User talk:Luigifan18:Viewtiful Warrior (3.5e Class)

Ratings

	HB Forged opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	It would've been a good idea on paper. In practice, though, everyone was confused, & the campaign ended in your typical "rocks fall, everyone dies" fashion.

Response on What Ratings Do: Downrating an article doesn't get it deleted. Only when an article becomes Community Opposed does anything even happen, and that is usually just an admin moving the article off the main space into a user sub-page, just like any unfinished or in-progress article. That's it. Deletion only happens if something is seriously wrong, like a site violation. Counter rating with a "Favor" on an article (stating that you feel that this is one of the best examples of homebrew material on the site, desiring to use it yourself and highly recommending it to others) on the grounds that you don't want it deleted is a disservice to the ratings system for helping users find material and get feedback on its use. I strongly recommend reviewing your rating. --Ganteka Future (talk) 12:26, 11 February 2019 (MST)

Ganteka Future opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

Sorry man. I know this is like, your baby, and the massive amount of hours put into it show a lot of love for both the project and the source material. It... the class is the 19th longest article on the entire wiki for all articles. It's too clunky to use. Expecting a DM to sit and read this to approve it for a character... I was struggling to get through the first level. The writing style you've adopted for this even bloats things further, with parenthetical flavor text inside flavor text interspersed between bits of mechanical information. Without dedicating hours of my own free time on this, consulting others, I'm not sure what specific advice to go with here, but as is, it isn't in a state that's really usable for people. Your sample character should have clued you in. Imagine fitting that on a character sheet for a player. Look how long that is and how much explanation is needed. I know you love this stuff. If you want other people to enjoy it in the translated style of D&D, it really needs an overhaul. I used to have a really painfully long class bloated with abilities and flavor. I went through 8 total overhaul revisions on it so far. It is okay to totally rewrite things. This needs it.

Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

First off, it's too strong for high, ignoring abuses adding both wisdom mod and charisma mod (multiple times) to attacks alongside full-bab is a very very bad idea. The VFX abilities are far too complex and full of loopholes. It somehow manage to be too much fluff and crunch at the same time, not sure how you did. The ability score to attack/damage is too much, as simple as that. It makes the Viewtfiul Warrior's damage potential so high it can kill enemies of CR massively higher with no difficulties. Alongside the Voomerang, it can kills hordes or bosses within a single round and end an encounter at the drop of a hat. Basically the class is overpowered and needs major redesign, this time with brevity and less 'gamey' design. EDIT: It has not been touched in a while, so back to oppose it is.

Loopholes in the VFX abilities? Could you please point them out? A large part of the reason I go into so much detail is to make sure that loopholes are kept to a minimum, so help in removing the loopholes that currently exist would be greatly appreciated. --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Undead Knave opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

I didn't read the entirety of this, but I didn't need to. A cursory glance at VFX Zoom, VFX Slow, and Voomerangs, allows a moderately optimized Viewtiful Warrior to deal approximately 10000 damage to the Tarrasque at level 7 without provoking an attack of opportunity. I will note that it is rather more damage for any creature that is at least large that does not have damage reduction as large as the Tarrasque's. We all recognize that Big T really sucks, but you shouldn't be able to kill him with damage from attacks in levels with single digits. What the hell, Luigifan? Edit: Just noticed this was rated at High balance point. I repeat: What the hell, Luigifan?

...It can deal over 10000 damage to the Tarrasque at level 7? Wait, what?!? The Viewtiful Warrior's meant to do a lot of damage in a short amount of time (and then need to retreat and recharge his powers), but that sounds a little extreme. Anyways, I fully acknowledge that putting the Viewtiful Warrior at High balance was a mistake - it's Very High now. --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

So since you've changed it it's a lot more extreme, and I haven't had a chance to actually run the numbers yet due to reasons, but they are a lot less extreme. At this point, a Viewtiful Warrior could still kill the Tarrasque somewhere between levels 3 and 8 (can math more when I have more time), but you wouldn't be able to kill as many of Big T in a single round no matter what any more. I'll go over the things it takes the next time I actually have access to a computer. --UK

Hmmm... I'm curious to see what you mean by that. Just how exactly does the Viewtiful Warrior dish out enough damage to kill a Tarrasque at level 8? --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

To begin with, I apologize for taking so long to respond to this. I was without my computer for a couple weeks. Getting down to things, though, the biggest part of this particular problem stems from Voomerangs. As a full round action when slow is active, they go out to 1200' dealing 4d8+2 ability scores damage (Str and Cha) and you get two ability scores (Dex and Cha) added to your attack roll that already has full BAB. Then you also do extra damage and are more likely to hit for every successful attack, and you get Zoom before too long so you can add another time and a half of your best ability score to both attack and damage. You flat out state that the Voomerang can hit the same creature more than once and that it can steer itself. That means that for a big creature, you can have it circle inside that creatures space so it just keeps getting attack after attack after attack.

Since I crunched the numbers, you've changed things a bit, but you still win every encounter that can be won by flat damage. Seeing as almost every battle can be won damage, especially if it can get Ghost Touch on all its attacks, there really isn't anything that can stand in its way, especially a levels it's supposed to be facing. --Undead_Knave (talk) 04:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

YX33A is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.

I like the idea, but think that the abilities granted by this class might make other players in a game feel somewhat slighted by how potent the VFX abilities are. Though I have a personal bone to pick with the effects of VFX Slow and VFX Mach Speed; Slow causes water to build up faster because it caused the water to build up into bigger input then the output could take. Mach Speed made liquids drain because it literally made the water flow faster, making it go down the pipe quicker. A source of liquid without input or output would not be affected by the VFX abilities. Personally, I would use the class in a solo game, but in a game with other players, unless everyone used this class, it might get annoying being upstaged by one player.

Foxwarrior opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

Mostly tl;dr coupled with no particular interest in the subject material, but I decided to read VFX Replay and its alternative because they were mentioned in the SGT: Well, the good news is, both of them are valid choices (well, VFX Replay is better only when abusing touch powers or going for crits); the bad news is, neither of them is level appropriate for a 5th level character. Okay, totally overpowered beyond reason for High balance, and why oh why would you have an exception about slot machine reels in a game where you can't even be sure slot machines have been invented yet? That sort of special case system works fine in a videogame, where you can know of all possible objects that can exist, but D&D is better with significantly broader strokes than that those side effects of Mach Speed and VFX Slow are still hopelessly unrelated physically.

Oh, also, that thing you did with Wisdom is evil; it means that the optimal ability score placement for a level 2 Viewtiful Warrior is fundamentally different from that of a level 12 Viewtiful Warrior. Stunning Fist isn't terrible, but one special once/round attack is not worth not dumping an entire ability score, and VFX Replay can make buffing the Save DC mostly irrelevant. --Foxwarrior (talk) 05:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the level at which Mach Speed is obtained represents that the hero gets it late in the first stage of the game, which is true in both Viewtiful Joe and Viewtiful Joe 2. Going by the logic that Joe (and Silvia) steadily increase in level as they progress through the game, culminating in being level 20 by the time they fight the final boss (who is also a level-20 character), then Mach Speed should actually be obtained earlier (both of the first 2 Viewtiful Joe games have 7 stages), but I felt like I should delay it to the time of VFX Replay (obtained early in Viewtiful Joe 2's second stage) for D&D balance reasons. In case you're wondering, VFX Zoom is obtained about ¼ of the way through stage 2 in Viewtiful Joe 1 and very early in stage 3 of Viewtiful Joe 2; the explanation is that Joe leveled up more slowly in the second game because he was sharing his XP with Silvia in that game, whereas he was on his own in the first. (I'm also assuming that the hero gains levels rapidly in the first few stages, but then his progression slows way down for the last 4 stages because only the bosses and minibosses have a CR close enough to his level to provide significant XP... well, actually, the bosses' CR tends to be higher. Especially Fire Leo from VJ1. Friggin' Fire Leo... argh!)

The slot machine thing is supposed to be a specific example of a broader principle. Spinning objects in general get slowed way down with VFX Slow (or sped up with Mach Speed). --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

If you wanted the slot machine thing to be a specific example of a broader principle, there are ways to phrase it like that. You didn't use any of them. Here are a couple of the ways: replace "The following effects occur within a radius of 100 feet per class level: " with "Unattended objects within 100 feet per class level are sped up. For example:" (This is bad because not all of the examples illustrate the same physical principle, so DMs have free reign to do all sorts of nonsensical things that are sort of speed-related); replace "Slot machine reels are sped up (as if the one-armed bandit wasn't unfair enough already). As far as game mechanics are concerned, this doesn't do anything important. " and the propeller clause with "Spinning objects are sped up. If it's a propeller..." (This is okay, but might be a little weird when applied to roulette wheels, slings, or planets). Ninja'ed. The other special cases are still weird though.

I don't care what stage Viewtiful Joe gets Mach Speed in the Viewtiful Joe game. I care that when he gets it in the D&D game, he doesn't immediately become by far the strongest character in a party of ostensibly equal-level characters! --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:37, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. I think I'm getting the theme of Viewtiful Joe, now: cheap Hollywood tricks as magic. You're clearly missing VFX Montage, VFX Pause Monologue, VFX Flashback, and VFX Shaky Camera Work. --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Yep - VFX is based on Hollywood tricks, as the whole series is based on cinematic traditions. VFX Slow is "Bullet Time", and VFX Mach Speed is essentially fast-forward. As for those VFX powers you described, I didn't make them because they don't actually appear in any Viewtiful Joe games, as far as I know; they might be in Red Hot Rumble, which I unfortunately haven't played. The ideas are so entertaining that I just might make them feats, though. Also, "VFX Shaky Camera Work" might actually be VFX Scratch from Double Trouble.

Also, VFX Mach Speed is actually kinda weak in the Viewtiful Joe games, as unlike Slow, it does nothing to help you get past an enemy's defenses. This results in your attack barrage literally bouncing off the enemy more often than not. VFX Slow is the strongest VFX power by far, and the other VFX powers are usually at their best being used to augment VFX Slow (with a Red-Hot One Hundred used under VFX Slow being considered the best attack in the game by massive leaps and bounds). I actually considered throwing in something to reflect VFX Slow's defense-piercing qualities by letting it bypass deflection bonuses, but ultimately, VFX Slow's tendency to override enemy defenses got written in in the form of - guess what - the Stunning Fist feat. There are some enemies that are best handled by just using VFX Slow and punching them repeatedly until you finally break down their defensive aura (the nurses in Viewtiful Joe 2 are an excellent example of this), and I decided to represent that by eventually giving the Viewtiful Warrior Stunning Fist rather than giving him an another vertical power boost. Actually, in the Viewtiful Joe games, VFX Slow and VFX Zoom both provide a 50% attack power boost, and they stack with each other in that regard. Thus, they're actually weaker in D&D than they are in the source material. I might nerf Mach Speed a little, though, since as I said at the beginning of this paragraph, it's actually not that strong for actual fights. --Luigifan18 (talk) 19:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

	Franken Kesey opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	Far too many details, requires continuous re-referencing; features are too much for one class.

Too many features? Hmm... I could split the ranged attacker and blade fighter into their own classes, since they're based on different characters... Also, I've been playing Viewtiful Joe lately, and the VFX bar isn't actually that big, but it does recharge at a decent rate. So I might cut down the maximum VFX pool and boost up the recharge rate. --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

VFX pool cut, class features removed from bonus feat list. The Viewtiful Warrior can't have access to all of its class features now. --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, splitting this up into different classes is highly advisable (on separate pages). The first homebrew creation of mine was called the Nahlasit, A 20 level class – that stuck to the characters – but not the mechanics of a single class. Thus I split the features up into three different classes (Judge, Viveka and Lord). All can be selected by one character and have a narrow focus that is clear for all. Many of the heroes of lore have more than one class – perhaps this is what makes them heroic. --Franken Kesey (talk) 18:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, no. A single Viewtiful Warrior can only have one of Voomerang or Round Trip, only one of VFX Mach Speed or VFX Replay, only one of Yamaarashi, Desperado, or Stinger, and only one of Red Hot One Hundred or Heavy Heart Shoulder Slam. Since I took the class features off the epic bonus feats list, a Viewtiful Warrior is strongly defined by these choices. I do plan on adding Viewtiful Warrior prestige classes, but those will have extremely different abilities. --Luigifan18 (talk) 18:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments

First glance, and I know you are not done yet, thus some of these may be premature.

1)VFX:

a. Not many classes have Knowledge (theatrics), as a class skill. The way you have it worded it should certainly be a knowledge check, though perhaps one that is less rare (but not common).

b. It is mentioned that certain features require different knowledge checks, but the range is not noted anywhere else.

2)Unarmed Strike looks inferior to Unarmed Mastery (do not need both): was this just leftover form an earlier edition?

3)VFX Slow:

a. Alone this should put the class into Very High balance.

b. Am starting to notice the amazing detail in your articles. And the amount of referencing that needs to be done every time a player uses one.

c. It might help if you build up to the Slow feature: list the other features gained at first level, then slow. When a potential player starts reading the first few lines, then finds a whole bunch of references to other features – before understanding the first – they quickly become confused.

4)Shocking Pink: Incomplete?

5)Red Hot Kick: what’s a midair jump?... Oh, name consistency helps, especially if you introducing a lot of names.

6)VFX Mach Speed: you could, honestly, merge slow and speed into one feature. (The abilities are quite similar, just opposite.)

7)Replay! More on this later.

8)Yatagashiri: in first paragraph, just state that you cannot do it to creatures two sizes larger (simplifies, and is essentially the same).

9)Desperado: seams very out of place (even as an option). Doesn’t the class flavor dictate that Viewtiful Warrior’s gain their power from sticking out?

10)Stinger and Air Raid much more justifiable. "Either/Or" clauses work best as variants (at the bottom or on a subpage, with link);but they both look very fun, and flavorful.

11)Are you planning on putting anything after 11th level?

One small, minor, petty little thing: generally, the colors red, blue and purple are avoided to keep from confusing them with links (as well as really light colors like yellow). Check out Ganteka’s page of colors for some of the colors that this wiki recognizes (orange may be a good substitute).

Overall this is a wonderful and original class that I look forward to playing. A class that deserves more than partial features from other classes. And a class that opens a new level, a new understanding of what DnD can become. --Franken Kesey (talk) 00:29, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The thing about the Viewtiful Warrior is that it's meant to be an adaptation of the Viewtiful Joe series to D&D, and I'm trying to replicate the mechanics of the first two games as closely as I can.

I had to come up with Knowledge (theatrics) for the Viewtiful Warrior, but the bard also should have access to it. Can't think of any other classes that would. I haven't decided on the Knowledge DCs yet.

The standard Viewtiful Warrior (unarmed combat) is based on the main character, Joe. Mach Speed, Yatagashiri, the Red Hot One-Hundred, and the Voomerang are exclusive to him in Viewtiful Joe 2 (he can also use the Shocking Pink in Viewtiful Joe 1, but they're given to Silvia in the sequel.) He uses punches as his upper-body attack. The ranged combat features are based on Silvia, who uses a ray gun as her weapon. VFX Replay, Desperado, and the Heavy Heart Shoulder Slam are her exclusive moves. Desperado is designed to work like it does in Viewtiful Joe 2. Stinger, Round Trip, and Air Raid are Alastor's exclusive moves. I designed them to work in the same fashion as when you fight him as a boss in Viewtiful Joe 1. He likes swords. And lightning.

As for, I feel that Replay and Zoom transitioned into D&D better than Slow and Mach Speed did. Probably because Replay and Zoom aren't as complicated as Slow and Mach Speed are. I tried to make it so that the VFX powers can do everything that they're capable of doing in the games. Also, in the Viewtiful Joe games, it's perfectly possible (and a good strategy) to toggle VFX powers on and off repeatedly to save VFX. In both Viewtiful Joe 1 and 2, the powers Slow, Mach Speed, and Zoom are obtained in that order. Replay is obtained later in Viewtiful Joe 2 between Mach Speed and Zoom, but I put it at the same level as Mach Speed for convenience's sake. Also, I make the Viewtiful Warrior choose between Mach Speed and Replay because Mach Speed's exclusive to Joe and Replay's exclusive to Silvia.

I haven't yet decided how Shocking Pink will work for D&D purposes. As for Red Hot Kick, it (again) is meant to work just like it does in the Viewtiful Joe games. Also, there are two major class features after 11th level - Viewtiful Forever and Take 2. (The fighter bonus feat's just there to fill the void.) Finally, the Monk gets Improved Unarmed Strike at first level, and then his unarmed attack enhancements seem to build off of that, so I set up the Viewtiful Warrior to work the same way. --Luigifan18 (talk) 05:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh. The jester should also get Knowledge (theatrics). And I suppose one could justify giving it to clerics as well (or at least to clerics of certain deities).

Knowledge (Theatrics) doesn't exist... o.O -- Eiji-kun (talk) 22:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I know, I had to make it up for this class. The only other Knowledge skill suitable for it is Knowledge (local). --Luigifan18 (talk) 23:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

It would seem to me the skill you want is Perform. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 01:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Not really. Just because you know about theater doesn't mean you can perform (well, Viewtiful Warriors generally can, but not the kind of performance that most audiences would find comfortable... it'd be roughly analogous to plopping Mick Jagger in front of a bunch of feudal serfs and having him perform a rock concert). Still might put Perform on the class skill list, but I really want a skill to be there representing knowledge of the performance arts much moreso than ability to perform in them (though Knowledge (theatrics) and the Perform skills will definitely have synergy with each other). --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

While I think the ability to perform indicates the knowledge of performing, if you really split hairs it should be knowledge local. After all, "know your audience". -- Eiji-kun (talk) 02:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

TLDR

So, this classes class features, from the word "class features" to the end of "Bonus feat:ukemi... level.", take 5,749 words. Add this to the 2,066 words ukemi takes up, and you get a class that so far requires the DM and players to read and parse 7,815 words.Fluffykittens (talk) 05:50, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

It makes far more sense if you've played Viewtiful Joe and Viewtiful Joe 2. --Luigifan18 (talk) 06:14, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

An individual character is not a build.Fluffykittens (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's not just Joe. I threw in elements of Silvia and Alastor as well. And to be honest, the selection of Heinshin heroes in the franchise is a bit limited. Aside from those three, there's really only Captain Blue, Jet Black, and Queen Heinderella. (And Captain Blue Jr., I suppose). Captain Blue, Jet Black, and Queen Hienderella would all have to be prestige classes. Oh, there's also Six Machine, but that'd have to be a vehicle. I haven't un-commented it yet, but I do plan on including an option to treat VFX as a highly specialized form of psionics. --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Level 10 Same-Game Test

I stumbled across the same-game test and decided to run the Viewtiful Warrior through it. Anyways, here's my evaluations for the level-10 situations...

• Hallway full of trap runes: Between "Toss-Up" and "Sure Loss": It really depends on what sort of saves the traps allow. If they allow Reflex saves, the Viewtiful Warrior's got the challenge in the bag. His base Reflex save is good, and he can make it even better through his VFX. The first trap might catch him off-guard, but once he realizes what he's up against, he'll just use VFX Slow to dodge everything... well, everything that can be dodged. Traps that work against Will saves have a 50-50 chance of working, as the Viewtiful Warrior's Will save is good, but he can't augment it with VFX. Traps that work off of Fortitude saves? The Viewtiful Warrior's screwed. As a side note, since the Viewtiful Warrior doesn't have access to any divination effects, he has to rely on pure perception to find the traps. Against traps that get triggered by reading them, such as symbol spells, he's in for a rough time... but not any rougher than what a fighter, monk, rogue, or other nonmagical class would have to endure.

• Fire Giant: Sure Win: Wow. This actually made me have to think a bit about the way the Viewtiful Warrior interacts with other game effects. As I described him before running him through the test, he could, while in VFX Slow, punch or kick any projectile back the way it came by making an attack roll against it and beating its original attack roll. But punching back boulders? If the boulders are bigger than the Viewtiful Warrior himself is, that's not going to happen. I'm basing this ruling on the fight with Flinty Stone in Viewtiful Joe 2. One of his attacks is to toss a big orange sphere at you; the sphere is about as big as Joe and Silvia are. While the sphere is in motion, I'm pretty sure that they can't punch it back at him - if the player tries it, he'll just wind up autododging the attack. The heroes can push the ball around once it's landed (curiously, it loses all momentum when hitting the ground), and Joe can even punch it with Mach Speed to get his aura up and generate clones. But attacking the boulder while it's in motion doesn't work. Anyways, I'm getting sidetracked... so, no boulder-punching, but the Viewtiful Warrior can dodge boulders so easily that it doesn't even matter. In fact, the Viewtiful Warrior shines in straight-up melee combat, even more so than a monk does. With smart use of his VFX, the Viewtiful Warrior can easily beat a fire giant in a toe-to-toe fight, even without Mach Speed.

• Young Blue Dragon: Likely Loss: It's the standard ground-versus-air problem... A Viewtiful Warrior is very capable of fighting in midair, and he can get up higher than many other classes thanks to his double-jump, but unlike his advanced variants, he can't actually fly or hover through class features (yes, I know Alastor can fly, but Joe and Silvia can't... I think it's safe to say that most Viewtiful Warriors can't fly, and the reason that Alastor can is because he's basically a half-fiend). Anyways, the Viewtiful Warrior is ultimately more limited in terms of midair maneuverability than even a clumsy flier; the Viewtiful Warrior has to drop back down to the ground sometime in the immediate future (Air Pummel doesn't keep him in the air forever, and he can't move laterally while using it), but the flyer doesn't. This puts him at a disadvantage against an opponent that can fly, such as a dragon, especially if it abuses that advantage by staying out of reach. The ranged Viewtiful Warrior is actually pretty likely to win, since she can use Desperado to harass the dragon from midrange and can still shoot it normally if it stays out of her lock-on radius. The dragon can only use its breath weapon every 1d4 rounds; ranged weapons can be used until there's no ammo left (and sometimes lack of ammo is more of an inconvenience than a problem). Other Viewtiful Warriors are probably going to find themselves relying extensively on Voomerangs or Round Trip. So, basically, the Viewtiful Warrior can theoretically win this fight, but he's at a severe disadvantage unless he specializes in using ranged weapons. (And before you ask, no, you can't use VFX Slow to punch a dragon's breath weapon back at it, for a very simple reason - the breath weapon isn't tangible. Punching bullets, or missiles, or arrows... yeah, the Viewtiful Warrior can do that simply enough. But even VFX can't allow someone to punch gases or plasma!!!! It just plain doesn't work!!!!)

• Bebilith: Likely Win: Hmm... let's see... bebiliths are good at ambushing, but Viewtiful Warriors are good at not being ambushed. If the Viewtiful Warrior is caught completely off-guard, the bebilith probably wins, since Viewtiful Warriors aren't good at resisting poison. However, uncanny dodge makes that unlikely to happen. Rend armor is irrelevant because Viewtiful Warriors function just fine without armor (they might wear light armor for a few extra points of AC, but they don't really need it). So, on to the straight-up fight... Bebiliths fight in melee with their poisonous bite, but usually begin combat by throwing webs. A Viewtiful Warrior technically can punch a web back, but... Uh... trying to envision that breaks my brain. Nothing of that nature ever happened in the Viewtiful Joe series... Okay, web conundrum aside, the Viewtiful Warrior can dodge webs pretty easily, but if he does get entangled, he's lost one of his greatest assets - his mobility - and the match probably goes to the bebilith. Likewise, if the bebilith actually manages to bite the Viewtiful Warrior, his poor Fortitude save means that he's in trouble - and since the Viewtiful Warrior is first and foremost a melee combatant, he's going to be in harm's way. However, Viewtiful Dodge and VFX Slow make both of those scenarios quite unlikely. This matchup can end badly for the Viewtiful Warrior, but it probably won't.

• Vrock: Toss-Up: If you ask me, a single vrock really isn't living up to its full potential. I mean, come on, the dance of ruin... Eh, whatever. The dance of ruin wouldn't even work on a Viewtiful Warrior, what with the great Reflex save and all, and that's assuming that he doesn't just stop the dance altogether with Stunning Fist or simply knocking a vrock dead. No, it's the vrock's other abilities that make this an even match. First of all, vrocks are described in the Monster Manual as being huge fans of melee combat, which also means that they're really good at it. Hey, that's true of Viewtiful Warriors, too! Vrocks are among the few creatures in the game that can really go toe-to-toe with a Viewtiful Warrior in melee combat. Sure, the Viewtiful Warrior has VFX, but the Vrock has some nasty tricks of its own. The main weapon the vrock has to work around the Viewtiful Warrior's advantages is its spores. The goddamn spores. The vrock can release these once every 3 rounds, and when it does, that's an automatic 1d8 damage. The spores don't require an attack roll and don't allow a Reflex save to avoid them, which means that Viewtiful Dodge and the VFX Slow dodge don't work. VFX or no, those spores are going to do their thing. And their thing is doing 1d8 damage when they come out, and then doing 1d4 damage per subsequent round for a full minute (making the Viewtiful Warrior look like the world's ugliest cactus when it's all over is just a humiliating extra). The Viewtiful Warrior has a d8 hit die - same as the vrock, but less than most other melee classes. Repeated applications of spores could really ruin his day. And then there's the stunning screech - which requires a Fortitude save to negate. This means that it's very likely to work on the Viewtiful Warrior and wreck his mojo, giving the vrock an entire round to whale on him. The stunning screech is only usable once per hour, but giving the Viewtiful Warrior a taste of his own medicine forces him to take the vrock seriously. The vrock also has a few spell-like abilities - while only one of them can be considered a direct attack (and only arguably so), they can be used to mess the Viewtiful Warrior up. Mirror image is a staple for spellcasters who enjoy reminding fighters of their utter inferiority, and the vrock can use it at will. That says a lot all by itself. Then there's telekinesis, which can easily be used to one-up the Viewtiful Warrior's projectile-reflecting antics. It can also be used to play catch-and-return with the Viewtiful Warrior; the vrock can keep it up indefinitely, but the Viewtiful Warrior can't. Also, a violent thrust can force a Viewtiful Warrior to Zoom In and use his Hurricane Kick to deal with all of the incoming projectiles, which will end up eating his VFX even faster than VFX Slow alone. Greater teleport reminds me of Joe's battles with Alastor, where the latter had a penchant for warping all over the place... yeah, greater teleport at will equals teleport spam, which equals very frustrated melee fighter constantly chasing his opponent around. Finally, once per day, the vrock can use heroism to make itself even better at melee combat than it already is. There's also the demon summoning ability, but that's too unreliable to consider as strongly as what I've already discussed. Oh, and on top of all that, vrocks can fly. They often don't, as they have a huge reckless streak, but just like the dragon mentioned above, they could easily take to the air and force the Viewtiful Warrior to resort to spamming Voomerangs or Round Trip. In fact, thanks to their average maneuverability, they could easily try to take control of the fight's momentum with aerial attacks, matching or excelling the Viewtiful Warrior's air game with terrifying ease. The Viewtiful Warrior is going to need every trick at his disposal for this fight! The vrock is truly an even match for the Viewtiful Warrior, and I'd consider it to be a worthy rival. (Maybe I'll consider Alastor a half-vrock for game purposes...)

• Mind-Flayer Tag-Team: Toss-Up: Hmmm... The Viewtiful Warrior has lots of advantages and disadvantages here. His Will saves are good, so he has a decent chance of withstanding mind blasts and shrugging off mind-control attempts. He's also good at grappling, so the brain-extraction thing isn't going to happen until his will's been crushed (which may or may not end up happening). In melee combat, the Viewtiful Warrior is going to mop the floor with the mind flayers. But the mind flayers have advantages of their own. First and foremost is the advantage of range. Just like a dragon's breath weapon, a mind blast is intangible, which means that the Viewtiful Warrior can't punch it back at the mind flayers. As long as the mind flayers keep their distance, they can pepper the Viewtiful Warrior with mind blasts until he finally succumbs. Mind flayers are also psionic; since VFX is considered a specialized form of psionics for D&D purposes, this means that mind flayers can intuit how VFX works more easily than most. Remember, mind flayers are intelligent and love to have contingency plans. I wouldn't put it past them to use their psionic powers to directly interfere with the Viewtiful Warrior's VFX. But really, it all comes down to distance control. If the Viewtiful Warrior can get up close and personal to the mind flayers, they're goners. If they manage to make the most of their ranged attacks and psionic abilities, the mind flayers have a good chance of coming out on top.

• Necromancer and Minions: Sure Win and Toss-Up: The Viewtiful Warrior is going to destroy the necromancer's minions, and he's sure to have a blast doing it. If he has Yamaarashi, expect him to throw zombies all over the room, hurling them into each other until they're katamaris of bruised limbs and bashed-up torsos. If he has Desperado, he can blast several bad guys at once. With VFX Mach Speed, he and his clones can rip the undead apart; VFX Replay isn't quite as useful, but if there's one thing undead have going for them, it's big Hit Dice, and tripling his damage can help the Viewtiful Warrior thin out the undead ranks much quicker. But the real fun comes in the form of VFX Slow. Once the Viewtiful Warrior stuns one zombie and sends it flying, every opponent he strikes with that use of VFX Slow is going to be launched. This means that before long, there's going to be zombies flying all over the room, crashing into each other and generally making a big mess. Hordes of zombies are no problem for the Viewtiful Warrior; completely and utterly wrecking cannon fodder is one of the things he does best. The necromancer, on the other hand... As a general rule, necromancers are spellcasters. And by 10th level, melee character vs. spellcaster has a tendency to end badly for the nonmagic guy. Thanks to his VFX, the Viewtiful Warrior actually stands a sporting chance, but the necromancer has one other edge - many of his spells force the target to succeed on Fortitude saves in order to avoid their worst effects. Fortitude saves aren't something the Viewtiful Warrior is very good at. So the Viewtiful Warrior is going to have to be careful to not let his enemy nail him with his magic. Thankfully, a lot of the worst necromancy spells are touch attacks (of the melee or ranged variety), and dodging melee attacks is no problem for the Viewtiful Warrior, but there's plenty of spells that can really mess him up available by 10th level. Slay living, ray of enfeeblement, waves of fatigue, and bestow curse are among the nastiest spells below 5th level the Necromancy school has to offer.

• 6 Trolls: Likely Win: A Viewtiful Warrior can beat up a troll with ease. By 10th level, 6 is no problem. It's keeping the trolls down that's a problem, and with VFX Mach Speed, that problem is as good as solved already. With VFX Replay, the Viewtiful Warrior may have to get a bit more... creative.

• 12 Shadows: Likely Win or Likely Loss: This depends on whether the Viewtiful Warrior took Round Trip or Voomerang at 2nd level. Since Round Trip is a force effect, it works quite nicely against incorporeal creatures such as shadows. If the Viewtiful Warrior doesn't have Round Trip... there isn't much he can do. Uh-oh.

And that's my take on the Viewtiful Warrior in the Same-Game test. In a straight-up brawl, he's just as good as a martial adept. For trickier situations that require a less... er, blunt solution, he can run into problems, but he often has the tools to solve them. There are some things that are just not gonna end well for him if he's on his own, though. Overall, I think this is a Rogue-level class. But, anyways, I'd like some feedback here. Did I misinterpret any situations or matchups? Was I a bit too harsh on some creatures, or did something slip by? If I missed something I should have considered, please let me know! --Luigifan18 (talk) 03:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Mach Speed is probably the only option you need to pick in order to be able to shoot dragons to death; Say +4 Charisma, +2 Dexterity, and a 1d8 damage longbow. Activate Mach Speed and Zoom (Red Hot One Hundred): Make a full attack for 14 attacks at full BAB (+18 modifier) and 2 attacks at less (+13 modifier); against AC 21 that's an average of 13.9 hits for 1d8+6 damage each, or an average of 146 damage per round, which is incidentally more than the dragon's health. If the SGT meant to say "Young Adult" instead, then it would only be 104 damage per round, which would take two rounds. Given that the Viewtiful Warrior can walk faster than the dragon can fly, the Viewtiful Warrior will have no difficulty keeping the fight going for that long.

Oh, and by the way, this strategy probably works against most of the other monsters too. --Foxwarrior (talk) 04:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Ignore the SGT. There are numerous reasons why it's a horrible way to balance characters since it only presents a specific number of scenarios (some of which are likely to never come up in a number of campaigns), and it's easily bypassed by characters that aren't balanced for it at all. (Hey, I'm going to make a commoner class that gets Incorporeal at will at level 10 with a touch attack that always deals 1 damage! Watch me defeat 80% of the SGT without any risk! Isn't that wizard-level and all awesome now!? After all, bypassing and being able to dance around them is beating them according to the DMG!) The final nail in the coffin though is that it uses monsters from the monster manual, which is by far the most unbalanced 3.5 book for monsters under WotC (I'm counting MM2 and MM3 as 3.0), so counting monsters from there is a poor show of actual monster power. Finally, even if you assume that they're about the same as all equal-CR monsters, the CR rules are complete bunk and should be eliminated for the most part (watch as I throw in a CR 10 humanoid with 30 HD or something). So in short, the SGT is retarded. --Ghostwheel (talk) 06:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The SGT has all the flaws you say, but that doesn't mean it isn't useful. It provides a tool for measuring characters against something other than easily misinterpreted or overly restrictive ideals. Perhaps it should never be used to declare whether a class is balanced, but it can at least show you something about a class that you haven't considered before. --Foxwarrior (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The RHOH only works with unarmed attacks (more specifically, it only works with punches, but D&D doesn't really distinguish between punches and kicks). The same is true of Heavy Heart Shoulder Slam. So while Mach Speed can enable extra ranged attacks, Zoom In can't. --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

"The Viewtiful Warrior is able to make two attacks for each one attack he would otherwise be entitled to, but each pair of attacks must be made against the same target." --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:23, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Or you could...

Y'know, make it VH. --Ghostwheel (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't seem like it would have completely addressed the complaints, but it probably needed to be done anyway.

You might be able to tone it down by power shuffling and delaying. You don't want to tone down the powers for whatever reason, but I don't think you have power targets for the actual class levels. Is there something in the source that says a level 5 warrior has to have Mach Speed and Reply instead of a level 10 warrior? If you have any freedom to push back the acquisition of problematic powers or shuffle the acquisition order of things around, you might be able to get some traction there. Particularly since level 1 looks really overloaded (judging by the table, I haven't looked at the text in a long time) and the higher levels are kinda blank.

And a policy thing to end on. While I appreciate you being on top of the CommOpp thing and moving your own articles (because less work for me and other admins is awesome), you have a week or so before it's supposed to happen. If you think the class might have some supporters in its current form or you want to try to address some criticisms, you have time to get those things in. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 16:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Considering what the Viewtiful Warrior's prestige classes are like, the Viewtiful Warrior itself should also be Very High. I meant for its damage output to be incredibly high from the get-go (the drawback being it becomes very weak and vulnerable if it runs out of VFX), but apparently it's so good that it blows other melee classes out of the water even with VFX's limitations. I guess I just assumed that "strong melee class = High", using the swordsage, crusader, and warblade as reference points.

I'm pretty happy with the Viewtiful Warrior the way it is now, as everything it can do is very closely based on stuff Joe, Silvia, and Alastor can actually do in the Viewtiful Joe games. And trust me, in the game it comes from, it is not overpowered at all. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The game it comes from doesn't seem as relevant as the game you're moving it into. Power is a function of level here, so if it's too strong at too early a level you shift things around so that it comes into that power later. It's possible that the games took place from levels 11-20 (or whatever) in DnD terms rather than levels 1-20, so you just do that and maybe shift up the prestige class entries a bit.

Or you work with Leziad to patch things up in a more general way, that's good too (and probably better IMO). - Tarkisflux ^Talk 23:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you want help?

I can probably help you to make the class mechanically high. I am offering help if you want some. --Leziad (talk) 19:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

It probably should have been Very High in the first place, as all of the prestige classes it can branch off into (Viewtiful Shogun, Viewtiful Monarch, and Viewtiful Captain) are pretty firmly in that balance range for varying reasons (Viewtiful Shogun has nigh-unbreakable defenses - including a good Fortitude save - at higher levels, Viewtiful Monarch is a spellcaster on par with the wizard ('nuff said), and Viewtiful Captain is basically "Viewtiful Warrior, but even better"). If the Viewtiful Warrior's still too strong for Very High balance (which it shouldn't be, considering that it has to compete with game-breakers like wizards, sorcerers, clerics, and druids), please let me know!

Above all else, though, I want the Viewtiful Warrior's playstyle to be faithful to the home franchise. Also, its massive damage output is, at least in my eyes, justified by the limitations imposed by the VFX system. Trying to spam your VFX abilities in the Viewtiful Joe games generally gets you beaten up due to running out at a very inconvenient moment. You really have to know what you're doing to succeed. Thus, the Viewtiful Warrior is a "burst damage" class - he can do a lot of damage in a short amount of time, but the drawback is that he can't keep it up for long, and if he tries, he can get himself killed very quickly. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The only problem with that is that in DnD each encounter is a scene by itself, several minutes (or even hours) pass between combat encounter, allowing the Viewtiful Warrior to be fully recharged at the beginning of each combat. If you want high damage output I would do something like:

Dramatic Attacks (Ex): The Viewtiful Warrior adds his charisma bonus to damage as long as he has at least one point of VFX in his VFX Pool. Additionally, whenever a VFX ability is in use, each of his attacks granted by base attack bonus deals an extra d8 damage, plus an additional d8 at 3rd level and each 3 levels thereafter, as he make each of his attacks more dramatic.

I understand wanting to be faithful to the game, but sometimes you must make concessions so you can fit a concept in DnD (and some require a lot of bending, like if I wanted to make a Jet Set Radio Ruddie class, I would need to make more than a few concessions.)

Many people said that simple wording would be better; while I agree, I know you disagree, so I won't bother you with that. Instead you should consider giving less abilities to each VFX, or maybe make them more like Tome Combat feats and the like. --Leziad (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The thing is, the Viewtiful Warrior's damage output is only meant to be much higher than average while VFX — specifically VFX Slow or Zoom In (or especially both) — is in use. Like I said, it's a "burst damage" class. Also, many aspects of each VFX power (well, Slow and Mach Speed, anyways) are really more for puzzle-solving than combat, though even those have combat applications against specific enemies. The VFX powers already required a lot of bending to translate them from fast-paced 2-D real-time combat (beat-'em-up) to tactical grid-based turn-based combat (RPG).

Also, if the problem is the Viewtiful Warrior being overpowered, I can't just add Dramatic Attacks in. What should I tone down or remove in exchange? --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The big problem with VFX right now is that you add your Cha to attack and damage waaay waay too much. Usually adding it once is fine and do a good damage boost, it become really powerful at twice and completely bonkers beyond that. Me and a friend did some calculation and it could easily kill many CR 20 enemies at level 7. There way to increase damage in VFX without making it too strong, but first some trimming must be done on the abilities themselves. As an exercise trim each VFX to what you think should be the absolute minimum, this version will not be final it will be our working ground. Once that is settled we will work our way back up, adding extra abilities and the like. --Leziad (talk) 22:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of to take out is the "increase damage of all attacks not affecting the Viewtiful Warrior and his allies" clause. --Luigifan18 (talk) 02:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

One example would be be to make the VFX Slow effect simply like slow instead of super slow (slow is a 3rd level spell and this superslow seem like a 5th level spell, additionally it affect all creatures save you (kinda) with no save, does it sound like a 1st character should have so much power?). --Leziad (talk) 02:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

No, but at the same time, I don't want to take it out either. Maybe the slow effect could become more powerful as levels are gained, eventually capping about where it is now. ...Actually, that sounds pretty good. Will try to implement in the morning; past my bedtime. --Luigifan18 (talk) 03:08, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

All right, done. Most of the Viewtiful Warrior's class features have been delayed, and VFX Slow in particular has had its effects stretched out so that it doesn't reach full power until level 20. --Luigifan18 (talk) 00:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)