|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posts
 Recent Posts
People keep saying 'old' and 'new' but there's really no comparison. The 3.5 version burns spell slots to do extra damage at a higher degree of accuracy. This one burns actions to give you a much smaller damage boost that essentially translates into a heavily nerfed Greater Magic Weapon spell. There are multiple differences but that's what it ends up as. These are two drastically different effects that just happen to have the same name.
The way I see it a Fighter is supposed to do what a Fighter is made to do, that fit a specific role that the Wizard can't do and the Fighter should be the best in that role. Summons. The main topic is too vague to give anything to go off of at the moment. *fades back into the shadows with HiPS granted from the Umbral Collar*
It doesn't, but who is going to cripple themselves with the current heavy armor if they have half a say in the matter? Start at 12 Dex. Add +4 item. Hell, add +6 item. How about that? Clerics do not really benefit from heavy armor. Being able to move at full speed is nice though. And if you can slip Wis to AC in there with some Bracers and Magic Vestment? Why not eh? Fighters focusing on max damage in melee are Combat Reflexes Spiked Chain builds. Need I say more? Paladins are just screwed. Mostly because his god has a funny sense of humor. 2 AC > DR 3. Especially when it adds to touch AC. It's still likely they'll go for the mithril breastplate, even if they don't have the Dex to support it (no gloves yet to support their standard 12) because 3 AC < being 1/3rd slower. Unless you're a dwarf and therefore 1/3rd slower anyways. Being slowed that much means you'll have an even harder time just getting into melee and thereby doing your job. It's hard enough as it is to even get to melee anything that isn't a melee brute. No point in making it harder.
Tier 1s are Tier 1s due to extreme versatility, power, and game breaking tactics. Chain Binding = infinite cash = infinite power, for example. Tier 2s are Tier 2 because they can do anything a Tier 1 can, but cannot do everything a Tier 1 can. Only difference is they can't change their spells around as needed. It takes an absurd amount of changing stuff around to make a Tier 1 Tier 3. It'd probably be better to just say forget the Tier 1 classes, and possibly the 2s and just use existing Tier 3s as a baseline. Tier 4 and 5 lacks compared to 3 because they are one trick ponies, often with no out of combat use whatsoever compared to versatile characters that can deal decently well with a variety of situations but rarely auto wins. It would be simpler to buff them than to lower Tier 1s. Though it'd be still easier to just again use existing Tier 3s as a baseline. Yes, that means it's no longer based on 3.5 core. Being based on 3.5 core is like building your house on sand. While living on the Gulf Coast. During hurricane season. Suffice it to say using a more solid baseline is strongly recommended. Hint: It doesn't involve core anything.
Sorry..normal Paizo board humor.. I will no longer do that in your posts if it offends you. Actually, I don't care. I have much thicker skin than that. Even when actively smiting I'm not actually offended. I'm just exacting retribution. Regardless, it is true. Edit: The NPC has to guess then if he can't block everything. The Wizard has to guess which is blocked if against a classed leveled humanoid or whatever, but he has an advantage in the guessing game as some counters have visible signs. For example, Arcane Sight gives aura strength and school. It's not exact, but between that and other cues you can make some fairly educated guesses. Or not take any chances and go with the weaker, reliable effects.
I've been assuming this thread was comparing the two in terms of their ability to contribute to a party against the enemies. PvP is literally no contest. Wizard wins. No need to roll a single die. Edit: Dragging it on by bringing it up again, and making an alt to rub it in is even less helpful. I'm already done with him, but you're undermining your own points by doing that.
To counter a Wizard, you must counter everything they do. To counter everything they do, you must counter everything period. If you counter everything period... you counter everything period. That includes everyone else. It takes extremely contrived DM fiat to get a scenario anywhere near where the beatstick can happily run up and beat down the enemy but the Wizard (Cleric, Druid, whoever) can do nothing at all. The closest you could possibly get to this is an enemy using an Extraordinary Spell Aimed Anti Magic Field. This means you are facing a highly optimized gish. The Anti Magic Field blocks most spells (a few still can get through). Extraordinary Spell Aim means it is not actually affecting the enemy gish, ergo his super buff array, magic items, etc still function perfectly. Slight problem. Melee guy steps up, his items turn off due to the AMF. He attacks, likely failing miserably because gish > melee no contest. He is subsequently torn apart. He sure was useful wasn't he? Now to be fair, anyone else who sticks around will probably get their ass handed to them as well. Unless they're using the same trick of course. Luckily teleport magics exist eh? Suffice it to say the example does anything but prove melee usefulness. Is that everything?
I am ignoring Krensky entirely as he is completely falsifying my position by claiming I said things I did not and are in fact the opposite of what was said. Unless saying that whichever DM is Rule 0ing is not professional is somehow an insult to professionals? Eh, I'm not even going to think about that logic fail too hard. Arrogance is more confidence than is warranted. This is not the case. My posts are 'invariably snarky and often downright insulting' only to those who are doing the exact things to warrant such responses and not to all people here. I do not bash people for disagreeing, which you would know if you took a look at the many posts where a disagreement took place and that was it because the person on the other end was not being willfully ignorant and antagonistic. My comments have been praised by multiple people for adding quite a bit to the discourse. I don't recall seeing you having said anything constructive. Feel free to prove me wrong, but if I were not me I'd take the guy who only starts throwing fireballs to fend off trolls over the guy whose answer to everything is fire, fire, and more fire. No redeeming correctness whatsoever.
What are you talking about? Can you rephrase this better? In the present form, you are making no sense. I am ignoring Krensky entirely as he is completely falsifying my position by claiming I said things I did not and are in fact the opposite of what was said. Unless saying that whichever DM is Rule 0ing is not professional is somehow an insult to professionals? Eh, I'm not even going to think about that logic fail too hard.
The Collar is primarily there for HiPS. Aka you can Hide while being watched. Well, it also grants unnamed skill bonuses, and random other stuff but that's the main reason. As for the other optimizers here... quite frankly they are not nearly as patient as I. While I have more of an 'enlightenment' mindset going on, the others just tend to facepalm when faced with stuff like that because it's like proving the sky is blue. Just look. Done. Then people look and it isn't done. They aren't blind, so why can't they see it? That's the thought process I predict.
You have to think past the Idea that the NPCs are dumb and the wizard can whole hardly run over them. the wide variety of trick a wizard has is the same wide variety of trick high level NPCs have. Not validating the question I have answered before it was asked and therefore should not exist with a response. And ofcourse the melee is running up and hitting everything.. that is their job.. I don't see a problem there... You presume they are able to do their job. I'm not assuming everything takes full fire damage, even when resistances and immunities clearly exist am I? So why are you assuming that everything will just sit there and drool while the melee guy runs up to it and uses his one trick? Refraining from logical fallacies applies to both sides of the argument. Likewise, having a job does not automatically grant one perfect ability to do it. If you believe it does, try seeing if getting a job as a SWAT sniper gives you perfect aim. Hint: You have to train a lot just to get hired, much less fielded, then there are still things you just can't do. And if it doesn't involve a sniper rifle... well you get the idea. And you keep assuming a NPC who is not getting into reach is non tragetable from everyone other then the wizard. Straw man. I am assuming he is non targetable by the melee guy. Part of the job of a group working together is using tactics to get what they are facing within range. And you get it down out of the sky by... Oh right. Killing it with viable ranged attacks. I specify viable so you can't say 'But wait a minute, the Fighter does 1d8+Small Number with his Longbow. He can totally help out past level 5 or so!' That's just looking busy.
Balance by DM fiat does not 1: Indicate a lack of a problem but in fact proves its existence beyond all doubt by validating it. 2: Indicate a viable fix as it presumes the DM is at least as competent as people that are supposed to be professionals designing the system in the first place. 3: Present a profitable approach as either leaving it to those not equipped to handle it, or those that could clearly make a product superior to yours and thereby steal your sales just isn't good business sense. Instead, you should try to do it yourself. If you screw up, you're no worse off than if you left it blank. You have nowhere to go but up.
Last I checked, Wizards have a wide array of tricks. They also have all Knowledge skills available, ergo they know the strengths and weaknesses of various creatures. Class levels can throw this off because humanoid opponents are a lot more diverse than monsters, but then vs humanoids you stick to generalistic tactics that work in as many circumstances as possible to maximize your odds. And if they aren't caster humanoids they're not relevant anyways as humanoid power = magic, those that cannot cast magic must make up the balance from items, and NPCs get less items (so that the subsequent taking their stuff doesn't result in broken PCs). Regardless, they both have the right tools and know how to apply them. The smart enemies that predominate high levels shut down some of their tricks. But the Wizard knows which are shut down and can just use the ones that are not. Meanwhile, what's that melee guy doing? Oh right, running up and hitting it, same as he has at every other level. So unless you are honestly trying to tell me it's harder for creatures who are often far more mobile than you to get out of, and stay out of melee range than it is to negate several dozen tricks that do all sorts of different things... you are simply wrong. This only happens when enemies become poorly played auto attackers when they can do so much better, and when all the casters are just goofing off (preparing nothing but fire magic for example, then crying when a Baatezu appears) to put it nicely. It is far easier to negate one trick than several dozen. This is just very basic math. I'm not assuming the Wizard is the only one doing anything. The standard party also includes a Cleric. The Rogue can still be relevant if he uses the right tricks, he'll just be about average instead of a god. That just leaves 1/4 useless entirely and objectively. Outside of standard, Druids (god) and Bards (average) exist. Also Sorcerers (demigods). Wrath: Degrees mean you are highly educated in your chosen field. It does not mean you are highly educated overall (degrees are specialized). It does not even mean you are highly intelligent. Not that these people aren't intelligent, but unless their degrees are in relevant fields such as statistical analysis it has little to no bearing on the discussion and is just ego stroking. Had you said these people were doing 11th grade math at age 5 with little effort, I'd be impressed with their relevant, and equal abilities. Instead it's just pointless bragging. Last ninja edit: Big B is correct. Including, and especially regarding the backwards compatibility bit meaning non casters are doomed to be second rate citizens at best no matter what.
Playing dumb =/= are dumb. There is simply no other explanation why the one trick ponies aren't being shut down hard other than enemies just auto attacking whoever is closest instead of playing intelligently. And if the one trick ponies are not one trick ponies, they're instead completely irrelevant. Any enemy that shuts down a high level Wizard is shutting down the entire party. Period. If every trick a Wizard can use is blocked, guess what? That means nothing works. It really is that simple.
Low level it doesn't matter what you do for the most part. Opponents are weak and simple with few exceptions. A two handed weapon is a save or die attacking the armor class save. Color Spray is an AoE save or die, but close range and you only get 2 a day not counting scrolls. Mid levels opponents start getting smarter, and becoming stronger faster. Naturally this results in the weak (non casters) falling behind the most. Casters are getting their better spells around now too, though they had some winners before. High levels you can pretty much forget about your melee brute being able to do much except fight enemy melee brutes. Even that isn't assured, just compare full attack routines. Meanwhile enemies counter some caster tricks, but not all. So... I'm guessing your high level opponents, and your casters are both playing dumb. Edit: Are there still people who actually think golems are a threat to wizards? Seriously?
Isn't the whole point of this topic to make the melee not feel so small in the pants when he fights a mage?Actually no, the point of this topic is to make the mage player feel like casting defensively is not a worthless roll due to auto-passing every time. Which means making it more difficult so it isn't an auto win... the rest naturally follows. I do. I find it assumes that the opponents that you are fighting cannot act intelligently. If the opponents are willing to surround the caster (double move, run, other method), then they should have a valid chance at an AoO when said caster tries to cast a spell. Which brings us back around to either the caster is unprepared and now dead because multiple enemies are surrounding him, or is prepared meaning he has such a low chance to be hit he doesn't care about the AoO. Either way the casting defensively bit is pretty much irrelevant.
First, no one cares about physical armor. Mage armor is just as good, and is 1 hour/level. Second, no one cares about physical armor. Mithril Twilight Chain Shirts do exactly the same thing as an always on Mage Armor. Like Mage Armor, no drawbacks. Third, wands are only suitable for spells you will cast all the time. They're too expensive otherwise. You need scrolls to cover the obscure stuff. Which is certainly possible, but the Wizard is getting it without spending his time, resources, and such making it. Your third question has already been answered multiple times, including as a part of my first answer here so I'm not quoting it.
If you want to compare by role, just look at those entries only. In fact many of the divisions are already based on role. They're just all together there because the purpose of the guide is to get all the players on roughly the same page. So if one wants a trained warrior type, and the other wants a shapeshifting hunter Warblade and Wild Shape Ranger lets these guys play together well, whereas picking Fighter and Druid instead ensures the former will be useless compared to the enemies and obsolete compared to the other guy. Example: Warriors are a Tier 6 melee, because there is absolutely nothing they do another melee doesn't do better. Fighters are Tier 5 because other than the Warrior, they don't really outshine anyone in that role. In other words all they can do is fight, and not even that well which fits the description. Barbarians are Tier 4 because while their fighting ability is about the same, they can also do a few things besides fight. Warblades are tier 3s because they can fight, and fight fairly well. They can also do things besides fight with a reasonable degree of competence. Favored Souls, if you made one to melee are Tier 2 because they can do all the uber melee cleric tricks. It just takes more of their 'trick slots' as it were because they don't get to change their spell list on a daily basis. This is why you can easily get a 10 str cleric with no melee feats who does about as much melee damage as the THF with melee feats, and we haven't touched Persist yet. And of course Druids are Tier 1 melees because a single class feature of theirs is as good or better than many low tier melee classes by itself. The fact Wild Shape doesn't make them into a second melee while still being a spellcaster at the same time (Oh noes!) is purely academic. The skill monkeys are also sorted well. Experts are Tier 5 (yes, that means an NPC class is as good as Fighters and Monks) because 'any 10 class skills' means they can get things like Use Magic Device, Iaijutsu Focus (do almost as much damage as a sneak attacker) and so forth. Rogues are Tier 4 because they get UMD and other useful skills, and fairly decent abilities. Beguilers are Tier 3 because they get just about everything the Rogue does, and also gets full casting. Sure, it's from a limited list. But 1: It contains most of the spells you care about anyways. 2: It's spontaneous. 3: Anything that adds new spells to that list expands your spells available more than it would for anyone else. Lastly, Cloistered Clerics are Tier 1 because... aside from a HD size decrease and a BAB step decrease they get everything clerics do and more. Starting with 4 more skill points and a broader skill list. Seeing as if you cared about hitting the thing with the other thing you can just Divine Power it up, that means you're just down 1 HP a level. Edit: Tier 1s are Tier 1s because of versatility and power. It doesn't become an or question until Tier 3, or maybe Tier 4.
Incorrect. Unless another revision has been released without my knowledge fighting classes are not being improved. Slight number gains are not an improvement when they lose the only two tricks they ever had.
It was linked in multiple places, which is why people are bringing it up. Here we go again. Spoiler:
The following is a repost of something I made over on the WotC forums. I'm not exactly sure which forum to put it on, as it's intended for a variety of purposes. It's here mostly because I'd like to get some feedback from knowledgeable minds, but it's also a useful tool, much like a handbook, and available for use.
My general philosophy is that the only balance that really matters in D&D is the interclass balance between the various PCs in a group. If the group as a whole is very powerful and flexible, the DM can simply up the challenge level and complexity of the encounters. If it's weak and inflexible, the DM can lower the challenge level and complexity. Serious issues arise when the party is composed of some members which are extremely powerful and others which are extremely weak, leading to a situation where the DM has two choices: either make the game too easy for the strong members, or too hard for the weak members. Neither is desireable. Thus, this system is created for the following purposes: 1) To provide a ranking system so that DMs know roughly the power of the PCs in their group 2) To provide players with knowledge of where their group stands, power wise, so that they can better build characters that fit with their group. 3) To help DMs who plan to use house rules to balance games by showing them where the classes stand before applying said house rules (how many times have we seen DMs pumping up Sorcerers or weakening Monks?). 4) To help DMs judge what should be allowed and what shouldn't in their games. It may sound cheesy when the Fighter player wants to be a Half Minotaur Water Orc, but if the rest of his party is Druid, Cloistered Cleric, Archivist, and Artificer, then maybe you should allow that to balance things out. However, if the player is asking to be allowed to be a Venerable White Dragonspawn Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer and the rest of the party is a Monk, a Fighter, and a Rogue, maybe you shouldn't let that fly. 5) To help homebrewers judge the power and balance of their new classes. Pick a Tier you think your class should be in, and when you've made your class compare it to the rest of the Tier. Generally, I like Tier 3 as a balance point, but I know many people prefer Tier 4. If it's stronger than Tier 1, you definitely blew it. Psionic classes are mostly absent simply because I don't have enough experience with them. Other absent classes are generally missing because I don't know them well enough to comment, though if I've heard a lot about them they're listed in itallics. Note that "useless" here means "the class isn't particularly useful for dealing with situation X" not "it's totally impossible with enough splat books to make a build that involves that class deal with situation X." "Capable of doing one thing" means that any given build does one thing, not that the class itself is incapable of being built in different ways. Also, "encounters" here refers to appropriate encounters... obviously, anyone can solve an encounter with purely mechanical abilities if they're level 20 and it's CR 1. Also note that with enough optimization, it's generally possible to go up a tier, and if played poorly you can easily drop a few tiers, but this is a general averaging, assuming that everyone in the party is playing with roughly the same skill and optimization level. As a rule, parties function best when everyone in the party is within 2 Tiers of each other (so a party that's all Tier 2-4 is generally fine, and so is a party that's all Tier 3-5, but a party that has Tier 1 and Tier 5s in it may have issues). The Tier System Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party. Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer. Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potencially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Examples: Sorcerer, Favoured Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges) Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time. Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factorum, Warblade Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well. Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Varient), Psionic Warrior Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly. Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters. Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner And then there's the Truenamer, which is just broken (as in, the class was improperly made and doesn't function appropriately). Now, obviously these rankings only apply when mechanical abilities are being used... in a more social oriented game where talking is the main way of solving things (without using diplomacy checks), any character can shine. However, when the mechanical abilities of the classes in question are being used, it's a bad idea to have parties with more than two tiers of difference. It is interesting to note the disparity between the core classes... one of the reasons core has so many problems. If two players want to play a nature oriented shapeshifter and a general sword weilder, you're stuck with two very different tiered guys in the party (Fighter and Druid). Outside of core, it's possible to do it while staying on close Tiers... Wild Shape Varient Ranger and Warblade, for example. JaronK
My MIC isn't in front of me. They're both in the weapon property section as +1 bonuses. Infusions do have long casting times. This is why you prepare long term, generalistic things ahead of time. For example, Spell Storing Item lasts 1 hour a level. Extend it, and it's easily lasting the entire adventuring day at mid levels, and the entire day period at high levels. Greater Mirror Image and Dimension Door have many practical applications, so it's hard to waste them. For the stuff you need right now and will need a lot of, you need to use your crafting abilities to get a wand, scroll, whatever. If it's something you won't need as often, scroll or on the spot SSI, then discharge the spell. Say you get randomly ability drained, keep a Restoration around, or keep diamond dust around and improvise. Stuff like that. If you do cast them in combat, better hope they're 1 round actions (or you don't mind burning an AP to make it 1 round) then hope the enemies don't get lucky and hit you as that will force damage or lose spell.
The main issue is it makes the prime stat less important. With that said, yes casters are quite strong. Everyone else is quite weak. When the others are less weak, or we have a monster baseline that compensates I'm really not sure if breaking the only guy's legs who can pull the party wagon is wise. Otherwise what will happen is overnerfing, or far less likely undernerfing depending.
I am assuming high intelligence + right tools can counter simple things like getting backed into a corner. I do not find this an illogical assumption. Do you? By the way, Wizards are even better about avoiding Bad Things happening to them, since the Artificer is borrowing their trick anyways. Sorcerers can do it too. Clerics and Druids don't get the same method, but they make up for it by being more durable and such without tricks. Artificers are actually one of the worst casters for dealing with the unexpected due to the prep time required beforehand. Of course, if they've made the right tool they're among the best, and the weakest god is still stronger than any mortal. Or something. Also, you are ignoring my own quote that you quoted when you made that statement. See how I accounted for what happens to unprepared casters? Point being casting defensively is irrelevant, because if he's slipped that badly he's already dead. Edit: Jal, weaker spells are well... weaker. If he's wasting time casting a second level spell instead of a sixth because he has a 40% chance to fail the latter and wants a reliable weak effect... why is this a problem? The melee guy is doing something very useful... unless you'd rather take the 4 level higher spell to the face? Let him auto pass his weaker spell. Isn't the whole point of this topic to make the melee not feel so small in the pants when he fights a mage?
Collar is Tome of Magic. Warning and Eager are Magic Item Compendium. Rest is core. Well, BoB is also the MIC, but I didn't use it. I believe Eager is unnamed initiative, Warning is Insight so they would still stack. +12 initiative is nice, and helps ensure first strikes. Assuming a smart party, they'll have inits around this mark as well. Enemies can't really afford it, so that's a nice touch. Even if EA did not apply to non magical equipment it's a difference of 8.333...% on a small ticket item. 1,050 vs 1,400, and 255 vs 340 if I recall correctly. Total? 435 gold. Woo. Who cares? I probably lost more than that to rounding up. I'm surprised it took this long for anyone to reply. I assumed the truth shocked people into silence.
... Still isn't coming across? Spelling it out this simply is an insult to everyone's intelligence here, starting with my own. But fine. The skill improves by +1 per level and a bit more from stats (maybe). The DC is improved by 1 every other level essentially. DC = 15 + 2 * spell level. Now your +2 scales at the same rate as its +2, or close enough at least. Therefore, you do not surpass the DC and auto pass. At least not without actually trying a little bit.
How is discussing how a caster can easily avoid making a casting defensively check in the first place not relevant to the subject at hand? 5' step back, cast spell normally. Surrounded means you're either unprepared and as good as dead, or prepared and enemies have a sub 5% chance to hit you anyways. Same deal with rough terrain and lack of flight or something. The only thing this requires is that the mage be intelligent... which he is. With that out of the way, assuming you really aren't getting it try using a formula that doesn't quickly get outstripped. Standard: DC = 15 + spell level.
So we have the DC at 15 + 1 per odd level until level 17 where it caps at 24 assuming you are casting your best spell, but gaining at least one point a level. Of course it becomes an auto pass. Your ability improves faster than the bar raises. Make the bar rise faster. Done.
I seen a humor article somewhere that was basically something like this: Monk: So in other words, you just wanted an excuse to keep me ineffective. Master: ...Yes. With that said, look at any other game with a martial artist type. Often they have the highest HP, but low defense. Since barring blowing almost all your cash on AC boosters (which anything other than physical attackers doesn't care about), they do have low defense and even their saves are only decent at best. Full BAB, D10 HD minimum, D12 preferred. They still aren't going to be overpowered but will at least be useful, provided they also get some focus. Though for the record, Paladins are actually more MAD (they need 5 stats, not 4).
There is a lesser property somewhere that just melds it. It's only +2 or something. Maybe +1? I dunno. Anyways I thought ACP only applied to some stuff, but it applies to more if not proficient and also applies to attacks, whatever. Then again, non light armors were such an obvious trap I just avoided them and light armors don't really have a check penalty. So I could just be thinking of something else.
Pseudo quadratic effect is mostly covered, but one part was missed. Spells scale properly with enemies, direct damage spells being the exception and thus the failure. Everything else? Not so much. So you get linear fighters, quadratic wizards, quadratic enemies. Do the math. Two ways to fix this: 1: Use... Two words. The first is Bull. Can you guess what the second is? If you are a non caster, you are assuredly behind. It may be only somewhat (Rogue), it may be by a massive amount (Fighter) but you are behind. To make up for this, you must optimize. Period. 2 + 2 does not equal 5. It equals 11 if you house rule counting to Base 3, but noone cares because base 10 is the assumed norm. The correct answer is 2 + 2 = 4. Simple as that. And when people such as yourself not only fail to grasp very basic concepts such as this but pull crap like disgrace to optimizers, elitism, and other such BS out of their ass while playing passive aggressive and trying to make it seem as if it were all my fault, guess what? Mr. Crusader of Logic demonstrates his Smite Imbecile class ability. For great justice. Likewise, if you are a character who is naturally exceptionally strong you either hold back a bit, or outclass everyone. A newbie's Druid is about as good as the optimizer's super Fighter at best (and more likely still superior) despite the massive difference in playing and optimization skill between them. Fourth edition = let's delete all classes but one, then make it look as if there are actually many different classes instead of Everyone Is The Same Group Think Kumbayah. It technically is balanced, but you could do exactly the same thing by just saying x class only and save your cash. Who cares? Now, does anyone have something constructive they would like to say to me or anyone else, or is this just going to go on for a while?
I can't think of anything that would actually work. After all, even if the DC were 60 or something stupid, melee guy has to be threatening to even try to disrupt. Have fun with that. 5' step alone means non reach auto fails. Reach weapons that don't threaten adjacent means he could 5' step in and actually be safe. Or out, either way. So that just leaves... spiked chains. Sound familiar?Which means you aren't discussing Casting Defensively, you are arguing about ranged/melee combat. How is discussing how a caster can easily avoid making a casting defensively check in the first place not relevant to the subject at hand? 5' step back, cast spell normally.
Stuff melds into your form, right in core. Animal Druid can just take it off, shift, put it on. I can get an object around my neck without using hands or anything else. I'd say the Druid can too. Though it would be easier if someone else did it.
I can't think of anything that would actually work. After all, even if the DC were 60 or something stupid, melee guy has to be threatening to even try to disrupt. Have fun with that. 5' step alone means non reach auto fails. Reach weapons that don't threaten adjacent means he could 5' step in and actually be safe. Or out, either way. So that just leaves... spiked chains. Sound familiar?
Why would you assume he only has an attack bonus of 8? 5 BAB, + whatever from strength, + whatever from his weapon, + whatever from anything else. It's a lot more than 8. Skills scale by ranks and stat. That's it. To hit scales by more. End result is he still gets AoOed, still gets hit on a 2, and might as well have not even cast defensively at all. At which point you could just say all Fighters get Mage Slayer at level x.
People complained about PA being too much math. Adding one more roll to every hit isn't going to go well (and I'd agree with their complaints, since adding that roll is unnecessary). The big question sounds better than it did the first time as DR low teens is actually enough to matter against foes not like the Hydra (lots of low damage attacks, most have smaller numbers of better attacks). It seemed like another DR 1-5 at high levels which doesn't matter, or that it was taking away something else and therefore irrelevant or worse.
Lose 3 CLs + Sorcerer base = no 9th level spells until epic. Combine that with the fact that a simple illusion or two will protect you about as reliably for a much lower cost... not broken. Just a big number. I'm also not sure why pointing out low DR was countered with... low DR. As if it were a counterpoint. Eh.
So if shields are considered armor, and armor above light still slows you... wouldn't that mean full plate + heavy shield = -20 foot speed? Or even just having a shield slow you in the first place... the last thing SAB needs is a heavy nerf. Edit: Straight DR is most likely going to be inadequate (too low to matter) especially when baselines such as only 5 points at level 19 are employed (hint: too little, too late). Percentage might work, but given the sheer number of people that had issues with basic adding and subtracting I doubt including more low grade math such as multiplication will be received well.
Well let's see... cast defensively with your AC vs the AoO = the skill result. Attacks scale faster, fighter hits on a 2. 95% to hit and if defensive casting fails you lose the spell. Compare to casting normally, getting AoOed on a 2, and at least having a chance vs the 10 + damage check. Therefore, (casting defensively becomes) rather pointless. I thought the context made that clear. To everyone else: This is a clarification to the person who thought that was an attack. My attacks are not veiled, and are justified. Neither criteria is met here, ergo no attack.
I dunno about spell rarity, and since it's just the same DM fiat as gear... not a fan of it at all. I mean, once you get to where you're allowing any book but know how to ID brokenness when you see it, and allowing any items they can afford the non casters aren't so bad anymore because they can get exactly what they need to function. Casters are less exacting and thus more forgiving. They can stick to core only spells and still be incredible. There's very little non core better than what they have because it's hard to go up much further. Mostly, non core magic just gives them random cool stuff. Moral of the story: DM fiat just tends to backfire as it does not meet the requisite standards to make such a decision. I am ignoring Paul until such time as he actually reads my work because if he had, he would not be asking questions I have already answered multiple times.
Slow combat is fun huh? I bet you like 4.0, which does the equivalent of making level 1 characters do 1d2 damage while still fighting CR 1 creatures with 13 HP or so. With that out of the way, talking is a free action. Caster: "This one's as good as dead! Don't risk yourselves!" Guy actually putting life on line who has just been given a pass: "Good. Dibs on his sword."
Mithril is cheap. It may be rare by the random peon's standards, but the random peons aren't wearing a Christmas Tree worth of equipment as their work uniform. You'll have mithril long before you have strong magic items. In fact, mithril chain shirts cost less than +1 non mithril chain shirts. RAW, rarity is by cost. Anything else is a house rule to make yourself right. The flaws with that approach should be obvious. High dex also means high initiative and such. You get flat footed less that way, because you go first. Also, Uncanny Dodge isn't hard to get, and stats 'naturally' improve with level. (as in you'll have more and more cash lying around to get Dex items and such) Combine that with a 30 foot speed (might be able to catch some of the faster enemies) compared to 20 (better hope they come right at you) and it's easy to see how badly heavier armors fail.
The only people I talk to as if they are morons are those that prove that they are in fact morons. Launching attacks against me = AoO cluebat smack back in line. Continuing to spread patently false information after being corrected multiple times = down troll down. So, you are either saying that you have done something stupid to warrant being treated as such, or you are wrong and making things up to attack me, Squirreloid, and probably others I am unaware of. Attacking an idea is not a personal attack. Liking something does not excuse its flaws. In fact, bringing up the flaws is how it gets fixed.
Remove dex caps, remove being slowed. Now instead of heavy armor being equal or inferior always no matter what due to decreased maneuverability + no real gain... it might be worth considering. Even if it did give more AC, slowing still ruins it.Yeah slowing speed is another negative to wearing armor that a non armored has to worried about. I forgot about that, however it is not always the case with light, and mithral medium armor. Which is what you wear exclusively before your stats outgrow it. In other words, maintaining optimal AC is about using the lightest armor possible. Maintaining as much speed as possible is about never using anything above light armor (mithril breastplate = light). Remove the speed and dex caps and suddenly the heavy armored knight isn't as weak an archetype.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
