Talk:Forsaker (3.5e Class)

Off the RNG

Effectively, many characters will take this class to get +10 strength, which transfers to a +5 modifier over other characters. Now, I'm not worried about the damage, but the attack rolls will be strongly effected, and may push the class too high on the RNG as far as attack rolls on concerned. Perhaps another option instead of straight increases to ability scores might be the way to go? --Ghostwheel 18:09, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Except that other characters will have +5 weapons, and the forsaker will not. Since he doesn't get magic items at all (see Forsake Magic ability) he has to make it up elsewhere. - TarkisFlux 18:23, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

And the other characters can have +5 Tomes of Strength and +6 Belts of Giant Strength. The character is pretty close to the 3.0 version of the Forsaker. I nerfed his Damage Reduction in exchange for better Fast Healing. --STDoc 18:25, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Ah, forgot about that. With that, I think the class is horribly underpowered. Much of the power characters in 3.5 have is based on their items--just look at the Big Six, as well as all the miscellaneous items they use for utility or to get out of sticky situations. Vow of Poverty is usually seen as being on the slightly underpowered side, and a level in the class is effectively that, but without the multitude of bonuses. --Ghostwheel 18:32, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

I had forgotten about those tomes. I second Ghostwheel on the item front.

Otherwise, he has good saves, all of the special save abilities, and ok SR, but his touch AC is poor and he lacks significant offensive abilities. He's an ok 'you can't hurt me guy', but he doesn't back that up with a reason to target him over other party members. He also can't deal with flyers or teleporters or other kiters at all, and that's a substantial issue for him. He doesn't need to deal with all of them, but a strike that acted like a dimensional anchor (to foil teleporters) or otherwise disrupted spellcasting, or abilities similar to the anti-caster feats that I can't remember the name of might help him remain more relevant after the item issue has been resolved. - TarkisFlux 18:47, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

But the ease of abuse is prevalent. I'm wary about making it more powerful, because a good aligned Forsaker could take Vow of Poverty and get quite a bit stronger.--STDoc 18:51, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps give it an ability that stops it for working? For example, requiring the forsaker to carry a crystal worth at least 100 gp for at least 1 day per week (not hard at all) or lose their abilities? This would make it easy to fulfill, while stopping someone from grabbing both VoP and Forsaker. Then you could boost the Forsaker without having to worry about VoP. --Ghostwheel 19:07, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

I've Got it! Let's take a nod from the Occult Slayer. The Forsaker needs to have a Masterwork Weapon (or in the case of Monks, masterwork Bracers/Gauntlets, etc) in order for his abilities to work.--STDoc 19:10, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Nice idea! Yeah, that could work well. Now just be sure to buff it up a ton to make up for the lack of any boosts from magical items. --Ghostwheel 19:34, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

I've added in an Anti-Magic Strike Ability which functions like Dispel Magic, and an ability which drains a spellcaster's spells and turns them into hit points for the Forsaker.

While you're at it, could you add in the paragraph description of the class, etc., where it's prompted to do so? Thanks! Surgo 19:50, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

New abilities

Signature weapon is nice, but can we expand it to two or three weapons at a time please? I'd really like the class to be able to swap between melee and ranged if it needs to, and not to be completely shut down by a good sunder or disarm.

The new dispelling strike could be made more clear. Is it just a regular attack roll with all of the attendant bonuses vs a DC of CL+11? Does the roll have the same bonuses as the attack that prompted it (so worse bonuses for iterative attacks as you go down the line)? Is it just d20 + BAB vs that DC? It should also still potentially dispel magical miss chances (blur, blink, etc.) even when the miss chance would indicate the attack did not hit, though we can probably skip damage in those cases. I really appreciate that it can be added on to any attack, making it possible for the forsaker to dispel lots of guys on his turn.

Spellfire destruction needs to be reworked. As it is, I give up my damage for a 33% chance of the target losing a spell that they don't care about and heals me less than or equal to my fast healing. That is not an ability I would write on my character sheet, because I wouldn't ever use it. I would be fine if they weren't able to absorb spell energy to heal (as that part of the class flavor seems to be all gone anyway), but if the ability stays it needs to take the highest level available spell all the time and heal at least twice spell level for it to be worthwhile (which makes it similar to the arcane ooze). Alternately, you could change it to a no-damage attack that forced a fort save or lose access to (Su) & (Sp) abilities and also denied spell casting and invocations and psionics and crap for 1d4 rounds. Effectively bringing them down to the forsaker's level. - TarkisFlux 20:09, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Tarkis, you read my mind. I was thinking about that on the way to work. And you're right, the Dispelling Strike needs to be reworded.--STDoc 20:48, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Update

The Forsaker has just undergone a minor Update. Post your thoughts and comments!--STDoc 21:24, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

HEY COME ON GUYS, A FORSAKER CAN'T USE SU ABILITIES FORGET VOW OF POVERTY!!!!!! POWER THAT COMES FROM GODS OR CELESTIAL BEINGS, THEY REWARD YOU BECAUSE YOU PRIVATE YOURSELF OF THINGS BY BOOSTING YOU WITH MAGIC!!! WHERE'S THE LOGIC?? COME ON!!!! AND THE ONE THAT SAID THAT THE FORSAKER CAN'T DEAL WITH A FLYER OR A TELEPORTER HAHAHAHAHA, HEY!!! HOW DOES THE FIGHTER DOES?? HE TAKES A COMPOSITE LONG BOW, THE FORSAKER WILL DO THE SAME! AND IF YOU WANT TO REDUCE THE DAMAGE YOU TAKE FROM MAGIC (BECAUSE IT IS SAID THAT DEMAGE REDUCTION DOESN'T WORK ON MAGIC AND POWERFULL ENERGY) YOU TAKE 2 LEVELS OF ROGUE AND YOU GET EVASION (IT IS EX ABILITY) SO YOU GET EVERYTHING YOU NEED AGAINST MAGIC. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.203.79.184 (talk • contribs)

Caps lock. Cruise control for cool, amirite? But serious I have no clue what the hell you are trying to say. -- Jota 18:02, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he can get a bow, and he can take a shot or two while the flyer outmaneuvers him and generally whittles him down at leisure. He gets even less against teleport ambushes, since if he shows any sign of not dying quickly they'll just leave his range as an action, reprep, and come back to try again, and again, until they win. That's how kiting works. So, if he is fighting a competent opponent, the fighter deals with these things by 1) being lucky or 2) being dead. Which is to say that he doesn't deal with them well at all. The forsaker has specific counters against that sort of magical wankery for a reason. Your point about taking a rogue dip for evasion may be useful in a build, but not so much in a discussion of the features of the class unless you had intended to suggest that it should be added to the class for some reason. It's really unclear where you're going with it in this context. - TarkisFlux 18:08, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Comment on balance: This version of the Prestige class is far, far, FAR more powerful than it's 3.0 counterpart. I'm not saying the 3.0 counterpart was that great - but still, this is a ridiculous power boost. I would never let my players touch this - auto-disabling casters, fast healing all the time, huge SR, evasion/slippery mind/mettle all together, and auto-negating magic in an aoe at epic level? Just wow, broke much? Who cares if you can't use magic items, these abilities are far better. I suggest toning it down - a LOT. - Quizart 22:49, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

Please read through the balance points article for how various articles are balanced on the wiki. While you might be comfortable playing at the fighter- or monk-range of balance, this version of the Forsaker is made to play in rogue-range games. --Ghostwheel 04:31, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

(grumble edit conflict grumble) While I agree that there are things here that still need adjusting (as mentioned and apparently ignored below), I don't think it's the things you're worried about. It's supposed to be substantially better than the old style class, it's written at a higher balance point and designed to be make up for missing item boosters, tomes of stat boosting / wishing for stats, magical bonuses to attack, damage, and AC, healing, save boosters, etc. that characters at this balance level would normally have. This really isn't much stronger than a regular character at that balance level, and your suggestion that you wouldn't let it anywhere near your game suggests that you just enjoy a lower balance point. So you shouldn't let this anywhere near your games. But it's actually not bad for what it set out to be, a rogue level anti-caster fighter style class who has given up all of the magic items that the game assumes you have at higher levels. - TarkisFlux 04:46, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

For God Sake, I remove some of the abilitys. You do not expect that a DM would all that you put there. I remove antimagic strike, Spell fire destruction and Evasion. At least this. - Player - 11/06/2010

First of all, I doubt any deific figures from any pantheon have anything to do with this. Secondly, please do not edit another user's article unless they have asked for help. You can voice your opinion or make suggestions on talk pages, but changing without a user's permission is a big no-no. --Ghostwheel 19:29, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

See here for our policy on editing the pages of another author. And I would allow this in a game. It's really not that awesome, except at shutting down / debuffing spell casters. It's quite good there, but so what? Do you have any specific concerns, or is this just a gut "overpowered!" reaction? - TarkisFlux 20:11, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Grammar

This class would substantially benefit by its creator (or someone else) going over it with a fine-toothed comb in regards to grammar. Surgo 04:11, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the suggestion. I'm slowly going over the class flavor text, and rewording the errors that I find. --STDoc 15:54, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Legality

I hate to throw this out there, but this class uses the same picture, same ideas, and nearly the same abilities as the 3.0 version. I'm not sure if that is a liability, but at least changing the picture would be a good start. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 15:42, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Missed this...

Limiting the anti-magic strike, the equivalent of a targeted dispel magic, to X/day really hurts this class. I'd even say that it even makes it fighter level again if it wasn't for the fact that spell-fire destruction is at will (which is really bizarre since it's arguably the stronger ability even if it has less overall utility). Can you pick a paradigm for the class abilities and stick with it please? Either X/day for anti-magic strike and spellfire destruction (and neither with any penalties to damage when they're used since they're already limited) or the current damage for effect trade off with either strike usable at will. - TarkisFlux 17:29, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Qualifier Feats and Abilities

The three feats used to qualify for this prestige class conflict with abilities gotten in the class itself. Only if you were using the SRD version of Great Fortitude, Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes would this point be moot.

However; Great Fortitude grants you DR 5/-, how does this interact with the DR (CL/2)/- the Forsaker gets? If it does not interact at all, one of them is useless. Iron Will gives you Slippery Mind and so does Forsaker. How do these combine? Lightning Reflexes gives you Evasion, so Improved Evasion is useless in the Forsaker.

Unless, of course, I missed something. --TK-Squared 17:56, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

I believe the author meant to use the SRD versions of the same feats, and wasn't aware that he linked to the Tome versions. Though I could be wrong *shrug* --Ghostwheel 18:05, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Fixed it. Thanks for the heads up, guys. STDoc 18:09, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Example?

Berserker / Forsaker: No... Items... EVER!! --Ghostwheel 09:33, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

I lol'd. It's an interesting concept, btw. I've been toying with the Defiant Class from the Planar handbook to make a God-Hating Forsaker. So far, horribly weak, extremely flavorful.STDoc 19:58, August 2, 2010 (UTC)