Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Turbomonkey 10-16-05, 03:27 PM	I have a player in my campaign who feels that casters are too powerful. He feels that they outshine all fighter type classes. He likes to player fighters but feels like it is meaningless when there is a wizard that can just kill most foes with a single spell. He makes a point that there is always new source books containing new spells, caster prestige classes, and spell caster feats that are far more powerful than any new fighter abilities. I tried to explain that every character type has a certain role and each has it's strengths and weaknesses. I used examples like casters can run out of spells but a fighter can hack all day long. He understands all of that but feels that it is getting to the point where fighters are not even necessary to a party anymore. He argues that if it was an all caster group they could just summon creatures to be the front line fighters. How do I get him to feel like a fighter is as important as a caster? So that he feels like the character he wants to play has a vital role in the party?
Thynass 10-16-05, 03:31 PM	Put an enemy wizard in and blow all the mages up with a fireball. That'll show him. Or even better, use a priest spell. That way the mages can't counter it. Alternatively, put something with good saves or SR in. Wizards lack the ability to deal with these things, even with summoned monsters. Single, harder enemies tend to be better against wizards than lots of little ones, at least when they have access to stuff like fireball. Your best bet is to combine these two. Attack the PCs with a dragon; good saves, SR and breath weapon to slaughter the low HP wizards. Then they'll see why other classes are good.
prettyripples 10-16-05, 03:39 PM	Ok, the problem is that if you ask the CO boards, he's right. At low levels, the brutes are essential, but as your party improves there's more and more that can be done with Persistent Buffs, Fly, Invisibility... who doesn't benefit from a caster? The best way to make the fighters more important - off the top of my head, anyway - is to change the circumstances. Have your party meet a BBEG they just have to run from (or have a 40-man army come hunting them, or something), so that they're on the run. Have this last a few days... all of a sudden, the casters are feeling the pinch. The cleric is saving his last few spells for healing, everyone needs some sleep, and as long as nobody knows Leonmund's Secure Shelter, it'll be down to the Fighter to see them through. Have the party fight large numbers, in tunnels. The fighter can hold the breach, and give the others a chance to blast away past him. For a wizard, there's always the old "take their items" dodge - all of a sudden, he's almost useless. It's always a lot easier to find a spare sword than get your spellbook back. Finally, just let some of your NPCs take a shine to your fighter. After all, they'll always have some favorites - if the fighter's doing the talking for a while, he'll feel more "valued". ---------- I know none of those were really what you were looking for, but in truth the casters are powerful at high levels.
Deluxe 247 G 10-16-05, 04:04 PM	I agree with prettyripples, for the most part. Levels 1-4 Fighters are better than wizards Levels 5-8 Fighters are about equal to wizards Levels 9+ Wizards will be better 95% of the time. It's unavoidable. It's how the game was made. I too favor fighters. But not hack-n-slash fighters. Specialize in something. No, not a weapon, a style. Grappling, sundering, etc. Sundering is one of my favorites. Improved Sunder from 3.5, Improved Sunder from 3.0 (Sword and Fist, IF your DM allows 3.0) and an adamantine weapon will render that powergamer's +1 Vorpal Keen Longsword useless VERY easily. And if he wants to be equivalent to a mage, I'd probably go with grapple, mages have a very hard time with grapple, and save up for a ring of fly or some resistance or something. Point is, Wizards>>>Average Fighters at high levels. Clever Feat combos counter this. If you're looking for kill count, spiked chain, whirlwind attack, potion of enlarge person, you can make up to 32 attacks in a single round (and that's if you use the Large[long] rules, I never figured out ifyou'd get tall orlong with that potion...), with a low amount of feats (for a fighter). Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Combat Expertise, Whirlwind attack, Prof(spiked chain)--you're gonna needit. This combo can be reached at Ftr-4 if you're a human. and without the potion you only get24 attacks. :weep: Granted, no enemy can be attacked more then once, but vs. multiple enemies, you rock. we've all got a little power gamer inside ourselves. :D just gotta be cleverer with fighters Hope it helps, Eli EDIT: I just read through the Large[Long] vs. Large[Tall] section and it says that most large creatures are Tall, with Ogres as the example and Horses for the Long. I know i've heard about this, but havenever seen anything about it intheMMv3.5 so uh... anyone know? I'd guess that Large Humans woould beTall, so you'd get up to 80 attacks.... :D
trolloc 10-16-05, 04:09 PM	Have them encounter occult slayers (complete warrior prc) with the spellwarped template (MM3) in a anti-magic field.
olshanski_home 10-16-05, 04:10 PM	If you're looking for kill count, spiked chain, whirlwind attack, potion of enlarge person, you can make up to 32 attacks in a single round (and that's if you use the Large[long] rules, I never figured out ifyou'd get tall orlong with that potion [/I] Bipeds become tall. Quadrapeds become long. Crawling things = long Standing things = tall. The size is dependant on the base creature, not on the potion or spell.
Thynass 10-16-05, 04:13 PM	anti-magic field. What an excelent idea!
BlueLikeYou 10-16-05, 04:20 PM	Casters are very poweful at high levels, but there is still a place for the fighter. Try doing some battles where the fighters have a chance to shine, or that put casters at a disadvantage. Here's some suggestions: -Golems -Creatures with high SR -Creatures that grapple (especially flying ones :)) -Enemy spellcasters (can counter PC spells, or unleash there own spells. Spells like flesh to stone, disintigrate, or finger of death are very dangerous to most arcane casters with their low Fort save). -Creatures with ranged weapons (hold their action to fire at casters when they try to cast a spell. This will force a concentration check based on damage dealt, which can be very hard to make).
VirgilCaine 10-16-05, 04:38 PM	Or even better, use a priest spell. That way the mages can't counter it. First, we have clerics, not priests in 3.0 and Dispel Magic sees no spell list division.
Thynass 10-16-05, 04:44 PM	First, we have clerics, not priests in 3.0 and Dispel Magic sees no spell list division. I call any spellcaster that casts divine spells a priest (perhaps a hang-over from Bauldor's Gate). Secondly, When talking about countr-spells, I was talking about countering spells with the same spell, by readying an action and making a spellcraft check.
HamHam 10-16-05, 05:02 PM	I call any spellcaster that casts divine spells a priest (perhaps a hang-over from Bauldor's Gate). Secondly, When talking about countr-spells, I was talking about countering spells with the same spell, by readying an action and making a spellcraft check. Which no one does because it's inneffective anyway. If any of them are going to waste time countering it's going to be with lots of prepared dispell magics, since it works on any spell (iirc).
Thynass 10-16-05, 05:08 PM	Which no one does because it's inneffective anyway. If any of them are going to waste time countering it's going to be with lots of prepared dispell magics, since it works on any spell (iirc). I should point out that the party I DM for has only one arcane spell caster who is a fighter sorcerer (4/4) and one cleric who only turns up half the time and generally gets used as a healer only. Therefore my expereince with counterspelling and dispell is non-existant. And further more, I reckon anyone in my party who took a spell caster would memorise as many fireballs as they could at third level, over dispell magic. Just because they like killing things. So the only chance they would have of counter-spelling would be using the same spell. Although they'd likely rely on a high Initiative roll and just cast fireball instead...
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 06:25 PM	I have a player in my campaign who feels that casters are too powerful. He feels that they outshine all fighter type classes. He likes to player fighters but feels like it is meaningless when there is a wizard that can just kill most foes with a single spell. He makes a point that there is always new source books containing new spells, caster prestige classes, and spell caster feats that are far more powerful than any new fighter abilities. I tried to explain that every character type has a certain role and each has it's strengths and weaknesses. I used examples like casters can run out of spells but a fighter can hack all day long. He understands all of that but feels that it is getting to the point where fighters are not even necessary to a party anymore. He argues that if it was an all caster group they could just summon creatures to be the front line fighters. How do I get him to feel like a fighter is as important as a caster? So that he feels like the character he wants to play has a vital role in the party? The way I see it, that is his problem, actually. So he don't like casters and don't want to play one. Good on him. But he wants to whine about it and force other players not to play casters (why else would he whine?). Not so good. If he thinks casters are too powerful (and they are at higher levels, although there is a few fighter-type builds out there that is just hot) then he can play one or acknowledge that they are powerful and move on. Anything else is just not on. Ask him point blank what is the purpose of his whine. What is he hoping to achieve? What does he want to see done? If the answer to any of the above is "nerf the caster" or something similar, tell him to grow up.
HamHam 10-16-05, 06:34 PM	If the answer to any of the above is "nerf the caster" or something similar, tell him to grow up. And if it's "buff the fighter"? Personally, in the game I'm running, I've upped the fighter progression to a bonus feat at every level, not just evens, and brainstormed various expanded feat chains, the very ends of which should be equal in power level to a ninth level spell.
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 06:41 PM	And if it's "buff the fighter"? Personally, in the game I'm running, I've upped the fighter progression to a bonus feat at every level, not just evens, and brainstormed various expanded feat chains, the very ends of which should be equal in power level to a ninth level spell. Same difference. In DnD, it is party power that matters. How does your character stack up with everyone else's characters. It is NOT uber-super powerful compared to everyone else in the game world. I don't care if your level 1 character can solo an ancient red dragon. I'll just use Mr Great Wyrm on you. If everyone else in the party can't even take out goblins, on the other hand, we have a problem. It is acknowledged that casters are powerful at higher levels. Thing is, they have to survive to the higher levels first. That is their balancing factor. Let me tell you that DnD 1st Ed had a far greater caster to fighter disparity than 3.5. Fighter is pretty good as is. You just need to choose your feats properly, which is the entire point of the class. As I said. If you don't like it, don't play it. Otherwise, stop complaining. I will not be changing things and nerfing everyone else just for your benefit.
VirgilCaine 10-16-05, 07:29 PM	I call any spellcaster that casts divine spells a priest (perhaps a hang-over from Bauldor's Gate). Secondly, When talking about countr-spells, I was talking about countering spells with the same spell, by readying an action and making a spellcraft check. First, it's Baldur's Gate. Second, everyone else when they say counterspell, they mean using any kind of countering mechanic.
HamHam 10-16-05, 07:38 PM	If everyone else in the party can't even take out goblins, on the other hand, we have a problem. Oh wait... that is the problem. Having a fighter around adds very little to a party's abilities against most higher level stuff. They're basically disposable meatshields. And the usual examples of "send tons of mobs at them for hours and end" or "anti-magic field" or whatever are generally not sufficent because a spellcaster's greatest strength is to tactically control the situation. He's not going to sit there and try to fight wave after wave of kobolds... he's going to fly up and just nuke them from a safe distance, then Teleport away once he's low on spells, come back the next day... and the counter to the anti-magic field argument is this: saying you need an anti-magic field to challenge your spellcasters is like saying you need a DR 1,000/- creature to challenge your fighter: both cases simply prove it's brokenness.
VirgilCaine 10-16-05, 07:47 PM	I would think that demons and devils would be good targets for fighter types, what with nasty energy resistance and SR foiling casters.
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 08:16 PM	Oh wait... that is the problem. Having a fighter around adds very little to a party's abilities against most higher level stuff. They're basically disposable meatshields. Except for the golems, the Rakshasa, the... :rolleyes:
Dynneroth 10-16-05, 08:33 PM	At higher levels, the probability of a leader of an evil group having ring of spell turning/ring of SR is pretty high. How would the leader have gotten to that position without some kind of protection from magic? Give that ring to a 10-15 level monk and now we're talking about a real bad boy. Have the campaign revolve around a group of lawful evil monks and clerics who are summoning outsiders for whatever reason. That should give everyone in the party something they can do. The point is each PC is necessary to cover the bases.
Leewei 10-16-05, 09:05 PM	There is at least one disparity between fighters and casters: versatility. With each new expansion book published, casters gain scads of new magic. New feats might balance the ticket somewhat between the classes, but the non-casters still need to spend a feat to get any benefit. I'd say this reflects a small flaw in D&D. Many other game systems equate spells, skills and attack bonus on some level, requiring development points to be spent for any form of advancement. D&D doesn't have this, so any PC finger-wiggler can get whatever he can convince the DM he deserves to have. The balancing point is arguably the money spent to obtain the new ability. By comparison, money spent on gear is a more expensive and haphazard investment, since gear can be stolen or damaged.
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 09:12 PM	There is at least one disparity between fighters and casters: versatility. With each new expansion book published, casters gain scads of new magic. New feats might balance the ticket somewhat between the classes, but the non-casters still need to spend a feat to get any benefit. I'd say this reflects a small flaw in D&D. Many other game systems equate spells, skills and attack bonus on some level, requiring development points to be spent for any form of advancement. D&D doesn't have this, so any PC finger-wiggler can get whatever he can convince the DM he deserves to have. The balancing point is arguably the money spent to obtain the new ability. By comparison, money spent on gear is a more expensive and haphazard investment, since gear can be stolen or damaged. The balancing point is the number of times it can be done. Having played games like MUDs (where it is far more glaring than in normal DnD, but based on the same principle), the mage's greatest weakness is the number of spells he can cast before having to rest. So, they MUST do scads of damage per shot. A fighter can do 40-50 damage at high levels per hit and can do it all day. The mage can't. Assuming 40 rounds per day (10 rounds per fight), 4 attacks a round and all of them hit. The fighter will be doing 50 * 40 * 4 = 8000 damage. The mage has to match this to be on equal footing AND he has to do it in the number of spells alloted to him. This does not take into account saves and misses with ranged touch attacks, or the fact that the mage has so much less hps and that he can be prevented from casting in far more ways than the fighter can be prevented from swinging a sword. The only flaw here is the player's mentality. Not the system.
Golgomox 10-16-05, 09:40 PM	Create a wizard-hunter band of other-wordly guys out to rid worlds of wizards. Maybe they're immune to most magic. Maybe they all have rings of spell turning. Maybe they have helmets that permanently absorb the spell from the mage "for good." Basically, confront the all-powerful mages with something that renders their magic utterly useless, even a hinderance. Then the Fighter could step in with all his proficiencies and extra damage and save the day. Problem is, after that, you're right back where you started. Possibly altering your campaign world so that magic in certain areas is either illegal or unusable. They would rely heavily on a man who would keep them alive. As a DM, in my world, there are hardly any flat-out normal classes. Pretty much everyone just "builds" their character when we start, and we throw out ideas, so that most fighters have some magic, and most mage-types have some combat ability, each one unique. All-in-all, the truth is, a guy who can just yell "Die" and something dies is FAR more powerful than a guy who has to swing a weapon and hope he hits. That's the reward for living through levels 1-5 when you're a total wimp. To be honest, a group with a few wizards really doesn't need a fighter, unless there are frequent cases where their magic is useless. Another idea; if Mages are dominating your sessions, make the game more challenging. They should be hard pressed to conserve spells because they know they'll have to spread their powers to stay alive. I have guys who are powerful at lower levels. The way I compensate is to usually add to the monster abilities. Better AC, more damage, more HP, etc. Helps balance the game out. Lastly, throw a few dragons at them. Thinning the heard has a way of humbling even the most powerful characters. Showing them that they're not invincible without some brawn might just do the trick. Good luck. Oh yeah, hi everyone. :w00t: I'm a newbie. Love D&D. I'll be posting a lot here. Seems like a good place.
allenchan 10-16-05, 09:56 PM	Seriously, its true. Once a wizard learns polymorph and the cleric has righteous might+divine power going, fighters are worthless. If he wants to keep up with the casters, tell him to visit the CO boards, and make sure he uses prestige classes liberally. Anything more then Fighter 4 is a waste.
Cadfan 10-16-05, 10:30 PM	Oh, for goodness sakes. Arguments which are bad and should never be made again. "The fighter is necessary at low levels to make sure the casters survive to high levels. That's balanced!" Ok, so I should play a fighter from levels 1 through 9, then I should have my character walk off a cliff so I can create a caster. That's the message I'm getting here. Shouldn't the game be balanced no matter what level you are at? No one should have to slog through useless levels to get to fun ones, and no one should have to keep playing a character which will never again be worthwhile because his level got too high. "Its balanced because you can make them fight in an antimagic field." This works one time. After that, it becomes obvious that you've created contrived circumstances to make the fighter excel, and everyone starts to resent it. "Have them fight another wizard, and when the party's wizard gets fireballed, the fighter will feel better about his high hit points." So, the message here is, yes, the weekness of a wizard is another wizard? Doesn't this just prove the point even more?
Turbomonkey 10-16-05, 10:33 PM	First off I want to thank everyone for all the insightful comments. So I agree with the fact that the Fighter becomes extremely shadowed by spell casters, especially with new spells coming out all the time. I really want all the people in my game to enjoy playing whatever type of char they want to play. I think his main complaint is that we keep buying new books and adding even more power to a class that is already extremely powerful at the mid to high levels. While the new content for fighters still doesn't compare. I know some clerics like to be Paladin/Clerics by buffing like crazy, getting uber armor, weapons, and taking fighter type feats. They can almost be as effective as Fighters when fully buffed. Then the fighter is battling next to him and saying wow he is as good a fighter as I am. Plus he can heal, ressurect, and blast too!! Man my char really sucks!!! I think the one way to resolve this issue might be to limit which new content is allowed. Not something I am crazy about doing as I enjoy new content and like spicing things up. Or another approach is to create modified fighter prestige classes. I am thinking of changing the Feat Requirements of the Weapon Master to Combat Reflexes and Weapon Focus; plus 5 feats which must be from the list of bonus fighter feats. This allows a more customized approach to the Weapon Master while increasing the minimum level at which you can take the prestige class (which as a Fighter will be level 7 instead of level 5; unless you're a Human and get the first level bonus feat). I am also going to allow the Fighter class to take some of the Epic Feats like Devastating Critical and Perfect Two Weapon Fighting as well as reducing the minimum ability scores from 25 to 20. All of the other Feat requirements will remain unchanged. It only seems right that if a Fighter were to focus on nothing but honing his weapon skills he should be able to cause some monsters to make save or die rolls, just like the caster can. That should give him enough options to create a Fighter that is up to par with spell casters. While at the same time not have to restrict spell casters too much. I am willing to play test it anyways... :D
primemover003 10-16-05, 10:46 PM	Casters are very poweful at high levels, but there is still a place for the fighter. Try doing some battles where the fighters have a chance to shine, or that put casters at a disadvantage. Here's some suggestions: -Golems -Creatures with high SR -Creatures that grapple (especially flying ones :)) -Enemy spellcasters (can counter PC spells, or unleash there own spells. Spells like flesh to stone, disintigrate, or finger of death are very dangerous to most arcane casters with their low Fort save). -Creatures with ranged weapons (hold their action to fire at casters when they try to cast a spell. This will force a concentration check based on damage dealt, which can be very hard to make). You've obviously not seen the Series of Energy Orb spells (and Lesser Orbs)... Conjuration (Creation) spells doing direct energy damage that bypasses SR and requires a ranged touch attack. High SR creatures aren't a challenge to any Wiz/Sor that can cast these spells. Grapplers and enemy archers suffer one HUGE disadvantage. Only Bards and Wiz/Sor have See Invisibility as a spell, and it's personal. So no potions and you need UMD ranks to coax a wand into working. Greater Invis/Fly/see invis combo is too powerful against mundane artillery like that. NPC's and monsters don't have the resources to counter this. Even a Cleric's True Seeing is limited to 120 feet... well short of a Arcane Casters comfortable blasting range. If you can't see it, you can't attack it. To really challenge a High Level wizard you need to be able to get them to cast a majority of their spells in a single day... That's not an easy task. You have to have that 5 encounters a day or otherwise deplete the party's resources. My last 2 campaigns have fizzled at about 15th level because that's really hard to do on a consistant basis. High Level spellcasters will just up and leave when they are feeling too much pressure. Unless the adventure has some mitigating factor like a time-limit they'll just teleport away to fight later.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-16-05, 10:58 PM	You wanna make a fighter feel important? Run an encounter with 1000 kobolds and no way to escape. Guess who's gonna end up crawling back behind the fighters because they ran out of spells.
Mirikon 10-16-05, 11:01 PM	Casters outshining fighter types is part and parcel of high level play. has been since forever. There are, however, easy ways to make sure the fighter types get some glory. I'll just go into three here. 1) Dungeon crawls: Spellcasters are at their most potent in the first fight of the day, or the first fight of the day that they use their spells in. Long dungeon crawls where they don't have a chance to rest for 8 hours are good ways to make warriors shine, as the spellcasters either blow their load before reaching the BBEG, or they have to conserve spells, with the fighters getting the glory in all the prelim battles. 2) Mage-killers: The three best things to throw at cocky mages? Beholders, Dragons, Golems. If you need someone to tell you why, you haven't read the Monster Manual close enough. 3) Duels: Perhaps the BBEG or one of his lieutenants is a big melee type. Enter the NPC challenging the fighter to a duel to the death!
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 11:05 PM	To really challenge a High Level wizard you need to be able to get them to cast a majority of their spells in a single day... That's not an easy task. You have to have that 5 encounters a day or otherwise deplete the party's resources. My last 2 campaigns have fizzled at about 15th level because that's really hard to do on a consistant basis. High Level spellcasters will just up and leave when they are feeling too much pressure. Unless the adventure has some mitigating factor like a time-limit they'll just teleport away to fight later. Actually, given that the wizard has limited spells and half of them would need to be defensive in case that archer pings you and you lose your invis spell to a crappy Concentration check, running them out of spells isn't as hard as you think. Plus critters with hps in the hundreds is bad for most blaster casters (non-blasters gets hosed with will and fort saves in the late 20s/early 30s, and that is fairly common in high level play). The most damaging spell is only 40d6 (Disintegrate, neglecting saves) or 32d6 (Meteor Swarm, taking into account saves). That is an average of 140 and 112 respectively. You'd need a few of those to KO a big critter. And you get maybe 4 MS a day. 5 Disintegrates. Maybe 5 and 7 if your DM is very generous with treasure. The Wizard will start having trouble by the end of the second encounter. By the end of the third, he is in deep doo-doo. In the fourth, he dies, unless he runs away. Wizards are flashy and have options. But they are hardly as uber-powered as everyone thinks. Killing them is quite easy, even with players that think outside the box. Clerics and Druids, on the other hand... *shudders*
20goingon1232 10-16-05, 11:08 PM	You wanna make a fighter feel important? Run an encounter with 1000 kobolds and no way to escape. Guess who's gonna end up crawling back behind the fighters because they ran out of spells. Fireball, Ice Storm, Cloudkill, DBF, Horrid Wilting, MS. Kobolds? What kobolds? Many small critters is when wizards excel, I'm afraid. It's big bad meanies with a few hundred hps and an ultra high Fort and Will save that scares them silly.
Ogmug 10-16-05, 11:31 PM	Fireball, Ice Storm, Cloudkill, DBF, Horrid Wilting, MS. Kobolds? What kobolds? Many small critters is when wizards excel, I'm afraid. It's big bad meanies with a few hundred hps and an ultra high Fort and Will save that scares them silly. except when the 1000 kobolds are not in groups. YEAH, go a head and fire off that 15d6 fireball, if kobolds are more than 30' apart, you only get a few and waste a spell Ice storm? : Ice storm? same problem. Only a 20' radius. Cloudkill?: That one is more problematic, as it spreads out. ... but a smart kobold would find high ground (cloudkill sinks) DBF? same issues as fireball. Horrid Wilting?: much more effective (wider radius.. 60'). but remember, 1000 kobolds will be coming from ALL directions if the DM is smart. A wizard can only cast in one (2 if quickened) directions at 1 time. Sorry, couldnt remember what MS is basically 1000 kobolds is not a pretty sight. Yes, the wizard could get rid of quite a few (but if he is able to cast Horrid wilting, he wont be getting exp for the kobolds so won't gain a level) and will eventually get overwhelmed. Once the kobolds get within melee range, the wizard will go down to an assisted grapple .. (now.. toss in a blade barrier before they get too close and then you are slicing and dicing) And 1000 sling bullets coming at you hurt (even with protection from normal missiles which will only supress 150hps, and stoneskin another 150. On average you will recieve near 400hps of damage)
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple 10-16-05, 11:40 PM	Also, if your fighter has maybe a few followers around, Heroes of Battle has rules for things like volley fire (forcing reflex saves from your opponent rather than you having to roll to attack).
Dynneroth 10-16-05, 11:50 PM	OK, I've thought a little more about this, and it was touched on in a previous post, but I think it is important to point out: spellcasters have a bag of tricks, so to speak, while a fighter is kind of a one-trick pony. That seems to be the crux of the argument. To put a finer point on it, that is the very reason I chose wizard when I played Neverwinter Nights in single player mode. With the pixie familiar, I could do almost everything in the game, except for the paladin- and druid-specific quests. With Knock and Invisibility a wizard can sneak around and get in many places a rogue can, and with Tenser's Transformation and Polymorph a wizard can become almost as adept at dealing damage as a similarly leveled fighter. However, the big equalizer is spell limits per day and having the right spell prepared for the situation for wizards or even knowing the right spell for bards and sorcerers. Finally, as someone pointed out, if a player thinks a particular class has an advantage over another, that player is free to choose that class. I would just hate to be in the party of six level 1 wizards/sorcerers. Survivability would seem to be pretty low. In that situation I would want to be a cleric or possibly even a fighter. Being the meat shield for five wizards who were indebted to me for saving their collective butts multiple times should be good for a few favors in the future.
Mirikon 10-17-05, 11:21 AM	Fighters are only a one trick pony if the person playing the fighter is stupid. Ask anyone on the CO boards about the fun you can have with a fighter and a spiked chain. Grab Improved Trip, Imrpoved Disarm, Improved Sunder, Improved Grab, and Improved Bull Rush, and you've suddenly got yourself a whole bag of tricks, if you play your cards right. Grab Combat Reflexes while you're at it, too. And being a fighter, you certainly got the feats for it. Heck, if you're worried about mages, grab the mage-killer feats from Complete Arcane. The only drawback to them is that your nonexistant caster level goes down by 4 with each feat.
VirgilCaine 10-17-05, 11:26 AM	With Knock and Invisibility a wizard can sneak around and get in many places a rogue can Neither of those spells solves the problem of running into traps. Invisibility doesn't help with SOUND or SMELL. but I think it is important to point out: spellcasters have a bag of tricks, so to speak, while a fighter is kind of a one-trick pony. That seems to be the crux of the argument. Note how short the Core feat chains are. Hmmmm. Maybe that was intentional? Fighters have to choose another trick to be able to use?
Aliquid 10-17-05, 11:40 AM	except when the 1000 kobolds are not in groups.or not all at the same time. If you do this too many times, the players will get annoyed, but for a change... try this: Put the players on a major time limit where they have to accomplish task "x" within two or three days. To accomplish task "x" they have to go through dozens of encounters. This means that the spellcasters don't have time to sleep and re-charge their spells between battles. Smart spellcasters will only use a few strategic spells each battle, and let the fighter do the rest. Non-smart spellcasters will blow through all their spells in the first couple encounters, and be completely useless for the rest of the day.
solbergb 10-17-05, 12:03 PM	Usually the fighter will be able to contribute if the spellcasters use some of their spells to keep him buffed. Casters who do 4-5 encounters a day at higher levels have a fair number of lower level slots that go begging. Use them on the fighter. Polymorph in particular can turn a fighter into a killing machine, because he gets all of his feats stacked onto the monster abilities. But it works better on a fighter whose equipment doesn't merge into the monster - barbarans and monks and similar light fighters tend to do better with polymorph because they don't depend on armor and have class abilities (flurry, rage) that stack with the form they're changed into. No fighter should be without GMW on all of his key weapons once GMW gets into the +3 range. This also means he can spend cash on more useful boosts to his weapon than simple + enhancements. Archers should be getting their flame effect from Flame Arrow, and put other elements on their bow. The builder books have some very effective fighter buffs, that are much better on someone with a lot of attacks and who hits accurately than on a typical caster. Spikes, Fires of Purity, Earth's Hammer, Sonic Weapon etc etc can do a lot to bring a fighter's output into line without having to shapeshift him.
Moon-Lancer 10-17-05, 12:11 PM	With the advent of new spells, their are a few feats that make fighters (maybe not the class as a straight progression but as a archetype in general) awfully powerful. One is karmatic strike. The other is the dervish prc. A build something like this could do very well in my opinion. You could also remove some of the other feats and do two weapon fighting instead. Swb= swashbuckler Ftr= Fighter CCL= Champaign of Corlian? Drv= Dervish 01 Swb 1 Weapon Finesse, Exotic Weapon proficiency Court Blade, weapon Focus Court Blade (flaw shaky), 02 Ftr 1 Dodge 03 Swb 2 Mobility 04 Ftr 2 Combat Expertise 05 Swb 3 06 Drv 1 Mounted Combat 07 Drv 2 08 CCL 1 09 CCL 2 Combat reflexes, Karmatic Strike 10 Drv 3 Spring Attack 11 Drv 4 12 Drv 5 Power Attack 13 Drv 6 14 Drv 7 15 Drv 8 Elusive Target 16 Drv 9 17 Drv 10 18 CCL 8 leap attack 19 CCL 9 hold the line 20 CCL 10 Lets not forget that their are feats in complete arcane for fighters that do not allow a mage to cast defensively. I think alot people overlook the power that a fighter like class can have. Sure casters are powerful, but their weakness is proportional. Well except for maybe divine casters. I don’t know what wtc was thinking. With leap attack builds, a fighter can get some really awsome damage with help from the casters and a ring of spell storing (truestrike)
Dynneroth 10-17-05, 12:22 PM	I really don't want this to become a flamewar. When I said "kind of one-trick pony" I meant they are pretty straightforward in the way they deal with things, and whatever way that is, whether it is bull rush or trip or whatever, they tend to do the same thing. Not to say they aren't effective, because they are. And I also realize that invisibility and knock do not take care of traps or sound or smell. A rogue is much better at sneaking past alert guards and trapped locks. I wasn't trying to imply they weren't. What I am saying is that it can seem wizards have a lot more to do. Flying, turning invisible, buffing the party, spider climbing, dimension door-ing... it seems like more options.
Zombie Carl 10-17-05, 12:55 PM	I find the most effective way of dealing with a mage is to have anyone grapple them. Touch attack on a mages AC, grapple of their pathetic base attack + their non existant strength bonus, and they can't cast spells. Whats so hard about dealing with a PC mage? Any monk worth their salt will be able to vault over the fighters and land knee-first on the spellcaster. Especially as monks gain SR at level 13 - they are just natural mage-hunters.
HamHam 10-17-05, 01:18 PM	Any monk worth their salt will be able to vault over the fighters and land knee-first on the spellcaster. Especially as monks gain SR at level 13 - they are just natural mage-hunters. Contingency Freedom. On his next action, the mage flys away. Which should only be necessary if for some strange reason he isn't already flying and invisible to begin with. ----------------------- Divine casters are even worse, because while mages have to carefully plan and prepare to cover up their weaknesses, divine casters just don't have any. Druids: You grapple me? Oh wait, you are now grappling a large Dragon/Elemental/whatever. I eat you. Oh wait, anti-magic field? Sick him boy. Lots of enemies in a sort amount of time? I can stay in wild-shape indefinately... and fight better than a fighter while doing it. Cleric: Grapple? Freedom of Movement. Anti-magic field? I move out of it's range, and go Cleric-Archer on you. Guess what? I may have an attack bonus in the fifties and add lots of damage from STR... but my arrows are perfectly mundane and unaffected when they enter the anti-magic field. Swarm? Persistant, or worse yet Divine Metamagic Persistant, buffs that make me a better fighter than any fighter my level. ----------------------- Sure, fighters have some rather mean PrC choices now-a-adays, but casters, divine ones in particular, have even better ones. No fighter PrC ever will get you unlimited Limited Wishes... with no XP cost.
The^Wanderer 10-17-05, 02:09 PM	I find the most effective way of dealing with a mage is to have anyone grapple them. Touch attack on a mages AC, grapple of their pathetic base attack + their non existant strength bonus, and they can't cast spells. Whats so hard about dealing with a PC mage? The great thing about a silenced Dimension Door, Teleport, or Greater Teleport is that none of them require a verbal or somatic component.
IceFractal 10-17-05, 02:21 PM	While a straight Fighter 20 may end up somewhat weak, melee types in general can be very strong. You'll note that many of the max-damage builds on the CO board are melee based, not spellcasters. In fact, Psion nova-types are about the only casters that have comparable damage. Of course, casters have a wide variety of other tricks, but damage is an area where melee has them beat. Really though, if you want to excell as a Fighter, straight up standard melee is not the way to go, as a Druid or Cleric will be much better at it. Fancy maneuvers that take a bunch of feats to use are the way to go. Check out the Chain Gun Tripper, or the King/President of Smack. And of course, there's the Hulking Hurler, but that one's just wrong. ;)
primemover003 10-17-05, 03:18 PM	The great thing about a silenced Dimension Door, Teleport, or Greater Teleport is that none of them require a verbal or somatic component. Ummm... read those again. All of them have a Verbal componant. But those are the spells (or magic items like the Cape of the Mountebank or boots of Teleportation) to have ready for grapples if you don't have a Ring of Freedom of Movement.
Lincoln Hills 10-17-05, 04:51 PM	I have a player in my campaign who feels that casters are too powerful. He feels that they outshine all fighter type classes... How do I get him to feel like a fighter is as important as a caster? So that he feels like the character he wants to play has a vital role in the party? If he's decided that he doesn't want to play a fighter anymore, he doesn't have to, of course... There's no point in trying to use argument to make him change his mind. Instead, ask yourself what it is about your campaign that makes him take this stance. Open battle with no obstacles (in other words, having a big open battle-mat) gives a huge advantage to casters. Your campaign can become more fighter-friendly if most fight scenes include cover and/or concealment for the enemy. Total cover, arrow slits, or the presence of hostages/prisoners/non-combatants in the area can really put a crimp in the style of the area-of-effect-spell fans. Heavy shrubbery or natural fog/mist make targetted spells impossible (whereas the fighter can still lob arrows and hope to make that 50% roll). And make sure your NPCs go after the caster-types - NPC archers should invariably target the casters, while NPC rogues in hiding should let the fighter and barbarian-types pass and jump out to impale the druid or wizard. (Unfair, you say? How 'fair' is power word: stun?) You as the DM should never single out a PC for punishment... but every warrior in your campaign world has probably been taught that killing the spell support is the first step toward victory. Is the orc general really likely to say, "Well, he only has d4s for hit dice, so I guess I'll cut him a break"?
Thynass 10-17-05, 05:42 PM	First, it's Baldur's Gate. Second, everyone else when they say counterspell, they mean using any kind of countering mechanic. Sorry this post is out of place, but I didn't see this before now. Baldur's Gate; I'm sure it is. I never pretended I could spell. Secondly, everyone can make a typo. Thirdly, everyone else? That sounds like a bet to me. Forthly, did I do something to offend you?
Voran 10-17-05, 05:44 PM	To be fair, I think its the responsibility of people like us in the community and GMs specifically in their games to balance stuff out when new source data comes in and basically says LEVEL 3 Mage Spell: Sphere of fricking Annihilation, or somesuch :) Make new creatures or magic items to counter stuff. Then again, under old 3.0 rules, epic levels were intended for casters and nothing else :P Fighter and such feats were pathetic compared to epic spell abilities :) Oooh you can super whirlwind attack? I can send 10 ancient red dragons at you at once!
Leewei 10-17-05, 08:19 PM	The only flaw here is the player's mentality. Not the system. A sufficiently creative non-caster can make up a lot of ground, but in the end, I still believe there is a discrepancy here. The game doesn't ultimately boil down to rounds and numbers for people. Scribe Scroll allows a lot of esoteric one-shot magic bullet spells to be available, beyond the spells per day allotted to a caster. Being able to scout effectively and control a battlefield on top of nuking, polymorphing and so on represents a whole slew of capability that relatively one-dimensional non-casters can't match well. The balance comes from using spells to buff the non-casters. This is something that I think would make sense in the high-end game: buffs that gave significant bonuses to attack, damage, movement and so on, but that reduced the effective caster level of a target. As it stands, quite a few builds point out how self-sufficient a well-designed buff-monkey can be.
20goingon1232 10-17-05, 08:25 PM	A sufficiently creative non-caster can make up a lot of ground, but in the end, I still believe there is a discrepancy here. The game doesn't ultimately boil down to rounds and numbers for people. Scribe Scroll allows a lot of esoteric one-shot magic bullet spells to be available, beyond the spells per day allotted to a caster. Being able to scout effectively and control a battlefield on top of nuking, polymorphing and so on represents a whole slew of capability that relatively one-dimensional non-casters can't match well. The balance comes from using spells to buff the non-casters. This is something that I think would make sense in the high-end game: buffs that gave significant bonuses to attack, damage, movement and so on, but that reduced the effective caster level of a target. As it stands, quite a few builds point out how self-sufficient a well-designed buff-monkey can be. If it does not, then you have no place talking about fairness between classes. If you want to compare apples with apples, then you have a point. When you start comparing apples with oranges, then it is time to move on.
q'afuu 10-18-05, 12:32 PM	I used examples like casters can run out of spells but a fighter can hack all day long. You explained that, but do you create adventures where this actually has an impact? In most of my adventures, running away when low on spells is a bad decision: the party's foes will use the time that gives them as best they can, which usually means that either the party can't succeed in their goal any more, or it becomes that much harder for them. I vary the number of encounters per day wildly, so casters have an incentive to hold something in reserve at all times. Nobody likes to get caught with their proverbial pants down. The above argument is more than enough to be able to balance casters vs. non-casters but it has to apply in practice, not just theory.
Mirikon 10-18-05, 12:49 PM	Indeed. The first step to having balance between casters and melee types is to vary the number and intensity of different encounters. And tossing in encounters durring the sleep period are also a good thing. Wizard wakes up and has to do anything stressful, he has to rest another 8 hours before he can get his spells.
Millennium 10-18-05, 01:38 PM	You explained that, but do you create adventures where this actually has an impact? In most of my adventures, running away when low on spells is a bad decision: the party's foes will use the time that gives them as best they can, which usually means that either the party can't succeed in their goal any more, or it becomes that much harder for them. I vary the number of encounters per day wildly, so casters have an incentive to hold something in reserve at all times. Nobody likes to get caught with their proverbial pants down. The above argument is more than enough to be able to balance casters vs. non-casters but it has to apply in practice, not just theory. Smart BBEGs will minimize their weaknesses by using as many kinds of minions as they reasonably can. If the people he sends to kill the PCs never come back, then along with troops he'll dispatch spies to report back on how the PCs are beating them (be sure to give the PCs adequate opportunity to spot and/or catch the spies, lest you be accused of railroading). If the spy reports that there are no clerics in the group, the BBEG will start hiring necromancers. If there are no fighters, he'll hire wizards to create constructs.
Leewei 10-18-05, 02:43 PM	If it does not, then you have no place talking about fairness between classes. If you want to compare apples with apples, then you have a point. When you start comparing apples with oranges, then it is time to move on. A comparison of versatility is just as valid as the ability do shell out damage in combat. Moreso, in fact, for games centered around roleplaying and non-combat challenges. To make this comparison more "apples to apples", I'd suggest couching the comparison in terms of availability and effectiveness of options available to players at any given point during a game. What it boils down to is this: Any caster has access to a number of attacks using various savings throw types, and can choose the most effective option for the circumstance. By comparison, a non-caster can move, attack, use a ranged attack, or perform a special manuever. Given the availability of "save or die" spells in the middle- to high-end game, casters' options are generally better than non-caster options. Non-casters can continue fighting until the cows come home, it's true. As soon as the healing spells run low, though, non-casters are as willing as anyone else to rest up for eight hours and get the casters charged up again.
Magesmiley 10-18-05, 05:35 PM	Its kind of an interesting debate here. I have to ask the original poster a couple of questions though - does he play any of his monsters intelligently? Any monster with a grain of intelligence is going to look at the party and be able to single out the easy kills and probable big dangers. Meet the party with tactics, rather than swarm forward mindlessly. Tin can, tin can, leather armor, no armor and a staff. Geee, who is easiest to kill and is probably the best to take out of the fight early. Try a handful of smaller creatures which use tactics to fight a well-rounded party. Have about 1/3 of them hold their actions (with bows ready) to make a pincushion out of anyone who vaguely looks like they're about to cast spells. Another 1/3 engage the fighter types. The other third send a few volleys of arrows at the spellcasters. Spellcasters are probably in a bit of hurt with this tactic. Use a rogue, monk, or shadowdancer who attacks from concealment. In and out quickly and gank a wizard. Sneak attack from a mid-level rogue from concealment can be very very bad for a wizard. If the rogue has a high initiative, there's good odds he can nail the wizard twice while he's flat footed (which probably means the wizard is down, if their levels are even vaguely in the same ballpark). Mix a few enemy spellcasters in with the next horde of little creatures. Have them hold actions to counterspell. Counterspelling the big guns who can devastate their hordes is often much more effective than blasting back. It keeps the mob intact and lets them overwhelm the other side's defenses. The fighter has its place in any group. There are places where fighters shine. True, he often can't unleash massive amounts of damage, but he doesn't have the wizard's big weaknesses - low hit points and low AC. Make sure the enemy plays to their own strengths and not the party's. If the enemy fights intelligently and makes an even vaguely accurate threat assessment and elmination plan, I think you'll see a change in attitude.
Zombie Carl 10-19-05, 07:55 AM	Contingency Freedom. On his next action, the mage flys away. Which should only be necessary if for some strange reason he isn't already flying and invisible to begin with. ----------------------- Divine casters are even worse, because while mages have to carefully plan and prepare to cover up their weaknesses, divine casters just don't have any. Druids: You grapple me? Oh wait, you are now grappling a large Dragon/Elemental/whatever. I eat you. Oh wait, anti-magic field? Sick him boy. Lots of enemies in a sort amount of time? I can stay in wild-shape indefinately... and fight better than a fighter while doing it. Cleric: Grapple? Freedom of Movement. Anti-magic field? I move out of it's range, and go Cleric-Archer on you. Guess what? I may have an attack bonus in the fifties and add lots of damage from STR... but my arrows are perfectly mundane and unaffected when they enter the anti-magic field. Swarm? Persistant, or worse yet Divine Metamagic Persistant, buffs that make me a better fighter than any fighter my level. ----------------------- Sure, fighters have some rather mean PrC choices now-a-adays, but casters, divine ones in particular, have even better ones. No fighter PrC ever will get you unlimited Limited Wishes... with no XP cost. Contingency has a max spell level of 6th; Freedom is 9th. Freedom removes all effects and spells that prevent movement - thats great. Doesn't help vs an Improved Trip/smack to the face on the way down. Fly: Mage attempts to cast fly. Monk most likely trips/punches mage. Assuming mage actually manages the concentration check, next round he can fly. Mage tries to fly, assuming he won the initiative and gets pretty high up, say 90ft. Monk makes a jump and grapple check. If not, monk trips the mage and pounds the last few remaining hp's he had out of him.
Jalathas 10-19-05, 08:23 AM	Ummm... read those again. All of them have a Verbal componant. But those are the spells (or magic items like the Cape of the Mountebank or boots of Teleportation) to have ready for grapples if you don't have a Ring of Freedom of Movement. It says silenced.
HamHam 10-19-05, 09:08 AM	Contingency has a max spell level of 6th; Freedom is 9th. So it is. :embarrass Freedom removes all effects and spells that prevent movement - thats great. Doesn't help vs an Improved Trip/smack to the face on the way down. Unless he's already flying. Fly: Mage attempts to cast fly. Monk most likely trips/punches mage. Assuming mage actually manages the concentration check, next round he can fly. Mage tries to fly, assuming he won the initiative and gets pretty high up, say 90ft. Monk makes a jump and grapple check. If not, monk trips the mage and pounds the last few remaining hp's he had out of him. Casting Fly is a standard action, and thus the mage can immediately fly 30 ft into the air. And he's not going to bother casting it while being grappled, he's going to cast a Silenced Dimension Door (which has only a Verbal component and thus does not require a grapple check) to jump away 500+ feet, then fly up to like 400 ft, then come back and nuke the pathetic little monk into oblivion.
Aharon 10-19-05, 05:37 PM	Hi Folks! Just a short comment: Many people point out that the wizard is rather easy to defeat because of hhis weaknesses like low HP and AC. But on the CO Board, they don't only care about melee builds, there are some guides that try to minmax wizards, which makes the class fairly powerful in my opinion. Of course there are special tactics that can be used very effectively against wizards, but you first have to know they are there. It was mentioned more than once that wizards have access to spells that make it easier for them to avoid direct attacs/grapples. A high level one would be something like freedom, but he can reach the same goal earlier with a Hat of Disguise or Alter Self - if the whole party looks like heavily armored fighters, it is harder for an enemy monk to decide who to grapple. I know that all tactics a wizard can use are vulnerable to countertactics, but you first have to know the tactic he uses - and usually, the person who has to react is the one that has a weakter position in a fight. Although I think the arcane casters are stronger than melee types from a point of view that is limited to their usefulness in fights, I also have to point out that this usefullness should not be all that a roleplay is about - a "weak" level 20 fighter with an interesting background can still be more interesting to play than a totally minmaxed wizard. But that's just my opinion on how roleplaying should be, and unfortunately not too relevant for the ongoing discussion.
True Archon 10-19-05, 07:21 PM	Here's my recommendation... Ask the caster players out there what they believe is their spellcaster's greatest weakness. Then compare the replies that you get and see what are problems that the fighter does not have. I'll start first. 1. Surprise attacks directed against the spellcaster. Let's face it. Spellcasters walk around with big bullseyes on their robes. Even if you're not wearing the stereotypical robes, almost any creature capable of fighting against high level parties is capable of picking out the most likely spellcaster in the group. When the attack comes suddenly where buffs or defenses can't be instituted before that low hit point total becomes stifling, spellcasters will see their weaknesses easily enough. 2. Spell preparation or spells known. There's nothing like running into an encounter with the wrong spells prepared, or the spells that you do know are going to be limited or useless. 3. Smart enemies. For every spellcaster that thinks that he has come up with every conceivable defense to protect his weaknesses, there is an intelligent Demon, Devil, Dragon, Mindflayer, or whatever studying those defenses to exploit a weakness. Those spellcasters may be casting those divinations every day to see what he might be facing to prepare against it, so why can't the enemies do the same? It's a mentality almost similar to "mutual assured destruction" 4. Singled out. A spellcaster who starts to feel the fire in the kitchen soon finds themselves wanting to get out. One thing I've noticed with spellcasters is a need for self-preservation. If they are concerned about their own well-being, they'll have spells ready to retreat and hide to safety. So, what about the rest of the party? Well, if they have some measure of loyalty or honor, they'll stick around despite the danger that they are in. I once saw a wizard player with a contingency in place that was triggered within the very first attack action provoked by the enemies. He was wisked away on the wings of a teleport to a place that he could receive help. If the contigency hadn't gone off, it was very likely (and argued by the rest of the party) that the party's cleric could have taken care of the wizard immediately, and they would have been down one party member for a single round. So, what are some other worries of all those spellcaster players out there? Don't be shy. Or worse, don't try to keep your dirty little secrets.... :eek:
Always-Late 10-19-05, 07:33 PM	A monk that can't fly is pretty much a dead monk. Every good monk should have some way to fly. Alternatively, they can dimension door straight up, until they're right next to you, and take that tactical feat that allows a hit right after a dimension door, which they make a grapple.
WcKid 10-19-05, 11:23 PM	As a mage, a properly equipped fighter scares the hell out of me. This is a cruel move my DM used on me: Fighter, with the three feats from CompArc, (can't cast defensively, and no armor bonus or concealment bonus from spells) +1 magebane mighty composite (+2) longbow, used with a readied action if I'm flying whenever I cast a spell. He dealt 1d8 + 5 +2d6 damage, Avg DC 26 to cast a spell, with the equivalent of a +2 weapon. I, as both a player and a DM, consider the three mage-killer feats no-brainers, as they make it alot easier to take out nukers. Also, if the fighter had taken Rapid shot, and the bow been his prime weapon, I would have died. If a mage is up flying, he can't heal unless he has potions, in which case, he's not casting. Win-win. In the encounter, we were all level 10, and I had 42 hp, buffed to 62, due to a Endurance spell from the cleric. We see a group of 17 gnolls led by a couple slighly larger ones on the path ahead of us. (14 basic and 3 lvl 3). No visible problem. I go up, Cleric buffs, Fighter goes in, rogue goes around. From the woods, a lvl 10 fighter and a lvl 10 sorcerer appear. Gnolls surrounded the fighter, and the three lvl 3s started to chop away. (They hit I think a grand total of 2 times) he was stuck, the cleric and the wizard started a spell duel, which the sorcerer was clearly winning, ("infinite" dispel magics), and when I tried to cast a spell, I got hit for 1/3 of my HP (he rolled above average damage). We ended up retreating from that fight after three rounds, because I was down to 17 HP, the cleric had gotten 1 successful spell off, and the fighter was still stuck. We got away because the rogue served as a distraction for the two high-levels, and then snuck his way back to the rest of us. The DM showed us the fighter's character sheet, and, had the rogue tried to attack him, he would have been attacking a guy with a +2 Clouting Club, which would have knocked him down repeatedly. With a sorc holding off the cleric and a fighter pinning me to the sky, it was an amazing example of tactics can be the most deciding factor in a fight. [/long-winded story] Anyways, a fighter with a decent bow (ie. +1 magebane) and dedicated to holding a mage down can do it easily. A properly prepared party that uses tactics can knock down any group that is assured of its own superiority. One Last Thing: Mages have the potential power to kill hundreds of men in an instant, yet all they can do on both sides is negate each other.
UmbraLux 10-19-05, 11:42 PM	Whether or not a fighter is better or worse than a mage is very dependent on the campaign. If there is generally a single large encounter followed by time to reast, heal, and regain spells casters will outdamage and outshine melee types all the time. If the pace of the game contains multiple seperate encounters with very little time for resting and regaining spells, the melee types come into their own. Ideally a campaign will be a mix of both allowing casters and non-casters their moments of glory.
SwiftFox 10-20-05, 12:46 AM	My biggest problem with fighters isnt their lack of utility in combat, because their surplus of feats will always allow them to do things a uber-buffed cleric or wild-shaped druid cant do. My problem with the fighter, and the reason why I never play one if it can be avoided is their complete lack of usefulness out of combat. Their skill points per level and sill selections quite frankly suck, and they rarely have the intelligence to get bonus skill points too. In any social situation, they will always be outshone by the character with a high charisma... how much does it suck that a fighter is LESS intimidating than a bard? They cant do stealth, they suck in wilderness situations, and god forbid a fighter gets put on sentry duty... At this stage, pretty much my whole regular RP group realises this, as our most recent campaign has seen EVERY single player roll up a spell-caster.
Centauri 10-20-05, 12:11 PM	Everytime one of these "warriors vs. casters" threads comes up, I see the same points raised and shot down: Just grapple the wizard: Silenced Dimension Door, polymorph. Do a lot of damage to him so he can't cast spells: high Concentration skill, and avoidance of damage. Monks are mage killers: flight, invisibility, Mage's Disjunction, polymorph. Mob them with little guys: area effects Attack them while they're asleep: Secure shelter, and the like. The wizard will run out of spells: Scrolls, wands, staves, etc. Shoot him with arrows if he flies away: invisibility, wind wall, etc. Now, it's a good bet that the average Wizards employee knows the ins and outs of the available spells at least as well as the people who shoot down the above advice, but I think a lot of this stems from sloppy spell design and a lack of understanding of how the spells interact. I mean, even way back in the Basic game, the fact that Invisibility turned off if you used it in combat was an obvious balancing factor. Who thought Greater Invisibility was a good, balanced idea, even with a duration measured in rounds? It's clear to me that, with all the rule-bending going on in the spell-list, things were bound to get out of control, even ignoring the abusive loopholes. Then again, the vast power of mages makes sense when you look at the stories on which D&D is based. The hobbits don't confront Sauron directly, but must rely on his overconfidence and strike his weakness. Only Gandalf could hope to confront the Balrog. And that's just Tolkien. There are many stories in which the wizard is the unbeatable villain, brought low in the end only by his own arrogance and some bit of trickery. It makes sense to try to model the power level, but there's no way to assure that the weak points get added. People who say "If I were Gandalf/Sauron, I never would have been defeated," get their chance to play such a character and cover up the flaws and weak links and that's it. I guess it comes down to the DM. He'll need to have the knowledge to know where the crucial combos are and either point-ban the spells or work with his players to come to an agreement. Yes, I think it's perfectly acceptable to go to a player and say, "I'm out of ideas for how to make this challenging for you. Please work with me and the other players to figure this out." The player might be a tad averse to exposing an Achilles heel (or helping come up with one to expose), but his goal shouldn't be to beat the DM and dominate the other players. A good player should realize, yeah, something's out of control here, and be big enough to offer suggestions. It needn't involve "nerfing" the wizard or augmenting the other characters. It could just be colloborating on a nemesis character, species, or class, that gives the wizard a particular challenge, while still allowing the other players to contribute.
Cadfan 10-20-05, 01:44 PM	Centauri gets the fundamental reason magic is unbalanced. He wins! It's clear to me that, with all the rule-bending going on in the spell-list, things were bound to get out of control, even ignoring the abusive loopholes. When a fighter wants to get good at something, he works within the rules. If he hates being grappled, he gets Improved Grapple so that he's a little better at it than other people. Or he gets Close Quarters Defense, which lets him get an attack of opportunity no matter what, and uses that to increase his grapple check to avoid being initially grabbed. No matter exactly which method he picks, he works by taking the rules for grapple checks, and getting better at using them. When the mage wants to stop being grappled, he gets a spell which reads, "This mage may never be grappled, ever, under any circumstances no matter what, so THERE, fighter! Sucks to be you." With these being their respective strategies for dealing with danger, its not too hard to see who has the edge.
Zombie Carl 10-20-05, 02:35 PM	So it is. :embarrass Unless he's already flying. Casting Fly is a standard action, and thus the mage can immediately fly 30 ft into the air. And he's not going to bother casting it while being grappled, he's going to cast a Silenced Dimension Door (which has only a Verbal component and thus does not require a grapple check) to jump away 500+ feet, then fly up to like 400 ft, then come back and nuke the pathetic little monk into oblivion. No chance, the monk wins the grapple and stunning blow's the mage (a fort save of +6 for the 20th level mage vs a DC of around 23-24 for stun). Good luck with that fortitude save, and good night. Assuming the monk is of an appropriate level, he will evasion the attacks from the mage, even if he did, somehow, manage to get a spell off without incurring the attack of opportunity. And remember, the monk has abundant step, so he just follows you and grapples you again. And thats assuming you manage to get past the SR 30 (you are casting 9th level spells, its going to be around that sort of range). And that is only taking into account a naked, human monk. No augmentation, magical items, nothing. Monks are magehunters.
HamHam 10-20-05, 05:17 PM	No chance, the monk wins the grapple and stunning blow's the mage (a fort save of +6 for the 20th level mage vs a DC of around 23-24 for stun). Good luck with that fortitude save, and good night. Assuming the monk is of an appropriate level, he will evasion the attacks from the mage, even if he did, somehow, manage to get a spell off without incurring the attack of opportunity. And remember, the monk has abundant step, so he just follows you and grapples you again. And thats assuming you manage to get past the SR 30 (you are casting 9th level spells, its going to be around that sort of range). And that is only taking into account a naked, human monk. No augmentation, magical items, nothing. Monks are magehunters. When exactly is he going to Stunning Blow me again? If the mage has allowed a monk to charge and Stunning Blow him, he deserves to die. Once you reach the situation where you've been surprised and or out-initiateved by a monk within his charge range... then yes, all things equal, you are probably toast. But a competent mage has two dozen different ways make sure it never comes to that.
Centauri 10-20-05, 05:35 PM	It's time for me to reiterate the Laws of Wizardry: Law I: Smart Wizards never lose. Law II: If a Wizard loses, he is an idiot. Law III: Idiots deserve to lose. Or put another way: Wizards are invincible. Only dumb wizards lose. If a wizard lost he must be dumb. Killing dumb wizards doesn't violate the thesis that wizards are invincible. Note, that's not how I prefer to think, but you'll find that it's the way things go on this board. It's best to accept it and move on.
HamHam 10-20-05, 05:59 PM	It's time for me to reiterate the Laws of Wizardry: Law I: Smart Wizards never lose. Law II: If a Wizard loses, he is an idiot. Law III: Idiots deserve to lose. Or put another way: Wizards are invincible. Only dumb wizards lose. If a wizard lost he must be dumb. Killing dumb wizards doesn't violate the thesis that wizards are invincible. Of course. How else do you think wizards have kept up their infaliable reputations all these centuries? ;)
Malachei 10-20-05, 06:15 PM	Just because he's whining doesn't mean he's right. I think you should ask yourself and the other players if there is a balance issue in your party. If you think he's right, then change your style of play (more encounters in which a fighter can shine, such as SR / magic immune creatures etc. as most of the other contributors have pointed out). Otherwise, leave it as it is. I hear a lot of comments from fighters able to dish out damage by the bucketfull (we're talking of 4+ attacks per round, mostly hits, with average damage of about 15 pts - and they can deal it every single round), and I think this is because the wizards can command the flashier effects. Of course, a successful PO or FOD is a flashy, powerful effect, but it doesn't work all the time, even with Spell Focus, high ability scores, etc., their opponent has to miss the save. In my campaigns, wizards are often claiming they have a hard time especially at low and high levels. At low levels they lack spell levels for versatility, at high levels, there is an increase in spell or magic resistant opponents (drow, outsiders, golems, etc.). I would not change play because of a single player's issue unless the majority of the party feels the same - otherwise, your change in balance might upset other players who in turn complain... I have a player in my campaign who feels that casters are too powerful. He feels that they outshine all fighter type classes. He likes to player fighters but feels like it is meaningless when there is a wizard that can just kill most foes with a single spell. He makes a point that there is always new source books containing new spells, caster prestige classes, and spell caster feats that are far more powerful than any new fighter abilities. I tried to explain that every character type has a certain role and each has it's strengths and weaknesses. I used examples like casters can run out of spells but a fighter can hack all day long. He understands all of that but feels that it is getting to the point where fighters are not even necessary to a party anymore. He argues that if it was an all caster group they could just summon creatures to be the front line fighters. How do I get him to feel like a fighter is as important as a caster? So that he feels like the character he wants to play has a vital role in the party?
Catra 10-20-05, 06:16 PM	*sigh* When will amateur DM's learn that this message board isn't the place to come whining with your player's problems? Really, all you have to do is peruse the Monster Manual for monsters that maximise melee combat. Then you have to provoke your players to think like a team. Then you hollow out each player's niche in the party so that everyone knows where there place is an no-one is out in the cold. Rinse and repeat with different tactics. Make your party function like a well-oiled machine; or at least a humorous one. This is what a DM does. Perfecting this art is what being a DM means. A mountain of suggestions won't sharpen your skill, you must learn it on your own. So please, if you aren't brave enough to sit down and talk it out with your player, at least disguise your plea for help as something constructive. Like Knowledge(carpentry).
Zombie Carl 10-20-05, 07:44 PM	When exactly is he going to Stunning Blow me again? If the mage has allowed a monk to charge and Stunning Blow him, he deserves to die. Once you reach the situation where you've been surprised and or out-initiateved by a monk within his charge range... then yes, all things equal, you are probably toast. But a competent mage has two dozen different ways make sure it never comes to that. Realistically, what do you expect to be able to do to stop him? Remember, the most likely outcome of you casting a disabling spell is going to be a faliure - SR 30, and a save of +12+bonus. You can't rely on your spells to stop him reaching you, especially with Abundant Step.
True Archon 10-20-05, 07:47 PM	It's time for me to reiterate the Laws of Wizardry: Law I: Smart Wizards never lose. Law II: If a Wizard loses, he is an idiot. Law III: Idiots deserve to lose. Or put another way: Wizards are invincible. Only dumb wizards lose. If a wizard lost he must be dumb. Killing dumb wizards doesn't violate the thesis that wizards are invincible. Note, that's not how I prefer to think, but you'll find that it's the way things go on this board. It's best to accept it and move on. Wow, it's so very true. There's this myth running rampant that spellcasters are all but invincible. Funny enough, it's always wizard-fan players that dismiss challenges thrown out on the boards with a wave while saying... "I'd just cast this spell ahead of time, and yes I happened to have it prepared to be Quickened, and yes I had whatever other spell ready for whatever you're going to say to foil my plans of greatness, and yes I'd have the appropriate magic item to counter your next plan even though I truly don't know what that may be until you post your next post, but yes I'll foil all your blasphemous idealogy that wizard's are not the greatest class ever, and yes it'll continue with each and every thread ever posted, and at the gaming tables, and....." Funny how, as a DM, I've never had a problem challenging that invincibility. :devil:
Androcus Divinicus 10-20-05, 08:33 PM	"In a game where the DM controls how a class's advantages and disadvantages can be used or exploited.... every class will more or less be equal in their ability to shine depending upon how the campaign is run." Bingo. This wins the thread. Whether or not the casters shine depends entirely upon how you run your world. If you're constantly running a high level campaign where nothing challenges a wizard's ability to prepare his spells in advance, and none of your monsters/NPCs/BBEGs use tactics, then your wizards will win every time. If you run your campaign in a way that maximizes the fighter's strengths and minimizes the wizard's then the fighter will shine. It comes down to a matter of how you balance your game. Period. Regards, Justin.
Centauri 10-20-05, 08:47 PM	If you're constantly running a high level campaign where nothing challenges a wizard's ability to prepare his spells in advance Like I said above, this is always brought up, and always shot down. What's going to keep a Wizard from preparing his daily spells, or having tons of scrolls, wands, and staves to tide him over? and none of your monsters/NPCs/BBEGs use tactics, then your wizards will win every time. Only stupid monsters lose? If you run your campaign in a way that maximizes the fighter's strengths and minimizes the wizard's then the fighter will shine. Okay, but how? Mobs of little guys? Area effects. Lots of anti-magic? Cheesy. Gandalf was reluctant to use much magic in The Fellowship of the Ring, because it would bring him and his companions to the attention of Sauron. So, one thing a person could do is introduce creatures who seek out large displays of magic and tries to stop them for some reason. That is something I've considered, if heavy magic use ever unbalances things in my game. Magic users would probably complain of being picked on, unless they relished the extra challenge. Best to talk to your mage players before doing something like this, I suppose.
MysteryGilgamesh 10-20-05, 09:05 PM	Everytime one of these "warriors vs. casters" threads comes up, I see the same points raised and shot down: Just grapple the wizard: Silenced Dimension Door, polymorph. Do a lot of damage to him so he can't cast spells: high Concentration skill, and avoidance of damage. Monks are mage killers: flight, invisibility, Mage's Disjunction, polymorph. Mob them with little guys: area effects Attack them while they're asleep: Secure shelter, and the like. The wizard will run out of spells: Scrolls, wands, staves, etc. Shoot him with arrows if he flies away: invisibility, wind wall, etc. And no one ever raised the other points? Stilled DD or Polymorph: Grab him again if possible, by chasing after him. A polymorph is laughable as a grapple breaker, because a fighter has an uber Str and high BAB, while the best a wizard will get is a high Str, it won't make up for the pitiful BAB. Not to mention whats good for the goose, is good for the gander. A fighter benefits much more from polymorph than any caster. Just turn your fighter into a Firbolg. He'll thank you. Flight, Invisibility: What, no one has rings or potions or scrolls or wonderous items or spellcaster buddies to give them a fly spell? And no one has rings/potions/wonderous items/scrolls/etc of See Invisibility, either? Area effects: Spread out. In fact, thats the best idea to do when combatting a mage. Just have the mob spread out, and approach from all sides. Attack them while they're asleep: It's impossible to do, honestly. A simple Rope Trick, a mere 2nd level spell, equals instant, absolute protection from any nighttime attacks. The only way to stop it is to have a rogue or someone hide and tail the mage, and use a ring of counterspell to counterspell the casting of RT (because most mages only mem one!), and then ambush the party with attackers. Wizard has run out of spells: Impossible. A wizard never runs out of spells, for the reasons stated above. However, if you somehow manage to strip the poor guy blind without him realizing it (a rogue with Sleight of Hand in a town does wonders for this), then employ harrying tactics, it's definatly possible to do. Shoot him with arrows: Again, invisibility and flight counters are expressed above. However, Wind Wall will take a dispel magic or similar effect to remove. So, keep a rogue with UMD (or bard, or another caster, etc) on hand.
True Archon 10-20-05, 09:45 PM	Like I said above, this is always brought up, and always shot down. What's going to keep a Wizard from preparing his daily spells, or having tons of scrolls, wands, and staves to tide him over? It's not that a Wizard needs to be kept from preparing spells, but that whether he prepares every spell in his repetoire to be useful for the day. Another drawback of Wizards with tons of scrolls, wands, and staves is the amount of wealth required to get this stuff. Add in the addition of expensive spell components and the 100 gp cost per page per spell level to scribe a single spell into their spellbooks, such things begin to take a toll on the pocketbooks. Of course, the cost of magic item creation feats can offset that cost, but with each expenditure of a feat on an item creation feat, there is the loss of equally important Spell Penetrations, Metamagic, Improved Counterspell, and what not. All of this stuff was designed to be a balancing factor in spellcasting. Only stupid monsters lose? No, but the use of intelligent tactics by an enemy against spellcasters, even if they lose, shows that spellcasters aren't having as easy of a time as the non-spellcaster's are believing that they are. Okay, but how? Mobs of little guys? Area effects. Lots of anti-magic? Cheesy. Mobs of little guys? Why not? Area of effects? Pfft!!! A band of drow, of sufficiently challenging level, can put together an effective use of spell resistance (and racial save bonuses), stealth (Spot and Listen checks), Fortitude save dependent sleep poison, spell-like abilities, perimeter flanking (or intermingling with the wizard's allies), and magic can make a wizard's life hell. Add in the drow's understanding of magic, intelligence, and coordinated team activity, you've easilly got a challenge worthy of a wizard. And this is just one quick, off the cuff, example to challenge wizards. I could come up with more. Instead of dismissing ideas with a wave, try to at least make an effort to see if something will work. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I've had little trouble letting the spellcasting players in my group see the difficulties built into magic, and I'm sure other DM's can say the same. It just depends upon how much of a problem it is with your group, and how much time you're willing to devout to solving that problem. As a DM, you have control over whole worlds of fantasy, and coming up with a challenging encounter for a wizard should be a whole lot easier than the wizard overcoming every one of your encounters in some smug, grandiose fashion.
q'afuu 10-21-05, 04:27 AM	What's going to keep a Wizard from preparing his daily spells... Nothing (usually). But that doesn't mean his daily complement of spells will cover his needs for the day, and it's really not that hard to prevent (or at least discourage) the party from hiding out for most of the day until the casters can recharge their spell slots. ...or having tons of scrolls, wands, and staves to tide him over? The cost. Unless your DM is fool enough to keep your wealth at the suggested amount per level regardless of your expenses. Most of the solutions to the other problems you mention require being at a fairly high level. At what level does a 5th level spell slot becomes a cheap enough commodity to be used for something like escaping from a grapple? At what level can you afford the items to really feel secure about your concentration checks? At which level can you afford the protection that'll allow you to comfortably target the area around yourself with an AoE spell?
HamHam 10-21-05, 08:47 AM	Realistically, what do you expect to be able to do to stop him? Remember, the most likely outcome of you casting a disabling spell is going to be a faliure - SR 30, and a save of +12+bonus. You can't rely on your spells to stop him reaching you, especially with Abundant Step. 1) How the hell are you getting SR 30? Regardless, any increase at all in your caster level (Spell Penetration for example) should mean your bonus to SR rolls is in the 20s, thus over 50% effective. 2) Reverse Gravity. No Spell Resistance, and No Save unless he has something to hold on to. Worst case scenario, he is now flying, which means he can't use Abundant Step since he's not stepping on anything. 4) Time Stop. 5) Prismatic Sphere. You will fail at least one of the saves if you try to get through it. 5) Cloak of Etherealness. Unless you can follow him onto the ethereal plane, he will just never be on the maerial plane on your turn. -------------- And this is a Wizard. I repeat: Clerics and Druids are even more powerful.
Centauri 10-21-05, 01:05 PM	Instead of dismissing ideas with a wave, try to at least make an effort to see if something will work. Oh, it's not me dismissing the anti-caster ideas. It's people like HamHam who have an answer for everything. And I don't really begrudge them that, since they've clearly put effort into studying the spells and know what they're good for. You can't even mention spell resistance or saving throws as obstacles without someone piping up about a very handy spell (good case in point, Reverse Gravity) that doesn't allow a save or spell resistance. Yes, in many cases one can dismiss right back. Really it's just a stupid game of Rock Paper Scissors: A: Paper is a Rock killer. B: Maybe if the Rock is a moron. Every Rock I've ever played knows Scissors. Bye-bye Paper. A: What kind of Paper player doesn't take the Rock feat? Your Scissors would be vaporized. B: It's a safe bet that my Rock will have an item that can let him cast Paper three times a day, so your Rock couldn't touch my Scissors. Et cetera. As a DM, you have control over whole worlds of fantasy, and coming up with a challenging encounter for a wizard should be a whole lot easier than the wizard overcoming every one of your encounters in some smug, grandiose fashion. Should be indeed, but I think we'd all like to manage it in a way that didn't seem contrived. If we want to challenge a Fighter, there are lots of common and uncommon enemies that fit the task. If we want to challenge a Wizard or Cleric or Druid, there are fewer options, because they have so many options. Repeatedly using one of those options seems cheesy, and anyway there's usually a work around that the character can implement and keep handy. All you might manage to do is make a slight change in the caster's equipment or daily spell list. If you did want to contrive things to go against arcane casters, I did find one interesting creature that might fit the bill. It's the Arcane Ooze from Monster Manual III. Arcane casters who start a round within 60 feet of an arcane ooze loses a random spell from his highest level slot. Advantages: Immune to magic (i.e. anything that offers spell resistance) Immune to acid Temporary HP (5 x spell level) for each spell drained. Doesn't need to see the caster. It's an ooze. Disadvantages: Some good spells don't offer spell resistance. (I'm not well versed in those myself, but understand that there are some good ones.) Slow. Stupid (as I recall). Can't fly. Needs "line of effect" (I'm not clear on how etherealness factors in). It's an ooze. However, I'm well aware that only idiots would have a problem with this creature. After all, smart Wizards never lose. As for Clerics and Druid, well, there are a few creatures that can do Wisdom damage. I think they usually require close proximity to the target, though.
HamHam 10-21-05, 01:29 PM	Oh, it's not me dismissing the anti-caster ideas. It's people like HamHam who have an answer for everything. And I don't really begrudge them that, since they've clearly put effort into studying the spells and know what they're good for. You can't even mention spell resistance or saving throws as obstacles without someone piping up about a very handy spell (good case in point, Reverse Gravity) that doesn't allow a save or spell resistance. The point I'm trying to make is not really that Wizards are invincible, it's that they can counter-act just about any tactic and cover just about any weakness, and for that matter don't, in general, need to use magical items to do so. Fighters, on the other hand, have no recourse but to rely on magical items or magical allies to do so, and simply does not have effective solutions to a lot of threats. You can certainly create both fighters and wizards to be equally good at certain things, such as killing outsiders, for example, but for a fighter that requires 20 levels of specialization and thousands of golds worth of equipment. For the wizard it means tweaking his spell list. If they have to fight a bunch of Neutral animals the next day, the fighter will have no way to compensate. The Wizard will change his spell list again. The wizard wants to protect against getting grappled? He chooses the right spells. The fighter wants to protect against getting grappled? He has to gain levels to get feats that do so, or buy more magic items. Is everyone starting to get the picture? ------------- And Druids and Clerics are just invincible, period.
cvazi 10-21-05, 02:40 PM	Is everyone starting to get the picture? All of the "Wizards are the ultimate solution" arguements forget one thing- The wizard has to survive the first round against the fighter. The fighter will turn the wizard and his d4 HD into a little red smear before the wizard can reach for his spell component pouch. Boots of Teleportation: 49,000gp Ring of Invisibility: 20,000gp Third Eye- Conceal: 120,000gp =================== The look of a Wizard as all of his defensive measures just failed: Priceless And Druids and Clerics are just invincible, period. This I can agree with.
Aliquid 10-21-05, 02:53 PM	Oh, it's not me dismissing the anti-caster ideas. It's people like HamHam who have an answer for everything. And I don't really begrudge them that, since they've clearly put effort into studying the spells and know what they're good for. You can't even mention spell resistance or saving throws as obstacles without someone piping up about a very handy spell (good case in point, Reverse Gravity) that doesn't allow a save or spell resistance.My problem with all those arguments is that they make some very serious assumptions that aren't always true. People list a bunch of ways someone might effectively attack a wizard, and then every one of these ideas are shot down with some spell or magic item the wizard can use to counter the attack.... there is a major flaw with this argument. What if the wizard can't cast that specific spell at that specific point in time? What if they didn't prepare it that morning? What if it isn't in their spellbook? What if they don't have that magic item? People say "of course they would", I say "not necessarily", and I say this for a few reasons. 1) Availability of spells. Not all campaign worlds have a magic shop with every possible spell on a scroll for a wizard to buy. In some campaign worlds, if you want to add a new spell to your spellbook, you have to go to an effort to find it. Maybe the wizard doesn’t have Reverse Gravity. 2) Spell selection. There are many spells a wizard might want to use in a day. If he prepares his spells to protect himself against every possible attack, then he won’t have room for many other useful offensive or non-combat spells. The wizard doesn’t always know “hey today I will be grappled”. Sure, scrolls are an option, but once again, you can’t assume that they will always have access to scroll making materials, and you can’t assume the wizard has the funds to make them or is willing to take the XP hit. 3) Magic items. Not every world has “ye olde magic shop” where you can walk in and buy any magic item possible. In some worlds magic items are rare and hard to find. You have to be lucky to find one, or track down a wizard that you can pay to make one. Too many of these arguments assume that the wizard has dozens of magic items on hand all the time. I know most of these points have been made already… but they need to be made again.
Centauri 10-21-05, 03:04 PM	Fighters, on the other hand, have no recourse but to rely on magical items or magical allies to do so, and simply does not have effective solutions to a lot of threats. Is that a bad thing in a game that is a) designed around a party of characters who cover each others weaknesses, and b) run by a DM who can choose which threats his players face? You can certainly create both fighters and wizards to be equally good at certain things, such as killing outsiders, for example, but for a fighter that requires 20 levels of specialization and thousands of golds worth of equipment. For the wizard it means tweaking his spell list. Well, I'm not a big fan of specialization within a class, definitely not when it goes down the roads of monster type or alignment, or something. Come to think of it, I can't think of many fighter feats, at least in the PHB, that specialize in that way. Of course there are species and alignment countering items, but there are also a lot of good general ones. I guess you'd just say that specialization is the only way a Fighter can hope to match or even not be overshadowed by a Wizard. Is that right? If they have to fight a bunch of Neutral animals the next day, the fighter will have no way to compensate. The Wizard will change his spell list again. A few things with this. One is that we're now talking about a Wizard who is more reliant on his daily spells, rather than whatever wands or scrolls he might be packing. If he runs out of the specialized spells, he is reduced to being a generalist. An exceedingly powerful generalist, I'll admit, but still a generalist, perhaps not prepared for exactly every eventuality. Also, the DM chooses the encounters. If the Fighter and the other warriors in the group are equipped to handle a certain type of enemy, why would the DM want to turn the tables on them, effectively neutralizing their equipment and feats? Well, I can think of a few good story reasons, but those could also involve letting the warriors exchange their equipment, or even swapping an entire character out for a different one. Finally, even though the Wizard will have access to divination spells, the DM needn't let him know in advance what he'll be facing. Yes, a prepared wizard can drill right through the opposition twelve different ways. The same wizard without that foreknowledge might only have three different ways to deal with the four kinds threats he things he might face, and that's probably more than enough, but it thins out the Wizard's options. Then again, he has a lot of spells, such as ones that enable modes of travel, that are good for a lot of situations The wizard wants to protect against getting grappled? He chooses the right spells. The fighter wants to protect against getting grappled? He has to gain levels to get feats that do so, or buy more magic items. I realize that "getting grappled" is just a general situation, but part of the reason that Wizards need those magic-bullet spells is that they're much less able (in the theory on which the game tries to rest) to handle "getting grappled" or whatever physical attack you choose to put in place of it. Yes, a Fighter might need to rely on his friends or his items to get him out of a particularly nasty situation, but (again in theory) he's got the hit points, armor, and BAB to last until his friends can help him. Wizards are awesome, and Fighters are limited. I won't dispute that. The situation won't balance itself. I think we, as a community, could use ideas on how we, as DMs, can mitigate the situation, within the established rules if possible. Those of you with the knowledge of the spells and items can turn your knowledge to the challenge of finding viable ways for players and DMs to get around those combos.
astute1 10-21-05, 03:53 PM	The big balancing factor between spellcasters and non-spellcasters, even at high levels, is the number of encounters between rests that the party has. If the party is forced to play 4-5 tough encounters between each rest time, then the spellcasters are forced to ration their spells and are balanced well with the fighters. However, if you get to rest between each encounter, then of course the spellcasters are going to shine - they can use all their highest level spells in every fight, without having to worry about saving any for the next fight.
Atch 10-21-05, 05:13 PM	If you really want to have some fun with your group and get their brains going, have them take on an adventure to subdue a powerful traveling wizard. Now, everyone is in the same boat. The casters have to deal with a more powerful caster and could use the melee characters' help. The original fighter in the first post needs to understand this fact (as well as many others mentioned herein) that wizards are the sum total of their levels' acquisitions, i.e. "I am going to find that horrid wilting spell in this small town" or "Hmmm.. a scroll..." Playing a fighter to me is more of a pride thing. He should take pride that he is still alive after 20 levels of going toe to toe with all manner of nasties. No tossing fire and such from a far. No changing in a "safer" form. Just a line in the sand and the determination not to fail.
weretouched 10-21-05, 05:24 PM	Realistically, what do you expect to be able to do to stop him? Remember, the most likely outcome of you casting a disabling spell is going to be a faliure - SR 30, and a save of +12+bonus. You can't rely on your spells to stop him reaching you, especially with Abundant Step. A monks SR is equal to his monk lvl+10. A wizard has to beat 30, so a wizard of equal lvl will beat it on a roll of 10...Not to mention anything that affects caster lvl... Granted the high will save would suck but with good headband of intellect and a couple of DC boosting feats you have a good chance. abundant step would suck except for "as if using the spell dimension door" meaning a counterspell would work(unless im mistaken) Take magearmor/shield/protection from law/etc...monks have the middle attack bonus for a +15 max at lvl20, not too scary to me. And yes wizards are invincible if they are smart, ever heard of raistlin. :cool:
Robert 22 10-21-05, 05:49 PM	I have a player in my campaign who feels that casters are too powerful. He feels that they outshine all fighter type classes. He likes to player fighters but feels like it is meaningless when there is a wizard that can just kill most foes with a single spell. He is basically right. Some options are: Put more negotiation/role-playing/problem solving in. No class wins on these, and mages with their social stigma often suffer. For exampe: An orc raiding party 200 strong is about to descend on the town. Neither the fighter nor the mage can stop that, but which is more likely to be able to rally the townspeople? Put things that need to be jumped, climbed, smashed, etc. The mage can do these things, but he burns spell slots doing it. Start fights at range (esp. in the wilderness). The 600ft to 1200ft ranges of missile weapons make spellcasting look like close-combat. From 5th level up any group that can have a caster should (just one is needed). Give him Improved Counterspell, and he does zilch casting. No boost to his own side, no offensive spells. But if the players casters have boosted everybody - dispel magic. If a player caster trys to cast - counterspell. This is the air warfare approach to magic - if one side has air superiority its everything, but while they are scrapping aircraft just cancel each other out. Now the fighter matters. Not only does he have to protect the caster, but if he can take out the enemy caster that would be even better. Every now and then give a situation only the fighters can handle: a tournament (with checks to avoid magical 'doping'; storming a breach in a wall (casters are good at making breaches, not so hot at getting through them); a location that doesn't permit or doesn't have magic; split the party up so they have to survive alone for a while (fighters are better loners than mages at low and mid levels). Don't do it to often because the spell-casters will think you are picking on them. Robert
True Archon 10-22-05, 05:59 AM	Oh, it's not me dismissing the anti-caster ideas. It's people like HamHam who have an answer for everything. And I don't really begrudge them that, since they've clearly put effort into studying the spells and know what they're good for. You can't even mention spell resistance or saving throws as obstacles without someone piping up about a very handy spell (good case in point, Reverse Gravity) that doesn't allow a save or spell resistance. Sorry. :blush: I kinda figured that was the way you were posting before, and was kinda thrown off by your follow-up post afterwards. That being said, I agree with you. Spellcasters have a lot of options out there because of their spell choices available. The problem with most of these debates is that "spellcaster advocates" tend to argue that said spellcaster always has the right tool for the job at hand. Which is generally not true. Sure, they can do some jimmying with the tools that do have, but even then it's not like they're doing the original fantastic job that they're claiming that they're doing. Yes, in many cases one can dismiss right back. Really it's just a stupid game of Rock Paper Scissors: A: Paper is a Rock killer. B: Maybe if the Rock is a moron. Every Rock I've ever played knows Scissors. Bye-bye Paper. A: What kind of Paper player doesn't take the Rock feat? Your Scissors would be vaporized. B: It's a safe bet that my Rock will have an item that can let him cast Paper three times a day, so your Rock couldn't touch my Scissors. Et cetera. It's sad, but true. Worse yet, is the fact that many probably aren't following your example either, nor would care to. All because it shows the weakness in their arguments. Should be indeed, but I think we'd all like to manage it in a way that didn't seem contrived. If we want to challenge a Fighter, there are lots of common and uncommon enemies that fit the task. If we want to challenge a Wizard or Cleric or Druid, there are fewer options, because they have so many options. Repeatedly using one of those options seems cheesy, and anyway there's usually a work around that the character can implement and keep handy. All you might manage to do is make a slight change in the caster's equipment or daily spell list. The biggest factor that many people don't consider is the limited number of actions made available in a round to wizards. Unless they've managed to find a way to Quicken every spell that they have, every spell is a standard action. Knowing this, a DM generally can challenge any spellcaster without much effort or use of "cheesiness". A Wizard who has had her reverse gravity counterspelled by the enemy with control weather and Improved Counterspell has not only lost a high level spell, but has also probably lost a tactical advantage that she was hoping to implement with her other prepared spells. Likewise, with the Monk with SR and high saves example thrown out to challenge the Wizard, like below: When exactly is he going to Stunning Blow me again? If the mage has allowed a monk to charge and Stunning Blow him, he deserves to die. Once you reach the situation where you've been surprised and or out-initiateved by a monk within his charge range... then yes, all things equal, you are probably toast. But a competent mage has two dozen different ways make sure it never comes to that. Why is it such a hard thing to picture a Monk wiping the floor with a Wizard? Honestly, why? Monk PCs do it all the time against the enemy NPC Wizards. The reverse can be said as true by this line of thinking, as well. I could say that any Monk that allows a Wizard to get the upperhand against her despite her natural abilities against spells deserves to die. Then there's the following one-sided argument: Realistically, what do you expect to be able to do to stop him? Remember, the most likely outcome of you casting a disabling spell is going to be a faliure - SR 30, and a save of +12+bonus. You can't rely on your spells to stop him reaching you, especially with Abundant Step. A monks SR is equal to his monk lvl+10. A wizard has to beat 30, so a wizard of equal lvl will beat it on a roll of 10...Not to mention anything that affects caster lvl... Granted the high will save would suck but with good headband of intellect and a couple of DC boosting feats you have a good chance. abundant step would suck except for "as if using the spell dimension door" meaning a counterspell would work(unless im mistaken) Take magearmor/shield/protection from law/etc...monks have the middle attack bonus for a +15 max at lvl20, not too scary to me. So, not taking in all the goodies given this wizard and figuring this wizard began her career with a generous ability score of 18 in intelligence and ending with a 23 intelligence of level 20, her caster level to defeat the SR is going to be: 1d20 + 20 for an average result of 30.5 vs. the SR 30. Even throwing in Greater Spell Penetration (+4), that's still likely to fall short on a 30% roll chance that the spell fails outright. Now take into account the Monk's awesome saves to either negate or limit the spell's results. The chances of failure seem to still be pretty significant, especially enough to worry any Wizard with some common sense. But, of course, this was without the additional "goodies" (magic items, feats, and several spells cast) the Wizard has. Which is definitely something to consider, but... Out of curiousity, what about all the goodies that the Monk has garnered in her 20 level career? With items increasing her own attribute scores, attack and damage rolls (Monk's Belt? Amulet of Mighty Fists?), and saves... :gah: Phew. That 2d10 damaging Stunning Fist, based against the Wizard's already weak Fortitude Save, also based on a DC modified by a major Monk ability score (Wisdom), then followed up by a round of FIVE attacks (three of which are at the highest BAB available to the Monk) at 2d10 damage each (without additional modifiers) vs. the Wizard's already low hit point total. All I can say is... wow. How does someone easily dismiss this? Oh! Wait! What about the feat Improved Natural Attack?! Make that 3d8 damage per hit! Oh, Abundant Step and Counterspell? PHB, pg 180 under "Supernatural Abilities"... "Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or being dispelled by...." etc., etc. However, this argument is going the route of the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" argument. The point is that Wizards aren't all that.
q'afuu 10-22-05, 07:47 AM	If we want to challenge a Fighter, there are lots of common and uncommon enemies that fit the task. If we want to challenge a Wizard or Cleric or Druid, there are fewer options, because they have so many options. Repeatedly using one of those options seems cheesy... Why is that? I think you're underestimating the number of decent challenges a DM can come up with for a full caster, and by consequence there is no need to become repetitive.
Kaboth 10-22-05, 08:24 AM	Or you could place them in a Dungeon that has lots of dead and wild magic zones.... only a few "safe" areas so they can use their utility spells. Like using knock to open a door at a distance... etc....
trolloc 10-22-05, 08:34 AM	hi i'm looking for my mithral golem, anyone seen him?
Zombie Carl 10-22-05, 08:48 AM	A monks SR is equal to his monk lvl+10. A wizard has to beat 30, so a wizard of equal lvl will beat it on a roll of 10...Not to mention anything that affects caster lvl... Granted the high will save would suck but with good headband of intellect and a couple of DC boosting feats you have a good chance. abundant step would suck except for "as if using the spell dimension door" meaning a counterspell would work(unless im mistaken) Take magearmor/shield/protection from law/etc...monks have the middle attack bonus for a +15 max at lvl20, not too scary to me. And yes wizards are invincible if they are smart, ever heard of raistlin. :cool: I personally wouldn't be happy with a 50% chance of my spell doing bugger-all, especially if faliure meant a swift pummelling. And a monk's base saves are +12 across the board, without modifiers (IE, a good wisdom and dex, and possibly a good fort bonus). Assuming a level 20 monk had the disappointing constitution score of 16, this puts his save at +15 vs say, a disintegrate. That's around 11 he has to roll, putting the chance of you actually getting a disintegrate to work is 25%-ish. I wouldn't bet on it. You can't counterspell spell-like abilities. And that's assuming you waited your turn to let the monk go first, assuming you won the initiative. Remember, tripping is a touch attack. Mage Armour et al wouldn't help. His touch AC is still going to be between 10-14. A monk weakling with a Str and Dex of 18 at level 20 trying a grapple on a mage: 5 attempts (5 attacks) to grab hold. With weapon focus: unarmed. At +20/+17/+14/+11/+8. Mages AC of what, 25-28? Grapple check. Assuming the mage has a Str 10, and not lower, that puts them at opposed rolls of +10 for the mage, and +19 for the monk. nearly twice as much bonus. That mage is going down, man. :cool:
weretouched 10-22-05, 12:04 PM	Im just putting in my input. But theres really no point in arguing class vs class. All people are going to do is defend their favorites and attack their least. Its going to be never ending. You wont be able to convince a person like this, no matter how much people say otherwise, im a wizard fan.(besides all of this is circumstantial, the end all spell, power word kill) Anyway ill admit that wizards have weakness', most were stated before this. Wizards have a trick for everything but the problem is if its ready. They have a lower spell use than almost every other caster class. The wizards advantage is flexibility, but A well built counterspell sorceror would beat a wizard of equal level with ease. Its all situational. Just put the party up against enemy tanks who are protected from things that require reflex and will saves. Besides if the player who thinks he's being outshined is too imature to realize that magic is stronger than sword in later levels tell him A) read a fantasy novel with magic(dragonlance) or B) tell him to make better feat chains. but he is right the mages excell in higher level games.
True Archon 10-22-05, 03:55 PM	Weretouched.... very well put. The problem I see is not that the spellcasters of the OP's game are having their day in the sun, and the Fighter's player isn't. It's not because the spellcasters were designed to get powerful at their later levels. Heck, they deserve it. At beginning levels they were the whipping boys. It's the fact that the warrior started out strong, and has fallen behind a little bit, and it's not because the warrior classes suck. It because they tend to advance steadily. To me, it sounds like either the player is whining, or has a legitimate gripe. If the player is whining, it's probably their fault that they're not contributing. If it's a legitimate gripe, then it sounds like the DM has lost their way to challenge the spellcasters in their group. Of course, it could be an all likely third option too. They both might be having a problem. Which is why they began talking to each other about the problem. So, shall we try to help this DM and player? I'll start. Challenging factors to wizards: 1. Proper spell preparation: The easiest solution for this is subjecting wizards to the unknown. Leave some things a mystery. Read up on Divination-type magic, and the inherent flaws built into it's use. Challenging factors to sorcerers: 1. Not having the right selection of spells: Have a good understanding of the spells known to any sorcerer characters. Place challenges that are not easily beatin' by the sorcerer's current spell list. Challenging factors to arcane casters: 1. Low hit points, Fortitude saves, and Reflex saves: One common quality of all these weaknesses is their inherent ties to a character's health. Enemies at higher levels should be at least hitting the arcane spellcasters as equally hard as the warrior counterparts, if not more. Smart enemies will focus their attacks against spellcasters first, even though the warriors charged up to meet the challenge first. Fortitude saves tend to be very immediately hazardous. Use some poisons, diseases, stunning fists, disintegrates, horrid wiltings, implosions, blights, baleful polymorphs, and what not. Watch as the warriors smile and the arcane spellcasters cringe. Reflex saves tend to result in a large amount of hit points being taken. Hit the wizards with complex traps, breath weapons, energy spell effects (fireballs, lightning bolts, flame strikes, etc.). Challenging factors to spellcasters in general: 1. Expenses: If you don't already, start requiring that the players keep accurate expense records of spells that use expensive components and spell scribing in their spellbooks (100 gp/level of the spell scribed). You'll notice a definite shift of continuous use of a few popular spells like: animate dead (and other undead creators), augury, commune, contingency, divination, force cage, identify, legend lore, nondetection, protection from spells, scrying, shapechange, stoneskin, true seeing, wall of iron, just to name a few. 2. Enemies with spell resistance and immunities: Just with the introduction of these two components, not every spell in a spellcaster's arsenal should work all the time. If they are, your players are either very lucky, or cheating. Everything that I mentioned above focuses on challenging spellcasters, and not warriors. If your warrior players are upset about the spellcasters dropping successful large, devastating spells like horrid wilting, they need to just accept it. However, they also need to take note of the times when they pummelled an enemy for umpteen hit points while the spellcaster's spell failed.
Urlithani 10-22-05, 09:10 PM	Rogues. See invisibility and true seeing do not allow spellcasters to see the hidden. Even a 7th level rogue who gets the drop on a 10th level mage deals 5d6 + poison damage. Throw in 2 and the caster could be out of a fight before initiative(even if he survives and teleports away, he's not really helping the party much for the first few rounds). The 7th level rogue also probably has at least a +12 to hide, opposed to a caster with a cross-class spot. High level rogues: If a high level rogue gets the chance to catch a high level caster, Use Magic Device and a scroll of anti-magic field will allow the rogue to sneak up on the wizard and get a sneak attack. Also, if the rogue wins with his higher initiative modifier, 3 or 4 sneak attacks and poison can ruin a wizard's day. Enemy spellcasters. Don't keep stupid bad guys. The evil spellcaster lays out a tactic for his henchmen. "When you see their spellcaster covered in a shimmering green aura, hit him with everything you've got. It may be our only chance to knock him out of the fight." So when the enemy caster hits a wizard/cleric with Dimensional Anchor, his cronies react by moving and shooting the affected character. On that character's turn he could be in serious trouble; if he can't find cover or get away, will he be able to teleport away next round if he can successfully dispel the Dim Anchor this round? Targeted dispels are worth it if they can remove a couple buffs. Evil clerics with fighters: Silence on the fighter who moves in for a grapple. Even without grappling/unarmed feats, an AOO by a non-fighter is usually survivable. A bad guy who has forehand information of the party(by scrying or spying)knows what elements to choose for resist energy and protection from energy, as well as spell immunity. Tactically speaking, bring a strong first showing. After a few rounds, have the enemy retreat. Continue to tail the party with enemies who only engage and frustrate the party with hit and run tactics. Have them waiting at tactically sound spots to get a good shot on the party, then fall back. When spread out and not staying long, spell durations wear out, and area affect spells such as fireball are either wasted or not used at all. This will frustrate even the fighters, but it is a sound tactic when you have a numerical but not quality advantage. A couple illusions would work well too. "Let me open up with a fireball before they even know we're here," says the Wizard. Fireball goes boom...oops, those Orcs weren't real! One spell wasted.
SwiftFox 10-23-05, 01:30 PM	I agree with the sentiment that one classes advantage over another is purely circumstantial. A wizard who is able to prepare for a specific scenario should usually have the upper hand... but I dont think any wizard character will always have the advantage of being able to prepare and defend himself against any contingency... cover his main weaknesses sure, but it would be impractical for an adventuring wizard to make himself 'invincible'. There are situations that can cause a wizard to want to retreat via some extremly effective and reliable method such as contingency teleport in order to prepare himself for the rematch... just as a fighter or monk should consider doing when they find they are tactically outmatched by a clever wizard who has all the right spells memorised to deal with them entirely on his own terms. A high-level monk or fighter should therefor consider owning some item that gives them that ability, such as a one-use item that teleports them to a safe haven, and probably another that masks them from divination. Its only fair after all, that such characters be able to cover their own weaknesses by enabling themselves to reasess a situation instead of plowing head-first into a clusterf--k. As long as the players themselves are equally intelligent, there should be no reason that one class should get the upper hand on another, except as previously stated due to mitigating circumstances.
True Archon 10-23-05, 04:43 PM	Pfft! Wizards are cowards! ;) Just kiddin'. Some are brave. However, I see a common theme here (below in bold): Rogues. See invisibility and true seeing do not allow spellcasters to see the hidden. Even a 7th level rogue who gets the drop on a 10th level mage deals 5d6 + poison damage. Throw in 2 and the caster could be out of a fight before initiative(even if he survives and teleports away, he's not really helping the party much for the first few rounds). .... .... So when the enemy caster hits a wizard/cleric with Dimensional Anchor, his cronies react by moving and shooting the affected character. On that character's turn he could be in serious trouble; if he can't find cover or get away, will he be able to teleport away next round if he can successfully dispel the Dim Anchor this round? I agree with the sentiment that one classes advantage over another is purely circumstantial. A wizard who is able to prepare for a specific scenario should usually have the upper hand... but I dont think any wizard character will always have the advantage of being able to prepare and defend himself against any contingency... cover his main weaknesses sure, but it would be impractical for an adventuring wizard to make himself 'invincible'. There are situations that can cause a wizard to want to retreat via some extremly effective and reliable method such as contingency teleport in order to prepare himself for the rematch... .... I've played in parties where our spellcaster has found things a bit too hot, so they decided to teleport away. I've run games where the party has had a spellcaster that buggered out to leave his companions left alone to deal with the situation. Having played a class where certain escape isn't always assured all the while the supposed allied wizard saved his own miserable hide, I've gotta say that just sucks. Needless to say, if I survive, I play my character like he had betrayed or left for dead, and I treat the spellcaster accordingly (as has the rest of the group). .... just as a fighter or monk should consider doing when they find they are tactically outmatched by a clever wizard who has all the right spells memorised to deal with them entirely on his own terms. A high-level monk or fighter should therefor consider owning some item that gives them that ability, such as a one-use item that teleports them to a safe haven, and probably another that masks them from divination. Its only fair after all, that such characters be able to cover their own weaknesses by enabling themselves to reasess a situation instead of plowing head-first into a clusterf--k. As long as the players themselves are equally intelligent, there should be no reason that one class should get the upper hand on another, except as previously stated due to mitigating circumstances. I must say that it's better for party cohesion if an escape plan has been thought of for all the party members. Sadly, if the wizard hasn't already offered, it is generally wise to prepare yourself for such an event.
HamHam 10-23-05, 04:57 PM	Clerics and Druids beat Wizards hands down anyway.
OleOneEye 10-24-05, 02:36 AM	My experience is that wizards have about the same death rate as other classes. The biggest difference I've noticed is in player ability, not class ability. The fighter and the ranger in my current game are the only ones to have made it from 1st to 9th.
Mirikon 10-24-05, 07:37 AM	Indeed, all the examples that have been thrown back and forth so far assume a certain level of skill by the player of said character, and that said player has been basically gearing his character to just this kind of situation. In reality, if the players are generally on the same level, skill-wise, then it shouldn't be too hard to balance encounters. And if it gets too hard, you can always have the Red Dragon they're hunting down be a White Dragon with a hat of disguise.