4e is a commin

**Thesleeper01** · 08-28-2008, 11:44 PM

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/dungeons-dr.../899114p1.html

from the 3rd paragraph

Eberron, the setting that was introduced just after Wizards of the Coast brought out version 3.5. Since then, of course, the company has introduced its new streamlined 4th Edition rule set, but Dungeons & Dragons Online continues to operate under the old rules, though that too may change in the future. "For the time being (DDO) is still a 3.5 Edition game," said Paiz. "We are starting to roll out some of the 4th Edition rule set where it makes sense, though."

According to Paiz, the transition to 4th Edition isn't going to be particularly abrupt. This is as much to not jar their passionate fan base as a tacit acknowledgement of the absolutely huge undertaking converting DDO to 4th Edition would be. That being said, the plan is to eventually move the game over.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-01-2008, 02:05 AM

I don't see how that's going to be quite possible, unless there are tons of stuff in the expansion books for 4E that they haven't given us any hints at. Most of the character classes will be gone (no bards, no newly-added monks, no barbarian..) they will need to add 2 new classes, Warlock and Warlord.

Magic and combat simply Does Not Work That Way in 4th edition, as it does ingame (or 3.5 tabletop). If they implement it more or less similarly to 4e tabeltop, magic users will have 2-3 at-will powers they can spam (no mana meter at all) and 1 or 2 powers per 2-3 levels that they can use once a fight or once a day.

Feats... Feats will be a major overhaul as well. Most of the old feats don't exist anymore, or have majorly different mechanics, (Dual wielding for example. You get no penalty, but can only attack with either or, not both weapons, unless you satisfy certain conditions of class and power) and a player at end-cap will have 18 feats instead of the paltry handful he would have in the current one.

Multiclassing works completely different too.. Currently, multiclassing gives you access to both aspects of your classes. Multiclassing in 4E doesn't really give you access to your second class' powers, you get a small bonus and can use one encounter power as a daily for some classes, or get a specific game mechanic (combat challenge from fighter, for example) and can take your second class' Paragon path.

At level 30, endcap for current 4e, a character will still only have the same at-wills he picked for level 1, 4 things he can use once an encounter, 4 things he can use per day, and 7 "utility" spells (healing, special effect, etc) uses per day. The same applies to melee classes as well with manouvers/moves. These also count for items too, using a daily-use item will use up one of your daily "slots".

One of the reasons i hate 4e tabletop is that the combat is so.. unintuitive most of the time. There's currently no mechanic for tripping.. if something that can trip you hits you, you're tripped, no amount of dexterity or strength can save you. A wolf can trip a dragon 10 times it's size if it hits... and a player has no trip mechanic. Or disarm. Or sunder...or magic counterspelling (And most of the time, dispelling effects...) In the current tabletop, there are no spells that you can use to dispell magical effects, poison, or disease like you can in 3.5. They're limited to Ritual Magic that can take hours to complete, and if you don't roll a very high DC, you run the risk of outright killing the character you're trying to save.

For example, to use remove disease, it requires some amount of spell components, and an hour to cast. You then need to roll your Heal skill minus the DC of the disease, and compare that result to the chart. If, say, your healing skill is 15, and you rolled a 15, and the DC of the disease is 15... it's (15+15)-30 = 15... which is enough to immediately drop the character you were healing's HP a number = to 50% of his HP. If you were unlucky and rolled less then a 5, you killed him immediately...

It's going to be a MAJOR change.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-02-2008, 07:46 AM

Thats not totaly correct becauase as an example if you make a 8 fighter / 8 wizard you will have a crappy BAB and a crappy list of spells meaning you will suck on melee and spell casting. In 3.5 multy classing can sometimes help but if not doen very well it will wreck a character.

In 3.5 combat a fighter has only one attack ability but at the upper levels for 4.0 they have a few daily and a few per encounter that could both be codeded in as haveing so many uses per shrine, for a daily 1 and for a encounter either make it one per fight (may be hard to code) or just give it an arbitary number of 4-10 based on how many fights you should be going through before you rest. Also some classes get special powers like cleric that can heal so many times per day.

The biggest change would be in the save or dies because there are none in 4.0 instead you have persistant effects that cause damage over time.

the 4.0 system will have may of the same classes in the current eddition but with limited space they will not have them in till later books are out. I see no reason to remove classes from the game.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-05-2008, 11:58 PM

Your opinions about multiclassing bely some inexperience in tabletop 3/3.5 I think. I know this is veering off on a tangent, but...

If you want to talk about raw power, yes, multiclass characters won't have the same skillsets or powerlevels (most of the time.. there are some exceptions) as a "pure" character. THIS IS INTENDED. By multiclassing, you're giving up your focus on one class to add diversity to your character. This is something i wish the munchkin/gungho player on DDO would understand too (I've seen way too many Ranger1/Rogue1/Paladin1/Barbarian 3 type characters...)

First off, multiclassing in DDO doesn't work quite the same way as it does in tabletop, and I rather wish it did. This would cut down on the number of "beats around the system by using buggy exploits" character builds like the Batman build that was running around for a long while. (Did they ever fix that?) In the Batman type build on DDO, you had a multiclass rogue/paladin, something that in tabletop is extremely improbable, and the way of going about it in DDO is also impossible. The reason for the Batman build was that rogues at level 3 gain Evasion, wherupon they negate all damage on a successful saving throw, and paladins gain good saving throws.

In tabletop, if you have a paladin, he is a paladin, only. Multiclassing a paladin means he can never gain any more levels in paladin, his order basically throws him out (except if you have some certain feats as listed in Book of Exalted Deeds, that allow you to take a few classes). Furthermore, lets say you were a rogue turned paladin. Thats fine, but if you break your Lawful Good alignment, disobay your Order, or do various things to break your Paladin's Code (lie or cheat, use poisons, willingly commit evil acts etc) , you lose all your special abilities (lay on hands, your astrally-given mount, your turn undead, your auras, etc) and spells. You can't do that in DDO... Also, in tabletop, the Evasion ability only works if you're in light or no armor, and with a light encumbrance. AFAIK in DDO it worked while you were overloaded in platemail... which is not the way it works.

Your example, a fighter 8/wizard 8, is rather peculiar or unusual, as they're at opposite ends. Wizards are generally older, as they require a long time to study magic, and don't have time to learn the martial arts that a fighter does (which is justified in that they start with no proficiencies in any weapon besides quarterstaff, dagger, crossbow, and club, and no armor proficiencies, as well as gaining very small amounts of skills per level.) Intelligence doesn't help a fighter's class skills very much, neither does strength help any of the skills a wizard has. Personally, if I was the DM, i'd suggest a sorceror, as the Charisma use of a sorc can benefit the fighter better, as well as the increase in spells per day, while focussing on self-buffing and touch/close spells. A finesse fighter that focussed on light armor and Dexterity vs Strength, with the appropriate feats (weapon finesse for example) would work.. I infact have one such character, and she's pretty decent. However....

A fighter/wizard is in some ways better then a fighter, or just a wizard. Here is a wizard that has proficiency in all armors and all simple and martial weapons, and has a wide range of combat feats. In addition, here is a fighter that has reasonable intelligence, and, lets say at 8/8.. is a fighter that can use any arcane magic wand, has a familar that grants him special bonuses, as well as can do recon, and depending on your wizard bonus feats you selected, can:
Create a scroll of any spell he knows
Brew a potion of any spell he knows
Create magic armor and weapons, or
Create a magic wand with 50 charges of any spell he knows.

You are also neglecting prestige classes, which is what a fighter/wizard or fighter/sorceror would be building up for, imo. Using just the core books, after 4 levels of wizard, your fighter/wizard would qualify, even with only one level of fighter, for the Eldritch Knight prestige class, which requires simply that you can cast 3rd level arcane spells and have a proficiency in all martial weapons.

With the Eldritch Knight prestige class, every time he gains a level, he gains the BAB and saving throws of a fighter, as well as +1 level to his arcane spell class. A fighter 1/wizard 3/eldritch knight 10 would be the equivalent of a 12th level wizard and an 8th level fighter (although he'd be missing his bonus feats. there is a price to that..)

Or, for example, take a real-life character I have, that i'm playing saturday. We're in a homebrew campaign, in Eberron. I have access to a variety of expansion books.. so I've created a Swashbuckler (Complete Warrior), which is essentially a finesse fighter, with theatrics bolted on. They're more or less like the Duelist core prestige class, but a base class. Swashbucklers are middling of the road fighters, with some fun character feats thrown in. They begin the game with weapon finesse, and gain various bonus feats/abilities such as Grace, which adds to thier reflex save while unencumbered or with light armor, or Insightful Strike, which gives them a + to damage based on thier INT modifier, a Dodge bonus to thier AC, and some fun abilities like Acrobatic Charge (which gives the stereotypical bar brawl some fun.. I can charge over difficult terrain and obstacles, which gives me the in-game ability to vault over tabletops, run down stairs, swing in on ropes, etc

as part of my charge attacks, making appropriate checks of course.)

As my character is a duelling type of character and his backstory was a mercenary, i've picked a variety of defensive and offensive feats, for example, i've taken the Two Weapon Fighting feats, and he fights with both a rapier and a kukri. I took Deadly Defense (Complete Scoundrel) which gives me an additional +1d6 damage each hit if i trigger my Combat Expertise, so i'm trading -2 to-hit for +2 AC and +1d6 damage x2 if my back is against the wall or i'm surrounded.

Recently, we've been running into a lot of trouble, and my character has been caught doing some less then honorable actions, though maintaining his Chaotic Good alignment. I've begun to multiclass him Rogue, so he's now Swashbuckler 8/Rogue 1. His high intelligence and dexterity compliments the rogue skills perfectly, in addition to his acrobatics, move silently, etc that he'd already learned. Next level i'm going to take the Daring Outlaw feat from Complete Scoundrel, which will let my Rogue and Swashbuckler levels stack in certain areas (it will give me a sneak attack equivalent to that of a single-classed character of each class)

Theres an example of a good multiclass, using classes that were built to combine with each other.

MOVING ON... lol

A fighter, or pretty much anyone, had more than just the "attack" option in 3.5, most of which have been removed from 4th edition or transplanted to different class' attacks. For example..

A fighter with a decent enough Bluff skill could use it in combat to Feint, which would deny thier opponent thier Dexterity bonus to AC (And with improved feint feat, could do it on the same turn as thier attack)

Similarly, they could Disarm them of thier weapon (impossible in 4th edition Ruled As Written, as there are no rules for it. It would have to be house-ruled in.

The same for Sundering an opponents armor, shield, weapon, whatever they are holding, etc. Considering 4th edition does away completely with materials' hitpoints, hardness, etc, sundering (and subsequently, bashing in doors/walls/obstacles) is out the door in 4th edition, without a heavy DM Fiat and houseruling.

The same for Tripping. There is no trip mechanic in 4th edition for players, and the one there is (for wolves and the like) makes no sense, as there's no way to counter it. If a wolf (or whatever is tripping you) hits you, you go down, no matter how much stronger, bigger, more athletic, etc you are. As i've said, if a wolf hits a horse, a giant, or a dragon, they are tripped automatically, no save.

Charging, Flanking, Bull Rushing, etc remain mostly the same. Grappling, however, is i'l admit a good change, considering it used to be a complex series of rolls to determine it, but is simplified too much in my opinion.

Mounted Combat takes another chop to the legs, though, as in 4th edition, either you attack or your mount attacks, not both, which when you're talking about magical creature mounts like gryphons, etc, makes no sense.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-06-2008, 04:36 PM

Your opinions about multiclassing bely some inexperience in tabletop 3/3.5 I think [/QUOTE]

My 2 foot stack of 3.5 books is only surpassed by my 5 foot stack of 2.0/advanced pile of books. I play a regular table top game and in that game I often DM so created a complex spread sheet that tracks all changes keeping track of everything from skills chosen to saves to BAB and a lot of other things. I have a verity of builds from warblades to casters and helped many other people with their builds because asI aluded to before if you don’t build your class right you will quite often end up with a steaming pile for a character.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Your example, a fighter 8/wizard 8, is rather peculiar or unusual, as they're at opposite ends. Wizards are generally older, as they require a long time to study magic, and don't have time to learn the martial arts that a fighter does (which is justified in that they start with no proficiencies in any weapon besides quarterstaff, dagger, crossbow, and club, and no armor proficiencies, as well as gaining very small amounts of skills per level.) Intelligence doesn't help a fighter's class skills very much, neither does strength help any of the skills a wizard has. Personally, if I was the DM, i'd suggest a sorceror, as the Charisma use of a sorc can benefit the fighter better, as well as the increase in spells per day, while focussing on self-buffing and touch/close spells. A finesse fighter that focussed on light armor and Dexterity vs Strength, with the appropriate feats (weapon finesse for example) would work..

Intelligence always helps all characters because all skills are Int based while it is true that a good cha can give a +3-4 to one skill having that + from int means that you will get to rise 3-4 skills every level for a non trained skill that still means a final score in DDO of around 10 plus mods plus bonus from stat.

A 8/8 Fighter / Wizard would have a BAB of 12 versus a full fighter having a BAB of 16 that means that factoring in a +15 to hit at that level (very likely more for the 16 pure fighter) means that they have:

8/8 fighter wizard – 27/ 22/ 17
16 Fighter – 31/ 26/ 21/ 16

Because the Multy-class has more stats to focus on (MSD) he will likely have a smaller str meaning he has a smaller bonus to damage maybe only ending with a +2-5 from str/skills and a 4-5 from weapon versus the pure fighter having +15 or more from str and skills and then +5 from weapon. Pure fighter also has more fighter feats getting 4 extra by level 16.

Versus a 35ac creature with DR 5 they would not be close damage wise at all using a long sword:

(average damage per innerative attack = total average damage per round)

Fighter – 20.825/ 14.7/ 8.575/ 2.45 = 68.6 average damage per round

8 Fighter/ 8 Wizard – 9.42/ 5.8/ 2.175 = 17.4 average damage per round

So for melee an 8 fighter/8 wizard is not half as effective because they lose a few points of BAB, feats stat progression and a few other things they have one quarter of a pure fighters projected melee ability.

They will make up for some of that with spells but were talking level 4 spells versus a melee god and with the action based system that means you will be under performing most of the time. Of course that is only a problem if someone makes a high end character and one or more make one that are not as upper shelf. I have been on both sides the crappy build that needs to be redone and solid character that can do the adventure solo there is a MASSIVE gulf that can be made with in the same class let alone if you take classes that are not the best combos.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

I infact have one such character, and she's pretty decent. However....

Create a scroll of any spell he knows
Brew a potion of any spell he knows
Create magic armor and weapons, or
Create a magic wand with 50 charges of any spell he knows.

Magic items at his level are limited to no bonus over a +2 though the total weapon bonus can be more so the good effects and high enhancements are out of his reach. Also being that the character needs to have both fighter and Wizard gear they will have less money to make gear or to buy spells.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

You are also neglecting prestige classes, which is what a fighter/wizard or fighter/sorceror would be building up for, imo. Using just the core books, after 4 levels of wizard, your fighter/wizard would qualify, even with only one level of fighter, for the Eldritch Knight prestige class, which requires simply that you can cast 3rd level arcane spells and have a proficiency in all martial weapons.

With the Eldritch Knight prestige class, every time he gains a level, he gains the BAB and saving throws of a fighter, as well as +1 level to his arcane spell class. A fighter 1/wizard 3/eldritch knight 10 would be the equivalent of a 12th level wizard and an 8th level fighter (although he'd be missing his bonus feats. there is a price to that..) <snip cropped for length>

I am actually not neglecting them some people would in fact multy into fighter / wizard and some would go 4fighter / 4 wizard / 4 bard / 4 cleric thinking they would be great because they can do everything but in fact would have powers for the 4 classes that would be the entry level only meaning that all the good class abilities are out of reach.

Part and parcel of my statement you responded to is that you need to know what your doing and make the right kind of class to not suck you saying that you can/need to do this and that thing to make a good character only reinforces that statement because not everyone will know or want to build the class the way your saying.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

A fighter, or pretty much anyone, had more than just the "attack" option in 3.5, most of which have been removed from 4th edition or transplanted to different class' attacks. For example..

A fighter with a decent enough Bluff skill could use it in combat to Feint, which would deny thier opponent thier Dexterity bonus to AC (And with improved feint feat, could do it on the same turn as thier attack)

Bluff is not a fighter class skill meaning that they will have half the maximum ranks if they spend all they could ignoreing the Int to spend the skills the item modifiers cost, cost of +cha items lets look at a character that is set up to do exactly what you ask to get an idea of there abilities:

Skill = CHA 20 = +5, spending 19 ranks at level 16 gets you +9, +10 bluff item so he would have a 5+9+10= 1D20+24 versus the creatures sense motive and BAB at level 16

Looking in the MM1 for an average fight the first CR 16 fight I come across is Angel, Planatar it has +23 sense motive and a BAB of 14 meaning that he gets to roll 1D20+37 versus you.

So if he rolls a 1 you need to roll a 15 to win or said another way any time he rolls a 7+ versus on his sense motive he wins because you cannot beat him.

Looking at the first hard fight (CR 20) in MM1 the first fight is a Balor demon, he has +30 sense motive and +20 for BAB so he rolls 1D20+50 versus your 1D20+24 in effect you can not roll better then he can even if you roll 20 and he rolls a 1 (unlike attacking 20 does not always succeeded).

You will be able to Bluff low level creatures with varying degrees of success but they would have low ac so you would not have any difficulty hitting them at least not as a well built toon. And you would have spend a lot of cash and feat to do it. Plus bluff only works on humanoids so it does not work on most creatures in the MM’s.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Similarly, they could Disarm them of thier weapon (impossible in 4th edition Ruled As Written, as there are no rules for it. It would have to be house-ruled in.

Oh yes disarm that’s a good one:

Step 1 - if you do not have the improved disarm feat (unlikely) then the opponent gets to make an attack of opportunity if they deal any damage the disarm is stopped.
Step 2 – You both make opposed rolls 2h weapons get +4 light weapons get –4 the larger creature gets +4 per size difference so the 2 earilyer creatures (angel and balor)

Angel - you are 1 size smaller it uses a 2h weapon and similar str it has a base +23 to hit as a guess it would make the AoA 50% of time 30% of time you would disarm it and the other 20% of the of the time it would disarm you.

Balor – Versus a balor you would get hit by the AoA stopping the attempt 95% of the time (every time he does not roll a 1) and with his 35 str and BAB 20 he would easily defeat you most if not all of the time on the strength checks.

Again useable but not truly worth using because of the slow down cumbersomeness and limited chance to succeeded on reasonable challenges.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The same for Sundering an opponents armor, shield, weapon, whatever they are holding, etc. Considering 4th edition does away completely with materials' hitpoints, hardness, etc, sundering (and subsequently, bashing in doors/walls/obstacles) is out the door in 4th edition, without a heavy DM Fiat and houseruling.

Destroyed loot means the PC’s get less, I have never had or saw a PC that actually used this ability more than a few times before the rest of the party got very unhappy with them and told them to stop.

In rare circumstances it can be useful but the rules don’t say you cannot attack items it just does not give HP values for items or separate rules.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The same for Tripping. There is no trip mechanic in 4th edition for players, and the one there is (for wolves and the like) makes no sense, as there's no way to counter it. If a wolf (or whatever is tripping you) hits you, you go down, no matter how much stronger, bigger, more athletic, etc you are. As i've said, if a wolf hits a horse, a giant, or a dragon, they are tripped automatically, no save.

Tripping was the only true alternate attack type that was viable in 3.5, it was over powered so much so that you could lock down large swaths of area tripping most any creature that dared to come your way then once you tripped them you could make an attack for free and then attack them when they got up again, I at level 16 had around a 40’ reach meaning 8 squares and I could take AoA’s through cover meaning that alies would not block my AoA and I could get into stances that would let me make all squares in reach be difficult terrain for the enemy and trigger extra attacks from the enemy entering a square I threaten. BUT with all that it was a purpose built character that needed to built very carefully to get the true power levels to a reasonable level. It took me weeks of looking through feats getting gems like Jotenburg and others to make him. And by doing that he was sub standard at ranged fighting.

A similar fighter would have 2 types of attacks they could use with range or melee meaning that he would have 4 avenues of attack (melee at will 1, melee at will 2, range at will 1, ranged at will 2) that could be used all day long that can come from fighter or any other class you wanted to multy class into, 4 powers that are noticeable more powerful that can be used once each fight 3 powers that are more powerful still that can be used once per day and 5 powers that give you some utility In 3.5 you did not heave nearly that many abilities or modes of attack.

On a side note being prone is not the big problem it was in 3.5 because you don’t get the AoA when you stand up, the only effect with the wolves is that they get a +2 to hit you where your prone and you need to spend your move to stand up. If your standing there fighting the wolves and not running then trip has no effect aside from ac because your not using your move action anyways.

Considering the power range you could get from multy-classing in 3.5 anything from a character that was inept to a character that was literally a GOD at level 7 (see Pun Pun the kobold) and the inherent problems with the systems including but not limited to:

Fighters & melee in general being very over shadowed by caster types, casters having the ability to cast game breaking spells and abilities (time stop, persistent spell, gate, wish, polymorph, save or die’s, divine power to name but a few) Mimic melee advantages (BAB & Feats in the case of fighters).
A lopsided monetary system that would let some classes gain more wealth than an entire kingdom.
A spell system that was cumbersome and prone to failure
An equipment/magic item system that was rife with problems from badly designed items often making one or a few classes way more powerful then they should.
Most gear being useless or close to it.

And many many other bugs and exploits that would ruin a game but by the rules were legal.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-07-2008, 12:19 AM

Personally, I think we have entirely different playing styles and preferences. My experience is in RPGA-sanctioned games and games with heavy DM influence, where the focus is on roleplay/interaction and not smash-n-grab looting. Also, RPGA games are heavily ruled on - the association specifically limits you to creating characters on thier terms, with strict point-based generation, specifically telling you what sourcebooks you can use for this campaign, etc. Also, the games I've been in have been heavily DM authoritated... while doing things off the wall is allowed, or acting extremely out of character, you better have a damn good reason (or, for example, we have a DM insert character that is part of the whole theme of the campaign...)

Personally, a lot of those arguments would be made moot by your DM, unless you've been running a super-high powered campaign, or your DM didn't know what he was doing. If your character had a reach of 40' at 16th level, it was your DM's fault for allowing you to have that, and not adjusting to the now greatly changed gameplay. All the games I've played with my DMs have been carefully locked down to prevent head-desking when the wizard completely derails the campaign by dimension-dooring through the month-long puzzle, or the fighter from killing the BBEG the first time he met him at level 4, when the campaign was supposed to go through to level 12.

That is also the problem with characters like Pun-Pun. NO SANE DM would ever let a player create such a character, as it would overbalance his campaign as soon as he started. He should know the relative power levels of the party, and adjust encounters and adventures up or down to match. Even when I was joking around DMing and we ran the 3.5 update for Tomb of Horrors, and I allowed my players to A. roll 5d6 drop lowest, reroll 1s B. opened the character generation up to templates ( subsequently, 2 of them made half-celestial half-elf clerics of pelor...) all it took was a simple adjustment of the DCs and damage dice for the traps (And upping the EXP rewards for it) and the optional Libris Mortis monsters to keep them in check most of the way. Also, player stupidity. By the end of the first session they had already almost done a TPK by investigating an area with a trap that was painfully obvious it was a trap, and one of the half-celestials was disintigrated in one of the stationary statue traps, and one other character was mind-controlled by a brain in a jar.

This is an extremely challenging, tournament-play module (and yes, it's not really guaranteed that anyone is able to complete it, seeing as the final monster is a demilich construct, though nerfed), yes, but these characters were already 2 levels over the suggested 9th level, had maximised stats and skills, and some were able to bypass a lot by flying over traps, etc. It was still an overly challenging adventure.

Moving on to the stats, you appear to be neglecting that both fighters and wizards only gain 4 + intmod skills per level. Unless you are having some godly character with 18-22 in both strength, and intelligence (And subsequently severely lacking in constitution and dexterity, and impossible on creation from level 1) you're not going to see a large improvement in + skills per levelup, and considering fighters and wizards' lack of in-class skills..

There is no way that a bunch of level 15-16 players are going to be able to take on something like a Balor, or any other Epic level encounters like that, without either an extremely good plan, or tons of backup/characters. CR20 MEANS that it's an expected encounter for 4 20 level characters. A Balor of CR20 has an Encounter Level of 20, which is severely overpowering for anything 2 levels below it. Heck, at level 16, on equal footing, you're only expected to survive with standard losses at level encounters, or one higher, or a mixture of lower CR monsters equalling the EL.

It also depends on the makup of the area they fight, what equipment they have, makeup of the party, etc. But in general, its not a "Hard fight", it's one where most of the party will die from.

Personally, I feel a "Solid character that can do the quest solo" should never be built, as that minimizes the effects of the rest of the party, and consequently, the enjoyment of the group. If theres a character that can do that, you might as well not even meet up.. he can easily clear any challenge. And like I said, it's the DM's responsibility to adjust accordingly such that the whole group has fun.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-07-2008, 12:33 PM

I am a role player by nature but the game has mechanical processes that need to be done, if you dont kill the dragon you can not roleplay saveing the damsel & if you TPW your just done. I have played a few RPGA events I would guess that the millage would vary for roleplaying, I like haveing powerful characters but that does not mean I dont roleplay at all.

It's true that a DM can house rule all the problems away with 3.5 but then can they not do that with 4.0? Theres less problems to start with and it is an easyer system to use plus it provides more time to roleplay.

In all honesty he would of had a reach of 40 feet by I think 9th, he did did have a reach of 20 feet at 3 to 5 (not totaly sure) the DM did adjust to my build and put in a massive number of creatures he decided were imune to my tripping or that would just stay back so that there was no reason to play that character, so much was done that the campagine was based around me not being able to do anything unlike one with my wizard that was abel to lock things down solidly with little or no saves. It was a valid character by the rules but it was a failing of the rules that it was much too powerful to actualy be played, conversly it was weaker than a caster of lower level.

If you start with a 16 in str and int you will be avle to give each +4 from level up's (lv 4, 8, 12, & 16) bringing each to 22 and by 16th you should easily be able to get a +4 stat item and mabey more. So it is reasonable to get to a get to 26+ on 2 stats though that means that your next highest stat would be a 12 with a two 10's, but you dont need to start with a 16 in each you can start with a 14 in each and still get to 24 let alone if you have a racial adjustment that works for you.

The 19 ranks I was talking about was the maximum ranks you can as a fighter place into any skill, you are incorrect on your 4+int mod to skills as fighters and wizards only recieve 2+ int mod at any given level with a maximum number ofskills spent equal to level +3 so 16+3=19 ranks or 4 at level one and 1 per level there after.

Level 20 is not epic it is just below epic epic is level 21+. The chart on PG 49 of the dmg states that an encounter of level = to character is a chalangeing encounter while one that is 1-4 levels higher is very difficult and should be does about 3 times every 20 encounters. There are some charger builds that can kill a balor with one charge, sometimes with one hit. He only hits for 20 points max with his sword +fire & vorpal both of those can be gotten around with the right spells and items. Its not an easy or run of the miss fight by any means but one that a party can easily beat and whats more should be able to beat.

At level 16 one of those "equal footing" fights your talking about is equivelanent to a level 16 character with sub standard stats, sub standard gear of level 16 with no back up. No players should die to a equal CR fight unless they are very depelted. A Belor demon is a VERY reasonable fight, to say otherwise is to say that there is one more thing wrong with 3.5 that is not so easy to fix with DM fiat. There was fighters suck thread where someone made a barb charger build and killed one the first round with one charge and I think it was level 15 he did it at ehough it may have been level 16-20 either way it was an encounter was probly 4-8 levels above him doing it solo.

In 4.0 you get a lot of the upper and lower builds so that everyone is on the same power curve makeing the DM's job a lot easyer. In the end what ever version I am playing I want a vehicle I can tell a storie with, the lss over head the better for me and for my group 4.0 deliveres that.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Personally, I think we have entirely different playing styles and preferences. My experience is in RPGA-sanctioned games and games with heavy DM influence, where the focus is on roleplay/interaction and not smash-n-grab looting. Also, RPGA games are heavily ruled on - the association specifically limits you to creating characters on thier terms, with strict point-based generation, specifically telling you what sourcebooks you can use for this campaign, etc. Also, the games I've been in have been heavily DM authoritated... while doing things off the wall is allowed, or acting extremely out of character, you better have a damn good reason (or, for example, we have a DM insert character that is part of the whole theme of the campaign...)

Personally, a lot of those arguments would be made moot by your DM, unless you've been running a super-high powered campaign, or your DM didn't know what he was doing. If your character had a reach of 40' at 16th level, it was your DM's fault for allowing you to have that, and not adjusting to the now greatly changed gameplay. All the games I've played with my DMs have been carefully locked down to prevent head-desking when the wizard completely derails the campaign by dimension-dooring through the month-long puzzle, or the fighter from killing the BBEG the first time he met him at level 4, when the campaign was supposed to go through to level 12.

That is also the problem with characters like Pun-Pun. NO SANE DM would ever let a player create such a character, as it would overbalance his campaign as soon as he started. He should know the relative power levels of the party, and adjust encounters and adventures up or down to match. Even when I was joking around DMing and we ran the 3.5 update for Tomb of Horrors, and I allowed my players to A. roll 5d6 drop lowest, reroll 1s B. opened the character generation up to templates ( subsequently, 2 of them made half-celestial half-elf clerics of pelor...) all it took was a simple adjustment of the DCs and damage dice for the traps (And upping the EXP rewards for it) and the optional Libris Mortis monsters to keep them in check most of the way. Also, player stupidity. By the end of the first session they had already almost done a TPK by investigating an area with a trap that was painfully obvious it was a trap, and one of the half-celestials was disintigrated in one of the stationary statue traps, and one other character was mind-controlled by a brain in a jar.

This is an extremely challenging, tournament-play module (and yes, it's not really guaranteed that anyone is able to complete it, seeing as the final monster is a demilich construct, though nerfed), yes, but these characters were already 2 levels over the suggested 9th level, had maximised stats and skills, and some were able to bypass a lot by flying over traps, etc. It was still an overly challenging adventure.

Moving on to the stats, you appear to be neglecting that both fighters and wizards only gain 4 + intmod skills per level. Unless you are having some godly character with 18-22 in both strength, and intelligence (And subsequently severely lacking in constitution and dexterity, and impossible on creation from level 1) you're not going to see a large improvement in + skills per levelup, and considering fighters and wizards' lack of in-class skills..

There is no way that a bunch of level 15-16 players are going to be able to take on something like a Balor, or any other Epic level encounters like that, without either an extremely good plan, or tons of backup/characters. CR20 MEANS that it's an expected encounter for 4 20 level characters. A Balor of CR20 has an Encounter Level of 20, which is severely overpowering for anything 2 levels below it. Heck, at level 16, on equal footing, you're only expected to survive with standard losses at level encounters, or one higher, or a mixture of lower CR monsters equalling the EL.

It also depends on the makup of the area they fight, what equipment they have, makeup of the party, etc. But in general, its not a "Hard fight", it's one where most of the party will die from.

Personally, I feel a "Solid character that can do the quest solo" should never be built, as that minimizes the effects of the rest of the party, and consequently, the enjoyment of the group. If theres a character that can do that, you might as well not even meet up.. he can easily clear any challenge. And like I said, it's the DM's responsibility to adjust accordingly such that the whole group has fun.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-07-2008, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by Thesleeper01

I am a role player by nature but the game has mechanical processes that need to be done, if you dont kill the dragon you can not roleplay saveing the damsel & if you TPW your just done.

Usually there is more than one way to kill the dragon besides running up and stabbing it with your sword, or a way of getting the damsel out withoug even encountering a fight with the dragon.

It's true that a DM can house rule all the problems away with 3.5 but then can they not do that with 4.0? Theres less problems to start with and it is an easyer system to use plus it provides more time to roleplay.

Not if there is currently no system even in place for some of the rules. The DM will have to actually create an entire economic system, for example, or game mechanics, and playtest them, before inserting them into his adventure, while in 3.5, the mechanics were mostly actually THERE, and open to tweaking/ruling out if necessary.

If you start with a 16 in str and int you will be avle to give each +4 from level up's (lv 4, 8, 12, & 16) bringing each to 22 and by 16th you should easily be able to get a +4 stat item and mabey more. So it is reasonable to get to a get to 26+ on 2 stats though that means that your next highest stat would be a 12 with a two 10's, but you dont need to start with a 16 in each you can start with a 14 in each and still get to 24 let alone if you have a racial adjustment that works for you.

This is completely wrong. Open up your PHB again and read pages 21-22.
Yes, you get level-ups for every 4 levels. HOWEVER, the amount you gain is 1 point of increase for every ability increase. If you started at 16 strength, and wanted to increase your strength at every level, you would end up at 20 strength, without increasing any other ability, at all. Splitting between int and str, one would end up at 18-18, nowhere near 22 for each. You don't gain extra ability increases for having higher int, either.

Level 20 is not epic it is just below epic epic is level 21+. The chart on PG 49 of the dmg states that an encounter of level = to character is a chalangeing encounter while one that is 1-4 levels higher is very difficult and should be does about 3 times every 20 encounters. There are some charger builds that can kill a balor with one charge, sometimes with one hit. He only hits for 20 points max with his sword +fire & vorpal both of those can be gotten around with the right spells and items. Its not an easy or run of the miss fight by any means but one that a party can easily beat and whats more should be able to beat.
At level 16 one of those "equal footing" fights your talking about is equivelanent to a level 16 character with sub standard stats, sub standard gear of level 16 with no back up. No players should die to a equal CR fight unless they are very depelted.

An EL that is equivalent to the characters is a challenging encounter that should take up moderate amounts of spells, consumables, etc, typically 20% of the party's stock. Again, crack open your DMG and reread 48-50. A CR 20 encounter is equivalent to a challenging encounter for 4 level 20 characters, each with the appropriate amount of equipment, spells, what have you as per the Character Wealth by Level chart on page 135. A level 16 character should have about 260,000GP worth of wealth in equipment, to keep in standing with the rated values, wheras 1 20th level character has 760k. Also, keep in mind that if you're dropping the amount of party members, the party's Effective Character Level drops drastically (the same as adding more monsters, you will need to add several lower-level monsters to equal the Encounter Level you want to achieve).

A single level 16 character has a party-equivalent ECL of 12, while the Balor retains his EL of 20. On the plus side, if one manages to ever kill him, he would get over 19k experience and 80k worth of treasure

A Belor demon is a VERY reasonable fight, to say otherwise is to say that there is one more thing wrong with 3.5 that is not so easy to fix with DM fiat. There was fighters suck thread where someone made a barb charger build and killed one the first round with one charge and I think it was level 15 he did it at ehough it may have been level 16-20 either way it was an encounter was probly 4-8 levels above him doing it solo.

Once again, a Balor is a reasonable fight, provided you have an ECL 20th party that is geared for a EL 20 encounter. Lets take a stab at the fight.

Now, you are unlikely to be able to catch the Balor by surprise or flatfooted, considering it's +11 to initiative, excellent vision, etc. Besides which, he probably knows you're there anyway.

A Balor has 20d8+200 HP (minimum 220, average 290, max 350). He has an AC of 35 and a spell resistance of 28, also, he more then likely has Unholy Aura up already (which he can cast at-will) giving him +4 deflection to AC, so 39 AC.

If your fighter has less than 151 HP and within 75', he is already good as dead as the balor has Power Word: Stun as an at-will spelllike ability, by which he stuns you for 1d4 rounds, no save. This is also the problem if the character EVER goes below 151 hp.

This is also compounded by the fact it can use Insanity on you (DC 25 will save) at over 200 feet, which gives you a permanant confusion effect.

Within a 40' radius, he can use Blasphemy as a level 20th spellcaster, which again, has no save. On a level 16 character, an at-will cast of Blasphemy will drop your strength by 2d6 for 2d4 rounds and daze you 1 round, making you not able to perform any actions. For a level 15, it's worse, as it paralyzes you for 1d10 minutes, no save, letting him immediately coup-de-grace you.

A Balor also does much more than "20 max damage with vorpal sword and whip", if he's doing anything more than sneezing at you.

A balor's full attack is 4 hits with the sword (average 20 damage, minimum 15) at +31/+26/+21/+16 to-hit. In addition, he gets 2 hits at you with the whip at +30/+25 (average 12 damage) and if it ever hits you with the whip, you need to make opposed strength checks, or take 6d6 fire damage until unentangled.

This alone puts it's full attack value at an average of over 90 damage in one round if it hits all attacks, a maximum of over 112 in one round.

This also doesn't take into account the vorpal weapon. Every time it makes an attack roll, if it ever rolls a natural 20, and confirms it's critical, your character is instantly dead. It doesn't need to ever get over your AC, and Fortification, etc doesn't take into account a vorpal weapon. The only way to avoid this is to have an incorporeal body, or be phasing through to the ethereal plane, which in doing so, you would be unable to attack the balor as well.

Your lance charger fighter needs to be able to deal over 290 damage, average, on one attack roll, in order to kill it immediately, preferrably by rolling a natural 20, which would make your character one-shot this fight 5% of the time. He then needs to survive the ensuing 100HP explosion when the balor dies.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-07-2008, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Not if there is currently no system even in place for some of the rules. The DM will have to actually create an entire economic system, for example, or game mechanics, and playtest them, before inserting them into his adventure, while in 3.5, the mechanics were mostly actually THERE, and open to tweaking/ruling out if necessary.

There is no ecomoney in 3.5 theres just a bunch of sell rates and silly forumlias that dont work and would end up wrecking your game if you were to follow them.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

This is completely wrong. Open up your PHB again and read pages 21-22.
Yes, you get level-ups for every 4 levels. HOWEVER, the amount you gain is 1 point of increase for every ability increase. If you started at 16 strength, and wanted to increase your strength at every level, you would end up at 20 strength, without increasing any other ability, at all. Splitting between int and str, one would end up at 18-18, nowhere near 22 for each. You don't gain extra ability increases for having higher int, either.

Woops for some reason I thought that the gain was 2 points and that 16+4=22 clearly wrong but still you can get to 22.
Either way I only posted it as a rebuke I dont think it is reasonable because of that as I have stated some classe combos make very pore combos.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

An EL that is equivalent to the characters is a challenging encounter that should take up moderate amounts of spells, consumables, etc, typically 20% of the party's stock. Again, crack open your DMG and reread 48-50. A CR 20 encounter is equivalent to a challenging encounter for 4 level 20 characters, each with the appropriate amount of equipment, spells, what have you as per the Character Wealth by Level chart on page 135. A level 16 character should have about 260,000GP worth of wealth in equipment, to keep in standing with the rated values, wheras 1 20th level character has 760k. Also, keep in mind that if you're dropping the amount of party members, the party's Effective Character Level drops drastically (the same as adding more monsters, you will need to add several lower-level monsters to equal the Encounter Level you want to achieve).

what level encounter a balor is to a level 20 party or how much more they have is irrevalent. It is a level 16 (Not 15) party we were talking about. If you look on page 49 you can see it there in black and white it clearly states that EC's 1-4 levels about party level should be about 15% of all encounters. That is a fact & it has nothing to do with any other level of partys or anything else.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

A single level 16 character has a party-equivalent ECL of 12, while the Balor retains his EL of 20. On the plus side, if one manages to ever kill him, he would get over 19k experience and 80k worth of treasure

ECL is irevallent it was not if the character did kill him inthe case that I talked about.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Once again, a Balor is a reasonable fight, provided you have an ECL 20th party that is geared for a EL 20 encounter.

The DMG does not agree with you, it an very difficult fight for 4 level 16 characters if you were to wait till the group is level 20 to go through them then the party can fight 4 of them in one day with no deaths. That is not a diffucult fight nor is it even remotely earth shattering.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Lets take a stab at the fight.

Now, you are unlikely to be able to catch the Balor by surprise or flatfooted, considering it's +11 to initiative, excellent vision, etc. Besides which, he probably knows you're there anyway.

If he knows your there or not is a roleplaying and or adventure design decesion and presumeing that the guy with the highest inish will know more (patently ubsurd) then mabey but more than likely the PC's are hunting the balor so the PC's will have things ready to counter it.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

A Balor has 20d8+200 HP (minimum 220, average 290, max 350). He has an AC of 35 and a spell resistance of 28, also, he more then likely has Unholy Aura up already (which he can cast at-will) giving him +4 deflection to AC, so 39 AC.

If as the DM you presume that a monster uses all of it's defensive powers at all times just because it can even when it is not in a fight you can but that is very unreasonable to presume that monsters are that anal rententive. Ac should be 35 and only go to 39 if he spends an action to cast the spell. Even if you presume he has it up the tanks will likely have around a +30 to hit on thier first attack abe mabey more if they have buffs meaning that they could reasonably hit on there last attack greater than 50% of the time.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

If your fighter has less than 151 HP and within 75', he is already good as dead as the balor has Power Word: Stun as an at-will spelllike ability, by which he stuns you for 1d4 rounds, no save. This is also the problem if the character EVER goes below 151 hp.

It is only useable once per day and needs to pass by SR (at that level the PC's should have SR up for the fight and it should be SR 28, meaning that the Balor needs to roll a natural to get 28 with the +8 bonus from CHA. Even if it did work 100% of the time it is only a stun for 1D4 rounds not a kill.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

This is also compounded by the fact it can use Insanity on you (DC 25 will save) at over 200 feet, which gives you a permanant confusion effect.

First he needs to get past SR then after the player needs to fail there save and 3rd for the PC to be worthless the cleric or caster needs to not have one of there cures for it memed or a scroll on hand to cure it.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Within a 40' radius, he can use Blasphemy as a level 20th spellcaster, which again, has no save. On a level 16 character, an at-will cast of Blasphemy will drop your strength by 2d6 for 2d4 rounds and daze you 1 round, making you not able to perform any actions. For a level 15, it's worse, as it paralyzes you for 1d10 minutes, no save, letting him immediately coup-de-grace you.

This also needs to pass by SR and is totaly useless if the party is evil or does not work on those that are evil.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

A Balor also does much more than "20 max damage with vorpal sword and whip", if he's doing anything more than sneezing at you.

A balor's full attack is 4 hits with the sword (average 20 damage, minimum 15) at +31/+26/+21/+16 to-hit. In addition, he gets 2 hits at you with the whip at +30/+25 (average 12 damage) and if it ever hits you with the whip, you need to make opposed strength checks, or take 6d6 fire damage until unentangled.

20 damage max is important because they will likely have stone skin on meaning that he will only hit for 10 damage a hit and as well there are items that will make it so you dont die on a nat 20 though you still take the 5X normal damage so 50 damage on a natural 20 and 10 max other wise of course he can roll less than maximum.

His sword does 2D6+8 so minimum is 10 not 15 meaning that if the minimum damage is rolled on it there will be no damage.

The entangle sucks but maximum damage from the fire is 36 though it will not have a very good chance to get that, the PC's should have resist to fire and prot up as well meaning that they will only take fire damage if the total is over 30 so on maximum damage they only take 6 damage.

Either way it is a pittance compared to the hp the party has that the cleric should be able to easily keep the party alive and healthey a long time.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

This alone puts it's full attack value at an average of over 90 damage in one round if it hits all attacks, a maximum of over 112 in one round.

The whip damage would never get past the stone skin and fire damge from it would be limited to no more than 6 per round and likely none.

The sword would do maximum 4X10=40 damage and average of 7+8=15 -10=5 average per hit with on average 3 out of the 4 swings hitting if on the fighter and all hitting on a caster or anyone with out a high ac so on a fight or paladin I would expect the damage to be 15 a round.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

This also doesn't take into account the vorpal weapon. Every time it makes an attack roll, if it ever rolls a natural 20, and confirms it's critical, your character is instantly dead. It doesn't need to ever get over your AC, and Fortification, etc doesn't take into account a vorpal weapon. The only way to avoid this is to have an incorporeal body, or be phasing through to the ethereal plane, which in doing so, you would be unable to attack the balor as well.

There is an item that will prevent you from being killed by the death effect from the vorpal though it does not reduve the damage so on a vorpal hit you would take 5 times normal damage minus 10 or 65 points on average with the average fighter requireing 3 hits from full at that level to be killed.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Your lance charger fighter needs to be able to deal over 290 damage, average, on one attack roll, in order to kill it immediately, preferrably by rolling a natural 20, which would make your character one-shot this fight 5% of the time. He then needs to survive the ensuing 100HP explosion when the balor dies.

Not true there are ways to get around it so you can get the benefits of charage and still have your full attack round though I think he was swinging for around 120 a swing, either way it is a moot point because it is not a single character of level 20 that is fighting the balor it is a group of 4 level 16's.

The balor has Dispell and that can throw a wrench in to the works but if he does not then the balor would be an easy fight with well built characters. As it stands ok level 16 characters should be chalanged by this fight and thats the way it is meant to be.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-07-2008, 10:27 PM

what level encounter a balor is to a level 20 party or how much more they have is irrevalent. It is a level 16 (Not 15) party we were talking about. If you look on page 49 you can see it there in black and white it clearly states that EC's 1-4 levels about party level should be about 15% of all encounters. That is a fact & it has nothing to do with any other level of partys or anything else.

The difference in power levels between 16 and 20 is immense. At level 20 they would have almost 4x the value of equipment (enough to buy nearly epic-level and named weapons and armor and the like) and some of the spells, especially combat, for example, disintigrate, that are 2x the power of a level 16 caster. The power levels are extremely non-linear.

The Very Difficult and Overpowering types of encounters are not typically there for you to actually attempt to fight. Many times, they're there to reinforce the knowledge that sometimes, some things are Just Too Tough to combat at this time, and they should run away if they want to live, which is why they're 5-15% of encounters in an adventure (not every day encounters).

Read the descriptions: Very Difficult: One PC may very well die. The Encounter Level is higher than the party level. This sort of encounter may be more dangerous than an overpowering one, because it's not immediately obvious to the players that the PC's should flee.
Overpowering: The PC's should run. If they don't, they will almost certainly lose. The Encounter Level is five or more levels higher than the party.

Even if you presume he has it up the tanks will likely have around a +30 to hit on thier first attack abe mabey more if they have buffs meaning that they could reasonably hit on there last attack greater than 50% of the time.

I'l give you that some of the melee classes would possibly be able to hit, the first 1 or 2 attacks. However, they would need a lot of buffs to approach +30 to hit, with a BAB on the second hit of 11+strengthmod, and for the last hits, at +1 + strengthmod. Most buffs do not stack with each other.

It is only useable once per day and needs to pass by SR (at that level the PC's should have SR up for the fight and it should be SR 28, meaning that the Balor needs to roll a natural to get 28 with the +8 bonus from CHA. Even if it did work 100% of the time it is only a stun for 1D4 rounds not a kill.

From the Balor statblock:
Spell-Like Abilities

At will— blasphemy (DC 25), dominate monster (DC 27), greater dispel magic, greater teleport (self plus 50 pounds of objects only), insanity (DC 25), power word stun, telekinesis (DC 23), unholy aura (DC 26);
1/day—fire storm (DC 26), implosion (DC 27). Caster level 20th. The save DCs are Charisma-based.

This is not how spell resistance works. The balor would need to roll a caster level check, which is 1d20 + 20 to defeat your spell resistance (depending on how you cast it. If it was the Spell Resistance spell, you would have 12 + the caster's level , which yes, would be 28. Spell resistances from items and spells do not stack. The caster would need to cast this on everyone in the party, as well.) The balor would simply need to roll an 8 or greater.
You can create items that grant spell resistance, however they are EXTREMELY expensive. To have spell resistance enough to worry a balor, you would need to create an item that grants 32 or higher spell resistance. This item would cost 230 thousand goldpieces.

Stunning: Please read the status effects.
Stunned

A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a -2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

1d4 rounds of BEING UNABLE TO MOVE, OR ATTACK is a big deal. The same with losing both your weapon and shield, and some AC. Furthermore, that gives it breathing room to simply perform it again, even if it was 1 round. It's entirely possible to stun-lock groups with PW:S.

First he needs to get past SR then after the player needs to fail there save and 3rd for the PC to be worthless the cleric or caster needs to not have one of there cures for it memed or a scroll on hand to cure it.

Once again, he will get past the SR a little better than 60% of the time. The will save is a given, yes, but if your a maximized damage/tank, your will save is going to be low. At level 16, a fighter, barbarian, paladin, ranger, or rogue has a +5 base will save, not enough to save at all. Lets say he has a 16 will, for some reason. That gives him a +8, not enough for any reliability. Throw on a +5 or +6 resist item (which costs Resist value squared x1000) and you're starting to get towards reliability, but that won't stack with any other resist item or buffs.

And there are not a lot of cures for insanity/confusion. They would have to burn a cast of Heal, or some other very high-level healing spells.

This also needs to pass by SR and is totaly useless if the party is evil or does not work on those that are evil.

The standard adventuring party is nonevil.

...and as well there are items that will make it so you dont die on a nat 20 though you still take the 5X normal damage so 50 damage on a natural 20 and 10 max other wise of course he can roll less than maximum.

There is an item that will prevent you from being killed by the death effect from the vorpal though it does not reduve the damage so on a vorpal hit you would take 5 times normal damage minus 10 or 65 points on average with the average fighter requireing 3 hits from full at that level to be killed.

I've never ever heard of this item. Can you cite it in any published book, or was it something written up in in Dragon magazine (which most DM's don't really consider canon, as some are extremely overpowered and unbalanced).
Also, please tell me how you get around "Even if you have extra attacks, such as from having a high enough base attack bonus or from using multiple weapons, you only get to make one attack during a charge."

The balor has Dispell and that can throw a wrench in to the works but if he does not then the balor would be an easy fight with well built characters. As it stands ok level 16 characters should be chalanged by this fight and thats the way it is meant to be.

The balor has GREATER dispell, which allows it to cast a 20' area-effect dispell, and further, makes the Caster Level Check of the dispell action 1d20+20 versus a DC 10+spell level, instead of 1d20+10. Furthermore, he has at-will greater teleportation, which would allow him to teleport farther then you could run, and still rain down greater dispell, insanity, etc.
Your stoneskin goes away if he makes either a targeted dispell or 20' area dispell and rolls greater than an 8, and proceeds to roll greater than a 7 to remove spell resistance, etc.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-08-2008, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The difference in power levels between 16 and 20 is immense. At level 20 they would have almost 4x the value of equipment (enough to buy nearly epic-level and named weapons and armor and the like) and some of the spells, especially combat, for example, disintigrate, that are 2x the power of a level 16 caster. The power levels are extremely non-linear.

True but irrevalent.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The Very Difficult and Overpowering types of encounters are not typically there for you to actually attempt to fight. Many times, they're there to reinforce the knowledge that sometimes, some things are Just Too Tough to combat at this time, and they should run away if they want to live, which is why they're 5-15% of encounters in an adventure (not every day encounters).

The second hardest encounter makes up 15% of all encounters and the hardest type makes up 5% of all encounters so 20% or on average one per 5 encounters could be with a balor for a level 16 party. And no the EC system is not to be used in the way you say it is a reasonable encounter for a level 16 party.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Read the descriptions: Very Difficult: One PC may very well die. The Encounter Level is higher than the party level. This sort of encounter may be more dangerous than an overpowering one, because it's not immediately obvious to the players that the PC's should flee.
Overpowering: The PC's should run. If they don't, they will almost certainly lose. The Encounter Level is five or more levels higher than the party.

Yes a PC could die, the running part is your beliefe because YOU think that they could not do it but it is being more and more clear they would be able to kill him rather easy.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

I'l give you that some of the melee classes would possibly be able to hit, the first 1 or 2 attacks. However, they would need a lot of buffs to approach +30 to hit, with a BAB on the second hit of 11+strengthmod, and for the last hits, at +1 + strengthmod. Most buffs do not stack with each other.

Perhaps but that does not mean that said buffing would not be there or that there would not be things like wraith strike that would let them hit.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

From the Balor statblock:
Spell-Like Abilities

At will— blasphemy (DC 25), dominate monster (DC 27), greater dispel magic, greater teleport (self plus 50 pounds of objects only), insanity (DC 25), power word stun, telekinesis (DC 23), unholy aura (DC 26);
1/day—fire storm (DC 26), implosion (DC 27). Caster level 20th. The save DCs are Charisma-based.

This is not how spell resistance works. The balor would need to roll a caster level check, which is 1d20 + 20 to defeat your spell resistance (depending on how you cast it. If it was the Spell Resistance spell, you would have 12 + the caster's level , which yes, would be 28. Spell resistances from items and spells do not stack. The caster would need to cast this on everyone in the party, as well.) The balor would simply need to roll an 8 or greater.
You can create items that grant spell resistance, however they are EXTREMELY expensive. To have spell resistance enough to worry a balor, you would need to create an item that grants 32 or higher spell resistance. This item would cost 230 thousand goldpieces.

Woops I made a mistake I dont play 3.5 any more. Still it gives a 40% chance that any effect does not work, the cleric if he does the SR can likely boost his caster level to make it harder to dispell, not likely much higher than a few levels higher.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Stunning: Please read the status effects.
Stunned

A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a -2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

1d4 rounds of BEING UNABLE TO MOVE, OR ATTACK is a big deal. The same with losing both your weapon and shield, and some AC. Furthermore, that gives it breathing room to simply perform it again, even if it was 1 round. It's entirely possible to stun-lock groups with PW:S.

No it is not even close to poseable PW:S is a SINGLE TARGET spell he could mabey keep ONE creature stun locked if it were in 75 feet but it would need to remove that creatures SR first. Also if you have a ranger type in group and the caster type they would be blasting back at him and just like the balod they can cast PW:S unlike the balor they can mabey keep him locked up till dead after he gets down to 151 hp.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

I've never ever heard of this item. Can you cite it in any published book, or was it something written up in in Dragon magazine (which most DM's don't really consider canon, as some are extremely overpowered and unbalanced).
Also, please tell me how you get around "Even if you have extra attacks, such as from having a high enough base attack bonus or from using multiple weapons, you only get to make one attack during a charge."

No I can not it is not a mag it is out of it is one of the campagine type books it is a neck item.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The balor has GREATER dispell, which allows it to cast a 20' area-effect dispell, and further, makes the Caster Level Check of the dispell action 1d20+20 versus a DC 10+spell level, instead of 1d20+10. Furthermore, he has at-will greater teleportation, which would allow him to teleport farther then you could run, and still rain down greater dispell, insanity, etc.
Your stoneskin goes away if he makes either a targeted dispell or 20' area dispell and rolls greater than an 8, and proceeds to roll greater than a 7 to remove spell resistance, etc.

He actualy dispells from the highest spell to the lowest one 1 at a time so if there are higher level spells up then it beceoms much harder to dispell your buffs.

Trying to dispell a bunch of PC's that may be apart some would likely get him killed as every round the caster or wizard could refersh teh spell dispelled while the rest of the party beats him down.

**Bisclaveret** · 09-08-2008, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by Thesleeper01

True but irrevalent.

The second hardest encounter makes up 15% of all encounters and the hardest type makes up 5% of all encounters so 20% or on average one per 5 encounters could be with a balor for a level 16 party. And no the EC system is not to be used in the way you say it is a reasonable encounter for a level 16 party.

Using that reasoning, that means every day I should give a level 1 party a Gelatinous Cube (CR3) or an Ochre Jelly (CR5) to fight (something that has 10x the party members hitpoints and can one-shot kill them if they get into melee range) or say, 20 kobolds (CR .25 x5), or 8 orcs (CR .5 each). It's a rough guide to just how much power your encounters have. Heck, i could make a level 1 party fight a red dragon wyrmling. It's only a CR4, has a 17 AC, and it's breath attack (2d10 30' wide cone of fire, with a reflex save of 15, nealry guaranteeing on killing most of the party in one round) and saving throws have DCs that far outstrip anything a level 1 party can achieve easily.

Perhaps but that does not mean that said buffing would not be there or that there would not be things like wraith strike that would let them hit.

A Bull's Strength (+4) buff on someone wearing a Giant's Strength belt (+4) does nothing. Similarly, a mage armor on someone wearing platemail gives no armor bonus for anything, except if you were fighting a ghost (incorporeal touch attacks, because the mage armor is force)

No it is not even close to poseable PW:S is a SINGLE TARGET spell he could mabey keep ONE creature stun locked if it were in 75 feet but it would need to remove that creatures SR first. Also if you have a ranger type in group and the caster type they would be blasting back at him and just like the balod they can cast PW:S unlike the balor they can mabey keep him locked up till dead after he gets down to 151 hp.

The MAJOR difference here being the balor has it as an AT WILL, SPELL-LIKE ABILITY. The balor can cast it an infinite number of times. Power Word: Stun is an 8th level sorceror/wizard spell. At 16, unless your wizard has super-high intelligence, he can only prepare it TWICE, THREE TIMES if he has an int of 26-27, and prepares nothing else that day. Furthermore, he will fail to overcome the spell resistance of the balor over 60% of the time, AND the balor's Unholy Aura PREVENTS Compulsion [mind-affecting] spell types from working.

He actualy dispells from the highest spell to the lowest one 1 at a time so if there are higher level spells up then it beceoms much harder to dispell your buffs.

It's still a Caster Level Check, regardless of the level of the spell on him.

Trying to dispell a bunch of PC's that may be apart some would likely get him killed as every round the caster or wizard could refersh teh spell dispelled while the rest of the party beats him down.

Once again, they can only prepare a limited amount of spells per day, or they've spent an ungodly amount of money getting scrolls or making a wand. The balor dispells stoneskin on the entire party. Stoneskin is a level 4 sorceror/wizard spell. Are you telling me that the wizard has done NOTHING but prepare 4 uses of level 4 stoneskin, 4 uses of level 5 stoneskin, 4 uses of level 6 stoneskin, etc? taking up every slot from level 4-8 and throwing out spells like disintigrate, hold monster, antimagic field, the Mass buffs (bulls strength, fox's cunning, etc)? Thats pretty inconcievable.

Lets assume a wand of stoneskin. The caster would need to get within touch range of the party member to cast it, and that would be his only standard action. He'd then need to move (assuming standard movement rates) to the next person and touch them, next round. This is a logistical nightmare.

**Thesleeper01** · 09-08-2008, 06:57 PM

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Using that reasoning, that means every day I should give a level 1 party a Gelatinous Cube (CR3) or an Ochre Jelly (CR5) to fight (something that has 10x the party members hitpoints and can one-shot kill them if they get into melee range) or say, 20 kobolds (CR .25 x5), or 8 orcs (CR .5 each). It's a rough guide to just how much power your encounters have. Heck, i could make a level 1 party fight a red dragon wyrmling. It's only a CR4, has a 17 AC, and it's breath attack (2d10 30' wide cone of fire, with a reflex save of 15, nealry guaranteeing on killing most of the party in one round) and saving throws have DCs that far outstrip anything a level 1 party can achieve easily.

Now your trying to put words into my mouth. I did not say that they should fight ochre jelly EVERY DAY. Or anything aproaching that none the less a level 1 party of 4 PC's should be able to handle an Ochre Jelly fairly well. Of course it all depends on the group and the DM if the DM sucks he will just drop a fight into there lap that is that hard with no warning before hand and slaughter the PC's that does not mean the system is at fault that means the DM did a pore job.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

A Bull's Strength (+4) buff on someone wearing a Giant's Strength belt (+4) does nothing. Similarly, a mage armor on someone wearing platemail gives no armor bonus for anything, except if you were fighting a ghost (incorporeal touch attacks, because the mage armor is force)

You dont reaily think I was talking about bulls strength and mage armor do you? Please tell me your not that obtuse. You clearly know the spells that are out there and the ones that PC's will likely have and the ones that will stack. I should not need to lead you by the hand to show you something you already know and playing stupid about.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

The MAJOR difference here being the balor has it as an AT WILL, SPELL-LIKE ABILITY. The balor can cast it an infinite number of times. Power Word: Stun is an 8th level sorceror/wizard spell. At 16, unless your wizard has super-high intelligence, he can only prepare it TWICE, THREE TIMES if he has an int of 26-27, and prepares nothing else that day. Furthermore, he will fail to overcome the spell resistance of the balor over 60% of the time, AND the balor's Unholy Aura PREVENTS Compulsion [mind-affecting] spell types from working.

It's still a Caster Level Check, regardless of the level of the spell on him.

Wow good catch I did not know that the protection spells would grant imunity to PW:S of course that is a 2 way street, the PC's would surely have it on them before the start meaning that unless all the spells were removed prior to casting PW:S the character would be immune to it's effects.

With assay spell resistance (Balor does not have) the caster of the party would have +10 to get past SR makeing it 90% chance and if he has spell peneteration and improved spell peneration he would have a 110% to penetrate it, even the cleric with that alone would have a 60% chance to penerate it. With wizards able to cast level 8 spells one spell getting through could be enough to kill you or destroy you if you dont have otehr characters that can back you up when your stunned.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Once again, they can only prepare a limited amount of spells per day, or they've spent an ungodly amount of money getting scrolls or making a wand. The balor dispells stoneskin on the entire party. Stoneskin is a level 4 sorceror/wizard spell. Are you telling me that the wizard has done NOTHING but prepare 4 uses of level 4 stoneskin, 4 uses of level 5 stoneskin, 4 uses of level 6 stoneskin, etc? taking up every slot from level 4-8 and throwing out spells like disintigrate, hold monster, antimagic field, the Mass buffs (bulls strength, fox's cunning, etc)? Thats pretty inconcievable.

Well first off the balor would not be able to dispell it on the whole party at once they would not be that tight together. Second a scroll of stone skin is cheep a wand of 50 charages is only 23,000gp a pittance for a level 16 party and of massive benefit when fighting creatures that will eat you and you will have plenty of charages to recast it later. Plus at the minimun level it will last 70 min.

Originally Posted by Bisclaveret

Lets assume a wand of stoneskin. The caster would need to get within touch range of the party member to cast it, and that would be his only standard action. He'd then need to move (assuming standard movement rates) to the next person and touch them, next round. This is a logistical nightmare.

Spectral hand and or different ways to move and contigent spells would let the party have many buffs ready and up to cast at a momments notice.

All in all the Balor would be DESTROYED because it would be his one action versus many PC's actions that would be able to team up on him and quickly beat him down.