# Most overrated "broken" things?



## Mort (Jun 29, 2007)

Often on this board you get cries of "this is broken - it's just too good," and sometimes you do what any good powergamer would do - you immediately use the combo! What combos, spells, classes, etc. did you find just didn't live up to the hype?

For me it was seeing divine metamagic- persistant spell in play. The cleric in the group had it and used it, but more often than not:

1) we were fighting undead and he wished he had the turn attempts back (it takes 7!)
2) we were fighting spellcasters and the spell got dispelled in an area or targeted dispell magic.
3) the cleric ended up as support (he was the only cleric in the party) and didn't really get to smack anything.

Anyway, bit of a let down of this "huge" combo.


----------



## green slime (Jun 29, 2007)

When Mystic Theurge was presented in the 3.5 DMG.

I remember certain people claiming it was too overpowered. What's more they claimed to have *actually play-tested* the "monstrousity".

Which sort of lead me to quietly question if they had been studying the Necronomicon a bit too closely, and failed some vital check.


----------



## Someone (Jun 29, 2007)

I second the Mystic Theurge.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 29, 2007)

I have seen people claim *Monkey Grip* is strong.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 29, 2007)

green slime said:
			
		

> When Mystic Theurge was presented in the 3.5 DMG.
> 
> I remember certain people claiming it was too overpowered. What's more they claimed to have *actually play-tested* the "monstrousity".




IMO, the MT can be a monstrosity if you use it with 3.0 buff spells.  With the combination of so many slots with buff spells that last an hour/level and can be empowered/maximized/etc, you can get some very high power buffs that last all day, and even layer some of them to protect against dispelling.  Of course, it's a pretty boring character to play, but can make for a great cohort.

The most overrated "broken" thing to me is the spiked chain.  It's not broken at all, but people claim it is because they don't like the concept.

I also remember a lot of people that thought that the monk was overpowered in the early days of 3.0 based on the fact that they could do sooo much damage with a d20 weapon die, or that their defensive abilities (Wis to AC, immunity to disease, 3 high saves) made them impossible to kill.  In reality, monks were (and still are) one of the weakest classes.


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jun 29, 2007)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> The most overrated "broken" thing to me is the spiked chain.  It's not broken at all, but people claim it is because they don't like the concept.



I'm with you. Arguments against the spiked chain usually turn out to be "I just don't like it, it doesn't make sense."


----------



## werk (Jun 29, 2007)

How about Vow of Poverty?


----------



## Ender_rpm (Jun 29, 2007)

Having seen a monk with VoP in play, I'm still in the "its kinda broken" camp. Of course, the player was the munchkiniest power gamer I've ever played with, but I digress


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jun 29, 2007)

Spiked Chain

I tried using it in a game, because a lot of people on ENworld screamed that it was broken.  Funny how the opposed rolls don't always go your way.

Brad


----------



## Nail (Jun 29, 2007)

Classes/PrCs?

Warlock and Mystic Theurge top my list.  Look too powerful, but turn out fine in play.


----------



## brehobit (Jun 29, 2007)

Clerics.

Everyone complains about how they are at the top of the charts in terms of power.  At the levels I generally play (1-8 or so) I just don't see it.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 29, 2007)

*Warblade* -- right up there with Warlock. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## ehren37 (Jun 29, 2007)

Spiked chain - its the only exotic weapon remotely worth a feat, so therefore its "teh borken". Usually people dont know how attacks of opportunity are resolved (ie, letting them retrip when opponent stands or getting multiple AoO's from mvoement). Lets not forget ignoring melee cover either. Mainly its because fighters arent allowed to have nice things, so anything that looks remotely good on paper must be broken. The spiked chain brokenness is a good litmus test to see if a DM is incompetent or not. If you cant handle some dude possibly tripping your bad guys, just hang up your hat, because the wizard will make you dook your drawers by 5th level.

VoP actually is broken IMO, but for intra party play reasons rather than mechanical ones. It leads to inner party strife where treasure has to be divded equally, lest the guy in rags not get his share to throw at orphans. Also, he cant have money for bribes, flying mounts, etc, so he becomes the party mooch who must be handed something in order to use it (but he cant actually own it). Hes a walking inconvenience at upper levels.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 29, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> Spiked Chain
> 
> I tried using it in a game, because a lot of people on ENworld screamed that it was broken.  Funny how the opposed rolls don't always go your way.
> 
> Brad




Like most "broken" things, they aren't broken in all (or even most) situations - to achieve true "broken-ness" you need a character built specifically to take advantage of it's abilties, and a player who knows when and how to apply it. 

I've seen some of the character builds that led to the characterization of spike chains being "broken" - and they can be truly annoying for the DM.  

Picture an Enlarged Tripping Chain fighter who covers 50' of terrain (10' square fighter + 20' on each side) with a trip bonus around +12 to +16 (or higher) depending on spells, feats, strength, and magic items.   This is without factoring in the Exotic Weapon Master bonuses at higher levels.  

Everything becomes more complicated and unless the DM metagames and has all the bad guys prepared to deal with it, fights agains medium or small opponents can indeed become trivial. Not every fight can involve Large 4-legged oppnents  . 

Even without the tripping factor, they can be very hard to deal with just because of reach and damage output.


----------



## Patlin (Jun 29, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Picture an Enlarged Tripping Chain fighter who covers 50' of terrain (10' square fighter + 20' on each side) with a trip bonus around +12 to +16 (or higher) depending on spells, feats, strength, and magic items.   This is without factoring in the Exotic Weapon Master bonuses at higher levels.




A shifter variant druid at high levels in the elemental form is 15'x15' with (if I recall corectly, no book here) 15' reach.  Trip bonuses are probably higher, too, since BAB isn't a part of trip.  About as bad, and without relying on any spells or equipment... and the character is a full caster.

This variant is generally regarded as less powerfull than a normal Druid, too, who I'm sure could accomplish the same type of thing with wildshape.

I remain unimpressed by the spiked chain.  In fact, I've played a chain wielder and found the experience a bit boring.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jun 29, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Everything becomes more complicated and unless the DM metagames and has all the bad guys prepared to deal with it, fights agains medium or small opponents can indeed become trivial. Not every fight can involve Large 4-legged oppnents  .
> 
> Even without the tripping factor, they can be very hard to deal with just because of reach and damage output.




...what damage output?  The spiked chain's multiplier is 20/x2, it's possibly the worst weapon for damage output that the world has yet seen.

Casters will eat the Spiked Chain Wielder alive.  Our group's casters certainly did.

Brad


----------



## Felon (Jun 29, 2007)

Genuinely broken things: druids, warblades, conjuration spells, abjurant champion PrC, wraithstrike spell being only 2nd-level, scorching ray spell capping at 11th level despite being only 2nd-level, web spell being tough as hell to get out of even if you make your save, Power Attack double damage with two-handed weapons, damn near anything out of Book of Exalted Deeds.

Overrated so-called broken things: Practiced Spellcaster feat, Searing Spell feat, spiked chain, mystic theurge, radiant servant of Pelor, warmages, favored souls, monks. Really can't believe I ever thought monks were broken, so I gotta cut slack to folks who still do.


----------



## Drowbane (Jun 29, 2007)

Not broken (IMO): BoED, BoVD, cleric, druid, entangle-spell, gestalt, monks, MT (and clones), orb-spells, power attack, practised spellcaster + wildmage combo (cheesy, yes), psionics, radiant servant of pelor, scorching ray, searing spell-feat, spiked chain, warblade, warlock, web-spell

Broken: arcane thesis, swarm wildshape, wraithstrike

No clue: abjurant champion (prc)


----------



## Felon (Jun 29, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> ...what damage output?  The spiked chain's multiplier is 20/x2, it's possibly the worst weapon for damage output that the world has yet seen.



I think "damage output" is a reference to all them attacks of opportunity a spiked-chain wielder can make with Combat Reflexes.

The whole tripping thing is annoying, but that's more a function of the trip rules than anything the chain really offers. Improved Trip probably shouldn't offer a +4 bonus.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 29, 2007)

Ooo, good call on *Psionics*! And quite ironic. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Benben (Jun 29, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Really can't believe I ever thought monks were broken, so I gotta cut slack to folks who still do.




Oh my gosh!  I remembered thread after thread of people complaining about monks in the 3.0 days.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 29, 2007)

Patlin said:
			
		

> A shifter variant druid at high levels in the elemental form is 15'x15' with (if I recall corectly, no book here) 15' reach.  Trip bonuses are probably higher, too, since BAB isn't a part of trip.  About as bad, and without relying on any spells or equipment... and the character is a full caster.
> 
> This variant is generally regarded as less powerfull than a normal Druid, too, who I'm sure could accomplish the same type of thing with wildshape.
> 
> I remain unimpressed by the spiked chain.  In fact, I've played a chain wielder and found the experience a bit boring.




At high levels.   The trip fighter I outlined above is only 2nd to 4th level.

Special attack options such as grapple, trip, sunder, disarm become generally less and less useful above about 9th level.   You fight more opponents who are immune or effectively immune (i.e. no items to  disarm or sunder, so large that trip and grapple are nearly impossible, incorporeal, freedom of movement, etc. etc.)

Generally only truly twinked out trip-fighters will be able to effectively trip those opponents that are trippable at high levels. 

And spiked chain fighter do tend to be boring.  To do your thing well, you have to spend a lot of feats and resources, leaving very little room for other combat options. 



			
				cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> ...what damage output? The spiked chain's multiplier is 20/x2, it's possibly the worst weapon for damage output that the world has yet seen.




Then you haven't seen a well built chain fighter.  It's not about the crits.  

It's about the number of attacks, and damager per attack that you can achieve.  (Combat Reflexes with a 20' reach,  Two-handed Power Attack multiplier, Spiked Chain flurry from Exotic Weapon Master.)   



			
				cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> Casters will eat the Spiked Chain Wielder alive. Our group's casters certainly did.




That's not really relevent.   A mixed group with casters will eat almost any single humanoid fighter type alive, regardless of what weapon they are wielding.


----------



## ehren37 (Jun 29, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> I think "damage output" is a reference to all them attacks of opportunity a spiked-chain wielder can make with Combat Reflexes.




Thats also spread among enemies. Unless you're fighting mooks, hitting each guy once isnt a big deal. Its almost always better to concentrate on one foe, since D&D doesnt really have a death spiral mechanic.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 29, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Thats also spread among enemies. Unless you're fighting mooks, hitting each guy once isnt a big deal. Its almost always better to concentrate on one foe, since D&D doesnt really have a death spiral mechanic.




I'm not talking about spread out among enemies.   If they move into you, you get an AoO there, if you manage to trip them you effectively give them an AC (and attack) penalty so that you are more likely to hit them or can power attack for more.  

If you are high enough level (7+) to take Exotic Weapon master, you can flurry with the chain for an extra attack. 

That's 2 more attacks than a non-reach two-handed fighter, and possibly against a lower AC - which allows more power attack or a higher chance of hitting with the rest of your attacks.

If you moved up to them (thus no AoO), you can also use your lowest bonus attack (the one most likely to miss) to make a trip attack against their touch AC, which (if successful) sets them up for your next round of attacks (and makes the follow up attack with improved trip more likely to hit).

And because of your extended reach, you are more likely to have other opponents in range when you do manage to drop your primary target.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jun 30, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Then you haven't seen a well built chain fighter.  It's not about the crits.
> 
> It's about the number of attacks, and damager per attack that you can achieve.  (Combat Reflexes with a 20' reach,  Two-handed Power Attack multiplier, Spiked Chain flurry from Exotic Weapon Master.)




At least he's effective at what he does.  Which is being boring.

Of course, he'd still be doing more damage on the important things if he had, oh, I don't know, a better weapon.



> That's not really relevent.   A mixed group with casters will eat almost any single humanoid fighter type alive, regardless of what weapon they are wielding.




Actually, it is.

A common reason the spiked chain wielder is viewed as being broken is that it's hard to fight in melee.  This means, of course, you don't fight it in melee.  And casters are especially good at that, given their ability to avoid AoOs by casting defensively.  And being prone really doesn't do jack to them.

Brad


----------



## Caliban (Jun 30, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> At least he's effective at what he does.  Which is being boring.
> 
> Of course, he'd still be doing more damage on the important things if he had, oh, I don't know, a better weapon.




Lol, it's pretty clear you've made up your mind.  Obviously, my experiences differ. 




> Actually, it is.




Still not relevent.  

That's equally true for any melee monster build, not just spiked chains.


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 30, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Genuinely broken things: druids,...conjuration spells...Book of Exalted Deeds.




Painting with a pretty broad brush there...


----------



## Felon (Jun 30, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Painting with a pretty broad brush there...



Well, what do you expect? We're covering a broad topic. And when it comes to the BoED's munchosity, a broad brush makes few mistakes.


----------



## DogBackward (Jun 30, 2007)

I think a big problem with the BoED is that, like with the Paladin, the creators tried to use roleplaying restrictions to balance an increase in mechanical power. It just doesn't work. Even if you don't count the difference in a DM's interpretations of what are a commonly disputed set of semi-vague "rules", there's still the fact that any determined player could get past these roleplaying "restrictions" with ease.

It takes a very good DM to run the BoED successfully. Exalted Deeds isn't broken, per say, it's just very fragile.


----------



## Felon (Jun 30, 2007)

The Book of Vile Darkness was mostly a book full of flavor that did nothing to really empower evil characters. Spells like clutch of orcus and hellfire sounded cool, but were quantifiably weaker than comparable existing spells. You may have noticed that when those spells were compiled into the Spell Compendium, they had features added to make them at least somewhat competitive (though I'm still not sure how great it is to cast a hold person that only lasts as long as I'm concentrating). You had vile spells and dark speech, stuff that hurt the user at least as much as his victim.

In stark contrast, Book of Exalted Deeds was a big pie full of crunchy power. That was its goal from square one. Prestige classes oozed over with special powers. You got poisons and diseases that conveniently only affected evil characters. You got vows which empowered indiscriminantly, even those characters to whom the vows were awfully convenient. And does anyone ever want to sit down compare vile feats to exalted feats and even pretend that they're of equal worth? 

But yeah, if you take most of the feats and prestige classes and equipment out, it's not so bad...


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 30, 2007)

Felon, you are exaggerating.  A lot.  The overwhelming majority of prestige classes from the Book of Exalted Deeds are taken by almost nobody.  They are, in fact, mostly UNDER powered.  It was only a minority that are overpowered.


----------



## Felon (Jun 30, 2007)

Yeah, Mist. I'm the first guy who suggested there was anything broken in the BoED.

Heck, I'm not even the first in this thread....

There are precious few PrC's that could be called underpowered. Fist of Raziel, OTOH...or the Anointed Knight....or the the Champion of Gwynwhatever...or the Defender of Sealtel....or.....aw, to heck with it. I'm tired of providing exhaustive evidence for my positions just to have somebody jump and go "I disagree" or "I agree" with the other guy. If I can't a real discussion going, then what's the point?


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jun 30, 2007)

vop is pretty strong. I played a level 5-13 druid vop. I coulden't say what was stronger, the druid or the vop, but he had awesome saves, awesome ac and spells. rarely got hit, but was the only one to die in the campaign. We fought a ghost lion thing and everyone else couldn't touch it so i went to solo it and it had a x3 crit i was not expecting, although i did get its hp low enough so it wasen't a tpk.  It was our cr too.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jun 30, 2007)

I agree 100% that mt, spiked chains, warblades ect... are not what i would call broken. Broken is something that makes the campaign fall apart or stops the game cold while people argue about the rules hole. basically I don't think strong should mean broken.

I do think half the time something is broken its because someone misunderstood what was written or didn't read it to begin with.


----------



## brehobit (Jun 30, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> *Warblade* -- right up there with Warlock.
> 
> Cheers, -- N



Warblades are probably the weakest of the Bo9S classes.  But still, IMO, much better than any core warrior-type.  Again, for the levels I generally play (1-8 or so).  Also, dips into WB are a huge bonus to a fighter (a 1 level dip at level 9 is silly-gross).  

So are they broken?  Assuming we lose some of the actually broken maneuvers (there are only 2 or 3 like White Raven Tactics) they aren't broken.  Just unbalanced with the core classes.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 30, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> Warblades are probably the weakest of the Bo9S classes.  But still, IMO, much better than any core warrior-type.  Again, for the levels I generally play (1-8 or so).  Also, dips into WB are a huge bonus to a fighter (a 1 level dip at level 9 is silly-gross).




Compare with a 1-level Barbarian dip... 

A lot of effort has gone into fixing Fighters so they don't suck (starting around levels 6-9). If a dip into Warblade is what the Fighter class needs, let 'em have it! Yay multi-classing, yay fixed Fighter class.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Dykstrav (Jun 30, 2007)

In my experience, the most overrated "broken" thing would easily be the warlock. I've never gotten a chance to play one. Every DM I've run across just flat-out hates them because they don't fit the sacred D&D convention of using their powers X/day (despite the fact that they get what essentially amounts to a teensy spell list and a single attack per round). But at least the people who complain about the warlock have stopped complaining about how "broken" the monk is because they don't need weapons and armor to be good in a fight...

A close second would have to be _Tome of Battle_ material. It keeps getting the "just plain wrong for D&D" complaints because of the powers per day thing, and maybe because _the Lord of the Rings_ didn't have a warblade in it. Whatever- I'm not an anime or video game fan either, but I still think _Tome of Battle_ does a decent job of being fantasy-themed martial arts.

I used to hate the spiked chain with a passion, but that's because I had four people out of parties of six wanting to make the same half-orc chainfighter build. There was a span of about two years where it seemed like every party had to have a half-orc chainfighter. (Which, incidentally, seems like a local phenomenon.) But that trend gradually died out so now I'm neutral toward it.

Oh yeah... And psionics still gets a bad rap in many ancient gaming circles because of the way psionics were presented in the first edition _Player's Handbook_. Apparently an _entirely optional_ system in a book published thirty years ago makes psionics unsuitable for any D&D game. But in those circles, psionics are still those zonky powers with no thematic connection to the fantasy genre or any sense of balance or purpose... Whatever.

Sorry, I'll stop being a bitter curmudgeon now.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jun 30, 2007)

I consider Abjurant Champion to be broken. It won't bring the game to a halt but good BAB, full caster progression and d10 hit dice is just too good.


----------



## DrStalker (Jun 30, 2007)

Player character monster races with racial hit die. In my experience such characters end up less powerful than a human using core classes;  there are probably some powerful races there but between racial hit-die (which are usually a medium BAB and don't contribute to spell caster levels) and level adjustments they seem fine to me.  

I don't like psionic casters as written, but my objection there is more with the way they "feel" than a fear they will be overpowered.  I've never had a chance to see 3.X psionics in play, other than NPCs with psionics which is completely different to players having them.


----------



## lobsterGun (Jun 30, 2007)

Spiked Chain *is* far too much mo-better than the rest of the exotic weapons to not be considered anything other than broken.

However, spiked chain by itself *isn't so broken that it deserves to be banned from games, so it makes a fine addition to the list of overrated broken things.



*Caveat: Combine spiked chain with a few feats (improved trip, combat expertise, deft opportunist, karmic strike, etc) and the combination becomes potent, but that's more the fault of the synergy than the chain alone.


----------



## The Thayan Menace (Jun 30, 2007)

*Arcane Deluge*






*Wild Mage* + *Practiced Spellcaster* ... *LINK*



​


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 30, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Yeah, Mist. I'm the first guy who suggested there was anything broken in the BoED.
> 
> Heck, I'm not even the first in this thread....




I object to you painting with a broad brush (and said so).  I object to you dismissing entire books, and whole groups of things, when what you really mean is a few things are problematic.  It's hyperbole.  There is no need for it.  You may in fact be persuading people to not even consider something in your overexuberance to name things you think are broken. 



> There are precious few PrC's that could be called underpowered.




Apostle of Peace, Beloved of Valarian, Celestial Mystic, Emissary of Barachiel, Exalted Arcanist, Initiate of Pistis Sophia, Lion of Talisid, Prophet of Erathaol, Risen Martyr, Sentinel of Bharrai, Skylord, Slayer of Domiel, Stalker of Kharash, Swamay, Sword of Righteousness, Troubadour of Stars, Vassak if Bahamut, Wonderworker....

MOST of those stink.  Most have bad, and even disabling entry requirements.  Do not go around telling people that you have to dismiss the ENTIRE group of prestige classes from that book to find anything not broken (which IS what you said).  You're wrong.  The prestige class list is not all broken.  In fact, the overwhelming majority of it is not broken, and some are even underpowered.  Have you EVER heard of someone taking a Skylord or Prophet of Erathaol or Emissary of Barachiel or Celestial MysticBeloved of Valarian? I have not.



> Fist of Raziel,




Is good.



> OTOH...or the Anointed Knight....or the the Champion of Gwynwhatever...or the Defender of Sealtel....or.....aw, to heck with it.




Actually most of those are average.



> I'm tired of providing exhaustive evidence for my positions just to have somebody jump and go "I disagree" or "I agree" with the other guy. If I can't a real discussion going, then what's the point?




I'm just asking you to stop exaggerating to make your points.  It *IS* a real discussion when someone challenges your views.  You don't provide "exhaustive evidence".  You often make wild claims, and when someone challenges you, you usually do what you just did...name a couple of things to back up your point (when you claims calls for a dozen things) and then claim people are picking on you.  Nobody is picking on you.  But when you say all the prestiges classes in a book are broken, you need to provide evidence that all the prestige classes in the book are broken.  If it's instead only a minority, you need to say "sorry I misspoke, a minority of the prestige classes are broken, but they are so good that I would discourage people from that book if they have a choice between it and one of the more balanced books" or something like that.


----------



## Nail (Jun 30, 2007)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> It won't bring the game to a halt but ....



Clearly, we need a better definition of "broken".

Mine would be: "Much more (or much less) powerful than other options in the game when used in play (as opposed to some hypothetical build), with the primary measure of balance being the core classes in the 3.5e PH."

I've played the 3.xe game as long as everyone else here, and I've rarely found anything core to be broken in play.  Typically, those core things that were once thought to be broken are now squarely in the "Most Overrated Broken Things" category.


----------



## Felon (Jul 1, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> MOST of those stink.  Most have bad, and even disabling entry requirements.  Do not go around telling people that you have to dismiss the ENTIRE group of prestige classes from that book to find anything not broken (which IS what you said).  You're wrong.



Hey, look everybody, Mistwell has an opinion! 

Note that all your rebuttal really amounted to was "Actually, no they're not overpowered. Those are average, most STINK. You're wrong." Really, you're not offering anything substantive; you're just making your own adamant-yet-vague assertions, so how are you any less guilty of the same crimes you're accusing me of--broad brushes and all that?



> You often make wild claims, and when someone challenges you, you usually do what you just did...name a couple of things to back up your point (when you claims calls for a dozen things) and then claim people are picking on you.



See, Mist, the chief problem with what you're trying to do here is that it puts a burden on you that few people could carry without stumbling into the territory of hypocrisy. That sentence alone contained everything you accused me of--a wild generalization with vague particulars. I name you Mistwell of the Broad Brush.

Here's a wild claim for you: I doubt you know many people more clinical than me. The "Assay Resistance" thread in this forum is actually a good example of what I "usually" do. I present a logical case, talk about it exhaustively, intentionally phrase things in the form of questions to avoid putting words in people's mouths, wait for a suitably articulate rebuttal, and in the end rarely does anybody concede anything or really attempt to mount a counter-arguement. They typically just agree or disagree according to their gut feelings, and that's because that is what self-esteem means to a lot of folks; standing by your gut, and not even feeling like you have to support it (indeed, to do so would be a sign of self-doubt; ever seen _Adaptation_?). It also happens to require a lot less typing.

To be frank, it's fatiguing to put a lot of time and effort into an arguement that's just going to be hand-waived dismissively anyway, so why do it here? You are convinced of your position, it won't shift, yet you think I should provide a dozen examples anyway? 

As to my "wild exaggerations", the fact is I provided a quick little list of broken things, no more pretentious than other posts made here. _You_ put a magnifying glass on the issue, _you_ chose not to challenge anyone else's "broad strokes". You are the provocateur here. Tell you what, you rise to the occasion this time instead of playing the easy role of the deconstructionist. And this time, I get to be the guy playing the glib "I'm entitled to my opinion" card. It'll be like a vacation.

In the interests of you not getting off on the wrong foot, I'll go ahead and point out that asserting authoritative knowledge of what _nobody_ plays based purely on what people you know play is both hyperbolic and a wild claim. Come to think of it, I don't know how solid it is to argue that popularity and brokeness has a strong correlation. How many folks are really doing the Hulking Hurler War Hulk, despite all the threads that mention it? When was the last time you ran into an anthropomorphic baleen whale Frenzied Berserker? I suspect many DM's say no to them, like they'd say "no" to a lot of BoED content. 

Me? I'd wager there's a stronger correlation between what's broken and what people _joke about playing_, but don't actually try to get away with.


----------



## Felon (Jul 1, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Clearly, we need a better definition of "broken".
> 
> Mine would be: "Much more (or much less) powerful than other options in the game when used in play (as opposed to some hypothetical build), with the primary measure of balance being the core classes in the 3.5e PH."



I think the 3.5 designer comments about why they revised the _haste_ spell touched on this line of thinking. They said they saw way too many mages writing haste on their spell lists _in pen_. It was such a great option that it wasn't worth considering _not_ casting it at the start of any non-trivial encounter. 

Clearly, there are few things so broken they actually cause a campaign to physically implode, so the definition does have to lend itself to some sort of inexhorable gravitational pull away from other options that should be attractive in their own right. 

But I'm not sure I'd go with the PHB as the benchmark. If I consider the _energy spheres_ spell from the Spell Compendium, it also has to be weighed against other SC spells, not just the PHB.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 1, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> I'm with you. Arguments against the spiked chain usually turn out to be "I just don't like it, it doesn't make sense."




That would be because the Spiked Chain is in fact silly. It may well be *mechanically* sound. But it is in no way, shape or form  logically sound. It isn't "broken". It's just stupid beyond all reason.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 1, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Clearly, there are few things so broken they actually cause a campaign to physically implode, so the definition does have to lend itself to some sort of inexhorable gravitational pull away from other options that should be attractive in their own right.




halking hurler combined with war halk, followers of mystra (casting in anti magic field), that monster in the feyrun book that was the base ability that created pun pun, at times shape change, that feat in complete arcane when its combined with mystic thurge or other dual arcane divine classes. the class in complete divines web expansion that lets you turn spells into su ablities 3 times a day, 

those are the things i would call too powerful to the point that it breaks the game. Or at least they can if used improperly. 

Why is it that the monk was thought to be very powerful and now is not? heck, now we think of the monk as one of the weakest classes. I think flashy classes have a way of influencing our notion of balance. The same happened to  warlock now its subpar. Its now happening to warblade and to a lesser extent duskblade. to be fair dont think we will ever think the warblade will suck, but it is up their with clarics druids and wizards.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 1, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Spiked chain - its the only exotic weapon remotely worth a feat, so therefore its "teh borken". Usually people dont know how attacks of opportunity are resolved (ie, letting them retrip when opponent stands or getting multiple AoO's from mvoement). Lets not forget ignoring melee cover either. Mainly its because fighters arent allowed to have nice things, so anything that looks remotely good on paper must be broken. The spiked chain brokenness is a good litmus test to see if a DM is incompetent or not. If you cant handle some dude possibly tripping your bad guys, just hang up your hat, because the wizard will make you dook your drawers by 5th level.
> 
> VoP actually is broken IMO, but for intra party play reasons rather than mechanical ones. It leads to inner party strife where treasure has to be divded equally, lest the guy in rags not get his share to throw at orphans. Also, he cant have money for bribes, flying mounts, etc, so he becomes the party mooch who must be handed something in order to use it (but he cant actually own it). Hes a walking inconvenience at upper levels.




I can handle anything a player can throw at me. But the Spiked Chain is just a stupid, poorly conceived idea. It has no place in any game that is even remotely based on reality. It is cheese pure and simple. It was introduced into the rules by people that have NO knowledge of how weapons actually work. And for a RPG, that is a pretty big failing...


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 1, 2007)

very true, and i find the art of the spiked chain is partly to blame... however I find many people use this argument but it does not help or prove the claim that its broken. Its really a argument that appeals to consequence of how silly it is thus it must be broken. I really don't mind visualizing it working much like ivy's sword.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 1, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I can handle anything a player can throw at me. But the Spiked Chain is just a stupid, poorly conceived idea. It has no place in any game that is even remotely based on reality. It is cheese pure and simple. It was introduced into the rules by people that have NO knowledge of how weapons actually work. And for a RPG, that is a pretty big failing...




Since when was D&D based on reality?   

No, seriously.


----------



## Mistwell (Jul 1, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Hey, look everybody, Mistwell has an opinion!
> 
> Note that all your rebuttal really amounted to was "Actually, no they're not overpowered. Those are average, most STINK. You're wrong." Really, you're not offering anything substantive; you're just making your own adamant-yet-vague assertions, so how are you any less guilty of the same crimes you're accusing me of--broad brushes and all that?




I was specific, not general.  I named them all.  I pointed out the specific ones that were weak, and the specific ones that were average, and explained why I felt that way about them.  You cut that part of the post.



> See, Mist, the chief problem with what you're trying to do here is that it puts a burden on you that few people could carry without stumbling into the territory of hypocrisy. That sentence alone contained everything you accused me of--a wild generalization with vague particulars. I name you Mistwell of the Broad Brush.




You will note I said "often" and "usually".  Not a broad brush.  



> Here's a wild claim for you: I doubt you know many people more clinical than me.




Well, I'd take you up on that bet for sure 



> The "Assay Resistance" thread in this forum is actually a good example of what I "usually" do. I present a logical case, talk about it exhaustively, intentionally phrase things in the form of questions to avoid putting words in people's mouths, wait for a suitably articulate rebuttal, and in the end rarely does anybody concede anything or really attempt to mount a counter-arguement. They typically just agree or disagree according to their gut feelings, and that's because that is what self-esteem means to a lot of folks; standing by your gut, and not even feeling like you have to support it (indeed, to do so would be a sign of self-doubt; ever seen _Adaptation_?). It also happens to require a lot less typing.




Sometimes you do go into that depth.  Often, you do not.  In this thread, you did not.



> To be frank, it's fatiguing to put a lot of time and effort into an arguement that's just going to be hand-waived dismissively anyway, so why do it here? You are convinced of your position, it won't shift, yet you think I should provide a dozen examples anyway?




All I said was quit dismissing huge swaths of material so blithely.  If you're gonna bash a book, be specific.



> As to my "wild exaggerations", the fact is I provided a quick little list of broken things, no more pretentious than other posts made here. _You_ put a magnifying glass on the issue, _you_ chose not to challenge anyone else's "broad strokes". You are the provocateur here. Tell you what, you rise to the occasion this time instead of playing the easy role of the deconstructionist. And this time, I get to be the guy playing the glib "I'm entitled to my opinion" card. It'll be like a vacation.




A simple "okay I didn't mean the entire book, or the entire class, just some things about them" would have sufficed.  It's not that you were being asked to offer a lengthy explanation.  It's that you were asked to actually admit you might have painted with too broad a brush.



> In the interests of you not getting off on the wrong foot, I'll go ahead and point out that asserting authoritative knowledge of what _nobody_ plays based purely on what people you know play is both hyperbolic and a wild claim.




Nope. I asked if *you* had heard of anyone taking those classes. How can that be an exaggeration and wild? 



> Come to think of it, I don't know how solid it is to argue that popularity and brokeness has a strong correlation.




Well, it was the advice of the authors of the books that "would you choose this over other options" is one important factor with the issue.  Monte Cook talked about that concept in his journal.



> How many folks are really doing the Hulking Hurler War Hulk, despite all the threads that mention it? When was the last time you ran into an anthropomorphic baleen whale Frenzied Berserker? I suspect many DM's say no to them, like they'd say "no" to a lot of BoED content.
> 
> Me? I'd wager there's a stronger correlation between what's broken and what people _joke about playing_, but don't actually try to get away with.




Okay, do people joke about playing most of those prestige classes in Book of Exalted Deeds?


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 1, 2007)

The thing about the Spiked Chain is that it does cost a feat and frankly, I consider the other exotic weapons broken in that they don't justify themselves being worth a feat.


----------



## Felon (Jul 1, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> You will note I said "often" and "usually".  Not a broad brush.



Mist, it's after midnight where I am, so if it was Bizarro Day, it's now over. "Often" and "usually" actually aren't specific descriptors anymore. They're broad.



> Sometimes you do go into that depth.  Often, you do not.  In this thread, you did not.



You're right, I wasn't trying to win anyone over. I didn't start a thread about the matter. I didn't step up to the podium and make some grand rant. If I had, I'd feel compelled to support it. In this thread, I just shared my personal line-item list of broken stuff. If you want to declare the Book of Exalted Deeds to be unduly maligned, you post the essay, and I'll deconstruct. I'm just not that motivated to attack a book that's on the no-fly list of every DM in my gaming circle, and has been for years. Tome of Battle I have a little more steam for, so pick a fight about that and maybe I can indulge you.



> All I said was quit dismissing huge swaths of material so blithely.  If you're gonna bash a book, be specific.



I'll be specific when I think it's appropriate. In this case, I feel so much of the content is power-creep personified (not just the prestige classes that you have made the focal point, but also exalted feats and equipment) that I regard the whole thing as a bad product. If folks desire more specificity, then they are free to not make much of my disdain. 



> Nope. I asked if *you* had heard of anyone taking those classes. How can that be an exaggeration and wild?



Here's the quote: "The overwhelming majority of prestige classes from the Book of Exalted Deeds are taken by almost nobody."

Not a question, and contains sifnificant exaggeration, unless you do in fact have authoritative knowledge of what nobody plays. 



> Okay, do people joke about playing most of those prestige classes in Book of Exalted Deeds?



Well, used to be (again, it's not fresh material anymore). The Emissary of Barachiel's ability to make the villains into friends so very easily was kind of a joke, since it could adversely affect a campaign like RHoD where there are lots of evil humanoids to win over.


----------



## The Shadow Lich (Jul 1, 2007)

Monks are not dirty in themselves. But with vow of poverty and the forsaken prestige class they sure are.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 1, 2007)

Monks, VoP, spiked chain, Warmage/Rainbow Servant combo, Divine Metamagic: Persistent, Warlocks, Psionics, BoED.

These are all over-rated in the "overpowered" division.

Monks: Looks great on paper, but if you try to actually stand up and fight in melee, you get squished. Let's not even talk about ranged combat. Half the time, even high level monks get wiped by equal level spellcasters. Arcane Mastery effectively makes your SR useless. If the spellcaster have the spell penetration tree on top of AM, a much lower level caster can wipe the floor with you, and being an anti-caster is really the monk's claim to fame.

VoP: Looks great, feels good, and claimed to be powerful at lower levels. Yeah right. I have seen 1st level VoP monks die in the first round of combat despite their uber bonus AC. At high levels, the VoP effects are effectively replaced by equipment, and even sub-standard equipment (ie., in a campaign where the DM disallows buying magic stuff) is enough to replace it. And what you are left with is either a few feats or left to be a no-money moocher.

Spiked Chain: Two words: Huge Monster. More words: 99% of the time.

Warmage/Rainbow Servant: Level 16 to work. Yeah. Like I am scared of a cleric with lower hp, lower AC, boom spells and no Turn Undead at level 16 when we could have had a Wizard in the wings...

DM: Persist: Anyone looked at the opportunity cost of either wasting a feat on extra turning or raising your Cha to 18 *and* the feats wasted to *get* DM: Persist? It is not trivial, especially when we are talking about all that for a once a day ability... And I haven't even taken into account the amount of stuff you are missing out for using up all those Turn attempts.

Warlocks: Ohh look! They have something that they can use all day! Woo-hoo! Yeah right. Once a round, to one target (mainly), at a fairly short range (unless you want to waste one of your 12 precious Invocations to extend it). I'd rather have a limited ammo bazooka that I can use on that tank and a piddly .22 with infinite rounds....

Psionics: One word for ya: Gate.

BoED: I don't know about you guys, but even on a wide open anything goes campaign, I have never used a prestige class from the BoED or any of its feats. Playing an exalted character is like giving the DM a gun to point to your head and a note saying "pull trigger". No thanks.


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Warlocks are not broken in bang-boom-pow sort of way (unless "broken" can encompass excessive weakness as well as strength), but they can be problematic due to the temptation to spam their invocations endlessly. It doesn't necessarily take godlike amounts of damage-dealing to be disruptive. Unlimited ability to shatter objects or charm creatures or teleport around or conjure up blocks of black chilling tentacles can all be abused pretty handily.

The thing I would have liked to see with warlock powers is unlimited usage, but with a potential price. For example, you can use the charm invocation as often as you like, but if a creature makes its save, it automatically adopts a hostile attitude and be charmed again by that invocation for 24 hours. If fits the flavor of the class and curbs the inclination to spam.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Warlocks are not broken in bang-boom-pow sort of way (unless "broken" can encompass excessive weakness as well as strength), but they can be problematic due to the temptation to spam their invocations endlessly. It doesn't necessarily take godlike amounts of damage-dealing to be disruptive. Unlimited ability to shatter objects or charm creatures or teleport around or conjure up blocks of black chilling tentacles can all be abused pretty handily.
> 
> The thing I would have liked to see with warlock powers is unlimited usage, but with a potential price. For example, you can use the charm invocation as often as you like, but if a creature makes its save, it automatically adopts a hostile attitude and be charmed again by that invocation for 24 hours. If fits the flavor of the class and curbs the inclination to spam.



Dude, the creature *knows* you tried to hit it with a compulsion effect. I don't know about you, but if someone tries that on me, you can bet I am going to turn hostile...!


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jul 2, 2007)

All that changes when you take Exotic Weapon Master and pick up the Exotic Flurry ability. Since there is no other way for a fighter/barbarian type to get flurry of blows with a useful two handed weapon--or a one-handed weapon--it quickly surpasses other weapons in damage output at that point.



			
				cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> ...what damage output?  The spiked chain's multiplier is 20/x2, it's possibly the worst weapon for damage output that the world has yet seen.
> 
> Casters will eat the Spiked Chain Wielder alive.  Our group's casters certainly did.
> 
> Brad


----------



## SadisticFishing (Jul 2, 2007)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> All that changes when you take Exotic Weapon Master and pick up the Exotic Flurry ability. Since there is no other way for a fighter/barbarian type to get flurry of blows with a useful two handed weapon--or a one-handed weapon--it quickly surpasses other weapons in damage output at that point.




Potion of Haste, Whirling Frenzy (Unearthed Arcana Barbarian variant).

Sorry to ask, but what is VoP?


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

SadisticFishing said:
			
		

> Potion of Haste, Whirling Frenzy (Unearthed Arcana Barbarian variant).
> 
> Sorry to ask, but what is VoP?



Vow of Poverty. Gives you a fixed set of optimised magic item equivalent bonuses and a couple of bonus feats for a few feats as investment. But you can't have money or equipment of any sort (almost), and have a RP restriction that is like handing your worst enemy a loaded gun and a note that says "kill me".


----------



## Caliban (Jul 2, 2007)

SadisticFishing said:
			
		

> Potion of Haste, Whirling Frenzy (Unearthed Arcana Barbarian variant).
> 
> Sorry to ask, but what is VoP?




Haste stacks with Spiked chain flurry, as does Whirling Frenzy (in those campaigns where it's allowed, which doesn't include any I've played in).   

VoP is "Vow of Poverty" from BoED (Book of Exalted Deeds).    I had a Psion take it in my home game.   I found it less "broken" than Psionics (something else that is hotly debated).

Warlocks aren't broken per se, it's just that having an endless source of _dispel magic _ or _dimension doors _ gets tiresome for the DM.   Any magical trap or lock will eventually be dispelled or bypassed unless you make the caster level unreasonably high.   If Warlocks have been around as long as the other classes, you have to change some of the base assumptions of the NPC's in the campaign to take their abilities into effect.  Not all DM's want to deal with that.


----------



## SadisticFishing (Jul 2, 2007)

Oh, duh, I actually figured that out before I posted then forgot :X

I actually have a player in my campaign with VoP (and two other Vows, he's an Apostle of Peace), and the book seems... overpowered, random fighter crits him for 134, but ooh! Fails a will save, his weapon breaks... He also has 42 AC at level 16, which is really nothing shabby. BoED seems very strong 

As for overratedness, I find that sorcerors are a lot weaker than wizards, and Warmages... Lots of people don't want to prepare spells, but knowing every spell is a pretty big bonus!

Hrm, just wondering - at the person that said warblade is weaker than crusader, are you sure? I've seen both in play, and maybe I'm just a more capable strategist or something, but the warblade seems much more powerful.

"and have a RP restriction that is like handing your worst enemy a loaded gun and a note that says "kill me"." ... huh?


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 2, 2007)

> "and have a RP restriction that is like handing your worst enemy a loaded gun and a note that says "kill me"." ... huh?




I see it more like the worst enemy hands YOU the gun, but because your exalted you cant kill him while is unarmed. 

vop is pretty strong but I think people forget the 2 feats part. the two feats imho allow vop to be stronger then a equalivent character with magic items. I didn't play long enough to be able to confirm if vop tops off at level 13 or not.


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 2, 2007)

SadisticFishing said:
			
		

> Hrm, just wondering - at the person that said warblade is weaker than crusader, are you sure? I've seen both in play, and maybe I'm just a more capable strategist or something, but the warblade seems much more powerful.




Staying power. 

The thing about a warblade is that it is flashy. It does have lots of move and "insert name here of high level manoeuver" that can do damage, but the thing is, if you have a decent selection of splatbooks (PH2 + Complete Warrior + Any other melee book including Tome of Battle), and a halfway competent reader (don't even need to be an optimiser) most barbarians and fighters can do as much damage as well. 

The crusader though, is more subtlely powerful. Even if you factor out the cheese that is White Raven Tactics, a crusader makes the ENTIRE party more powerful. Sure, the crusader isn't going to be the one who did the most damage compared to the warblade or even the swordsage in an encounter, but a well-built crusader will most assuredly be the last man standing. 

This is what a lot of people don't realize as it isn't that obvious on paper. If the crusader only say does 10 pts of damage compared to a barbarian or fighter or warblade doing 20, at first glance, it would appear the crusader is weaker but a lot of people forget that the crusader was I) probably responsible for about 5 pts of the other guy's damage AND II) the crusader is probably at near max HP while everyone else might be near death.

It pretty much is impossible to take a crusader down via the HP route thanks to having the usual d10 warrior HD but throw in Devoted Spirit discipline AND steely resolve AND the Die hard feat means that beating the crusader the HP route is an exercise in frustration. It also has the standard Good Fort save meaning just like regular old fighter, it isn't bending over to poisons and spells like that.

What truly makes it powerful though is that even though it has a "weak" Will Save, trying to actually target that is ALSO a waste of time. (You got to get past the boost from their Divine Grace ability, plus the ability to re-roll once per day PLUS Mettle, good luck there).

Throw in their "don't need to waste time recovering manoeuvers" and you get what many of the *players* (not just people that read the text and optimise on paper) think is the strongest martial adept class by far.

Someone said it best on the WOTC's boards. You know that old "paladin in hell surrounded by dead demons with more coming" picture? That was no paladin. That was a crusader.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

StreamOfTheSky said:
			
		

> Since when was D&D based on reality?
> 
> No, seriously.




Vast segments of the game are actually based on reality. Humans, animals, armour, most weapons, most social structures, money, etc. In fact I would say there are far more aspects of reality in the game then fantasy... so when I see something so blatantly stupid as the Spiked Chain, it stands out...


----------



## Patlin (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Warlocks are not broken in bang-boom-pow sort of way (unless "broken" can encompass excessive weakness as well as strength), but they can be problematic due to the temptation to spam their invocations endlessly.




If you can call it a "temptation" to use the primary distinguishing ability of your class! 

As Cameron pointed out, if you are required to make a saving throw and succeed, you are aware of it.  Charm spells tend to result in hostility from potential victims, at least in my campaign.  A Warlock (or other caster) who used charm with obnoxious consistency would be likely to see his portrait on flyers in many civilized area, and would probably be attacked if he was recognized.


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> Dude, the creature *knows* you tried to hit it with a compulsion effect. I don't know about you, but if someone tries that on me, you can bet I am going to turn hostile...!



Well, if that's explicitly stated in a rule, please cite the reference. 

The issue I was addressing was the eventuality where A) the creature isn't sophisticated enough to know what a compulsion effect is, and B) the likelyhood that the warlock would just keep spamming charm on him. If it's a non-combatant NPC, it's like spamming dispel magics on an iinanimate object. I explicitly added a caveat about not being able to charm a creature that makes its saving throw for 24 hours.


----------



## Chu Li (Jul 2, 2007)

If anyone ever thought MTs were powerful, then take a look at the Arcane Hierophant from RotW:
MT plus 3/4 BA, d6 HD, strong Fort & Will saves, continued Kick-ass arcane companion progression (familiar + animal comp. lvls stack in one creature for both purposes AFAIK), continued wildshape and some special features (some cast-through-animals-&-plants-trick, I think) and 4+ skill pts  

Style-wise, I really like that class but in play it's just an MT+ for druids (who hardly seem in need of any further augmentation).

Just in case nobody's noticed yet: D&D's power-lvl has increased over the last few years.
That's cool, to a certain degree. I want my PCs (and some NPCs) to perform cool stunts.
What I'm concerned with is the internal power disparities. Some classes/feats/features disrupt other players' (or possibly the DM's) fun. Of course, there's almost always the potential for abuse, but certain classes/feats/features make it easier to pull freak-stunts that make other characters look like useless whimps. 
Yet, I think that abuse of the rules/munchkinism is mainly a player problem. Although D&D practically invites you to do it, I still believe it is the decision whether you succumb to that invitation or not that either makes you a mature player or a type-of-player-I-don't-like-so-much. IMHO fairness to your fellow-players and the DM is an integral part of any (RP-)Game. Unless, of course, you just want to WIN the damn game and bruise some egos in the process.   

Yours sincerely

Chu Li


----------



## Stalker0 (Jul 2, 2007)

Warlocks can be a bit strong at the 1st-3rd level range. Eldritch Blast is very competitive at this level, and unlimited use is very nice when everyone's resources are low. But past that they seem just fine to me, become weak at high levels.


----------



## Caliban (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Well, if that's explicitly stated in a rule, please cite the reference.




*Succeeding on a Saving Throw*

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Patlin said:
			
		

> If you can call it a "temptation" to use the primary distinguishing ability of your class! .



Exactly the point. A spellcaster with a wand can spam if the cost of replacing the wand is minimal. But the temptation isn't there for most folks because the class they're playing has better things to be doing with their resources. Bang boom pow.

The warlock's strength is repetition. The guy playing the warlock probably doesn't think of what he's doing as abusive, even when he's crossed the line. His reaction is likely to be "cut me some slack, this is my schtick".



> A Warlock (or other caster) who used charm with obnoxious consistency would be likely to see his portrait on flyers in many civilized area, and would probably be attacked if he was recognized.



When it comes to regulating risk-to-reward ratios, I think mechanical restrictions work a lot more reliably than an arbitrary "flyer-of-doom" method, which is basically an RP-based restriction. This is why I suggested that the more abuse-prone warlock abilities have some kind of built-in catch. Instead of being a standard matter of checking off resoures, the warlock would have to make a decision as to when he's pushing his luck too far.


----------



## Chu Li (Jul 2, 2007)

A word of advice concerning _Charm whatever_: Do not get caught in your attempt. Stay out of sight. Your target might feel strange for a while, but how are they gonna pin that on you, their long lost buddy, that just happens to walk around the corner?

Chu Li


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> *Succeeding on a Saving Throw*



Where is this found?



> A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack.



Innkeeper: "Hey, I feel a tingle! You're dead meat, you SOB!"  

Barmaid: "Oh yeah? I was tingling a minute ago too! Must be a warlock! Get'im!"

Random passerby: "A warlock charming people? Someone start making a flyer!"

Innkeeper: "Wait, don't hurt him! He's my best friend!"

Barmaid: "Oh yeah, mine too. Sorry, buddy."


----------



## Caliban (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Where is this found?




The PHB, in the spells section.  I pulled the quote from the SRD, so I don't have a page number.


----------



## shilsen (Jul 2, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> The PHB, in the spells section.  I pulled the quote from the SRD, so I don't have a page number.



 Pg. 177 in the 3.5 PHB.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> The thing I would have liked to see with warlock powers is unlimited usage, but with a potential price. For example, you can use the charm invocation as often as you like, but if a creature makes its save, it automatically adopts a hostile attitude and be charmed again by that invocation for 24 hours. If fits the flavor of the class and curbs the inclination to spam.




If I recall correctly, the Warlock's charm ability only works on one creature at a time.  If you charm someone else, the first one becomes uncharmed.

Brad


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 2, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> If I recall correctly, the Warlock's charm ability only works on one creature at a time.  If you charm someone else, the first one becomes uncharmed.
> 
> Brad




The only question being "Does the uncharmed person realize he was charmed". My hunch is yes, since they will remember everything that happened and wonder why the hell he treated the random, shady person he had never met before in his life, as if he was their best friend since grade school.

Spamming charm like it is going out of style simply won't work I think.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 2, 2007)

AllisterH said:
			
		

> The only question being "Does the uncharmed person realize he was charmed". My hunch is yes, since they will remember everything that happened and wonder why the hell he treated the random, shady person he had never met before in his life, as if he was their best friend since grade school.



 Warlock and Enchanter Lesson #1: be nice to your _charm_ targets! Since they don't know why they like you, do not give them reason to hate you later.

 -- N


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Vast segments of the game are actually based on reality. Humans, animals, armour, most weapons, most social structures, money, etc. In fact I would say there are far more aspects of reality in the game then fantasy... so when I see something so blatantly stupid as the Spiked Chain, it stands out...



I really didn't want to go down this path because there was an entire thread about the spiked chain recently, so I'm just going to say one thing regarding the realism of the spiked chain:

Personally, I find the weapon extremely believable. There are lots of real world, historical examples of chain weapons that function mechanically the same way the spiked chain does. The real objection people have to be is some imagined spiked chain that involves people holding onto the spikey bits. Unfortunately for them, this is not how the spiked chain works, nor is it even how it is pictured in the PHB. 

The spiked chain as pictured in the PHB is composed of a 5' length of chain with spikes on it, a hand ring, two 2.5' lengths of spikeless chain with a hand ring in the middle, another hand ring, and a 5' length of chain with spikes.

The obvious mechanic is one holds the outer hand rings, spinning the 5' lengths of chain with spikes. When one wishes to attack, one decides whether it is a close attack or a far attack. For a far attack, one releases one of the hand rings, extending the chain out to 10', with the spikey bit at the end. When one wishes to attack close, one does not release the hand ring, and instead just lashes out with the 5' of spikey chain.

This mechanic is completely realistic and believable. There is nothing about it that is ridiculous. You simply spin the outer lengths of chain with spikes on the end on either side of your body, and release them using the exact same physical process utilized by _numerous_ historical weapons.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> If I recall correctly, the Warlock's charm ability only works on one creature at a time.  If you charm someone else, the first one becomes uncharmed.
> 
> Brad



Wasn't it also a sonic based effect? Word of something or other? Cause that is pretty obvious...


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Pg. 177 in the 3.5 PHB.



Thanks, guys.


----------



## werk (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> Wasn't it also a sonic based effect? Word of something or other? Cause that is pretty obvious...




All invocations have somatic components, IIRC, and charm person has a verbal component.

That makes it pretty easy to tell who made him "feels a hostile force or a tingle"


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 2, 2007)

werk said:
			
		

> That makes it pretty easy to tell who made him "feels a hostile force or a tingle"



I'm never going to be able to play a warlock after all this talk about how they make people feel a hostile tingling. I'll feel like every town I enter, I'll have to go door to door and warn everyone about myself.


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> If I recall correctly, the Warlock's charm ability only works on one creature at a time.  If you charm someone else, the first one becomes uncharmed.



Right, but how long do you need some NPC charmed for? Until after he's giiven you a discount on equipment, or has spilled the beans about some major secret, or has otherwise expended his usefulness.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> I see it more like the worst enemy hands YOU the gun, but because your exalted you cant kill him while is unarmed.
> 
> vop is pretty strong but I think people forget the 2 feats part. the two feats imho allow vop to be stronger then a equalivent character with magic items. I didn't play long enough to be able to confirm if vop tops off at level 13 or not.



No. You missed the point. Exalted demands a straight and narrow line in which you can walk. That means it is up to the DM to adjudicate whether you fall or not. I have yet to meet a DM that can adjudicate that kind of power over a PC without friction.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> I'm never going to be able to play a warlock after all this talk about how they make people feel a hostile tingling. I'll feel like every town I enter, I'll have to go door to door and warn everyone about myself.



Only if they start throwing invocations left and right. If you stay discrete, you'd be fine...


----------



## werk (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> Only if they start throwing invocations left and right. If you stay discrete, you'd be fine...




I think he meant that his warlock is DEAD SEXY and everyone that sees him 'gets a tingle' 

wink wink
nod nod


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> That would be because the Spiked Chain is in fact silly. It may well be *mechanically* sound. But it is in no way, shape or form  logically sound. It isn't "broken". It's just stupid beyond all reason.



You have polarized yourself so strongly to that position to the point that you consider it a matter of fact. You're emotionally invested in it being stupid beyond all reason, despite all the people who reasonably disagree. What I wanna know is how you get to be all hyperbolic without anyone giving you an excessively hard time about it.   

It's a chain. You can hit people with a chain. It's got spikes just to make it seem a little more exotic and damaging. It's a bit of outlandish weapon, like a lot of specialty weapons seen in fantasy. It requires a little suspension of disbelief, but less than Xena bouncing her chakron-thingy off of walls. Really, no big whoop.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> I really didn't want to go down this path because there was an entire thread about the spiked chain recently, so I'm just going to say one thing regarding the realism of the spiked chain:
> 
> Personally, I find the weapon extremely believable. There are lots of real world, historical examples of chain weapons that function mechanically the same way the spiked chain does. The real objection people have to be is some imagined spiked chain that involves people holding onto the spikey bits. Unfortunately for them, this is not how the spiked chain works, nor is it even how it is pictured in the PHB.
> 
> ...




I have to call you on this one, even if there is another thread...

Show me the pictures. Show me historical examples of a weapon like the Spiked Chain that has been used in the real world. I've read dozens of books on the history of weapons. Heck, I have a better weapon reference collection then the city library. And there isn't a single image or described weapon that even looks vaguely like a Spiked Chain.

As shown in the PHB the Spiked Chain is unusable. If you hold the two main rings you have a double weapon without reach. If you choose to let one go to achieve reach you aren't ever going to regain a grip on the ring while in combat. And putting spiky bits on any of the links is just silly. As I've stated before, there is even an image showing a SC user BLEEDING from his hands while using the silly thing... so even the game illustrators (at least one...) know it's a dumb design...

Not to mention that a SC is a Piercing weapon  and can thus be used underwater...

Historical chain weapons have lengths of "smooth" links. They are also almost all Bludgeoning or Slashing weapons. Those that would fall into the Piercing category are basically daggers that can be retrieved via the chain.

The SC is not historical. It isn't even based on a historical concept. It is silly.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I have to call you on this one, even if there is another thread...
> 
> Show me the pictures. Show me historical examples of a weapon like the Spiked Chain that has been used in the real world. I've read dozens of books on the history of weapons. Heck, I have a better weapon reference collection then the city library. And there isn't a single image or described weapon that even looks vaguely like a Spiked Chain.
> 
> ...



It is probably someone looking at historical chain weapons (kusari-gama and the like) and had the brainstorm of adding barbed wire to it.

Regardless of historical accuracy, it exists in the game as a weapon. That is all there is to it.

After all, if we get into historical accuracy, we can always speak of the so-called "scimitar", "falchion", "rapier", etc. family of inaccurate naming.


----------



## Seeten (Jul 2, 2007)

Didnt Kill Bill have a "spiked chain" type weapon on the girl lieutenant of the crazy 88's?


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Right, but how long do you need some NPC charmed for? Until after he's giiven you a discount on equipment, or has spilled the beans about some major secret, or has otherwise expended his usefulness.




Depends on the case.

Certainly on what the feelings of the target are after the Charm wears off.

Brad


----------



## Felon (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> As shown in the PHB the Spiked Chain is unusable. If you hold the two main rings you have a double weapon without reach. If you choose to let one go to achieve reach you aren't ever going to regain a grip on the ring while in combat. And putting spiky bits on any of the links is just silly. As I've stated before, there is even an image showing a SC user BLEEDING from his hands while using the silly thing... so even the game illustrators (at least one...) know it's a dumb design...



It's a weapon you'd have to be some kind of flawlessly-coordinated superhero to use without injuring yourself. Granted. But why single it out as more outlandish than a hundred other things in D&D that allows a human being to tackle ten-ton steely-skinned monsters?


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> If you choose to let one go to achieve reach you aren't ever going to regain a grip on the ring while in combat.



Now you're putting an interpretive limitation on what a combatant could or could not do, when we're clearly discussing a game that allows your characters to become superhuman. A level 20 human monk has a base land speed of 90' per round, which means they can walk 9 miles an hour and hustle 18. Hustle isn't even running, and yet this speed is only marginally slower than the fastest speeds achieved by humans while _sprinting_ over short distances. This same monk could easily long jump nearly 60 feet (that's on an average jump check), more than double the world record. I'm all for real-world logic in games, but not as much when it comes to the physical limitations of obviously superhuman characters.







			
				Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Not to mention that a SC is a Piercing weapon and can thus be used underwater...



Yeah, so can a lance. Does that make any more sense? No. Just because it's piercing doesn't mean the DM should cover their eyes and sing happy tunes to themselves.







			
				Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Historical chain weapons have lengths of "smooth" links. They are also almost all Bludgeoning or Slashing weapons. Those that would fall into the Piercing category are basically daggers that can be retrieved via the chain.
> 
> The SC is not historical. It isn't even based on a historical concept. It is silly.



You just referenced the historical concepts yourself. There are plenty of chain-based weapons in history, TSR just added spikes to them.


----------



## ehren37 (Jul 2, 2007)

lobsterGun said:
			
		

> Spiked Chain *is* far too much mo-better than the rest of the exotic weapons to not be considered anything other than broken.




Thats sort of like saying Skill focus Concentration is too good compared to Combat Casting, so it must be broken.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

Seeten said:
			
		

> Didnt Kill Bill have a "spiked chain" type weapon on the girl lieutenant of the crazy 88's?




It was a steel ball (hollow or solid?) that had spikes on it. The chain itself was unaltered links. In game terms it would have been a Bludgeoning/Piercing weapon like a Morningstar. It also only had a striking head on one end of the chain.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> It is probably someone looking at historical chain weapons (kusari-gama and the like) and had the brainstorm of adding barbed wire to it.
> 
> Regardless of historical accuracy, it exists in the game as a weapon. That is all there is to it.
> 
> After all, if we get into historical accuracy, we can always speak of the so-called "scimitar", "falchion", "rapier", etc. family of inaccurate naming.




Complaining about naming inaccuracies is what weapon experts do for fun... 

But throwing an item into the game that has no basis in reality isn't the same thing...


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> It's a weapon you'd have to be some kind of flawlessly-coordinated superhero to use without injuring yourself. Granted. But why single it out as more outlandish than a hundred other things in D&D that allows a human being to tackle ten-ton steely-skinned monsters?




I see it as the biggest example in the game of bad design. Of thoughtlessness on the part of the people that wrote the rules. Weapons play a MAJOR role in RPGs. I think they deserve more consideration and time...

Of course, I also sketch weapons as a hobby...


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 2, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> Now you're putting an interpretive limitation on what a combatant could or could not do, when we're clearly discussing a game that allows your characters to become superhuman. A level 20 human monk has a base land speed of 90' per round, which means they can walk 9 miles an hour and hustle 18. Hustle isn't even running, and yet this speed is only marginally slower than the fastest speeds achieved by humans while _sprinting_ over short distances. This same monk could easily long jump nearly 60 feet (that's on an average jump check), more than double the world record. I'm all for real-world logic in games, but not as much when it comes to the physical limitations of obviously superhuman characters.Yeah, so can a lance. Does that make any more sense? No. Just because it's piercing doesn't mean the DM should cover their eyes and sing happy tunes to themselves.You just referenced the historical concepts yourself. There are plenty of chain-based weapons in history, TSR just added spikes to them.




The Monks abilities are magical in nature. A chain weapon is mundane. Mundane items should be usable...

If a DM has to make a house rule for a mundane weapon, the weapon itself is broken... as for a lance, unwieldy yes, impossible to use underwater? No.

All the things that TSR can be blamed for, the Spiked Chain isn't one of them. Even TSR didn't come up with such a silly concept...

And adding those spikes turns a viable weapon into a useless one...


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 2, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> The Monks abilities are magical in nature. A chain weapon is mundane. Mundane items should be usable...





			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Fast Movement (Ex): At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to her speed, as shown on Table: The Monk. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed.



It is _not_ magical in nature.


----------



## Caliban (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I see it as the biggest example in the game of bad design. Of thoughtlessness on the part of the people that wrote the rules. Weapons play a MAJOR role in RPGs. I think they deserve more consideration and time...
> 
> Of course, I also sketch weapons as a hobby...




Naw, that's the Dire Flail.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> It is _not_ magical in nature.




All right, it's an Extraordinary ability... "beyond what is ordinary or usual; highly unusual or exceptional or remarkable". It is well within the concept of the "fantasy" aspect of a fantasy role-playing game.

A chain weapon is part and parcel of the real world. Except for a Spiked Chain which is silly. There is reality in an RPG. The Spiked Chain is not part of that reality. Make it a magic item. Which is the only way it would be usable...


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Naw, that's the Dire Flail.




If you change the text for the Dire Flail it makes a great chain weapon. Just take out the solid shaft and you are good to go...


----------



## Caliban (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> If you change the text for the Dire Flail it makes a great chain weapon. Just take out the solid shaft and you are good to go...




Change the text and take the spikes off the spiked chain and you are good to go as well.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 3, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Thats sort of like saying Skill focus Concentration is too good compared to Combat Casting, so it must be broken.



To be honest, it isn't. The Spiked Chain, that is.

There is a general sort of logic where the whole Simple, Martial, Exotic categories are concerned.

A one-handed martial weapon does 1d8 damage. Everything seems to based off this. If it is a light weapon, it goes down a die step (d6). If it is a two-handed weapon, it goes up a step (2d6). If it has a special ability, it does down half a step (e.g., heavy flail for 1d10). If it has two special abilities, it goes down a full step (e.g., expanded critical and finesse for rapiers, expanded critical and druid weapon for scimitar). If there is a combination of the above, it is usually a better ability coupled with a die step down (e.g., scythe has a heavy critical of x4, but low threat range and half a step down from a greatsword in damage).

If it is a simple weapon, things goes down a step, e.g., 1d6 damage for a one-handed weapon.

If it is an exotic weapon, it gains special abilities or are just plain weird for a Western European setting (e.g., two-bladed sword is two 1d8 weapons, but is better for TWF).

A Spiked Chain is a two handed exotic weapon with a few special abilities. It should really be a 3d6(19-20/x2) weapon. But because of its reach, trip ability and disarm bonus, it gets a lower threat range, and one-and-a-half smaller die sizes.

Seems about right, imo.


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 3, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> If it is an exotic weapon, it gains special abilities or are just plain weird for a Western European setting (e.g., two-bladed sword is two 1d8 weapons, but is better for TWF).
> 
> A Spiked Chain is a two handed exotic weapon with a few special abilities. It should really be a 3d6(19-20/x2) weapon. But because of its reach, trip ability and disarm bonus, it gets a lower threat range, and one-and-a-half smaller die sizes.
> 
> Seems about right, imo.




That's the thing though. In reality, I've seen only two EWP taken. Spiked chain and Bastard sword is the other. Pretty much all the rest aren't worth the cost of one of your precious feats, even if you're a fighter (with splatbooks, fighters now have much better choices).

I think the reason why people freak over the spiked chain is that melee is "mundane" and is something they can envision and do themselves.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jul 3, 2007)

When people say BO9S isn't broken, is this compared to spellcasters or compared to other classes? 

I mean, can any fighter really stand next to a warblade and not feel a bit hosed?


----------



## Nifft (Jul 3, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> When people say BO9S isn't broken, is this compared to spellcasters or compared to other classes?



 Compared to casters, Bards, Barbarians, Rangers (with access to Spell Compendium), Rogues and Scouts.



			
				Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I mean, can any fighter really stand next to a warblade and not feel a bit hosed?



 Fighters are used to that feeling. They're the class right next to Druid, remember? 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 3, 2007)

I find all this talk about the spiked chain funny.  Granted, the D&D spiked chain is not exactly real life usable.  But I really want someone to fire of a single magic missle before I listen to that argument with much belief!  D&D isn't about reality so much as it is having fun.  If I have a player who wants to use one in a game because it'll make his character more enjoyable, I'm certainly not going to say no!  I mean, the weapon itself is really not that strong, and certainly not completely worth that exotic feat it takes.

Of course, as long as we're talking about odd things that shouldn't make sense bu we play with them anyway ... let's talk about spiked armor!  Come on.  They way spiked armor would really be seen by an enemy is with excitement.  The spikes essentially provide a guide for your blade to ensure a hit!  And that's not even talking about the potential damage that a set of spiked armor would exact upon the armor wearer's assistant and fellow combatants when fighting in tight quarters.  Or all those climb and jump checks that certainly a player in spiked armor should be worrying about.  I don't find the spiked chain nearly so offensive to my realism than D&D's concept of spiked armor!  But then again, if a player wants a set of spiked armor in my game because it helps them enjoy the game, I think that is a small enough compromise that I as a DM am willing to accept.  Spiked armor (and all the real life problems that D&D ignores) is not going to ruin my game.



And really, that is at the heart of this thread, isn't it?  Isn't this thread at least partially about what parts of our not-real-life-because-its-only-a-game fantasy can we accept?  It is a game ... to me broken means it destroys the game.  Broken brings the game to a halt until the broken aspect is resolved and brought back in line.  But that's just my definition.

In that light ... spiked chains, monks, VoP, psionics, etc do not make my game come to a halt.  They do not destroy my gaming experience.  To be honest, they enhance it and I am better for them because their inclusion doesn't break my game and it means that my players enjoy the possibilities not involved in other games.


----------



## Felon (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> All right, it's an Extraordinary ability... "beyond what is ordinary or usual; highly unusual or exceptional or remarkable". It is well within the concept of the "fantasy" aspect of a fantasy role-playing game.
> 
> A chain weapon is part and parcel of the real world. Except for a Spiked Chain which is silly. There is reality in an RPG. The Spiked Chain is not part of that reality. Make it a magic item. Which is the only way it would be usable...



...unless the wielder was _extraordinary_. You know, a warrior who is highly unusual or exceptional or remarkable.


----------



## Imp (Jul 3, 2007)

I've said this before, it's not so much that the spiked chain is implausible, it's that it's implausible and it's become standard equipment for a certain kind of fighter in the game.  It isn't overpowered, but like the greatsword and longbow it's top-of-the-class for its role and so it becomes a centerpiece of the game and therefore not so extraordinary.

What do you mean, the baron's elite guard use guisarmes?  Why?

It is also true that most all other exotic weapons are to varying degrees lame and weak.


----------



## Slaved (Jul 3, 2007)

I would rather have a character use a spiked chain than the dwarven warpike.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Change the text and take the spikes off the spiked chain and you are good to go as well.




With the Dire Flail all I have to do is change the text. The mechanics remain the same.

With a Spiked Chain I would need to change the weapon type from Piercing to Bludgeoning. 

I prefer the former over the later.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> ...unless the wielder was _extraordinary_. You know, a warrior who is highly unusual or exceptional or remarkable.




How skilled the warrior in question is is pointless. The weapon itself is absurd.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

Nonlethal Force said:
			
		

> I find all this talk about the spiked chain funny.  Granted, the D&D spiked chain is not exactly real life usable.  But I really want someone to fire of a single magic missle before I listen to that argument with much belief!  D&D isn't about reality so much as it is having fun.  If I have a player who wants to use one in a game because it'll make his character more enjoyable, I'm certainly not going to say no!  I mean, the weapon itself is really not that strong, and certainly not completely worth that exotic feat it takes.
> 
> Of course, as long as we're talking about odd things that shouldn't make sense bu we play with them anyway ... let's talk about spiked armor!  Come on.  They way spiked armor would really be seen by an enemy is with excitement.  The spikes essentially provide a guide for your blade to ensure a hit!  And that's not even talking about the potential damage that a set of spiked armor would exact upon the armor wearer's assistant and fellow combatants when fighting in tight quarters.  Or all those climb and jump checks that certainly a player in spiked armor should be worrying about.  I don't find the spiked chain nearly so offensive to my realism than D&D's concept of spiked armor!  But then again, if a player wants a set of spiked armor in my game because it helps them enjoy the game, I think that is a small enough compromise that I as a DM am willing to accept.  Spiked armor (and all the real life problems that D&D ignores) is not going to ruin my game.
> 
> ...




Last time I checked, Magic Missiles weren't usable in the real world. But then a Spiked Chain wouldn't be either...

And a Spiked Chain in my campaign WOULD destroy my gaming experience. It would be an insult to thousands of years of warriors developing the best possible weapons for the task at hand. Lives were spent earning that knowledge. To introduce such a blatantly absurd weapon is insulting to them...


----------



## Thurbane (Jul 3, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Fighters are used to that feeling. They're the class right next to Druid, remember?



To be hosed by a shapechanging spellcaster is one thing; for a fighter to get hosed at fighting by another warrior-class, that's just salt in the wound...


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> How skilled the warrior in question is is pointless. The weapon itself is absurd.



This is why I didn't want to go down this road. You've been shown time and again why it's not absurd at all within the confines of the game, and yet you still insist that it is. The world of D&D is not like our world, the people in it are superior to us. Just because you, or I, or anyone in history, could not have controlled a spiked chain weapon does not make it impossible for someone from D&D. And anyway, it wouldn't be that difficult to reel it back in. You don't have to grab the ring itself, you grab the interior length of chain (which, per the PHB, is not spiked), and slide outward to the ring.

What's that you say? That's the exact mechanic used to reel in many other chain-based weapons? Why, so it is!

Sorry to be snarky, but it seems all you keep saying is "it's absurd," when each and every area where you've said it doesn't make sense, it has been shown to make sense.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Last time I checked, Magic Missiles weren't usable in the real world. But then a Spiked Chain wouldn't be either...




And that's my point!

Using a spiked chain no more offends my sensibilities than using magic.  Because in fantasy, it doesn't have to be about sensibilities!  It's about what makes the game fun.

Of course, we all have our limits.  Nobody has the right to tell you what is allowed or disallowed at your gaming table.  But likewise, nobody has the right to tell other people what is sensible otr not for their own table.  That's why they're called DMs!



			
				Tetsubo said:
			
		

> It would be an insult to thousands of years of warriors developing the best possible weapons for the task at hand. Lives were spent earning that knowledge. To introduce such a blatantly absurd weapon is insulting to them...




See, I don't see the offense more than other areas, personally.  Actually, I think it far less offensive to sensibilities than magic.  The spiked chain to the thousands of years of warriors is far less aggressively offensive than magic is to all the herbalist and shamans throughout the world.  After all, at least a spiked chain could be constructed and hung on a wall and displayed, even if it is only a ceremonial instrument and not actually usable.  Like the spiked chain only more greivous, D&D magic takes a legitimate knowledge of herbalism, magneticism, and healing - and mutates it into something destructive and powermongering.  [Or, at least it can.]

Yet, people have no problem suspending the offense to shamans and legitimate herbalists (such as the historical Merlin or Aesclepius, to use two specific historical examples].  We do it all the time, because we choose to.  We want magic in the game - even though it far more offensively distorts the legitimate practices that it represents than does the spiked chain.

I'm not saying you have to include the spiked chain.  Just understand that decision as your inability to suspend reality in that area.  It isn't a problem with the game, it's your choice!  [And we all make those choices, so I'm not trying to say that there is anything inherently wrong with that choice, either.]


----------



## shilsen (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> And a Spiked Chain in my campaign WOULD destroy my gaming experience. It would be an insult to thousands of years of warriors developing the best possible weapons for the task at hand. Lives were spent earning that knowledge. To introduce such a blatantly absurd weapon is insulting to them...




I'm guessing that warriors over the last thousands of years are now either (a) dead and/or (b) completely unconcerned about what imaginary characters in your personal D&D game use. 

But then I'm weird like that.


----------



## Caliban (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Last time I checked, Magic Missiles weren't usable in the real world. But then a Spiked Chain wouldn't be either...
> 
> And a Spiked Chain in my campaign WOULD destroy my gaming experience. It would be an insult to thousands of years of warriors developing the best possible weapons for the task at hand. Lives were spent earning that knowledge. To introduce such a blatantly absurd weapon is insulting to them...




Dude, take a few deep breathes and calm down.  That much hyberbole can't be healthy.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> And a Spiked Chain in my campaign WOULD destroy my gaming experience.




Oh, and one other thing.  You'll notice that your response doesn't talk about "broken" as I define it.  To me, broken means it destroys the game, not your gaming experience.  "Broken" is a term that deals with mechanics, not one's enjoyment of the game.  Broken halts the game because the rest of the mechanics cannot overcome the advantage given by the "broken" mechanic.

As I said above, you can eliminate the spiked chain from the game at your table.  But not because it is broken, but because you choose not to suspend reality in that area.  That doesn't make the spiked chain broken, it makes it unnacceptable to you.  Those are two different things.  Mechanically, the spiked chain is not broken.  It may be unnacceptable to you, however.

To use a personal example from myself, just to show that I'm not trying to attack you:  I don't allow Complete Psionics in my game.  I choose not to suspend my reality in that direction.  I thought the book poorly edited and didn't care much for the PrCs and some (but not all) of the power fixes.  Additionally, I hate the flavor of the ardent - at least I think that's the one but I might have the name wrong (anything specifically anti-religion is automatically contrary to my homebrew setting).  I am a firm believer in that most pre-industrial worlds had a strong sense of superstition if not religious fear (or love).

My point in that example is not that Complete Psionics is broken - because there is very little in Complete Psionics that even has a chance at breaking the game!  Rather, Complete Psionics doesn't fit my style of gameplay.  I choose to not use it because it will ruin my experience, but not because it is broken.  That's my choice as a roleplayer and it has nothing to do with the mechanics!

Like it or not, the spiked chain is not broken.  It may unnecessarily drag out combats ... but it does not give a mechanical advantage to any player that cannot be overcome through another set of mechanical advantages.


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

Nonlethal Force said:
			
		

> Oh, and one other thing.  You'll noticve that your response doesn't talk about "broken" as I define it.  To me, broken means it destroys the game, not your gaming experience.  "Broken" is a term that deals with mechanics, not one's enjoyment of the game.  Broken halts the game because the rest of the mechanics cannot overcome the advantage given by the "broken" mechanic.



In his defense, he never was arguing that the spiked chain is broken:







			
				Tetsubo said:
			
		

> That would be because the Spiked Chain is in fact silly. It may well be *mechanically* sound. But it is in no way, shape or form logically sound. It isn't "broken". It's just stupid beyond all reason.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 3, 2007)

Okay, fair enough.  This being a thread about "broken" things, I may have made an assumption.  I can admit that.  But if that's true, then this thread has strayed from the topic!   [Not that this is unusualy or anything ...    ]


----------



## rockstarfozzy (Jul 3, 2007)

I don't understand how the spiked chain could ruin someone's entire gaming experience.

If you have such a problem with it, then you really arn't in any position to comment on whether it's broken or not, since your opinion will clearly be bias because of your non-nonsensical hatred of the weapon.

I mean really, you just need to chill out.

Anyhoo, one of my players ran a spiked chain fgt/swsh build in a campaign i ran once. He was a machine, and the player loved running him. Everyone just called him "Chains." Regardless, in response, i did what any good DM would do, i adjusted the difficulty. 

Thats the thing about "broken" characters. If you are a good DM, you can adjust the campaign to fit the characters needs, and to provide them with a decent challenge. Maybe I'm just not one to whine over things there's no need to whine over.


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

Which is why _I_ said:







			
				The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> I really didn't want to go down this path because there was an entire thread about the spiked chain recently, so I'm just going to say one thing regarding the realism of the spiked chain:



And then I proceeded to derail this entire thread.


----------



## rockstarfozzy (Jul 3, 2007)

The concept of "Broken" in and of itself is kind of stupid IMO. Sure, there are build that are better than others, more effective than others, etc, but much of the joy I garner from gaming is from role playing. I won't say that i dislike building effective characters, but if I don't have an interesting personality to boot, i just won't play it. No fun you know.

Some would argue that balancing issues in the game are super important because if the party is unbalanced, the people will feel weaker than others in fights. I guess my response would be that you can compensate for being weaker in fights by being stronger in other areas. Of course that Spiked Chain Wielder is a monster during battles, but whose going to disarm the traps on the way? And whose going to dispel the fly spell on the opposing spell caster before he blasts your SPW to bits with that disintegration ray?


----------



## Fifth Element (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> The SC is not historical. It isn't even based on a historical concept. It is silly.




Do you exclude everything from your game that isn't historical? Cuz I think there *might* be a few things in D&D that aren't historical, or even based on historical concepts.

Hey! You got your reality in my fantasy!


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

rockstarfozzy said:
			
		

> The concept of "Broken" in and of itself is kind of stupid IMO. Sure, there are build that are better than others, more effective than others, etc, but much of the joy I garner from gaming is from role playing.



This is true, but the real problem with broken things is when you lose variety. When a player is ostracized for taking a feat, class, weapon, ability, or whatever instead of another one because it's essentially useless, or not nearly as good as this other one.

I played a core rogue in an OA game once and it was stupid how much more powerful than me everyone else (who had built their characters out of the OA book) was in combat. I fired 3 arrows the entire campaign. The first one missed, the last two were used to coup de grace fellow party members as part of the plot. It was frustrating for a while, but I developed my own game plan and ended up having tons of fun (I ended up starting an underground criminal organization, taking over a corner of the world, and my character became a recurring villain for that DM).

Whenever I've felt like I was on the short end of the balance stick in a game, I've just gone out and changed the game so that it played to my strengths. The best thing about D&D has always been its flexibility and the way you can accomplish just about anything you put your mind to.


----------



## Felon (Jul 3, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> How skilled the warrior in question is is pointless. The weapon itself is absurd.





			
				Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Last time I checked, Magic Missiles weren't usable in the real world. But then a Spiked Chain wouldn't be either...
> 
> And a Spiked Chain in my campaign WOULD destroy my gaming experience. It would be an insult to thousands of years of warriors developing the best possible weapons for the task at hand. Lives were spent earning that knowledge. To introduce such a blatantly absurd weapon is insulting to them...



OK, it's pretty clear where we stand now. Discussion on the spiked chain has progressed to the point where Tetsubo's veneer of having a rational objection has been stripped away by logical counter-arguements which concede that the SC may well be unrealistic, but point out that D&D is filled with things that are no less outlandish. He's quite willing to dismiss this and any other objective statment by shaking his head in denial and uttering "it's absurd...it's silly...it's stupid..." in an infinite loop. He's willing to state his opinions as indisputable fact. He's willing to make crazed statements about insulting the warrior tradition and that having a spiked chain would destroy his gaming experience. Apparently, he feels that his hobby of reading books about weapons and drawing pictures of weapons gives him some rare and special perspective that's inaccessable to others. 

Tetsubo, you should really consider what you think you're accomplishing with this behavior that has become something of a pattern. if you think it's a dumb weapon, and you just want to share your opinion and move on, that's no big thing. But if you have an opinion which you feel compelled to throw out at any available opportunity with the intent of provoking responses from others, then you have some onus to entertain reaonable discussion. In other words, play fair. If you feel compelled to rebutt every rebuttal, then it ought to consist of more than just digging your heels in and dismissing logic with outrageous, emotionally-charged denials and reiterating your initial position. Otherwise, the end result is just baiting people and making a spectacle of yourself. Is that what you're trying to accomplish? Whether or not it is, it's disruptive behavior.


----------



## Caliban (Jul 3, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Apparently, he feels that his hobby of reading books about weapons and drawing pictures of weapons gives him some rare and special perspective that's inaccessable to others.




I think he may be right about that.  His perspective is innaccessable to me, at least.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 3, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> To be hosed by a shapechanging spellcaster is one thing; for a fighter to get hosed at fighting by another warrior-class, that's just salt in the wound...



 Heh, I view it differently: IMHO it's nice that there's a primary warrior who can stand up next to a Cleric or Druid with pride, even at high level. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Mort (Jul 3, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> To be hosed by a shapechanging spellcaster is one thing; for a fighter to get hosed at fighting by another warrior-class, that's just salt in the wound...




First, a fighter with splatbooks (especially PHB II) can compete with a warblade as far as damage output and combat effectiveness. That said, the warblade will be more fun to play because they have many varied things they can do while the fighter will be stuck with one or at most two tricks.

To get this thread slightly back on track - I find all the threads on how the warblade is "broken" kind of funny - because compared to the other classes in Bo9S it's the least powerful - especially compared to the crusader. Yet no one really says anything about the other classes (or at least much more rarely)


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> To get this thread slightly back on track - I find all the threads on how the warblade is "broken" kind of funny - because compared to the other classes in Bo9S it's the least powerful - especially compared to the crusader. Yet no one really says anything about the other classes (or at least much more rarely)



I don't own the book of 9 swords, but I do know that I hear the Crusader popping up all the time as an effective build, or even for dipping to put some spine in a character.


----------



## Mort (Jul 3, 2007)

The Blow Leprechaun said:
			
		

> I don't own the book of 9 swords, but I do know that I hear the Crusader popping up all the time as an effective build, or even for dipping to put some spine in a character.




I'm just talking about how whenever the word "broken" comes up - warblade is always touted, yet really the crusader is a much more effective class - for dipping or as a straight build (that's IMO of course, but it's pretty easy to back up)


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> I'm just talking about how whenever the word "broken" comes up - warblade is always touted, yet really the crusader is a much more effective class - for dipping or as a straight build (that's IMO of course, but it's pretty easy to back up)



I wasn't disagreeing with you


----------



## FireLance (Jul 3, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> To get this thread slightly back on track - I find all the threads on how the warblade is "broken" kind of funny - because compared to the other classes in Bo9S it's the least powerful - especially compared to the crusader. Yet no one really says anything about the other classes (or at least much more rarely)



I think it's because the crusader tends to get compared to the paladin, while the warblade tends to get compared to the fighter. 

Crusader abilities and paladin abilities are different enough that the comparison of which is better does not seem so stark.

However, warblade abilities overlap with fighter ablities somewhat. The warblade also gets (slightly delayed) access to fighter-only feats and a small number of bonus feats (albeit a shorter and generaly less useful list). In addition, it gets a better hit dice, more skill points, a better skill list, the ability to switch out weapon-specific feats, and a few other advantages in combat.

Some people have advised that the warblade looks less broken when it is compared to the barbarian instead.


----------



## Piratecat (Jul 3, 2007)

Enough.

You know what? If someone has a thread that discusses something you don't like, but it's peripheral to the main conversation, *don't derail their thread.* Be polite and start a new one - heck, politely link to it, even - but don't start arguing about minutiae.

And you know what else? If someone starts derailing the thread, *report the problem instead of arguing.* I'm appalled that this sunk to the level of personal insults before someone reported it. 

At this point, I want no discussion whatsoever about the spiked chain. Time to move on, guys, on _both_ sides.

As always, please email me with questions, complaints, or discussion.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jul 3, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> OK, it's pretty clear where we stand now. Discussion on the spiked chain has progressed to the point where Tetsubo's veneer of having a rational objection has been stripped away by logical counter-arguements which concede that the SC may well be unrealistic, but point out that D&D is filled with things that are no less outlandish. He's quite willing to dismiss this and any other objective statment by shaking his head in denial and uttering "it's absurd...it's silly...it's stupid..." in an infinite loop. He's willing to state his opinions as indisputable fact. He's willing to make crazed statements about insulting the warrior tradition and that having a spiked chain would destroy his gaming experience. Apparently, he feels that his hobby of reading books about weapons and drawing pictures of weapons gives him some rare and special perspective that's inaccessable to others.
> 
> Tetsubo, you should really consider what you think you're accomplishing with this behavior that has become something of a pattern. if you think it's a dumb weapon, and you just want to share your opinion and move on, that's no big thing. But if you have an opinion which you feel compelled to throw out at any available opportunity with the intent of provoking responses from others, then you have some onus to entertain reaonable discussion. In other words, play fair. If you feel compelled to rebutt every rebuttal, then it ought to consist of more than just digging your heels in and dismissing logic with outrageous, emotionally-charged denials and reiterating your initial position. Otherwise, the end result is just baiting people and making a spectacle of yourself. Is that what you're trying to accomplish? Whether or not it is, it's disruptive behavior.




I have no desire to be disruptive. My point seems to have been missed by others. I won't post in this thread again.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 3, 2007)

To be fair, Warblade looks a lot better than it actually is. It's hard to blame people who read the class casually and misunderstand its limits.

For example, Warblades get *Bonus Feats*. But the Warblade chooses from a list that's pathetically restricted relative to what a Fighter could choose for his (identically named) class feature.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Erywin (Jul 3, 2007)

When we first got Bo9S and I had a look over the classes, never did I relate the Warblade to a fighter, a barbarian yes, fighter no.  That being said Blarg is currently playing a gestalted Crusader/Rogue (fighter feats instead of SA) and I haven't found it overpowering yet, majority of the group is 10th level.

As far as broken goes, I am really getting frustrated with the abrupt jaunt ability (wizard alternate class feature from PHB 2?)

Cheers,
E


----------



## Nifft (Jul 3, 2007)

Erywin said:
			
		

> As far as broken goes, I am really getting frustrated with the abrupt jaunt ability (wizard alternate class feature from PHB 2?)



 It's easily the strongest variant ability in the book.

And Conjurers have already gotten a *lot* of love in the supplements... 

 -- N


----------



## evilbob (Jul 3, 2007)

I agree with some of the general sentiments that rockstarfozzy gave:  most of the time, trying to evaluate a "broken" thing in D&D is kinda pointless.  In my opinion, "broken" means "challenges the DM in new ways."  Personally, I enjoy being challenged as a DM, so I don't mind having a player try something that others might consider "broken."  To me, it's more of a test of my ability as a DM to roll with it, and make sure that in the end, it gets balanced - and that everyone has fun.  (At the end of the day, I've had far more problems with specific player personalities impeding fun than with any game mechanic I've ever read.)

Even the infamous Book of Exalted Deeds can be contained by a DM willing to work with their players and be careful about how the power is used.


----------



## The Blow Leprechaun (Jul 3, 2007)

evilbob said:
			
		

> Even the infamous Book of Exalted Deeds can be contained by a DM willing to work with their players and be careful about how the power is used.



I think this last point is the best one, too. DM's need to be on top of the rules because a lot of times what's broken is merely misunderstood or misused.

I ran a Psion once and missed the bit about not being able to use more total power points on augmentation than your manifester level. Believe me, if you waive that restriction, psionics _are_ broken. But it's because I misread the rules. I still think psionics are powerful, but definitely not broken.

So maybe everything is an example of an overrated broken thing!


----------



## BadMojo (Jul 3, 2007)

You know, I would have thought that Piratecat's instructions in big red text just a few posts up would have been enough... for ignoring them and discussing spiked chains you are  banned for 1 day - Plane Sailing


----------



## rgard (Jul 3, 2007)

Hi, I hadn't heard that the Ur-Priest was broken, but when I read the class description, I thought it looked great and I should give it a try.  Used it with wizard and mystic theurge.

It was fun through the 10th level of the prc.   Then it wasn't as much fun:  

1.  Overcoming SR is a pain though not impossible.
2.  You cap out at one 9th level spell...unless you have god-like wisdom.
3.  All the while you did burn some precious feat slots and probably multiclassed to qualify for the feat.  Who needs Iron Will when you will have an outrageous will save?  

The party Cleric should be laughing at the Ur-Priest in any epic level campaign.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## Cameron (Jul 3, 2007)

evilbob said:
			
		

> I agree with some of the general sentiments that rockstarfozzy gave:  most of the time, trying to evaluate a "broken" thing in D&D is kinda pointless.  In my opinion, "broken" means "challenges the DM in new ways."  Personally, I enjoy being challenged as a DM, so I don't mind having a player try something that others might consider "broken."  To me, it's more of a test of my ability as a DM to roll with it, and make sure that in the end, it gets balanced - and that everyone has fun.  (At the end of the day, I've had far more problems with specific player personalities impeding fun than with any game mechanic I've ever read.)
> 
> Even the infamous Book of Exalted Deeds can be contained by a DM willing to work with their players and be careful about how the power is used.



I get ya, man. I totally get ya.

Sometimes, I see all the DMs that scream "broken this, broken that" and I think "lazy 'tards!" Those DMs that nerf this or that because it doesn't conform to their views on what DnD should be (usually DMs that think fondly of the good old days of 1E) just makes me roll my eyes. I played 1E. It wasn't as good or less hack and slash than 3.x...


----------



## Cameron (Jul 3, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Hi, I hadn't heard that the Ur-Priest was broken, but when I read the class description, I thought it looked great and I should give it a try.  Used it with wizard and mystic theurge.
> 
> It was fun through the 10th level of the prc.   Then it wasn't as much fun:
> 
> ...



The beauty of the Ur Priest is for you to summon an Effreet and steal his 3 wish/day thing and use it on yourself. Multiple times. But that's its only schtick. The whole world hates an Ur Priest and all the religions try to kill one on sight.

Sublime Chord is probably a better accelerated casting prc.


----------



## Dykstrav (Jul 3, 2007)

With reguard to individual positions on the spiked chain issue... 

It's my opinion that if a single game element can cause this much contention, it's broken.

You know, I would have thought that Piratecat's instructions in big red text just a few posts up would have been enough... for ignoring them and bringing up spiked chains again you are  banned for 1 day - Plane Sailing


----------



## Nifft (Jul 3, 2007)

Dykstrav said:
			
		

> It's my opinion that if a single game element can cause this much contention, it's broken.



 By all the gods...

*Alignment is broken!* 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Thurbane (Jul 3, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> First, a fighter with splatbooks (especially PHB II) can compete with a warblade as far as damage output and combat effectiveness. That said, the warblade will be more fun to play because they have many varied things they can do while the fighter will be stuck with one or at most two tricks.
> 
> To get this thread slightly back on track - I find all the threads on how the warblade is "broken" kind of funny - because compared to the other classes in Bo9S it's the least powerful - especially compared to the crusader. Yet no one really says anything about the other classes (or at least much more rarely)



Hey, I'm not a Bo9S hater (even though I traded mine in on a copy of Cityscape), and I'm not even sure there's much "broken" in it...it just does not fit thematically with any of my games, and I have no real desire to add another sub system of rules to the game (same for psionics and incarnum).

If it works for you and your game, I say go for it.


----------



## rgard (Jul 3, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> The beauty of the Ur Priest is for you to summon an Effreet and steal his 3 wish/day thing and use it on yourself. Multiple times. But that's its only schtick. The whole world hates an Ur Priest and all the religions try to kill one on sight.
> 
> Sublime Chord is probably a better accelerated casting prc.




True, but never got there as the prc was used with MT.  Just got the spells and caster level.  Glad you mentioned sublime chord, forgot about that one.  I may use it in one of me 1E to 3.5E conversions of my characters.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## Someone (Jul 4, 2007)

evilbob said:
			
		

> In my opinion, "broken" means "challenges the DM in new ways."




I've found several definitions of "Broken". It can mean:

- A concept I don't want in my games. See this thread for examples.

- An option that is better, even marginally, that other similar options, but still mechanically balanced. Suppose a one handed exotic weapon that deals 1d12 damage: it's better than the bastard sword, yet the extra damage is an average of 2 points over a longsword, which is more or less reasonable for a feat.*

- An option that changes traditional gameplay, but are in itself balanced in general power level with other options. Warlocks are the prime example, as casters that don't need to rest and can cast an unlimited number of spells*.

- An option that gravely disrupts gameplay. The Frenzied berserker drawback of attacking party members enters this cathegory*

- An option that is too good not to use. The old 3.0 haste spells was the prime example*

- An option so powerful that a character with it is grossly more powerful than other, near identical characters without it.

*Pretend you agree with these for a moment. The examples are just that, not another reason to derail the thread.


----------



## boolean (Jul 4, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> To get this thread slightly back on track - I find all the threads on how the warblade is "broken" kind of funny - because compared to the other classes in Bo9S it's the least powerful - especially compared to the crusader. Yet no one really says anything about the other classes (or at least much more rarely)



Part of this may be due to the Warblade appearing in the Bo9S preview on the WotC site. It was the first (and in many cases only) martial adept class most people saw.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jul 4, 2007)

I think the other thing about the warblade is he looks at the fighter and says, "Anything you can do I can do better." The Crusader and Swordsages are powerful in a different way.

Its the old example of the bard vs fighter. The fighter may be completely dominant in combat, but the bard just might not care since the fighter is so social inept. But if you have 2 fighters, and one is just plain better at combat then the other, the lesser character starts to feel it.


----------



## Mort (Jul 4, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think the other thing about the warblade is he looks at the fighter and says, "Anything you can do I can do better." The Crusader and Swordsages are powerful in a different way.
> 
> Its the old example of the bard vs fighter. The fighter may be completely dominant in combat, but the bard just might not care since the fighter is so social inept. But if you have 2 fighters, and one is just plain better at combat then the other, the lesser character starts to feel it.




Depending on books allowed - I don't think the warblade will outfight the fighter nearly as much as may appear on paper and certainly not as much as most people think. Sure if you have a core book fighter vs. a standard warblade the warblade will be better, but that's not a fair comparison since the Bo9S is itself an expansion. 
Compare a warblade to a fighter with access to the complete books, PHB II and access to Bo9S stuff and it should come out much more even (note I haven't done an actual comparison and would gladly be proven wrong - but just from seeing the warblade in play, I doubt I would be).


----------



## Someone (Jul 4, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Compare a warblade to a fighter with access to the complete books, PHB II and access to Bo9S stuff and it should come out much more even (note I haven't done an actual comparison and would gladly be proven wrong - but just from seeing the warblade in play, I doubt I would be).




I've seen some of such comparisons in the Wizards' boards. Generally they use heavily twinked fighters oriented either to full attacks, or a devastating charge, in which case they may outdamage the warblade. Since the warblade can use his maneuvers reliably, and the fighter must either start his turn adjacent to the enemy (for full attacks) or away form it (for charges), my personal conclusion is that the warblade is roughly equivalent to a fighter with an extra move action available every turn.


----------



## Thurbane (Jul 5, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think the other thing about the warblade is he looks at the fighter and says, "Anything you can do I can do better." The Crusader and Swordsages are powerful in a different way.
> 
> Its the old example of the bard vs fighter. The fighter may be completely dominant in combat, but the bard just might not care since the fighter is so social inept. But if you have 2 fighters, and one is just plain better at combat then the other, the lesser character starts to feel it.



That's pretty much how I see it, too.


----------



## Felon (Jul 5, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I think the other thing about the warblade is he looks at the fighter and says, "Anything you can do I can do better."



Yes, this is a pretty good way of putting it. I think it was pretty bad design to do things like give the warblade access to the fighter's weapon specialization niche and then lather on barbarian hit dice and skill points. They really should have just let it carve its own identity.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 5, 2007)

Eh, the Warblade doesn't have the bonus Feats to actually pull off a Fighter's tricks.

For example, the famous *Chaingun Tripper* needs a few feats:
* 3 necessary: XWP (Spiked Chain), Combat Expertise, Improved Trip
* 4 nice: Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain), Power Attack, Weapon Spec (Spiked Chain)
* Follow-up PrC -- Exotic Weapons Master (2 levels): Exotic Flurry, Exotic Trip

Warblades have exactly one of those feats on their bonus feat list (Combat Reflexes). What a Human Fighter can do at level 1, a Human Warblade must wait until level 3 to accomplish. When a non-Human Fighter has all 7 of these feats (6th level), a non-Human Warblade has only 4 of them (including Combat Reflexes). If you consider Power Attack to be necessary rather than merely nice, and many folks do, then the non-Human Warblade has to wait until 9th level.

(Note that I'm not saying Fighters are as strong as Warblades, just that a Warblade cannot do everything that a Fighter can do. The Warblade is not strictly better than the Fighter. But boy I'd rather play the Warblade...  )

Cheers, -- N


----------



## zlorf (Jul 5, 2007)

Spike chain was annoying  It was more annoying when we were playing that you can be retripped when getting up from prone as AOO.  It has it place in the game. Someone said it makes combat longer. So does, blink, displacement, mirror image,  invisibility, AC, slow DM's, so players, kids...and so on 




			
				rockstarfozzy said:
			
		

> I don't understand how the spiked chain could ruin someone's entire gaming experience.
> 
> If you have such a problem with it, then you really arn't in any position to comment on whether it's broken or not, since your opinion will clearly be bias because of your non-nonsensical hatred of the weapon.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cameron (Jul 9, 2007)

Someone said:
			
		

> I've seen some of such comparisons in the Wizards' boards. Generally they use heavily twinked fighters oriented either to full attacks, or a devastating charge, in which case they may outdamage the warblade. Since the warblade can use his maneuvers reliably, and the fighter must either start his turn adjacent to the enemy (for full attacks) or away form it (for charges), my personal conclusion is that the warblade is roughly equivalent to a fighter with an extra move action available every turn.



These days, the Paladin and his Charging Smite variant is a better base for chargers, I think.


----------



## smetzger (Jul 9, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I have to call you on this one, even if there is another thread...
> 
> Show me the pictures. Show me historical examples of a weapon like the Spiked Chain that has been used in the real world. I've read dozens of books on the history of weapons. Heck, I have a better weapon reference collection then the city library. And there isn't a single image or described weapon that even looks vaguely like a Spiked Chain.




The spikes on the chain are a bit much.  But an actual chain is believable.  Seen Shanhai Noon?


----------



## czak808 (Jul 9, 2007)

The warblade gets BAB & saves as a fighter AND 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, class and a special ability at every other level?  Compared to the other martial classes, yea that seems much more powerful.


----------



## Thurbane (Jul 9, 2007)

czak808 said:
			
		

> The warblade gets BAB & saves as a fighter AND 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, class and a special ability at every other level?  Compared to the other martial classes, yea that seems much more powerful.



No, apparently it's only on pen and paper, or so I'm told...


----------



## Felon (Jul 9, 2007)

smetzger said:
			
		

> The spikes on the chain are a bit much.  But an actual chain is believable.  Seen Shanhai Noon?




I think this topic may still be off-limites (look for the red text on the previous page), but at any rate, Tetsubo has stated the intent to not reply in this thread again.


----------



## FireLance (Jul 9, 2007)

czak808 said:
			
		

> The warblade gets BAB & saves as a fighter AND 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, class and a special ability at every other level?  Compared to the other martial classes, yea that seems much more powerful.



You do realize that the barbarian also gets BAB and saves as a fighter and 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, and a special ability at every level too, right?


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 9, 2007)

I addition the war blade are also not proficient with any ranged weapons of any kind (except those that are already melee weapons) and they are not proficient with heavy armor or tower shields.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jul 9, 2007)

The Cerebremancer!  That being said, I played one from 1st to 20th in an Age of Worms campaign.  People say that psionics is broken, the complement of magic aids that my psion could go super nova and then act as a wizard with little hampering of the character.  In addition, they use the same prime stat requisite.  This means that it is cheaper to be good with half the cost than the MT.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 9, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> The Cerebremancer!  That being said, I played one from 1st to 20th in an Age of Worms campaign.  People say that psionics is broken, the complement of magic aids that my psion could go super nova and then act as a wizard with little hampering of the character.  In addition, they use the same prime stat requisite.  This means that it is cheaper to be good with half the cost than the MT.



 Cerebremancer vs. MT is an interesting comparison.

- Ceremremancer: one casting stat.

- Mystic Theurge: share Metamagic feats and Item Creation feats.

I wonder which is "technically" stronger... probably depends on the style of the game. Downtime + wealth for item creation would be the tipping point I suspect. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## geosapient (Jul 9, 2007)

deleting my post...


----------



## The Thayan Menace (Jul 9, 2007)

*Veritas!*



			
				Mort said:
			
		

> What combos, spells, classes, etc. did you find just didn't live up to the hype?



*Shilsen*

-Samir


----------



## shilsen (Jul 9, 2007)

The Thayan Menace said:
			
		

> *Shilsen*
> 
> -Samir



 Hey!


----------



## Felon (Jul 10, 2007)

FireLance said:
			
		

> You do realize that the barbarian also gets BAB and saves as a fighter and 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, and a special ability at every level too, right?



Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 10, 2007)

do you think the class features of the warblade balance with the barbarian? If so, you wouldn't mind going toe to toe with one, right?

The barbarian has many more options available to him that a warblade simply doesen't have (archery)

The point is the warblade is dead meat without his maneuvers and stances. with his maneuvers or stances, the war blade is a bit stronger then the barbarian, but the barbarian still out damages him. 

*edit*


----------



## Venator (Jul 10, 2007)

rockstarfozzy said:
			
		

> I don't understand how the spiked chain could ruin someone's entire gaming experience.
> 
> If you have such a problem with it, then you really arn't in any position to comment on whether it's broken or not, since your opinion will clearly be bias because of your non-nonsensical hatred of the weapon.
> 
> ...




It can ruin an entire groups gaming experience.  Adjusting encounters around a chain tripper from levels 1-10ish is absolutely hellish on the group.  Right off the bat any medium sized (and most large sized) bipeds are eliminated from the game.... Either the tripper absolutely dominates leaving everyone else wondering why they are even at the table, the chain tripper does next to nothing and the group struggles to make it through the encounter wondering why they always come across monsters no one has ever seen before, or its a crystal clear DM vs PCs (or PC in this case) situation in every encounter.

The spiked chain is hated because it is associated with the mechanicly broken tripping rules, and has reach.  Both far worse with an Enlarge Person, commonly found in wands.


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 10, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.




Well, why don't we try and compare them since they are quite similar (warblades get starting gold as per barbarians NOT fighters which should've tipped people off that warblades are designed in context of the barbarian).

Hp, BAB, Skill points and Saves are the same. Both get uncanny dodge (and the improved version with the warblade being one level behind in receiving this)

Weapon proficiencies - Same except that warblades don't get proficiency in ANY ranged weapons, not even the Xbow.

Armour and Shield proficencies- Exactly the same.

Unique Skills - Barbarians get Handle Animal, Listen, Ride and Survival while Warblades have Balance, Concentration, Diplomacy, Knowledge (history & local), Martial Lore and Tumble. Personally, I think the warblade one is slightly better since some manoeuvers function off of skills, however the barbarian's skills aren't anything to dismiss (both Handle animal and Ride can increase a barbarian's skill/effectiveness in combat while Listen means at least a barbarian won't be surprised as often.  

Abilities - Fast movement, Trap sense, Damage Reduction, Indomitable Will vs Weapon Aptitude, Battle Clarity/Ardor/cunning/Skill/Mastery and 4 bonus feats from a pretty tight list. Here's where I think it depends on the starting point total of the game. If you are in a 30 pt game and above, you have enough points for the essential abilities (str, dex and con) but also enough to actually have an Int bonus. 28 and lower, this favours the barbarian as you might not have enough left over to have am INT score that gives you a bonus. 
Thus 28 pt and lower game - Barbarian. 30 and higher game - Warblade.

Signature ability - Rage vs manoeuvers. If all you want to measure is damage, then barbarians win this one easily. With less MAD than the warblade, a barbarian can afford a higher starting STR meaning their rage induced STR bonus becomes higher meaning they can afford to use a higher Power Attack value thus giving them more damage per swing. What manoeuvers do is give a warblade more OPTION other than ,"Rage, Charge, Power Attack".

For example, at level 1, a warblade only knoes 3 manouevers and 1 stance, yet of the choices available, not one of them is going to allow a warblade to do more damage. You can repeat this for pretty much every level as none of the manoeuvers will enable a warblade to even come close to a equivalent level raging barbarian

(The two problematic manoeuvers, IHS and WRT are both non-damaging manoeuvers)

Really, warblades stack up pretty nicely with barbarians. Barbarians fight with power while warblades fight with skill.


----------



## Felon (Jul 11, 2007)

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> The barbarian has many more options available to him that a warblade simply doesen't have (archery)




This is a canard that is discussed in the DMG, where it discusses building new classes that are better than those in the PHB and rationalizing doing so with the alleged trade-off that they're even worse at things that their archetype doesn't really lend itself to anyway. A sorcerer does not have some huge edge over the wizard just because he's proficient with a lot more weapons. The barbarian can fire a bow while a warblade has to fire a crossbow, but ranged combat not what either class is really about. Warblades and barbarians are front-liners. Evaluate their strengths based on that.



> The point is the warblade is dead meat without his maneuvers and stances. with his maneuvers or stances, the war blade is a bit stronger then the barbarian, but the barbarian still out damages him.



So, the warblade is stronger only if he actually utilizes his strengths? Good to know.


----------



## FireLance (Jul 11, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Right, they're roughly equivalent....oh, wait, we haven't even gotten to the maneuvers yet.



I was disagreeing with the logic, not the conclusion (although I'm not sure that I agree with the conclusion, either ).

The original quote was:







			
				czak808 said:
			
		

> The warblade gets BAB & saves as a fighter AND 4+ skill points/ level, d12 for hit points, class and a special ability at every other level? Compared to the other martial classes, yea that seems much more powerful.



There was no explicit mention of maneuvers, just BAB and saves, skill points, hit points and special abilities, so by that logic, the barbarian is also much more powerful than the other martial classes. If the complaint was that the warblade's maneuvers and other special abilities were better than the special abilities of the other martial classes, it wouldn't have triggered my logical flaw detector.


----------



## Felon (Jul 11, 2007)

AllisterH said:
			
		

> Well, why don't we try and compare them since they are quite similar (warblades get starting gold as per barbarians NOT fighters which should've tipped people off that warblades are designed in context of the barbarian).



Maybe so, then maybe again folks miss all the benefits of the barbarian that the warblade matches due to all the benefits of the fighter that it co-opts.    



> For example, at level 1, a warblade only knoes 3 manouevers and 1 stance, yet of the choices available, not one of them is going to allow a warblade to do more damage. You can repeat this for pretty much every level as none of the manoeuvers will enable a warblade to even come close to a equivalent level raging barbarian.



Remind me, when does a warblade get damage multiples on Power Attacks?


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 11, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> #177




Felon. The war blade CANT use a crossbow. He cant use any ranged weapons. he gets destroyed with ranged combat if he cant somehow avoid the ranged attacks. 

Your assertion is that the barbarian is equal to a warblade without stances and maneuvers. are you still disputing this? I wasent sure, becuse you didendent adress this again. So yeah, a barbarian could back peddle with a bow and save for a maneuver or stance, the warblade doesn't have many options. 

is it possible you have not read the warblade description if you think they can use a crossbow? A warblade doesn't do more damage then a barbarian, and this has been shown.

However the warblade has more options, so he may, with creative use of stances and maneuvers, survive in combat (or run away) while the barbarian may not. he wont have as much impact as the barbarian when the barbarian was alive.

*edited to be nicer*


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 11, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Maybe so, then maybe again folks miss all the benefits of the barbarian that the warblade matches due to all the benefits of the fighter that it co-opts.




Actually, there doesn't seem to be MUCH overlap compared to a fighter. A warblade gets the ability to be counted as a fighter -2 in terms of feats, but it doesn't get bonus fighter feats. The list of feats is quite restricted and it only gets 4 bonus feats...



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Remind me, when does a warblade get damage multiples on Power Attacks?



Hmm? Which manoeuver are you referring to here?

Seriously, at 1st level, using the elite array, I find it hard to believe that people think warblades are more powerful than the standard barbarian.


----------



## brehobit (Jul 11, 2007)

AllisterH said:
			
		

> Seriously, at 1st level, using the elite array, I find it hard to believe that people think warblades are more powerful than the standard barbarian.




Let's look at 1st level.  Barb vs. Warblade against each other.  Yes, I know the problems with a head-to-head battle, but I don't see a better way to deal with the issue. If we want something more "fair" perhaps have the warblade and the barbarian go up against 2 kobolds, then 2 goblins, then 2 orcs, then 1 gnoll then 1 bugbear, then 1 ogre, etc.  and see who dies first.  I'd guess it will be the barbarian (he can only rage once or if he has extra rage he's missing some other feat (power attack or weapon focus I'd guess) and can only rage 3 times.  

Barb & Warblade both have STR 15, CON 14, DEX 13. Hps are 14 and 14, both have AC 15 (say chain shirt and dex) and greatsword.

Barbarian rages.  Warblade is in stance that grants +2 AC.


AC barb is now 13, WB is 17
Barb does 2d6+6 damage, has +5 attack bonus, hits on a 12 or better.
WB does 2d6+3, has +3 attack bonus hits on a 10 or better.

Average damage from barbarian is 13*.45= 5.85
Average damage from WB is 10*.55=5.5
_and_ the barbarian has an extra 2 hit points.

Doesn't take into account: +1 reflex save from WB (int=12), +10 movement from barbarian, skill lists, or *ANY *of the warblade's maneuvers.  Assumes warblade is only fighting one person at a time and that the barbarian is only in one fight. Also, barbarians are certainly at their (relative) best at 1st level vs. all other core fighting classes.  Only the Bo9S classes can really keep up at that level.

At 3rd level the warblade can have every other attack do +2d6 damage.  That puts him well past the barbarian in terms of damage.  At 4th level it's 2 of every 3.  In that level range the barbarian gets trumped in terms of average damage in a head-to-head fight.

Mark


----------



## Halivar (Jul 11, 2007)

I can see _why_ people say VoP is broken. However, given that fact all of my DM's like throwing no-save level-drains (Stygian bolt is broken like an '85 Trans-Am on cinder-blocks) around, soulfire armor becomes absolutely necessary for survival (I'm not kidding; it's not optional in our game... if you don't have it, you lose levels). Therefore, the only time I have used VoP as a player, I got punked the first night I played with it (level-drained to 0).

Your gaming group may have a different experience.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Jul 11, 2007)

I agree. At low levels, the warblade does more damage, but once the barbarian gets a second attack, the warblade starts to fall behind. At level 20 the barbarian is doing alot more damage then the warblade.


----------



## Zurai (Jul 11, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> If we want something more "fair" perhaps have the warblade and the barbarian go up against 2 kobolds, then 2 goblins, then 2 orcs, then 1 gnoll then 1 bugbear, then 1 ogre, etc.  and see who dies first.
> 
> Barb & Warblade both have STR 15, CON 14, DEX 13. Hps are 14 and 14, both have AC 15 (say chain shirt and dex) and greatsword.
> 
> Barbarian rages.  Warblade is in stance that grants +2 AC.




There is no stance that grants +2 AC free and clear. Not even a higher-than-1st level stance. The 1st level Diamond Mind stance grants +2 AC _against one enemy_, and -2 *against all other enemies*.




> Also, barbarians are certainly at their (relative) best at 1st level vs. all other core fighting classes.  Only the Bo9S classes can really keep up at that level.
> 
> At 3rd level the warblade can have every other attack do +2d6 damage.  That puts him well past the barbarian in terms of damage.  At 4th level it's 2 of every 3.  In that level range the barbarian gets trumped in terms of average damage in a head-to-head fight.
> 
> Mark




Actually, there's been math done (by Tempest Stormwind, on the official boards) with barbarian vs warblade with identical stats and feat (power attack only, for the sake of comparing barbarian vs warblade in general, not specific build vs specific build). He's done basic math for all 20 levels and full blown spreadsheet math for the first 7 levels.

Only at levels 3 and 5 does a warblade do more damage than a barbarian.

That's a non-Complete Champion barbarian, too. A CC barb (lion totem for pounce) will *obliterate* a warblade for damage past level 5.


----------



## AllisterH (Jul 11, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> Let's look at 1st level.  Barb vs. Warblade against each other.  Yes, I know the problems with a head-to-head battle, but I don't see a better way to deal with the issue. If we want something more "fair" perhaps have the warblade and the barbarian go up against 2 kobolds, then 2 goblins, then 2 orcs, then 1 gnoll then 1 bugbear, then 1 ogre, etc.  and see who dies first.  I'd guess it will be the barbarian (he can only rage once or if he has extra rage he's missing some other feat (power attack or weapon focus I'd guess) and can only rage 3 times.
> 
> Barb & Warblade both have STR 15, CON 14, DEX 13. Hps are 14 and 14, both have AC 15 (say chain shirt and dex) and greatsword.
> 
> Barbarian rages.  Warblade is in stance that grants +2 AC.



Er, why didn't the barbarian simply shoot the warblade before he came into range? The barbarian does have a bow or does the lack of ranged combat on the warblade simply get handwaved away?.....

Stance of Clarity - Gain +2 AC against one foe, -2 AC against everyone else. You do realize that for a gauntlet one on one style battle, this is really strong but said warblade is going to be hurting when he faces more than 1 opponent like your 2 creatures at once scenario.


			
				brehobit said:
			
		

> AC barb is now 13, WB is 17
> Barb does 2d6+6 damage, has +5 attack bonus, hits on a 12 or better.
> WB does 2d6+3, has +3 attack bonus hits on a 10 or better.
> 
> ...



Actually, a better way to calculate it is to use a running total. Your method doesn't really show who would win if they just started swinging at each other.

1st round:
Barb prob to hit - 45% - No damage
WB prob to hit - 55% - 10 damage

2nd round: 
Barb prob to hit -45%:90% - 13 dmg
WB prob to hit - 55%:110% - No dmg

3rd round:
Barb (45%:135%) - No dmg
WB (55%:165%) - 10 dmg

Warblade wins   Of course, the number of creatures who at CR 1 can stand up to one swing of even a cleric wielding their regular mace is quite miniscule.


			
				brehobit said:
			
		

> Doesn't take into account: +1 reflex save from WB (int=12), +10 movement from barbarian, skill lists, or *ANY *of the warblade's maneuvers.  Assumes warblade is only fighting one person at a time and that the barbarian is only in one fight. Also, barbarians are certainly at their (relative) best at 1st level vs. all other core fighting classes.  Only the Bo9S classes can really keep up at that level.



True it doesn't really factor in the other class abilities like the fact that the barbarian's rage has also increased its Fort and Will saves....

Actually, for the warblade, he can't. There aren't any manoeuvers that will automatically add damage to the attacks. Sapphire Nightmare Blade adds bonus damage and the best bet, but that manoeuver requires a Concentration check although you could use Steel Wind with Power attack to get more damage...


			
				brehobit said:
			
		

> At 3rd level the warblade can have every other attack do +2d6 damage.  That puts him well past the barbarian in terms of damage.  At 4th level it's 2 of every 3.  In that level range the barbarian gets trumped in terms of average damage in a head-to-head fight.
> 
> Mark




The only one that doesn't actually come with conditions is the White Raven's Tactical Strike (and that admittedly is all kinds of awesomeness for the rest of your party) 
Mountain Hammer  - only works when the warblade's feet are touching the ground. Horseback - Nope, On bridge- Nope, on seaship nope.
Claw at the Moon - requires a jump check (admittedly the easiest check to pull off)
Rapid Wolf Strike - take a -4 AC till your next turn.


----------



## rgard (Jul 11, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Cerebremancer vs. MT is an interesting comparison.
> 
> - Ceremremancer: one casting stat.
> 
> ...




Hi Nifft, change the MT to an Archivist/Wiz/MT and I think that may be the tipping point.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## Nifft (Jul 12, 2007)

rgard said:
			
		

> Hi Nifft, change the MT to an Archivist/Wiz/MT and I think that may be the tipping point.



 The more stuff you allow outside the SRD, the stronger spellcasters get in general. Psionics has so little support. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## rgard (Jul 12, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> The more stuff you allow outside the SRD, the stronger spellcasters get in general. Psionics has so little support.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Fair enough.

thanks,
Rich


----------



## Numion (Jul 12, 2007)

Somebody commented on Spiked Armor (Armor, folks, don't ban me!), that it's no good in D&D because IRL it would guide blows to your armor. This is true, but since D&D has many unarmed opponents or opponents who grapple, the armor would make sense.

At least I would spike the hell out of my armor if I knew I was fighting bears instead of soldiers IRL. Grapple this, beeyotch!


----------



## The Thayan Menace (Jul 12, 2007)

*It's On!*



			
				Numion said:
			
		

> At least I would spike the hell out of my armor if I knew I was fighting bears instead of soldiers IRL. Grapple this, beeyotch!



Damn ... ursas got served!





-MC Asad
​


----------



## Someone (Jul 12, 2007)

Numion said:
			
		

> Somebody commented on Spiked Armor (Armor, folks, don't ban me!),




Spiked chain...mail. 

_So close._


----------

