Elf combat melee classes. Why bother?

[redoubt]

You mentioned rangers, so I'll use them as a quick example/question.

If you gave rangers access to DEX, STR and CON enhancements... I would take pretty much those with a little filler. I've already got 34 dex. I'd sure as heck put a couple points into CON to go up to 18 and a couple into STR to hit 24 instead of 22. All in all, I would be taking 5 points of ranger/elf dex, 2 points of ranger STR and 2 points of ranger CON. Maybe I could squeeze in some ranger WIS to increase my spell points or some ranger CHA to improve UMD.

While giving every class access to all the stat enhancements would provide new "options" would it not also simply force you to take them to compete? Someone (or lots of someones) would do it. The characters would become that much more powerful again and the mobs would inflate again. Now any character that did not take ALL of them would be "gimp".

Besides, isn't the ability to access all the stats supposed to be the "human" thing?

Do you really want racial and class enhancements to every stat?

I agree that some other races could use a few enhancements to help catch up with dwarves. I agree that dwarven toughness is VERY powerful. Aside from Halfling smallness I'm having trouble remembering suggestions within the thread to improve the other races. How about we discuss some of those? It would be great to see some ideas to improve elves (as an example) that don't try to make dwarven clones.

So far I remember:
halfling smallness - a joke I think.
another halfling one - tiny avenger was it?
elven armor mastery - light only

Lots of folks are made about the good bonuse to axes. What if the elven bonus to elven melee was increased? Or split it so you pick one (i.e. rapier) and get a better one cheaper?

Elven rapier attack
+1 for 1 ap
+2 for 2 ap
+3 for 3 ap
+4 for 4 ap -- total progression cost 10, but is limited to one weapon

Elven rapier damage
same as above

elven rapier crit range
+1 for 2 AP - requires weapon focus pierce
+2 for 4 AP - requires improved crit pierce

elven rapier crit confirm
+2 for 1 ap
+4 for 2 ap
+6 for 3 ap
+8 for 4 ap.

elven rapier penetration
25% chance to bypass piercing DR - 1 ap
40% - 2 ap
55% - 3 ap
70% - 4 ap

These are powerful yes, but limited to a SINGLE weapon which is the balance point. You could give options for all the elf weapons: longsword, rapier, shortsword, bow etc. (But not to stupid weapons like shuriken - who the heck want to specialize in shuriken???) This would be in-line with the more graceful, "educated and trained" concept of an elf rather than the brute force "just wack it really hard with any ole axe" dwarven mentality.

With narrow focus, but powerful enhancements like these, you would also rapidly run out of AP. Taking some of every stat enhancement would not be possible if you wanted one of these lines. Heck you might not even have enough AP to fill out all the rapier bonuses. (I mean, I just listed 46 actions points for rapier alone.)

This would give lots of options. It would give big boosts to elves. This would give elven longsword fighters some bigger teeth. It would boost elven dex melee types as well.

Would this type of thing give you the options you seek, or are you just looking for STR and CON enhancements?

Drow could get same as elves.
Halflings daggers, light picks(?), cross bows(?) and some other small weapons.
WF - greatsword, greatclub, greataxe, maul (each is separate), (maybe longsword)
Dwarves get what they already have
Humans - similar lines, but at 50% of the bonuse but apply in classes. I.e. ALL-Marial or ALL-Simple or ALL-Exotic.

[jjflanigan]

This I would disagree with. You cannot solve a problem by constantly increasing everything to match the best. That causes a power spiral that cannot be sustained. Its like trying to solve a game with too much loot by adding more/better loot.

A Small nerf to dwarves would not be a bad thing especially in the enhancement department which is easy to respec. (Of course, I am sure that everyone else would cry doom and disagree with me.)

I fully understand that if you just keep increasing things then they get massively out of hand quickly.

However, with the current state of the game and the current mindset of most of the players, I think we'd take a large hit to player morale (maybe even player base) if they start making sweeping changes that would be classified by almost everyone as a nerf. If you go just by this thread, they'd need to remove Dwarven Armor Mastery (or make it not stack with fighter armor mastery) as well as Dwarven Toughness and then modify Dwarven Axe Damage / Attack to not work with as many weapons ...perhaps even change their Spell Defense to only work on a small subset of spells. That's a lot of nerfing right there.

Also, please note, I no longer have any of my dwarven characters...they were too short and fat, so I rebuilt the two I had as other races at this point. That's the basis for my position that other race / class combinations are just as much fun to play and are just as useful in the game as dwarven versions of them. I'm not sure why everyone feels the need to compare themselves to other players to feel good. If you have fun and your character survives and contributes...why does it matter if Player Z has a higher armor mastery than you?

[redoubt]

I fully understand that if you just keep increasing things then they get massively out of hand quickly.

However, with the current state of the game and the current mindset of most of the players, I think we'd take a large hit to player morale (maybe even player base) if they start making sweeping changes that would be classified by almost everyone as a nerf. If you go just by this thread, they'd need to remove Dwarven Armor Mastery (or make it not stack with fighter armor mastery) as well as Dwarven Toughness and then modify Dwarven Axe Damage / Attack to not work with as many weapons ...perhaps even change their Spell Defense to only work on a small subset of spells. That's a lot of nerfing right there.

Also, please note, I no longer have any of my dwarven characters...they were too short and fat, so I rebuilt the two I had as other races at this point. That's the basis for my position that other race / class combinations are just as much fun to play and are just as useful in the game as dwarven versions of them. I'm not sure why everyone feels the need to compare themselves to other players to feel good. If you have fun and your character survives and contributes...why does it matter if Player Z has a higher armor mastery than you?

As far as armor mastery goes, I think that if they brought back fighter armor mastery 4 it would mostly fix it. Other races could get 7 points of dex AC with MFP. That requires 24 dex. That is a lot for a STR fighter. (DEX fighters mostly don't care cause we often wear robes.) The argument that the dwarves would just take it too does not really hold water. How many dwarven fighters are going to use 10 points of DEX bonus? And at what cost? The one possiblility I see is a pure Intimi-tank, just because he's not relying on damage to hold aggro.

[jjflanigan]

As far as armor mastery goes, I think that if they brought back fighter armor mastery 4 it would mostly fix it. Other races could get 7 points of dex AC with MFP. That requires 24 dex. That is a lot for a STR fighter. (DEX fighters mostly don't care cause we often wear robes.) The argument that the dwarves would just take it too does not really hold water. How many dwarven fighters are going to use 10 points of DEX bonus? And at what cost? The one possiblility I see is a pure Intimi-tank, just because he's not relying on damage to hold aggro.

Sadly, that wouldn't fix it. People would then just shift the complaint to say that dwarves could get the benefit of Armor Master 4 for cheaper than other races (fighter armor mastery 2 + dwarven armor mastery 2 instead of fighter armor mastery 4).

[redoubt]

Sadly, that wouldn't fix it. People would then just shift the complaint to say that dwarves could get the benefit of Armor Master 4 for cheaper than other races (fighter armor mastery 2 + dwarven armor mastery 2 instead of fighter armor mastery 4).

They can already put on a daggerstooth belt and take only 2 levels of dwarven and have 4 points dex bonus for little AP cost. I see little difference.

I think dwarven armor mastery makes sense. Don't they make most armor anyway???

Now, I'm not saying you are wrong (because they will complain), but a complaint that dwarves can have skill X for less cost than another race smacks of whining and asking for the nerfing of another class just because you can't have your personal dream combo.

Look at the casters: they get spells at different levels.
Look at rogues and rangers: they get evasion at different levels.
I know the argument is not using enhancements, but there are different levels of investment in a given class required to get skill X.

ALSO -- this would give ANY fighter access to a very high level of DEX bonus. Maybe it cost more depending on the race you choose, but you can still get it! (My human cleric can get 3 points of WIS for less than any other race. And humans are the only race that can get 4 point of WIS bonus.)

[MysticTheurge]

However, with the current state of the game and the current mindset of most of the players, I think we'd take a large hit to player morale (maybe even player base) if they start making sweeping changes that would be classified by almost everyone as a nerf. If you go just by this thread, they'd need to remove Dwarven Armor Mastery (or make it not stack with fighter armor mastery) as well as Dwarven Toughness and then modify Dwarven Axe Damage / Attack to not work with as many weapons ...perhaps even change their Spell Defense to only work on a small subset of spells. That's a lot of nerfing right there.

I think tweaking these enhancements, limiting them, as opposed to eliminating them or reducing the actual bonuses would be the best answer.

So far, I'm really liking:

Dwarven Armor Mastery - Make it apply in heavy armor only. Still powerful, just a bit more limited. And it fits better with the iconic image of a dwarf.
Dwarven Axe Effects - I think you could readily limit these to one-handed, melee axes in order to tone this one down nicely. Heck you could even add another line for one-handed, melee hammers for a good dwarven alternative.
Dwarven Toughness - Honestly, I never had a big problem with this until they changed toughness enhancements. If you could get 20 extra hit points from being a dwarf it'd be fine, no big deal. Getting 50 hit points for being a dwarf is more problematic.
Spell Defense - Again, I think the halfling model here is simply the best way to go. Put in a line for each type of save.

People are still going complain about the "nerf" but honestly sometimes nerfs need to happen.

[jjflanigan]

I think tweaking these enhancements, limiting them, as opposed to eliminating them or reducing the actual bonuses would be the best answer.

So far, I'm really liking:

Dwarven Armor Mastery - Make it apply in heavy armor only. Still powerful, just a bit more limited. And it fits better with the iconic image of a dwarf.
Dwarven Axe Effects - I think you could readily limit these to one-handed, melee axes in order to tone this one down nicely. Heck you could even add another line for one-handed, melee hammers for a good dwarven alternative.
Dwarven Toughness - Honestly, I never had a big problem with this until they changed toughness enhancements. If you could get 20 extra hit points from being a dwarf it'd be fine, no big deal. Getting 50 hit points for being a dwarf is more problematic.
Spell Defense - Again, I think the halfling model here is simply the best way to go. Put in a line for each type of save.

People are still going complain about the "nerf" but honestly sometimes nerfs need to happen.

The only one of those changes that I would have an issue with is the proposed one for Armor Mastery. In the iconic concept of a dwarf they are masters of working with metals and stones. As such, it would seem silly to me for them to lose their armor mastery simply because their full plate was made out of mithril instead of adamantine.

[Ringos]

It is fair...you too, my friend, can play a dwarf. Fair just means we all have access to the same stuff. You, however, have chosen an elf for flavor reasons and now seek to have a "dwarf in disguise". If all of the options are exactly equal we will end up with one look, one template and only a single character class. The variations in choices are part of what makes the game fun. Please don't seek to change that. Just go back and play a Dwarf.

That said, I've played both. It's the player behind the toon that makes 'em "uber".

Bingo!

[MysticTheurge]

The only one of those changes that I would have an issue with is the proposed one for Armor Mastery. In the iconic concept of a dwarf they are masters of working with metals and stones. As such, it would seem silly to me for them to lose their armor mastery simply because their full plate was made out of mithril instead of adamantine.

But iconicly, mithral is more of an elven metal.

[jjflanigan]

But iconicly, mithral is more of an elven metal.

Right, but why would making armor out of a lighter metal mean that dwarves are no longer as adept at moving around in it?

[MysticTheurge]

Right, but why would making armor out of a lighter metal mean that dwarves are no longer as adept at moving around in it?

Because their natural aptitude is with heavier armors allowing them to get a bit more flexibility out of them than others would. Lighter armors they're no more proficient with than anyone else.

I mean, you could come up with a reason that makes sense. You just don't want there to be one. Just like I don't want there to be a reason that they're better with all armor ever (which you could also come up with if you wanted to).

In general, it's relatively easy to justify most things of this nature (assuming they're moderately reasonable) and it comes down to a question of game balance. I mean, you could justify my above "Improved Smallness" line for halflings. But it wouldn't be a good idea to put it in the game.

[jjflanigan]

Because their natural aptitude is with heavier armors allowing them to get a bit more flexibility out of them than others would. Lighter armors they're no more proficient with than anyone else.

I mean, you could come up with a reason that makes sense. You just don't want there to be one. Just like I don't want there to be a reason that they're better with all armor ever (which you could also come up with if you wanted to).

In general, it's relatively easy to justify most things of this nature (assuming they're moderately reasonable) and it comes down to a question of game balance. I mean, you could justify my above "Improved Smallness" line for halflings. But it wouldn't be a good idea to put it in the game.

Well, it wasn't that I didn't want there to be one, I just didn't think of it in the manner that you phrased it .

Perhaps rather than making it only apply to heavy armor, just impose a cap on it, something along the lines of "Gives you the ability to move better in armor, increasing the Maximum Dexterity Bonus on your armor by +1 (to a maximum of +6). You may still be restricted by your tower shield's max Dex bonus."

This would basically have the same effect, but would allow for decisions and options

Dwarven Fighter would be able to receive the same benefit from normal FP that a non-dwarf gets from mithril FP, without the ability to jack it up even higher. Would also, basically, limit it to just heavy armors as the maximum bonus that the enhancement would allow it to raise to would be +6.

[MysticTheurge]

Well, it wasn't that I didn't want there to be one, I just didn't think of it in the manner that you phrased it .

Perhaps rather than making it only apply to heavy armor, just impose a cap on it, something along the lines of "Gives you the ability to move better in armor, increasing the Maximum Dexterity Bonus on your armor by +1 (to a maximum of +6). You may still be restricted by your tower shield's max Dex bonus."

This would basically have the same effect, but would allow for decisions and options

Dwarven Fighter would be able to receive the same benefit from normal FP that a non-dwarf gets from mithril FP, without the ability to jack it up even higher. Would also, basically, limit it to just heavy armors as the maximum bonus that the enhancement would allow it to raise to would be +6.

That's a nice take on it too. Though I do think it'd be more confusing for people. I know it may just be the way you worded it, but I could see someone thinking that means "a max of +6 higher than it would be normally."

Still you could probably come up with something here that would be a nice solution, without absolutely limiting it to heavy armor.

[QuantumFX]

This I would disagree with. You cannot solve a problem by constantly increasing everything to match the best. That causes a power spiral that cannot be sustained. Its like trying to solve a game with too much loot by adding more/better loot.

A Small nerf to dwarves would not be a bad thing especially in the enhancement department which is easy to respec. (Of course, I am sure that everyone else would cry doom and disagree with me.)

And I couldn't disagree with you more and I'm not crying doom if they did nerf them. Enhancements have a natural limiting factor: how many APs are available to the character. Dwarves are the only race that has so many useful racial enhancement choices that it's hard to fit them all into a build unless the class enhancements suck (ex. Rangers).

[Mercules]

Well, it wasn't that I didn't want there to be one, I just didn't think of it in the manner that you phrased it .

Perhaps rather than making it only apply to heavy armor, just impose a cap on it, something along the lines of "Gives you the ability to move better in armor, increasing the Maximum Dexterity Bonus on your armor by +1 (to a maximum of +6). You may still be restricted by your tower shield's max Dex bonus."

This would basically have the same effect, but would allow for decisions and options

Dwarven Fighter would be able to receive the same benefit from normal FP that a non-dwarf gets from mithril FP, without the ability to jack it up even higher. Would also, basically, limit it to just heavy armors as the maximum bonus that the enhancement would allow it to raise to would be +6.

Actually I kind of like this. My Dwarven Rogue benefits from Dwarven Armor mastery as he can wear a Mithral BP, keep his evasion and have a higher AC than he would in a robe, since he has more rounded stats instead of being the master of Dex. He fills out his max Dex bonus on the Mithral BP but would be over if he didn't have access to the enhancement. If the enhancement didn't stack, or only stacked to a max level it would still be useful for those that are not Fighters or to cheapen the enhancement cost for those that are Fighters in the case of maxing out.

[Andah]

They can already put on a daggerstooth belt and take only 2 levels of dwarven and have 4 points dex bonus for little AP cost. I see little difference.

I think dwarven armor mastery makes sense. Don't they make most armor anyway???

Now, I'm not saying you are wrong (because they will complain), but a complaint that dwarves can have skill X for less cost than another race smacks of whining and asking for the nerfing of another class just because you can't have your personal dream combo.

Look at the casters: they get spells at different levels.
Look at rogues and rangers: they get evasion at different levels.
I know the argument is not using enhancements, but there are different levels of investment in a given class required to get skill X.

ALSO -- this would give ANY fighter access to a very high level of DEX bonus. Maybe it cost more depending on the race you choose, but you can still get it! (My human cleric can get 3 points of WIS for less than any other race. And humans are the only race that can get 4 point of WIS bonus.)

Whining just because I can't have my dream combo? I don't think people are understanding that it sucks all the fun out of the game for people if they have to play a race they don't like just to be on par with the more elite fighters in the game.

Sorcs get new spells slower because they have more SP and cast faster.

Rangers have more combat abilities, and so they don't get some of the rogue abilities until later.

What would be the balancing factor then in Dwarves versus Elves? Dwarves get better AC, More HP, Better DCs and more Weapon Bonuses for cheaper, but... Oh, right... But nothing. That wouldn't be balanced.

[wundernewb]

Don't believe me, or don't feel I'm fairly accounting for all factors? Take a look:

Firstly, Dwarven Axe Damage and Dwarven Axe Attack are grossly overpowered enhancements. Where an elf gets bonus attack and damage to a longsword and rapier, a dwarf gets battleaxe, throwing axe, greataxe, handaxe and DWARVEN AXE. Both enhancements are 2 points at first rank and 4 at second rank. How are they the same number of points when a dwarf gets almost three times the weapons where the damage is applicable, especially when one such weapon does a d10 of damage, meaning even if it were that ONE weapon, which they gain as a free proficiency, it should still be a more expensive enhancement as d10+2 is better than d8+2 without a shadow of a doubt.

d10+2 isn't as much of an advantage over d8+2 (or even d6+2), as critting on a 19-20 or an 18-20 is an advantage over critting on 20 only.

The extra damage from weapon effects makes 2 or 4 (and that's maximum) points of base damage more or less irrelevant.

I agree with the rest of the post though.

[Yaga_Nub]

Because their natural aptitude is with heavier armors allowing them to get a bit more flexibility out of them than others would. Lighter armors they're no more proficient with than anyone else.

I mean, you could come up with a reason that makes sense. You just don't want there to be one. Just like I don't want there to be a reason that they're better with all armor ever (which you could also come up with if you wanted to).

In general, it's relatively easy to justify most things of this nature (assuming they're moderately reasonable) and it comes down to a question of game balance. I mean, you could justify my above "Improved Smallness" line for halflings. But it wouldn't be a good idea to put it in the game.

First, yes I read the rest of the posts I just wanted to point something out to see if it makes sense.

I think that MT hit the nail on th head by saying that their natural aptitude is with HEAVIER armors. But we should be talking about the metals themselves not just the armor. I'll give a real world example to show where I'm coming from and everyone tell me if it makes sense.

I play softball a lot during the spring and summer. I really don't pay much attention to the actual weight of the bats I use but I always like heavier bats. My team has two bats that look nearly the same but one is 4 to 6 ounces lighter (if I remember correctly haven't looked at them since July). I know after the first swing if I'm using the lighter bat (and change right away) because I'm always early on my swing. Because I'm used to the heavier bat, my swing speed is faster than I'm used to when I'm using the lighter bat. So it throws me off. Could I adjust, absolutely but then I would either need to practice a while with the lighter bat or force myself to wait just a little longer before swinging. Now that example isn't exactly right but since I can't compare a bat made out of iron, steel, aluminum, titatnium, etc. you'll have give me a little leeway with weight being the comparable factor.

Could an argument be made that since elves are the race usually associated with mithral they should have an armor master enhancement that is active only when wearing mithral armor and the dwarfs have an enhancement that is active only when wearing armor not made of mithral?

[Mercules]

Could an argument be made that since elves are the race usually associated with mithral they should have an armor master enhancement that is active only when wearing mithral armor and the dwarfs have an enhancement that is active only when wearing armor not made of mithral?

Well, except in the fluff Elves are not always the ones related to mithral.

Tolkien example. Mines of Moria. Why were the Dwarves so interested in reclaiming the mines? It was full of mithral. The shirt Frodo received was made for an elven prince. The Dwarves gave it to Bilbo from Smaug's horde and Smaug captured it from the dwarves. The dwarves also outfit themselves in shining mithral mail for the Battle of 5 Armies.

D&D example. Streams of Silver was the book. The companions of the hall were looking for Bruenor's ancient home. Name of the home? Mithral Hall. Bruenor found armor worn by his ancestor and wore it through the rest of their adventures, mithral armor. Ageis Fang, Bruenor's greatest creation, had a mithral head and admantite handle and all the dwarves of Mithral Hall were outfited with mithral armor and weapons.

[Raithe]

I don't think people are understanding that it sucks all the fun out of the game for people if they have to play a race they don't like just to be on par with the more elite fighters in the game.

Some interesting notes relevant to this thread:

1) This thread has made me start looking for dwarves while online. I examined several Reaver Raid group makeups last night as they were forming, including one in which I took part. The race most represented was drow by far, and even among melee types humans and drow outnumbered dwarves.

2) I've been reading a little of my main server's forum. Take a look at this thread. The barbarian build using the wounding of puncturing equipment is an elf (not even drow), and the player who created it claims its the best melee killer in the game.

Differences and imbalance in this game between characters is mostly related to gear. Someone is always going to have better gear makeup if they have more time to spend online, so why worry about race? If you play these games long enough, you eventually realize that the most fun in playing is to be had when characters have deficiencies that need the compensation of player skill.