Topic of Dipping Classes

[Zavandar]

Maybe you're right, but also maybe you're being effected by the opinions on these forums too much?

lol, me?

no, I've known for a long time that sorcadin us a strong build. I've helped people make them (and recently), so there's more out there than people think

I also think they're incredibly boring to play, which might be why you dont see so many

Just because a build isnt seen often doesn't mean it's weak.

even with moving div grace to lvl 5, a 27/3 sorcadin would be fine. It's not like you have to choose between gearing saves and charisma, like you do with other div dips. Con, cha, saves, skills. Easy

Exactly. It doesnt really nerf sorcs all that much. It hurts the other paladin dip builds more. Those builds already make decent sacrifices for it and dont come out game breaking like, supposedly, the sorcadin that is also boring to play, with barely any schools selection. I dont like this idea at all.

Your idea to cap at div lvl x3 is less game changing and doesnt really nerf anyone except sorcadins. If something needs to be done, I'd start there and probably leave it there.

it does nerf sorcs because it restricts their gearing options

[AstralUniverse]

that's what I said.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

I personally feel a lot of atmospheric flavor is lost that could otherwise be prevalent in the world when people ignore the divine obligations on their character sheet. Plenty of paladin orders can multiclass, but there are implications and cultural/religious/traditional doctrines surrounding it that can be used to enhance the narrative. Same for monks.

There is simply not enough reason for these implications as cited in 3.5. A lot of these restrictions are briefly mentioned, but nothing beyond. For instance, Shar's monks can multiclass freely as sorceres - but why? These class combinations have nothing to offer one another, and there's very little cultural/religious/traditional backing to why this is the only class her monks can multiclass into. In the same way as if you limited domains of clerics, you would find that there will be an overpopulation of monk/paladin worshipers, and those worshipers would directly align with the mechanical benefit therein.

Arelith use to HIGHLY encourage clerics to take domains associated with their deity, and we had a whole lot of priests of Akadi roaming around.

Most of the orders themselves don't go into too much detail when you read about them, but if you then go and read about the faiths involved in those orders, there tends to be a lot of information that rationalizes and explains such things. There's also a good deal of mention in writing about some of them.

Taking your instance about Shar, for example, the Monks of the Dark Moon could freely multiclass as sorcerers because they tapped the Shadow Weave, her own personal creation and something she was using to try to weaken Mystra and subsequently subsume her divine domain of Magic. Each worshipper that uses the shadow weave is one less that gives divine power to Mystra, whose destruction is a highly sought after goal for Shar, second only to the erasure of all light and life.

Some of this writing, is of course 3.0 and not 3.5 - but when it comes to lore, 3.0 and 3.5 actually occur more or less at the same time- 3.5 was more of a mechanical update with lore splashes than any kind of full lore overhaul like 2nd -> 3rd or 3.x->4 was (no Time of Troubles or Spellplague or major time advancements).

Regarding the Akadian clerics, while I see where you're going with that, that's a hill I'm willing to die on- DM's are meant to speak for the gods. If you displease your god, there are IC consequences, which could be as insignificant (mostly) as the cleric sneezing constantly, or as painful as permanent negative piety. That may come off as harsh, but I think it's vital for setting consistency- wizards don't spontaneously cast spells by force of will, they study. Rogues don't just sit in the fireball and barely get singed like a tank, they nimbly avoid it.

Clerics don't alter the fabric of reality in front of them by bringing back the dead and causing firestorms and implosions by force of will, they do it because their god deems it an essential use of power to further their domain, and clerics who don't meet that criteria should be very wary of a divine presence being upset with their misuse of power.

Remember The Craft? https://youtu.be/8EUTXbhTFg8?t=63

[Ork]

Imagine you want to play a Dark Moon Monk. If we enforced restrictions, your options are now limited to two: 30 monk or some sort of Frankenstein monk/sorcerer. The end result is you're not going to have a lot of Dark Moon Monks because that is mechanically discouraged by these restrictions.

Instead of increasing build diversity, you'd be decreasing it. And even worse? You'd also have more restricted roleplay than Monks and paladins already currently enjoy. If you need an example of these pieces happening already, just remember the tide of OP monks. When something is mechanically incentivised, it will occur more frequently.

I'm glad you're willing to die on a hill, but it provides a net nothing to our setting.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

I feel perhaps you may be misunderstanding my desire to adhere to the thematic restrictions. I won't turn this into a discussion about whether or not any combination of sorcerer/monk could be viable, but into a discussion about what an individual wants to play. Maybe you'd rather play a monk/rogue - that's fine! There's an order that allows that (more than one, actually!)

The restrictions were put into place, IMO, to encourage people who wanted to multi-class these classes for power spikes to do more research into the lore and cultural implications of their character on the world- so to speak, they have an organizational narrative built into their stories, that they are free to run with or break away from over time as their character's story progresses.

Once you get into individual game world lore, most of them have monastic orders that allow violations of these restrictions into various classes- all of them, just about, no less. So it's not that you can't play a monk sorcerer or paladin/rogue if you want to- it just means you need to do some extra research into which orders allow that type of thing, which adds to the narrative, whether your character complies with it or fights the established tradition.

Which I think is way cooler than just slapping any two normally disparate classes together with no regard for the setting, at least as an observer looking at someone else's story.

[Ork]

To which I still disagree. If I want to roleplay as a Dark Moon Monk, it shouldn't matter that I dipped rogue. It might fit the character thematically where the restrictions are by and large arbitrary. It doesn't make good story to be legalistically following the setting to a T.

[AstralUniverse]

I have a quarterstaff SS monk and I RP it as a disciple of the Shining Hand. Yeah, I know its supposed to be monk dipping wizard and not the other way around but you can totally sue me. Its Arelith, running in a shitty old engine - not pnp - building diversity is more important than going THAT strict into multiclassing-lore.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

I have a quarterstaff SS monk and I RP it as a disciple of the Shining Hand. Yeah, I know its supposed to be monk dipping wizard and not the other way around but you can totally sue me. Its Arelith, running in a shitty old engine - not pnp - building diversity is more important than going THAT strict into multiclassing-lore.

I'm in a similar situation where I plan to take monk dip and have already incorporated it into my character's RP, making one of their goals to eventually train at the monastery so that when I do it is entirely justified. If we go and nerf monk dips before I even get to take one then I'll probably just quit as it will have ruined weeks worth of RP leading up to the last few levels where I might finally gain the 6 AC needed to do epic content with others. I don't know why people think a build that does 30 damage a hit needs the exact same AC as builds doing 200 damage a hit. Sure I might have more APR but lets be honest those last few attacks won't hit the broad side of a barn most of the time due to the pitifully low AB.

[Apothys]

Rather than limit any kind of dipping, why dont we make a Pure class build or Full Prestige Class more attractive with some special benefit or Benefits gained at Max level? Perhaps showing them as true masters of there class compared to the people who dip for all the cool advantages.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Rather than limit any kind of dipping, why dont we make a Pure class build or Full Prestige Class more attractive with some special benefit or Benefits gained at Max level? Perhaps showing them as true masters of there class compared to the people who dip for all the cool advantages.

Yes they should just give some level 28 bonus to most other classes like they did with pure druids. Reward people for not choosing to dip instead of punishing those of us who do choose to dip. I don't know why people are so obsessed about nerfing dips anyways. Yeah sure paladin and monk dips might get better saves or AC but by doing that instead of dipping something like rogue or weapon master we lose out on things like UMD or the ability to deal 200+ dmg crits. There is a big difference in doing 30 dmg a hit and 200 dmg a hit or being able to use divine wands and I think that's already a reasonable trade-off for some extra AC.

[Shadowy Reality]

I don't know why people are so obsessed about nerfing dips anyways.

Because people typically don't dip because that is how they envisioned their character, they do it because it is mechanically advantageous for their build.

Note that I am not saying that people who take the dips don't roleplay that dip, or are bad roleplayers in any shape or form, they are not, but they incorporate that roleplay because they must, that was not their character vision.

If the typical paladin4 or blackguard4 dips and respective Charisma to saves/damage/ac was nerfed to class levels, you would cease to see the Brycer builds and all the other builds that make use of divine dips. Why? Because while 4 free saves is still fairly good for a dip, there would be other more beneficial dips.

Or the other way around, if now fighter27 had a cookie that far outweighted the benefits of the current div3 dips, you would see those divine dips thrown out of the window and a rise in fighter27 builds.

True build diversity comes when all dips are mechanically similar. Currently, they are not.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

I don't know why people are so obsessed about nerfing dips anyways.

Because people typically don't dip because that is how they envisioned their character, they do it because it is mechanically advantageous for their build.

Note that I am not saying that people who take the dips don't roleplay that dip, or are bad roleplayers in any shape or form, they are not, but they incorporate that roleplay because they must, that was not their character vision.

If the typical paladin4 or blackguard4 dips and respective Charisma to saves/damage/ac was nerfed to class levels, you would cease to see the Brycer builds and all the other builds that make use of divine dips. Why? Because while 4 free saves is still fairly good for a dip, there would be other more beneficial dips.

Or the other way around, if now fighter27 had a cookie that far outweighted the benefits of the current div3 dips, you would see those divine dips thrown out of the window and a rise in fighter27 builds.

True build diversity comes when all dips are mechanically similar. Currently, they are not.

Nerfing brycers would decrease build diversity

[NPC Logger Number 2]

True build diversity comes when all dips are mechanically similar. Currently, they are not.

If all dips are mechanically similar then there will be no build diversity.

[Shadowy Reality]

Nerfing brycers would decrease build diversity

Don't focus on Brycers in particular, focus on problematic dips. But let's invert the scenario.

Imagine there is a new wizard feat, which requires you to be Wizard level 28+, that feat gives you Int to AC, Int to Saves and a bonus of +15 Disicpline. Suddenly that bard3 and that ranger3 dips are pretty much worse in all aspects.

Wizards would start pretty much being all pure Wizard 30. That change would effectively decrease build diversity just by existing, because those two dips are just not worth it anymore. Those dip3 builds still exist mind you, but people will cease to use them.

It is the same with these dips. Other builds just cease being used because they are much worse by comparison. The point is not nerfing dips, it is making dips more or less similar to each other, and pure classes. This may mean nerfing certain dips, buffing other dips, or buffing pure classes.

If all dips are mechanically similar then there will be no build diversity.

They don't need to provide the exact same bonus, but they need to provide comparable bonus.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

Nerfing brycers would decrease build diversity

Don't focus on Brycers in particular, focus on problematic dips. But let's invert the scenario.

Imagine there is a new wizard feat, which requires you to be Wizard level 28+, that feat gives you Int to AC, Int to Saves and a bonus of +15 Disicpline. Suddenly that bard3 and that ranger3 dips are pretty much worse in all aspects.

Wizards would start pretty much being all pure Wizard 30. That change would effectively decrease build diversity just by existing, because those two dips are just not worth it anymore. Those dip3 builds still exist mind you, but people will cease to use them.

It is the same with these dips. Other builds just cease being used because they are much worse by comparison. The point is not nerfing dips, it is making dips more or less similar to each other, and pure classes. This may mean nerfing certain dips, buffing other dips, or buffing pure classes.

If all dips are mechanically similar then there will be no build diversity.

They don't need to provide the exact same bonus, but they need to provide similar bonus.

If you read my earlier posts, i share the sorceror concern. Id want to see a fix that is kept in check by not effecting brycer is what I am saying. Like Zavander's x 3 class for limit of divine shield wouldn't impact Brycer nearly as much as sorceror. Sorceor would need 5 pal to reach their highest cha to ac potential which would miss out on 2 epic feats and a caster lvl of only 25. If we did similar things for favoured soul (make paladin and cleric levels NOT stack) then a favoured soul would have to be only 21 caster level if they also wanted 3 cleric for domain powers.

Pushing the divine grace to a later level would be a worse idea than just having the cap x 3 class level.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

If all dips are mechanically similar then there will be no build diversity.

They don't need to provide the exact same bonus, but they need to provide similar bonus.

Monk Dip - Extra AC equal to wisdom modifier, poison and lycanthropy immunity, 1 extra APR and access to Spot/Tumble/Disc.

Paladin Dip - Save bonus equal to charisma modifier, fear immunity, some weapon/armor proficiencies and extra AC with divine shield with some feat investment.

Rogue Dip - Access to UMD, Open Lock, Disarm Trap, and Tumble, with extra skill points, and extra sneak attack damage.

Fighter Dip - Extra feats, weapon and armor proficiencies, access to Disc.

WM Dip - Ability to crit half the time, on some builds for 200+ damage.

SD Dip - Access to HiPS and Shadow Clone jutsu.

Ranger Dip - Access to -track, extra feats and skill points, ability to craft arrows along with Spot & Tumble.

Bard Dip - Access to bard song, UMD, Tumble, still gets CL so great dip for wizards.

These all look balanced enough to me. Monks and Paladins might seem overpowered at first but to get the most out of them you have to invest heavily in specific ability scores at the expense of others and take certain feats instead of others. By taking those classes instead of Rogue or Bard you also lose out on UMD along with CL for casters. Druid/Monks have already been nerfed despite the fact pure Druids have Monolithic forms with permanent damage shields which makes them more powerful and harder to counter in PVP. WM and SD take a few more levels to get their full benefits but 200+ crits or HiPS is a lot stronger than an extra +6 saves or AC. Plus WM and SD usually leave room to also dip in Rogue or Bard giving them UMD which is also imo a lot stronger than a bonus to saves or AC.

Honestly, there are plenty of build experts and a couple of channels in the Arelith discord dedicated to helping people learn the game mechanics and figure out good builds they can use to win at either PVP or PVE. But if every good build they come up with gets nerfed I will not blame them if they start being secretive and stop sharing this information freely which would just lead to more imbalance, less build variety, and a sense of elitism. I do my best to stay in character and role play my sheet, even role playing toward class levels I plan to take in the future. But I feel like I get punished on every character I make just because some people do not use the information made freely available to them and then cry about it until the class or build I'm playing as gets nerfed. My last character got nerfed hard because I chose to dip, even though the pure class variant was objectively better in every way and barely got touched. I've already been nerfed once on my current character and people are pushing for it to get nerfed again before I even reach level 20.

Why do I deserve to be punished just because I took the time to research game mechanics and listened to advice from more experienced players while some other players didn't? And yes, this would be punishing me, for no reason, just because I put a bit more effort into being good at the game than some others. I'm not even going to argue about that. It's just a fact. Even from a role playing/lore perspective, it's absurd my character would suddenly overnight be less good at defending themselves or lose access to certain spells just because someone miles away lost a PVP and got salty about it.

[AstralUniverse]

in world where there's a cap at div x3 (How I got convinced into this, I dont know) a sorcerer can take 4 paladin lvls, which is what they want anyway because wasting an epic feat on divine shield is not worth 1 CL, they would still get 2 bonus epic feats and +12 saves/ac. This nerf is minor. Bardadins and other builds in which for them charisma is secondary or even third after con, take 4 lvls already for both divine feats and normally have 16-18 cha. They're unaffected.

Monk dip prevents you from anything but cloth armor and no shield, so basically we can also cap the ac gain from wisdom at monk lvl x3 to give healer clerics the same treatment as sorcadins exactly.

I'm not in favor of nerfing these dips at all. But if we're going to do it we might as well hit these two specific problems right in the head and call it a day, without shutting down half of the building economy.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Monk dip prevents you from anything but cloth armor and no shield, so basically we can also cap the ac gain from wisdom at monk lvl x3 to give healer clerics the same treatment as sorcadins exactly.

I'd be fine with this. Those three extra monk levels are only going to net me about 7 AC anyways. I'd feel bad for healer path clerics who are forced to take two more levels of monk for the full bonus though. They already lose armor proficiency and tend to pump wisdom so monk dip just makes the most sense for them. And I don't think they're particularly broken compared to battle clerics (who don't dip monk) or pure caster wizards (who can solo the abyss naked, without dipping at all).

[Aeralad]

I like having goals stated when considering things. Right now I see people just whaling on monk and divine dips which is fair enough whatever. Some people might be going on about other dips, and I think Logger busted out with weapon master etc.

Considering the enworld thread still, it does seem a large thing to balance the huge amount of builds with each other. I still think if the ones you want - maybe not tier 1 - are changed then a tier 2, a new tier 2 level or such will happen.

What I'd like to see is a goal stated. The thread seems all over the place. Maybe it's to nerf monk/divine dips because people feel these specifically are a problem?
But I'm also thinking maybe as a nerfing process with an end goal, maybe the ideal would be to have a sort of "optimized variety of builds" such that a few or at least two of each class is well represented in the pvp play?
Might that be an agreeable goal?
Maybe thats too much and a better goal might be just some variety at all in the optimized builds?

Actually, the goal was stated right in the original post, it's just I tend to lose track of it after a lot of pages of text myself. Ignore me if you like. I just like to do summaries of threads.

It seems these are the 3 primary arguments against changing divine/monk dips to scale with levels:

1.) Dips are used for a variety of classes and not just the most powerful ones. Changing the dips might result in affecting more than just the sorcadins.

2.) The 2 dips mentioned are actually not as powerful as they seem.

3.) Why is this change a good thing when people spend their time finding the best builds and why they are the best with the resources available to players?

Also, as a suggestion it has also been stated in various places to reward pure builds.

[dallion43]

1. *Put your own* people complain because *Put your own*. A build/combo/dip is OP.
2. Nerf.
3. Numbers people shelf their chars. They create new chars with the current most optimized build.
4. Many follow, including half of the *Put your own* people from #1.
5. *Put your own* people complain again because *Put your own*. A build/combo/dip is OP.
6. Nerf.  
7. Numbers people shelf their chars again. They create new chars yet again with the current most optimized build. 
8.  repeat 1 to 7, every so often. 
9. Everyone plays a lvl 30 con sorc. With all of the repercussions of it. 
10. Arelith consists of very low population, in comparison to today, that never leaves that fancy Cordor tavern where Cordor Gate Strikers coalition dwell.

While above is partially a harmless no-offense joke :p, lets not go there. 

The dips in question always been there and didn't change on their own. What changed is the fact that UMD dip isn't relevant anymore, so everyone went with the other two dips.

People that don't build their build WILL ALWAYS end up with a MECHANICALLY weaker build. Period. Doesn't matter how much you balance. It has 0 to do with RP of any of the two PCs.
Not to mention that the new team behind new classes is very mechanically savvy, so lets trust them on this whole *after UMD cut changes situation*. The add new options solution to this *problem* is a great one, IMHO.

P.C
Out of curiosity, if one is unwilling to dip, gear or play the numbers game because it isn't his *fun*, why go and advocate to change people's existing builds that spent a lot of effort and do find *fun* in it?  
If one is to be proactive, offer stuff to add, not take.
Trust me gearing a ~13-15mil dip isn't easy as some people on the forums claim it to be for for the average person with limited game time.