Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
==Aelryinth
Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the bard I am assuming he has barkskin on him because I mainly play with druids in the group and not clerics. But that didn't come up! Heroism doesn't stack with good hope.
If you know of anymore common 10 minute per level buffs let me know! But BOTH the bard and rogue would be getting them.
This is the problem - you're assuming equal access to buff spells for both characters, but one of these parties has more spells available than the other.
Let's say the party looks like this:
Arcane wizard
Fighty Fighter
Sneaky Rogue or Sneaky Bard
Holy Cleric
In the party with the bard, the wizard doesn't need to prepare or expend spell slots on Heroism, allowing him to cast other spells instead. Instead of casting Heroism (which the bard takes care of), he casts Greater Magic Weapon on the Fighter and the Bard.
In the party with the rogue, the wizard DOES have to prepare and expend spell slots on Heroism, meaning that's two spells he doesn't have available for Greater Magic Weapon.
Conversely, if the wizard instead played Sorcerer and didn't take Heroism as a spell known, the bard's party still gets Heroism. The rogue's party has to spend 6k on a wand, or go without.
If you want a fair comparison and you're assuming that the party provides Heroism for the rogue, then you need to assume that the party provides a spell or an item of equal value to the bard.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
So, your example is that the rogue is receiving buffs from someone else, while the bard is casting them on himself? The rogue is sucking up party resources, while the bard is providing them himself.
You don't think it's a little lopsided that, in the rogue's party, someone is casting heroism on everyone (costing 4 spells), while in the bard's party someone is casting heroism on everyone except the bard (costing three spells), and the bard has to cast something on himself instead?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then POST YOUR NUMBERS.
JUSTIFY why the Rogue gets Buffs the Bard is giving HIMSELF, and that are NOT coming from the party. Because you are blatantly favoring the ROGue in your 'the rogue gets everything the bard does' buff suite.
Because none of us are believing your case. It has so many gaping holes we're flying dragons through it.
==Aelryinth
Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
So, your example is that the rogue is receiving buffs from someone else, while the bard is casting them on himself? The rogue is sucking up party resources, while the bard is providing them himself.
You don't think it's a little lopsided that, in the rogue's party, someone is casting heroism on everyone (costing 4 spells), while in the bard's party someone is casting heroism on everyone except the bard (costing three spells), and the bard has to cast something on himself instead?
I've already talked about this in-depth.
Then POST YOUR NUMBERS.
JUSTIFY why the Rogue gets Buffs the Bard is giving HIMSELF, and that are NOT coming from the party. Because you are blatantly favoring the ROGue in your 'the rogue gets everything the bard does' buff suite.
Because none of us are believing your case. It has so many gaping holes we're flying dragons through it.
I've already talked about this in-depth.
I've already talked about this in-depth.Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
So, your example is that the rogue is receiving buffs from someone else, while the bard is casting them on himself? The rogue is sucking up party resources, while the bard is providing them himself.
You don't think it's a little lopsided that, in the rogue's party, someone is casting heroism on everyone (costing 4 spells), while in the bard's party someone is casting heroism on everyone except the bard (costing three spells), and the bard has to cast something on himself instead?
No, you haven't.
You've dictated rules that blatantly favor the rogue. There's a major difference.
==Aelryinth
Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
Untrue, as the Bard gets inspire courage boosting his hasted extra attack, the bonus buffs we are discussing boost him even further than the rogue.
Extra attacks boost DPR.
It's funny. Even in my analyzes, I said the bard does more overall effective damage.
And yet... This current line of discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's funny. Even in my analyzes, I said the bard does more overall effective damage.
And yet... This current line of discussion.
When people who overall agree with you still find the method you used to reach your conclusion lacking, I'd say that's an even stronger reason to give that methodology a good hard look.
My problem isn't that you're stacking the cards to the rogue's advantage in this comparison, but rather that you seem either unwilling or unable to realize that you're doing it.
Greater Magic Weapon.
Shield of Faith.
Greater Magical Vestment.
Great now both the rogue and the bard have those buffs.
So.. nothing changed!
Untrue, as the Bard gets inspire courage boosting his hasted extra attack, the bonus buffs we are discussing boost him even further than the rogue.
Extra attacks boost DPR.
How so?
Both get the buff, so both have their damage increased by a percentage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both get the buff, so both have their damage increased by a percentage.
Even assuming they both get the bonus, which has repeatedly been pointed out is controversial at best, it's not the same percentage. The bard makes four attacks to the rogue's three or one attack. If they both get +2 to damage per attack, that bonus will give the rogue either a +6 or a +2 DPR per round, and the bard a +8 bonus per round.
It's funny. Even in my analyzes, I said the bard does more overall effective damage.
And yet... This current line of discussion.
When people who overall agree with you still find the method you used to reach your conclusion lacking, I'd say that's an even stronger reason to give that methodology a good hard look.
My problem isn't that you're stacking the cards to the rogue's advantage in this comparison, but rather that you seem either unwilling or unable to realize that you're doing it.
Ummm no. I have no idea how you read that analyses and came to the conclusion that I was "stacking the deck" for the rogue.
If I was really stacking the deck, I would have just assumed that bard's FCB didn't go to skills and that they had 10 int. BAM! not eclipsing rogue.
Most of my assumptions are in favor of the bard, people not seeing that is more of the problem.
Both get the buff, so both have their damage increased by a percentage.But it's not the same percentage. The bard makes four attacks to the rogue's three or one attack. If they both get +2 to damage per attack, that bonus will give the rogue either a +6 or a +2 DPR per round, and the bard a +8 bonus per round.
Ah OK.
He only gains +1 damage/hit though, because the spell provide +2 by level 10, which is only 1 higher than the weapons I had them start off with.
Ummm no. I have no idea how you read that analyses and came to the conclusion that I was "stacking the deck" for the rogue.
If I was really stacking the deck, I would have just assumed that bard's FCB didn't go to skills and that they had 10 int. BAM! not eclipsing rogue.
Most of my assumptions are in favor of the bard, people not seeing that is more of the problem.
Personally I'd say a 10 int bard with FCB in spells instead of skills (or both!) is the better bard, but for this particular comparison I guess your variant is the better fit. Either way I don't see that as a favorable assumption, merely a build that tries to cover the rogue's base.
But again - spell slots, like WBL, is a finite resource.
If the wizard in the rogue's party has to use spell slots on casting Heroism on the fighter and the rogue, that's spell slots he doesn't have available for other things.
If the wizard in the bard's party doesn't have to use those spell slots on giving the fighter and the rogue Heroism, that means he can use those slots for other buffs, like Greater Magic Weapon - or Stinking Cloud, or Fireball, or whatever else he wants to cast.
Also you have yet to address the fact that your rogues DPR inside a level 1 obscuring mist or a dark alley is actually 5. At level 10.
I have. By saying I'm not talking about it. You are getting into things that I want to test with play before talking about.
JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW: I still haven't made a positive claim for the rogue. I'm just comparing numbers while taking into consideration some in-game factors. I'm not even talking about which class is better. I'm still talking about the bards ability to "parity and more" the rogue from a purely mechanical aspect. Which has little to do with actual play.
I thought I made that clear.
Both get the buff, so both have their damage increased by a percentage.But it's not the same percentage. The bard makes four attacks to the rogue's three or one attack. If they both get +2 to damage per attack, that bonus will give the rogue either a +6 or a +2 DPR per round, and the bard a +8 bonus per round.Ah OK.
He only gains +1 damage/hit though, because the spell provide +2 by level 10, which is only 1 higher than the weapons I had them start off with.
Actually it'd be +2 to hit/damage per shot for the bard since he doesn't need a magical weapon, and no bonus at all for the rogue since he gets Heroism instead of GMW.
Alternately they could both take GMW and the bard gets heroism, which means the bard gets +2 to hit over the rogue, as well as better saves and a bonus to skill checks.
Personally I'd say a 10 int bard with FCB in spells instead of skills (or both!) is the better bard, but for this particular comparison I guess your variant is the better fit. Either way I don't see that as a favorable assumption, merely a build that tries to cover the rogue's base.
You may want to build a counter bard. I couldn't find a way to make that feat fit in.
Favorable bard assumptions:
Not making them get UMD
Not making them get climb (you cause fly doesn't actually do the same thing)
Letting them be archers with no melee capacity, because if they were melee they would still have 10 strength because they need the dex as a main stat if they want to do dex skills better than the bard.
Covering the rogues's base was the whole point of the comparison.
Both get the buff, so both have their damage increased by a percentage.But it's not the same percentage. The bard makes four attacks to the rogue's three or one attack. If they both get +2 to damage per attack, that bonus will give the rogue either a +6 or a +2 DPR per round, and the bard a +8 bonus per round.Ah OK.
He only gains +1 damage/hit though, because the spell provide +2 by level 10, which is only 1 higher than the weapons I had them start off with.
Actually it'd be +2 to hit/damage per shot for the bard since he doesn't need a magical weapon, and no bonus at all for the rogue since he gets Heroism instead of GMW.
Alternately they could both take GMW and the bard gets heroism, which means the bard gets +2 to hit over the rogue, as well as better saves and a bonus to skill checks.
Umm no, the rogue does not get heroism instead of GMW.
GMW still only improved the bards damage by 1 from the original estimate.
But again - spell slots, like WBL, is a finite resource.
If the wizard in the rogue's party has to use spell slots on casting Heroism on the fighter and the rogue, that's spell slots he doesn't have available for other things.
If the wizard in the bard's party doesn't have to use those spell slots on giving the fighter and the rogue Heroism, that means he can use those slots for other buffs, like Greater Magic Weapon - or Stinking Cloud, or Fireball, or whatever else he wants to cast.
Exactly. That is the real cost of heroism and what the bard is bringing to the table.
It's not the bard netting a +2 to-hit from it.
Favorable bard assumptions:
Not making them get UMD
Not making them get climb (you cause fly doesn't actually do the same thing)
Letting them be archers with no melee capacity, because if they were melee they would still have 10 strength because they need the dex as a main stat if they want to do dex skills better than the bard.
Covering the rogues's base was the whole point of the comparison.
Not making a bard take UMD is a poor decision. Conversely making the bard take Linguistics ranks is a terrible decision.
Not making them get climb seems pointless to me, since he's putting ranks into Fly instead. I'd say the bard puts ranks in Climb up to about lvl 7, then Fly from there on. Coincidentally I'd probably do the same thing with the rogue, since otherwise the rogue will struggle heavily when the flying game gets started.
Considering the rogue is significantly more useless at ranged than the bard is at melee, I really don't see how making them use different combat styles is a favorable assumption. If anything it muddies the water even more, since 1hf in melee vs ranged combat is a completely different debate.
Favorable bard assumptions:
Not making them get UMD
Not making them get climb (you cause fly doesn't actually do the same thing)
Letting them be archers with no melee capacity, because if they were melee they would still have 10 strength because they need the dex as a main stat if they want to do dex skills better than the bard.
Covering the rogues's base was the whole point of the comparison.Not making a bard take UMD is a poor decision. Conversely making the bard take Linguistics ranks is a terrible decision.
Not making them get climb seems pointless to me, since he's putting ranks into Fly instead. I'd say the bard puts ranks in Climb up to about lvl 7, then Fly from there on. Coincidentally I'd probably do the same thing with the rogue, since otherwise the rogue will struggle heavily when the flying game gets started.
Considering the rogue is significantly more useless at ranged than the bard is at melee, I really don't see how making them use different combat styles is a favorable assumption. If anything it muddies the water even more, since 1hf in melee vs ranged combat is a completely different debate.
That's kind'of why they are favorable assumptions for the purpose of comparing classes to check for parity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. That is the real cost of heroism and what the bard is bringing to the table.
It's not the bard netting a +2 to-hit from it.
Why wouldn't it be? Why does the wizard consider the rogue sufficiently valuable in combat to use a 3rd level spell slot on him, but simultaneously not consider the bard sufficiently valuable in combat to use a 3rd level spell slot on him as well?
If you want a fair comparison between two character builds you need to assume that both characters get an equal amount of external support. In this case the rogue is getting more external help than the bard. That's creating a bias that's skewing the numbers and that's what I and several other posters have tried to point out repeatedly.
Who the HELL fights for 216 rounds of combat?
216 rounds... I wonder when a bard can get that many effective rounds?
So you mostly win out on sleight of hand and escape artist versus the bards sense motive and social skills. Not really surprising.
Let's not talk about everything and just focus on this.
If we are comparing classes for parity, isn't this a problem?
What sort of rogue can't steal? Because that is what we are doing here, making Bard the rogue. If the bard can't "parity and more" then it's not eclipsing. The "and more" is irrelevant if "parity" is not covered.
Because we aren't comparing "better", we are looking at objective mechanical eclipsing with some considerations (like instead of sneak attacking the bard is shooting arrows).
Exactly. That is the real cost of heroism and what the bard is bringing to the table.
It's not the bard netting a +2 to-hit from it.
Why wouldn't it be? Why does the wizard consider the rogue sufficiently valuable in combat to use a 3rd level spell slot on him, but simultaneously not consider the bard sufficiently valuable in combat to use a 3rd level spell slot on him as well?
If you want a fair comparison between two character builds you need to assume that both characters get an equal amount of external support. In this case the rogue is getting more external help than the bard. That's creating a bias that's skewing the numbers and that's what I and several other posters have tried to point out repeatedly.
It's not that the wizard won't cast heroism on the bard. It's that the bard is casting good hope on the whole party making heroism unneeded.
As for the rest, I'm looking at a party situation and talked about all the particulars. I didn't make a claim on "better" or "more useful" to the party. I just said that in a party without bard, people are probably still rocking heroism like many of the 10min/lvl buffs.
Of course the Bard doesn't really need UMD so I could just switch those points into Sleight of Hand but frankly its not much of a skill.
There now you are starting to get it. That's part of an objective comparison looking for parity.
Parity of the rogue. Which people think suck. So what you do to parity it, you'll probably think are sucky things to do.
SMALL NOTE: Sense motive doesn't "read his target and know what they are likely to do (sense motive)". Mechanically it's a weak skill.
Also what sort of rogue cannot sneak up to an orc thug in a dark alley without being spotted automatically due to a lack of cover or concealment. What sort of rogue then fails to kill that 8HP orc in one round from 30' away. That would be yours as you charge in for 1d6+1 damage.What sort of rogue can't steal? Because that is what we are doing here, making Bard the rogue. If the bard can't "parity and more" then it's not eclipsing. The "and more" is irrelevant if "parity" is not covered.
Because we aren't comparing "better", we are looking at objective mechanical eclipsing with some considerations (like instead of sneak attacking the bard is shooting arrows).
Not what my rogue would do, but maybe that is how you would play him.
*shrugs*
As presented your rogue cannot kill a single 8HP orc sentry in the dark in a single round. That is quite the indictment of someone claiming to be a rogue.
Not really.
Endless torch feint stab.
or
dark vision consumable + snipe
or
Throw endless torch at enemy and then snipe.
or other things I have yet to think of.
But again - spell slots, like WBL, is a finite resource.
If the wizard in the rogue's party has to use spell slots on casting Heroism on the fighter and the rogue, that's spell slots he doesn't have available for other things.
If the wizard in the bard's party doesn't have to use those spell slots on giving the fighter and the rogue Heroism, that means he can use those slots for other buffs, like Greater Magic Weapon - or Stinking Cloud, or Fireball, or whatever else he wants to cast.
Exactly. That is the real cost of heroism and what the bard is bringing to the table.
It's not the bard netting a +2 to-hit from it.
Exactly, as someone providing that spell and bringing that benefit they should get the benefit of it and the rogue should not. The ability to bring long term party buffs into a given scenario should be reflected in the bard's stats. Otherwise why not give the rogue the benefit of inspire courage? She's in a party right?
Edit: if not that particular buff, the bard should be getting the benefit of x+1 long term buff where x is the number of long term buff the rogue benefits from.
But again - spell slots, like WBL, is a finite resource.
If the wizard in the rogue's party has to use spell slots on casting Heroism on the fighter and the rogue, that's spell slots he doesn't have available for other things.
If the wizard in the bard's party doesn't have to use those spell slots on giving the fighter and the rogue Heroism, that means he can use those slots for other buffs, like Greater Magic Weapon - or Stinking Cloud, or Fireball, or whatever else he wants to cast.
Exactly. That is the real cost of heroism and what the bard is bringing to the table.
It's not the bard netting a +2 to-hit from it.
Exactly, as someone providing that spell and bringing that benefit they should get the benefit of it and the rogue should not. The ability to bring long term party buffs into a given scenario should be reflected in the bard's stats. Otherwise why not give the rogue the benefit of inspire courage? She's in a party right?
Edit: if not that particular buff, the bard should be getting the benefit of x+1 long term buff where x is the number of long term buff the rogue benefits from.
I disagree.
Alternatively you spend 300gp on a potion so you aren't stumbling around in the dark and then shoot, without sneak attack as it automatically sees you within its darkvision range (no cover or concealment) dealing 1d6+1 damage and failing to kill it allowing it to alert its allies.
Well gee, I didn't know it was a cover-less encampment. This situation seems legit.
FYI stealth rules: "Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below)."
Cutting down surrounding cover is pretty much standard practice if you want to set up a secure base somewhere. It helps you spot invading forces or foolish rogues who cannot turn invisible.
Don't forget tents! Need to cut everything down!
Although this makes me wonder if as per the stealth rules, you could solid snake box sneak?
Such musing may be to lighthearted for this flame-y thread.