Is 3 Levels -by 20- Necessary?

[joleda]

The rule came about a long, long time ago. I was around when it was introduced and everyone just accepted it because some of the alternatives that were offered were considered worse. Some options were considered far worse by some prominent people. Personally, I don't like the 3-by-20 rule.

Some of the alternative rules that people slung around in place of 3-by-20 were:

1. One, and only one, base class. I actually liked this one better than 3-by-20! This rule would cause the server to have a niche, when compared to other servers 'n systems, that isn't too ridiculous. If someone wants to be a caster, they must be born a caster, more or less.

2. The first level of a class cannot start after a specified level, such as 10, 15, or 20. Yes, some builds would only have 1 level of something, but it would make them harder to achieve due to prerequisites.

3. People offered up the idea of heritage feats (taken at creation) that would restrict which class combos were available. Some heritages would forsaken metamagic feats, while other would forsaken close combat, and stuff like that.

4. Some people offered up the idea of removing the Able Learner feat from the game. Very few builds, that rely on skills, would only have 1 level of a class.

It is what it is. It be what it be. ...

The only way that changing this rule makes any sense to me is if the server did a wipe 'n reboot. For example, if the magic level on items were lowered and the length of buffs was greatly reduced. Changing this rule right now, with the high-level magic items available, would allow some truly god-like builds.

[Flights of Fantasy]

The '3 by 21' rule would enable:

Sorcerer 8/Cleric 4/Dragon Disciple 10/Archmage 8 builds with caster level of 30 and 22 BAB with the Augment Form feat. Now, since both Divine Might and Shield apply to the character itself, you will be able to get the benefit of Shapechange with both feats. You do not have to go for Epic Divine Might, you can just keep pumping your charisma as high as possible while getting enough base constitution for Fast Healing III. In otherwords, you get a very competant melee warrior, with high enough spell DCs.

You could actually go for Sorcerer 8/Blackguard 4/Dragon Disciple 10/Archmage 8.

Aren’t both builds currently possible? Archmage only requires 3 feats and I believe the new dragon disciple requires 1. That’s 2 feats (3 humans/halflings) left to take before hitting 18. That’s just enough for Blackguard with Divine Might at 18.

Your last post is also off topic. Again, this topic is ONLY for the discussion of the by 20 part of the rule. Any builds that ignore the required 3 classes are irrelevant.

Update: Popped into character creation to check out the requirements and confirmed both builds are possible with 3 by 20 and 3 by 21 giving no additional benefit. DD doesn't require a feat but requires the ability to cast 5th levels spells and AM requires 3 feats with the ability to cast 7th level spells. That means you can take your first level of DD at level 14 (11 without Cleric/BG 3) and your first level of AM at level 18 (15 without Cleric/BG 3). That's plenty of room to take at least 3 class levels in DD, AM, and Cleric/BG by 20.

However, it's not possible to do either build with only 8 levels of Sorcerer, but it's not because of the feats or the 3 by 20(21) rule. The requirement of having the ability to cast spells at a certain level prevents it.

Update: I made a mistake. I didn't notice that DD level 3 doesn't increase spell power, which delays taking AM to level 19 (16 without Cleric/BG3). The build would be possible with 3 by 21 but not 3 by 20. However, the build isn't as powerful as it originally sounded since at least 10 levels of Sorcerer are required. The remaining 10 non-epic and 10 epic levels have to be divided out between Cleric/BG, DD, & AM. That means levels in at least two of the remaining classes will have to be sacrificed. This will also make getting caster level 30 more difficult with high arcana spell power feats.

[niapet]

The rule came about a long, long time ago. I was around when it was introduced and everyone just accepted it because some of the alternatives that were offered were considered worse. Some options were considered far worse by some prominent people. Personally, I don't like the 3-by-20 rule.

Some of the alternative rules that people slung around in place of 3-by-20 were:

1. One, and only one, base class. I actually liked this one better than 3-by-20! This rule would cause the server to have a niche, when compared to other servers 'n systems, that isn't too ridiculous. If someone wants to be a caster, they must be born a caster, more or less.

2. The first level of a class cannot start after a specified level, such as 10, 15, or 20. Yes, some builds would only have 1 level of something, but it would make them harder to achieve due to prerequisites.

3. People offered up the idea of heritage feats (taken at creation) that would restrict which class combos were available. Some heritages would forsaken metamagic feats, while other would forsaken close combat, and stuff like that.

4. Some people offered up the idea of removing the Able Learner feat from the game. Very few builds, that rely on skills, would only have 1 level of a class.

It is what it is. It be what it be. ...

The only way that changing this rule makes any sense to me is if the server did a wipe 'n reboot. For example, if the magic level on items were lowered and the length of buffs was greatly reduced. Changing this rule right now, with the high-level magic items available, would allow some truly god-like builds.

Wow this is interesting; I like it! It would be even cooler it it was 1 base class, one prestige class >:D

[Maverick 40]

Leave 3x20, it is more a founding principle than a rule and it should remain so.

[Flights of Fantasy]

Wow this is interesting; I like it! It would be even cooler it it was 1 base class, one prestige class >:D

I like that idea, too, but it'd have to be implemented at the start of the server. A change like that would probably result in 99% of the server RCRing if done now.

[aaron22]

And it totally kills some prcs..

[Bobthehero]

*laughs in Favored Soul*

[Sun Wukong]

1. One, and only one, base class. I actually liked this one better than 3-by-20! This rule would cause the server to have a niche, when compared to other servers 'n systems, that isn't too ridiculous. If someone wants to be a caster, they must be born a caster, more or less.

I do not think that the Guild Thief/Neverwinter Nine PRCs were yet unlocked back then. It required the membership feats that few to no DMs knew how to grant. Thus in order to acquire the 2d6 sneak attack dice for Arcane Trickster PRC you would have had to create a Wizard/Assassin/Arcane Trickster - which limited your alignment to any evil. Back then there were perhaps too many Rogue/Wizard/Arcane Trickster/Eldritch Knights of all alignments for such a change to be very popular. Generally a great annoyance all things considered.

2. The first level of a class cannot start after a specified level, such as 10, 15, or 20. Yes, some builds would only have 1 level of something, but it would make them harder to achieve due to prerequisites.

It would have been impossible to enforce without DMs manually checking every single character and updating some excel sheet with the level up history to ensure that no one cheated. Also, can you image something like that on a Sorcerer that gains 3rd level spells at level 6? Sorcerers would have had to wait after level 10 for their first PRC level, while wizards could take their first level after level 5. It really was not that popular of an idea.

3. People offered up the idea of heritage feats (taken at creation) that would restrict which class combos were available. Some heritages would forsaken metamagic feats, while other would forsaken close combat, and stuff like that.

In a way it does sound interesting, but it was just not feasible option back then. What would happen with already existing characters, and who would have scripted and coded all that? Not to mention that it didn't really sit well with the 'do whatever you want' nature of the 3rd edition D&D rules. There was that role-play argument that characters should be able to change based on role-play, instead of being predetermined and locked down by a feat taken at level one.

4. Some people offered up the idea of removing the Able Learner feat from the game. Very few builds, that rely on skills, would only have 1 level of a class.

It was pointed out how even with Able Learner feat it made mechanical sense to take more than just one level of a skill based class. Classes come with additional perks, and some classes just have so few skill points to spare even with intelligence investment. There were also few examples how clever leveling order removed the need to take Able Learner feat altogether. Able Learner just made leveling more pleasant without need to plan your skill point investment in advance.



So yeah... the '3 by 20' was indeed the lesser of all suggested evils.

Wow this is interesting; I like it! It would be even cooler it it was 1 base class, one prestige class >:D

Yeah, the above was also suggested. It had some support among the evil elven Ranger/Assassin players, until the bandwagon went along and pointed out how everyone would be forced to take the 10th level of their one PRC... And somehow the evil elven Ranger/Assassins were suddenly against it.



There were also suggestions on how the first PRC taken would be free, and other PRCs or base classes would require DM permission.




So yeah, the '3by20' has its flaws, but the server really dodged a bullet there.

[Flights of Fantasy]

Wow this is interesting; I like it! It would be even cooler it it was 1 base class, one prestige class >:D

Yeah, the above was also suggested. It had some support among the evil elven Ranger/Assassin players, until the bandwagon went along and pointed out how everyone would be forced to take the 10th level of their one PRC... And somehow the evil elven Ranger/Assassins were suddenly against it.

Why would there be a requirement for all PrC levels to be taken? A single base class and a single PrC sounds very well balanced. I understand why the Ranger Assassins would want to avoid the last level of Assassin in favor of another level of Ranger, but that build doesn't sound overwhelmingly powerful (But I've never played one). Even if it was that powerful, the Assassin could have just been rebalanced so that missing the 10th level comes at a cost.

[niapet]

If the three rules by 20 rule did not exist my Wizard would have 1 level of cleric to use all cleric scrolls, 1 level of shadow dancer for hips, one level of druid to use all druid scrolls, one level of rogue to get all the skills as class skills and practiced spellcaster to loose no casters levels.

It's probably a good rule.

[niapet]

Wow this is interesting; I like it! It would be even cooler it it was 1 base class, one prestige class >:D

I like that idea, too, but it'd have to be implemented at the start of the server. A change like that would probably result in 99% of the server RCRing if done now.

This server is what 10 years old? Maybe it is time? I mean everyone talks about the insane events that have happened over the years is such a casual way that it almost seems silly.

Would the wipe and new campaign really be the worst thing? I bet it would revive.the server, not kill it.

[Bobthehero]

I know I'd stop playing if my character was wiped and I couldn't rebuild him.

[Sun Wukong]

Why would there be a requirement for all PrC levels to be taken? A single base class and a single PrC sounds very well balanced.

Those who wished for it said: you are going for the 'PRESTIGE' of a prestige class, and therefore it doesn't make any sense to stop mid way, or basically whenever you get a class ability such as HiPS or something else for mechanical power.

As for the topic of single base class and single PRC class, the stock NWN2 came with a very limited number of classes. Not to mention that such a limitation would have reduced the number of available classes even further. 'Guild Thief' and 'Bodyguard' both required special qualification feats and were unavailable, you could not get Arcane Trickster without access to both arcane spell casting and sneak attack dice, actually functional Arcane Archer, and I think that the Red Dragon Disciple PRC had been already removed because half of the server was playing one for the extra stats. The Storm of Zehir expansion had not even come out yet. In otherwords, the type of characters you could create would be severely limited.

I mean, with such a system you could choose something from the following list: Fighter/Divine Champion, Fighter/Frenzied Berserker, Fighter/Dwarven Defender, Fighter/Blackguard, Fighter/Weapon Master... Now, there is nothing wrong with these class combinations... But with the current system you could create a chaotic evil Fighter/Blackguard/Frenzied Berserker/Divine Champion of Garagos, which is something far more interesting.

The simple fact is that freedom to pick and choose classes allows us to create more interesting characters.

And... thus far the '3by20' rule has been a tolerable compromise... among the varied interests of NWN2 players.

---

Thus, I guess the '3by20' rule is necessary.

[Skade]

Stop the Leveling at level 20.

That would make the server more uniqe and bit closer to pnp in terms of power of a character

[Sun Wukong]

Stop the Leveling at level 20.

That would make the server more uniqe and bit closer to pnp in terms of power of a character

It is bit too late for that train... But could we go back in time... The Original Baldur's Gate with the Tales of The Sword Coast expansion had the maximum experience cap of 161,000. Such a cap on NWN2 would result in level 18 characters at the most. Now, if all content was also designed with that in mind, it would not be all that terrible, I suppose. Multiclassing would have a real cost for casters, and the ECL races would have their fair share of flaws. It would be something quite different.