Talk:Spider Rider (3.5e Prestige Class)

Archives
Archive 1 (Discussions 1 – 9)

Rating

Formatting - 5/5: I give this a 5 out of 5 on formatting because this is formatted completely correctly, as per the evaluational base class layout and the preload. Good work! --Green Dragon 22:25, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Grammar Changes

I made some grammar changes. For future reference, sourcebooks tend to use the following sentence structure for describing spell-like abilities: At 7th level the spider rider can use summon spider V as a spell-like ability once per day (with a caster level equal to the character's spider rider class level).

This was the original version: Once a day at 7th level the spider rider can use summon spider V as a spell-like ability (the caster level is equal to the character's spider rider level).

So you can see that "At Xth level the such-and-such can use such-and-such as a spell-like ability X times per day." And "once per day" is preferred to "once a day". Also, for positive bonuses, "gains" is preferred to "gets". So "gains a +2 inherent bonus" is preferred to "gets a +2 inherent bonus". Just some comments. --Othtim 18:20, 9 March 2008 (MDT)

In the later books (specifically, I looked in Tome of Battle and Complete Mage), they're stopped referring to the class and use "you."

"At 2nd level, you can use inflict jock itch as a spell-like ability three times per day."

—Sledged (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2008 (MDT)

By technical writing standards, "you" is usually preferred. I did not actually notice that, but it will help as I add more content. I use 2nd person imperative ("you") at work, so I'm used to it! --Aarnott 22:26, 9 March 2008 (MDT)

So is "you" officially preferred now? I'm down for whatever but a standard would be nice so that someone doesn't have to go around changing the grammar on all the articles from now on. --Othtim 23:47, 9 March 2008 (MDT)

Rating

Formatting - 5/5: This class is well formated looks good and is ready to be sent off to a publisher. :) --Hawk 21:32, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5: This prestige class has truck loads of flavor, is unique and adds not one but two deities... wait a second that's not two new deities thats one and Lolth in disguise :) --Hawk 21:28, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Power - 5/5: This prestige class appears to be well made and balanced, better than many PrCs i've come across in the WOTC books. --Hawk 21:28, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5: Great job. Now that a few things have been fixed this class is well worded... however this rating is not :). --Hawk 21:28, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Just a question; what WOTC PrCs is this better balanced than? I am interested to know... --Sam Kay 10:50, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Anything to do with psionics is broken classes or prestige classes for a start, I'd say it is on par with the shadowdancer. --Hawk 20:24, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Alignment

Is the mount's alignment still neutral? —Sledged (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

No. The spider is an aspect of the rider's own mind and is thus the same alignment as the character. --Sam Kay 13:30, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Shrink

Does shrink affect the spiders ability scores? Does it work like a stackable reduce person? —Sledged (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Yes. --Sam Kay 13:30, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Added it in. --Green Dragon 17:59, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because I feel that the class has a lack of useful abilities pertaining to actual spider riding and that its spell-like abilities are wimpy.

Spider Mount: The mount suffers from being extremely fragile relative to the rider for much of the progression. Assuming you take the class as soon as possible, the mount is 3-5 hd behind the rider until level four. When you're at those lower levels and don't have nearly enough money to suitably equip both rider and mount, every hit die counts. And once you complete the class, the spider continues to lag behind in hit dice until epic levels, where it at finally stabilizes at about 6-7 hit dice behind the rider. Finally, the spider doesn't gain abilities that say "this is a spider". It's more of a slightly-different version of the paladin's mount, which mostly gains abilities of the "PLEASE DON'T KILL ME" nature. Spiders have venom, webs, and the ability to judge where prey is located on these webs, so it'd be great if it could get some class abilities that emphasize this.

On Spider Riding: With the recent change to Spider Jump, I feel that this area has been improved quite a bit. However, the other benefits don't really help out. While Perfect Rider is marginally useful with the proper items to crank up your Mounted Combat feat to decent levels, Skill Focus (Ride) is arguably better since it provides a better bonus until 12th level and can be gotten much earlier, (potentially) helps you qualify for PrCs, and doesn't use up a class level. Master Rider is OK, and Spider Knight is good. It's just that those are the only abilities that help you do your schtick better in the entire class. Most of the "power" this class has is in the form of the lance and spirited charge, which any character can do (although admittedly the SR does it a little better since the rider can pretty much always charge thanks to Spider Jump). Finally, you can't actually do any spider riding until at least second or third level, depending on your size. I suppose this is unavoidable considering the nature of the class.

Next, the spell-like abilities. Other than web; they're woefully underpowered. Now that the PrC prerequisites have been increased, the spell-likes are even further behind compared to an average wizard or cleric than they were before. Consider summon spider VI. The earliest the spider rider gets this is at level 15. A wizard can learn this at 11th level. But they generally don't, since summon monster/spider is a weak line of spells. This is because it takes 1 round to summon anything and the creatures summoned are behind in terms of CR (and continue to slip as spell levels increase). The spider rider wants to charge and full attack stuff, but the summons run counter to this. And unlike the Spider Rider, spellcasters get to use these spells more than once per day. Frankly, they're only good for trap fodder, except I think that would make your goddess angry with you. And finally, a fifth level spell is not a good capstone ability. It's worse than Perfect Self, and that basically makes you ineligible for Enlarge Person and gives you practically useless damage reduction.

Because it doesn't fit anywhere else, turn/rebuke is mostly useless except as fuel for divine metacheese. Compare the hit dice of a gargantuan monstrous spider to an average spider rider of the same CR's rebuking ability. At best, he'll only be able to rebuke a 12 HD creature (class level + 4). Gargantuan monstrous spiders have 16 hit dice. And that's if rebuke is based on character level and not spider rider class level.

My recommendations are as follows. First, increase the number of hit dice the mount gets. I suggest 18 hit dice at 10th level as a conservative start. Second, give the mount actual flavorful abilities concerning spiders. An improved venom ability, stronger webs, and a wider-reaching tremorsense will go a long way at making the spider more than just a reflavored Special Mount. Let the rider extract and use poison from her mount, and give her poison use so she doesn't utterly fail at doing so. I suggest adding in maybe a 3/4 spellcasting progression so that casters don't feel completely dumb for taking levels in this class. It would definitely give the Share Spells ability a boost, that's for sure. Either upgrade the summons to level 7, 8, and 9 versions and do something about spider calling; make them swift abilities that gain more uses as you level up or something of that nature; give the spiders a bonus in stats when near a spider rider; or dump them entirely. And at the very least let the spider mount share planar web.

I suppose that making the mount better will help make the riding better. I'd like to see the bonuses from Perfect Rider and Spider Knight spread out a little more and for Perfect Rider to provide higher bonuses, say +6 by spider rider 10. And how about adding a clause stating that if you have both Mounted Archery and Master Rider, the penalties from making ranged attacks when mounted on a monstrous spider are removed entirely? --Finfreeze 15:54, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

I strongly disagree. Having played two spider riders (one at epic), I have to say that I was no weaker than anyone else. The spider thing is not an issue either, because at that level, you can easily afford barding, which stops it being too frail, and even if it dies, you can get it back again. Neither is the summoning a major problem; as a spell like ability it is a standard action (it's in the spell like abilities rules), and it is not designed as a major ability, so it's not like you are depending on it. The rebuke ability is mostly for flavour. Seriously, this class is not underpowered, otherwise Sledged wouldn't have said that the prerequisites need increasing. --Sam Kay 11:56, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Class-granted underlings should never match the PC in power at higher levels. The PC is the star of the show, not the side-kick. Remember that the spider mount is essentially a class feature. As far as class-granted underlings go, the spider mount is superior to familiars, paladin mounts, and fiendish servants. Only animal companions compare to it, and once you hit epic level, it outstrips even them. It's also worth noting, that thanks to the spider mount's shrink ability, it has the benefit of going with the PC in places where other Large underlings can't. —Sledged (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Have enough of these issues been addressed for this rating to be changed and/or nullified? --Green Dragon 23:27, 23 March 2008 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems to have gotten all the major issues out of the way. But is rebuke spiderkind based on spider rider class level or character level? Oh yeah, and the ex-spider rider section seems to be written with the assumption that Lolth is the only spider deity. --Finfreeze 15:54, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it's formatted pretty much the way things should be formatted, and most of my biggest gripes have been fixed. One problem I can see is that the monstrous spider's bonus feats link goes to the rider's bonus feat list. I would also like it if the monstrous spider's hd-based feats and BAB progression were explicitly listed for easy reference and so you don't confuse them with the bonus hd of animal companions and the like. Nothing really major. --Finfreeze 15:54, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

The link is sorted. As for the BAB and feats, it is not standard to place the BAB (neither is it hard to work out, as a magical beast it's BAB=HD) or HD based feats in the table and the feats aren't fixed like bonus feats are, so you don't need a list saying "these are the feats you can have". --Sam Kay 11:56, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because while it covers all the bases in terms of class descriptions, sample NPCs, lore, and the like, the actual spider mount is just a glorified paladin mount. Also Aranae as written is pretty lame and kinda feels there mostly to fit in the neutral spider rider role (as opposed to letting spider riders be one step away from their deity). She's mentioned like all of once on the actual page, even in situations where each goddess is individually named. It really doesn't help make her feel tacked on. --Finfreeze 15:54, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

I disagree about the mount thing too. There is a definatly distinctive character to the mount, something that a mere paladin mount cannot hope to match flavour-wise. Plus, aranae is basically lolth, using a guise to trick some "weakling neutrals" into doing her bidding. It's right in the aranae page. What more do you need than that? --Sam Kay 11:56, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

I agree with findail that aranae feels needlessly tacked on. having her in the article doesn't do anything for it. --Othtim 11:25, 18 March 2008

All it is, is that it tell the reader what deities are available for the spider rider. What is wrong with that. And the mount has more flavor the a paladins. I know I have DMed a game with this class in play.ShadowyFigure 04:28, 30 March 2008 (MDT)

D&D Podcast

The D&D podcast mentions this class in a question about 4th edition woo. --Hawk 00:09, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

And who, do you think, asked the relevent question? --Sam Kay 11:56, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Well Samuel I don't know at a guess I'd have to say maybe.... was it you :P. They get a lot of wuestions and they wouldnt answer them all so I still think it's cool :P. --Hawk 20:55, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Great Job

I think this is awesome. Excelent job.--Hatman 14:19, 2 April 2008 (MDT)

thanks. --Sam Kay 12:18, 6 April 2008 (MDT)

I second that, In fact i actually used this as a reference as to what i need in a page when i put in my classes...--Cerin616, Drew 17:52, 11 April 2008 (MDT)

4e Spider Rider Prototype

Everybody who likes the spider rider, have a look at this! --Sam Kay 13:39, 16 April 2008 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it is one of the few custom prestige class pages that convinces the reader that the creators and contributors truly thought through their world mechanics, balance, and desirability. --Illeist 04:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it reads like a page out of the SRD; it contains no glaring errors or confusing word usage. --Illeist 04:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it conforms to the wiki's standards of excellence. --Illeist 04:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC) can Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the final sections about interactions within the world are lacking and brief. Regardless, the rest of the article is interesting and highly enjoyable. --Illeist 04:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Rating

Power - <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>>/5 I give this class a <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> --Pi: not just a food. 10:04, 14 June 2011 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the wording is clear, concise, and unambiguous. --Pi: not just a food. 10:04, 14 June 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>>/5 I give this class a <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> --Pi: not just a food. 10:04, 14 June 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the quotations and stories are well written and there is an actual purpose of the members of the class to take the prestige class. --Pi: not just a food. 10:04, 14 June 2011 (MDT)