Why do Fighters and Rogues scale down but Scholars do not?

Infinite use vs. finite use is the answer that comes to mind.

Now, you could be asking about wands vs. profs/BS, which is a more interesting question.

Wands are also finite use (though in some ways less noticeably than spells, despite being the exact same number). And from the perspective of an archer that brings 600 arrow tags (on average) to each game, trust me when I say wand charges will run out. But for sake of argument, lets treat them as infinite.

Wands are 1 damage per 50 build. Profs are 1/2 damage per 45 build at max-out. That is roughly the same with martial classes spending less and having a higher starting base. Rather than looking at fighter and rogue costs as scaling up, I think it the actual scenario is that fighters and rogues are getting a discount during early levels to help them "get up to speed."

Viewing the difference as a discount early instead of an increased cost later, makes it seem rather reasonable.

-MS
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Marshal
Scholars can buy as many spells as they want. Fighters cannot buy as many disarms, slays, parries, eviscerates etc as they want without being forced to spend lots of dead build buying worthlessly overpriced Weapon Proficiency skills.
 

Saephis

Squire
<Number> Elemental <Carrier> versus <Number> <Carrier> isn't an equitable comparison, in short.

The former can be stopped with charge-based, magic effects, while the latter can be stopped an unlimited number of times by a shield.
 

ASFDan

Scholar
I'm not sure your premise follows. I tested whether a fighter/rogue is required to have "lots of dead build" in order to buy skills, and I was able to make a legal (in terms of build progression) 50th level fighter with just 2 proficiencies, and stopped only because it was clear I wasn't going to have to buy a 3rd prof anytime soon. It's possible to get well into the 20s/30s (I forget exactly, it's been a while since I did the math) with just a single prof and no "dead build".
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Marshal
I'm not sure your premise follows. I tested whether a fighter/rogue is required to have "lots of dead build" in order to buy skills, and I was able to make a legal (in terms of build progression) 50th level fighter with just 2 proficiencies, and stopped only because it was clear I wasn't going to have to buy a 3rd prof anytime soon. It's possible to get well into the 20s/30s (I forget exactly, it's been a while since I did the math) with just a single prof and no "dead build".

Are you buying lots of critical strikes? I don't see how this is possible otherwise.
 

ASFDan

Scholar
(Technically you don't ever need a prof at all if you're willing to buy unlimited critical attacks/back attacks, but I went under the assumption that there would be a point at which the player wouldn't want any more. From playtesting experience that assumption is no longer clear to me).
 

ASFDan

Scholar
It's been a while, but my recollection is that I did not buy excess critical attacks because I specifically wanted to test how robust a player's options were with the new prerequisite rules.

The big thing to remember is that fighter skills count as their own prerequisites now (that is, 2 build spent on a slay is also 2 more build in prerequisite fighter skills towards your next slay, etc). There is a point where the skill tree is almost completely self-sustaining, and it happens with a relatively low amount of prof investment to kick off the cycle.
 

ASFDan

Scholar
Thinking about it now, the build may have been inclusive of the previous version of Hardy (when it counted as a fighter skill), but I'm not certain the change has a significant effect on the outcome. I will try to rebuild it and see whether it holds up.

All that said, don't discount critical attack as a skill worth buying and holding on to in increased numbers. My play test experience (which others in SF can attest to, having been on the other end of it) showed it to be an absolutely fantastic skill when applied liberally and directly to the forehead*.

*Marshal note: Do not apply critical attacks directly to the forehead.
 

Avaran

Baron
Thinking about it now, the build may have been inclusive of the previous version of Hardy (when it counted as a fighter skill), but I'm not certain the change has a significant effect on the outcome. I will try to rebuild it and see whether it holds up.

It is still definitely doable.
 
<Number> Elemental <Carrier> versus <Number> <Carrier> isn't an equitable comparison, in short.

The former can be stopped with charge-based, magic effects, while the latter can be stopped an unlimited number of times by a shield.

The former comes in limited quantity, while the latter is unlimited.
The former is a lower number than the latter (at a roughly equal level for a scholar and a fighter).
The former takes a longer time to deliver than the latter (both due to verbal length and due to delivery motion).

There are a lot of points of comparison, with lots of pros and cons.

-MS
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Marshal
I'm going to cross post this here because the subject of wands, and per day abilities keeps coming up like these are somehow actually limited at high levels.

A Fighter swinging 50s is certainly horrible for the gap between the new players and the old players. But assuming all that Fighter did was pick up Weapon Profs that costs 720 build.

A Scholar with 720 build spent on spells has:
29 Disarms
29 Pins
29 Binds
29 Shuns
29 Webs
29 Sleeps
29 Confines
29 Dragon's Breaths
28 Prisons

All that with 260 Wand Charges (per logistics period for a total of 520 for most events) at 29 damage per shot which bypasses shields from range.

Why is this ok for balance for Scholars but not Fighters and Rogues? To put things into perspective in the 2,0 rules under your example:

Fighter spending all build on Weapon Profs:
19 Weapon Proficiency: 690 Build (Swing for 21 Damage)
15 Disarms: 30 Build

Or since people will argue that no one would buy that many weapon profs:
13 Weapon Proficiency (Swing for 15 damage, same as wands)
10 Disarms
15 Parry
10 Shatter
0 Shuns
10 Ripostes
15 Slays + 15 Improved Slays
0 Confines
10 Stun Limb
10 Eviscerate

Scholar spending all build on spells:
29 Disarms
29 Magic Armor
29 Shatter
29 Shuns
29 Spellshields
29 Sleeps
29 Confines
29 Stun Limb
28 Prisons

All that with 240 Wand Charges (per logistics period for a total of 480 for most events) at 15 damage per shot which bypasses shields from range.


Why is this ok? What is the balance here? Don't say that Fighters can "swing 15 all day" 480 wand charges is more than most scholars can use in an entire event if they are TRYING to spend all their wand charges.
 
You are right. I didn't consider the 72nd level scholar with build spent exclusively on spell slots in order to have a 29 column.

Of course, the reason I didn't consider it is because after 24 years of game, this character doesn't exist. I believe the highest level character in the game is roughly 55 and that is a VERY old character. Even with every method possible for getting build, level 72 is pretty much a pipe dream. Characters progress at a glacially slow pace starting in the 40s and the pace is always slowing down a little. At 1/2 a build per weekend, a single level takes more than a year at a single chapter. Even hitting up every game at 4 or 5 chapters isn't likely to get more than 2 - 3 levels a year.

Pointing to the extreme edge case doesn't bolster your argument. If I had to guess, I'd say the national average is about level 25, which means the oft-cited 30 level isn't a bad standard to consider. A scholar who entirely focuses on spells and nothing else (a build I have very rarely seen since the creation of high magic) only has roughly 100 wand charges a day. As most archers will tell you, you could easily find yourself mostly or completely tapped after the 2nd wave battle of the day with that number.

-MS
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Marshal
Both formal magic levels and spells count towards wand charges in 2.0.

Characters of this level of build are considered "inevitable" as a reason for scaling down Fighter and Rogue damage.

As far as people that only buy spell levels, this is quite common in our chapter, even more common than Fighters that only take Weapon Proficencies.
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Marshal
I used this level of build because another individual used Fighters swinging for "50s all day" as the reason for nerfing Fighter scaling in another thread.

This sort of comparison works very well at 30th level too though it gets worse because high level scaling is what makes Fighters and Rogues bad.
 

Thorgrim

Artisan
I think the problem is that at high level, fighter and rogue sustained damage becomes too high in comparison to celestial damage. When you can swing 20's from the front or 40's from behind indefinitely it kind of negates the effectiveness of Dragon's Breath. In fact celestial damage outside of wands becomes almost completely irrelevant in high level games. I don't think the best answer is to scale fighter and rogue damage down so dramatically, but instead the focus should be on how to make celestial caster damage from spells more sustainable and competitive with fighter and rogue damage, with the caveat that if you give them better sustainable damage, you should also reduce the number of take out abilities they have.
 

Avaran

Baron
At 1/2 a build per weekend, a single level takes more than a year at a single chapter. Even hitting up every game at 4 or 5 chapters isn't likely to get more than 2 - 3 levels a year.

I would like to point out a couple of things:

I few years ago (2011 or 2012, I think?), I mapped out all announced events across Alliance and found that out of 52 possible weekends, there were 45 or 46 weekends with an event going. Someone with the means could Pay-No-Play (or Season pass) every single one of those. I know of an Owner who gobbied/pay-no-played/attended every possible event and went from being circa level 35 to level 48 in the span of that year (many owners have 'agreements' to allow each other play for free in each other's chapters; that year, they took this to mean "free gobbied events" - those Owners aren't Owners any more AFAIK).

I myself have 3 season passes going right now IIRC, plus I gobby OR and play in SEA, and I know there are a few more chapters/season passes I could get, but don't. (Season passes are really cheap for what you get!) I'm a LOT higher level than I otherwise would be if I was only getting build/XP from the chapters I could actually play in (OR and SEA) without getting on a plane.

I know of at least 3 people right now who blanket/play more than that. I really don't feel it's as big a long-shot as you think because those very old characters that are currently 50-55 didn't have Pay-no-play and Season Passes for the first 15+ years they played.

I know characters that were started less than 5 years ago who are level 30 or higher now. Back when the game first started, even after 5 years, nobody was even remotely close to that.

I'm not saying that every player does this, or will do this, but it is possible and more and more players are taking advantage of "pay for build" options. I've been on one particular Season Pass since it was first offered. The email that I get every time they have an event has a list of everyone who has the pass on it. The list has grown every year and the last one I saw had like 15 players on it. That's a lot.
 

Saephis

Squire
Pay no play is awful for the game.

Good for chapters to get funds, though, outside of events (which get gobbled up between site fees and dues). It does come down to player responsibility, though, which is rarely learned through the pay no play model.
 

Daimyo Shi

Newbie
Wow the levels you are talking about here are huge, I been playing for 2 years and I am level 13, talking about 40 and 50 level charcter or more in some threads really make hard to say what needs limits and what doesn't.
 
Top