Balancing Bards and FS?

[Boddynock]

Also, idea of "balancing" DND sounds silly to me. DND is not balanced, some classes are stronger, some are weaker. It is not a mmo, and it is not designed to give everybody a fair chance. You pick character, you figure out how to survive using this character and skills.

I think we ought be conservative and careful in terms of nerfs but this sort of mindset is not very productive, sort of like shooting yourself in the foot. First of all this is arguably not Pnp DnD but based on it, we take what we -want- from sourcebooks, so we can have balance.
I don't care that it's not an MMO, MMOs aren't the only games that need balancing, (which btw I disagree that it's not, it's very much a small scale MMORPG, it has all the traits plus some more in regards to RP) if we, here, didn't bother with some notion of balance, things would be a lot worse than they are now.

I think conversations like these are healthy to have on a calm level even if no changes spur from them. But then again I think closing these discussions would be pretty much censure and overall unhealthy for the server populace... Anyway.

Think about solutions creatively and don't base your lines of thought with categorical opinions...

I got to give Cham a +1 this one. D&D is not an MMORPG, but this is BGTSCC, not D&D, and while it is not massively multiplayer, it most certainly is a MORPG.

A lot of the suggestions I see are in regards to people using DIPs to create powerbuilds. The solution to this has always been the same thing, but is only used in certain cases. That is to tie the power of certain abilities to the class level of the class that grants is. Divine saves, at present, just gives your CHA to all saves, but this feat, and feats like it, could and arguably should be altered to work like the duelist AC feat, you get your CHA or your class lvl to saves, whichever is lower. So even with a +5 CHA mod, if you dip three into BG for the saves, you get a max of +3 to saves.

Most class defining abilities are already tied to class level in some way, but there are a few notable ones that lack this feature, and of them, most of them probably need it. That being said, I doubt this one change would solve most of the balancing issues we face, but it would almost certainly be a step in the right direction. The alternative, if we go for the approach of buffing underpowered builds and staying away from nerfs, is taking certain class features and removing the tie to class level and basing them off character level, but since that would provide equal benefit to any build who choose to DIP for those abilities, it wouldn't work to build power in underpowered classes in relation to the high power ones.

This could also work for people trying to level and play, for example, a swashbuckler. I have leveled a swash from level one, and moving the INT to DMG feat from 3 to 5 hurt, a lot, made it arbitrarily difficult to level until lvl 5. If you put the same caveat on that feat INT or Swash lvl to dmg, whichever is lower, you could move it back to lvl 3 without any major issues.

EDM too OP? Tie it to the class level of the class that gave you access to it, max of +1 dmg per lvl for DM, +2 for EDM. Those 3 and 4 lvl DIPs to get EDM now get a max of +6 or +8 from it, still great, but no where near as good as it is now.

I am sure there are a number of other feats to which this could be applied to positive effect, but they escape me at the moment.

[AlwaysSummer Day]

It should be noted that nerfing FS and Bards would be far easier than buffing virtually everything else. Changing two classes or figuring out how to increase the power of all the other classes without inadvertently buffing them is nearly impossible.

Also why not allow Monk/Druids than? Why not single level dips? If balance doesn't matter why does it seem it only doesn't matter when it comes to these two special classes?

[Boddynock]

It's interesting that when I asked why all the monsters get extra AB against dwarves the reasoning I got back was that dwarves were OP and had to be nerfed. The simple fact of the matter is events tend to end up geared towards the power level of FS and bards.

I am currently in an event and the boss mob is dealing 200-300 points of damage a round with over 70 AB and that damage is assuming no crits are landed. The mobs are created with the presumption that if they are not exceedingly powerful the FS and Bards will roflstomp them immediately. This means that all warriors are basically worthless. Even casters are relegated to a secondary roll. The bards have soooooo many skills on top of their fighting prowess and magic that any rolls the DM asks for are likewise suffering from a bloated DC.

Part of the problem here, and perhaps the entire problem, is it is next to impossible to balance an encounter after you add that 7th or 8th PC. The power range you end up with when you have a mix of say, some RP builds, some well built archers dropping mad damage, some FS and a bard or two... I mean, if you make it challenging for the Bards by using a bunch of sonic resistant stuff, the FS will roflstomp, you make it a tough melee badass and the archers will sit behind the shield wall and roflstomp, and all the while the non-optimized RP builds die as soon as something looks at them. You can't, as a DM, provide balanced combat encounters after a certain party size, and you can't provide challenging encounters without making the mobs insane.

The solution? I don't know if there is one, other than severely limiting party size (which some DMs are starting to do I have noticed) or perhaps step away from combat focused events (which I have also seen some of and I am loving it).

I think, and I could be wrong on this, the bloated DC thing is more a result of people ninja switching gear with skill bonuses on it after the DM calls for a roll. Honestly, you can only have a few really truly high skills at a time with the number of slots you can wear.

[NegInfinity]

I am currently in an event and the boss mob is dealing 200-300 points of damage a round with over 70 AB and that damage is assuming no crits are landed. The mobs are created with the presumption that if they are not exceedingly powerful the FS and Bards will roflstomp them immediately. This means that all warriors are basically worthless. Even casters are relegated to a secondary roll. The bards have soooooo many skills on top of their fighting prowess and magic that any rolls the DM asks for are likewise suffering from a bloated DC.

Mobs with nonsense stats and ab is another thing I don't particularly enjoy. But it is not exactly related to favored souls.

I think we ought be conservative and careful in terms of nerfs but this sort of mindset is not very productive, sort of like shooting yourself in the foot. First of all this is arguably not Pnp DnD but based on it, we take what we -want- from sourcebooks, so we can have balance.

"let's balance it" idea is based on assumption that it is easy to make a better job than original books who are many years old. In practice that "balancing" attempts result in trolls that can deflect arrows and guard dogs that have thousands of hitpoints at level 5, or zombies that have invalid damage reduction.

I would rather prefer to use a system that has been proven to function, and base game on that.

I don't care that it's not an MMO, MMOs aren't the only games that need balancing,

The point of the server is roleplaying. Every time proposition like this one surfaces, it always sounds like an attempt to destroy this or that roleplaying aspect of the server out of mechanical concerns.

You don't "balance" roleplay. You balance mmo, where you think about grind/loot/raid/drop, and not about your character.

Think about solutions creatively and don't base your lines of thought with categorical opinions...

I base my opinion on my experience. Bards/FS aren't even a concern from roleplaying perspective. If they are running in circles in some area instead, DM can always spawn a dragon that will swallow them whole.

As for "creative" you already have it - "application only". That's still not perfect, but tolerable enough.

Also why not allow Monk/Druids than? Why not single level dips? If balance doesn't matter why does it seem it only doesn't matter when it comes to these two special classes?

I don't really care, as long as character plays the role. It is a mechanical concern. To me it sounds like "but it is so OP, let's nerf it, because it can solo this area while I can't!".

You can be an half-fiend cockroach ex-familiar that became a favored soul of jergal - IF you can make that character believable (which is gonna be hard).

[NegInfinity]

Part of the problem here, and perhaps the entire problem, is it is next to impossible to balance an encounter after you add that 7th or 8th PC. The power range you end up with when you have a mix of say, some RP builds, some well built archers dropping mad damage, some FS and a bard or two...

Yes, exactly.

I think someone once tried to calculate how many possible dnd builds are there, and the resulting number had at least eleven digits in it.

Good luck balancing this kind of problem space.

[Boddynock]

Part of the problem here, and perhaps the entire problem, is it is next to impossible to balance an encounter after you add that 7th or 8th PC. The power range you end up with when you have a mix of say, some RP builds, some well built archers dropping mad damage, some FS and a bard or two...

Yes, exactly.

I think someone once tried to calculate how many possible dnd builds are there, and the resulting number had at least eleven digits in it.

Good luck balancing this kind of problem space.

I agree with you here that balance is a practically impossible goal, but I still argue it should be attempted because of what I said above. I am not sure why other people are advocating for balance, but to my mind it is for the enjoyment of the players. Everyone wants to feel like their favorite PC is positively contributing to a goal in an event, and that often means it boils down to mechanics. Total balance is almost certainly iunachievable, but steps should be taken I think to help ensure everyone feels accomplished with their playtime. Whether this is done with balance changes (a moneumental task) or restructuring the way events work (which is honestly probably a lot more manageable) I still think it is a worthwhile goal.

[NegInfinity]

I agree with you here that balance is a practically impossible goal, but I still argue it should be attempted because of what I said above. I am not sure why other people are advocating for balance, but to my mind it is for the enjoyment of the players.

That's DM's goal, pretty much.

The way I see it would make sense to throw something at players and see how it fares. If it fares badly, up the difficulty a bit. Past that point, it depends on the nature of the event.

help ensure everyone feels accomplished with their playtime.

Please also consider story as part of "accomplishment", since suggestion forums had too much focus on mechanics, lately.

What I meant is that in some cases permadeath of my character would be worth it - IF the story that lead to that was worthwile and interesting enough.

[AlwaysSummer Day]

To me it sounds like "but it is so OP, let's nerf it, because it can solo this area while I can't!".

Yes more passive aggressive insults rather than actually address the points and counter points.

[Boddynock]

To me it sounds like "but it is so OP, let's nerf it, because it can solo this area while I can't!".

Yes more passive aggressive insults rather than actually address the points and counter points.

Not an insult, just an opinion.

And I do consider story part of "accomplishment" but a good story generally has a good conflict, and in D&D conflict is often (not always) combat focused, and even when it isn't it still usually uses some sort of mechanics.

That being said, I still don't have any real solutions other than the ones I have mentioned above.

[joleda]

Also, idea of "balancing" DND sounds silly to me. DND is not balanced, some classes are stronger, some are weaker. It is not a mmo, and it is not designed to give everybody a fair chance. You pick character, you figure out how to survive using this character and skills.

I think we ought be conservative and careful in terms of nerfs but this sort of mindset is not very productive, sort of like shooting yourself in the foot. First of all this is arguably not Pnp DnD but based on it, we take what we -want- from sourcebooks, so we can have balance.
I don't care that it's not an MMO, MMOs aren't the only games that need balancing, (which btw I disagree that it's not, it's very much a small scale MMORPG, it has all the traits plus some more in regards to RP) if we, here, didn't bother with some notion of balance, things would be a lot worse than they are now.

I think conversations like these are healthy to have on a calm level even if no changes spur from them. But then again I think closing these discussions would be pretty much censure and overall unhealthy for the server populace... Anyway.

Think about solutions creatively and don't base your lines of thought with categorical opinions...

I got to give Cham a +1 this one. D&D is not an MMORPG, but this is BGTSCC, not D&D, and while it is not massively multiplayer, it most certainly is a MORPG.

A lot of the suggestions I see are in regards to people using DIPs to create powerbuilds. The solution to this has always been the same thing, but is only used in certain cases. That is to tie the power of certain abilities to the class level of the class that grants is. Divine saves, at present, just gives your CHA to all saves, but this feat, and feats like it, could and arguably should be altered to work like the duelist AC feat, you get your CHA or your class lvl to saves, whichever is lower. So even with a +5 CHA mod, if you dip three into BG for the saves, you get a max of +3 to saves.

Most class defining abilities are already tied to class level in some way, but there are a few notable ones that lack this feature, and of them, most of them probably need it. That being said, I doubt this one change would solve most of the balancing issues we face, but it would almost certainly be a step in the right direction. The alternative, if we go for the approach of buffing underpowered builds and staying away from nerfs, is taking certain class features and removing the tie to class level and basing them off character level, but since that would provide equal benefit to any build who choose to DIP for those abilities, it wouldn't work to build power in underpowered classes in relation to the high power ones.

This could also work for people trying to level and play, for example, a swashbuckler. I have leveled a swash from level one, and moving the INT to DMG feat from 3 to 5 hurt, a lot, made it arbitrarily difficult to level until lvl 5. If you put the same caveat on that feat INT or Swash lvl to dmg, whichever is lower, you could move it back to lvl 3 without any major issues.

EDM too OP? Tie it to the class level of the class that gave you access to it, max of +1 dmg per lvl for DM, +2 for EDM. Those 3 and 4 lvl DIPs to get EDM now get a max of +6 or +8 from it, still great, but no where near as good as it is now.

I am sure there are a number of other feats to which this could be applied to positive effect, but they escape me at the moment.

^^^ Good stuff! I bolded and underlined it cause it's that good!

Just for debate, of course, but can I add another idea along this same vein? What if Tumble did not give bonus AC? What if Spellcraft did not give bonus Saves against spells?

[NeOmega]

The root of all evil is the Divine Power spell which makes BAB progression of any cleric / fs build completely irrelevant. Two things are happening:

- Due to Divine Power (mostly) and other cumulative buffs cleric/fs surpasses high BAB classes at their primary role

- Divine PRCs that are supposed to make a cleric more specialized in combat (like Hospitaler or Warpriest) are because of Divine Power useless, they gimp cleric's spellcasting giving him in return high BAB which he doesn't need.

Therefore, I think that removing Divine Power completely from the game would be quite a good solution. Some other things could be touched as well such as nerfing Death Ward to its pnp version (which is without the Ability Drain immunity) and making Stone Body / Iron Body slow unaffected by Freedom of Movement.

I don't want to remove it, I wouldn't mind seeing it give +6 or + 8 STR. The BAB part is TOTALLY TERRIBLE though. Horrible.

[Thorsson]

^^^ Good stuff! I bolded and underlined it cause it's that good!

Just for debate, of course, but can I add another idea along this same vein? What if Tumble did not give bonus AC? What if Spellcraft did not give bonus Saves against spells?

Not good stuff at all. Just about every character would become weaker, which would then require adjusting every mob. And for what?

Plus full Tumble is the one thing the mega casters, and even the FS/BGs can't get. They don't need anything that makes them relatively stronger.

[Thorsson]

The root of all evil is the Divine Power spell which makes BAB progression of any cleric / fs build completely irrelevant. Two things are happening:

- Due to Divine Power (mostly) and other cumulative buffs cleric/fs surpasses high BAB classes at their primary role

- Divine PRCs that are supposed to make a cleric more specialized in combat (like Hospitaler or Warpriest) are because of Divine Power useless, they gimp cleric's spellcasting giving him in return high BAB which he doesn't need.

Therefore, I think that removing Divine Power completely from the game would be quite a good solution. Some other things could be touched as well such as nerfing Death Ward to its pnp version (which is without the Ability Drain immunity) and making Stone Body / Iron Body slow unaffected by Freedom of Movement.

I don't want to remove it, I wouldn't mind seeing it give +6 or + 8 STR. The BAB part is TOTALLY TERRIBLE though. Horrible.

You would remove many Cleric/FS from the game. Because with the fixed dispel you can't afford to take many Hospitaler or WP levels or you become dispellable.

And then you nerf Bards and then you have to nerf Arcane Casters and Druid Dragons.

Where does it stop?

[Thorsson]

I felt I should say a little more.

I'm someone who likes to play sneakers or 'smart' fighters (i.e. not tanks). These have both gradually become nigh on unplayable at higher levels on BGTSCC. Will nerfing Bards and FS (and Clerics and any other EDM types) make them playable again? Nope.

Every 'fix' breaks something else. That's the way these things work.

[Kinkurono]

I think the better thing to do here is do some small nerfs to FS, like reducing their saves or just making them application only, and maybe bards. then re-do the monster content on the server so caster level is not the single most important thing there is.

Epic content shops would help is but you need to fix the powerlevel of items a bit, though this is not the thread to talk about that.

obs: I don't want to ruin anyone's fun but when your "Fun" is making the game boring to the others then that should be looked at and if possible change or do you want for the DM's to do events like this "Please no bards and FS so the rest of the party can do something".
Also quit this mentality of "You can't balance D&D" Well, D&D is balanced around having a DM and a party of like 3 to 5 people while this server has most of the time 40 players and no DMs outside of events etc. So there is need for balance so everyone can have their fun, want it or not this is a MORPG as someone already pointed it out, you can't justify every little imbalance with "Well its like this in PnP" or saying its impossible to Balance, when that is not the case

obs2: Before someone says "But if you start balancing classes they will just lose their flavor ! might as well remove all of them and just make a single class" That is a logical fallacy and false, Balancing a class won't automatically make it equal to other classes in the mechanical side or RP-side that's just not the point of balancing.