The class balance thread (let's try to keep this one trolling free)

[MGuy]

Ok so it looks like conversation has hyped up a bit. First Brendan, it is not that spells like Comp languages aren't useful, it is that they are far more situational than more general use spells like Silent Image. When you're low level and you can only take a few spells with you on your journey and you don't have a good feeling that you will need Comp Languages you shouldn't be preparing it because to do so is unrealistic. As mentioned before, unless you know or are close to knowing that you might need it you prepare something more general use. Most situations where you would need comp languages aren't time sensitive and most likely you won't get stuck if you don't have it.

Basically what I'm saying is this: There are no major consequences in an encounter where not having a spell like Comp Language makes you fail. There however are major consequences for not being prepared for combat. If you don't have Read MAgic prepared you won't die for it. If you don't have enough fireballs to defend yourself and the party from trolls you will likely die because of it. The spells any reasonable adventuring caster would realistically have on hand are spells geared towards adventuring. As a player you will not be overtly punished for failing at exploration but you will be punished for failing combat*.

*Note that this means bypassing, retreating from, straight up winning, or otherwise getting through a combat encounter in some successful fashion.

[deadDMwalking]

Deaddm i memorize utility spells all the time. So do many of my players. Using utility spells is a lot more fun in my opinion than lobbing a lightning bolt or fireball.

I agree.  And I also use utility spells on the rare occasion that I'm playing a wizard.  They can allow the game to go in interesting directions. But while that's the case, it's also true that they end up being shortcuts.  It's hard to discuss without concrete examples, but comprehend languages has been done to death.  I picked another at random: secure shelter.

You conjure a sturdy cottage or lodge made of material that is common in the area where the spell is cast. The floor is level, clean, and dry. In all respects the lodging resembles a normal cottage, with a sturdy door, two shuttered windows, and a small fireplace.

There's more - but that the gist.  So, what does the spell do?  Basically, it makes a relatively safe place to rest, which is convenient if you're in a place that you don't feel safe.  But if you were in such a situation and you didn't have the spell, what would you do?  

You'd probably spend more time finding a defensible place, perhaps one that is less secure than the secure shelter, so you might have to double up on watches (and therefore spend longer overall resting).  The spell is useful, but with enough time and effort, the party will duplicate the utility of the spell through mundane means.  

Very rarely will a utility spell 'change' the game - it just 'speeds it up' - but that can be a lot of fun.  Busting out a secure shelter feels like a win and is a real contribution to a party, rather then looking for a cave with only a single easily defended entrance.  

None of which required any particular spell, nor did any of them actually require a spell caster.

That is exactly my point.  None of the modules require any particular spell.  Therefore, the module presumes that you can 'overcome' any challenges without recourse to any particular spell.  

Therefore, while a spell may be helpful and provide a 'shortcut', it is clear that they are not actually providing a 'solution'.  The 'adventure/puzzle' can be solved other ways, too.  So it's nice when a utility spell provides an easy solution, but it's NEVER the only solution.  

But you know what? It doesn't stop the adventure. The adventure does not presume that you'll have access to the language of the potential friend nor does it presume that you have comprehend languages. As a result, the adventure can continue just fine even if you don't have the spell. The adventure is designed with the assumption that you won't be able to speak to the enemies or they speak common anyways if negotiation is supposed to be the 'one way to succeed'.

There are other situations, however, where combat is the only way to proceed. If your mission is to kill the evil demon summoner, you will have to kill him. Combat spells may be needed to advance the plot (ie, accomplish what you need to accomplish). A utility spell, while it can provide a useful shortcut, is never assumed to be the solution, and as such, you can continue the adventure just fine without ever using them.

Not only is that wrong, but they are contradictory. You will need to pick one of those paragraphs or the other.

Now you're being a dumbass again.  I can't blame you - you haven't actually stopped being a dumbass, but I'd prefer to avoid calling you out on it if I could.  In this case, I can't.  

Either some particular action will stop the adventure or it will not. If there is only one solution to a particular problem, we are talking about a railroad plot that you assured us wasn't present a couple of paragraphs ago.

I gave the specific example of 'your mission is to kill someone'.  I suppose poisoning the opponent wouldn't strictly count as 'combat', but in a loose sense, it does.  And of course, if they find out you just tried to poison them, they may initiate combat directly.  If you're trying to defeat someone that is independently powerful, disabling them will be necessary.  Now, that doesn't have to be the mission.  But for the example I provided, it just happened to be the mission the PCs chose.

If your mission is to kill the evil demon summoner, you will have to kill him.

I didn't explain WHY that's the mission, nor did you ask.  If the mission is to 'DRIVE OFF' the evil demon summoner, than you wouldn't have to kill him.  

Now, while an adventure, especially one built around defeating a particular enemy assumes you'll try to defeat that enemy, the module doesn't assume that you'll use any single tactic.  And to grab the macguffin on the first level you can use a variety of different means - you could have a summoned monster grab it for you, you could use spider climb to get it, or you could use climbing ropes - or any number of other solutions limited only by your imagination.  Because it's a Role Playing Game.  Lots of 'problems' have multiple solutions.  All you have to do is find one that works.  

And in every game I've ever played or run, there was at least one situation where the only remaining solution turns out to be combat.  Usually because the goals of the opposition are diametrically opposed to the goals of the PC.  For example, the PCs want to save the princess, and the assassin wants to kill her.  If the assassin is not 'defeated' or 'disabled' (usually via combat) than the PCs would 'lose'.  

You think combat is awesome and the only part worth using, and can't imagine a scenario with out it.

No.  I don't think combat is awesome and the only part worth using.  I do think you're a dumbass.  That's a pretty weak strawman, especially since I never said that.  I can think of plenty of scenarios where combat is not necessary.  I can also think of plenty of scenarios where combat is necessary.  Since every game I've ever played in, and just about every game I've ever heard of eventually involved combat of some kind or another.  What do you want me to say?  That everyone I've talked to is doing it wrong?  

Clearly, if they're having fun, they're doing it right.  Why don't you tell me about a 10+ level campaign that never had a fight.  I'd love to hear it.  

Welcome to the railroad, because that is no different than requiring a spell caster with access to web to cross some chasm.

And we've reached a new kind of stupid.  What the hell are you trying to say?  

I've said that if you come across a chasm, you could cross it in any number of ways.  You could use a rope to climb down one side and climb up the other.  You could summon an air elemental to ferry the party across.  You could jump really far and cross it.  Or you could cast web to span the chasm and I suppose if you've cast spiderclimb you could walk across the web.  I don't know why you wouldn't just climb down the chasm and then back up, but maybe there's a dragon down there or something...  But getting stuck in the web wouldn't be my first choice, and if I can bypass the chasm without using a web spell (which, coincidentally, has combat applications), that would be better as well.  

So since you have trouble with understanding my point the first four times, I'll try again.

Utility Spells allow you to 'shortcut' certain parts of the adventure to achieve success more quickly and/or easily.  That's great because it lets you do other things.  That said, if you don't have the right utility spell available, the adventure will continue anyway.  They're good to have, but they're not strictly necessary.  

If combat does become strictly necessary, combat spells will be useful.  Most spell casters seem to prepare a preponderance of combat spells because they KNOW that if they're needed, it'll be important to have them on hand.  Utility spells are added in 'lower level spell slots' - when you have 5th level combat spells, you'll probably not use many 2nd level combat spells.  Those slots then get repurposed to utility spells.  This is part of why high level wizards are so effective - they have a bunch of 'fun shortcuts' on hand, and they can still kill monsters.  But if they don't prepare any utility spells, the adventure will go on - it might be longer and more difficult, but it doesn't automatically make it impossible.

[Panzerkraken]

Ok so it looks like conversation has hyped up a bit. First Brendan, it is not that spells like Comp languages aren't useful, it is that they are far more situational than more general use spells like Silent Image. When you're low level and you can only take a few spells with you on your journey and you don't have a good feeling that you will need Comp Languages you shouldn't be preparing it because to do so is unrealistic. As mentioned before, unless you know or are close to knowing that you might need it you prepare something more general use. Most situations where you would need comp languages aren't time sensitive and most likely you won't get stuck if you don't have it.

Basically what I'm saying is this: There are no major consequences in an encounter where not having a spell like Comp Language makes you fail. There however are major consequences for not being prepared for combat. If you don't have Read MAgic prepared you won't die for it. If you don't have enough fireballs to defend yourself and the party from trolls you will likely die because of it. The spells any reasonable adventuring caster would realistically have on hand are spells geared towards adventuring. As a player you will not be overtly punished for failing at exploration but you will be punished for failing combat*.

*Note that this means bypassing, retreating from, straight up winning, or otherwise getting through a combat encounter in some successful fashion.

I think you're making a mistake by assuming that the Mage will be the only person in the party capable of dealing with a given situation.  The trolls are just as easily dealt with by a mage using a bottle of oil and the ignite cantrip once they're knocked down by melee as they are by a mage using fireball.  And the mage is being every bit as effective, with less magic expenditure.

Edit:  DDM illustrates my point really well here:

There's more - but that the gist.  So, what does the spell do?  Basically, it makes a relatively safe place to rest, which is convenient if you're in a place that you don't feel safe.  But if you were in such a situation and you didn't have the spell, what would you do?  

You'd probably spend more time finding a defensible place, perhaps one that is less secure than the secure shelter, so you might have to double up on watches (and therefore spend longer overall resting).  The spell is useful, but with enough time and effort, the party will duplicate the utility of the spell through mundane means.  

Very rarely will a utility spell 'change' the game - it just 'speeds it up' - but that can be a lot of fun.  Busting out a secure shelter feels like a win and is a real contribution to a party, rather then looking for a cave with only a single easily defended entrance.  

Even the combat spells are really just a shortcut.  They're not the only answer to the fight, they just speed it up, the same way that the utility spells he's talking about do.

[MGuy]

I'm not knocking Comp. languages for being a non-combat spell. I'm knocking it for being a narrow noncombat spell.

You should also note that things like fireball and Sleep can be used for out of combat purposes. You put guards to sleep to sneak past them. You place delegates to sleep after a meal and go through their pockets looking for secrets. Fireball can be used as a signal, for intimidation, to ignite some other thing, etc etc. The capacity to use these spells in and out of combat is there. Comp Languages has far less uses at all and can't be used in combat at all. Copy pasta this for things like Jump, Read Magic, etc.

[deadDMwalking]

I think you're making a mistake by assuming that the Mage will be the only person in the party capable of dealing with a given situation.  The trolls are just as easily dealt with by a mage using a bottle of oil and the ignite cantrip once they're knocked down by melee as they are by a mage using fireball.  And the mage is being every bit as effective, with less magic expenditure.

No, that's fine, too.  If it works out that the Fighters and/or other party members take down all the trolls and the party lights them up using mundane means, that works - and it saves spells.  Great.  

Now, let's say the Wizard held back and the Trolls just tore all his companions apart.  In this situation, if his only third level spell is tongues, he's probably dead (and so are his companions).  

Mguy points out that if you don't win in a fight, you might die.  If you don't succeed in talking to someone, who know what might happen?  It might mean a fight you could have avoided, but the likelihood that it is an unavoidable fight that can not be won, and the only solution was talking to the other party in a language no one in the party speaks, seems pretty small.  Besides, that's pretty shitty adventure design.

[Panzerkraken]

No, that's fine, too.  If it works out that the Fighters and/or other party members take down all the trolls and the party lights them up using mundane means, that works - and it saves spells.  Great.  

Now, let's say the Wizard held back and the Trolls just tore all his companions apart.  In this situation, if his only third level spell is tongues, he's probably dead (and so are his companions).  

Mguy points out that if you don't win in a fight, you might die.  If you don't succeed in talking to someone, who know what might happen?  It might mean a fight you could have avoided, but the likelihood that it is an unavoidable fight that can not be won, and the only solution was talking to the other party in a language no one in the party speaks, seems pretty small.  Besides, that's pretty shitty adventure design.

Fair enough, but I'd call poor design on any situation where one party member makes ALL the difference.  There should always be alternatives, torchbearers on the end of 10' poles to find traps, fighters with 18 STR to break open doors, potions for healing, etc.  Each one is a technique.  It may not be the preferred technique, but it's a technique.  The same for magic.

[MGuy]

I think you're making a mistake by assuming that the Mage will be the only person in the party capable of dealing with a given situation.  The trolls are just as easily dealt with by a mage using a bottle of oil and the ignite cantrip once they're knocked down by melee as they are by a mage using fireball.  And the mage is being every bit as effective, with less magic expenditure.

Edit:  DDM illustrates my point really well here:


Even the combat spells are really just a shortcut.  They're not the only answer to the fight, they just speed it up, the same way that the utility spells he's talking about do.

The fireball thing was just an example and is faster/easier/safer than waiting for melee to finish up the trolls.

Second while yes, combat specific spells, are just a shortcut they are focused on the part of the adventure that has the most grave consequences. As a mage you can choose to outfit yourself with the most narrow spells (like comp language, jump, alarm, etc) but that only puts you and the rest of your party in danger. If you're an adventuring mage you prepare adventuring type spells.

[MGuy]

Fair enough, but I'd call poor design on any situation where one party member makes ALL the difference.  

No one is saying this.

In fact I think I spoke at length about how I don't like the fact that the fighter can't really do much outside of low level shennanigans and is reduced to being basically a pair of hands at higher level becaus eof his lack of other "real" abilities.

[beejazz]

Even the combat spells are really just a shortcut.  They're not the only answer to the fight, they just speed it up, the same way that the utility spells he's talking about do.

I think the better part of what they're saying is that:

1) You can't always opt out of combat (people attack you).
2) Combat spells affect the likelihood of success in combat.
3) Combat can kill you.

Basically because you can't always pick your combat encounters, and because they represent a point at which the game may end, you're more likely to need (in the survival sense) combat spells than non-combat spells.

____________________________

Comp lang has been used as the example, which adds two minor points:

1) Utility spells can bypass combat entirely.
1a) But you're glad you had complang because combat.
1b) Therefore if you didn't have it, and prepared combat spells, you'd still be glad you prepared combat spells.
2) Some spells are not required here and now. You can delay on translating a book, or ignore the runes on the walls.

How a game is run adds:

1) There shouldn't be chokepoints that depend on a utility spell in a linear adventure.
2) In a nonlinear adventure there can be chokepoints for optional content (I mentioned requiring a spell to get treasure, which would make it the difference between xp and no xp in some editions).

And then there's the last little scraps:

1) Some spells (flight, invisibility, most illusions) are both combat and non combat.
2) Some spells have (more time consuming or difficult) alternatives that don't rely on a spell slot. Comp lang isn't a great example. Maybe knock? Why waste the spell slot if you've got a rogue?

______________________________

Does that more or less sum up the state of the argument at the moment?

EDIT: I'm now realizing I've lost the connection between this and class balance. Care to sum it up, anybody?

[Lord Mistborn]

EDIT: I'm now realizing I've lost the connection between this and class balance. Care to sum it up, anybody?

We where arguing about how much combat is in D&D relating to my point that "good in combat" is not a thing that should be role protected. This devolved into a debate about the relative merits of CompLang vis a vis Silent Image and Sleep. Thanks for giving me an excuse to get this thread back on track.

In fact I think I spoke at length about how I don't like the fact that the fighter can't really do much outside of low level shennanigans and is reduced to being basically a pair of hands at higher level because of his lack of other "real" abilities.

So this is a thing. The fighter classes conceptual space is limited to "dude with a sword". As characters advance in levels they will reach a point where the fighter's limited conceptual space prevents him from gaining relevant abilities.

Discuss.

[Bedrockbrendan]

So this is a thing. The Fighter classes conceptual space is limited to "dude with a sword". As characters advance in levels they will reach a point where the fighters limited conceptual space prevents him from gaining relevant abilities.

Discuss.

we have already had that discussion dozens of times in just the last two to three months. I don't see any benefit to rehashing it with the same players.

[Lord Mistborn]

we have already had that discussion dozens of times in just the last two to three months. I don't see any benefit to rehashing it with the same players.

At high levels in any edition you are expected to fight monsters the size of city buses and sword them to death. Even in older editions the fighter class goes from human with a sword to superhuman with a sword. All I'm arguing is that superhumanity be leveraged into some real lateral advancement. Otherwise you end up with the high level fighter being useless.

[Bedrockbrendan]

At high levels in any edition you are expected to fight monsters the size of city buses and sword them to death. Even in older editions the fighter class goes from human with a sword to superhuman with a sword. All I'm arguing is that superhumanity be leveraged into some real lateral advancement. Otherwise you end up with the high level fighter being useless.

I know your argument. You have already made it several times. Mcguy has also made a very similar argument more than you have. There is no more mileage in that discussion.

[jibbajibba]

I know your argument. You have already made it several times. Mcguy has also made a very similar argument more than you have. There is no more mileage in that discussion.

Agreed.
No ones minds are going to be changed.

If we are continuing with this thread then we need to focus on something like the importance of balance, what balance means and more overarching themes than focusing on individual balance issues, I suggest....

[Lord Mistborn]

I know your argument. You have already made it several times. Mcguy has also made a very similar argument more than you have. There is no more mileage in that discussion.

So is your response.

A) You're right LM a 9th level fighter being able to singlehandedly defeat a insect the size of a short bus is clear proof that where not dealing with "normal" humans.

B) That's wrong LM, fighters should always remain in the ballpark of what a normal human can do even at level 20.

Edit: This very important. If the fighter is not allowed to keep up at high levels then taking levels in fighter should not be an option passed that point. At least in a balanced system.