31 réponses à ce sujet

[MagicalMaster]

Even if you "tuned" Poison, it would still be usable by Rogues and the only advantage is still economy. If you made a new Assassin-only poison, that'd be going beyond tuning and adding something completely new, like making a Fighter-only scripted item that buffs a proc effect on a weapon/armor/shield.

 

How is that going beyond tuning?  Assassins are supposed to be poison specialists, they get a bonus to saves against poison, and they're one of only two classes that can use poison without fear.  You're adjusting what's supposed to be a core feature of the class.  The problem is the lack of downside for failing the poison check and the general weakness of poison by default.

 

And a Fighter-only scripted item is as much tuning as giving them a 1 AB bonus per 10 Fighter levels or something.

 

As for Death Attack, as I said, Death Attack is the only differentiator and I don't think it's good design to make a class whose sole raison d'etre is one class ability - look at Shadowdancer. That said, I don't understand Shadowdancer as a class. Shadow Evade, Improved Evasion, Defensive Roll are essentially tanking abilities, but the one ability unique to it, HiPS, effectively drops aggro.

 

You could easily do something like make you gain Death Attack every level (instead of every other level) and/or change the function so you can paralyze opponents in combat (or nix the paralyze in exchange for something else, like debuffing the target).

 

Shadowdancer is basically meant to have insane survivability -- usually can avoid aggro with HiPS but even if you don't (like versus enemies that see through stealth or have high detect) then you have the other stuff to fall back on.  It would probably make more sense to get HiPS last as an "ultimate" ability, though.

 

On the other hand, 1 Dex per 2 levels is you adding something completely new into the mix. You could just as well say Fighter only needs "tuning" by giving it +1AB and +1AC per 4 levels.

 

Precisely!  I'm glad we agree (and doing that for an Epic Fighter bonus actually does a lot to make the class more viable)!

 

AC is pretty irrelevant to the archery build in question, considering it's essentially a support DPS role. It has no Uncanny Dodge, no Monk AC and incurs AoOs in melee range - which ignore Dex and Dodge bonus, so that's easily >20AC lost there. In melee against mobs designed to challenge a Monk/SD, PM or DD tank with healing support, it would be toast either way. Its best defense is to maintain distance and avoid getting aggro.

 

No, the AoOs don't ignore the Dex and Dodge bonus.  If you have a Fighter/Wizard/AA with high Dex and Dodge AC from boots, that all counts for the AoO triggered in melee.  Test it if you don't believe me.

 

So it's 2 AB for 4 Damage which is still different from the 2 AB for 2 Damage you originally posted. On top of that, since you're going into this level of detail, the Fighter build gets 2 more pre-epic feats, and the to-buy list for this kind of Archery build typically looks like:

 

Point Blank Shot

Rapid Shot

WF Longbow

Improved Crit

Blind Fight

Toughness

Lingering Song

Curse Song

Extend Spell

Called Shot

 

So the pure AA build would have to give up two of those feats if it were indeed going for max AB. First 5 are non-negotiable. Toughness would more than compensate for the loss of 1 conditional AC for survivability, not to mention the higher base HP on Fighter compared to AA. Curse Song and Called Shot would much, much more greatly compensate. Lingering Song and Extend Spell on the other hand help with uptime for longer engagements and are harder to measure.

 

Hey now, I originally just said "you lose 2-3 AB and damage to gain 6 damage" -- you're the one who wanted to go into this detail!

Toughness is easy to toss out, only environments I've seen where it matters are some of my modules.

 

So all you need to do is drop Lingering Song or Extend Spell.

 

Also, not to mention the elephant in the room, but going Bard/Fighter/AA like that also gives a 20% XP penalty unless half-elf, at which point you're losing an AB and AC.

[Aelis Eine]

If you're going down that route, I don't think throwing more AB or damage at a class is a good solution if the underlying problem is redundancy. There's light-touch changes and there's heavy-handed changes. Tweaks like those are starting to lean towards the latter and we start going into complex questions that I don't care to go into, like in this case, whether the basic BAB system is so inadequate that every melee class needs an AB booster.

 

Suppose you buff Fighter AB for example, wouldn't Blackguard be justified in getting a similar AB boost, and why is the advantage of being a high BAB class so negligible that changes like this need to be made across the board?

 

Also, Point Blank down to Blind Fight is 5 feats, then Curse and Called Shot make 7. You'd have to drop both Extend and Lingering. Losing Extend Spell means the duration on key buffs like Haste and War Cry are 1/2 to 1/3 of what they could be, along with DPS downtime due to needing more frequent rests and rebuffing.

 

Anyway, the point of this is whether 4 damage - and the benefit of extra pre-epic feats - is a worthwhile exchange for 2AB. In an environment that, to be fair to other classes, is balanced such that pure Monk AB is viable. Instead of bringing in the math to prove it as you said you could, you brought in an elephant. I don't know what to think about that.

[MagicalMaster]

If you're going down that route, I don't think throwing more AB or damage at a class is a good solution if the underlying problem is redundancy. There's light-touch changes and there's heavy-handed changes. Tweaks like those are starting to lean towards the latter and we start going into complex questions that I don't care to go into, like in this case, whether the basic BAB system is so inadequate that every melee class needs an AB booster.

 

If Dwarven Defenders and Barbarians are redundant, then buffing Rage by doing something like making it an actual AB/damage boost or even just flat out given a bonus to AB/damage to Barbarians would eliminate the redundancy.  Barbarians get some minor defensive benefits but focus on sheer offense during Rage while DDs are purely focused on defense.

 

Giving the Assassin more damage would eliminate its redundancy with Rogue.

 

I don't see how something that that is a "heavy-handed' change.  A Heavy Handed change is like...removing the AB/damage bonus from AAs and making them solely focused on special arrow abilities.

 

Suppose you buff Fighter AB for example, wouldn't Blackguard be justified in getting a similar AB boost, and why is the advantage of being a high BAB class so negligible that changes like this need to be made across the board?

 

No, because Blackguards get Sneak Attack, some spell-like abilities, and the ability to summon demons.

 

The problem is that Fighters run out of good feats to pick up by level 40.  A pure Fighter is much better on a level 30 server, for example.

 

The problem with AB, frankly, is that I've never seen a module that isn't my own actually tuned around any kind of DPS check.  Which means doing 10% or 25% or 50% or 100% more damage is usually irrelevant, what matters is being able to survive.

 

Also, Point Blank down to Blind Fight is 5 feats, then Curse and Called Shot make 7. You'd have to drop both Extend and Lingering. Losing Extend Spell means the duration on key buffs like Haste and War Cry are 1/2 to 1/3 of what they could be, along with DPS downtime due to needing more frequent rests and rebuffing.

 

Don't you know that 9 = 10?  Sheesh.

 

Anyway, the point of this is whether 4 damage - and the benefit of extra pre-epic feats - is a worthwhile exchange for 2AB. In an environment that, to be fair to other classes, is balanced such that pure Monk AB is viable. Instead of bringing in the math to prove it as you said you could, you brought in an elephant. I don't know what to think about that.

 

No, I never mentioned the pre-epic feats at all.  You're the one who brought that up.  Hell, my original statement was talking about 3 AB/3 damage versus 6 damage because I figured you'd try to end on an odd AA level -- though I then changed that to 2 AB/2 damage versus 6 damage given that we were discussing a build that DID end on an even level.

 

"And 2 AB will be better than 2 damage 99% of the time (at the point at which we're discussing, aka epic levels).  Can show the math if you want."

 

That was responding to MrZork in a situation where he was discussing 2 AB versus 2 damage (not even 2 AB versus 4 damage).

 

But we can go over the math.  We'll assume you have equal AB to the enemy's AC since you're an Arcane Archer.  That gives you

 

90/65/40/15/90/65 = 3.65 hits per round (with Haste and Rapid Shot).  Add 2 AB and we get

 

95/75/50/25/95/75 = 4.15 hits per round, or a 13.7% improvement.  Which means you need to be doing 29 damage per shot for the AB to be equal or better.

 

In this case we have 4.5 base damage plus 10 AA damage plus 3 from Bard Song plus 2 from War Cry plus, shall we say, 5 physical damage arrows with 2d8 bonus damage?

 

That's 33.5 damage per shot, which is already 4 more than we need -- and keep in mind we're not counting the final 2 damage from the 21st and 23rd AA level or the 4 damage from WS/EWS from the Fighter.  So overall that's 35.5 damage at 4.15 hits per round (147.325 damage per round) versus 37.5 damage at 3.65 hits per round (136.875 damage per round).  Nor this counting Prayer/Battletide, Sneak Attack feat on gear, Weapon Specialization on gear (like Aielund Saga), or anything else custom.

 

And that's not even counting Mighty either, which could easily add another 8 damage in a higher magic environment (14 base strength and +12 bonus from gear).

 

Obviously it's also not counting Damage Resistance either -- if a monster is ignoring 20 damage from all sources or something the larger damage per hit will clearly be better (it's also not factoring in something like Epic Dodge or Deflect Arrows which favors AB).

If we buff up our AB another 5 relative to enemy AC we get

 

95/90/65/40/95/90 = 4.75 hits per round (with Haste and Rapid Shot).  Add 2 AB and we get

 

95/95/75/50/95/95 = 5.05 hits per round, or a 6.3% improvement.  Which means you need to be doing 63 damage per shot for the AB to be equal or better.  That's a much harder damage mark to hit -- even factoring in Prayer/Battletide/+8 Mighty we're only up to 44.5 damage.  So unless we're rocking arrows with something like +7 physical and 2d12 of two different damage types the the damage will be better (again, ignoring module/server specific stuff like Sneak Attack on items, WS on items, or any other bonus).

 

The reason this even close/flip-flops is due to the AA's insane AB and relatively low base damage, of course (because archery sucks by default in NWN past the first few levels).

[Aelis Eine]

I'd define heavy-handed, or extensive changes as any script or 2da adjustments, including both changed and new classes, feats, spells or abilities and associated flavor text, that would require documentation exceeding the length of an essay, or 2500 words. Most PvP-oriented servers would fall under this, same with action servers that require entire wikis or forum sections to document their changes.

 

The Fighter/AA would have 18 BAB + 10 Enchant Arrow + 2 Bard Song + 2 War Cry + 5 Curse Song + 1 for having two more Great Dexes than the Monk + The rest (remaining Dex, Weapon Enchant, EWF, Prowess) = 38 + The rest.

 

A Monk would have 15 BAB + The rest.

 

If the target's AC is equal to the AA's AB, a Monk would need a natural 20 to hit it. Even if its AC was 5 less than the AA's AB, the Monk would still need to roll an 18 or better on its best attack, and everything else would only hit on a natural 20. I don't think those enemy stats will work, unless the mod is designed specifically for AAs.

[MagicalMaster]

I'd define heavy-handed, or extensive changes as any script or 2da adjustments, including both changed and new classes, feats, spells or abilities and associated flavor text, that would require documentation exceeding the length of an essay, or 2500 words. Most PvP-oriented servers would fall under this, same with action servers that require entire wikis or forum sections to document their changes.

 

Let's say I made a change as follows:

 

Fighters get +1 AB/damage at level 20, a further +1 AB/damage at level 30, and a final +2 AB/damage at level 40.

How many words would you consider that to be?

 

If the target's AC is equal to the AA's AB, a Monk would need a natural 20 to hit it. Even if its AC was 5 less than the AA's AB, the Monk would still need to roll an 18 or better on its best attack, and everything else would only hit on a natural 20. I don't think those enemy stats will work, unless the mod is designed specifically for AAs.

 

I've often seen a figure indicating that a high BAB class should hit 75% of the time for standard mobs on its highest attack (with bosses having higher AC).  Let's assume full +12 stats on gear and +6 weapons (obviously doesn't matter much since it generally affects everyone equally).

 

Pure fighter would be 30 BAB + 12 base STR + 6 bonus STR + 4 feats + 6 weapon = 58 AB.  Therefore we'd expect to see 64 AC on mobs (which is 2.3 hits per round).

 

Pure monk would be 25 BAB + 10 base STR/DEX + 6 bonus STR/DEX + 4 feats + 6 weapon = 51 AB.

 

Fighter/AA would have 28 BAB + 12 base DEX + 6 bonus DEX + 4 feats + 10 AA + 2 War Cry + 6 weapon = 68 AB.

Which is enough to make the damage be better in most cases.  But there are some caveats:

 

1, you'll note I didn't count the Bard Song/Curse Song -- because if the world is tuned for expecting party buffs like that then the AC of mobs will be higher to compensate (also Bless/Aid/Prayer/flanking to factor in).

 

2, this is assuming we're tuning around a pure fighter, when something like a STR/DEX cleric, WM, or AA will have much higher AB at a minimum.  If the world is intended for powerbuilders then the AC may very well be higher.

 

P.S. another moral of the story is that Monk damage is completely awful by default.  Bad damage per hit and terrible AB.

[Aelis Eine]

Let's say I made a change as follows:

 

Fighters get +1 AB/damage at level 20, a further +1 AB/damage at level 30, and a final +2 AB/damage at level 40.

How many words would you consider that to be?

 

 

That's 22 words, or already close to 1% there while barely scratching the surface. As you highlighted, Monk also appears to need a buff and there's many more glaring issues than Fighter AB.

 

I've often seen a figure indicating that a high BAB class should hit 75% of the time for standard mobs on its highest attack (with bosses having higher AC).  Let's assume full +12 stats on gear and +6 weapons (obviously doesn't matter much since it generally affects everyone equally).

 

Pure fighter would be 30 BAB + 12 base STR + 6 bonus STR + 4 feats + 6 weapon = 58 AB.  Therefore we'd expect to see 64 AC on mobs (which is 2.3 hits per round).

 

Pure monk would be 25 BAB + 10 base STR/DEX + 6 bonus STR/DEX + 4 feats + 6 weapon = 51 AB.

 

Fighter/AA would have 28 BAB + 12 base DEX + 6 bonus DEX + 4 feats + 10 AA + 2 War Cry + 6 weapon = 68 AB.

Which is enough to make the damage be better in most cases.  But there are some caveats:

 

1, you'll note I didn't count the Bard Song/Curse Song -- because if the world is tuned for expecting party buffs like that then the AC of mobs will be higher to compensate (also Bless/Aid/Prayer/flanking to factor in).

 

2, this is assuming we're tuning around a pure fighter, when something like a STR/DEX cleric, WM, or AA will have much higher AB at a minimum.  If the world is intended for powerbuilders then the AC may very well be higher.

 

P.S. another moral of the story is that Monk damage is completely awful by default.  Bad damage per hit and terrible AB.

 

Frankly I've never seen that 75% rule before so I'll need a reference showing that it does, indeed come up often, or at least a supporting argument before I believe that claim is valid. Also, if the world was designed for powerbuilders, wouldn't the objective be to build mobs that would hard counter dominant builds rather than make things easy for them by designing mobs inaccessible to other builds?

 

[MagicalMaster]

That's 22 words, or already close to 1% there while barely scratching the surface. As you highlighted, Monk also appears to need a buff and there's many more glaring issues than Fighter AB.

 

Well, I was expecting you'd say that would be more than 22 words since you were talking about flavor text -- which meant I thought you'd expect the TLK to be changed to include that or something.

 

Frankly I've never seen that 75% rule before so I'll need a reference showing that it does, indeed come up often, or at least a supporting argument before I believe that claim is valid. Also, if the world was designed for powerbuilders, wouldn't the objective be to build mobs that would hard counter dominant builds rather than make things easy for them by designing mobs inaccessible to other builds?

 

It was mentioned a lot a few years ago in discussions with Kail Pendragon, Webshaman, and several other of the more active forumgoers.  The basic idea is that full BAB classes hit most of the time, 3/4 BAB classes hit like 50% of the time, and lower AB builds can still hit like 25% of the time on the highest attack.  I generally balance my module AC assuming that rule for a recommend button fighter (which gets 4 less AB than an optimized fighter).

 

If the world was designed for powerbuilders, then you expect every physical attacker to be something like a buffed up strength cleric, AA, or WM and thus they have extremely high AC.  The monk would exist only to tank.