Palemaster Spell Progression

[Thief Of Navarre]

Full progression. It's not any more OP than any of the other OP casting classes already implemented that either don't, or barely stunt casting progression while still offering a lot of abilities.

Look at the wiki.

I think Kangleton's got a point. Most of the PrC classes are quite powerfull; the only difference between a lvl10 palemaster and the equivalent level evil cleric/specialist is that the latter has to renew their buffs every twenty fours to retain their crit/SA/hold immunity :S

[Urithrand]

Bedlam, much as we appreciate your obvious desire to work hard to put your point across, what we're suggesting is truly nowhere near as powerful as the version in Libris Mortis. Even with full spell progression from level 2 onwards as we're requesting (we're not asking for full progression), it's powerful, yes, but not excessively OP. Immunity to crits is great, but a wizard getting involved in melee is still going to get him killed, whether he's immune to crits or not.

Also, it's worth pointing out that this PrC makes the character nowhere near as powerful as a vampire. And they get the crap beaten out of them fairly regularly. The spell progression as-is is terribly *under*powered.

I'd be happy to run through how overpowered EVERY caster class is to EVERY non-caster class...ad nauseum.

And you'd be wrong. This issue has been addressed time, and time, and time again, and the answer is still the same as it has always been. Casters are no more powerful than melee classes. They never have been. Every class has its niche and every class is good for it's own things. Casters need tanks just as much as tanks need casters, same as ever.

[BedlamX]

Um...vamps usually only get whooped on by groups or paladins. The non-caster ones have a harder time than caster vamps for sure. But comparing the two is, again, not a way to decide things as they are not the same. Plus...give a PM with only 19 spells levels vamp abilities and see how powerful they become.

I would also point out that many find the EK "overpowered", but, following your idea that without full progression, a PM is "underpowered", I would say the EK is seriously underpowered. They get a max of 19 spell levels (and more likely 18 to get the feats needed to become one at a decent level) and full BAB (which usually leaves them 4 or 5 levels behind a pure fighter by 20). What you are insinuating is that the extra AC (never underestimate the benefit of 6 non-dispellable AC on a wizard on a "low magic" server), immunities (which take out the attack benefits of rogues and weapon masters), and other bonuses of a PM are less powerfull than a +5 BAB (which is all the EK really gets). So, if you start beefing one PRC up to come in somewhere between the "underpowered" and "overpowered" abstract points, all the others will start, too. Then we are going to have to go after the non-casters to get them caught up due to the even larger difference in power base. Then the casters gripe cuz they are no longer way more powerful and the cycle starts all over.

I thought PM was underpowered, too...until I started typing up the bonuses for each and saw them side-by-side. Then they just didn't look so bad to me. They have more bonuses with less requirements and downsides than any of the other PRCs (with the exceptions of Mystic Theurge and Stormlord). Very few actually have full progression (most have at least 1 level lower and most have 2-3 lower) and most don't have the immunities and bonuses of a PM. If someone would point out what makes the others so much more OP than PM, I'd be happy to drop it.

Oh...and by the way...full progression from lvl 2 may as well be full progression. There is minimal difference between a lvl 19 and lvl 20 caster.

Then again...think I'll just drop it now. Don't see any minds changing anyway.

[Urithrand]

Show me more than 5 people who have played a palemaster in the last year. I very much doubt you can. And why? Because the class is useless and underpowered. It's as simple as that, and your arguments hold no water at all. If the class didn't need rebalancing, there would be people who play it.

Just complaining that everything is over powered isn't going to get anyone to listen to you when you can't back it up with a legitimate argument. The truth is that being immune to critical hits is really not that amazing, neither is +6 AC. I bet my palemaster build, fully buffed at level 20 would have less AC than a fighter in FP +3 and a heavy shield +3 also fully buffed. Not to mention only about half the HP, none of the AB and only 15 caster levels., a death touch that requires a touch attack with a shitty AB and an even shittier DC, and being immune to crits. No damage reduction, no spell resistance, no massive save bonuses or stat increases. I'm sorry but *where* is the OP bit?

[Peridan]

7/10 progression seems fair to me. Anything else might be a bit much. Extra summons, immunities, and other various bonuses would balance the class out nicely compared to other casting PrCs. I do think as it stands now that the class is a waste of time mechanics-wise. RP...Well, you can have a great RP concept with it regardless of how much ass you kick/ get kicked.

[Dragor]

This isn't a caster v. melee thread...

[roguethree]

Show me 5 Triadic Knights, 5 Shadowbane Stalkers, 5 Frenzied Berserkers, 5 Darkwood Stalkers, 5 Dark Hunters, 5 Invisible Blades, 5 Duelists.

I am 100% in favor of the all of the classes on the server being made viable and useful. However, referencing the above, I think developer time would be better spent on improving the melee classes if time is going to be spent on class balance.

Referencing the Palemaster specifically, it'd be nice to see them give up something to gain their new abilities. For example, a Weapon Master gives up several feats to take that line. Perhaps add a requisite that the Palemaster take Necromancy as the specialized spell school in addition to Charisma penalties that increase with level? This precludes Sorcerers from taking the class, but I think that'd be a fair compromise.

[Urithrand]

I think this thread has gone as far as it's going to anyway. If the devs should decide to invest the time, everyone except Bedlam seems to be in agreement that at least 7/10 casting levels would be fair, so I'd appreciate it if someone would lock this thread now.

Thanks.

[Kaeldorn]

Actually, I distinctly recall Bedlam agreeing on 7/10 as well. Just not 9/10.

We're not touching any of the other abilities they might get according to Libris Mortis. Too much work that can be better spent on other things.

I'll forward the suggestion to Saulus when I see him on.

[Doubtful]

I'm all for either 8/10 or full casting progression, as it stands it's a pretty impotent prc.

The trouble with all these bloody arguments about balance is that by D&D'svery nature there will always be massive imbalances. Trying to balance it is like trying to balance paper-scissors-rock.

So, let the pale master have his arcane goodness, he'll need it when folk cotton onto the fact he's a semi undead monster who's grafted on a few other peoples bits and they hunt him to a bloody and permanent death.

[BedlamX]

Uri...it wasn't me that started the whole comparing non-arcane PRCs to arcane ones. But if arcane is compared to divine, it is reasonable to compare both to non-casters. I tried to keep it as an apples to apples debate and was given a smart-ass reply for it, so I added in the divine ones to keep it all open (and got a nasty little rep comment for it, I might add). I was perfectly happy keeping this all about the various arcane PRCs relative power. As a matter of fact, you seem to be th eone that wants to compare the PM to the fighter in your example (which assumes the fighter can have buffs but th ePM doesn't have a fighter buddy...or use his summons to their best potential). Of course a wizard can't handle a buffed fighter alone (unless they use said summons to slow him down while they spam "I win" spells like Bigbys and death magics or something). Again...apples to oranges.

That said, I really wish people would stop putting words in my mouth/on my screen. I am not complaining about everything being overpowered. Unlike some, I simply accept it. When someone brings up an idea to help non-casters, I do like to helpshape it to be not so over the top, but I usually stay out of them. I also never said PM was overpowered. Just that its bonuses are better than most PRCs and only 3 levels (on average) lower in spell casting power. And there are many other PRCs I bet you can't find me 5 players of besides PM. Guess all of them need looking at, too. That is just not a viable arguement.

PM is the easiest PRC to qualify for. Lvl 5, non-good wizard. No special feats. No skill requirements. Just an evil (or neutral) wizard with a penchant for dead things. Add some more requirements and penalties and I could see upping the spell progression. But, as is, there is just nothing given up to justify near full spell progression. Even with a slight addition to the requirements, I'd say a 7/10 progression is about right (or whatever keeps them at a 17 caster level at 20).

I'm not really argueing with you, Uri. A point was made to check the Wiki. I did that to show the PRCs side-by-side and found it to be not that big a difference with the low requirements and very good bonuses. I got no problem making it a little better progression if the requirements are bumped to what others are. But a 19 caster level with those bonuses and no real requirements is just "overpowered".

[Root]

Pfft. Any Sorc would still be better off going Heartwarder.

[DM_Equinox]

I think that what needs to be said on the topic has been, and that we are beginning to talk in circles. Therefore I'm going to close this for now before it begins spiraling... somewhere

[Kaeldorn]

No changes will be made at this time.