Talk:Forsaker (3.5e Prestige 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) at

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)

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)