3E Balance thread

[Setherick]

Hi joe

I respect your thoughts and its a great thread.

However we both have different views

Check out my thoughts!

You know that "joe" is Ross, right? Guy who runs the show? Mr. Payton if your nasty.

He also respond to Harri Potoru, but you'll have to ask him why.

[Tadanori Oyama]

Hi joe

I respect your thoughts and its a great thread.

However we both have different views

Check out my thoughts!

You know that "joe" is Ross, right? Guy who runs the show? Mr. Payton if your nasty.

He also respond to Harri Potoru, but you'll have to ask him why.

I'm pretty sure Tom goes by the Duke of New York as well. Or Boxy Brown if you catch him with a mustache.

[Tadanori Oyama]

i never said the balance was good i said fighters and paladins are =
and then you bring in the wizard out of nowhere
and i was saying i like fighters better than paladins cause I CANT STAND LG

The arguement here has been about the balance between classes, not about perference.

The point isn't that you like Fighter's better, it's that a Paladin is mechanically superior to the Fighter. Fighters gain "special" feats and they gain more feats but these feats are narrowly applied. Class features are what truly define a class and a Paladin's class features are potent.

A starting Paladin is immune to magical and mundance disease and immune to fear and fear related effects and can heal itself.

A starting Fighter is a little better with it's choosen weapon (Weapon Focus), and whatever other minor bonuses one wants to take the feats to get.

[Setherick]

i never said the balance was good i said fighters and paladins are =
and then you bring in the wizard out of nowhere
and i was saying i like fighters better than paladins cause I CANT STAND LG

The arguement here has been about the balance between classes, not about perference.

The point isn't that you like Fighter's better, it's that a Paladin is mechanically superior to the Fighter. Fighters gain "special" feats and they gain more feats but these feats are narrowly applied. Class features are what truly define a class and a Paladin's class features are potent.

A starting Paladin is immune to magical and mundance disease and immune to fear and fear related effects and can heal itself.

A starting Fighter is a little better with it's choosen weapon (Weapon Focus), and whatever other minor bonuses one wants to take the feats to get.

Basically what Tad is saying, fighters are teh suxor.

[Tadanori Oyama]

i know its about balance not preferance
i think there balanced cause the fighter has bonus feats and it seems like no mater how many times i say that you just dont get it and i am not saying fighters are better than other martial classes i think there = NOT BETTER
and thats not cause i hate LG

And your not hearing me either: Fighters and Paladins are not equal. Paladins are better. The bonus feats a Fighter gets will never make them as powerful as a Paladin.

A fourth level Human Fighter has a BAB of +4, a 3/1/1 save spread, and six feats. They gain access to Weapon Specialization, which gives them +2 damage to a weapon they have weapon focus on.

A fourth level Human Paladin has a BAB of +4 and three feats. Divine Grace gives the Paladin a bonus to all saving throws equal to CHA mod, so it's inherently higher than the Fighter's though they have the same base progression. The Paladin can Smite Evil. The Paladin is immune to disease. The Paladin is immune to fear. The Paladin can turn Undead. The Paladin can cast Divine Spells.

In short: "fighters are teh suxor". They get the short end of the stick in power balance.

[ethan_dawe]

Ross (and others) are right about the paladin, especially as it levels up. Divine grace itself is nasty, especially if you have a cloak of charisma. Even without the mount, they hit hard.

[clockworkjoe]

<a href="" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win"></a>

great explaination for this disscussion

Watched it.

I know how the rules work. I ran games for years with 3.5. I've run arena fights with high level characters.  I've written and have been paid to write 3.5 D&D material. I know the rules.

classes are not balanced because there is nothing a non-caster can do that a caster cannot do.

A druid has an animal companion that can protect it for the one round the druid needs to cast summon nature's ally. Plus all casters have concentration as a class skill.

A rogue's hide skill is nothing compared to invisibility plus flying and etherealness plus illusion magic in general. Sneak attack doesn't work on a LOT of monsters (undead, constructs, plants etc)

Blindsight defeats hide.

The creature usually does not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature’s description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn.

3E can be fun to play. I did run several campaigns with it. BUT why bother with unbalanced rules where some players are angel summoners and some are BMX bandits? Why not play 4E or some other system that is better balanced?

A group is best served by having all casters.  An arcane spellcaster, a cleric, a druid and maybe a bard.

So, can you give me a specific situation where a group is better served with a fighter than a druid?

 

[clockworkjoe]

Even if a fighter blows all his feats on improving saves, the feats don't scale. In core rules it's just a flat +2 bonus.

a paladin just needs to boost his charisma to get better saves and then the fighter is out of feats. So you still have a character who is worse than the paladin in all respects.

[Tadanori Oyama]

i guess it really comes down to opinion in witch is better

Paladins.

Everything Ross said.

There's also the tiny problem that the feats which increase Saves aren't Fighter Bonus Feats so a Fighter would have to use their normally acquired feats to purchase them, which any class in the game could also do.

[clockworkjoe]

bards are better than fighters. They get healing magic, spells, and are masters of social skills.

Using rules as written, the social skills in the game are fucking dangerous especially when you use epic skill stuff. It's not impossible for a character to max out shit like diplomacy and bluff to basically convince people anything.

[Setherick]

To kick the dead horse some more, here's my character sheet from the epic level Hound Archon-Half Dragon Paladin I played (note Ross allowed me to not count the +3 adjustment for half-dragon).

EDIT: Link should work now.

[clockworkjoe]

<a href="" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win"></a>

great explaination for this disscussion

Watched it.

I know how the rules work. I ran games for years with 3.5. I've run arena fights with high level characters.  I've written and have been paid to write 3.5 D&D material. I know the rules.

classes are not balanced because there is nothing a non-caster can do that a caster cannot do.

A druid has an animal companion that can protect it for the one round the druid needs to cast summon nature's ally. Plus all casters have concentration as a class skill.

A rogue's hide skill is nothing compared to invisibility plus flying and etherealness plus illusion magic in general. Sneak attack doesn't work on a LOT of monsters (undead, constructs, plants etc)

Blindsight defeats hide.

The creature usually does not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature’s description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn.

3E can be fun to play. I did run several campaigns with it. BUT why bother with unbalanced rules where some players are angel summoners and some are BMX bandits? Why not play 4E or some other system that is better balanced?

A group is best served by having all casters.  An arcane spellcaster, a cleric, a druid and maybe a bard.

So, can you give me a specific situation where a group is better served with a fighter than a druid?

 

so your saying sean is  just totally wrong and dosent know anything
cant we just all have our own opinions?
some people like 3.5E some like 4E cant we all just get along

as for paladin vs fighter there is no right or wrong answer
and if your gona reply to me and say "no i am right" than do so just keep in mind that makes me think your just a contrary little bitch

What do you want from me? I've explained my position and defended it with what I think is good evidence and arguments. I can't stop you from playing 3E obviously.

But the thing is, saying '3E is a balanced system' is factual statement which can be disproven, not an opinion (provided you define balanced in a reasonable manner, which I could do but that would take a long time and that would derail this discussion). I could go on and on about game design and concepts such as system mastery but I don't think you really care.

It seems to me that you feel that any criticism of 3E is a criticism of you as a gamer. That if you play 3E, then you are a bad gamer. I am not making that argument. All I am saying and all I've said is: 3E is not a balanced system. 4E is better balanced than 3E.

[Setherick]

i meant it is an opinion witch is better
by deffinition thats an opinion

and the contrary little bitch thing only goes for the paladin thing
 
and i posted that to ask what do you want from ME

Actually, if you go back to your original post you state:

On a more practical level, if you want to play a fighter, play a paladin, they are pretty much mechanically better in every way.

that's not true a fighter has bonus feats
in my eye there =

So you never stated it as an opinion, you stated it as an objective fact. And now, a couple of days and thirty or forty posts later, Ross has proven to you time and time again that your initial statement was wrong.

[robotkarateman]

This thread needs a bucket of kittens.

[Setherick]

Despite the fact that I own two cats, the picture above makes me ask "will it blend?"