brad bender's page

You got it Bave,I see what your talking about as well...there is a jump around 9th also.
That's also my pet theory about why organized play just happens to wrap up around 12th level.
At least it was last I checked.

Well, I suppose that might be why or maybe that the game dramatically slows down around 11th-ish level because of the time involved in the adjudication of all the spells, effects, and special abilities of everyone/thing involved.

People have survived falls from miles in the air in real life.

Just throwing that out there.

As for the whole Caster Supremacy Argument, there are ways a fantasy RPG can rein in the spellcasters - the problem is that D&D 3.X used NONE of them except finite spell slots. D&D-style magic is, for the most part, fast, convenient, cheap, and safe. Heck, at least in AD&D, some spells could backfire badly. (Haste aged you, Polymorph could kill you, Teleport had a small risk of teleporting into solid rock...) So we're stuck with wizards with no limitations, and non-casters with no useful abilities because REEEEEAAAALISM.

So, if we actually want the snivelling peasants martial classes to stay relevant after level whatever, we have two unpalatable options:

1: Beat spellcasters with the nerfbat until they scream for mercy, then beat them some more.
2: Give up in the futile and wrongheaded pursuit of 'realism', and give martial classes the sort of abilities seen in Exalted, some of the whackier myths, or at least a high-budget kung-fu movie.

Ah yes, because those Paladins and Archers really seem to be struggling. I have seen more dragons and demons get one rounded by archers than I have by casters.... true story.

All of these "casters have unending power" theories rely incredibly on a GM who is going to just let casters do whatever they want. I have never seen Blood Money actually used in a game. I have never seen people make such silly, obscure, and ludicrous combinations in an attempt to obviously game the system.

It isn't that the folks I play with don't know about it, or can't do the math, it is quite simply that they can't come up with anything resembling a defense of clearly unintended results.

Sure, Blood Money is a written spell. But it is just as invalid as the wizard who trys to summon a wall of iron, fabricate it into 1000 masterwork longswords and profit. Do you need a rule to shut down obviously stupid and unintended consequences?

Sure, you can Magic Jar yourself into a melee monster. Still involves saves, spell resistance, range, duration, and that little detail of leaving your body an awesome target. Forgot those drawbacks, eh?

The ultimate failing of these comparisons is the simple fact that it assumes that the caster always has the right build/spells/equipment in order to pull them off, in every encounter all the time, while still being able to do the other stuff they need to do. That's the limiting factor kids. The archers can shoot all day, the fighters can swing all day, the wizard cannot cast spells endlessly, let alone a specific spell.

I have never in my life, until this thread, seen someone try to spin that a 1st level wizard is overpowered. If you were going to play a campaign where the entire campaign never advanced passed 4th level, let me know how many wizards you think there would be.

Sorry, but I check my arguments for holes.

It's very unlikely that enemies will not fail their save, because if you are focused on it you should easily have at least a DC 16 Color Spray. If you are extremely focused (say Heavens Oracle) you will have a Persistent Color Spray. Most monster in the range of CR 1-3 are lucky to have even +1 to Will Save. Therefore, the odds of the monster failing the will save are higher then the Fighter/RAnger hitting them.

Also the difference between HP of a Fighter and a Wizard at level 1 is probably only 2-4 points. And their AC is...

1) I can't remember anyone admitting their argument is riddled with holes, so of course you can't see them.

2) You are assuming that someone builds a caster around a 1st level spell? Going to throw a feat into Spell Focus just for that first level feat into an otherwise sub-optimal school for it, by and large?

3) Then, your theory is that you are going to deal with someone who is taking one of the most powerful and twinkie routes of all time, Heavens Oracle, to make it work more?

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions for that build that is only expected to play one game... ever... with that character and only use one spell. Sure, it works for your example to a degree but isn't particularly realistic.

Further, your build is going to run around with 4-5 of these a day, assuming nothing else is memorized and optimized in that direction and foresaking everything else. After those 4-5 rounds, you are largely a commoner with a worse ac and lower hitpoints.

Now, to your math. Assume you have a more realistic 15 DC on your Color Spray. Assume your enemy is a +1 will save. Easy peasy, 70% fail rate. So sure, odds are you will beat that enemy. However, in order to make good use of a color spray you have to be targetting multiple targets, usually 3 seems to be the ideal minimum. Even if you are targetting two, odds are you are going to have one pass. With three you are almost certainly going to have one pass, and a decent chance of two passing. Your 12-13AC having wizard is going to now have to deal with those bad guys who are a bit miffed to say the least.

Conclusion, your assessment is crazy. You act as though your first level wizard is going to have an 18-20 in INT as well as a 14-16 in Dex and Con, or devote all their resources to color spray and it never targetting more than one monster who never succeeds the save. All it takes is one made saving through and your 6-8HP having wizard is dead.

That 1st level barbarian orc with the great axe? What are his odds of killing you with one swing... pretty good as well.

Out of curiosity, by the time you get done throwing the nerf bat at all this stuff, what's the point of playing a caster?

First, you really just nerfed their combat spells for the most part when the bulk of their real "campaign power" comes from out of combat spells, most of which are higher level.

Second, casters are already far from what they were in 3.5 in a much more negative way, btw.

Third, martials are dramatically more powerful than they were in 3.5, to the point of largely being more powerful than casters for longer.

Seriously, consider fighters and paladins in particular. Build a fighter archer, a monk archer, or a paladin anything and then let's talk. I have seen all three of those dominate games far more than any caster ever, ever has.

Sure, a caster at 17th level is going to be extremely powerful, even relative to those classes. However from levels 1-5 or so the casters are dead weight. From 6-10 they are carrying their own weight. From 11-13 they are pulling their weight in combat and more than their weight out of combat. From 14+ they are net contributors.

Want to know what the best group in the world looks like? Probably 2-3 (archers) fighters, a cleric with the travel domain, and a bard. They will *murder* anything that you put in their path.

Look, it is pretty simple.

If you know there is going to be a Paladin in the group, understand that if you make a shady-ish character you are heading down conflict rod to one degree or another. If you have outwardly visible signs of "transgressions" expect it to get worst.

Sure, you can argue that someone shouldn't play a Paladin, the same way someone could argue that the Warlock doesn't have to projecting "BAD" either.

I find it amusing when a player says that it is another characters fault for playing a class (Paladin) that is required to be Paragon-Good when they make a character whose entire foundation is shady at best.

Nevermind everyone else in the group is on one page and you are not.

Pretty clear who the douche in this one is.

My biggest concern is the fact that a PC is digging a 10' deep trench in a ballpark 20' diameter. Which means you have a bit more than 60 linear feet of trench, call it 2' wide and 10' deep, a mere 1200 cubic feet of earth. Roughly 45 yards of hard, wet soil? That is two big dump trucks full of dirt.

You are doing this by hand, with medieval tools, and expecting to be able to get any rest? Holy crap. That is two days of digging, nothing else, digging and you would be exhausted.

You play a campaign from 1-20, is it alright that half the party has to be relegated to essentially baggage the others lob around depending on what level you actually are? Is it enjoyable that the wizard has to play for months to finally overshadow the fighter who then has to continue playing despite being entirely unable to do anything on the level the wizard is, just so he can enjoy his phenomenal cosmic power he had to slog through a million goblins for?

I think that simplifies things. I don't think any character is "baggage" at any level, it is simply that their contribution will be greater or less than their proportional size of the party.

I will also say that a large portion of this was made better in PF. The fact is martials are now far more active in higher level games than they were before. Their ability to material impact BBEG type monsters is dramatically greater than before.

How often does a Wizard drop a dragon in a round or two? Pretty rare, about 2-5% of the time using a juiced save or die. A well put together archer? Gets pretty damned ugly for that dragon.