue4/Fighter2/Swash3/Invisible Blade2, 10 Cleric5/paladin5. ...You're the only one in that team optimized for damage, and naturally you're going to come out ahead in that department. Cleric 5 / Paladin 5? Come *on*. The rogue/IB might come close if you're using the pre-nerf IB and are against sneak-attackable / feintable foes. He won't necessarily match your spike damage (to borrown an MMO term that your bard player will understand), but he can easily match your daily damage if he tries and invests in good weapons. The bard... well, he's a bard.
jokey665 04-23-07, 03:01 PM	Not knowing what pre-nerf invisible blade is... he's playing the Complete Warrior one. But yeah, sadly, most enemies we face are of the undead sort, so he usually ends up not doing much.
Archangel_Arcanis 04-23-07, 03:21 PM	seeing the party and getting an understanding of the game type. If you hold back you get a TPK and then the bard is going to blame you for it since all of their characters are pretty weak. I think you have built a sturdy but not broken character.
Tempest Stormwind 04-23-07, 03:35 PM	Not knowing what pre-nerf invisible blade is... he's playing the Complete Warrior one. But yeah, sadly, most enemies we face are of the undead sort, so he usually ends up not doing much. Post-nerf, you can only use Uncanny Feint once per round. Renders the class far weaker than it actually is. So, the only other guy who's capable of dealing lots of damage... is against foes he's immune to. You're in a game where you have one encounter per day. Naturally, you're going to appear stronger than the rest of the party.
Azoriel 04-23-07, 04:56 PM	*crosses fingers and hopes he hasn't derailed the thread*:shifty: Concern noted; I'll try to keep things relevant. I've never played in an Age of Worms game, and have never actually heard much about them. Some background for everyone's benefit: Age of Worms has been noted for being very difficult combat-wise. However, some of the more recent reading I've done on this adventure series would indicate that there's a very strict schedule you must adhere to, so either the DM is throwing them a bone by allowing one encounter/day, or he's letting doomsday slip by without telling them. The only way to balance this out of character problem is with out of character solutions like holding back as if though you were going to have 4 encounters per day. I would very much agree that metagaming here is a bad idea; giving 110% because one needs to is acceptable, whereas unnecessarily throwing away one's daily resources just because one can is not. That being said, I still don't think holding back will convince the bard's player of much. Here's an example of what I'm talking about... http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3473409&postcount=12 Back on topic though, I'm still mostly favoring the idea that the OP's friend is used to MMO class balance, and D&D simply doesn't follow that model. Compare Cleric vs. any non-caster at level 3+ for an easy lesson in this. *crosses fingers and hopes he hasn't derailed the thread*:shifty: Agreed; one need only compare wizard vs. fighter to know that the game isn't supposed to be balanced for PvP. Comparing wizard vs. psion, though, may bear some fruit, as they are similar to each other (primary caster vs. primary manifester). Conversely, a big problem with theory vs. application is that the former only takes place in one's own head, thus being prone to contamination by one's own prejudices, thus making elephants out of non-issues (Psions can cast in armor!) and ignoring major counterpoints (Gate being overpowered doesn't matter at all because of factor X). However, this would seem to be the medium of choice for both bard and psion player (in addition to being a lot easier than demonstrating via application), so...
PhaedrusXY 04-23-07, 05:40 PM	I'm second highest of 4, btw. 14 Bard, me at 12 with the build I posted in the original post, 11 Rogue4/Fighter2/Swash3/Invisible Blade2, 10 Cleric5/paladin5.Good god. I'm surprized your party is still alive. It's not that you're UBER, it's that they all suck. Bard14 and the Invisible Blade might be great in some types of campaigns (Urban adventure, vs. lots of foes that can be Charmed/Dominated/Sneak Attacked). Vs undead hordes on the other hand... And Cleric 5/Palladin5?! :uh-huh: What is this? A WotC-built NPC? Pick a class, for god's sake. At least they stack for Turning, so I guess it's not entirely hopeless. Even your own character is quite far from optimized, IMO. Cerebremancers, and all other "duel casting" classes like Mystic Theurge, are inherently weaker than "full progression" casters. They can be strong, but it is alot harder to pull off than just focusing on one "casting" progression. No wonder you're having to burn through all your power points and spell slots every encounter. If you didn't, every one would probably be a TPK. :D
Kilawpilath 04-23-07, 07:33 PM	Elan as a whole are not as overpowered as some people think in a way that wasn't mentioned here. The type of action that is required to activate their 2 Racial abilities. They are both Immeadite actions. And you can only use 1 immeadite action per round. Meaning if you have 2 Enemies targeting you. One attacks you and you decide to reduce the damage, you can't buff your resistances when the next one decides to hit you with an effect that causes you to roll a save unless you survive that effect and he does it again next round. Also, if your friend is complaining about damage, why not suggest he just take some levels of the prestige class Stormsinger. Level 3 you get to deal 1d20 + perform bonus electrical damage to a single target. And that's something that can be done once every round. (As long as you have 11 Ranks in Perform(Sing))
TikiMan 04-23-07, 10:24 PM	I still don't think holding back will convince the bard's player of much. I dunno about the bard, but I played in a game with people I'd never met before, under a DM who had never had psionic characters. By metagaming how many resources I should spend each combat my character came off as effective without blowing anyones socks off. I've converted a couple of other DMs who had bad experiences with psionics, and I've lost count of how many players I've turned on to psionics (because I made it interesting without making it seem munchkiny). Psionic characters in particular have the ability to abuse DMs who don't throw/threaten a full gauntlet of encounters at the party, so I think they have a particular need to watch how many resources they expend in an encounter. Of course, this doesn't apply to the OP's situation because the party needs to spend 100% of it's resources just to avoid a TPK. Comparing wizard vs. psion, though, may bear some fruit, as they are similar to each other (primary caster vs. primary manifester). The only thing I have ever seen any Wizard vs. XXX fight prove is a fundamental truth that most people already know; "there is nothing more gimped than an unprepared wizard, and there is nothing more powerful than a well prepared wizard." Casters with independent known/per day resources can be compared across several different fights to see their impact, but the wizards greatest power lies in his ability to change his spells from day to day (hour to hour if you know what you're doing). Wizard vs. Psion would most likely come down to who rolled initative, followed by who failed their save first. @OP: As others have said, your character is simply the only well built character who doesn't currently have his talents nerfed by the undead you're fighting. Possibly ask the DM (or the silly Cleric/Paladin) to run a totally on the side combat that has no effect on the current game (just for test purposes). Make it a fight against nothing but humanoid NPCs. This may shed some light on their plight. ;) Edit: spoke with a friend of mine who still regularly plays WoW and thought I'd continue the analogies. Pretty much, the situation you're in would be like having a party consisting of a Pally (you), a Mage (rogue), a Warlock (Bard), a Priest (cleric), and you're all running through Stratholme. It's not your fault that all the undead are immune to poly and fear/seduce, nor is your fault that your priest is holy specced. Your shackle undead ability just happens to be pretty uber right now, but if you ever get around to running instances with fewer undead the party balance should work itself out.
ArcTan 04-24-07, 04:29 AM	Sorry *MY NAME EDITED OUT*, I'm just not convinced. I will admit however that I am not a Psion expert so maybe I have some mechanics wrong, but whatever the case I am looking at character balance from a diffrent view point then the man who wrote that article. Two characters of equal level should be of equal threat when pitted against each other. Sure, there is some Rock, Paper, Scissors matching going on and one class might really have another classes number, but when Psions are involved---I'm sorry, your numbers up. This is absolutely wrong, and the source of a great deal of nonsense. D&D is a game. Game balance in D&D only matters in the context of playing the game. Unless you're playing a game about duels between different PCs, duels are irrelevant to the game. The whole point of classes like Bards, Dragon Shamans, Marshals and so on is that you judge classes by their *usefulness to the party*, not by whether they'd win in a duel -- otherwise the whole idea of a "support" class wouldn't exist. I mean, surely someone with a Bard 12 character is aware of this fact, and notices that the class he chooses to play is purposely lacking in the field of ways to directly damage a single opponent in a useful manner.
ArcTan 04-24-07, 04:36 AM	BTW, it sounds like this party's DM has certain issues with communication with the party. This is not a new or unusual thing, and is something I see as something D&D, sadly, lets happen all too easily with even somewhat experienced groups -- a lack of real connection between the power level different players within the group and the group as a whole expect to hit and what the DM's trying to squeeze out of the campaign. The DM shouldn't be running encounters that put the squeeze on your party so hard that the one more-optimized character really does end up taking all the spotlight to save the asses of all the less-optimized characters. If it's reaching the point where people aren't having fun, the DM needs to pull back and lower the difficulty so people can use the options they chose. (Sadly, some of your characters really seem to have run wild with their own interpretation of the flavoring of D&D mechanics with a poor grasp of what those choices mean. Being a Cleric 5/Paladin 5 effectively means wasting half your XP, which is fine if you want to challenge yourself, but not fine if you seem to think that it means you're extra holy and special for doing it. And not fine if you blame the bad results this makes the rules generate for your character on other characters who didn't make bad choices.)
ArcTan 04-24-07, 04:58 AM	The only thing I have ever seen any Wizard vs. XXX fight prove is a fundamental truth that most people already know; "there is nothing more gimped than an unprepared wizard, and there is nothing more powerful than a well prepared wizard." Pshaw. I'm willing to bet that a Soulknife is more gimped than an unprepared Wizard. It depends on what you mean, of course. An "unprepared Wizard" meaning a Wizard who hasn't gotten the chance to prepare any new spells for today is obviously boned. However, a Wizard who wasn't quite sure what was going to happen today and prepared a general selection of spells is still quite a powerful character -- quite a bit more powerful than any non-full-caster, still (so the Wizard prepared some generic magic missile and fireball for today -- big deal, the Fighter's still carrying the same sword-and-board he always does too), and arguably *still a match* for the Sorcerer, despite preparation being supposed to be the Wizard's asset over the Sorcerer. Because even without specific prep, the Wizard still has more total different spells on his spell list than the Sorc, and the Wizard can get scrolls and wands and staffs a lot cheaper than the Sorc (by being able to take craft feats as bonus feats), and similarly can do metamagic a lot more easily than the Sorc. I fail to see how this makes him more gimped than any other character. The Wizard gets the chance to prepare undeath to death because he knows ahead of time there'll be lots of Undead today, and will otherwise have to futz along killing Undead the hard way with chain lightning and Maximized fireball. The Monk, however, had no choice but to do things the *really* hard way at all, by whacking the Undead with his fists. Who's really more gimped in this situation?
Azoriel 04-24-07, 05:36 PM	Wizard vs. Psion would most likely come down to who rolled initative, followed by who failed their save first. On this, I think we can most certainly agree. ;) As for the sub-optimal party members, if your (the original poster's) party is open to suggestions, here's a few of my own (if you want them): The truedeath crystal from the magic item compendium lets you sneak attack undead. And you don't even need to own the magic item compendium to see the rules on it. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ps/20070209a Even if you don't bother feinting, sneak attacks are easy enough to pull off when you have more or one party members; just tumble around an enemy and then flank with a front-liner. (Not a good idea when you're dealing with rows and rows of enemies, but, if you aren't setting yourself up to eat 6+ attacks...) With the right feats, bards can easily be one of the most potent members of an adventuring party (though most people either don't know about these feats or ignore them). Words of creation can double bardic music bonuses, metamagic song is better than divine metamagic in any campaign that doesn't allow the abuse of nightsticks, song of the heart increases your bonuses by +1, and snowflake wardance adds the bard's charisma to his attack rolls with slashing weapons (in addition to everything else). And that's just the top of the iceberg. Start digging into multiclass options (both prestige and base classes) and magic items and a bard's options go up even further. I'm willing to bet that your bard isn't exercising any of those, though. Most bards (who don't use any of the aforementioned abilities) will only expend 0-1 bardic music every fight; if your bard is in this camp while playing in a one encounter per day campaign with 14 bard levels, he's being grossly negligent. Not sure what to tell the paladin/cleric who apparently can't make up his mind. I hope he did this just to get holy mount or something (even though that feat isn't worth the effort). Otherwise, I'd be very disappointed.
Lycanthromancer 04-24-07, 07:42 PM	Talk to the paladin/cleric player, as well as the DM, and ask if he could retool his character to use the prestige paladin from Unearthed Arcana. That might help somewhat...
jokey665 04-25-07, 10:02 AM	I did, and the DM is letting him rebuild if he wants to.
PhaedrusXY 04-25-07, 12:02 PM	I did, and the DM is letting him rebuild if he wants to.HOORAY for reasonable DMs! :cheer:
FeceMan 04-25-07, 12:24 PM	HOORAY for reasonable DMs! :cheer: Hooray for not-sadistic DMs, more like.
jokey665 04-25-07, 01:01 PM	Well, my DM is sadistic, actually. This is a rare act of kindness.
Sunblast 04-25-07, 01:21 PM	In our current campaign, psionics are simply not allowed in the game (There are still illithids, githzerai, etc., but things from the Psionics Handbook are not permitted). This really doesn't have much to do with whether psionics are overpowered or not. For us, it's really more about whether the psionic players are overpowered. The player most interested in psionics is also the only one that has the books for them. However, he's notorious for misinterpreting and "forgetting" rules. I often hear him tell me of some incredible character build he has that, using psionics, can do simply rediculously overpowered things. Each time, I'm certain he's misreading or ignoring a rule (or five), but without the proper books, how can I prove him wrong? Allowing him to play psionics in a campaign with players and a DM that can't catch him in a lie is just asking for trouble, so they were just removed entirely. That probably isn't the sort of thing you were looking for, but I do feel that it indicates one of the reasons many players don't care for psionics (myself included). Psionics just seems to be an alternate magic system with "mana" instead of spell slots, and most players are simply not educated in how psionics work. If psionics are really and truly balanced, then it could just be ignorance that makes so many people dislike them. I think that's the case for me (though I also have some RP issues with them). I doubt that helped any, but that's just my two cents. :twocents:
InkBlot 04-25-07, 01:36 PM	things from the Psionics Handbook are not permitted That is truly a wise decision. The 3.0 Psionics Handbook is a blight on all mankind. However, if your friend has the Expanded Psionics Handbook, then you should ask to borrow it. He's not using it so he shouldn't mind, right? Then you can bone up on the psionic rules and catch his lies. The psionic system, like you said, is very very similar to the core magic system. This makes it very easy to learn. The two main psionics rules, and the two main differences from magic, are thus; 1. Thou shalt not spend more power points than thy manifester level on any one power. 2. Thou shalt not expend psionic focus for more than one effect at a time. Besides that, you just need to keep the Expanded Psionics Handbook at the table so you can look up specific powers or feats every once in a while. This is just like you should keep the Player's Handbook around to look up spells when you need to. For more help, check out the New DM's and Player's Guide To Psionics (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=486266) in the sticky at the top of the forum. There's also a Psionics FAQ (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=638776) up there.
Nephlite 04-25-07, 01:37 PM	In our current campaign, psionics are simply not allowed in the game (There are still illithids, githzerai, etc., but things from the Psionics Handbook are not permitted). This really doesn't have much to do with whether psionics are overpowered or not. For us, it's really more about whether the psionic players are overpowered. The player most interested in psionics is also the only one that has the books for them. However, he's notorious for misinterpreting and "forgetting" rules. I often hear him tell me of some incredible character build he has that, using psionics, can do simply rediculously overpowered things. Each time, I'm certain he's misreading or ignoring a rule (or five), but without the proper books, how can I prove him wrong? Allowing him to play psionics in a campaign with players and a DM that can't catch him in a lie is just asking for trouble, so they were just removed entirely. Reasonable issue. It would be like me buying complete Mage wanting to play a Wizard and shoot 4d6 every round with 2nd level spell (which not what reserve feats give). If you haven't veen showed the spell/feat, it is fine to be wary or not allow it till you've at least reads that particular part. That probably isn't the sort of thing you were looking for, but I do feel that it indicates one of the reasons many players don't care for psionics (myself included). Psionics just seems to be an alternate magic system with "mana" instead of spell slots, and most players are simply not educated in how psionics work. If psionics are really and truly balanced, then it could just be ignorance that makes so many people dislike them. I think that's the case for me (though I also have some RP issues with them). I doubt that helped any, but that's just my two cents. :twocents: No more than any "new" book and DM not reading a lick of the book to check what he is able to do (when he picks new spells). But I personally believe it is ignorance.
InkBlot 04-25-07, 01:40 PM	Also, all the rules from the Expanded Psionic Handbook are available online, for free, in the System Reference Document. (http://systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/psionic.html) So you don't even need to borrow your friend's book. The SRD is only lacking flavor text, examples, and "product identity" such as illithids and thri-kreen.