Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jay_Ibero_911 10-08-06, 07:44 PM	I've seen the term thrown around here a bunch, and from the context, I assume it is some kind of broken build. Can anyone elaborate for me?
Kerik 10-08-06, 07:50 PM	It means Clericzilla or Druidzilla, or a mutliclass combination. The reason they are thought as this is because they operate off of divine magic, meaning no spell failure chance, heavier armor proficiencies, they get the entire list of spells available for their level, turning or wildshaping and an animal companion, and other useful stuff. Thw whole problem is that any cons they have can be easily negated by feats or magical items, and the pros they can can be ludacrisly supersized and exploited.
Kerik 10-08-06, 07:56 PM	This term and the opinions that others express about the CoDzilla are in my opinion irrelevant, however. There will always be ridiculously powerful combinations of dnd classes, features, feats, and such. Take for example a Hulking Hurler2 War Hulk4 Stone Giant. Its CR would be twenty, equal to the Tarrasque, a Pit Fiend, a Balor, and below a Solar Angel. However, because of the combination of class features, it gains the capability of throwing a rock weighing 6,400lbs a distance of at least 25ft, to deal an average of 896 points of damage. This is at a minimum +33 attack bonus, so it's not likely to miss, and one hit will instantly kill any one of the monsters I listed. It would even be on par with a demigod.
Jay_Ibero_911 10-08-06, 07:58 PM	Oh is that all? I figured it had something to do with clerics, I just thought it would be more complicated than that, like Divine Metamagic abuse or something...
Heahengel 10-08-06, 07:59 PM	Succinctly said, CoDzilla means Cleric or Druid, which many feel are unbalanced compared to other base classes. Its not a specific build of cleric or druid that is broken in a specific way, it is those classes in general (the argument goes).
Tempest Stormwind 10-08-06, 08:02 PM	What you've mentioned is the weak part of it -- it's not that they have all those things. It's that they have all those things on top of class features that are stronger than entire other characters. The hulking hurler example above is pretty nonoptimized, actually (Trust me; I'm the guy who assembled the 'finalized' (1.4 billion d6 damage) and 'hulk-less' (no levels in war hulk) versions of it). And it looks terribly strong. BUT! Take a look at its will save. And other things -- it's extremely one-dimensional. Not so with the cleric or the druid. Meanwhile, ask yourself a simple question. What is the cleric or druid bad at? You won't be able to find an answer. The druid's particularly bad because it can be more than one thing at once -- a powerful tank that is also the primary nuker and supplementary healer, for instance, while another druid's the main healer, summoner, and sneak. A party of four clerics, or four druids, or some combination of these, can utterly steamroll absolutely EVERYTHING in the game. This goes double if you're using Divine Metamagic. The origin of the term "CoDzilla" is linked in my sig -- the RadicalTaoist quote. That is where it originated, and the term spread through sigs since. You can read that thread for its original context. (I was there when it was posted. The original image was a Japanese movie poster, for instance, and the edit below it was a "you know, I can see someone sigging that..." before it was replaced with a response to its first sigging.) Let's just say there's a reason the CO board says that Druid 20 is one of the strongest characters in the game -- only Artificer 20 can meet it if you're using a single class. And even if you aren't, Druid 20 (and Artificer 20, actually) STILL comes out in the frontrunners.
Kerik 10-08-06, 08:09 PM	Another excellent example is that any 17th level wizard or an 18th level sorceror can cast Celerity, a 4th level spell that is cast as an immediate action, to gain a standard action during anyone's turn. Then that character can cast Time Stop during that extra standard action and gain 2-5 extra rounds. During that time, the character can cast plane shift and move to a plane where no time elapses in the previous plane they were in. The character can then set up contingency spells, rest, hire help, etc, and cast plane shift again to get back where the character was. The character then just has to wait for the remaining 1-4 rounds of the Time Stop spell to elapse and attack. If the character is critically wounded or in danger or whatever, the character can then repeat the whole process.
Kerik 10-08-06, 08:22 PM	Do you have the full stats for the finalized version?
Tempest Stormwind 10-08-06, 08:28 PM	Do you have the full stats for the finalized version? Hm? Referring to me suggesting that a druid 20 was considered one of the best general characters on the CO boards? No. Because to be honest, you need only one feat -- Natural Spell. The rest is all gravy. You can read up more on it here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=465005). Do you want me to bust out clerics as well?
Kerik 10-08-06, 08:36 PM	I meant the 1.4 million d6 damage rock thrower.
PhaedrusXY 10-08-06, 08:49 PM	I meant the 1.4 million d6 damage rock thrower.It's in here somewhere (near the end I'd imagine): http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=142565
Tempest Stormwind 10-08-06, 09:11 PM	I meant the 1.4 million d6 damage rock thrower. Million? Try quadrillion. It's been a while; the minutiae are fuzzy since no one plays hurlers. (Note: Druids and clerics are still just as common.) But yes, the basics are on page 14 of that thread (default forum settings). There's more refinements later (I found a few more multipliers, for instance, and there were additions of things like Axethrower, which has since become Brutal Throw).
Xeviat-DM 10-09-06, 01:39 AM	Without derailing the thread too much; how did you calculate the damage of that collosal lead beachball?
Tempest Stormwind 10-09-06, 02:04 AM	Without derailing the thread too much; how did you calculate the damage of that collosal lead beachball? Complete Warrior final pages, on improvised weapons. Note that damage scales linearly with weight, which is directly proportional to carrying capacity, which scales exponentially with Strength. The summary: The first 400 pounds gives you 5d6, and then +1d6 per 200 pounds after that. I also figured in a few other effects on the lead beachball (that won't factor in if you're simply hefting a Kuiper Belt object at people), things like Shrinking (a +1 enhancement that mimics Shrink Item; I made sure the SHRUNK one was towards the limit of his carrying capacity, which packed an approximate 4000x multiplier on the weight there), making it sharp or pointy (deals damage as double its weight), and so on, combined with other effects like Natural Heavyweight. It got to the point where if I could cram in one more point of Strength, he'd deal a few million more d6 with one throw. By that point the CO boards just decided to stop on that angle (though I remained long enough to deal with the hulk-less version, and later I used the Hurler in a NON-cheese build based on hucking harpoons at people). The whole thing works NOT because of the Hurler (although that's a big part of making it feasable); it's the ludicrous uncapped and oddly-scaling improvised weapon damage in the back of CW.
Xeviat-DM 10-09-06, 02:42 AM	The whole thing works NOT because of the Hurler (although that's a big part of making it feasable); it's the ludicrous uncapped and oddly-scaling improvised weapon damage in the back of CW. I'm always glad when power-gamers are able to recognize that they're power gaming. :P What method did you use to determine how the scale continued to grow? Considering it goes 2 > 5 > 10 > 25 > 50 > 100 > 200 > 400, I'm under the assumption that it will double each time; I'm assuming you continued to double it? But, the table doesn't say you can continue it endlessly. It also says that a 11 to 50 pound item is a two-handed weapon for a medium creature, and to double this weight for every size above medium. Medium > Large > Huge > Gargantuan > Collosal x2 > x4 > x8 > x16 > x32 50 x 32 = 1,600 By the scaling on the table, 1,600 pounds will deal 7d6 damage (5d6 is 400, thus 6d6 is 800 and 7d6 is 1,600). Oops, derailed. ----------- The only time I had a cleric break a game was when a 5th level cleric had two ettin skeletons as companions (made with animate dead and desecrate). That was a very annoying character. But, in my defense, my players don't run clerics too often, so I haven't seen the most broken stuff in my games (and I'm usually quick to houserule cheese, such as Divine Metamagic).
Tempest Stormwind 10-09-06, 03:03 AM	I'm always glad when power-gamers are able to recognize that they're power gaming. :P What method did you use to determine how the scale continued to grow? Considering it goes 2 > 5 > 10 > 25 > 50 > 100 > 200 > 400, I'm under the assumption that it will double each time; I'm assuming you continued to double it?Read the text accompanying it. It contains the phrase "For every additional 200 pounds of an object's weight beyond 400 pounds, it deals an additional 1d6 points of damage if used as an improvised weapon." This explicitly explains what's going on, instead of making implicit guesses. And for the record, yes, I'm a powergamer, and I'm also a strong roleplayer. My characters tend to be good at what they do and realistic in how they do it. Stuff like this, though, stays on the CO forums where it belongs -- and that's okay, and it's what the forum is there for.The only time I had a cleric break a game was when a 5th level cleric had two ettin skeletons as companions (made with animate dead and desecrate). That was a very annoying character. But, in my defense, my players don't run clerics too often, so I haven't seen the most broken stuff in my games (and I'm usually quick to houserule cheese, such as Divine Metamagic). The real point is you shouldn't need to houserule anything; claiming that it's okay because you can houserule it is committing an Oberoni fallacy. About a third of the DMM cheese could be removed if it contained a line that prevented the effective level of the final spell from going above what you can cast. The remaining two-thirds can be dropped by removing Nightsticks (or claiming that they don't stack) and removing or changing the myriad ways of cheapening metamagic costs (I'm looking at you, incantrix). By the way, since we're on clerics now, I suppose I should mention The Cheater of Mystra, the first real build to use Divine Metamagic properly. It's simple -- Cleric 10 / Dwoemerkeeper 10, or Cleric 5 / Dwoemerkeeper 10 / whatever 5. (Dwoemerkeeper is in the Complete Divine web enhancement, meaning it was finished but cut for space. You use Magical Training to qualify.) Take Divine Metamagic (Persistent Spell) and the Initiate of Mystra feat. Buy Nightsticks (The Duracells of the Gods). Behold. There is NOTHING in the game you can't own. You can cast Miracle at will as a supernatural ability (no AoO, no dispels, no SR), amongst other spells. You can cast in an antimagic field without any concerns. Your buffs last all day -- including Divine Power, which means you're a better fighter than the fighter. And if you're smart, you've bought an Orange Ioun Stone, a Karma prayer bead, and an Ankh of Ascension, which together grant you +9 to your caster level for a short while -- namely, the same short while when you cast these buffs. This boost makes them essentially impossible to dispel, and often gives you MORE benefit than you could manage otherwise. And all of them last all day. Imagine for a moment a cleric with all of his best spells active all the time, essentially immune to both dispelling and AMF, and capable of using his best spells supernaturally (meaning he ignores YOUR SR). Oh, and since he's a cleric of MYSTRA, he's packing Anyspell (which casts any arcane spell) and Miracle (which can emulate essentially any arcane spell). Some of this (The DMM cheese and the AMF immunity; i.e. the worst offenders) is possible on straight Cleric 20. The dwoemerkeeper is responsible for the rest. Oh, did I mention it casts exactly the same as a cleric 20 as well? It just doesn't turn as well. (Seriously, this is one area I think we can all agree psionics got VERY RIGHT -- no PrCs with full progression on their casting prowess.)
angryman 10-09-06, 03:24 AM	Even without astronomically broken builds, cleric and druid are just good at most things and they have no real weaknesses. They have a bad ref save, but elemental resistances and healing and D8 HD to compensate. They have shorter range spells than wizards, but that's never an issue.
Dire Celestial Bonobo 10-09-06, 03:25 AM	During that time, the character can cast plane shift and move to a plane where no time elapses in the previous plane they were in. Are any such planes detailed in core or (even general) WotC material, and not saddled with substantial risks? Otherwise, all you're saying is that house rules can cause problems.
Xeviat-DM 10-09-06, 04:47 AM	Read the text accompanying it. It contains the phrase "For every additional 200 pounds of an object's weight beyond 400 pounds, it deals an additional 1d6 points of damage if used as an improvised weapon." This explicitly explains what's going on, instead of making implicit guesses. Woops, missed that one. The real point is you shouldn't need to houserule anything; claiming that it's okay because you can houserule it is committing an Oberoni fallacy. I didn't mean to say that. I meant that I haven't myself witnessed anything incredibly overpowered in game, because of my conservative DMing style. I wasn't defending the brokenness of clerics (I myself made a cleric for a RAW turnament who abused invisibility, sanctuary, spell immunity [divination], and Divine Metamagic [quicken] to wait out the 30 man free-for-all to pick off those left over at the end), I was just stating that I haven't seen the worse the class has to offer.
Tempest Stormwind 10-09-06, 11:22 AM	Are any such planes detailed in core or (even general) WotC material, and not saddled with substantial risks? Otherwise, all you're saying is that house rules can cause problems. Incidentally, yes and no. The default plane setting to do this in is the Far Realms, but trying that there takes balls. Not a problem, though, since in the SRD -- the SRD, mind you -- there's the Genesis spell (level 9 wizard, level 9 Creation domain -- note that Complete Divine also had the creation domain and replaced the 9th level power, though). This lets you create your own demiplane. It also lets you manipulate the time trait of your demiplane or create it out of whatever you want (diamonds? Magma? Why not?). The only similar ability is a psionic power that five out of six psion types cannot get pre-epic, and while that one does have a lower XP cost and a weak antigenesis effect, it also has text preventing manipulating the Time trait and the unusual material creation.
Dire Celestial Bonobo 10-09-06, 09:44 PM	in the SRD -- the SRD, mind you -- there's the Genesis spell (level 9 wizard I can't find any such spell listed in the SRD. Downloading the "Spells (F-G)" file directly from wizards.com gives a list that goes from "Geas, Lesser" to "Gentle Repose", with the word "genesis" not even appearing in the document. Are you sure it's there?
PhaedrusXY 10-09-06, 10:06 PM	It's in the Divine section (Divine Domains and Spells). There are some other feats and things in the Divine section that mere mortals can use, also... which makes me wonder exactly why they are in that section. Some of the feats have absolutely nothing to do with gods, or even spellcasting.
Dire Celestial Bonobo 10-09-06, 10:26 PM	It's in the Divine section (Divine Domains and Spells). Ahh - that's why I've been unconcerned about it. It's also not at all clear that "The spellcaster determines the environment within the demiplane when he or she first casts genesis, reflecting most any desire the spellcaster can visualize. The spellcaster determines factors such as atmosphere, water, temperature, and the general shape of the terrain." lets the character set the time trait -- that's pure interpretation, and so is strictly a DM call.
dog45 10-11-06, 09:38 PM	Let's just say there's a reason the CO board says that Druid 20 is one of the strongest characters in the game -- only Artificer 20 can meet it if you're using a single class. And even if you aren't, Druid 20 (and Artificer 20, actually) STILL comes out in the frontrunners. QFT
angryman 10-11-06, 10:07 PM	Is druid strong because they get good saves, pure casting, huge bonuses in animal forms and cheesy mechanical tweaking?
dog45 10-11-06, 11:19 PM	Is druid strong because they get good saves, pure casting, huge bonuses in animal forms and cheesy mechanical tweaking? Lucy, you got some esplain'n to do...
angryman 10-11-06, 11:28 PM	Lucy, you got some esplain'n to do... Druids can't wear heavy armour---> dragonskin armour Druids can't use their armour in animal form---> wild armour ability Druids can't cast in animal form---> wild spell 3 of the major drawbacks of playing a druid are easily negated.
xanadu 10-11-06, 11:59 PM	What is the cleric or druid bad at? Reflex saves :P
ShinAkuma2 10-12-06, 01:06 AM	Reflex saves :P That's sort of mitigated by the fact that Reflex-offering spells are often not as dangerous as their Fort/Will-based bretheren.
Sapp 10-12-06, 01:07 AM	WotC has a love affair with Clerics and Druids. Even their PrCs are cheesy. Just look at the stuff they come up with. I'm still nursing my nuts from the kick that came from the Planar Shepherd. That was just too blatant. WotC must have known about the exploits people keep talking about that involve the Efreeti. If that wasn't enough, they had to find an interesting way to break planar bubble. They can't be that ignorant. I conclude that WotC chose to ignore what they knew. It had to have been deliberate.
Xeviat-DM 10-12-06, 02:15 AM	I believe representatives of WotC have admited to pumping up the Cleric and Druid's power to encourage people to take them. I don't think it's necessary though; In my 20+ extended circle of gamer friends, there are a handful of players who actually enjoy playing supportive roles. What would be nice is if the game were balanced so that any of the 4 primary character classes could be replaced with any other class without too much trouble. I ran a game with a ranger, sorcerer, barbarian, and rogue, as as long as they got their cure wands when the stopped back at base, they were "fine" (in the relative sense; it would have been nice to have had a cleric handy when people were level drained or diseased).
Shaftiel 10-12-06, 02:33 AM	But clerics have a huge negative... no one wants to play them. I can't be the only one who's encountered this. I end up playing a cleric in fully half the campaigns I'm in because no one else wants to do it, and a lot of these are with intelligent, skilled players. The survey WotC did on popularity of the various classes a while ago bears this out... Clerics were way, way down on the list. (Sorcerers, funny enough, were near the top despite the endless complaints about them.) I'm not saying that they aren't overpowered - from a pure mechanical prospective they absolutely are. But many, many people refuse to play them, because at the end of the day their role frequently gets reduced to medic - and rotating through cure spells isn't all that exciting. Edit: lol, Xeviat posted the exact same thing while I was typing this.
Sapp 10-12-06, 02:42 AM	Yes. A lot of people: 1. are not willing to invest the time to read/research or manage for their PCs. 2. don't put effort into becoming more powerful. 3. don't care. This is why I play simpler characters most of the time, and leave more complicated designs (casters) to those who can think faster, have more spare time, or have more experience than myself. I know quite a few people who've never played clerics or druids before. "Travel domain? What's so special about that?" I guess you could say the Cleric and Druid have the 'potential' to be the best core classes. The potential is realized by a strong player.
babysamurai 10-12-06, 05:46 AM	I think C.o.D.zilla is a myth. …Just like the fighter being underpowered.
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-12-06, 07:17 AM	I think C.o.D.zilla is a myth. <snip> Untrue. The campaign I currently run usually has a druid which totally dominates the battlefield dispite the fact that there is a monk and a dwarf fighter among the party. With wildshape and extensive knowlege (consider every monster manual and splat book monster section to be your 'spellbooks') he easily finds ways to defeat encounters... often even soloing ELs 4-6 levels higher above party average if the opposition is straight from a listing. But clerics have a huge negative... no one wants to play them. I can't be the only one who's encountered this. I end up playing a cleric in fully half the campaigns I'm in because no one else wants to do it, and a lot of these are with intelligent, skilled players. The survey WotC did on popularity of the various classes a while ago bears this out... Clerics were way, way down on the list. (Sorcerers, funny enough, were near the top despite the endless complaints about them.) <snip> True. The last campaign I played in (partied with a cruder incarnation of the DruZilla mentioned above) I got 'stuck' with playing a cleric. However, I refused to do any healing in the heat of battle (I gave out cure/heal/restore activation items and told everyone to 'do' themselves), took +1BAB/lvl divine casting PrC for a few levels to ensure I'd get +16 by lvl 20. My ClerZilla would routinely surpass DruZilla in DPR (Damage Per Round) only failing to to do so when misses caused to many pairs of attacks to fail to get their rending bonuses. (I relied on rending bonuses, Dru just used gobs of bestial STR). So you would think that my 'showing how it is done' would have convinced someone to pick Cleric as a class in the following campaign... AANNHHGG!!... wrong answer. The appealed for a NPC cleric, had one (who they treated like the stereotypical wizard's familiar (ala Order of the Stick) often forgetting about the NPC for extended periods. On one juant abroad, they went to get healing and 'woops' no one invited the NPC along. Shortly thereafter (after they patched things up with jilted NPC), the party (11th level now) got charged with 'protecting the world' and bestowed the awesome power of gestalt-edness. Three of the four PCs were considering taking cleric when we parted for a month long break. Can you guess how many actually took cleric when we returned? Close... not none but less than one-half. One person designed a build using 5 levels of Cleric. Well the NPC left the party after getting killed/rezzed and now the party has to rely on temples or items to get their clerical warm and tinglies. So why do I have the feeling the next campaign, when someone else runs the game, that even if I announce I'll be playing an arcane caster, no one will have picked cleric when the dust settles? And what really bunches my shorts up is that all but one of these folks play MMOGs and routinely play support type characters. Well, returning to CoDZILLA topic, this cleric free party has only avoided Total Party Kill on several occasions due to DruZilla's ingenuity (which is the real power behind this build).
babysamurai 10-12-06, 07:25 AM	Untrue. The campaign I currently run usually has a druid which totally dominates the battlefield dispite the fact that there is a monk and a dwarf fighter among the party. With wildshape and extensive knowlege (consider every monster manual and splat book monster section to be your 'spellbooks') he easily finds ways to defeat encounters... often even soloing ELs 4-6 levels higher above party average if the opposition is straight from a listing. That’s cool, I just don’t agree with you.
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-12-06, 08:11 AM	That’s cool, I just don’t agree with you. I did,t say 'they are great' or express an opinion in any other way. I merely stated what the character can due versus out of the box encounters. These are facts, not opinions. Unless you are doubting the accuracy of this evidence, there is nothing to 'disagree' with. Or am I misunderstanding what you are really responding to? Are you just saying that CoDZILLA is no more unbalanced than the other base classes? Do you doubt that DruZILLA would win in a contest of the most broke core only rules base class? Please clarify. TYVM.
babysamurai 10-12-06, 08:20 AM	Please clarify. TYVM. I was just saying that what you posted were your opinions based off of your personal experiences. And I don’t agree with your opinions, that’s all.
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-12-06, 10:09 AM	I was just saying that what you posted were your opinions based off of your personal experiences. And I don’t agree with your opinions, that’s all. Really? Maybe we just have differences as to what defines an opinion and a fact. My last clarification attempt didn't do so well. So on to Round Two. Let's bring in wikipedia... Opinion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion) - An opinion is a person's ideas and thoughts towards something. It is an assessment, judgment or evaluation of something. An opinion is not a fact, because opinions are either not falsifiable, or the opinion has not been proven or verified. Fact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact) - Used colloquially Outside of science, a word 'fact' may be associated with some of the following: An honest observation confirmed by widely respected observers. Errors are common in the interpretation of the meaning of observations. Power is frequently used to force the politically correct interpretation of an observation. A repeatedly observed regularity. One observation of any phenomenon does not necessarily make it a fact. Repeatability of an observation is required usually by using the stated procedures or operational definitions of a phenomenon. Something thought to be actual as opposed to invented. Something concrete used as a basis for further interpretation. Information about a particular subject. Something believed to be the case. No. My experiences are facts, not opinions. To imply otherwise is to doubt the honesty of my description of my experiences as defined by wikipedia. I hope I made my self clear here. I stated that the party DruZILLA can solo a +4-6 lvl EL, and you cannot simple dismiss it by stating that it is an 'opinion,' it is only dismissible by impeaching my testimony. If you disagree fine... quote the specific points with which you disagree and explain yourself as eloquently as possible. You have only to look at the character optimization boards to find some campaign bending (not quite breaking) tricks to make the 'solo act' I described feasible. Well, let's return closer to the OP theme. If CoDZILLA is a myth or just an opinion, then how did the stereotype of CoDZILLA take hold? Why is it so prevalent throughout the board? [Stereotypes become that way because they are true so often, if only by anecdotal evidence and observation, BUT observation is sufficient for a colloquial fact.] Why is it so ingrained in the Gamer Society that it becomes the stuff of satire and becomes ClerZILLA vs DruZILLA as depicted in several of the latest strips from Order of the Stick (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0353.html)? I will make no other links to these boards referring to CoDZILLA because we know they exist or the OP would never have started this thread. [edit: if babysamurai denies they exist I'll add some in an edit, but let's try and stipulate their existence for now] Now, in regards to the numerous other sightings of CoDZILLA, I can see that one could try and make a case that CoDZILLA is the DND society equivalent of Bigfoot or Nessie. But with wiki's definition of a colloquial fact (please, DND is not a hard science, it is a social interaction with written etiquette) I will now state something that babysamurai might call an opinion, but I think I have supported with evidence that the following meets the definition of a fact... Yes, Virginia (and Jay_Ibero_911 and babysamurai), there is a CoDZILLA! ;)
babysamurai 10-12-06, 10:20 AM	Really? We must have differences as to what an opinion and a fact are. Let's bring in wikipedia... But then how did the steroetype of CoDZILLA take hold? Why is prevalent throughout the board? Why is so ingrained in the Gamer Society that it becomes the stuff of satire and becomes ClerZILLA vs DruZILLA as depicted in several of the latest strips from Order of the Stick (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0353.html)? I will make no other links to these boards refering to CoDZILLA because we know they exist or the OP would never have started this thread. [edit: if babysamurai denies they exist I'll add some in an edit, but let's try and stipulate their existance for now] No. My experiences are facts, not opinions. To imply otherwise is to doubt the honesty of my description of my experiences as defined by wikipedia. I hope I made my self clear here. Now, in regards to the numerous other sightings of CoDZILLA, I can see that one could try and make a case that CoDZILLA is the DND society equivalent of Bigfoot or Nessie. But with wiki's definition of a colloqual fact (please, DND is not a hard science, it is a social interaction with written etiquette) I will now state something that babysamurai might call an opinion, but I think I have supported with evidence that the following meets the definition of a fact... Yes, Virginia (and Jay_Ibero_911 and babysamurai), there is a CoDZILLA! ;) A fact is: the Sun is hot. Not: a bunch of whiners think a class in a game is too powerful, therefore it is. Your moniker would be really nifty if it was SpawnOfMelkor.
angryman 10-12-06, 10:49 AM	Meh, clerics and druids are mechanically overpowered. If you don't think that, either you have some bizarre rationalisation or you don't understand the rules. People don't want to play clerics? Why? I personally like clerics because they're fairly flexible and mechanically. They are a very solid class that has a lot of options and are very, very tough.
babysamurai 10-12-06, 10:59 AM	Meh, clerics and druids are mechanically overpowered. If you don't think that, either you have some bizarre rationalisation or you don't understand the rules. Try not to insult people because they don’t agree with “your” opinions. I would say its people that don’t properly understand the rules that think the cleric/druid is overpowered.
Wilds 10-12-06, 11:14 AM	Try not to insult people because they don’t agree with “your” opinions. FYI your provoking it by just saying u disagree with out any backing statements at all. So both of you are at fault if the person ment to insult you
babysamurai 10-12-06, 11:25 AM	FYI your provoking it by just saying u disagree with out any backing statements at all. So both of you are at fault if the person ment to insult you Oh, well thanks for joining the conversation Mr Helper.
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-12-06, 11:52 AM	Try not to insult people because they don’t agree with “your” opinions. Talk about the pot calling the kettle... <snip> Your moniker would be really nifty if it was SpawnOfMelkor. Oh, well thanks for joining the conversation Mr Helper. Name calling, and as I have been so politley trying to tell in the last posts 'implying that I am a liar'. I think we all know who comes closest to being a flamer. But why? Are you so in love with CoDZILLA you think that the game designers are gonna hit it with a nerf bat? This isn't a MassiveMultiplayerOnlineGame... they can't weild the nerf bat over night, and we can always feel free to change the rules client side if they did :cool: Admit it, babysamurai, my observations that cleric and druids can dominate a party are accurate. I am not alone in this 'reported observation' (note... this is no opnion). Others have stated that game designers intentionally gave clerics and druids more power to attract players to the underplayed support classes. Even with the lack of linked quotes, this theory certainly makes sense as it is sooooo often seen MMOGs (thought the MMOG solution is usually to cripple the strong, making the weak relatively stronger).
Karak_Nechot 10-12-06, 12:50 PM	I would say its people that don’t properly understand the rules that think the cleric/druid is overpowered. Actually, it's quite the opposite. People who actually really DO know the rules (i.e., the CO boards) know that the druid and cleric are substancially overpowered. CoDzilla is the litmus test for most builds on the CO boards, because it is so powerful. Basically, if you can make a build or use a rules exploit to make a character who is more powerful than the most powerful basic characters out there, druids and clerics, you have something worth noting. Time and time again, it has been shown that clerics and druids can be built with full advantages and no weaknesses, whether using the core or, even worse, the splatbooks. Each splatbook actually makes the cleric and druid even more powerful, whether by simply adding more spells to the spell list of either, or feats, like the reserve feats in the Complete Mage. A part of all clerics and/or druids can eaily handle almost any encounter better than a normal party can. I don't think you need much more prove than that.
Deckeon 10-12-06, 01:04 PM	I love how whenever CoDzilla is brought up, some jack***** comes on and starts listing stats for some broken cheezy-never-would-you-play build from CO boards. Druid 20 you would play, Cleric 20(or prestige'd) you would play. A tangent of the Hulking brute is to couple it with cleric for some perfectly non-loophole friendly overpowered-ness. I submit any class is better with 7 cleric levels due to DP being so over-powered. Cleric7or8, halfOgre(or whatever ECL2) Hulking brute 10. Hulking brute's drawback is he gets +2str rather than BAB. He can charge and knockaround multiple enemies with a sweeping strike. Imagine one that casts divingpower begating 20 bab on top of that str. many DMs would probably allow that if they've ever dealt with highlevel casters/clerics or druid. Then this guy casts his first DP and the DM is like OMG :eek:
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-12-06, 01:28 PM	A fact is: the Sun is hot. <snip> This fact was determined through observation. No one has ever touched the sun, but we can be pretty sure through anecdotal and scientific observation that this is true. So are observation based facts to dismissed? Until we achieved low orbit recon we only had observation and theory to determine that the earth is round, and not flat as anectdotal evidence and 'common sense' dictated for most of mankinds existence. Still, a few 'flat earthers' exist because they have not experienced the direct observation that the earth is round. So do you refuse to beleive what others have honestly observed? <snip> Not: a bunch of whiners think a class in a game is too powerful, therefore it is. <snip> I never said these classes were too powerful, TYVM. Other's have stated it though Actually, it's quite the opposite. People who actually really DO know the rules (i.e., the CO boards) know that the druid and cleric are substancially overpowered. <snip> I said they could, can, and have dominated the battlefield, surpassing other classes who have melee as a primary ability. These are facts. You inferred, perhaps, that I stated they were too powerful. But if I were asked I would say the cleric is balanced. Even as is, I mentioned how my gamer group suffers from 'cleric-itis' and still can't seem to take it as a full class even if offered gestalt for gosh sakes. The druid's balance comes from loss of use of most magic items when they go beastial. I said these classes, played smart, can blow away the competition. A few hours on the CO boards will tell you, that ANY CLASS can dominate, and take a campaign to the bending/breaking point if allowed. So in the big picture, I would say enough balance is there. OPINION 1: One of the easiest powergamer classes to get in under the GMs radar is a CoDZILLA. The GM's relief that party healing support is available gives you the in. You don't need to change classes wily nily or find funky PrC trainers... you can use a single class straight through... your path is cleared from day one. As long as you get the sweet feats you need your are home free. support this opinion from above post... I love how whenever CoDzilla is brought up, some jack***** comes on and starts listing stats for some broken cheezy-never-would-you-play build from CO boards. Druid 20 you would play, Cleric 20(or prestige'd) you would play. <snip> FACT 1: Few CO builds rely on a single class, sub-optimized CoDZILLAs can still pull it off. FACT 2: The above fact and opinion are what makes CoDZILLA the most often played character that resembles stuff from the CO boards in my last three gaming circles. OPINION 2: CoDZILLA is the easiest CO build to get past any GM and probably most often played character template from the CO boards that sees actual play. THAT is why it is so lauded over other CO builds. A CO build (even a sub-optimal CO) that can actually make it to the gaming table! OK so you settle for bending the campaign instead of breaking it, it still is massive quantities of fun! WOOT! No whining here (at least not by me).
angryman 10-12-06, 10:48 PM	Try not to insult people because they don’t agree with “your” opinions. I would say its people that don’t properly understand the rules that think the cleric/druid is overpowered. I didn't insult anyone, I was merely making an observation. I observed that some people with vested interest in these classes justify their overpoweredness by saying things like; * "Nobody would play a cleric if they weren't very powerful." * "Healing classes are unpopular so they need to be given a host of other abilities to make them attractive." * "Clerics have to answer to their gods and this dictates their actions so they're balanced." This one I hate the most. "I play a cleric of war and destruction (excellent domains, by the way), so as long as I'm acting like the average PC, my god will be more than happy," or "I take the XXX and YYY domains, no god and some half-baked background story to maximise my choices." As for understanding the rules, if you can't see mechanically that clerics and druids are overpowered, then I recommend reading the PhB again, then the splatbooks, then the complete sets etc, and tell me honestly you think that they are balanced and fine. If you can somehow ignore the avalanche of potential game-breaking things they can do, I am almost impressed. Note, I didn't say "clerics are always overpowered." I said they're mechanically overpowered- a GM can certainly nix taking ridiculous domains, bar access to divine metamagic, etc, but that's not really RAW. Finally, I've played in and GMed many games (including core only) and the cleric ALWAYS dominates in every combat scenario you can dream up. I'm sure someone's going to say, "Aah but if you're flying in a low magic zone that doesn't allow healing, against 5 evokers and archers with held actions, then the cleric is screwed...thus clerics aren't overpowered!" To this I say, pshaw.
Wilds 10-12-06, 11:09 PM	Oh, well thanks for joining the conversation Mr Helper. WEll if you really want me to chime in....i will CoDzilla is what happens when Wizards gets bored and decides to make the cleric the only character you ever need. through the splat books they can do almost anyhting, blast, tank, heal, stealth, charm. You wnat it, you find the right book, BOOM you have a cleric how can blow stuff up better than an Evoker. Druids are just what happens when you change into a T-rex and then cast a spell of your self. Need i say more? theres my "joining the conversation"
angryman 10-12-06, 11:20 PM	Also, if anyone remembers a year or two back, I ran the Divine Challenge on these boards, which pitted player created level 9 druid or cleric SOLO against CR 8-11 creatures, including dragons. After a couple of dozen pages, a new thread and a couple of dozen more pages, even with other people's sage advice, the monsters were one by one slaughtered. (except the frost giant that critted the bow cleric haha)
Decius 10-13-06, 12:08 AM	Please, how did a druid handle a +4, a +5 and a +6 EL encounter by himself, without extraordianary rolls? How about a monk- Given a week and 10% of your wealth to make specific preparations, how should a druid prepare to meek a monk, given that the monk will be attacking the druid at a time of the monk's choosing? Because a properly prepared monk will pwn a lone equal level druid with hit and run tactics, and a druid will destroy anything in a straight-up fistfight. A CR +4 Black dragon (Mature adult, CR 10) will also wear out a druid in open terrain with several attacks over a day, destroying potions with Corrupt water from 200' and using a line of acid from 100' up. The druid is reduced to medium and long range spells-Flame Strike, Call Lightning, and Call Lightning storm are the spells that could apply, so a moderate amount of preparation reduces damage to about 5d6 divine, reflex half. Meanwhile, once every 3 or 4 rounds (due to having to circle back around), the druid takes 14d8 acid damage. At level 10, he would have 8+9d8+10*Con modifer HP, and could get 2 or 3 heals off per breath, healing up to 11d8+30 to 14d8+40 if he prepared only cures for his 4th and 5th level spells. That's a good chance of a one-hit kill, and a huge drain on resources. For that matter, the same tactics can apply on the ground, simply by keeping a 100' distance by falling back.
Seerow 10-13-06, 12:14 AM	How about a monk- Given a week and 10% of your wealth to make specific preparations, how should a druid prepare to meek a monk, given that the monk will be attacking the druid at a time of the monk's choosing? Because a properly prepared monk will pwn a lone equal level druid with hit and run tactics, and a druid will destroy anything in a straight-up fistfight. Druid walks around in wildshape. When the monk attacks, the Monk gets his free first hit in, Druid easily passes the fort save for stunning fist, Druid and Animal Companion possition selves so that to hit one of them, the Monk has to provoke from the other. The Druid then readies an action to attack the monk should he spring attack into the Druid's threatened space. Now, anytime the Monk tries to attack, he eats an AoO from both the Druid and the Companion. The Monk doesn't have the AC or HP to stand up to that long. Of course, this assumes that the Monk DOES have the mobility advantage. The Druid could have a flying form, or a form with a higher ground speed than the monk, or he could actually try using one of his spells! (Earth to Lava is fun. Any number of summons can be fun too) Seriously, trying to say a Monk would take a Druid is silly. Monk is one of the few classes weaker than the Fighter.
Jay_Ibero_911 10-13-06, 12:27 AM	Wow...I didn't know I'd open up such a can of worms with my question...Ultimately I don't think it's so much that Clerics and Druids are outright the most powerful class, but they are the easiest classes to make broken with appropriate feats and/or prestige classes.
Seerow 10-13-06, 12:35 AM	Wow...I didn't know I'd open up such a can of worms with my question...Ultimately I don't think it's so much that Clerics and Druids are outright the most powerful class, but they are the easiest classes to make broken with appropriate feats and/or prestige classes. No, not really. The problem with Clerics and Druids is they're powerful WITHOUT special feats or prestiges. Seriously, Druid20 needs a single feat. Cleric20 doesn't need anything special, unless DMM is allowed, but even without it Cleric20 is pretty awesome. Other classes with Prestiges and such can be made more broken than the straight Cleric20 or Druid20, but those are considered the baseline on the CharOp boards, BECAUSE they're so effective while being so simple. It's not that they break easily with certain combos, it's that they break easily if they have a competent player using them.
Vaelan 10-13-06, 12:37 AM	As for understanding the rules, if you can't see mechanically that clerics and druids are overpowered, then I recommend reading the PhB again, then the splatbooks, then the complete sets etc, and tell me honestly you think that they are balanced and fine. Balance is so wonderfully subjective. The fact is, you cannot look at the books and see what will excel in any given game because every game is different, often substantially so. I'll give you an example. In my game, most opponents are intelligent. General intelligence is factored into EL quite highly. Anyone worth opposing will be highly intelligent. The tactics that make clerics and druids so "powerful" are incredibly predictable. An intelligent opponent will be well aware of these predictable tactics and plan accordingly. Further, clerics require preparation to deal with anything and an opponent that does not make copious use of misdirection simply isn't worth mentioning.
babysamurai 10-13-06, 03:19 AM	I think we all know who comes closest to being a flamer. I am not homosexual, though I did experiment in my youth. …But who doesn’t?
angryman 10-13-06, 09:05 AM	Please, how did a druid handle a +4, a +5 and a +6 EL A CR +4 Black dragon (Mature adult, CR 10) will also wear out a druid in open terrain with several attacks over a day, destroying potions with Corrupt water from 200' and using a line of acid from 100' up. The druid is reduced to medium and long range spells-Flame Strike, Call Lightning, and Call Lightning storm are the spells that could apply, so a moderate amount of preparation reduces damage to about 5d6 divine, reflex half. Meanwhile, once every 3 or 4 rounds (due to having to circle back around), the druid takes 14d8 acid damage. At level 10, he would have 8+9d8+10*Con modifer HP, and could get 2 or 3 heals off per breath, healing up to 11d8+30 to 14d8+40 if he prepared only cures for his 4th and 5th level spells. That's a good chance of a one-hit kill, and a huge drain on resources. For that matter, the same tactics can apply on the ground, simply by keeping a 100' distance by falling back. I forget exactly how the druid killed the black dragon, but it was very cheesy and it worked and I had 3 people giving me DM advice on the battle, so it wasn't just me being a noob. And no offense, but in the battle you mentioned, there are a bunch of ways the druid could defeat the dragon. (Hint, they can *spontaneously* summon things) As for monk vs druid, I'd like to see a monk defeat a druid as a huge (or garguantuan pre-errata?) dire bear that also has the same as an animal comanion, who can also cast all of his spells. Or, hell, fly. Sorry, that fight's just silly, and yes I ran similar ones to that too.
SpawnOfMorgoth 10-13-06, 07:19 PM	No, not really. The problem with Clerics and Druids is they're powerful WITHOUT special feats or prestiges. Seriously, Druid20 needs a single feat. Cleric20 doesn't need anything special, unless DMM is allowed, but even without it Cleric20 is pretty awesome. Other classes with Prestiges and such can be made more broken than the straight Cleric20 or Druid20, but those are considered the baseline on the CharOp boards, BECAUSE they're so effective while being so simple. It's not that they break easily with certain combos, it's that they break easily if they have a competent player using them. Comment on first paragraph 'one feat' comment for the Druid; in addition to the ubiquitous 'Natural Spell' I suggest 'Assume Supernatural Ability' as another must have for the serious Dru WSer. Ex abilities are nice, but getting the best Su power of a beasty can really but the screws to the opposition. I forget exactly how the druid killed the black dragon, but it was very cheesy and it worked and I had 3 people giving me DM advice on the battle, so it wasn't just me being a noob. And no offense, but in the battle you mentioned, there are a bunch of ways the druid could defeat the dragon. (Hint, they can *spontaneously* summon things) As for monk vs druid, I'd like to see a monk defeat a druid as a huge (or garguantuan pre-errata?) dire bear that also has the same as an animal comanion, who can also cast all of his spells. Or, hell, fly. Sorry, that fight's just silly, and yes I ran similar ones to that too. A druid, assuming a size with more reach than a melee opponent can fly over, engage, and kill without getting a scratch. Even monsters who can range attack but whose bread and butter attacks are melee (and their CR rating reflects the more powerful melee attacks that the flying dire fill-in-the-blank neutralizes) can be routinely defeated by a lower level ECL druid. This activity is just like the typical flying XP farming action against high level ground pounding melee cons you can see on any MMOG that can have that scenario. :D
Nelagend 10-14-06, 12:01 AM	Meanwhile, ask yourself a simple question. What is the cleric or druid bad at? You won't be able to find an answer. Let's just say there's a reason the CO board says that Druid 20 is one of the strongest characters in the game -- only Artificer 20 can meet it if you're using a single class. And even if you aren't, Druid 20 (and Artificer 20, actually) STILL comes out in the frontrunners. Druids I'll buy this for. Clerics DO have a weakness in my experience - they have neither great mobility nor great range, as they tend to wear medium/heavy armor and run a lot of touch and short range spells. Granted, in the dungeon this isn't a problem, but two unmounted mid-level clerics in an open field with their undead minions are in for a LONG day if a competent party of low-level PCs decides to have some fun. Now at 20th level this may change, but most campaigns don't reach 20th in my experience. Granted, a mid-level druid and a mid-level cleric have the option to go "Entangle, advance under zombie cover, we're in command range, I win."
angryman 10-14-06, 05:43 AM	Clerics don't have a range disadvantage, they just don't have many long range spells (unless from domains). Let's look at some of the classic cleric (no) save or dies: Destruction-close Harm- touch Holy Word-40' radius Implosion-close Slay Living-touch What they lack in range, they make up for in sheer nastiness. Slay living is the first true save or die spell, at level 5. (Phantasmal Killer is level 4 for wizards, but it's 2 saves) Destruction is just plain rude. Implosion is another nasty little spell. However close range is 25'+5'/2levels, which is 70' at level 17, which is usually within the scope of the battle, unless someone is attacking from extreme range. But these attacks don't work against undead! Yes, because clerics have trouble with undead. :rolleyes:
The_Shaman 10-26-06, 05:45 AM	Oh, yes, clerics definitely have a problem there. Let me see, would casting heal/mass heal still be spontaneous for a cleric :D ?
NineInchNall 10-26-06, 12:53 PM	No, it is not a cure spell.
Mousse 10-26-06, 04:58 PM	Much as I love Fighters, there is no rational or coherent way to say that a Fighter is the direct equal to a Druid or Cleric. Period. I mean, hell. Honestly. Just compare them directly. In pure, raw stats, the Dru/Cle both lose veeeeery slightly in HD (1 HP on average) and BAB (1 less attack and a ~25% reduction in accuracy), are equal to or better than in skills and skill points (Cleric =, Druid >) and WIN at saves (Fort and Will are the most important saves in the core, and guess who gets good both?). Still not convinced? Class abilities. Wild Shape and/or Spells vs Feats. Let me repeat that again. Wild Shape and/or Spells vs Feats. You don't even need to understand the game to know that Wild Shape and/or Spells trumps Feats. Hell, these abilities can even DUPLICATE feats at times. And of course, this isn't to say that the Cleric and Druid don't get feats either (enough to grab the important things). I mean, honestly. How can you look at these things in comparison and NOT reach a conclusion that, by raw numbers alone, the Cleric and Druid are substantially stronger than the Fighter?
Edea 10-26-06, 05:06 PM	Clerics and Druids are roleplay-dependent. From a mechanics standpoint, they are unbalanced, as has been said so many times before, even in this one thread. It's horrifyingly obvious, especially compared to a wizard (sorcerer does get 1 extra spell per day, but then look at the even steeper price payed, delayed spell level access). The main 'balancing' factor (yeah, right) is that you can lose all of your abilities just be acting against your alignment. A class shouldn't be balanced based on DM anality; I for one loathe few things more than nitpicking through a character's actions to ensure they all fall into the 'code.' "OOP, druid was caught picking up a shield with a piece of metal stuck inside of the grain! HAHAHA 24 hour suppresion, bish!" That's idiotic. But apparently if a druid carries a "metallic" shield, she loses all her class abilities. Hah, create a spell that turns wood into metal rather than the other way around...not :rolleyes: . Unless it screams "ADAMANTINE!", what's the big deal? It's the same for a cleric following the ethos of a god or cause; the rules text acts like you should use a near-paladin level of scrutiny, but I'm like...reality just doesn't play out that way, especially verisimilitudinous reality (heck, just read BoED). As for what is on the spell lists: domains and/or feats. Easily bypassed.
angryman 10-26-06, 10:14 PM	Clerics and Druids are roleplay-dependent. From a mechanics standpoint, they are unbalanced, as has been said so many times before, even in this one thread. It's horrifyingly obvious, especially compared to a wizard (sorcerer does get 1 extra spell per day, but then look at the even steeper price payed, delayed spell level access). The main 'balancing' factor (yeah, right) is that you can lose all of your abilities just be acting against your alignment. A class shouldn't be balanced based on DM anality; I for one loathe few things more than nitpicking through a character's actions to ensure they all fall into the 'code.' "OOP, druid was caught picking up a shield with a piece of metal stuck inside of the grain! HAHAHA 24 hour suppresion, bish!" That's idiotic. But apparently if a druid carries a "metallic" shield, she loses all her class abilities. Hah, create a spell that turns wood into metal rather than the other way around...not :rolleyes: . Unless it screams "ADAMANTINE!", what's the big deal? It's the same for a cleric following the ethos of a god or cause; the rules text acts like you should use a near-paladin level of scrutiny, but I'm like...reality just doesn't play out that way, especially verisimilitudinous reality (heck, just read BoED). As for what is on the spell lists: domains and/or feats. Easily bypassed. Roleplaying-dependent? Play a "no devotion" cleric of war and death. How indeed am I going to lose my powers? This actually encourages me to run around slaughtering things, a la the average PC. This encourages me *for roleplaying reasons* to memorise all the kickass self-buffs, save or dies and run around with persistent divine power & RM. You cannot take his powers away legitimately if he does this because he is killing things, ie, furthering his cause. And, no this is not a specific example; try travel and luck. How do you lose your powers then? Knowledge and magic? The only clerics you really can punish are the ones that take things like good and healing domains.
Vengeance of Thor 01-30-07, 10:52 AM	Yanno, listening to all of this kinda makes me laugh . . . I know a whole slew of 3E/3.5E players who swear up and down the the reason they play those editions is because 2nd was way too over powered in the various class options (looking at the kits from the vraious class books), yet i don't think i ever heard an arguement this obsurd ever mentioned. What everyone needs to realise when talking about power-levels of characters, is that: EACH CAMPAIGN HAS IT'S OWN POWER-LEVEL BASED OFF OF WHAT THE PLAYERS AND DM ARE COMFORTABLE WITH.[B] The other _observation_ I have is that while there is another viable arguement for choosing 3XE over 1st or 2nd, and one I've agreed with myself is that the system is such that you can make a character that is no longer a cookie-cutter of all other characters of his class; this is the same reason as to why these discussions are coming up: [B]WHEN YOU HAVE A SYSTEM BUILT TO LEND ITSELF TOWARDS FULL CHARACTER CUSTOMIZATION, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SYSTEM THAT SUPPORTS COMPLETE AND UTTER POWER-GAMING. Think about this folks, how long has D&D been around? How many different revisions has it gone through? When did the products making fun of power-gamers become prevelent?
zopzop 05-27-07, 03:57 PM	Guys (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an expert) wouldn't a 10 psion (telepath)/10 slayer be CoDzilla's worst nightmare? I think I came up with something that isn't broken but will put the hurt on druids/clerics/wizards. You would need the following : 1) Access to the True Mind Swith power 2) Use the Expanded Knowledge feat to get access to Null Psionics Field 3) Find a creature who has sweet STR, DEX, CON and good EX abilities whose HD don't exceed your own. I nominate Cloud Giants, Storm Giants, and Titans. Titans and Cloud Giants pwn because of they have an EX ability that allows them to use weapons for creatures one size larger with no penalty. The psion would just find the proper prey and true mind swith into his body. You are now that creature permanently! If you come across a cleric/druid/mage, manifest null psionics field and go to town. Assuming magic/psionics transparency, you'll be immune to anything they can throw at you. Once you get them into your null psionics field bubble, you can destroy them since your stats > their stats. What can a druid/cleric/wizard possibly do to you when they can't use any of their spells, spell-like abilities or supernatural powers? You, however, can put the hurt on them with your oversized weapon and massive strength score.
Zelck 05-27-07, 08:03 PM	Guys (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an expert) wouldn't a 10 psion (telepath)/10 slayer be CoDzilla's worst nightmare? I think I came up with something that isn't broken but will put the hurt on druids/clerics/wizards. You would need the following : 1) Access to the True Mind Swith power 2) Use the Expanded Knowledge feat to get access to Null Psionics Field 3) Find a creature who has sweet STR, DEX, CON and good EX abilities whose HD don't exceed your own. I nominate Cloud Giants, Storm Giants, and Titans. Titans and Cloud Giants pwn because of they have an EX ability that allows them to use weapons for creatures one size larger with no penalty. The psion would just find the proper prey and true mind swith into his body. You are now that creature permanently! If you come across a cleric/druid/mage, manifest null psionics field and go to town. Assuming magic/psionics transparency, you'll be immune to anything they can throw at you. Once you get them into your null psionics field bubble, you can destroy them since your stats > their stats. What can a druid/cleric/wizard possibly do to you when they can't use any of their spells, spell-like abilities or supernatural powers? You, however, can put the hurt on them with your oversized weapon and massive strength score. If you move in close and don't let them get away, they lose. But I challenge you to find a character that can win in such a situation. In fact, what many people don't realize is that antimagic fields hurt melee classes about as much as magical ones. On the other hand, if they do get away, you're very dead because mobility with spells > mobility without spells, and Druids get all kinds of fun instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) spells while Clerics can still do stuff like Gate, or Planar Ally.
zopzop 05-27-07, 08:46 PM	If you move in close and don't let them get away, they lose. But I challenge you to find a character that can win in such a situation. In fact, what many people don't realize is that antimagic fields hurt melee classes about as much as magical ones. True. Titans or Cloud Giants aren't really that mobile. But what about Pit Fiends or Balors (both 20 HD or less). They have insane STR, DEX, CON, they fly pretty well, and they have excellent AC while under the effect of antimagic/null psionic field (the Pit Fiend around 40 AC and the Balor 35 AC). An extended null psionic field cast by a level 20 psion would last for 6 hours no? The casters (druid/cleric/mage) would have to avoid you for a full 6 hrs and you can just manifest the power again as it expires (the cost is nothing for a high level psion). The druid (and the cleric if he doesn't have access to a domain that grants him Disjunction) can't do anything (since their spells, their supernatural abilities, and their summoned creatures can't penetrate the NPF) . They can't even dispel the null psionics field. Even if the null psionics field is disjunctioned, you can recast it (either quickened or extended). On the other hand, if they do get away, you're very dead because mobility with spells > mobility without spells, and Druids get all kinds of fun instantaneous Conjuration (Creation) spells while Clerics can still do stuff like Gate, or Planar Ally. At worst it would be a stalemate since they can't harm you and they would be running for their life. Edit : I see how the cleric and the mage would be a pain in the ***. They would just gate 40 HD solars/pit fiends/balors who also function pretty well under an antimagic/null psionic field (good stats, AC, and they fly) and pwn you :( I hate clerics and mages :( But I still think a druid would be owned badly.
Flay Crimsonwind 05-27-07, 09:22 PM	I think we all know who comes closest to being a flamer. I am not homosexual, though I did experiment in my youth. …But who doesn’t? I'm sorry, other's can argue the point of the CoD better than me, but as someone trying to follow the thread, a) what exactly was that supposed to mean (unless you were just trying to take something out of context to make your statement seem witty), b) was that supposed to be funny, and c) if you're just going to troll, can you please go away? You're damaging the thread...... That being said, I think it's already been stated what the reasoning behind calling CoD the best classes are; they have such simple broken potential. Unless you count the lower BaB as a significant balance, which is further negated by the sheer abilities present in their spellcasting, there isn t even that much to consider. They're just very good at what they do, which is, if you're a half decent character builder, just about anything. they're essentially the Dr. Who's of the Core classes, just going off his quote "I think you'll find, Sir, that I'm qualified to deal with practically everything, if I choose." That pretty much defines the Cleric AND the Druid, thus this thread, and thus the title CoDzilla.
Midnight_v 05-27-07, 09:40 PM	I just wanted to pull this from my sig. incase it you couldn't find it in tempest's link. Origin of Codzilla: Spoiler: It bears saying: if up against a logic-impervious DM who thinks Core is balanced and Psionics isn't, then the most powerful way to disprove that is to play a C.o.D. (Cleric or Druid). Noncore material will not be necessary unless you are going for pure overkill. So by all means, if you must win that argument, take you C.o.D. to town. Annihilate the opposition. Make the NPCs and other players scream "Oh no, it's C.o.D.zilla!!!!!" in badly dubbed English. Breathe radioactive fire. Knock down buildings. Then stomp out of the burning Tokyo that is the ruins of the game and swim off into the ocean, seeking a DM with some basic cognitive functions. Funny I can't belive people are debating if fighter is better than cleric with a straight face. Oh the power of ignorance. I wish we had a sticky somewere that explained why cleric druid artificer are the 3 in D&D. Wizo's please enact this.
DinwathSereglin 05-28-07, 12:28 AM	But yes, the basics are on page 14 of that thread That might be the most disgusting thing I've ever seen.
Tempest Stormwind 05-28-07, 12:48 AM	That might be the most disgusting thing I've ever seen. Then I pray you never google Pun-Pun. The point I was making in the post you linked was that no one plays hurlers at all because, while powerful, they are *exceedingly* one-dimensional. This isn't the case with a cleric or druid.
Zelck 05-28-07, 04:09 AM	True. Titans or Cloud Giants aren't really that mobile. But what about Pit Fiends or Balors (both 20 HD or less). They have insane STR, DEX, CON, they fly pretty well, and they have excellent AC while under the effect of antimagic/null psionic field (the Pit Fiend around 40 AC and the Balor 35 AC). An extended null psionic field cast by a level 20 psion would last for 6 hours no? The casters (druid/cleric/mage) would have to avoid you for a full 6 hrs and you can just manifest the power again as it expires (the cost is nothing for a high level psion). The druid (and the cleric if he doesn't have access to a domain that grants him Disjunction) can't do anything (since their spells, their supernatural abilities, and their summoned creatures can't penetrate the NPF) . They can't even dispel the null psionics field. Even if the null psionics field is disjunctioned, you can recast it (either quickened or extended). Right. My point is this though. Place a fighter in an AMF against that Titan, and you get one squished fighter. Place a barbarian in an AMF against that Titan, and you get one squished barbarian. NOTHING does well in an AMF against a large high-str opponent.
runestar 05-28-07, 12:37 PM	Except maybe that aforementioned cheater of mystra build... Come on - the ability to cast spells in an AMF? Wotc has been displaying their love for clerics a tad too blatantly...:P I am just wondering if the day will ever come when it becomes CaDzilla...
AllisterH 05-31-07, 10:11 AM	A majority of the CO builds are theoretical and also kick in at a certain level while being sub-par before that level. There also very DM dependant be it by what splatbook they allow, hell to what point buy they use (some builds are only viable using a 32 point buy initially thus a 28 or worse yet a 25 pt buy would neuter the build even before you started). The druid only needs a score of 14 in wis and that's it.
Judging Eagle 05-31-07, 11:17 AM	I seriously hope that you guys realized that Babysamurai was baiting you. He's been here long enough to know most of what you said to be true, why do you think that he was being so obstinant and patronizing? You simply picked up the gauntlet and he decided to go with the flow. In any case, the real reason that CoD isn't uber-broken is that most people won't play one. Which is why they get more and more and more power thrown at them, b/c people don't play them, so people don't realize how powerful they really are. Heck, I convinced an other player in my Eberron group to roll a Cleric (he went for a Turninglord build with Radiant Servant of the Sovereign Host) to give my human Archivist an other caster to give me a hand (and pretty much give me access to any cleric spells; then i turn around and hand him non-evil aligned domain spells in scroll format to cast. So the Human Cleric 6/Radiant Servant 1 Casts Recitation (AkA "Prayer 2") as a 3rd lvl scroll; the Changeling Divine Rogue/Bard (of the Traveller) drops a Good Hope out of a wand, and my Archivist casts Haste; +5 to hit, +1 Attack, +4 damage, Double Movement (up to +30'), +1 AC/Ref, +2 to all skills/saves yadda yadda yadda all in one round; done in almost every fight we run into. The other players can't possibley gripe, since they're getting mad buffs in ever fight that matters, and my character doesn't care since they are paying him gold to buy/make these scrolls (which I then roll over to buy new spells/scrolls to get a very wide stock of scrolled spells). Of course, unless you've seen your character abuse their Water Breathing to kill a Drowned that was 4 CR's over the party as if it was just a zombie or watched them beat the ever living snot out of enemy fighting monsters of the same or greater level; you don't really consider a class that has "I heal people" as capable of "beating the ever loving snot out of people that are not in my own personal God or personal beliefs sight." The above cleric also tanked a gargantuan scorpion (CR ... 10 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/monstrousScorpion.htm)) at level 7 via a combination of getting grappled, getting healed by the otherwise usless Healer NPC and using a dagger to keep attention on himself while the rest of the party surrounded and ripped the scorpion to shreds. I really don't care since my archivist has been a better fighter at fighting than the warforged fighter/barbarian/warforged juggernaut since level 1. Which is retarded, but if I can get DR's and Damage types that he can never access that puts my single attacks out of range of his total damage per round, what do I care? Of course, the Ninja 4/Rogue 1/Spell Theif 1/Targeteer 1 is now able to deal more than 1d8+1 damage a round. I think he'll be approaching 100-odd damage a round plus dex damage from poisoned bolts; so he will be making everyone that tries to deal damage look small in pants. Of course, he needed a lot of help to get to that point (I was helping him choose classes and feats and gear and my Archivist is helping him maintain Greater Invises as well as use Minor Creation to create 7 pound piles of Terinav root, a dex damage contact poison), but the fact that he had a 6 level no power curve and now has a level of awesomeness power is also equally retarded as the fact that he has 7 attacks that deal 1d8 + 5d6 + 14 damage a round. In any case, to have non casters approach casters in terms of utility or power you have to do really dumb **** like dumpster dive for base classes, feats and items. Not to mention wierd PrCs.
Kalarus 05-31-07, 08:41 PM	Of course, unless you've seen your character abuse their Water Breathing to kill a Drowned that was 4 CR's over the party as if it was just a zombie or watched them beat the ever living snot out of enemy fighting monsters of the same or greater level; you don't really consider a class that has "I heal people" as capable of "beating the ever loving snot out of people that are not in my own personal God or personal beliefs sight." That quote just brought back fond memories. We had to deal with a Drowned once, I happened to be playing a Cleric at the time. Our first encounter with it caused us to retreat rather quickly as we were woefully unprepared to deal with such a creature. Some knowledge checks and research later solved that problem. We went in under the effect of a Water Breathing spell. Found the Drowned and engaged. My first spell to try on it was Spark of Life (SC P196/197). The Drowned failed its Will save. Suddenly the creature found itself with an inexplicable need to breathe, and the players and DM found themselves with a complete lack of rules for drowning Undead, who have no Con score and thus no way to determine how long they could theoretically "hold their breath". The rest of the combat involved the dwarf barbarian grappling the Drowned till we'd collectively beaten it to death. The encounter took a single L3 Cleric spell. Good times :D
Remmer 06-01-07, 01:33 PM	You guys are all wrong, and this thread is pointless. I mean, c'mon. Really, there's no such thing as a CoDzilla. Class construction engines say that everything is balanced, and according to the Bible, they're infallible. If you read it, you too would know that all characters are equal, it is impossible to abuse the rules for power, and any fighter can pwn your mythical "CoDzillas". :pbbbtt:
Kursk 06-01-07, 01:45 PM	During that time, the character can cast plane shift and move to a plane where no time elapses in the previous plane they were in. The character can then set up contingency spells, Sure if a DM allows them to get to such a plane. They could also go to a plane where all who enter are raised by 100 levels... if the DM allows...
Tempest Stormwind 06-01-07, 01:59 PM	Sure if a DM allows them to get to such a plane. They could also go to a plane where all who enter are raised by 100 levels... if the DM allows... Kursk, the time trait of some planes *can* do this, according to the rules. No DM ruling required. No trait can do the free-XP thing. Hell, wizards can actually *create* such a plane, casting Genesis. (the arcane Genesis lets you set any planar trait you want, including the time trait.) They can do this at level 17, the same level that Kerik's example came from. It's also in the SRD. Clerics used to be able to do exactly this as well, except that the Creation domain was changed. If you stick to the SRD, though, a cleric with that domain can cast Genesis just the same. There's also a similar (but weaker) psionic power on the shaper list, and a truespeech utterance that behaves similarly, but both of those prevent you from altering the time trait. I mentioned all of this back on page 1 (though I wasn't aware of the utterance at the time).
Kursk 06-01-07, 02:14 PM	Kursk, the time trait of some planes *can* do this, according to the rules. No DM ruling required. No trait can do the free-XP thing. Actually, per RAW in the DMG it is up to the DM to decide cosmology, etc., when the DM designs his world so it is a ruling one way or another. Same with what deities, type, shape of the planet, etc., etc. So, If the DM has that type of plane then it's possible, if not, then no.
Tempest Stormwind 06-01-07, 02:20 PM	Actually, per RAW in the DMG it is up to the DM to decide cosmology, etc., when the DM designs his world so it is a ruling one way or another. Same with what deities, type, shape of the planet, etc., etc. So, If the DM has that type of plane then it's possible, if not, then no. Reread your Plane rules. One of the traits of every plane is its Time trait, which can in fact be dramatically faster compared to the material plane. Hell, in the core D&D cosmology, the Far Realm has such a time trait ("One round in the Far Realm equals no time on the Material Plane." Concepts like before and after are meaningless on the Far Realm; it's actually for this reason that it's considered critical to modern optimization theory and possible Pun-Pun counters). The DMG also says that demiplanes can have pretty much any traits imaginable. The Genesis spell creates such a plane, and you can adjust any trait, including the Time trait. Thus, even if the DM doesn't include such a plane in the multiverse, a high-level wizard can just make one. This was the real point of my last post -- unless the DM houserules Genesis (i.e. he adds the limits from the psionic version), you can create your dream plane, with an indefinitely fast flow of time in a plane that has lakes of powdered diamonds and similar material-component-grade rare and valuable items, perhaps with a secondary layer in which time runs infinitely slowly, essentially serving as the perfect cold storage for anything you don't want waking up.
Kursk 06-01-07, 02:35 PM	Reread your Plane rules. Yes. So? The DM decides on these issues when he creates the world. So ALL decisions he makes when creating are up to him and thus a house ruling, whether to include or not. Genesis isn't a Core spell BTW...
Johnny_Angel 06-01-07, 02:44 PM	Reread your Plane rules. One of the traits of every plane is its Time trait, which can in fact be dramatically faster compared to the material plane. Hell, in the core D&D cosmology, the Far Realm has such a time trait ("One round in the Far Realm equals no time on the Material Plane." Concepts like before and after are meaningless on the Far Realm; it's actually for this reason that it's considered critical to modern optimization theory and possible Pun-Pun counters). The DMG also says that demiplanes can have pretty much any traits imaginable. The Genesis spell creates such a plane, and you can adjust any trait, including the Time trait. Thus, even if the DM doesn't include such a plane in the multiverse, a high-level wizard can just make one. This was the real point of my last post -- unless the DM houserules Genesis (i.e. he adds the limits from the psionic version), you can create your dream plane, with an indefinitely fast flow of time in a plane that has lakes of powdered diamonds and similar material-component-grade rare and valuable items, perhaps with a secondary layer in which time runs infinitely slowly, essentially serving as the perfect cold storage for anything you don't want waking up. If a wizard or sorceror wants to get really crazy: Create a Timeless Plane Cast Time Stop while in a battle While you are Time Stopped cast Plane Shift to go to your timeless plane Take as much time as you need to prepare yourself for your opponent Plane shift back into the battle (in which your time stop is still active since no time has passed)
Keenath 06-01-07, 02:51 PM	...saying things like; * "Nobody would play a cleric if they weren't very powerful." * "Healing classes are unpopular so they need to be given a host of other abilities to make them attractive." ... Note, I didn't say "clerics are always overpowered." I said they're mechanically overpowered- a GM can certainly nix taking ridiculous domains, bar access to divine metamagic, etc, but that's not really RAW. Finally, I've played in and GMed many games (including core only) and the cleric ALWAYS dominates in every combat scenario you can dream up. We've kind of been dancing around this, but I think the reason for the apparent intentional overpower of CoDs is a bit of metametagaming by WOTC. If metagaming is using out-of-character knowledge to determine in-game choices, then metametagaming is using knowlege about how play proceeds at the table to determine in-game mechanics or choices. The CoDs are granted extra power because it is simply ASSUMED that, as divine casters, they will be the local healing resource, and thus their spellcasting is crippled by the metagame. They are assumed to have to spend a certain percentage of their daily spell slots on cures and restorations, which makes them "actually" weaker than the full-casting looks on paper. Whether that works or not depends on how heavily you invest in wands of CLW and how many divine casters you have in the group.
Kursk 06-01-07, 02:54 PM	We've kind of been dancing around this, but I think the reason for the apparent intentional overpower of CoDs is a bit of metametagaming by WOTC. If metagaming is using out of character knowledge, then metametagaming is using knowlege about how play proceeds at the table. The CoDs are granted extra power because it is simply ASSUMED that, as divine casters, they will be the local healing resource, and thus their spellcasting is crippled by the metagame. They are assumed to have to spend a certain percentage of their daily spell slots on cures and restorations, which makes them "actually" weaker than the full-casting looks on paper. Whether that works or not depends on how heavily you invest in wands of CLW and how many divine casters you have in the group. It is also assumed that a DM has a person play a Cleric per the PHB and doesn't treat it like an arcane caster without religious restrictions or obligations... Same with a Druid.
Johnny_Angel 06-01-07, 03:02 PM	It is also assumed that a DM has a person play a Cleric per the PHB and doesn't treat it like an arcane caster without religious restrictions or obligations... Same with a Druid. I think this is a good point, and it's something that I've noticed come up a lot in threads of this nature. Like I've said before in other threads, I must just have a stricter DM than most groups. He's not an a*hole, but I'd be willing to say that there are a lot of things brought up in threads on the boards here that would never fly in an actual game with him as the DM. A lot more goes into playing a druid than just not being able to use metal. Am I denying the fact that druids and clerics are powerful? Definately not I'm simply saying that -when talking about druids and clerics- there are things other than numbers that need to be considered.
Kursk 06-01-07, 03:08 PM	I think this is a good point, and it's something that I've noticed come up a lot in threads of this nature. Like I've said before in other threads, I must just have a stricter DM than most groups. He's not an a*hole, but I'd be willing to say that there are a lot of things brought up in threads on the boards here that would never fly in an actual game with him as the DM. A lot more goes into playing a druid than just not being able to use metal. Am I denying the fact that druids and clerics are powerful? Definately not I'm simply saying that -when talking about druids and clerics- there are things other than numbers that need to be considered. I've also noticed this. I think it comes from the "characters as a build" mentality. They're just optimized numbers that accomplished mechanical actions. The DM's "world" is just a framework in which the "builds" roll to hit and cast spells without regard to anything else. Sad really.
Judging Eagle 06-01-07, 03:12 PM	Except that anyone could very well play a cleric with the Destruction and Knowledge domains who is utterly viciously comitted to ridding the lands of all clerics of any deity. A cleric of no god can have just as forceful (if not, perhaps even more so) a personality as one with a god. Especially if it's a cleric who wishes to dash all temples to deities, kill said deities and their cleric pawns. Really, any other objections by a player mean that a lack of creativity exists in the group where the druid can't be a druid who is vicious hunter of all beings alive or constructed or the if there can't be a power-mad zeusophobic cleric.
Kursk 06-01-07, 03:17 PM	Except that anyone could very well play a cleric with the Destruction and Knowledge domains who is utterly viciously comitted to ridding the lands of all clerics of any deity. A cleric of no god can have just as forceful (if not, perhaps even more so) a personality as one with a god. Especially if it's a cleric who wishes to dash all temples to deities, kill said deities and their cleric pawns. Really, any other objections by a player mean that a lack of creativity exists in the group where the druid can't be a druid who is vicious hunter of all beings alive or constructed or the if there can't be a power-mad zeusophobic cleric. Playing evil, homicidal characters has it's own drawbacks that usually result in death... So, again no problem.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 03:20 PM	*Sigh.* Roleplaying restrictions do not decrease character power. They can start in game fights, but they don't decrease class power. CN cleric of Kord. "In battle healing? It's a crutch for the weak! Win the battle first and then we can heal to be better prepared for the next battle." Druid restrictions are even more ridiculous. "You killed that animal!" "Yep. The strong feed on the weak. And now to eat it." "It was the last of it's species." "Ah the sweet taste of evolution. And blood. But mostly evolution. And blood." Unless your GM deliberately makes an adventure where participating would violate your ethos there is nothing stopping either of those classes from going to town with their powers. And setting up a fall like that is poor GMing. Really though I find it strange that Clerics and Druids get such great personally buffs and such mediocre group buffs. Nothing in the Clerics 3rd level spells is equal to Haste. And Nothing in their 4th level spells can touch Polymorph or Mass Enlarge Person. Hero's feast is pretty neat but then mages get Mind Blank and Polymorph any object...
Judging Eagle 06-01-07, 03:22 PM	Rofl, oh you're silly. Who ever said that either was evil, let alone homicidal? Warlike perhaps. Willing to teach clerics how to draw their divine powers not from gods but from the emotions or ideas that actaully inspire an existing cleric, definately. Besides, truly power-mad people are very, very, charismatic. So, you'll want to help them overthrow the vicious petty gods and teach their clerics and followers to learn the ideals of inner harmony and how to use self-meditative methods to create their own well-being. Battle Siddhartha! Like Battle Pope, only he fights all pantheons!
Kursk 06-01-07, 03:30 PM	*Sigh.* Roleplaying restrictions do not decrease character power. They can start in game fights, but they don't decrease class power. I guess you just need to play with a more competent DM? :thinks:
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 03:45 PM	I guess you just need to play with a more competent DM? :thinks: A competent GM knows he can't force players to suck via RP. Either the RP situation has a workaround in which case the cleric loses no power or it's a wordy equivalent of "Rocks fall the cleric dies." Which is bad GMing. But go ahead. Try and prove me wrong. Name a RP situation that prevents a CN cleric of Kord have to NOT cast righteous might and smash people during a fight. Name a RP situation that prevents the N Druid from transforming into a dinosaur and raining down doom while tearing off peoples heads. How does being incredibly powerful violate their codes of conduct?
Kursk 06-01-07, 04:11 PM	A competent GM knows he can't force players to suck via RP. Either the RP situation has a workaround in which case the cleric loses no power or it's a wordy equivalent of "Rocks fall the cleric dies." Which is bad GMing. But go ahead. Try and prove me wrong. Name a RP situation that prevents a CN cleric of Kord have to NOT cast righteous might and smash people during a fight. Name a RP situation that prevents the N Druid from transforming into a dinosaur and raining down doom while tearing off peoples heads. How does being incredibly powerful violate their codes of conduct? Kinda a power damper to have to give 20% of everything to your temple isn't it? I don't have time to run a DM school here and go over every aspect of DMing. My advise is to find s/o who really knows how to DM and play in their game for a year or two. If you'd like to pay me I could teach you but my price would probably be too high for you.
KurenaiYami 06-01-07, 04:16 PM	Kinda a power damper to have to give 20% of everything to your temple isn't it? I don't have time to run a DM school here and go over every aspect of DMing. My advise is to find s/o who really knows how to DM and play in their game for a year or two. If you'd like to pay me I could teach you but my price would probably be too high for you. Every competent DM forces divine spellcasters to throw money away? Most of my gods are content with the fact that I'm crusading to further their cause. It's fine to have a different play style, but saying that not everybody who uses your arbitrary rulings is not competent is really just bad manners.
Kursk 06-01-07, 04:20 PM	Every competent DM forces divine spellcasters to throw money away? Most of my gods are content with the fact that I'm crusading to further their cause. That's great as long as that works for your game and you don't feel a need to further balance the Cleric against other classes. If that's the case why would you add something like 20% tithe? It's fine to have a different play style, but saying that not everybody who uses your arbitrary rulings is not competent is really just bad manners. Where did I say anyone had to use than particular example? Oh, I didn't :rolleyes:
KurenaiYami 06-01-07, 04:22 PM	Where did I say anyone had to use than particular example? Oh, I didn't :rolleyes: Around the time you called them incompetent?
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 04:34 PM	Kinda a power damper to have to give 20% of everything to your temple isn't it? I don't have time to run a DM school here and go over every aspect of DMing. My advise is to find s/o who really knows how to DM and play in their game for a year or two. If you'd like to pay me I could teach you but my price would probably be too high for you. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 20% gold reduction? Oh please. Now I have to take the item creation feats to stay at wealth by level. Oh Noez. It's not like the cleric needs half their gear anyway. It's just nice. And that doesn't even begin to hurt the Druid. Do the trees demand a tithe? Edit: Actually if you take the item creation feats you go 60% OVER wealth by level (after lame I hate your class tax). So much power loss. What shall I do?
Kursk 06-01-07, 04:36 PM	Around the time you called them incompetent? Umm... Nope. Try reading what was written. Remember, reading is FUNdamental. ;)
KurenaiYami 06-01-07, 04:37 PM	HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 20% gold reduction? Oh please. Now I have to take the item creation feats to stay at wealth by level. Oh Noez. It's not like the cleric needs half their gear anyway. It's just nice. And that doesn't even begin to hurt the Druid. Do the trees demand a tithe? Edit: Actually if you take the item creation feats you go 60% OVER wealth by level (after lame I hate your class tax). So much power loss. What shall I do? Actually, the fact that you had to spend all your feats on Item Creation feats is also a pretty good hit to power.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 04:39 PM	Actually, the fact that you had to spend all your feats on Item Creation feats is also a pretty good hit to power. Depends on what sources you have available. Core Clerics don't need that many feats. Besides item creation is sickeningly good if used correctly, or just for your personal benefit. And you only need Craft Wondrous Item really.
KurenaiYami 06-01-07, 04:42 PM	Umm... Nope. Try reading what was written. Remember, reading is FUNdamental. ;) Eh. Take "your arbitrary rulings" and replace it with "arbitrary rulings" and it still holds. The specific example doesn't really matter, you're still calling people incompetent because they do something differently, which is bad manners. Technically calling anybody incompetent for any reason is bad manners, seeing as it's an insult. In truth, a competent DM is one who has fun playing with their group and the players enjoy playing with. Whether or not they impose arbitrary "roleplaying restrictions" to limit power has nothing to do with competency, and that you DID state.
KurenaiYami 06-01-07, 04:43 PM	Depends on what sources you have available. Core Clerics don't need that many feats. Besides item creation is sickeningly good if used correctly, or just for your personal benefit. And you only need Craft Wondrous Item really. I never said they needed them, but they could probably be more powerful if they chose different feats and didn't have to give up experience for every piece of magical gear they wanted, even if it is a small amount to begin with.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 04:45 PM	Actually now that I think about the situation this isn't a role playing restriction either. It's a wordy version of "Some thief takes your stuff." It's just the thieves are your superiors in the church. Any class can be "Balanced" by random acts of nerfing by the GM. It doesn't mean that any role playing was involved. Edit: Kurenai Yami, XP is an interesting thing. The further behind your cleric falls the faster he catches up. The char op boards have shown exactly how much free XP you can squeeze out of being one level behind the party (with significantly better gear).
Kursk 06-01-07, 04:46 PM	Eh. Take "your arbitrary rulings" and replace it with "arbitrary rulings" and it still holds. The specific example doesn't really matter, you're still calling people incompetent because they do something differently, which is bad manners. Technically calling anybody incompetent for any reason is bad manners, seeing as it's an insult. In truth, a competent DM is one who has fun playing with their group and the players enjoy playing with. Whether or not they impose arbitrary "roleplaying restrictions" to limit power has nothing to do with competency, and that you DID state. As far as competence or the reverse, it applies if someone says "I can't, as a DM, handle X character type by doing the job of a DM. If they can't then they are lacking in competence as a DM. That's axiomatic. It's not good or bad.
Keenath 06-01-07, 05:40 PM	I've also noticed this. I think it comes from the "characters as a build" mentality. They're just optimized numbers that accomplished mechanical actions. The DM's "world" is just a framework in which the "builds" roll to hit and cast spells without regard to anything else. Sad really.Essentially characters ARE just piles of numbers that do mechanical things. RP happens up here between my mouth and your ears (and vice versa). The sheets and dice are mechanical devices that mechanically determine mechanical outcomes for the imaginary things we're talking about. I don't recall seeing anywhere in the book that says Clerics are required to tithe, nor that it's a 20% tax, nor anything else. Do you really believe that the church of Pelor and the church of Farlangn The Unpronouncable operate the same way and have the same requirements of their clerics? In any case, a player can usually justify any sort of character. Any RP-based restriction you (and it is you, not the book) try to apply to a cleric or druid, he can probably find a way around it.
Kursk 06-01-07, 05:50 PM	Any RP-based restriction you (and it is you, not the book) try to apply to a cleric or druid, he can probably find a way around it. Hasn't happened yet. Anyway, not the point of what you quoted. I was commenting on people who don't have a clue as to what an RP game is. It usually takes me a few weeks to train up (or untrain) a new player.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 06:03 PM	Hasn't happened yet. Anyway, not the point of what you quoted. I was commenting on people who don't have a clue as to what an RP game is. It usually takes me a few weeks to train up (or untrain) a new player. I have yet to see any RP in your comments. I've seen DM fiat with a bunch of pretty words wrapped about it, but if the players only options are "do what the DM says or die," there really isn't much RP. And it's not a limitation of the class. By the way how are the new shoes? (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/01/10)
Kursk 06-01-07, 06:09 PM	I have yet to see any RP in your comments. I've seen DM fiat with a bunch of pretty words wrapped about it, but if the players only options are "do what the DM says or die," there really isn't much RP. And it's not a limitation of the class. By the way how are the new shoes? (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/01/10) No, I don't role play on these boards so you wouldn't of course see any. A cleric interacting with their church is RP. "Rules" can lead to the RP. Like I said earlier, I'm not trying to train people here. Not a good medium to do so. Also, I never stated do what the DM says or die. You sure have an overactive imagination.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 06:17 PM	No, I don't role play on these boards so you wouldn't of course see any. A cleric interacting with their church is RP. "Rules" can lead to the RP. Like I said earlier, I'm not trying to train people here. Not a good medium to do so. Also, I never stated do what the DM says or die. You sure have an overactive imagination. Here's the thing. The conversation in it's original context was me claiming that the "Roleplaying Restrictions" so often tossed about to claim that clerics and Druids were not overpowered were complete bunk, as RP restrictions do not limit personal power. You claimed I was wrong and was working under an incompetent GM. I asked for an RP example to disprove my comments. One that didn't involve a wordy version of "the GM takes your stuff because he has infinite power." You responded with your tithe thing. Now we get to the meat of the issue. If this is a real role playing encounter where the cleric can not lose 20% of his wealth it's an encounter, not a weakness. If this is an adventure hook leading to a internal religious war over the rights of distant clergymen this is an adventure hook and thus a BENEFIT. If this is a "you turn over your money or lose your powers" encounter it's GM fiat with pretty words. If this is a "you turn over your money or the high priest destroys you because he's way stronger then you," it's GM fiat with pretty words. Either way my point stands. RP restrictions do not affect class balance. GM fiat can, but that's always true.
Kursk 06-01-07, 06:21 PM	If this is a "you turn over your money or lose your powers" encounter it's GM fiat with pretty words. No more than a "GM fiat" saying that if your cleric defies his god he loses his powers. Do you know HOW a cleric with a deity gets his powers and why?
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 06:31 PM	No more than a "GM fiat" saying that if your cleric defies his god he loses his powers. Do you know HOW a cleric with a deity gets his powers and why? Nonsense. The character has no real choice in one of the situations. It's not Roleplaying if you give the character a choice between doing what you want and loss of their powers. It's the same as if the fighters god came down to him and demanded the fighters sword if he wanted to keep all his feats. Sure there are two options, but one of them destroys the character. I'm sure you can see the difference between taking a Cleric of Pelor's powers away for slaughtering children and telling the cleric of Pelor he has to give all his possessions away or become a warrior with 3/4 BAB. And the first one will never happen with a competent player at the helm (unless he wants to lose all his powers).
Kursk 06-01-07, 06:36 PM	Nonsense. The character has no real choice in one of the situations. It's not Roleplaying if you give the character a choice between doing what you want and loss of their powers. It's the same as if the fighters god came down to him and demanded the fighters sword if he wanted to keep all his feats. Sure there are two options, but one of them destroys the character. I'm sure you can see the difference between taking a Cleric of Pelor's powers away for slaughtering children and telling the cleric of Pelor he has to give all his possessions away or become a warrior with 3/4 BAB. And the first one will never happen with a competent player at the helm (unless he wants to lose all his powers). Your using extreme examples. Tithing as a rule for a divine character is a reasonable requirement for some gods. Obviously, this particular example doesn't fit many gods. BTW,other than some racial deities I don't use the Greyhawk ones.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 06:46 PM	Your using extreme examples. Tithing as a rule for a divine character is a reasonable requirement for some gods. Obviously, this particular example doesn't fit many gods. BTW,other than some racial deities I don't use the Greyhawk ones. It's still GM fiat. Now it may be reasonable, and it may be fair (I can't say either way. The tithe is kind of a joke in my mind). But it's not any more RP related then a fighters natural predisposition to find artifact swords in many campaigns.
Kursk 06-01-07, 06:51 PM	It's still GM fiat. Now it may be reasonable, and it may be fair (I can't say either way. The tithe is kind of a joke in my mind). But it's not any more RP related then a fighters natural predisposition to find artifact swords in many campaigns. Any house rule is a fiat. ANY reaction RP wise by NPCs to a characters action is fiat.
DaidojiTaidoru 06-01-07, 07:02 PM	Any house rule is a fiat. ANY reaction RP wise by NPCs to a characters action is fiat. Perhaps the better term is railroading. GM fiat is acceptable, until it starts forcing the characters to dance to it's tunes. If a RP interaction between two parties has only two outcomes, PC destruction or PC doing what the player wants that is not an interaction so much as a nice set of rails with talking. If there are multiple options for the PC (Why do you need 20000 gp? Plague? Oh we can handle that right guys?) that is real RP interaction. But that doesn't really cut down on power levels. Any class can be forced to perform self detrimental actions. The fact that Paladins and Cleric come with prelaid rails doesn't mean they're the only class that can be nerfed that way. (Wave to Mr Oberani as he passes). Once again. Roleplaying restrictions only ever matter in the following situations. 1 - Bad Players. 2 - Good Players who want to fall. 3 - The GM using it to force you to do something. 1 and 2 don't weaken a class. 3 can be done to ANY class because the GM is all powerful. Thus using roleplaying restrictions to balance a class is utterly meaningless unless those restrictions are given specific mechanical detail (like the Knight class).
Sleepwalker13666 06-01-07, 07:07 PM	I believe representatives of WotC have admited to pumping up the Cleric and Druid's power to encourage people to take them. I don't think it's necessary though; In my 20+ extended circle of gamer friends, there are a handful of players who actually enjoy playing supportive roles. What would be nice is if the game were balanced so that any of the 4 primary character classes could be replaced with any other class without too much trouble. I ran a game with a ranger, sorcerer, barbarian, and rogue, as as long as they got their cure wands when the stopped back at base, they were "fine" (in the relative sense; it would have been nice to have had a cleric handy when people were level drained or diseased). In one of the dragon magazines during the 2nd-3rd transition they said they where making the cleric and druid more powerful to give people the incentive to play them. Since 3rd they have been gradually more powerful, despite that my group rarely plays them. One thing that annoys me with clerics and druids is the selfish spell casting mentality brought in by online games, that is rather than focusing on helping the party with buffs and healing spells, piling buffs on yourself so you can do everybody else's job, that wasn't meant to be the clerics role, a cleric in the party is meant to be a form able ally that makes everyone better at what they do, and to help keep the party alive. Fortunately my main knows how to cooperate.
Yadot 06-01-07, 08:55 PM	While it's true that the Cleric can be a real boon to his party, most of his better buffs are self-only (Divine Favor, Divine Power, Visage of the Diety), thus usually making it better for Clerics to buff themselves and go to town.
Johnny_Angel 06-02-07, 05:34 PM	Personally, I feel that CoDzilla is a myth; it's my belief that the bard is the most powerful class in the game. Why fight when you can just fascinate everything and make people believe whatever you want? (disclaimer: although I am somewhat joking here, I'm also somewhat being serious because a lot of people seem to think the bard is a weak class; I feel otherwise)
Leo 06-02-07, 06:01 PM	May I remember that it's the Dm and not the player who decides how deity thinks? And also that divine magic ALWAYS comes from exterior sources? So, even if you do your destruction-knowledge godless cleric, you're still geting your powers from gods who share your point of view. Problem is, I don't know any god who likes to see his subdits being slaughtered just because you feel like doing it. So, chances are you're going to lose the powers, godless or nor. Same for the druid. It's not you who decides if you're respecting nature and balanced, i'ts Mother Nature, wich by turn is controled by the DM, and not the munchkin player. Actually, that Druid who goes around killing everything and anything because he can is pretty much chaotic evil, the alignment of senseless destruction. Ups, druids can't be chaotic evil. By-bye powers. Too bad. Or do you control the gods and the entities that created the universe? Heck, why even bother making our character then? Just take your CR28 deity and go to town.
Kalarus 06-02-07, 07:07 PM	May I remember that it's the Dm and not the player who decides how deity thinks? And also that divine magic ALWAYS comes from exterior sources? While this is true So, even if you do your destruction-knowledge godless cleric, you're still geting your powers from gods who share your point of view. this isn't necessarily true. While I personally fully agree with this interpretation of how godless Clerics work, various people argue for various other interpretations. While I (and apparently you) think that a Cleric's powers are *granted*, apparently people feel that Clerics should be allowed to just tap divine powers at will, just for "upholding their cause". Nothing to restrict them, or more accurately, *nobody* to restrict them. The cause is not personified, it's simply a power source in this interpretation. Problem is, I don't know any god who likes to see his subdits being slaughtered just because you feel like doing it. So, chances are you're going to lose the powers, godless or nor. and people will scream "DM fiat! Unfair!", and a group of players who started out as friends will have an argument where the game suddenly supersedes friendship. A slightly practical reason why I like my Clerics to have a god. Same for the druid. It's not you who decides if you're respecting nature and balanced, i'ts Mother Nature, wich by turn is controled by the DM, and not the munchkin player. Actually, that Druid who goes around killing everything and anything because he can is pretty much chaotic evil, the alignment of senseless destruction. Ups, druids can't be chaotic evil. By-bye powers. Too bad. Natural selection will be brought in here as an argument of course. Never mind that this form of senseless destruction has, in fact, nothing to do with natural selection because there's nothing natural about wanton slaughter. Only humans consider it so normal to kill their own species (and I am referring to the players, not the characters) that they could see such a thing as "natural". Of course, nothing here is allowed to count against the interpretation that such behaviour is perfectly legal. Or do you control the gods and the entities that created the universe? Heck, why even bother making our character then? Just take your CR28 deity and go to town. Because then people have to realise that somebody (the DM) is letting them do this, rather than maintain the illusion that they are doing something the DM cannot legitimately act against. Really things like this are much the same as the baby-eating Paladin, only in this case, people haven't gotten the joke yet.
AllisterH 06-03-07, 01:00 AM	The thing about clerics and their relationship to the gods and their powers has NEVER been well-stated in the core books. I mean, it doesn't matter what edition you played, the drawbacks and role-playing requirements of the paladin were ALWAYS clearly stated. Whereas until Faith & Avatars, the only "real" discussion about the requirements of being a cleric were in various Dragon magazine articles and things like "clerics can't use edged weapons".
Kalarus 06-03-07, 05:10 AM	The thing about clerics and their relationship to the gods and their powers has NEVER been well-stated in the core books. I mean, it doesn't matter what edition you played, the drawbacks and role-playing requirements of the paladin were ALWAYS clearly stated. Whereas until Faith & Avatars, the only "real" discussion about the requirements of being a cleric were in various Dragon magazine articles and things like "clerics can't use edged weapons". The drawbacks of violating a Paladin's code of conduct and roleplaying requirements are stated. What that code of conduct is exactly and a hard and fast definition of LG isn't, because they dwell on concepts that people have different ideas about. If it is as clear as stated, why are there baby eating paladins?
Vaelan 06-03-07, 07:22 AM	If it is as clear as stated, why are there baby eating paladins? Because eating babies is not explicitly prohibited. Sure, it will be Evil 99% of the time, but that other 1% of the time, babies probably make an excellent appetizer.
Yadot 06-03-07, 11:09 AM	Because eating babies is not explicitly prohibited. Sure, it will be Evil 99% of the time, but that other 1% of the time, babies probably make an excellent appetizer. True, I recommend red wine. It complements the taste of evil baby quite well.
CCS 06-03-07, 11:40 AM	It means Clericzilla or Druidzilla, or a mutliclass combination. The reason they are thought as this is because they operate off of divine magic, meaning no spell failure chance, heavier armor proficiencies, they get the entire list of spells available for their level, turning or wildshaping and an animal companion, and other useful stuff. Thw whole problem is that any cons they have can be easily negated by feats or magical items, and the pros they can can be ludacrisly supersized and exploited. And this is (or should be) all just a hypothetical problem. Why? Because the spellcasting ability of either is well within the power of the DM to control. They use divine magic & other divinely granted abilities/gifts. They pray to their dieties for the spells etc. Thus, since the DM ultimitely controls those dieties, all they have to do is deny the request.....And no explanation need be offered to the player. The same goes for the offsetting of negative class features through magic items. Once again, the DM controls everything of this nature that gets placed into the game. Wether they stock it in a treasure hoard or allow it to be bought at market, all those items come from the same source. And if the player insists upon trying to make it? You just write adventures that keep them too busy or deny them the components.
Chie 06-03-07, 12:13 PM	And this is (or should be) all just a hypothetical problem. Why? Because the spellcasting ability of either is well within the power of the DM to control. They use divine magic & other divinely granted abilities/gifts. They pray to their dieties for the spells etc. Thus, since the DM ultimitely controls those dieties, all they have to do is deny the request.....And no explanation need be offered to the player. The same goes for the offsetting of negative class features through magic items. Once again, the DM controls everything of this nature that gets placed into the game. Wether they stock it in a treasure hoard or allow it to be bought at market, all those items come from the same source. And if the player insists upon trying to make it? You just write adventures that keep them too busy or deny them the components. That's DMing of the worst sort.It also has nothing to do with the power level of the class.For one thing,if you're going to regulate every spell the cleric asks for and decide on every single item he can get,you might as well be the one playing the cleric for him.If the character is kept too busy to make items or you intend to deny him components then you're wasting his feats and skills that he probably would have used for something more useful if you had said from the outset that you didn't intend to actually let him use any of the abilities of his class or that he paid for through his feats. And you can limit every class like that if you want to hand-pick every possible item,spell or ability they have access to,but you're not likely to keep them in your game for very long.If you want to houserule that certain spells and items don't exist then that's one thing.But just deciding that a character can't use an ability arbitrarily is not only bad DMing but it makes you more than a little bit of a jerk. Your point boils down to this:There is no overpowering,because I can control everything the character can do,everything the character can get,and I won't allow him to do anything that might prove the slightest inconvenience for me and force myself to actually be a DM as opposed to a dictator.
Tempest Stormwind 06-03-07, 12:15 PM	And this is (or should be) all just a hypothetical problem. Why? Because the spellcasting ability of either is well within the power of the DM to control. They use divine magic & other divinely granted abilities/gifts. They pray to their dieties for the spells etc. Thus, since the DM ultimitely controls those dieties, all they have to do is deny the request.....And no explanation need be offered to the player.Point to ANY rule, ANYWHERE, that says this can happen. You'll only find it where Miracle is involved. By the rules, a divine spellcaster prepares a divine spell (or knows one in some cases) and when he goes to cast it, its effect happens. That's seriously it. The only difference from arcane spells in terms of actual casting would be that it doesn't have arcane spell failure. As for preparing, the differences are they don't need spellbooks (they know their entire list) and they don't need rest to prepare, although they DO need to prepare them at a given time (and if they don't they need to prepare them ASAP). "There's no problem with the rules because of this DM houserule" is essentially classic Oberoni.
Kalarus 06-03-07, 12:50 PM	True, I recommend red wine. It complements the taste of evil baby quite well. Red wine is also great to go with cheese. Yay for food metaphors! :D Actually I like red wine with just about anything. Even with red wine.
Kalarus 06-03-07, 12:59 PM	Point to ANY rule, ANYWHERE, that says this can happen. You'll only find it where Miracle is involved. By the rules, a divine spellcaster prepares a divine spell (or knows one in some cases) and when he goes to cast it, its effect happens. That's seriously it. The only difference from arcane spells in terms of actual casting would be that it doesn't have arcane spell failure. As for preparing, the differences are they don't need spellbooks (they know their entire list) and they don't need rest to prepare, although they DO need to prepare them at a given time (and if they don't they need to prepare them ASAP). "There's no problem with the rules because of this DM houserule" is essentially classic Oberoni. To provide rule support for this, it is found on page 32 in the PHB. "Clerics do not acquire their spells from books or scrolls, nor do they prepare them through study. Instead, they meditate or pray for their spells, receiving them through their own strength of faith or as divine inspiration." I believe it was 2nd edition in which Clerics were literally granted spells by a deity. While I do not actually like the idea of Clerics just tapping some abstract "faith" to get spells, rather than pray to a god, it is well within the rules to do so. If I played a class, any class, and the DM told me that I could simply not use my class abilities because he said so (perhaps followed by a "nyah nyah"), when he has fully approved of people playing the class, I'd be away from that table in as much time as it took me to pack my bag and get my coat. I believe someone has something like this in his/her signature which is very appropriate for this situation: The DM can change any rule. Whatever the DM says, goes. If the DM says enough ****, his players go too.
Fwib 06-03-07, 01:08 PM	Point to ANY rule, ANYWHERE, that says this can happen. You'll only find it where Miracle is involved. By the rules, a divine spellcaster prepares a divine spell (or knows one in some cases) and when he goes to cast it, its effect happens. That's seriously it. The only difference from arcane spells in terms of actual casting would be that it doesn't have arcane spell failure. As for preparing, the differences are they don't need spellbooks (they know their entire list) and they don't need rest to prepare, although they DO need to prepare them at a given time (and if they don't they need to prepare them ASAP). "There's no problem with the rules because of this DM houserule" is essentially classic Oberoni.Agreed: if the DM thinks the character is acting too far outside his deity's/cause's remit, then he ought to warn the player that if he keeps it up, then he will lose his powers, and then if the behaviour persists, loss of abilities as a whole, until redeemed, thus:Ex-Clerics A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description).
DaidojiTaidoru 06-03-07, 02:09 PM	I still have yet to see anyone make a passably decent reason for why a clerics diety would prevent him from casting the big offenders of the cleric spell list though. Pelor: "Why my daughter do you once again ask for the spell Rightous Might? Why do you not ask for buffs for your allies?" Cleric: "There are non self 5th level buff spells? Where? I want some of that!"
Tempest Stormwind 06-03-07, 03:22 PM	To provide rule support for this, it is found on page 32 in the PHB. "Clerics do not acquire their spells from books or scrolls, nor do they prepare them through study. Instead, they meditate or pray for their spells, receiving them through their own strength of faith or as divine inspiration."Which doesn't say that the deity will ever deny him his spells. In fact, this entire paragraph is missing from the SRD (the rules stripped of flavor), confirming it's flavor.I believe it was 2nd edition in which Clerics were literally granted spells by a deity. While I do not actually like the idea of Clerics just tapping some abstract "faith" to get spells, rather than pray to a god, it is well within the rules to do so.And in second edition fighters who specialized in darts outdamaged fighters who specialized in swords. Doesn't mean that it applies that way to this edition.If I played a class, any class, and the DM told me that I could simply not use my class abilities because he said so (perhaps followed by a "nyah nyah"), when he has fully approved of people playing the class, I'd be away from that table in as much time as it took me to pack my bag and get my coat.Given how the only way a cleric can lose their powers in the rules is if he, and I quote, "grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god", and that code of conduct is never, ever specified, any stripping of his powers is coming from a houserule. Even if it does, you can legitimately sidestep it by playing a cleric of a cause (no god to impose a code of conduct on) or a battle-cleric (i.e. "I kick ass in the name of Kord": perfectly legitimate justification for turning yourself into CoDzilla, no?).
Keenath 06-03-07, 09:37 PM	although I am somewhat joking here, I'm also somewhat being serious because a lot of people seem to think the bard is a weak class; I feel otherwiseIt isn't a weak class, it's just that SO much of what they do is entirely DM dependent. A wizard who throws a fireball knows exactly where it'll go, how much damage it'll do, and how it interacts with objects. A bard who casts Charm Monster is entirely at the mercy of his DM; some play Charm as a virtual hypnosis that can practically control people via 'suggestions', while others play it as a 'best friends' spell that stops them from doing anything you wouldn't do for your brother. It all depends on how strictly the DM interprets "would not normally do". If I tell a fighter to hand me his weapon, is that something he'd normally do? Even if he considers me friendly? Would he let my buddies -- his enemies -- pass safely on my word, even if he considers ME a friend? It's all the DM's choice. Suggestion is nearly as bad, particularly when people try to produce near-Dominate by making their suggestion, "Do whatever I say."
Necroramo 06-03-07, 09:39 PM	May I remember that it's the Dm and not the player who decides how deity thinks? And also that divine magic ALWAYS comes from exterior sources? So, even if you do your destruction-knowledge godless cleric, you're still geting your powers from gods who share your point of view. UR-PRIESTS
Kalarus 06-04-07, 09:14 AM	Which doesn't say that the deity will ever deny him his spells. In fact, this entire paragraph is missing from the SRD (the rules stripped of flavor), confirming it's flavor. And in second edition fighters who specialized in darts outdamaged fighters who specialized in swords. Doesn't mean that it applies that way to this edition. Given how the only way a cleric can lose their powers in the rules is if he, and I quote, "grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god", and that code of conduct is never, ever specified, any stripping of his powers is coming from a houserule. Even if it does, you can legitimately sidestep it by playing a cleric of a cause (no god to impose a code of conduct on) or a battle-cleric (i.e. "I kick ass in the name of Kord": perfectly legitimate justification for turning yourself into CoDzilla, no?). I think you misinterpreted my post a little. I was providing rule support from the PHB to support your perspective, not argue against it. Quite obviously what I posted works in no way against what it was supposed to support.
Johnny_Angel 06-04-07, 08:03 PM	It isn't a weak class, it's just that SO much of what they do is entirely DM dependent. A wizard who throws a fireball knows exactly where it'll go, how much damage it'll do, and how it interacts with objects. A bard who casts Charm Monster is entirely at the mercy of his DM; some play Charm as a virtual hypnosis that can practically control people via 'suggestions', while others play it as a 'best friends' spell that stops them from doing anything you wouldn't do for your brother. It all depends on how strictly the DM interprets "would not normally do". If I tell a fighter to hand me his weapon, is that something he'd normally do? Even if he considers me friendly? Would he let my buddies -- his enemies -- pass safely on my word, even if he considers ME a friend? It's all the DM's choice. Suggestion is nearly as bad, particularly when people try to produce near-Dominate by making their suggestion, "Do whatever I say." My favorite suggestion is "lay down and go to sleep."
Judging Eagle 06-06-07, 10:58 AM	May I remember that it's the Dm and not the player who decides how deity thinks? And also that divine magic ALWAYS comes from exterior sources? Yes, exterior source. Like an ideal. Believing that all gods are merely powerful mortals and that you can gain clerical powers on your own based on your own innate spirituality and inner calm is very atheistic in nature. It should also be noted that most human beings can't possibly know how a centuries to millenia old being can or should think. Most gods probably don't even care or if they do care, they have to watch what happens. Nerull can't do anything if you and some adventurer allies raid a temple of Nerull, drive out the Nerulites and raid the coffers. Unless he has a local knight or prophet that he could in some manner direct to oppose you. If Nerull came specifically donw to oppose you, it would cause massive problems for him. When he's not in "god mode" he can't see what's going on and thus some other things that he's doing might stop working; so if he stops judging his newly dead followers in Carceri to stop some schmuck mortals, he'll have a massive back-log of petitioners to deal with. Plus whatever Pelor is going to do next to hamper his undead Nerulite worshippers. Gods don't come to any one point since it means that an other god can attack their home base, and even if it won't happen, it's a risk that you can't really afford to take. So, even if you do your destruction-knowledge godless cleric, you're still geting your powers from gods who share your point of view. Bzzzz, wrong. Tell me where in the PHB it says that Clerics without a god get their powers from a god? The only things that gods can give are domains; and gues what sparky? A pile of gods give out the same domains. So, you'd have to be ******* off all the gods that have those domains at the same time. Do you know what it means when you can **** off all the gods that 'could' grant you a domain? It means that you're probably on your Divine Rank of 0 or more. You're own incorrect argument is flawed on this count. In any case, godless clerics can worship ideals. Atheism isn't about not believing in gods, in the D&D metavers, Atheism means that you don't believe that Pelor is the sun god. You beleive that Pelor is a formerly powerful mortal that became the sun god. Much in the same manner than Vecna became the undead god of secrets and St.Cuthbert became the neutral god of smiting justice. Both of which are recorded as being mortal and both of whom have some of their mortal items left behind in the material plane (Hand/Eye of Vecna and the Mace of St.Cuthbert). Since mortals become gods, one can assume that all gods were mortals. Mortals themselves don't merit worship. Ideas, beliefs and beings that are not and cannot be mortal should merit worhip. Problem is, I don't know any god who likes to see his subdits being slaughtered just because you feel like doing it. So, chances are you're going to lose the powers, godless or nor. I think that the gods in your campaign setting are far, far, too "interactive" with your game world. If they really are that likely to step in, why do all of the good clerics still have their powers? Wouldn't the evil gods have stripped them of their powers? How about the evil clerics? Why haven't the good gods taken their powers away? Oh, yeah, they haven't. So, doing the same to a PC cleric is basically saying: "I don't like the way you're playing, so I'm going to break the fourth wall here and do something that will hamper you, b/c I'm a vindictive ass." Same for the druid. It's not you who decides if you're respecting nature and balanced, i'ts Mother Nature, wich by turn is controled by the DM, and not the munchkin player. Killing undead, constructs, aberrations, oozes and most evil: humanoids, giants, monsterous humanoids & outsiders; should count as "protecting nature" in my books. You're also forgetting the fact that undead can be druids, with undead animal companions and undead creature wildshape; which by defenition is a curruption of nature; but it's allowed and encouraged to be used in evil/vile campaigns. There's also the Blighter class (which was around in the 'wild' classes 3.0 splatbook; and was re-printed in 3.5 in complete divine). A druid prestige class that focuses on, and I paraphrase: "Destroying forests." Whoops; looks like that completely bypassed your strawman argument, didn't it? A whole evil druid entry class that focuses on destroying forests. Whoops, it must not exist, must it? Actually, I find that most munchkins are DMs, not players. Since by defenition "munchkin" is anyone who doesn't know the rules, and makes **** up to cover their own ass. Yeah, I'm calling you on it, I think that you're a munchkin. You make bull **** excuses up in order to hamper a PC that you can't (or don't want) to feel comfortable with while ignoring tons and tons of printed material that says that what you're argueing is wrong. Which is really your rampant discrimination and hate-mongering prejudice for all things that aren't to your liking showing through. Unless you prove me wrong with some display of openmindedness and lateral thinking at some later point. Actually, that Druid who goes around killing everything and anything because he can is pretty much chaotic evil, the alignment of senseless destruction. Ups, druids can't be chaotic evil. By-bye powers. Too bad. You realize that there are evil druids, right? Heck, there are even Chaotic Evil Druids. The god Malar out of the Forgotten Realms encourages his worshippers to hunt down and kill those that wander into their forests indiscriminantly in a ritualized fashion. Yes, there's a written Druidic god that encourages their followers to cause senseless destruction. Not only is it senseless, but this senseless destrction is considered prayer. Which is hilarious, since it completely throws that argument of yours into disarray. Or do you control the gods and the entities that created the universe? Heck, why even bother making our character then? Just take your CR28 deity and go to town. Sorry, the game ends at lvl 16-17. No one can play past that, unless everyone makes a gentleman's agreement to not use 8th through 9th level (and up) spells and the DM agrees to not fiat everything. Even then, the game is shaky.
Keenath 06-06-07, 02:15 PM	There's also the Blighter class (which was around in the 'wild' classes 3.0 splatbook; and was re-printed in 3.5 in complete divine). A druid prestige class that focuses on, and I paraphrase: "Destroying forests." Whoops; looks like that completely bypassed your strawman argument, didn't it? A whole evil druid entry class that focuses on destroying forests. Whoops, it must not exist, must it?While I agree with your comments in general, this one sticks in my craw a bit. The Blighter, if you read it, is specifically stated as having lost their normal connection to nature -- whatever favor you lose by ceasing to respect nature, they've lost it. The Blighter then does the exact OPPOSITE of what Nature wants him to; he forcibly sucks the life out of natural places to power his own abilities. This does not represent a forest-destroying character who is still "in favor" with nature! He's as hated by a druid as some necromancer who's raising undead -- probably MORE, because the necromancer is only incidentally twisting the natural order, while the blighter does it intentionally. You realize that there are evil druids, right? Heck, there are even Chaotic Evil Druids.Ah, no there aren't, unless they have some sort of PRC or special dispensation that lets them ignore the PHB limitations. "Alignment: Neutral good, lawful neutral, neutral, chaotic neutral, or neutral evil." CE is not on that list. The god Malar out of the Forgotten Realms encourages his worshippers to hunt down and kill those that wander into their forests indiscriminantly in a ritualized fashion. Yes, there's a written Druidic god that encourages their followers to cause senseless destruction. Not only is it senseless, but this senseless destrction is considered prayer. Which is hilarious, since it completely throws that argument of yours into disarray.But they still can't be CE unless they have some sort of special ability. Though I can imagine a clerical domain whose domain power is "can still be a druid if you're CE". That said, you are completely correct that destruction is not necessarily evil or chaotic. A druid who goes after undead and aberrations could even be considered lawful, especially if the country has specific laws about such things. In the same vein, an "ultimate predator" druid could easily 'destroy indescriminately' and be neutral-evil or neutral-chaotic. He's definitely walking the chaotic-evil tightrope, but it depends on other aspects of his personality. In my opinion, you should never lose class features for behavior unless you're completely aware that you're heading that way -- it's not something that happens by accident.
Judging Eagle 06-07-07, 01:56 PM	Whoops, my bad. I've just seen CE druid NPCs in adventures that Wizards and Dungeoun publishes, so I didn't think anything of it. Then again, these are the same people that time and again write up NPCs with levels in a PrC that they don't qualify for, in the same PrC entry no less. About the Blighter, well, yes, he's not 'really' a druid. However if you want to play a truly deranged druid, your DM can't really take your powers away from you. Heck, if you take levels of blighter, your DM has to give them to you if you go out of your way to destroy forests. Which was really the point. Of course, he has to also send other things at you to 'stop' you. Which is a non-issue, since you're an adventurer and you expect either the Elven Proactive Re-Foresty Battalion's Druidic Assasins to come after you as much as the Paladin expects the Fiendish Secret Service' Fiendish Ninjas to come after him. In any case, Leo wasn't using any facts at all, merely his opinion. So his arguments seem hollow as a result.
Keenath 06-07-07, 03:15 PM	Heck, if you take levels of blighter, your DM has to give them to you if you go out of your way to destroy forests. Which was really the point.Of course, because you're no longer a druid, you've given up all your druid abilities (other than the ones replaced by the Blighter class) and you are explicitly going against the druid concept -- so I don't see how that falls in line with your discussion of 'things a druid isn't allowed to do'. A blighter isn't a druid and need not follow the druid code any more than a bard.
JSorenson1979 10-21-07, 11:34 PM	This term and the opinions that others express about the CoDzilla are in my opinion irrelevant, however. There will always be ridiculously powerful combinations of dnd classes, features, feats, and such. Take for example a Hulking Hurler2 War Hulk4 Stone Giant. Its CR would be twenty, equal to the Tarrasque, a Pit Fiend, a Balor, and below a Solar Angel. However, because of the combination of class features, it gains the capability of throwing a rock weighing 6,400lbs a distance of at least 25ft, to deal an average of 896 points of damage. This is at a minimum +33 attack bonus, so it's not likely to miss, and one hit will instantly kill any one of the monsters I listed. It would even be on par with a demigod. Then why would any DM in their right mind allow a PC to play that? I've always been of the opinion that most Prestige Classes were intended more for NPC's anyway, as most of them are very "flavor-dependent" rather than the more iconic classes in the core rules (that is PHB, DMG, and MM) Also, i've made it a point since 2E never to use the Tarrasque....it must have been a lot tougher in the old days if it only warrants a CR20