As melee, RDD is strong, but takes a backseat to the casting melee: clerics & druids, then bards. As far as non-casting melee go it is second IMO to Dwarven Defender. It is strong, but in terms of power you'd need to go clubbing more than one or two builds with the nerf bat before you got to RDD.
Now, from the RP-side of things...fair enough. That is harder to say. OTOH current D&D lore is saying that many feel ALL sorcerers and bards have some dragon blood in their ancestry and that therefore a touch of dragon blood is fairly common. All RDDs do is really focus on bringing out and maximizing and building on that touch of dragon blood. It odesn't have to mean AFAIK that they have more dragon blood to begin with than any other sorc or bard.
As for the rule, it could easily be ammended to:
"Characters must have a minimum of 3 levels in any class that they have taken by the time they reach level 20. Classes taken as prerequisites for prestige classes that are also taken are exempt from this rule."
All thinsg considered, still a simple and clear rule that while not perfect would do more harm than good IMO.
Restrictions on Multi-Classing?
-
broncoblitz
- Dasarian Hero
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:55 am
- Location: A modern magician working in a Lab
As much as i complain about some of this stuff sometimes, telling people how many levels people need to have in certain classes is a bad idea.
Plus the dm's have way too much on their plate to have to worry about how many levels player x may or may not have in any given class.
Plus the dm's have way too much on their plate to have to worry about how many levels player x may or may not have in any given class.
I'm always right. I'm also a jerk. It's not my fault you can't get over the latter to see the former.
Hurray for Me!
Topic titles are like turn signals. They aren't for your benefit, but for the people around you.
Hurray for Me!
Topic titles are like turn signals. They aren't for your benefit, but for the people around you.
.A fairly major issue that hasn't been brought up in this post is the challenge rating of the server. If the DM's allow "power builds" then at some point it will effect the server, as the builders will be attempting to make areas challenging. To make an area challenging to an uber build could quite easily make it impossible to a normal player.
I noticed Wyvern mention that no measures where taken in Dasaria 1 and it worked, ironically I stopped playing Dasaria 1 for that very reason due to the balance of some of the areas and the fact certain uber builds we're farming areas my characters we're scared to venture at all. Although now with the experience of being a builder I know myself that isn't always the easiest of problems to remedy. But at the time it didn't work for me, if you get my meaning.
Ignoring it altogether in my opinion will alienate certain players ( specifically daft gits like me who don't number crunch
)
I noticed Wyvern mention that no measures where taken in Dasaria 1 and it worked, ironically I stopped playing Dasaria 1 for that very reason due to the balance of some of the areas and the fact certain uber builds we're farming areas my characters we're scared to venture at all. Although now with the experience of being a builder I know myself that isn't always the easiest of problems to remedy. But at the time it didn't work for me, if you get my meaning.
Ignoring it altogether in my opinion will alienate certain players ( specifically daft gits like me who don't number crunch
)
As I have said before, we won't design areas with soloability in mind. Some will undoubtedly be able to do so with a certain type of build, and fair play to them. But D&D isn't about creating the ultimate badass, it's about party-oriented play. While we wont (and dont intend to) stop power/solo play, we wont (and indeed never did before) design areas with the power builder in mind. I know that when I put an area together, I will be aiming for 2-3 people within the set level range to be able to manage it with at least semi-intelligent play. When I play test an area, I always use characters that are pure built (full fighter, full wizard etc), not number crunched and always take the games recommended level up options for everything. That way, even a monkey who builds a character will have the bar set at a reasonable height.
That's not to say we will get it right everytime. Like with Raven in the old campaign, she was not meant to be soloed. But once the mages discovered that acid sheath tore through her in a few rounds and were farming her like crazy, guess what, she suddenly found she weathered it a bit better after a few tweaks. I can't think of one area in the old campaign that was built specifically for high powered soloers. Those character types will always have an advantage in most if not all areas, because its all about numbers at the end of the day, and thats what those characters have stacked in their favour.
It is impossible to set the bar for an area to a perfect height, because the bar is a different height for everyone. But I usually consider an area to be successful if the majority of players who pass through it can have a fun time with or without a few friends and come away with something at the end, be it gold, xp or items.
That's not to say we will get it right everytime. Like with Raven in the old campaign, she was not meant to be soloed. But once the mages discovered that acid sheath tore through her in a few rounds and were farming her like crazy, guess what, she suddenly found she weathered it a bit better after a few tweaks. I can't think of one area in the old campaign that was built specifically for high powered soloers. Those character types will always have an advantage in most if not all areas, because its all about numbers at the end of the day, and thats what those characters have stacked in their favour.
It is impossible to set the bar for an area to a perfect height, because the bar is a different height for everyone. But I usually consider an area to be successful if the majority of players who pass through it can have a fun time with or without a few friends and come away with something at the end, be it gold, xp or items.
It's just a game...
-
Mensha Khaine
- Dasarian Hero
- Posts: 715
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:04 am
I'd say a little less than the amount running around with demon blood.BeyondRedemption wrote:but storywise...I mean come on, how many folks really have red dragon blood coursing through their veins?
RDD are also drawn to areas where dragon are.. Das1 has a number of dragons around.
RP wise, I think RDD would make more sense as a race than a class. It's not something you can learn.
When there is no other way, the perilous path is the only road to salvation.
-
obsoletenihilist
- Dasarian Scout
- Posts: 476
- Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:13 pm
The difference between RDD and Half-Dragon is this..Mensha Khaine wrote:I'd say a little less than the amount running around with demon blood.BeyondRedemption wrote:but storywise...I mean come on, how many folks really have red dragon blood coursing through their veins?
RDD are also drawn to areas where dragon are.. Das1 has a number of dragons around.
RP wise, I think RDD would make more sense as a race than a class. It's not something you can learn.
6 levels.
RDD spend 10 levels + whatever they waste on caster levels just to get the same bonuses as a Half-Red Dragon Template. Half-Dragon templates give the character a +4 ECL from what I remember.. and the character doesn't waste 10+ levels and miss out on high base attack bonus etc by taking a class that is melee oriented and only gets medium.
I really don't find RDD to be that overpowered. The only real spot they are extremely powerful might be versus a fire heavy area due to their 100% immunity.
-
broncoblitz
- Dasarian Hero
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:55 am
- Location: A modern magician working in a Lab
Hmmm maybe i should make my Deep gnome Sorc/RDD/Barb/Frenzied berserker
He would hit HARD
He would hit HARD
I'm always right. I'm also a jerk. It's not my fault you can't get over the latter to see the former.
Hurray for Me!
Topic titles are like turn signals. They aren't for your benefit, but for the people around you.
Hurray for Me!
Topic titles are like turn signals. They aren't for your benefit, but for the people around you.
Wyvern is absolutely right. I have two characters exactly the same level.. One can solo the relevant level areas without a problem.. The other struggles without being in a party.(Thats the one I enjoy playing the most)
Let the powerbuilders do so..just don't adjust content to them.
Party play is immensely more satisfying in the end.
Let the powerbuilders do so..just don't adjust content to them.
Party play is immensely more satisfying in the end.
Tomar - WarPriest of Girru.
Deanna - Mage of crafting
Sera - Want help? seek elsewhere
Merido Oaken - Cry havoc and let loose the Hogs of War!
Deanna - Mage of crafting
Sera - Want help? seek elsewhere
Merido Oaken - Cry havoc and let loose the Hogs of War!
So when the powerbuilder enters pvp with his male lolth worshipping cleric/rogue ( for those extra dodge skill points and umd points ) because he hasn't bothered reading the pantheon and whoops your butt then it will be ok ?EdCase wrote:Wyvern is absolutely right. I have two characters exactly the same level.. One can solo the relevant level areas without a problem.. The other struggles without being in a party.(Thats the one I enjoy playing the most)
Let the powerbuilders do so..just don't adjust content to them.
Party play is immensely more satisfying in the end.
A minimum class limit lessens the gap between the most power builds and the weakest builds at little cost to any RP builder.
What do people who oppose the idea see as being the downside here? Certainly it is no panacea - its upside is not massive. But I do see the upside as being larger than the downside.
What do people who oppose the idea see as being the downside here? Certainly it is no panacea - its upside is not massive. But I do see the upside as being larger than the downside.
Personally I disregard the notion that taking a single level of a class is some how inconsistent with proper role play. Is it really beyond conception that someone starting out in one profession would having tried it then decided that this is not the way he wishes to lead his life?UltimaBoB wrote:A minimum class limit lessens the gap between the most power builds and the weakest builds at little cost to any RP builder.
What do people who oppose the idea see as being the downside here? Certainly it is no panacea - its upside is not massive. But I do see the upside as being larger than the downside.
Take for example a boy who was raised in a small village under the tutelage of a authoritarian Militia-man father. This child pressured into joining the militia at a young age by his overbearing parent consequently decides to run away from home and per sue the more carefree and whimsical life of a bard or wanting to rebel against the lawful ways of his father decides to move to the big city and become a rogue. Hence 1 level fighter, XX whatever else. These types of back stories in my opinion are not only role play appropriate they are also realistic. Limiting the ability to create a character as such would be silly. Furthermore a seasoned orc barbarian might become interested in shamanism taking a level or two of cleric in order to better serve his clan as a shamanistic leader. I can think of a miriad of other role play appropriate reasons a character might divert from a established class making a quick jaunt into another class. A fighter who is sick and tired of stumbling over traps and breaking valuble loot while bashing chests might decide to seek out assistance from the local thieves guild and take a level of rogue. etc...
As far as disallowing certain more powerful prestige classes this is the dominion of the DMs. Personally unless a class contradicts the flavor of the module or the classes have game breaking abilities I would hope the full extent of the classes avalible in NWN2 will remain avalible in dasaria2 as well. Variety is the spice of life after all.
Interesting points and I do not necessarily disagree. But DMs floated the idea that those with 1 level in something might possibly lose the benfits of that 1 level dip. Personally, I prefer a hard and fast rule that is clear to all over something more nebulous and uncertain.
Certainly no prestige is worth banning as not a one can compare with the base classes of cleric and druid (or to a lesser extent bard) in raw power so I see no need to pick on prestiges.
Certainly no prestige is worth banning as not a one can compare with the base classes of cleric and druid (or to a lesser extent bard) in raw power so I see no need to pick on prestiges.