So...how DO you challenge a party above level 4?

[Seikojin]

I might as well set up my defenses, as well. Before entering the cave, I cast my extended Mage Armor, Polymorph, and Greater Magic Weapon after the Polymorph. I take 10 on Knowledge (the Planes) to know about Dwarven Ancestors, MM4, exceed the check DC by 8 (5 HD outsider = DC 15). Before casting Polymorph, I take out my granite statue and place it on the floor, then use the command word to make it grow to large size. I cast Polymorph, and assume the Dwarven Ancestor's form. My Otherwordly feat makes me an outsider, thus I can assume the form of an Outsider using both Polymorph and Alter Self. My spirit as a dwarven ancestor inhabits the now Large sized statue. I am now Large, with a +18 Natural Armor bonus and DR 10/adamantine. My total AC is 30 (the ancestor is large and has 8 dexterity, so -1 dex, -1 size, +18 natural armor, and +4 armor from Mage Armor). I cast Greater Magic Weapon on the greataxe I hold, giving it a +2 bonus. I also gain a +7 to my fortitude save, because the Ancestor has a 28 constitution and I can still wear my +2 constitution necklace.

My attack bonus is:
3 Base + 6 Strength + 2 Enhancement Bonus - 1 Size = +10
My fortitude save is now +14
My reflex save is now +3
My Initiative is now +15
AC: 30
DR 10/adamantine
My damage rolls are 3d6 (Large Greataxe) + 6 (Strength) + 2 (Enhancement Bonus) = 3d6 + 8/x3
My Speed is 20 feet
My reach is 10 feet
I retain all my spellcasting abilities

Have I won, yet? Keep in mind, that, actually, just ONE of these snakes is meant to be an at-level encounter. Also, regarding the "flee if they don't die in the first round," the basis of victory was explicitly stated that once my victory is inevitable, the encounter is over. I could fight tons of these things and not break a sweat, they can only hit me on a 20, they can't deal damage except on a roll of 6 and thus cannot inflict poison (I must be injured to even save) and even if they could poison me, I pass my fortitude save on a 2.

I would also argue that, as an animal with an INT score of only 1, even a viper lookout would continually try to attack until it died. I'd, in fact, argue that vipers are not intelligent enough to have "lookouts."

True, two cr7s would be an el9. Remember, this isn't an SGT, this is a challenge to someone over level 4. So these vipers are just the beginning of an adventure.

True, they shouldn't have the knowhow to flee. But they are hardier and seem trained to be something other than a run in the wild viper.

The HP was a range, I would normally roll and apply that value to clusters of monsters if there were many. In this case, I would roll each of theirs. If we took average on 6d8+6, the book says 33. So 33+3d10+3. I was figuring 50hp wouldn't be a stretch. Or 51? LOL Say 50.

If you come stomping in as a stone giant dwarf (nice contradiction btw), they would notice before you got within visual and they would have retreated in further. This set you up to face the full 20 encounters up front, which you, even with you high and mighty AC and all your spells would have a hard time overcoming.

True, low int creatures generally are a fight to the death situation. These are trained, and as such, they will be able to do what they have been trained to do

[Seikojin]

On topic, I have a fairly easy job when I DM for my group. They really like parties of Wizard, Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, [whateverclass]. There is only one guy there with a firm grasp of character optimization, and his grasp isn't supremely strong, he just listens to whatever I say (as opposed to the many that don't listen at all). We end up with spiked chain rogues, invisible blades, fighters with Monkey Grip, and clerics that heal a lot in combat. I never use published adventures, because coming up with my own stuff is more fun and gives a large degree of flexibility that a published adventure does not.

Most of the players in my area can make themselves pretty good characters. I too have a pretty good time DMing. Not having to hold everyones hand in making characters allows me to build alternate paths (see your experience with the reoccuring villain almost dying) that they players may take

I am sure I am not alone when I say the best part of DMing is watching your players do exactly what you want on their own.

[Aspenor]

True, two cr7s would be an el9. Remember, this isn't an SGT, this is a challenge to someone over level 4. So these vipers are just the beginning of an adventure.

True, they shouldn't have the knowhow to flee. But they are hardier and seem trained to be something other than a run in the wild viper.

The HP was a range, I would normally roll and apply that value to clusters of monsters if there were many. In this case, I would roll each of theirs. If we took average on 6d8+6, the book says 33. So 33+3d10+3. I was figuring 50hp wouldn't be a stretch. Or 51? LOL Say 50.

If you come stomping in as a stone giant dwarf (nice contradiction btw), they would notice before you got within visual and they would have retreated in further. This set you up to face the full 20 encounters up front, which you, even with you high and mighty AC and all your spells would have a hard time overcoming.

True, low int creatures generally are a fight to the death situation. These are trained, and as such, they will be able to do what they have been trained to do

Well, let me know what the 20 encounters are, then.

PS: this doesn't really seem like 20 encounters, more like 1 huge encounter, but whatever. Well, either that or railroading "you didn't sneak so now you are ****ed." (no offense)

[Seikojin]

You can use the info for the Thrush in the DMG, I think it's under alternative familiars. All the stats should be the same, or close enough.

Yeah, I know we're steering off topic. Sorry . But in response, I can easily make it do what I want. In the situation where the Mirror Mephit is my familiar, the familiar controls the simulacrum and I control the apprentice. I control the simulacrum by proxie. The same holds true for using precocious apprentice to summon the mephit. I control the mephit and thus control the simulacrum by proxie. I order the mephit to order the simulacrum to grant me the wishes.

@both Sei and sainy: really, no DM should allow this to happen in a real game, I know I wouldn't, I would just Rule Zero it. I am really only talking about the possibilities in theoretical optimization, which are theoretical but should not be employed in an actual game.

In a RAW sense, yeah, I totally agree that you could do that. But this is under the assumption that all the material for it to occur is available to your character.

Yeah, wish is definitely 'run by the GM' spell in my games. Wish in earlier DnD was written in a way that let players know, this is not an easy fix spell. FOr good reason too. Efreeti are EASY to get to before you can cast the spell, and they can be tricked into giving up their wishes through many different means. So wish had to be left up in the hands of the people, not the paper. I was saddened when I saw defined output from wish and permenancy. It is a common rule of mine that wish and permenancy are a negotiation with DM to get any results out of it.

Despite not thinking classes are unbalanced, I do feel 3.5 permancy and wish are. LOL

[TheDjinnFor]

Non-core is more balanced than core.

My response would probably involve something about setting up a infinite wish spell loop at level 1, and obtaining 'better than class features' (like spontaneous casting of an entire school) with a feat. And the infamous Pun-Pun.

Anything beyond PHB, DMG, and MM1 is the equivalent of grabbing random archetypes that exist in fiction, imagination, and the world, and just representing them using d20 and tile-based mechanics. There's literally no attempt at balancing anything, either with the core rules or with any other splat book.

They just made sure it wasn't much crazier than what power-gamers were doing at the time, and made grossly overpowered caster powers RAW rather than something RAI. The problem was, there were only a few exploitable things in core, and mostly could be controlled by a DM saying "Naw, that spell description doesn't specifically say you can do that, you're just interpreting it a certain way, and it's up to me to be the final arbiter in what it does and does not mean". Instead of giving the final say over to the DM, non-core takes it away by more explicitly denoting powers... and like I said, it was balanced with what was RAI (by the powergaming community) at the time, not what was RAW.

Non-core just introduces more **** that the DM has to deal with.

Just because you wrote it doesn't mean it isn't bad structure. In fact, given your history you are making his argument for him. But nice try.:

I came up with it on the spot. "Wrote it" my foot. I completely didn't see the whole "villain captures ally" coming until they let it happen, and I had to come up with something on the spot as a response. I knew that the "villain" wouldn't cut them any slack and would take advantage of the situation immediately, possibly utilizing some minor distraction to waste the PCs time.

That's what happened. I didn't railroad anybody into anything. It just happened to turn out that way. I've got enough experience with levels 1-20 that I can make stuff up as I go, thanks.

My job as the DM is to ensure things work. And if a given archetype is flat out NOT SUPPORTED, then the responsible thing to do is to tell them that.

If a given archetype is flat out not supported, it's your fault for not supporting it. You run what the players want to run, not what you want to, or what you think is right.

AC is useless because you can't get enough of it. So unless you live in Djinn land that is a perfectly valid and focused solution. A melee's HP vanish like nothing because of the lack of AC yes, but also because they don't have much more at all. So giving them more is again a perfectly logical and focused solution. Unless you live in Djinn land where random orcs have +1 swords.

AC is useless because you need to gimp your characters attack to get displacement. According to you. Wow, a gimped character for 75% displacement (i.e. increasing the bonus by 5), so much different... And casters still bypass AC, anyways, so who cares?

Here's a hint: If buffs were worth a **** people would use them. +4 str for anything less than an hour a level is insulting, especially when it does not stack with common items and will therefore be replaced by the same later. +4 str for a minute a level is a waste of actions and resources. So if you want to whine about people not buffing the fighter go yell at whoever changed that from 3rd to 3.5.

It was an oversight that can be fixed with proper DMing. Things were balanced so that a party of well-buffed fighter-rogue-cleric-wizard could beat it. Things change when you're going wizard-sorceror-druid-[xxx].

Here's another hint: If melees need casters to prop them up, this makes them gimps because see, the casters don't need the melees and because see, teamwork requires all members be able to contribute.

Isn't that what I just said? I just said that players who use casters who decide to be selfish hurt everybody else. The problem is, that's not guaranteed to happen, especially with proper DMing, like posing situations where the casters can't just do it all.

And even from the perspective of the melee, it's still better the casters win encounters on the spot than throw out piddly little +2 to hit/damage effects... because guess what? That means the enemy gets a turn. And that is going to more than make up for any advantage some trivial short term buff gave.

Weren't you arguing for a while that PCs need Rope Trick to ensure that they are always on the attack because whoever uses short-term buffs is insta-win? Hmm. Now short-term buffs are a waste of spell?

/

Let's take it down a notch and knock off the name calling / fighting. I'd hate to have to cast this one next

Squelch could use some of the Cube power. Pretty please?

Anyways, hey Asp, whatever happened to this?

Not at all. In fact, the vast majority of "brokenness" in the 3.5 books can easily be made non-issues by a remotely competent DM.

Try to infinite wish loop in an actual campaign? Not even a rookie DM would make a stupid mistake like that. Does it work on paper? Yes. Does it work in a game? No.

Pathfinder v. 3.5.....who the **** cares? Play what you like.

Long road.

[Riggs]

/

Let's take it down a notch and knock off the name calling / fighting. I'd hate to have to cast this one next

Nice.

This thread is still going?

Sheesh.

[SquelchHU]

My response would probably involve something about setting up a infinite wish spell loop at level 1, and obtaining 'better than class features' (like spontaneous casting of an entire school) with a feat. And the infamous Pun-Pun.

There are Wish Loops in core only. Even the ones that aren't pure core still center around core material such as the wonderfully balanced Planar Binding and Candle of Invocation. But nice try.

Anything beyond PHB, DMG, and MM1 is the equivalent of grabbing random archetypes that exist in fiction, imagination, and the world, and just representing them using d20 and tile-based mechanics. There's literally no attempt at balancing anything, either with the core rules or with any other splat book.

Core = You're a caster? A winner is you! Wait, what do you mean you aren't? Full BAB is TOTALLY AS GOOD AS ANGEL SUMMONING SO GET BACK ON YOUR BMX AND STOP WHINING!

Non core = ...Ya know, we really screwed the pooch on putting Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit in the same game. So here's a lot of stuff for you both. But Angel Summoner, since you're already jaw droppingly awesome most of it is weaker than what you already have. And BMX Bandit, since you have nowhere to go but up you improve a lot.

They just made sure it wasn't much crazier than what power-gamers were doing at the time, and made grossly overpowered caster powers RAW rather than something RAI. he problem was, there were only a few exploitable things in core, and mostly could be controlled by a DM saying "Naw, that spell description doesn't specifically say you can do that, you're just interpreting it a certain way, and it's up to me to be the final arbiter in what it does and does not mean". Instead of giving the final say over to the DM, non-core takes it away by more explicitly denoting powers... and like I said, it was balanced with what was RAI (by the powergaming community) at the time, not what was RAW.

Non-core just introduces more **** that the DM has to deal with.

Where are the lol smileys when you need them?

Get off your Gygaxian horse.

If a given archetype is flat out not supported, it's your fault for not supporting it. You run what the players want to run, not what you want to, or what you think is right.

Translation: Blame the DM because the game makes archers made of fail. Um, no, archers are made of fail regardless of the DM's personal feelings about pewpewpew. But nice try.

AC is useless because you need to gimp your characters attack to get displacement. According to you. Wow, a gimped character for 75% displacement (i.e. increasing the bonus by 5), so much different... And casters still bypass AC, anyways, so who cares?

AC is useless because EVEN IF YOU DO THAT YOU STILL FAIL AT AC. To get enemies only hitting on a 16 or better you need about 19 AC at level 1 (a little higher than what you will actually have), about 30 at level 5 (a fair bit higher than what you will actually have), about 45 at level 10 (much higher than what you will actually have), about 55-60 at level 15 (close to double what you will actually have) and 75ish at level 20 (no, just no).

Anyways, you're still missing the point.

It was an oversight that can be fixed with proper DMing. Things were balanced so that a party of well-buffed fighter-rogue-cleric-wizard could beat it. Things change when you're going wizard-sorceror-druid-[xxx].

So you call the two good party members wasting their actions to make the two bad ones not feel bad about themselves, while Team Monster interrupts their happy feel good moment with WHARRGARBL! a good thing? Um no, clearly the way to do this is to ditch the dead weight gimps.

Isn't that what I just said? I just said that players who use casters who decide to be selfish hurt everybody else. The problem is, that's not guaranteed to happen, especially with proper DMing, like posing situations where the casters can't just do it all.

Only in Djinn land. In the real world I said kick those gimps to the curb and get some real PCs, that not only don't need all caster actions spent on buffs, but on WEAK buffs.

So yes, the gimps will suffer as a result of their own gimpitude... but that's not everyone suffering, because the casters are fine.

Ignoring more Gygaxian handwaving.

Weren't you arguing for a while that PCs need Rope Trick to ensure that they are always on the attack because whoever uses short-term buffs is insta-win? Hmm. Now short-term buffs are a waste of spell?

Only in Djinn land. In the real world it's not hard to deduce the difference between GOOD short term buffs, and total fail like Bull's Strength.

[The_Mighty_Cube]

/