my profile | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Wizards.Com Boards   » Wheel of Time   » Munchkin and Min/Maxing (Page 3)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Munchkin and Min/Maxing
Tristifer
Member
Member # 128380


posted May 19, 2003 03:23 PM      Profile for Tristifer   Email Tristifer    Edit/Delete Post
true, but how is it possible for a 'sparker' to be stronger with the OP than a trained character?

--------------------
Eth Sularus Oth Mithas
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain
Tai'shar American

From: Chicago, IL | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Varnosst
Member
Member # 131580



posted May 19, 2003 09:53 PM      Profile for Varnosst   Email Varnosst    Edit/Delete Post
[Evil Smirk]
Well, the thing here that I find most amusing is that as the GM, you have all the power. Chanellers, while powerful to be sure, can only weave so many times in a day, and they have limits as to how fast they can weave, while as the GM, I have no limits. They kill 20 trollocs?...no prob got another 20 with their Sgt leader and the Mydrraal leading them just over here. Why are the Children of the Light always causing them grief? cuz they keep killing them...if the channellers make it to sundown and still have weaves left, and didn't have to sweat thru some stuff with no weaves available, something is wrong. I count trolloc grunts as CR 1, which means that a whole fist (200) is only worth appx 7000 XP. Sure the first wave gets whomped, but when the weave slots gets lower and lower level, wilders and initiates alike start sweating. And archers are the best thing in the world. Hide, sneak attack and fade away, most of the time without even being seen by the PC's.
To be sure, being able to weave has its advantages, but it ain't an easy lifestyle in my campaign.

--------------------
"The most efficient method of dealing with this, is to neutralize them.......ALL of them"

From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
drothgery
Member
Member # 4490


posted May 20, 2003 06:26 AM      Profile for drothgery      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gray Skwid:
quote:
Originally posted by Tristifer:
how do you explain how a 'sparker' is more powerful with the OP than an character that can only be trained to use the OP?

This is not a rule. It is a trend.

HTH.

And it's not even a general trend, as the generalization is only close to accurate with sparkers that get training later. Jane Random Wisdom, who doesn't know she can channel, is usually a lot weaker than Susan Sedai.

--------------------
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com/
Optional d20 WoT Rules at http://home.san.rr.com/drothgery/wot_rpg.htm

From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted May 29, 2003 05:37 PM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
You know, I see no reason for a question on why players would not try to make the most of their class abilities.

Min/Maxxing isn't wrong, and there are only two reasons I can think of that would prompt a thread like this.

1. Some people don't know how to roleplay min/maxxed characters.

2. Some people don't want others to be as strong as they are. (i.e., some people want to have the only min/maxxed characters)

Both of those reasons are unreasonable.

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sharn_Penndroen
Member
Member # 82230



posted May 30, 2003 04:34 AM      Profile for Sharn_Penndroen   Email Sharn_Penndroen    Edit/Delete Post
No, I think that the point is you don't want all channelers to be cookie cutters. If Wilder/Initiate is better in all ways than a Wilder or an Initiate, then why would anyone not be a Wilder/Initiate. You seem to have forgot then Min part of MIN/MAX. If you want to be the best at one thing usually it makes you a little weaker in another. Point being that an Initiate should have some benefit not attainable to a Wilder, and visa versa. Also either single class should have some advantage over the mulitclass and visa versa. The problem is that the Wilder Initiate combo seems to be better in all ways.

As far as someone not wanting anyone else to have a good character, that would apply to the very purile only. Most of the people who have posted here are spending more time GMing than playing, so I don't believe that could apply to them. Heck, on the rare occasion that I play and don't GM I want everyone else to MIN/MAX as well. Because I need someone to MAX where I MINed. That's why characters need parties. You would be a light blinded fool to want a bunch of useless characters in your party.

--------------------
A man who will not die to save a woman is no man. - Shienaran Saying

The Light shine on you, and the Creator shelter you. The last embrace of the mother welcome you home. - Shienaran Funeral Ceremony

From: Brookhaven, MS | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fisher-King
Member
Member # 140220



posted June 02, 2003 06:38 PM      Profile for Fisher-King      Edit/Delete Post
There is a disadvantage.

Getting high-level weave slots later.

Look at it... a character splitting levels between Initiate and Wilder will have oodles of low-level slots. But he'll be a 10/10 character when the pure-classed is a 20. That means he won't have any 9th, 8th, or I think 7th level weave slots.

And that means that, unless you're handing out angreal like candy, he'll be dreading that 1 on the Concentration check every time he uses a high-level weave.

--------------------
"You ain't gettin' me on your goal row!"

From: Slidell, LA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sharn_Penndroen
Member
Member # 82230



posted June 02, 2003 07:19 PM      Profile for Sharn_Penndroen   Email Sharn_Penndroen    Edit/Delete Post
I agree with you Fisher King, if you play that way. A lot of people play that you either stick with Initiate weave progression or Wilder and don't change depending on what class you have taken. In other words, they use the total channeler level for determining weaves per day. (usually using Initiate progression)

I like the way you just described and I believe that would be sufficient to deter people from unecessarily Multiclassing. I think that I would implement that in my campaign. (Maybe this is the way that it is supposed be done and I, like an idiot, just didn't realize it. Wouldn't be the first time.)

--------------------
A man who will not die to save a woman is no man. - Shienaran Saying

The Light shine on you, and the Creator shelter you. The last embrace of the mother welcome you home. - Shienaran Funeral Ceremony

From: Brookhaven, MS | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fisher-King
Member
Member # 140220



posted June 04, 2003 08:12 PM      Profile for Fisher-King      Edit/Delete Post
Well, it's a lot like Sorc and Wizard in DND... nobody complains about the cross-class of the two being too strong. Same thing with Psion/Psychic Warrior, and that's actually a closer comparison since you can use your power points from both classes to manifest the powers of both classes (Wizard and Sorc, while they have the same basic pool of spells, have to learn spells seperately for each class they have).

The Psion/PsyWar cross-class isn't overpowered because it takes it forever to get the highest-level powers - it's likely that, before the character gains his first seventh-level power, he's epic. By comparison, the single-classed psion has far better powers every step of the way, and the single-classed PsyWar has more feats and a better attack bonus.

However, the dual-classed character is better in a fight than the single-classed Psion. And he's also a better manifester than the single-classed PsyWar (he's got a lot more power points).

So it evens out to them all being pretty balanced with each other.

And, really, so should the Wilder/Initiate thing, if you make them follow the weave/day progressions in the book for each class.

Addendum: The multiclass is actually balanced in this case too, since it does have more weave/day slots. In fact, it's got more than under your system. But they're lower level. Be REALLY careful handing out angreal.

[ June 04, 2003, 08:17 PM: Message edited by: Fisher-King ]

--------------------
"You ain't gettin' me on your goal row!"

From: Slidell, LA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Merclaar
Member
Member # 67223



posted June 04, 2003 10:35 PM      Profile for Merclaar      Edit/Delete Post
Ahh Fisher King, you know in WoT (as per rules) the Wilder Initiate Levels stacks?

As far as I know [Wink]

[ June 04, 2003, 10:35 PM: Message edited by: Merclaar ]

--------------------
cu

--
Merclaar

Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
MT
Member
Member # 88155


posted June 07, 2003 01:51 AM      Profile for MT      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fisher-King:
Addendum: The multiclass is actually balanced in this case too, since it does have more weave/day slots. In fact, it's got more than under your system. But they're lower level. Be REALLY careful handing out angreal.

There are two flaws in this brought out by the WoT system. The first is that if you play it "by the book", a W/I gets an extra Affinity and Talent mearly for taking the other class.

Even were you to remove this (as I suggest all people should), there's also the fact that W2/I2 gets 3 channeling feats, which allows them to take extra affinities, which when they have them all allows them to channel a weave one level lower, thus nullifying the Wilder progression table.

Add to it that you can still cast 0-2 weaves outside of the Talents you have (0-3 if you have the affinities), still get the +5 when overchanneling, and the +4 to weavesight.

Add to this that at level 15 (W2/I13) the Initiate progression table now equals the Wilder one, and starts to beat it from then on.

Add to this that you get a +2 to Fort and Will in one level that would have taken five levels of straight Wilder to get.

The only disadvantage is you have a block, which can be removed with one of your many extra Channeling feats, and a you have to join the White Tower, which gives you even more power socially (if used correctly).

W 2/I 18 is by far the best Min/Max channeler.

Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fisher-King
Member
Member # 140220



posted June 07, 2003 08:52 PM      Profile for Fisher-King      Edit/Delete Post
Let me look in the book.

Assuming attributes of 18 in all three channeling stats, this is what the Wilder2/Initiate18 has:

0: 6
1: 9
2: 9
3: 6
4: 6
5: 4
6: 4
7: 3
8: 2
9: 1

Whereas an Initiate20 has:
0: 4
1: 6
2: 6
3: 6
4: 6
5: 4
6: 4
7: 4
8: 4
9: 4

Honestly, I'd rather have the extra ninth, eighth, and seventh level slots than the ability to cast second-level weaves cross-Talent. By twentieth level, a channeler should probably have all five Affinities and all the Talents they plan to use... there's no need for worrying about feats. In levels before that, the multiclass is slowing itself down. I'd take pure Initiate over Initiate/Wilder any day of the week.

And I don't think that, by the book, Initiate and Wilder levels stack in terms of weave slots per day.

I do agree with denying the cross-class the second free affinity and talent... those are, IMHO, meant for the beginning channeler, not an experienced channeler who takes on a new class. It's a lot like the quadruple skill points at first level - you don't give those to someone who cross-classes into Wanderer for the same reason.

--------------------
"You ain't gettin' me on your goal row!"

From: Slidell, LA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
MT
Member
Member # 88155


posted June 07, 2003 09:32 PM      Profile for MT      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fisher-King:
[QB]Honestly, I'd rather have the extra ninth, eighth, and seventh level slots than the ability to cast second-level weaves cross-Talent. By twentieth level, a channeler should probably have all five Affinities and all the Talents they plan to use... there's no need for worrying about feats. In levels before that, the multiclass is slowing itself down. I'd take pure Initiate over Initiate/Wilder any day of the week.
[QB]

But you get all the advantages of a Initiate and all the advantages of a Wilder with W/I. The weave levels do stack by the book, and W/I uses the Initiate weaves / level chart. That was my point was that the Initiate weaves/ level is better because you get more channeling feats (to get more affinities earlier) and after level 15 you kick more ass anyway.

The only advantage a pure Initiate has is they don't have a block and don't have to use a feat to remove it. But they don't get the +5 to Concentration and Fortitude when overchanneling or the cross-talent 0-2 levels ability, or the +2 to Fort and Will.

Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Snow Crash
Member
Member # 85099


posted June 09, 2003 04:45 AM      Profile for Snow Crash      Edit/Delete Post
Ah, fisher-king dude, the rules actually state that when a pc multiclasses Initiate/Wilder. In order to get weave slot totals use the total channeler class levels and look itup on the initiate table.

Therefore a wilder2/initiate18 would have exactly the same weave slots as an initiate20 except hey would gain the bonus weaves from a third stat.

From: Australia | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Snow Crash
Member
Member # 85099


posted June 09, 2003 04:54 AM      Profile for Snow Crash      Edit/Delete Post
besides as I was chatting to my GM about this the other day. Min/Max characters have a disadvantage as well, It's the min. We have a pc in our group with two weapon attack, powerwrought swords a whole lot of combat feats etc. He gets 4 attacks per round and does an average of 50+ points of damage per round. The point is as a GM you also need to point out his min every now and then as well. He has spent all his feats and points in combat. Stick him in a situation where he requires stealth or social skills, give him an enemy that can hardly be seen and make him make search rolls and he is going to fall flat on his face.

Also as a GM remember that what ever the PCs can do so can the important NPCs. Take this guy and pit him against a real blademaster "you look to young to have that heron boy. Let's see if you're worthy of it"

The same with powerful channelers, they can come up against other powerful channelers as well, a mi/maxed channeler can't do much when they are shielded. If you as a GM have to fudge a few dice rolls or stats to make it happen, then do so; thats what a GM's screen is made for. It's up to you to make the game a challenge and to make it enjoyable (these two usually go together by the way) [teach]

From: Australia | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
MT
Member
Member # 88155


posted June 09, 2003 10:23 AM      Profile for MT      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Snow Crash:
If you as a GM have to fudge a few dice rolls or stats to make it happen, then do so; thats what a GM's screen is made for.

And thus we get to the root of why players do Min/Max. Many feel they need the best possible character in order to survive all the monsters and traps and Rule 0's that the DMs throw at them.

This isn't so much a problem with WoT because it's low magic and most players and GMs play it for the RP aspects. But in D&D, where magic has no rules, monsters can do anything, and Prestige classes are like super powers, players do whatever they can to get that extra advantage. And Min/Maxers don't have to fudge the dice rules.

Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
drothgery
Member
Member # 4490


posted June 09, 2003 11:54 AM      Profile for drothgery      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MT:
This isn't so much a problem with WoT because it's low magic and most players and GMs play it for the RP aspects.[/QB]

WoT is low in magic items, and weilders of magic are relatively rare (and if the GM is trying to keep things close to the novels, high-level weilders of magic are exceedingly rare). But it's not low in magic power. While I'd bet on a by the book Cleric 20 or Wizard 20 against an Initiate 20 or a Wilder 20, it certainly wouldn't be a sure thing.

--------------------
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com/
Optional d20 WoT Rules at http://home.san.rr.com/drothgery/wot_rpg.htm

From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
MT
Member
Member # 88155


posted June 09, 2003 12:18 PM      Profile for MT      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by drothgery:
[QUOTE]WoT is low in magic items, and weilders of magic are relatively rare (and if the GM is trying to keep things close to the novels, high-level weilders of magic are exceedingly rare). But it's not low in magic power.

Yes, I was refering to the magic items portion rather than the power of channelers. In D&D, an average character is stacked with healing potions, wands of healing, +1-+3 magical weapons, things that give you haste, ability bonuses, make you invisible, blurred, able to climb walls, able to open doors, etc.

As a barbarian you can have the ability to buff yourself, steal like a thief, shoot arrows like an archer, cast fireballs, spew fire breath, etc etc; all with the right amount of money. Conversely, all the opponents you fight can as well, plus many of the monsters in D&D are built around countering all the magic that players are assumed to have. It's a visious cycle that everyone seems to love and enjoy, as indicated by the volumes of new spells and items that come out every year.

Anyway, that's my D&D rant, and how it forced min/maxers into being.

Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fisher-King
Member
Member # 140220



posted June 09, 2003 04:42 PM      Profile for Fisher-King      Edit/Delete Post
The best way to deal with a min/maxed character is to isolate them. Min/maxed characters rely on having someone else cover their min, so when they're stuck by themselves, they're pretty much doomed when they encounter their min.

For example, you take the super-channeler, isolate them, and then put them in a room with a group of angry Seanchan...

--------------------
"You ain't gettin' me on your goal row!"

From: Slidell, LA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Snow Crash
Member
Member # 85099


posted June 11, 2003 05:08 AM      Profile for Snow Crash      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MT:
quote:
Originally posted by Snow Crash:
If you as a GM have to fudge a few dice rolls or stats to make it happen, then do so; thats what a GM's screen is made for.

And thus we get to the root of why players do Min/Max. Many feel they need the best possible character in order to survive all the monsters and traps and Rule 0's that the DMs throw at them.

This isn't so much a problem with WoT because it's low magic and most players and GMs play it for the RP aspects. But in D&D, where magic has no rules, monsters can do anything, and Prestige classes are like super powers, players do whatever they can to get that extra advantage. And Min/Maxers don't have to fudge the dice rules.

If the players are min/maxing in order to combat the GMs bending rules then the GM is doing it too often, as I said the idea is to do it only when it helps advance the story, remember, you, as a GM, are there to hekp things flow. Too many (GMs and PCs alike) get it into their heads that this is a game of one side vs the other, GM vs player. If thats the case then you are playing for the wrong reasons. Don't play to win, play to have fun and enjoy the story as it unfolds. [Bounce]
From: Australia | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xenocide
Member
Member # 52270


posted June 11, 2003 11:11 AM      Profile for Xenocide   Email Xenocide    Edit/Delete Post
I think the problem is one of definition. We have only a few main characters who were self-trained to any degree. Nynaeve, Liandrin, Rand, the False Dragons. The rest were guided by others to learn how to channel. My House rules hold that if you start out a Wilder you stay a Wilder unless you switch to Initiate in which case you lose the weave slots and start over. You keep feats earned but you have to learn a new style of channelling.

In real terms, this would almost never happen. That is why wilders are so distinct within the Tower, they are different.

On a side note, a sul'dam has no channelling skill, just possibly a few ranks in weavesight with the potential to become an initiate and most damane would be initiates trained by other damane and sul'dams.

A small question, how do you deal with max channelling abilities. I would probably not enforce these on a PC but an NPC who can't attain the shawl. Is these some inborn max # of levels a channeller can have? What do they do when they're full? Browns, Whites, and Yellows I can see going expert while Greens take Armsmen or something like that. Any ideas?

--------------------
When reality and I conflict, reality is wrong (Great DM slogan)

From: Dallas | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
drothgery
Member
Member # 4490


posted June 11, 2003 12:47 PM      Profile for drothgery      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Xenocide:
A small question, how do you deal with max channelling abilities. I would probably not enforce these on a PC but an NPC who can't attain the shawl. Is these some inborn max # of levels a channeller can have?

There isn't anything defined in the rulebook, but if you, as a GM, roughly equate level with strength in the Power, I'd work off the following guidelines

17+ channeler levels - Forsaken and roughly equivalent
15-16 - Supergirls; Cadsuane, Elayne
13-14 - Strong Aes Sedai; Sheriam, Moiraine
11-12 - Above-Average Aes Sedai
9-10 - Average Aes Sedai
7-8 - Below Average/inexeperienced Aes Sedai

Lila Elisor in my online game is 8th level because she's only been AS for two years. She's potentially very strong, and will top out at level 14 if she sticks around that long.

quote:
Originally posted by Xenocide:
What do they do when they're full? Browns, Whites, and Yellows I can see going expert while Greens take Armsmen or something like that. Any ideas?

I'd think Noble in most cases.

--------------------
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com/
Optional d20 WoT Rules at http://home.san.rr.com/drothgery/wot_rpg.htm

From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sophiathegreen
Member
Member # 136464


posted June 15, 2003 01:51 PM      Profile for Sophiathegreen   Email Sophiathegreen    Edit/Delete Post
MinMax is not done in roleplaying game only. When they design the first space caputal for man to go into space they have only so much weight they can carry and a certain volume to fit it all in. So they first have to consider what was the most inportant item needed first. They didnot add than indoor swimming pool or than dinnaring room either.
From: El Pase Texas | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged


All times are Pacific Time
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | http://www.wizards.com/ | Privacy Statement



Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.2.0

Shop Games Books Magazines Stores Events Company Worldwide Community