| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| DTB08-26-05, 08:16 PM | :eek: Ok Im just doing a battle for fun and I have two players each making a character level 20(gestalt) and they're going against a Tarrasque one firend got his AC to 80 by using the exalted deeds book and a couple other wotc books wtf i cant hit him at all unless I get crits and i cant grapple because he constantly has a Freedom of Movement activated on him . Im confused because his classes are Monk13, Ranger6, Fighter4, Tempest5, Tattoo Monk10 and Defender of Sealtiel2. My friend tells me the levels add up to 20 overall because three of his classes are gestalted being the core classes of course. I please need help and advice, because I think I might of made a mistake allowing gestalt in a battle test. Ill never allow gestalt in a campaign to me it seems cheap. |
| OGS-Remix08-26-05, 08:31 PM | If you follow the UA rules for Gestalt, you can't take more then 1 prestige class per level. So Tempest 5, Tattoo Monk 10, Defender of Sealtiel 2 doesn't work unless you qualify for a prestige class at level 3. I would suggest reading over the Gestalt rules again; and yes, they are intentionally much more powerful then standard characters even with the limits. |
| Fixxxer08-26-05, 08:32 PM | Stop. Slow down. Punctuate. What are his stats? What sort of stat-boosting items does he have? Can you do a breakdown of exactly what kinds of bonuses to his AC he has? |
| TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe08-26-05, 08:59 PM | Stop. Slow down. Punctuate. What are his stats? What sort of stat-boosting items does he have? Can you do a breakdown of exactly what kinds of bonuses to his AC he has? I'm glad someone said it... :rolleyes: First off...the "Big T" has a +57 on his bite attack...meaning....even when you roll a natural 20 you only get a 77...so, something doesn't add up here. Secondly, are you playing the "Frightful Presence" aspect of the battle correctly? If he's passing a DC 26 Will Save you've got bigger problems. Thirdly, Rush. 150ft in one round, once every 10 rounds. Fourth(ly), my best guess would be....have some evil-super genius awaken Big T...Then it's allllllll good. (j/k) And if it is in fact items which are causing this problem....then just Disjunction him. |
| Xaktsaroth08-26-05, 09:23 PM | If his AC is 80, what's his touch AC? Most high AC builds fall apart there. :P Empower, Maximized Ray of Enfeedlement the guy. :P |
| Chosen of the Dark Sun08-26-05, 09:43 PM | I'm glad someone said it... :rolleyes: First off...the "Big T" has a +57 on his bite attack...meaning....even when you roll a natural 20 you only get a 77...so, something doesn't add up here. Secondly, are you playing the "Frightful Presence" aspect of the battle correctly? If he's passing a DC 26 Will Save you've got bigger problems. Thirdly, Rush. 150ft in one round, once every 10 rounds. Fourth(ly), my best guess would be....have some evil-super genius awaken Big T...Then it's allllllll good. (j/k) And if it is in fact items which are causing this problem....then just Disjunction him. The AC is 80, not the attack. |
| Majorafire7708-26-05, 09:55 PM | I'm glad someone said it... :rolleyes: First off...the "Big T" has a +57 on his bite attack...meaning....even when you roll a natural 20 you only get a 77...so, something doesn't add up here. Secondly, are you playing the "Frightful Presence" aspect of the battle correctly? If he's passing a DC 26 Will Save you've got bigger problems. Thirdly, Rush. 150ft in one round, once every 10 rounds. Fourth(ly), my best guess would be....have some evil-super genius awaken Big T...Then it's allllllll good. (j/k) And if it is in fact items which are causing this problem....then just Disjunction him. Dude, natural 20 always hits no matter what the AC is. |
| Otto the Bugbear08-26-05, 10:07 PM | 80 AC? Not bad, but not great, especially using gestalt rules. In fact, 80 AC is easily within the realm of a playable character at level 20 without gestalt. Certainly looks like it falls into the realm of possibility with that many levels of Tattooed Monk. Specifically check out the bellflower tattoo. A character like this will typically have to sacrifice in other areas. Usually the to-hit bonus will drop off (fighting defensively, improved combat expertise, defending weapons). What's the deal with fighting that big dumb lizard anyway? Everyone needs to stop picking on him. :weep: Cheers Otto :) |
| kam_Islash08-26-05, 10:25 PM | The max I can think of with stock magic is: 10 Base 13 from +5 full plate, made of mithril 5 from amulet of natural armor, 5 from ring of protection 9 from a +5 tower shield 3 from dex bonus, if the full plate is made of mithril 1 from a dusty rose ioun stone For a grand total of 46 How the devil did he get 80? Did he find some epic juju or something? |
| Tyler Do'Urden08-26-05, 10:31 PM | How many of his AC bonuses go away in an antimagic field? Anything from magic items and anything labled as a supernatural ability. Have him show you his sourcebooks so you can verify everything, then drop a disjunction on him. It'll be great. Acid fog is really good too. No attack roll, no save, no spell resistance. |
| bitnine08-26-05, 10:43 PM | Well... What do you really expect from a level 20 gestalt character? If you can't do something nuts with about 40 class levels of abilities and statistics plugged into a character, then I'd actually be more concerned. That being said, an AC of 80 isn't really THAT nuts, all things given. |
| kam_Islash08-26-05, 10:45 PM | Yeah with AC 80 most epic monsters STILL hit you on a 2. |
| Otto the Bugbear08-26-05, 10:49 PM | How the devil did he get 80? Did he find some epic juju or something? Go to my sig. There you will find a plethora of ways for jacking up your AC. Especially when tailor making a build just to one-shot fight the Tarrasque. Nothing epic about it. How many of his AC bonuses go away in an antimagic field? Anything from magic items and anything labled as a supernatural ability. Have him show you his sourcebooks so you can verify everything, then drop a disjunction on him. It'll be great. Acid fog is really good too. No attack roll, no save, no spell resistance. He's only fighting the Big T, so all those nifty things are moot in this context. In a more continuous game, those tactics are very strong, especially the Acid Fog. Yummy. Cheers Otto :) |
| kam_Islash08-26-05, 11:50 PM | I cant see your Sig, Otto. |
| Enslaved DM08-27-05, 01:09 AM | Gestalt classes are ridiculous. The Book of Exalted Deeds is ridiculous. Allow people to freely pick and combine and you are going to get things like this. |
| Tyler Do'Urden08-27-05, 01:14 AM | He's only fighting the Big T, so all those nifty things are moot in this context. Suppose, at the last minute, some crazy weird tarrasque-worshipping sorceror loser decides to leap out and destroy the infidels that dared attack "the perfect machine of destruction" so that once they're dead, he can stand there and get eaten by it, thus completing his quest. Magic in D&D is like Jello; it's really easy to find, usually on sale, and there's always room for more. Actually, Jello's a little better because like flavors stack. |
| LefferDP08-27-05, 01:31 AM | Can't the tarrasque just get a use activated ring of true strike? |
| lonesoldier08-27-05, 01:46 AM | Have you considered the benefits of "Rocks fall, you die" ? Seriously though, post up his character sheet so we can rip it apart. Then we'll take it to the holiest of holies in the Character Optimization area and make one with a greater AC, with the same CR. |
| Lina_Inverse08-27-05, 01:46 AM | who cares?you can get into the 150 or so for AC.and well above 2 billion for damage.or get 3/wishs day for free. etc. |
| Mirikon08-27-05, 01:55 AM | The max I can think of with stock magic is: 10 Base 13 from +5 full plate, made of mithril 5 from amulet of natural armor, 5 from ring of protection 9 from a +5 tower shield 3 from dex bonus, if the full plate is made of mithril 1 from a dusty rose ioun stone For a grand total of 46 How the devil did he get 80? Did he find some epic juju or something? Actually, I'm willing to bet this guy is a VOP Monk. |
| psychocow08-27-05, 03:45 AM | Magic in D&D is like Jello; it's really easy to find, usually on sale, and there's always room for more. Actually, Jello's a little better because like flavors stack. :heehee: siged! |
| Pax08-27-05, 04:19 AM | :eek: Ok Im just doing a battle for fun and I have two players each making a character level 20(gestalt) and they're going against a Tarrasque one firend got his AC to 80 by using the exalted deeds book and a couple other wotc books Honestly, I can do this using Core Rules only - or very, extremely nearly that much AC. (Hint: it involves taking levels of Duellist. That was one of my two ideas for a similar one-shot: "make a level 20 character, and you get to face the tarrasque ... among other things". I built it with 3.0 rules, using the PHB, DMG, FRCS, and Sword and Fist - it was "just" a Human Fighter(10) / Duellist(10). +10 ... base +10 ... a Dexterity of 30 (14 to start, +5/inherent, +6/enhancement, and +5 from advancing levels.) +9 ... an Inteligence of 28 (17 to start, +5/inherent, +6/enhancement) +1/insight ... from an ioun stone +5/unnamed ... from a defending off-hand weapon (a dagger, if it matters) +2/dodge ... Twin Sword style +3/dodge ... fighting defensively (enhanced bonus due to ranks of Tumble) +10/dodge ... Duellist ability: Elaborate Parry +1/dodge ... feat +8/armor ... Bracers of Armor +9/shield ... Animated Tower Shield +5 (NOTE: some GMs differ on what "animated" means when applied to a shield; this may not be allowed in all campaigns - if that proves to be so, you'll have to find something else to take up the slack) +5/natural armor ... amulet of natural armor +5/deflection ... ring of protection +5/unnamed ... Combat Expertise (Conditional: +8/unnamed ... Mobility) That's an AC of 82 (90 when movement-provoked AoO's are involved), assumign the animated shield is allowed (without it, and with only a Shield Spell via wand-and-UMD, it becomes 5 points lower). Non-gestalt, only one PrC, and a rather limited range of books involved. With 3.5, I think, given a bit of effort, I could push that to over 100 ... maybe. In 3.5e? I'd probably throw in a Shapechange effect, and turn into a Kelvezu (a demon / Tanar'ri detailed in MM2). Skip the high dexterity, skip the manual of agility. That'd make it: +10 ... base +13 ... a Dexterity of 37 (Shapechange gives 31, and then toss on another +6/enhancement) +10 ... an Inteligence of 30 (14 to start, +5/inherent, +6/enhancement, and +5/levels); I'd go for more, but the bonus is capped at your Duellist level! +1/insight ... from an ioun stone +5/unnamed ... from a defending off-hand weapon (a dagger) +2/dodge ... Twin Sword style +3/dodge ... fighting defensively (enhanced bonus due to ranks of Tumble) +10/dodge ... Duellist ability: Elaborate Parry +1/dodge ... feat +8/armor ... Bracers of Armor +9/shield ... Animated Tower Shield +5 (NOTE: some GMs differ on what "animated" means when applied to a shield; this may not be allowed in all campaigns - if that proves to be so, you'll have to find something else to take up the slack) +20/natural armor ... amulet of natural armor, and Kelvezu's starting bonus of +15 +5/deflection ... ring of protection (Conditional: +8/unnamed ... Mobility) +5/unnamed ... Combat Expertise ... well. That's an AC of 102 (110 versus AoOs prompted by movement), again if the shield is allowed. And no extra penalty to hit from combat expertise compared to the 3.0 version, either. Nor did I really try to half-"cheat", by scavenging like a madman for every last possible bonus to AC in every last one of my fourty-odd books, either. In gestalt - go good aligned, and throw Wizard into the mix. The first five levels are fighter-wizard, the next ten duellist-wizard, and the last five fighter--Argent Savant. Drop the Bracers of Armor (spend the money somewhere else); we can get the armor bonus from Greater Luminous Armor, and ALSO impose a penalty on enemies' attack rolls in the process. Not to mention, cast Exalted Raiment and pick up a +4/sacred bonus to AC. Bood thing, too - have to lsoe the Tower shield, BUT, a simple Shield spell is good for +6/shield (Argent Savant bonus). Between the loss of the tower shield, and the gains from shield spell and exalted raiment spell, AC improves by +1 more. Note this also removes questions about the legality of Canny Defense while using an Animated shield. Then we toss Improved Blink into the mix, and laugh all the way to the bank - because NOW, half of the attacks that would have hit, MISS ANYWAY - with no penalty to our own attacks. Oh, and then there's always the option to buy or build a Shield Guardian. The permanent Magic Circle vs Evil of a Lantern Archon familiar, too. Positively lots of ways to boost AC, which I haven't bothered applying yet. So. Still think the AC of 80 is all that amazing an accomplishment ...? :D Im confused because his classes are Monk13, Ranger6, Fighter4, Tempest5, Tattoo Monk10 and Defender of Sealtiel2. My friend tells me the levels add up to 20 overall because three of his classes are gestalted being the core classes of course. You only gestalt two classes at a time, and if ANY classes are gestalted ... ALL of them are (in pairs). And you can only play a gestalt character if EVERYONE is playing a gestalt character - logically, yes, this includes enemies, too! (Or, at least the significant ones, anyway). |
| LefferDP08-27-05, 04:40 AM | You only gestalt two classes at a time, and if ANY classes are gestalted ... ALL of them are (in pairs). And you can only play a gestalt character if EVERYONE is playing a gestalt character - logically, yes, this includes enemies, too! (Or, at least the significant ones, anyway). So... Should the Tarrasque have a Wizard/Incantrix/Initiate of the Seven Veils on the other side? |
| Otto the Bugbear08-27-05, 07:22 AM | I cant see your Sig, Otto. Go to the 'My Account' section and change your settings. For this thread... My old Armor Class record. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=4360017#post4360017) This one is all stock magic items I believe. My new Armor Class record. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=439367) This one uses custom magic items. Actually, both may still have some small errors, but even with those corrected the output is impressive. Technically, given enough time, it's posible to get an AC of infinity (or however high you want it to become.) Cheers Otto :) |
| Board_Rider08-27-05, 11:03 AM | Yeah just start over and chalk it up to XP. As far as outlandish AC builds? They're nice if you're DM gives you enough gold to actually buy all that magical stuff to do that. |
| tharivol26608-27-05, 11:14 AM | ac modifiers of the same type dont stack. bracers of armor and rings of protection are deflection i think as are mage armor so these things dont stack. dodge bonuses dont stack, insight bonuses dont stack,ect. this is why there are so many different types of ac mods. |
| Pax08-27-05, 12:00 PM | So... Should the Tarrasque have a Wizard/Incantrix/Initiate of the Seven Veils on the other side? No, spellcasting classes would be inappropriate. Fighter (increase to d10 HD, bonus feats) or Barbarian (increase to d12 HD and ability to rage), however, might be appropriate. As far as outlandish AC builds? They're nice if you're DM gives you enough gold to actually buy all that magical stuff to do that. Well, sicne by the RAW a 20th level character should have 760,000gp, and not one single item my builds listed costs over 140,000gp ... indeed, most of them cost 50,000 or less ... :) Seriously speaking, my Duellist was left with about 300,000gp to buy his rapier and "miscellaneous" equipment, after looking for AC-boosting items. ac modifiers of the same type dont stack. Absolutely correct - with some exceptions. bracers of armor and rings of protection are deflection i think as are mage armor so these things dont stack. Incorrect. Mage Armor and Bracers of Armor give armor bonusses. In my builds above, I specified the actual Bonus Type by name. dodge bonuses dont stack, Incorrect. Dodge bonusses are one of the exceptions to the stacking rules - dodge bonusses always stack, unless specifically called out otherwise by one or another of the sources of those bonusses. The other exception is "unnamed bonusses from different sources". insight bonuses dont stack, Well, I only listed one insight bonus, and it's only a +1. :) |
| Alynn08-27-05, 12:02 PM | Rop = Deflection Bonus Bracers of Armor = Armor Bonus Those stack. But your right that like bonus' do stack |
| Sapp08-27-05, 01:05 PM | So... Should the Tarrasque have a Wizard/Incantrix/Initiate of the Seven Veils on the other side? How about Warhulk? That should add about +96 strength. Or 3 levels of Hulking Hurler and 45 of Warhulk. +90 strength and the ability to chuck mountains at the PCs. |
| DTB08-27-05, 01:25 PM | Ok I finished the battle yesterday(26th) and it lasted 6 rounds before my two friends gestalted defeated it. And Im thinking about doing it again with only two pcs non-gestalt. This game is to next generation with the amount of stacking wanna be MTG crap(2nd edition would be nice to play less numbers to deal with at high levels Id guess as me being an intermediate DM & Player) |
| Lord Schpungus08-27-05, 01:43 PM | 2e had less numbers? Yeah, right. But 3rd's numbers actually make sense. |
| Board_Rider08-27-05, 02:15 PM | Well, sicne by the RAW a 20th level character should have 760,000gp, and not one single item my builds listed costs over 140,000gp ... indeed, most of them cost 50,000 or less ... :) Correct, but usually the money that you recieve is gradual. Not all at once. Sure you could save for a couple of 50,000 gp items and you would get there but it would be difficult. If you are creating a "snapshot" character, which many builds at 20th level are, then of course it is possible. Never have I simply handed out 200,000 (thats 50k per PC in a 4 man party) gold pieces (or items equivalent) for one encounter. Besides being a lot of money for one encounter the encumbrance would be crazy. |
| primemover00308-27-05, 04:02 PM | Correct, but usually the money that you recieve is gradual. Not all at once. Sure you could save for a couple of 50,000 gp items and you would get there but it would be difficult. If you are creating a "snapshot" character, which many builds at 20th level are, then of course it is possible. Never have I simply handed out 200,000 (thats 50k per PC in a 4 man party) gold pieces (or items equivalent) for one encounter. Besides being a lot of money for one encounter the encumbrance would be crazy. I'm with Board Rider... a real 20th level PC, played from 1st will be more well rounded than a built at level 20 character. Most people building a character that high blow all their cash on weapons and armor or costly items. They completely forget about the little items that will save their bacon. |
| Pax08-27-05, 07:44 PM | Correct, but usually the money that you recieve is gradual. Not all at once. Sure you could save for a couple of 50,000 gp items and you would get there but it would be difficult. You don't have to buy a single item all at once - magic items with variable ratings can be "upgraded", imply by paying the differecne in costs (once, of course, you have found and secured the services of a capable item crafter of the appropriate sort). Rings of Protection, for example - a RoP +1 costs 2,000gp; a RoP +2 costs 8,000gp. IF you have a +1 ring, it costs 6,000gp (and 6 days) for someone iwth Forge Ring to upgrade it to +2. Never have I simply handed out 200,000 (thats 50k per PC in a 4 man party) gold pieces (or items equivalent) for one encounter. Yet, one presumes that it is 18th to 20th level characters that are expected to find those +5 tomes and manuals, not to mention the +5 vorpal swords and such. Besides being a lot of money for one encounter the encumbrance would be crazy. An Adamantine +1 Ghost Touch, Blurstrike, Sacred Burst, Disrupting Light Mace of Speed is worth 203,305gp, and weighs only four pounds. ^_^ Of course, as a GM, I simply impose restrictions - in general, no single item can be worth more than 30% to 40% of your starting wealth, and the rest have to be worth 10% or less of that number - buildings excepted. (Yes, I have and use the Stronhold Builder's Guide, and a simple house can be OBSCENELY expensive, if it's given safeguards worthy of it's high-level resident(s) ...!) |
| Otto the Bugbear08-27-05, 07:59 PM | I guess I should have been a little more clear. Those links I provided are not for characters. They are for builds. They are to show off the game's mechanics. They are to show off some tricks that people may not have thought of otherwise. They are a tool to help people along. A character will be much, much different. Typically it will be far less narrow in scope. It will be able to deal with different things more easily than a build that is focused on one aspect. Cheers Otto :) |
| Man in the Funny Hat08-27-05, 08:21 PM | edit |
| Board_Rider08-27-05, 09:44 PM | You don't have to buy a single item ..... if it's given safeguards worthy of it's high-level resident(s) ...!) All of that is basically true if you, or a DM runs a high magic campaign where it is easy to "upgrade" items as you suggested. In my campaigns it is a bit dificult to say "Hmmm...I have an extra 6k laying around..might as well upgrade my ring." As far as the weight thing, yes, I realize that weapons can be given that cost an obscene amount. But again I usually don't equip a NPC with a 200k weapon. Even if I did the PCs certainly aren't going to be able to sell that as I tend to follow the PHB (DMG?) guidelines that say most things are sold at 50%. As I said prior, amd Otto pointed out again as well, these are character builds and are snapshots of what a character could be. |
| Pax08-28-05, 01:15 AM | All of that is basically true if you, or a DM runs a high magic campaign where it is easy to "upgrade" items as you suggested. In my campaigns it is a bit dificult to say "Hmmm...I have an extra 6k laying around..might as well upgrade my ring." ... which is the default model of D&D. If you play differently, hey, great for you. But it's hard to have a meaningful discussion about what the D&D rules can do, when we get diverted into what they SHOULD be doing. ^_^ My campaign is not yours, and vice versa. As I said prior, amd Otto pointed out again as well, these are character builds and are snapshots of what a character could be. Not mine. Mine was conceived for actual play, and IMO, in any campaign that followed the wealth-by-level guidelines in a standard-wealth, standard-level-of-magic setting ... would be entirely and reasonably achievable in play. Otto's, well, I looked at his AC records, and yes, he's almost solely devoted to AC, to the near-absolute exclusion of all else. My Duellist, though? Bah, so somewhere between half and two thirds of his money went to his main schtick ("an AC so high that if you have to ask ... the answer is no"). That's hardly "total exclusion". :) |
| Lina_Inverse08-28-05, 04:49 AM | All of that is basically true if you, or a DM runs a high magic campaign where it is easy to "upgrade" items as you suggested. In my campaigns it is a bit dificult to say "Hmmm...I have an extra 6k laying around..might as well upgrade my ring." As far as the weight thing, yes, I realize that weapons can be given that cost an obscene amount. But again I usually don't equip a NPC with a 200k weapon. Even if I did the PCs certainly aren't going to be able to sell that as I tend to follow the PHB (DMG?) guidelines that say most things are sold at 50%. As I said prior, amd Otto pointed out again as well, these are character builds and are snapshots of what a character could be. standard rules are all we can discuss because we get into dm fiat zone all disscussions become moot.thus you can only argue a core rules stance.any reasonable dm will allow item upgradeing or be forced to constantly give out upgrades,giveing the pcs unnessasary ridiculous amounts of cash.and if the pcs dont HAVE level approriete gear all i have to say is. so all your pcs are excepted to only be pure casters? |
| moustache guy08-28-05, 11:31 AM | Just some things I wanted to point out in Pax's build +10 ... base +13 ... a Dexterity of 37 (Shapechange gives 31, and then tosson another +6/enhancement) +10 ... an Inteligence of 30 (14 to start, +5/inherent, +6/enhancement, and +5/levels); I'd go for more, but the bonus is capped at your Duellist level! +1/insight ... from an ioun stone +5/unnamed ... from a defending off-hand weapon (a dagger) +2/dodge ... Twin Sword style +4/dodge ... fighting defensively (enhanced bonus due to ranks of Tumble) This is actually only a +3 +10/dodge ... Duellist ability: Elaborate Parry +1/dodge ... feat +8/armor ... Bracers of Armor +9/shield ... Animated Tower Shield +5 You can't use a shield as a 3.5 duelist, even an animated shield, and keep your canny defense bonus. +20/natural armor ... amulet of natural armor, and Kelvezu's starting bonus of +15 You can't polymorph or wildshape yourself into a demon. The only shifiting effect I know of that can is a 9th level shapeshifter. I don't know of any item that lets you shapeshift into a demon, unless you were a demon to begin with. +5/deflection ... ring of protection (+4/unnamed ... Mobility) Mobility is only good for AC against AoO, and should not be included in general AC. Besides, for a duelist, this should be +8 from enhanced mobility The rules I have brought up drop the AC of this build by 36. DOn't get me wrong! The build has potential. |
| Pax08-28-05, 04:40 PM | Just some things I wanted to point out in Pax's build +4/dodge ... fighting defensively (enhanced bonus due to ranks of Tumble) This is actually only a +3 My bad. ^_^ +9/shield ... Animated Tower Shield +5 You can't use a shield as a 3.5 duelist, even an animated shield, and keep your canny defense bonus. I guess you and I have a different interpretation of what "Animated" means in terms of shield use, then. +20/natural armor ... amulet of natural armor, and Kelvezu's starting bonus of +15 You can't polymorph or wildshape yourself into a demon. The only shifiting effect I know of that can is a 9th level shapeshifter. I don't know of any item that lets you shapeshift into a demon, unless you were a demon to begin with. Yes, the second listing was specifically including the effect sof a Shapechange spell, or possibly Fiendform from MaFR/PGFR, to become a Kelvezu. Alternately, just start as a Tiefling, instead of a Human, and Polymorph might be able to pull it off (I'd have to look up the Kelvezu's hit dice to be sure). (+4/unnamed ... Mobility) Mobility is only good for AC against AoO, and should not be included in general AC. Besides, for a duelist, this should be +8 from enhanced mobility I put it in parentheses for that very reason - but yes, I forgot it would be superior mobility. The change to Fighting Defensively's dodge bonus, and adding in Superior Mobility, results in an AC of 83 (91 vs movement-prompted AoOs). I'll correct the math for both listings in my other post. ^_^ |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 05:39 PM | standard rules are all we can discuss because we get into dm fiat zone all disscussions become moot.thus you can only argue a core rules stance.any reasonable dm will allow item upgradeing or be forced to constantly give out upgrades,giveing the pcs unnessasary ridiculous amounts of cash.and if the pcs dont HAVE level approriete gear all i have to say is. so all your pcs are excepted to only be pure casters? I think that you misunderstood me. I never said that the PCs could not upgrade their items. I said that it is difficult..and it should be IMO. Rules Time!!! Please read PHB page 113 and DMG page 136. Look, you buy a Ring of Protection +1 at 2000 gp. At 3rd level this means that you have 700gp left if you use the rules. You need weapons, armor, scrolls, lodging, food etc..so there is not a bunch of gp left. But yea!!! you leveled up and your by the book DM has made sure to have given you another 2700gp (+700gp "change" + 2000gp Ring.= 5400gp). Well you want that Ring of Prot. +2 so you decide to save the money that you have. So with no armor, shield or weapon you now have 3400gp going towards your ring. Well despite dying 3 times and your party hating you, you make it to level five...and your DM actually is generous!!! Between that level you have received another 4500gp (instead of the 3600gp difference). So now you have 7,900gp...more than enough to get that Ring. So you go to the magic shop and you get 50% for your +1 ring (1000gp) towards the 8000gp Ring +2. So from your 7900gp you spend 7k of it and are left with 900gp. Oh and you have a ratty set of leather that the party let you have. See where this is going? These figures are 1/4th the total by the way. For example gold earned between 4th and 5th level for the party would have equaled 18k. Your average EL 5 encounter gives up 1,600k. 4 4th level PCs would each earn 400 (1600/4) per EL 5 encounter. The difference between 4th and 5th level is 4k XP (6k to 10k) so it would take 10 EL 5 encounters to level up...dishing out, on average, 16,000 gold, not 18,000. So yeah buying a buttload of expensive magic items takes time and sacrifice which is really difficult in a game of D&D. Sure arguments of DM tendencies are moot...but if you want rules, there ya go. |
| Pax08-28-05, 05:59 PM | Board Rider, I don't know wher eyou got the idea that all treasure MUST come form an encounter. That simply isn't true. If the GM sunbders someone's magic weapon, that creates a wealth deficit that needs to be made up (probablynot all at once, although it's possible) with additional treasure above and beyond that generated for encounters. If the party is making significant use of consumable items (especially if, say, the GM is more comfortable placing scrolls and potions than swords and wondrous items), then their use (since it destroys the item in the process) creates a similar wealth debit, which must similarly be made up for in the hopefully-near future. None of the making-up will be generated in sufficient quantities by encounter-linked treasure. Specifically placed treasure, perhaps placed alongside treasure directly associated with an encounter ("right, the ogre warlock has ______, and ... hmm, I think I'll also throw in a silver longsword +1 of ghost touch ... and a 1500gp gold-and-emerald armband, to start covering Joe's loss of his sword to that rust monster from last session, and the way that last encounter ate the party's wand charges like they were going out of style"). |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 06:13 PM | Board Rider, I don't know wher eyou got the idea that all treasure MUST come form an encounter. That simply isn't true. Where did I say that treasure "MUST" come from an encounter? I gave an easy example, using the rules, that would be the quickest way to get the PCs from level 4 to level 5. Using encounters. Sure a DM may have extra treasure laying around, sure he may try to replace magic items with sundered items. However, by the rules (which was my point to Lina_Inverse), character wealth at 4th level is 5400gp. Heck throw on an additional 20%. thats only another 1,080gp. Every DM can give more or less gold, more or less magic, more or less whatever. But I stand by my argument that, going by the rules, creating one of those 20 level builds with all those items of magic and whatnot simply is unrealistic or very difficult to say the least. |
| Alynn08-28-05, 06:45 PM | So you go to the magic shop and you get 50% for your +1 ring (1000gp) towards the 8000gp Ring +2. So from your 7900gp you spend 7k of it and are left with 900gp. Oh and you have a ratty set of leather that the party let you have. See where this is going? Why sell it, when you can just add another enhancement to the ring? IE pay someone 6000 + 1200gp (5gp/1XP for XP loss) and maybe another fee on top of it depending on who is doing it for you. 7200 for a RoP +2, upgraded from your RoP +1. Take out the money for the XP loss and it's only 6000. So after paying your 6K you have 1900gp I get your point though, at those low levels yes it is hard, but past that, you can start affording 1-2 minor magic items a level (or upgrade), and past 10 you can afford the really big stuff. By level 5 a PC can easily afford a +1 armor, +1 shield, +1 weapon, and a decent wand and still have money left over for everything else. Also, if they concentrate on one item, of course they will be short on cash, but why go for a RoP +2, when you can easily afford an amulet of natural armor +1, RoP +1, and Bracers of Armor +1 (for straight magic users). That is +3 to AC for 3000 less than the cost of a RoP +2. Upgrade the Bracers of Armor to +2 and you get double the AC (+2 Armor, +1 RoP, and +1 Natural armor) as a RoP +2 for the exact same price. |
| Pax08-28-05, 06:52 PM | However, by the rules (which was my point to Lina_Inverse), character wealth at 4th level is 5400gp [...] I stand by my argument that, going by the rules, creating one of those 20 level builds with all those items of magic and whatnot simply is unrealistic or very difficult to say the least. Except that, by the rules, 20th level charactes have 760,000gp of magic items. Heck, I've just joined a game starting at 20th level (intending to advance into Epic levels). And what does my made-at-20th-level character have, for gear and money? EXPERIENCE : 196,000xp NEXT LEVEL : 216,000xp CASH : value 2,383pp 7gp, 4sp (in assorted coin) EQUIPMENT |--price--| |--where--| |--book--| |---Item------------------------------------------------| 60,302gp Weapon various Small Thinaun Dagger, "Needle" [+1, Ghost Strike<sup>+2</sup>, Last Resort<sup>+1</sup>,] [Sure-Striking<sup>+1</sup>] [MktVal: +5; +10,000] 35,165gp Shield - Small Mithril Buckler [+1, Ghost Ward<sup>+1</sup>; Improved Shadow; Improved Silent Moves] [MktVal: +2; +31,000gp] 23,220gp - - Small Silver Daggers, x10 (vest) [+1] [MktVal: +1; +20gp] [Price each: 2,322gp] 27,648gp - - Small Cold Iron Daggers, x12 (bandolier 1) [+1] [MktVal: +1; +2gp] [Price each: 2,304gp] 63,624gp - - Small Adamantine Daggers, x12 (bandolier 2) [+1] [MktVal: +1; +3,000] [Price each: 5,302gp] 25,025gp Vest CA Knife-Thrower's Vest of Resistance (+5) 100gp - - Masterwork Bandolier, x2 49,000gp Bracers DMG Bracers of Armor (+7) 20,000gp Weapon UnE Small Spectral Dagger 25,000gp (Eye R) LiMo Graft: Bodak's eye 36,000gp Gloves DMG Gloves of Dexterity (+6) 36,000gp Amulet DMG Amulet of Health (+6) 50,000gp Ring L DMG Ring of Protection (+5) 40,000gp Ring R DMG Ring of Freedom of Movement 2,500gp robe CV Tunic of Steady Spellcasting 6,000gp Boots MaFR Gwaeron's Boots 50,000gp Lens MaFR White Skull Mask 42,000gp - BoEM1 Ocular Band 500gp - PHB Masterwork Glassteel Thieves' Tools 130gp - PHB Masterwork Climbing Kit 1,800gp - CV Possum Pouch 5,000gp - RoW Survival Pouch 9,000gp - HoB Daern's Instant Tent 20,000gp - DMG Carpet of Flying (5'x5') 5,000gp - DMG Dusty Rose Prism Ioun Sone (+1 insight to AC) 30,000gp - DMG Pale Green Prism Ioun Stone (+1 competence) 6gp - A&Eq Bolt Cutters 2gp - A&Eq Glass Cutter 6sp - A&Eq Mess Kit 120gp - A&Eq Gnomish Springwall, x2 6,000gp - MaFR Rod of Viscid globs 360gp - MaFR Silent Portal Disk 3,000gp - MaFR Troll Gut Rope 60gp - FRCS Masterwork Potion Belt 9,000gp - DMG Decanter of Endless Water 5,400gp - DMG Murlynd's Spoon 20,000gp - DMG Portable Hole 2,200gp - DMG Heward's Handy Haversack gp - - - CONSUMABLES (32,000gp) |---price---| |--book--| |-Class-| |-S-| |-C-| |--#--| |--Spell & Item---------------------| 2,500gp PHB sor/wiz 2 5 - (1) Potion of See Invisibility, x5 3,750gp UnD sor/wiz 3 5 - (1) Potion of Amorphous Form, x5 3,750gp PGFR cle 3 5 - (1) Potion of Blindsight, x5 1,000gp MaFR cle 1 1 - (3) Potion of Faith Healing, x20 6,000gp PHB cle 2 3 - (3) Potion of Cure Moderate Wounds, x20 15,000gp PHB cle 3 5 - (3) Potion of Cure Serious Wounds, x20 gp - - - - - - The GM put a cap - with which I don't quite agree - of 75Kgp per single item, only one item worth more than 50Kgp ... or else I'd've had only two daggers (both returning, both Blurstrike, etc - up to a +8-ish market value for each), and probably a Tome/Manual for +5 Dexterity. And the bracers would have been +8, and the shield would have been Greater Shadow/Silent Moves. Not unreasonable, in the slightest. And more restricted than the rules require - by the rules themselves, the entire 760Kgp could, if there was something that costly, be a SINGLE MAGIC ITEM. That's how the WBL guidelines work: no adventure will assume a character in thr party has an item worth more than their WBL limit ... but any given encounter might require something worth any amount UP TO that amount (inclusively). |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 07:02 PM | Why sell it, when you can just add another enhancement to the ring? IE pay someone 6000 + 1200gp (5gp/1XP for XP loss) and maybe another fee on top of it depending on who is doing it for you. 7200 for a RoP +2, upgraded from your RoP +1. Take out the money for the XP loss and it's only 6000. Oh I agree. Oh well it will never work with my group because they will not want to wait....its all about instant gratification with them *sigh* I also agree that a 5th level guy could afford those items. Upgrading will take time though... |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 07:11 PM | Except that, by the rules, 20th level charactes have 760,000gp of magic items. Yeah I know they do. And its easy to "build" a 20th level PC with a high armor class. I've said this. When you have 760k in total to blow then, yeah, you can buy whatever you want or is allowed. Thats if (and you are apparently) starting at 20th level. However, when you begin at 1st level you don't have all that cash to blow and must work towards it. |
| Pax08-28-05, 07:14 PM | Some thigns I hadn't even noticed before. BR, could you try using a few paragraph breaks now and then? Or even just use paragraphs at all? Please read PHB page 113 and DMG page 136.[/I] Look, you buy a Ring of Protection +1 at 2000 gp. At 3rd level this means that you have 700gp left if you use the rules. Well, at that level, a +1 weapon, or +1 armor and/or shield, would be a better investment of money. But, for the sake of argument ... So you go to the magic shop and you get 50% for your +1 ring (1000gp) towards the 8000gp Ring +2. So from your 7900gp you spend 7k of it and are left with 900gp. Oh and you have a ratty set of leather that the party let you have. See where this is going? You don't sell the ring. You go to the shop (or mages' guild, or local ring-forging wizard-artisan, or whomever), and you pay 6,000gp to upgrade your ring from +1 to +2. It's a simple, direct increase - yu pay the difference in market value, you do NOT have to sell the ring. Ring of Protection +1 ... value 2,000gp. Ring of Protection +2 ... value 8,000gp. Difference between teh two, 6,000gp. Cost to upgrade from +1 to +2 ... 6,000gp, and not one bent copper more. That covers the time, XP, materials, everything. Yes, when upgrading a magic item directly, you DO get a 100% "trade in" - because you're not getting a new ring, your old ring is getting better. Modern analogy: I have a P3(600MHz) with 128MB of memory and a 27GB hard drive, sporting an older GeForce hard drive. What would it cost me to upgrade that to a P3 (900MHz) with 256MB of memory, a pair of 80GB hard drives, and a newer GeForce video card? Less than it'd cost to buy it new, and certainly less than it'd cost me to completely scrap my current machine in favor of a new one with the better specs. See, I can keep using the same CD drive, the same motherboard (barely, of course - going beyong a P3 processor WOULD require a more fundamental upgrade), I can keep the same chassis and power supply. All I need is a couple newer sticks of memory (well, newer than the near-antiques I'm using right now, anyway) ... a new CPU chip that's compatible with the daughterboard I've got on this model computer, two new hard drives of the specified size, and the new video card. Plus, some of the older parts I could SELL, or at least donate to a charity somewhere (someone that puts together computers for libraries and schools in less-economically-gifted regions, perhaps). So in the end, it'd cost me a lot less than selling / junking the old, and buying a "new" one would ... for the exact same capabilities. ... well. Upgrading magic items is rather like that. The Ring of Protection? Maybe that bland copper ring has a bit of silver laid in it in some pattern or other; maybe there're a few magical runs etched ito it, and it's got an inexpensive stone set in it now. And that's if you want it's increased magical power to be reflected with increased apparent mundane value. But, even so ... what if you do sell the old ring ...? Well, your net worth is now 1,000gp LOWER than it should be, so the GM needs to account for that with some extra wealth along the way. That's how the WBL guidelines are supposed to work - it's an indicator of current wealth, not lifetime wealth. |
| moustache guy08-28-05, 07:15 PM | You could go tiefling, unfortunatly the LA cuts in a little bit. The racial adjustments are nice though. About the shield... Animated: Upon command, an animated shield floats within 2 feet of the wielder, protecting her as if she were using it herself but freeing up both her hands. Only one shield can protect a character at a time. A character with an animated shield still takes any penalties associated with shield use, such as armor check penalty, arcane spell failure chance, and nonproficiency. Canny Defense (Ex): When not wearing armor or using a shield, a duelist adds 1 point of Intelligence bonus (if any) per duelist class level to her Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while wielding a melee weapon. If a duelist is caught flat-footed or otherwise denied her Dexterity bonus, she also loses this bonus. Therefore, a duelist with an animated shield is couted as using a shield and looses access to most of her class abilities. The duelist class was much more powerfull in 3.0 where they could use a shield. Okay, I'm going to stop derailing this thread now... :embarrass |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 07:28 PM | Some thigns I hadn't even noticed before. BR, could you try using a few paragraph breaks now and then? Or even just use paragraphs at all? Oh you have got to be kidding me. This coming from someone who can't type? Come on Pax whats the point here? Besides, we are on a public forum not a discussion board on the proper use of the English language and syntax. Give me a break. Well, at that level, a +1 weapon, or +1 armor and/or shield, would be a better investment of money. But, for the sake of argument ... You don't sell the ring. You go to the shop (or mages' guild, or local ring-forging wizard-artisan, or whomever), and you pay 6,000gp to upgrade your ring from +1 to +2. It's a simple, direct increase - yu pay the difference in market value, you do NOT have to sell the ring. Ring of Protection +1 ... value 2,000gp. Ring of Protection +2 ... value 8,000gp. Difference between teh two, 6,000gp. Cost to upgrade from +1 to +2 ... 6,000gp, and not one bent copper more. That covers the time, XP, materials, everything. Yes, when upgrading a magic item directly, you DO get a 100% "trade in" - because you're not getting a new ring, your old ring is getting better.... .... That's how the WBL guidelines are supposed to work - it's an indicator of current wealth, not lifetime wealth. I cut out the computer analogy. Again, PAX, what is your point? Okay so you save a thousand GP. Great. By the rules your average 4th level PC should have or be around 5400gp. Trade in or not. And lifetime wealth? WTF? I assume you mean that a PCs current wealth level should not reflect buying mundane items and whatnot. I can roll with that, and I did in the example above, but the fact still remains that getting high level magic items (buying or upgrading) is a lengthy process that takes time. |
| GreyLord08-28-05, 07:47 PM | Little late at coming in, but if I recall the rules correctly on Gestalts, and having used them in game... First off, the player cheated. He cannot have more than 3 classes. First, he chooses his Gestalt Classes to start with, I do not believe that he can actually change them later, except to go single class prestige. So 2 classes plus a Single Class Prestige = 3 classes. Second, 80 AC isn't unusual, however, you need to hack off some of their funds. A lot of what the players spend on as they advance is to get better and better stuff as it becomes available, hence they are always spending their funds. BUT, an AC of 80 isn't all that terrible, with the right items or abilities, you could easily make a lower level villain than they are and completely destroy them. AC isn't everything, there's a LOT of spells and other items which make AC completely irrelavant. |
| AramilWindwalker08-28-05, 08:37 PM | cutting funds won't do diddly squat if his is a VoP monk/duelist/saint with high dex, wis, and int. It will onlt make him more powerful in comparison. VoP is the most broken crap in the BoED, which is why i use it extensively... with druids(and that druid variant from UA with the monk ac bonus) Two such characters running right now. my dms hate me |
| DogOnWheels08-28-05, 08:42 PM | AC 80 belonging to a PC OMFG I don't get it; what does OMFG mean??? :D |
| Mock2608-28-05, 09:01 PM | Hey, you're the DM, hit him as often as you want! You don't have to show him your rolls. And, if you want to be mean and have some fun, just copy his character and have him fight someone exactly like himself. Take care and have a great day.... ciao, john. |
| GreyLord08-28-05, 09:03 PM | cutting funds won't do diddly squat if his is a VoP monk/duelist/saint with high dex, wis, and int. It will onlt make him more powerful in comparison. VoP is the most broken crap in the BoED, which is why i use it extensively... with druids(and that druid variant from UA with the monk ac bonus) Two such characters running right now. my dms hate me However, of course, the character is an illegal build. Gestalts CANNOT depart from their chosen gestalt classes except to get a single prestige class. At least the way I interpret it. If they took a third class they are no longer gestalt since then they are a Class/Class/Class instead of a Class/Class. They can't have 3 classes of which they are level 1 at unless it is a Prestige Class. Even then, and the rules are kind of vague, if they do a prestige class it can only be either as a single prestige class, or a Prestige Class/Normal Class. At least the way I read the rules. Hence they can't have more than one prestige class in the way I interpret it. However, there are many ways to interpret it, it seems the DM just took a VERY liberal veiw/interpretation of the Gestalt rules for the poster's campaign. I can see how it could be interpreted to allow for something like that, I personally don't agree with that interpretation however. It could be read that as long as the player only has one prestige class at a time, and levels differently in it, the same standing for all the other classes as well, that build could be allowed, but that's a VERY LENIENT AND LIBERAL interpretation of the rules. In my opinion. I wouldn't have allowed the build personally. |
| Pax08-28-05, 09:05 PM | First off, the player cheated. He cannot have more than 3 classes. This is not true. You can have as many classes, in toto, as you like - two per level, to the limit of yoru actual level in grand total. A 3rd-level Gestalt character could, in fact, be a Wizard(1), Fighter(1), Cleric(1), Rogue(1), Paladin(1), Monk(1). Not that he'd truly WANT to be that, but it's possible. And it's six classes. One level of Wizard-Fighter. A level of Cleric-Rogue. A level of Paladin-Monk. That's three levels. First, he chooses his Gestalt Classes to start with, I do not believe that he can actually change them later, except to go single class prestige. Not true. Gestalt is a method, not a class - you can go from Fighter-Rogue to Fighter-Wizard, in the same character, and then, you can even go back again. Also: you can gestalt a Prestige class with a BASE class, just not with another prestige class. Oh you have got to be kidding me. This coming from someone who can't type? Come on Pax whats the point here? No, I'm not kidding. And yes, I can indeed type, quite well - but this forum software doesn't have a spellcheck function, so my typographical errors do tend to get through more here than they would in, say, MS Word. And the point is that your posts are very difficult to read and follow; stream-of-consciousness is not an effective writing style when you want someone to understand your words. Again, PAX, what is your point? Okay so you save a thousand GP. Great. And at higher upgrades - say, form +3 (18Kgp) to +4 (32Kgp), your "sell the old and buy a new one" woudl result in even larger, and equally unneccessary, losses. By the rules your average 4th level PC should have or be around 5400gp. Trade in or not. So a 4th level PC shouldn't have a +2 Ring of Protection at all - bought or found. But it's possible at 5th level, where your own example showed the PC selling the old ring and buying the new one. And lifetime wealth? WTF? Yes, LIFEtime wealth. Very often - in fact almost always - when I see someone talking about selling a 2Kgp item for 1Kgp and not then providing another 1Kgp of other treasure ... it is because the person believes that, when you sell an item for half value, it's your loss. Forever. IOW, that the character should accumulate that amount of money over their lifetime, but if they SPEND any (or things they buy with it are used up, broken, or lost) ... tough for them. I assume you mean that a PCs current wealth level should not reflect buying mundane items and whatnot. No, mundane gear comes out of that total, too. But the totals are not "how much money they've ever SEEN up until this moment", no ... it is, rather, "how much money is their stuff worth at this very instant in time". I can roll with that, and I did in the example above, but the fact still remains that getting high level magic items (buying or upgrading) is a lengthy process that takes time. ... as does getting to 20th level in the first place. The WBL guidelines show what a person's "stuff" - cash on hand, mundane gear, permanent magical gear, and expendable magical gear - should be worth, in toto. Let's revisit your example, shall we? At 5th level, you're saying they have 7,900gp in cash, and a 2Kgp magic ring? Well, that's actually a bit high (9.9K, compared to 9K even per Table 5-1 in the DMG), but even you commented on that fact. So let's drop it to strictly by-the-WBL, and say it's only 7,000gp of cash. So, you'd have them sell their Ring +1 for 1Kgp, leaving them with 8,000gp of money, then buy a new ring for 8Kgp, leaving them with ... 0gp of stuff. Now they're a thousand GP short; yoru example HAS treated that 9,000gp as a lifetime-to-date total. The fact is, at 5th level, AFTER getting that +2 Ring, they should still have 1,000gp of wealth LEFT to them (much of that probably beingmundane equipment) - this isbecause, at that level, they should have 9,000gp at that moment, AFTER all is said and done. And on the way to the next level, they should slowly see their current wealth total climb, until it hits 13Kgp right about the time they hit 6th level. But, to illustrate this fact ... let's take your example a step further, and assume this hypothetical person - who is unhealthily obsessed with this single item - seeks to upgrade to a +3 ring as soon as humanly possible. Well, a +3 ring costs 18,000gp. By the assumptions you made, they'd need 14,000gp in ready cash, and sell their old ring for 4,000gp - at which point they would BARELY be able to get the new Ring. So, they somehow get to 8th level; they've earned (and not spent one penny OF) 18,000gp. They sell their old ring, buy the new one, and are left with a +3 Ring and 4,000gp. That totals to 22,000gp ... which is 5,000gp less than the rules say this person SHOULD have!. The truth is, they needed only 10,000gp, and should have had 1,000 of them already. At 7th level, they could upgrade to their new +3 ring, and STILL have 1,000gp of "other wealth" - cash or kind, it doesn't matter. A level earlier, and about six thousand GP of wealth richer. It'd only gt worse if we continued. The gap would only become self-compounding and WIDER. When Table 5-1 says a 20th level character has 760,000gp ... it means they have gear, money, and other equipment - magical and mundane alike - that add up to 760,000gp of full market value as of that exact instant in time. Now, maybe over the course of their long and fruitful career, they've seen two million GP worth of things come into their hands, and pass back out again. That doesn't matter; that's not the sort of thing the WBL guidelines seek to address. Those guidelines address what does a character of this level have in their hands, as of the moment that reach the specified level. Nothing more. Nothing less. Only and exactly that - because those wealth totals are "snapshots", if you will. Anything and EVERYthing you put together that adds to that much or less is a valid and reasonable "snapshot" of what a character of that level could reasonably expect to own (within DM limits based on their vision of campaign balance, of course - as is true of everything, even the selection and use of feats listed in the PHB!). |
| Board_Rider08-28-05, 09:25 PM | No, I'm not kidding. And yes, I can indeed type, quite well - but this forum software doesn't have a spellcheck function, so my typographical errors do tend to get through more here than they would in, say, MS Word. And the point is that your posts are very difficult to read and follow; stream-of-consciousness is not an effective writing style when you want someone to understand your words. Thats funny you mention that considering that you seem to understand all that I am writing quite well and nobody else has ever even commented on that. And admitting that spellcheck usually catches your errors isn't making a great argument for your typing ability. Again, how I write on these forums is so trivial it doesn't even need any more commentary. So a 4th level PC shouldn't have a +2 Ring of Protection at all - bought or found. But it's possible at 5th level, where your own example showed the PC selling the old ring and buying the new one. Exactly. If you follow the chart. And at higher upgrades - say, form +3 (18Kgp) to +4 (32Kgp), your "sell the old and buy a new one" woudl result in even larger, and equally unneccessary, losses....... So a 4th level PC shouldn't have a +2 Ring of Protection at all - bought or found. But it's possible at 5th level, where your own example showed the PC selling the old ring and buying the new one................. Nothing more. Nothing less. Only and exactly that - because those wealth totals are "snapshots", if you will. Anything and EVERYthing you put together that adds to that much or less is a valid and reasonable "snapshot" of what a character of that level could reasonably expect to own (within DM limits based on their vision of campaign balance, of course - as is true of everything, even the selection and use of feats listed in the PHB!). Look I think that its pretty apparent that our interpretation of what wealth is, how it is obtained or how it is distributed is viewed differently. We can keep going back and forth but I don't think it even matters anymore. We've hijacked this thread to death. |
| GreyLord08-29-05, 12:31 AM | Once again it depends on how you interpret it. It states that "to make a gestalt choose two standard D&D classes" on page 72. That's two...not three, not four, but two. It also states that you cannot combine two versions of the same class. Now on leveling it states that the character chooses two classes. This can be interpreted in several ways, a conservative interpretation which I've taken means quite blankely, they can ONLY have two classes. Now in a more liberal interpretation one couldn't have two versions of the same class as per page 72 once again, however the character in the first post has "Ranger6, Fighter4" which in my interpretation are two of the same type as a ranger is a subclass of fighter. Only with the MOST liberal interpretation of the rule can you freely wheel and deal with classes, and that's specifically because it is unclear on when it states "Each time he gains a new level, he chooses two classes..." which could be interpreted that they can choose two new classes at each time (but present the problem as are they continuing with both classes as a mc of a single class character, do they both have to be level 1, and if they aren't, if it's the 5th Sorcerer/1 Fighter which occurs, or even worse, what if they choose Fighter1/Wizard1, and then Rogue1/Sorcerer1, then Fighter2/Sorcerer2, then Cleric1/Wizard1...what occurs with the BAB, there's the House rule on Fractional BAB, BUT that's dependant more on just keeping with two classes...if you go by the above, even though you are alternating with two of the same...your BAB goes up every level, even if you have a worse BAB for the send level...it can get quite complex). A liberal interpretation like that means the DM has so many uncertainties that could be exploited by the players because it's not defined by UA...that I find that a more strict interpretation of the rules which goes along with the suggestions of UA are much easier to go by, and seem more in line with the intent of the creation of the rule. However, technically you are correct, as it is open to interpretation. Just one interpretation goes more easily with the rules presented with UA, and the other one means that you are going to have to houserule 3/4 of how one does a gestalt class and how it's handled in regards to BAB, saves, and such things. If you notice, in the Gestalt rules they ONLY provide examples of gestalts with two classes. |
| Pax08-29-05, 01:09 AM | Once again it depends on how you interpret it. It states that "to make a gestalt choose two standard D&D classes" on page 72. That's two...not three, not four, but two. It also states that you cannot combine two versions of the same class. Right, we're on the same page so far. Now on leveling it states that the character chooses two classes. Right. "Chooses two classes" - not "must take the same two classes as before"; and furthermore, "chooses two classes", not "chooses one class". This can be interpreted in several ways, a conservative interpretation which I've taken means quite blankely, they can ONLY have two classes. Eh. If you say so, but we just jumped off the same page as each other. Especially as the first comment at the top of the right-hand column on UA page 73 reads (color=red]emphasis[/color mine): "A gestalt character can't combine two prestige classes at any level, although it's okay to combine a prestige class and a regular class." Now in a more liberal interpretation one couldn't have two versions of the same class as per page 72 once again, however the character in the first post has "Ranger6, Fighter4" which in my interpretation are two of the same type as a ranger is a subclass of fighter. "Subclass" is a distinction that does not exist in 3E rules. Ranger is no more a subclass of Fighter, than Paladin is a subclass of Bard. That restriction is meant to prevent people from combining, for example, Specialist Wizard (Enchanter) and Specialist Wizard (Illusionist). OR being a Fighter-Fighter, for absolute gobs of bonus feats. "Each time he gains a new level, he chooses two classes..." which could be interpreted that they can choose two new classes at each time That's precisely what it means. If you had to continue with the same classes you already had, there would be no choice, now, would there? (but present the problem as are they continuing with both classes as a mc of a single class character, do they both have to be level 1, No. They are each "whichever level would be next in that class, based on how many times I've gained that class' abilities already". and if they aren't, if it's the 5th Sorcerer/1 Fighter which occurs, or even worse, what if they choose Fighter1/Wizard1, and then Rogue1/Sorcerer1, then Fighter2/Sorcerer2, then Cleric1/Wizard1 Actually, that'd be: Fighter(1) - Wizard(1) Rogue(1) - Sorceror(1) Fighter(2) - Sorceror(2) Cleric(1) - Wizard(2) Which is pretty much the same as saying "Fighter(2)/Rogue(1)/Cleric(1) -/- Wizard(2)/Sorceror(2)" ...what occurs with the BAB, there's the House rule on Fractional BAB, BUT that's dependant more on just keeping with two classes That question is why so many of us who've actually played and GMed Gestalt games are wont to urge people to USE Fractional Accounting. And it's not really at all dependant on sticking with the same two classes, really. The table might make it look that way, but it's not. For my gestalt Arena (see my SIGnature below), I went with Fractional Accounting - and simply extracted the basic formula used to derive that table's numbers. Here, read for yourself how I explained it there: Saving Throws and Base Attack Bonus EW uses the "fractional accounting" method described in Unearthed Arcana (sidebar, p73). How this works is like this: at each level you gain a fractional increase to each base save, and to your base attack bonus. These fractions are added directly, and the sum (rounded down) is your actual base bonus. For example, take a Cleric(2)/Rogue(1). Using the PHB rules, this character has a Base Attack Bonus of only +1. Using the Fractional Accounting rule, this character has a BAB of +2 (0.75 + 0.75 + 0.5). Furthermore, if you ever, even once, count a given save as "good", you get a flat +2 bonus to the base bonus for that save. However, you only get this bonus ONCE, no matter how many classes count that save as "good". The table below shows the bonusses gained at both epc and pre-epic levels: ----- Table E-2: Fractional Accounting, Per-Level ----- Good Save Poor Save Good BAB Average BAB Poor BAB +1/2 +1/3 +1 +3/4 +1/2 For comparison: Fighters and Paladins have Good BAB; Clerics andMonks have average BAB; Wizards and Sorcerors have Poor BAB. A Wizard has a Good Will save, but poor Reflex and Fortitude saves. A liberal interpretation like that means the DM has so many uncertainties that could be exploited by the players because it's not defined by UA... I am a GM using that exact "liberal interpretation", and I don't see the uncertainties cropping up, sorry. Your side of this has uncertainties and vague unease. My "side" has direct firsthand experience. Well, of the two, I know which "side" I'll go with. Just one interpretation goes more easily with the rules presented with UA, and the other one means that you are going to have to houserule 3/4 of how one does a gestalt class and how it's handled in regards to BAB, saves, and such things. Nah, no houseruling needed. Seriously; just take the Fractional Accountign rules, distill the core of them, and use that. Heck, it took me ... what, four paragraphs and a one-line "table" to explain it, just above here? If you notice, in the Gestalt rules they ONLY provide examples of gestalts with two classes. The only example of actual class levels is a first-level Gestalt. After that, they merely talk about differing combinations ... which, of course, will be of two classes at once ... since Gestalt characters only GET two classes at once. In practise, it's not as difficult or problem-prone as you make it out to be. In fact, it's quite simple and straightforward, once you've done it a couple times. Here, take a look at a character I tried (briefly) in my own arena; I apologise in advance if any of the RPOL-specific formatting codes don't translate well: PLAYER NAME : gmpax CHARACTER NAME : (W) K'ethram RACE (ECL) : Half-Farspawn (+2) Shadow (+2) Half-Dragon (Topaz, +3) Shifter [totals to +7, discounts to +5] CLASS (LEVEL) : Barbarian (10)/ Fighter(4)/ Ranger(1)/ Weretouched Master(5) Level 1 : Barbarian 1 ... : Fighter 1 Level 2 : Barbarian 2 ... : Fighter 2 Level 3 : Barbarian 3 ... : Fighter 3 Level 4 : Barbarian 4 ... : Fighter 4 Level 5 : Barbarian 5 ... : Ranger 1 Level 6 : Barbarian 6 ... : Weretouched Master 1 Level 7 : Barbarian 7 ... : Weretouched Master 2 Level 8 : Barbarian 8 ... : Weretouched Master 3 Level 9 : Barbarian 9 ... : Weretouched Master 4 Level 10 : Barbarian 10 ... : Weretouched Master 5 ... NET LEVEL : 12-gestalt (ECL 15) ALIGNMENT : CE DEITY : - GENDER : ? SIZE : M SPEED : Land 65' [10 + 10 + (1.5x30)] TYPE : Outsider (Native, Aug.Dragon, Aug.Humanoid, Human, Shapechanger, Extraplanar) EXPERIENCE : 110,000xp NEXT LEVEL : 120,000xp CASH : 1,650gp ABILITY SCORES Str 44(+17) (16/base -/shf 2/hfs -/sha 8/hdr 2/lvl 6/enh 4/rage -/lst 2/raz 4/were) 10p Dex 22(+ 6) (16/base +2/shf 2/hfs -/sha -/hdr -/lvl -/enh -/rage 2/lst -/raz -/were) 10p Con 32(+11) (16/base -/shf 6/hfs -/sha 2/hdr -/lvl -/enh 4/rage -/lst -/raz 4/were) 10p Int 10(+ 0) (10/base -2/shf -/hfs -/sha 2/hdr -/lvl -/enh -/rage -/lst -/raz -/were) 0p Wis 20(+ 5) (16/base -/shf 4/hfs -/sha -/hdr -/lvl -/enh -/rage -/lst -/raz -/were) 10p Chr 12(+ 1) (10/base -2/shf 2/hfs -/sha 2/hdr -/lvl -/enh -/rage -/lst -/raz -/were) 0p SAVES +20 FORT (11/con 7/lvl 2/luck) [+10 - 0] +15 REFL ( 6/dex 7/lvl 2/luck) [+10 - 0] +10 WILL ( 5/wis 3/lvl 2/luck) [+ 0 -10] HIT POINTS : 212 (10d12+110) ARMOR CLASS Standard : 30 (10/base 7/natural 6/dex 6/armor 1/defl) Touch : 17 (10/base -/natural 6/dex -/armor 1/defl) INITIATIVE : +5 (5/dex) BASE ATTACK : +10/+5 WEAPONS 2 claws Attack : +29/+29 (10/bab 17/str 1/foc 1/mag) Damage : 1d6+22 each (2/level 17/str 1/mag 2/spec) Threat : 20/x2 Properties : magic 2 Tentacles Attack : +26/+26 (10/bab 17/str -2/secondary 1/mag) Damage : 1d6+9 (8/str 1/mag) Threat : 20/x2 Properties : magic Bite Attack : +24 (10/bab 17/str -4/tertiary 1/mag) Damage : 1d6+9 (8/str 1/mag) Threat : 20/x2 Properties : magic LANGUAGES Common Daelkyrr RACIAL TRAITS Shifter Shapechanger subtype Shifting, 3/day Longstride Razorclaw Low-Light Vision Shadow (10HD, +2) Cold Resistance 15 Shadow Blend - total conealment in less than full daylight Special Abilities (based on total HD) +2 luck to all Saves Evasion Speed 150% normal Darkvision 60' Low-light vision Half-Farspawn (1HD, +2) Natural armor improves by +3 Natural Weapons 2 Tentacles, 1d4 Tentacle reach is 5' True Strike 1/day as a swift action Spell Like abilities Blur, 3/day Touch of Idiocy Stinking Cloud Blink 3/day Greater Invisibility Blindsight 60' Immune to Poison Acid Resistance 10 Electricity Resistance 10 DR 5/magic Change Shape 2 additional tentacles (as above) amorphous morale penalty to native MP creatures Natural weapons treated as Magic for bypassing DR SR 11 Half-Dragon (Topaz) Natural Armor increases by +4 Natural Weapons 2 Claws, 1d4 + full strength Bite, 1d6 + half strength Breath Weapon, 1/day Line 6d8[Dessication] Reflex DC 21 for half Immune to Cold, paralysis, sleep Darkvision 60' low-light vision CLASS FEATURES Barbarian (10) DR 2/- Rage 3/day Trap Sense +3 Improved Uncanny Dodge Fast Movement +10' Fighter (4) Bonus Feats Specialisation Ranger (1) Favored Enemies +2: Construct Wild Empathy Weretouched Master (5) Weretouched I = Tiger, +2 Str II = Tiger, Pounce III = Tiger, +2 Str, +4 Con Wild Empathy Bonus Shifter Feats Frightful Shifting Alternate Form FEATS Cha 1 [PHB ] Combat Expertise Ftr 1 [PHB ] Weapon Focus: Claws Ftr 2 [ CW ] Improved Toughness Cha 3 [ CW ] Instantaneous Rage Ftr 4 [PHB ] Weapon Specialise: Claws (shifter) Ran 1 [PHB ] Track Cha 6 [RaE ] Shifter Savagery (shifter) WTM 2 [RaE ] Extra Shifter Trait: Razorclaw (shifter) Cha 9 [RaE ] Battleshifter Training WTM 4 [ECS ] Shifter Multiattack (shifter) SKILLS Skill Points : 60 Maximum ranks : 13 (class) / 6.5 (cross-class) ----------------------------------------------------------- Knowledge: Nature +10 (10r; +0/int) [--- --- ran wtm] 18p Survival +18 (13r; +5/wis) [bar --- ran ---] 18p ----------------------------------------------------------- Spot +15 (10r; +5/wis) [--- --- ran wtm] 18p Listen +18 (13r; +5/wis) [bar --- ran wtm] 18p ----------------------------------------------------------- EQUIPMENT |--price--| |--where--| |--book--| |---Item------------------------------------------| 36,000gp belt DMG Belt of Giant Strength (+6) 6,000gp amulet DMG Amulet of Mighty Fists (+1) 13,350gp armor various Mithril Brastplate [+1, Greater Aquatic<sup>+2</sup>] [Market Price +3] 2,000gp ring R DMG Ring of Protection +1 |
| GreyLord08-29-05, 02:43 AM | I thought to type up a long dissertation such as you, but seeing I already stated the interpretation was possible under a liberal interpretation such as you hold...Your coming back trying to convince the world (and against the light of some of the things that Wizards actually clarified awhile back when a TON of discussion on Gestalt and how broken it was in relation to a liberal interpretation) that yours is the only interpretation...is pure arrogance. So instead of a long discussion, I'll say like I recognized that there were other interpretations, you should at least step down from your high horse and recognize that there are other interpretations that are just as valid if not MORE valid than yours (especially in light of comments from earlier times that came out for clarificaions Wizards/Sorceror builds and Fighter/Barbarian builds were against Gestalt rules...it meant something, even for the liberal interpreters). I can see you'd allow the build. In which case however, you should also realize that the Tarrasque is underpowered in relation to the liberal interpretations (as it would seem most of the playtesting along with the examples provided came from more conservative usage of the Gestalt rules). To make it more balanced according to a more liberal build, it should be a Tarrasque with at least another class tossed in. Probably a few more classes for optimization. Instead of even a +2 to the CR, one should probably add +3 or even +4 or +5 to equal up the challenges. On a more conservative relation a +1 or +2 as per the rules seems to equal out. For a very conservative ruling, a +1 is normally sufficient. And get off your high horse, when you start ASSuming that you're the only one who's ever DM'd with Gestalts, or that I've never done that, your arrogance just SHINES through the roof. On a more specific note, in my interpretation a character could keep one of their base classes, and add on a prestige class to replace the other. Hence as per the rules they could be a Monk/Paladin until they qualified to be a Blackguard (by accident or falling or whatever)...and then continue to be a Monk/Blackguard. They couldn't get another prestige class. However of course in your interpretation the could be a Monk/Paladin, and then be a Fighter/Barbarian the next level. Of course besides that then you have to houserule XP at that point, or favored classes...in relation to Gestalt since it never stated that they didn't exist anymore. You're also going to have to houserule whether or not they can continue to be a Monk/Paladin again or if it's over. If you do allow it then they get to be the above, let's say a Monk/Blackguard...a liberal interpretation would then allow them to be a Theif-Acrobat/Barbarian. Of course I would say that instantly gives them the two prestige classes against the rules in my ruling (as their actual class would then be Fighter/Barbarian/Monk/Paladin/Blackguard/Theif-Acrobat) but...it's the liberal interpretation vs. the middle ground vs. the conservative. The only thing a liberal interpretation doesn't allow is that a Bard could also be a Prestige Bard selected at the same levels, or similar types of classes. I think you assumed once again in your arrogance that all you'd houserule was BAB, but I meant you'd be houseruling 3/4 of their characters in what or what you didn't allow, and not just the examples of XP or BAB that I've given, but also in skills, feats, and other items. Play it right on a liberal interpretation and you can almost get a feat every single level, BAB +1 every level, the best saves, and just about everything maxed...as a min/max'er that is. I found that out rather quickly, and it's hard to argue against your players when they see easily exploitable rules and can verify their arguments BY the Book...unless you take a harder stance. Still, I've gotten more long winded than I should have....We'll just say that the wording is easy to interpret many ways, the more conservative way is the easiest to keep players in line, the more liberal one gets the more questions that can arise from players, as options are more plentiful. Also, get off your high horse...and stop thinking your the only one who's ever used gestalts in your campaigns. As stated in That question is why so many of us who've actually played and GMed Gestalt games Which implies I haven't. I understand the fractional arena...the book even explains it...USING TWO CLASS Gestalts I might add. BUT...from personal experience as well as knowing myself, there are MANY arguements on how to twist that fractional BAB to basically subvert to being the Best BAB all the time. Unless you are a MUCH more heavy handed DM than I am (and seeing you are thinking my conservative interpretation is rough...somehow I doubt it...BUT you could be...though your assuming that your way is the only way to interpret things does imply that it might be a little unfun playing under you if you ONLY allow your houserules...I at least look at what my players suggest and admit their validity, and unless I think it will break the game normally allow it as long as it's from my allowed material [Core books, Complete Warrior/Complete Arcane, and some of UA]. Heck i even allowed Gestalts with normal characters...talk about one heck of a houseruling on my part...so I probably am more liberal than what you are seeing here...BUT by the rules, if I have to interpret them, I am strictly more conservative. By the rules I even make my players train and find trainers!!! In game play though, with players, I've been convinced to do it otherwise...sooooo.). Either way though, in rules interpretation, or in gameplay with houserules...I wouldn't allow the build that the topic starter listed above. I'd have smacked them upside the head, and told them to never show it to me again or shred it and toss it in the trashcan. Then I'd tell them build another character that wasn't so full of cheese! |
| Mock2608-29-05, 03:24 AM | Pax, how old are you and your players? Bear in mind that you can forbid any rules supplement in your game. It is YOUR game, you set the rules. It is also your responsibility to maintain game balance. You have only yourself to blame when things get unbalanced like this. I understand that it is only a fun pick-up game, but as I stated, you as the DM have to maintain the balance. Don't forget Rule 0 that clearly states that the rules are guidelines. Take care and have a great day.... ciao, john. |
| Pax08-29-05, 03:37 AM | Your coming back trying to convince the world (and against the light of some of the things that Wizards actually clarified awhile back when a TON of discussion on Gestalt and how broken it was in relation to a liberal interpretation) that yours is the only interpretation...is pure arrogance. Two points here. One, I merely illustrated in black and white how the rules don't say "single-classed pretige class". They say much the opposite, in black and white ... remember, "A gestalt character can't combine two prestige classes at any level, although it's okay to combine a prestige class and a regular class". Two: if WOTC has changed their minds on how the Gestalt rules are supposed tow ork, why is there no mention of this in a FAQ or Errata file? Yes, I do keep on top of those. I GM an arena; I rather need keep abreast of developments in the rules of the game. ^_^ And yes, I just checked, immediately prior to clicking "Submit Reply" - came all the way back up to the start of the post after writing it all, too. Although I do thank you for prompting such a through review, seems I missed the Errata for Complete Adventurer being updated, a few days back. Got it now, though. So instead of a long discussion, I'll say like I recognized that there were other interpretations, you should at least step down from your high horse and recognize that there are other interpretations that are just as valid if not MORE valid than yours Well, one part of your assertation is plain wrong - the bit about three classes only, "one prestige class alone" ... or the book wouldn't explicitly say that prestige+base is an allowed combination. (especially in light of comments from earlier times [...] Not in the Errata, not in the FAQ, not a rule that is in force. To make it more balanced according to a more liberal build, it should be a Tarrasque with at least another class tossed in. Yes, I did say that. Near the start of the thread, actually; I suggested Barbarian as an excellent choice, as I recall. a Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker combination woudl be absolutely devastatingly ugly to face. And get off your high horse, when you start ASSuming that you're the only one who's ever DM'd with Gestalts, or that I've never done that, your arrogance just SHINES through the roof. Hey, I'm writing about direct experiences, and you're writing about vague and ill-defined maybes. I draw my conclusions from what is put in front of me. However of course in your interpretation the could be a Monk/Paladin, and then be a Fighter/Barbarian the next level. Of course besides that then you have to houserule XP at that point, or favored classes...in relation to Gestalt since it never stated that they didn't exist anymore. Absolutely. For my arena, I just handwaved them way - since I have other restrictions, arena-prompted restrictions, that make it very unlikely anyone would ever trigger them anyway. Otherwise? I don't see what the problem is. In yoru example, that's four classes at level 1 each - no XP penalties yet. Avoiding XP penalties from then on would be difficult for that character, but ... THEY chose the classes they gestalted, after all. Then again, they're now ex-monk and ex]-paladin, since THOSE rules don't go away anymore. Nor the alignment restrictions, either. So I guess they'd better have BOTH monk and paladin as favored classes, or they're S.O.L., eh? You're also going to have to houserule whether or not they can continue to be a Monk/Paladin again or if it's over. No houserule needed. Just look at the actual rules that already exist: Monks must be lawful; Barbarians must be chaotic. Since alignment has to change in order to gain that level of Barbarian, the character cannot be a Monk anymore. Paladins have to be Lawful Good, so there's an identical issue with Paladin ---> Barbarian, too. The character stopped advancing as a Monk; Ex-Monk comes into play directly and simply. Likewise, they stopped advancing as a Paladin - no more gaining palaidn levels, even if the alignment issue is resolved. If you do allow it then they get to be the above, let's say a Monk/Blackguard...a liberal interpretation would then allow them to be a Theif-Acrobat/Barbarian. Of course I would say that instantly gives them the two prestige classes against the rules in my ruling (as their actual class would then be Fighter/Barbarian/Monk/Paladin/Blackguard/Theif-Acrobat) The rules only say that you cannot combine two prestige classes at once, not that you can never have two prestige classes in the character's lifetime. The only thing a liberal interpretation doesn't allow is that a Bard could also be a Prestige Bard selected at the same levels, or similar types of classes. First, I wouldn't use both the BAse _____ and Presatige __ in any game - be they Bards, Paladins, Rangers, or whatever. Second, the "interpretation" I'm using also forbids you to be a Fighter-Fighter, or Wizard-Wizard, or Sorceror-Sorceror, or the like. No doubling up on Cleric to just be a Cleric with double spells-per-day and four domains, nope. I think you assumed once again in your arrogance that all you'd houserule was BAB, but I meant you'd be houseruling 3/4 of their characters in what or what you didn't allow, No, I don't do that in the game I am currently running. It is you who are being arrogant here, insisting that I will have to do X or Y, when in fact, I do not in CURRENT practise, have to do any such thing. and not just the examples of XP or BAB that I've given, but also in skills, feats, and other items. Play it right on a liberal interpretation and you can almost get a feat every single level, Explain how and I might believe that. BAB +1 every level, Of course. You can do that right now, too. It's called be a straight fighter. What's the problem? the best saves, Straight monk. The problem is ...? and just about everything maxed...as a min/max'er that is. Mayahp so, but not on the same character. I run an arena game ... a game chock full of diehard min/max'ers, powergamers, and even a couple outright munchkins. Yet, strangely ... despite all your doomsaying and prognostications of disaster ... nothing especially bad has happened. The only problem areas would have been problems regardless of wether the game was gestalt ... or not. I found that out rather quickly, and it's hard to argue against your players when they see easily exploitable rules and can verify their arguments BY the Book...unless you take a harder stance. Or unless you simply know the books inside and out, front to back and front again, yoruself ... and take the simple stance of "my way, or the highway". Mature and responsible playes will understand that, even if something is technically legal due to some obscure loophole, sometimes the rules simply must be changed to prevent abuses. And strangely enough, the gestalt part of my gestalt arena has been the source of precisely zero abuses. That's 0, nada, nicht, nihil, none. In several months, with nearly half-a-hundred diehard powergamers pushing the envelope - folding, twisitng, and spindling the rules - in an effort to achieve some measure of advantage and dominance over their fellow combatants. Also, get off your high horse...and stop thinking your the only one who's ever used gestalts in your campaigns. Start speaking in other than vague hyperbole, and ground your claims in examples from actual games, rather than hypothetical "might happens" and "could be's", then. I understand the fractional arena...the book even explains it...USING TWO CLASS Gestalts I might add. Uh, you understand it less perfectly than you think. The examples given in the Fractional Accounting sidebar are NOT Gestalts, they are standard multiclass characters. BUT...from personal experience as well as knowing myself, there are MANY arguements on how to twist that fractional BAB to basically subvert to being the Best BAB all the time. Money, mouth, get 'em together. Gimme an example that I can't shoot down in a couple sentences, by referencing existing and easily-applicable rules taken solely from WOTC sources. Unless you are a MUCH more heavy handed DM than I am No, I just don't sweat the maybes and might-be's; if a problem ever arises, I'll fix it THEN. "Don't burn your bridges until you've crossed them", and all. Hasn't happened yet - and I'm not holding my breath waiting, either. though your assuming that your way is the only way to interpret things does imply that it might be a little unfun playing under you if you ONLY allow your houserules... I've only ever gotten compliments for my GMing style, actually. My primary fault lays in not being able to follow through on a classic "wheels within wheels, plots within plots" style of campaign as well, nor as long, as I'd like to. I do better with a simpler, less-involved-story style of game. *shrug* I at least look at what my players suggest and admit their validity, and unless I think it will break the game normally allow it as long as it's from my allowed material [Core books, Complete Warrior/Complete Arcane, and some of UA]. And the implication that I don't is rooted ... where, exactly? Either way though, in rules interpretation, or in gameplay with houserules...I wouldn't allow the build that the topic starter listed above. Well, neither would I, but that's because it's not possible, even handled the way I handle Gestalt characters. Then I'd tell them build another character that wasn't so full of cheese! Eh, I don't mind cheese, as long as it's managable cheese, and the other players at the table will still have their fair share of the fun. |
| Pax08-29-05, 04:09 AM | Pax, how old are you and your players? I'm thirty four, actually. As for my players ... I have no clue, except I believe they run the whole gamut - from teenagers to fellow thirty-somethings. I've never actually met them face to face, though .... it's an online game. I've had little luck finding offline groups I can get to of late (transportation is problematic when you're poor). And, since we're sharing ... how about you? :) |
| NinjaHedge08-29-05, 04:11 AM | This is why the trasque is not the highest CR creature in the MM. Put them against a Titan and see if they kill it in 3 rounds. 2 level 20 gestault characters should make short work of a CR 20 creature. |
| GreyLord08-29-05, 09:52 AM | Two points here. One, I merely illustrated in black and white how the rules don't say "single-classed pretige class". They say much the opposite, in black and white ... remember, "A gestalt character can't combine two prestige classes at any level, although it's okay to combine a prestige class and a regular class". Two: if WOTC has changed their minds on how the Gestalt rules are supposed tow ork, why is there no mention of this in a FAQ or Errata file? Yes, I do keep on top of those. I GM an arena; I rather need keep abreast of developments in the rules of the game. ^_^ Wow, making me have to look it up again as well. I didn't realize this, but it seems that the posts are no longer around. Everything prior to July seem to have been deleted. Stinker as it means it's hard to reference anything (though I even tried the archived webpages...but it's hard to find things via that method)...so I suppose officially, that those statements now seem to actually have been deleted. Oh well, on with the munchkins. We'll just have to agree we see the Gestalt rules very differently and probably wouldn't agree with each other's rulings. For example that line you highlighted, I interpret it different than you obviously do. You'd be unhappy playing with my players and in my campaigns, and you'd probably hate playing with my players in your campaigns (give em an inch they'll take you a mile, not really rules lawyers, but if they see something open to interpretation...). |