Talk:Warmage, Retooled (3.5 Class)

Ratings
Let's observe it from the other side: that is, the class is defined as within VH range, but the spell list and classes remain as-is. Would it be defined as proper VH level, or would it have class features that should be boosted towards VH range because they're weaker than expected?

I gauged it as High level for reasons that involve my natural inclination towards High balance and being built through the Tier system in mind (rather than the Balance Points; note that the class already has three years worth of changes), but I've always pegged it higher than what would be defined as Tier 3, which I generally equate with High balance even though the "translation" isn't precise (your decision on just how imprecise). My inclination is that the class' chassis inclines towards High balance, but the spells, the benefits of (Improved) Warmage Edge and the capstone ability are distinctively VH.

Personally, I have no qualms in changing it to VH, but the last thing I want is to do it from an incomplete evaluation, because then I risk the chance of "it's not VH enough, you need to boost several things", which is something I don't wish to change (much as I've refused to change the extra damage output from Warmage Edge, as many people have intended to nerf it to class level + Int modifier, which leaves a lineal damage boost whereas my proposal inclines towards the graph made by comparing average HP per CR, remaining lower at each time). If I were to change it to VH considering the existing spell list, and considering fellow Cid's suggestion about rearranging certain spells (I suspect probably Meteor Swarm and some of the damaging fog spells getting a lower level, as he mentions "some" instead of "just"), would there be any class features that would threaten its VH balance point? The last thing I want is to have someone oppose the class because it feels it's not "proper" VH balance material, as my intention isn't to build the Tome Warmage. T.G. Oskar (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The sorcerer is pegged as wizard-level despite having no real class abilities. I would treat this much the same way, and see no problem in just changing the balance range to VH, as it gets most of the better spells available to the sorcerer, with many more spells "known". --Ghostwheel (talk) 07:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I see where you're getting at. It *technically* has the familiar, but the wizard also has it, and has other class features as well, so debating on that point is moot. You're free to comment on the class features, though. T.G. Oskar (talk) 07:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments
I think you've hit a weird in-between place with this class. While I'm very willing to point out that one VH power does not a VH class make, you've got enough here that I'm not sure which point it fits better in. It's really good at answering the question "what is the most efficient way to murderize these foes?" with the appropriate spell. But outside of that they have rather limited utility (ignoring UMD for the moment), and in that sense they're not too unlike the Tome Barbarian. So they could just be low VH or high H and be fine (and I'm not sure where they fit exactly yet). It doesn't have to fit in the balance guidelines exactly and you really should just put it in whichever one it fits more into. That's unlikely to please Ghost at all, or anyone else who has a narrow view of the balance categories and wants strict differentiation, but it's a supported thing IMO.

Still, if you want to make sure it's more H than VH, you have a few options. The first is to pull UMD so they can't rely on scrolls or wands to supplement their otherwise narrow spell selection. That has the potential to drop it to a strong T4 since you pulled advanced learning and that's the only way to gain other utility, but you could put advanced learning back in as divination or abjuration only if you wanted them to grab a bit of utility without doing it through gear. The second is to disallow their metamagic tweaks from affecting their highest level spells (if they couldn't metamagic them that way in the first place). I'm looking at widen and discriminating here specifically, but limiting metamagic edge to similarly lower spell levels doesn't seem out of the question. Widened discriminating disjunction is a nasty, nasty thing and I don't really want them to be doing that at any level, VH or not. The third would be to move some of the more concerning spells up in level. Glitterdust is a great level 2 spell, but it's a less spectacular level 3 or 4 spell (despite the higher save DC) because of the other spells you could be casting instead. This last might be a bit might be a bit unorthodox, offensive, or even pointless in the eyes of some (I'm pretty sure Ghost hates the idea of glitterdust at any level, for example), but it is effective at pushing back problematic abilities until they are less so because of the availability of counters.

Hope there's something useful in there for you. - Tarkisflux Talk 04:39, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Was waiting on Ghost's answer on the matter, and as you can see above, his concern seems to be mostly over the spell list. I'll see how I work on Cid's suggestion, probably using the Healer method (evocation spells that would be weaker such as Polar Ray and Meteor Swarm would be online earlier, while other spells might come later).


 * As for the Advanced Learning bit: that was unintentional. In fact, if you look at the table, it's supposed to have a progression that comes online at 3rd level and progresses faster (once every 4 levels), and designed so that it can be replaced with Expanded Learning. It does cover Abjuration, which is one of the suggestions you made, but also Conjuration (unlimited, so you can get VERY powerful spells later on) and Evocation (out of legacy; there's some useful Evocation spells such as Luminous Swarm, keep in mind); I didn't decide to apply Divination, though.


 * Again: I have no qualms at shifting its balance rating to VH, but I simply wanted to hear a bit more before making a change, if only because while it's a folly to please everyone, it's also folly to change your mind without having a clear idea on what's to change. T.G. Oskar (talk) 07:23, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the spell list is the big concern. They don't get to trade out older spells for utility stuff, don't get a lot of choice in their selection (other than advanced learning), and have to rely on a skill for their supplements instead of a class list, so it's not obviously better than a Sorcerer. When you already have 2 or 3 spells that murder your foes, the marginal utility of 2 or 3 more is a lot less. Still, it's probably a wash between those additional spells known and boosted progression and I agree that VH is a better point for it with your recent clarifications and changes. And the advanced learning correction probably puts this in low T2, which you also seem ok with.


 * Would you mind discussing why you added UMD to the class though? - Tarkisflux Talk 17:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)