|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Not exactly. Putting the PCs in a room or area with an AMF is arbitrary. But having an NPC of X caster level that can cast the spell is a more legitimate way of fielding the spell. The enemy caster can be disabled, etc, whereas an area effect can not.
How is it GM fiat when an enemy caster legitimately casts it? It's clear that my games run very, very differently than many of the posters on here. It's almost impossible to compare home brew situations, though.
To each their own. A 25K item is not really epic at all, though.
I think it becomes more and more true as you go up in levels. Casters actually lose the ability to do direct damage more and more as enemy defenses improve, as HD scale non-linearly with PC level. In my homebrew especially, cloaks (or whatever slot I want) of resistance +5 become commonplace for enemies eventually.
Yeah, you can summon, but the summons have crappy to hit numbers, or you can try to dominate, but that is also a crap shoot.
Also, one anti-magic field and all your casters have a sad face indeed.
You aren't gaming it out well. Those spells really lose efficacy once opponents have a combination of SR, elemental resistance, and awesome saves. If you try to direct damage high level opponents to death, you will lose. You can try to summon your way out of it, but summons don't have the to hit values anywhere near good martials. A good archer can outdamage any caster in the game against single targets. And that target gets no SR, no saves, no nothing. Thanks to clustered shots, they just eat nearly all the damage with no recourse.
Well, as much as he's been hyping Pathfinder, and his concerns about wizards being underpowered in 5e, I would have to imagine that non-spellcasters are pretty much an afterthought for him.
Spell casters need martial support in PF or they will fail spectacularly. Spell casters ironically kinda stink at causing damage at high levels.
I was actually more concerned about clerics than wizards. They might have kept wizards damage high, but they destroyed many, many modes of play. Including all the ones I like.
For the record, I have more martial PCs than casters.
Use magic from mage, and just make up the rest. It would be easy peasy. Or take stuff from Exalted, too.
I make NPCs before hand, but usually end up winging what they actually do in the game. Obviously, mindless or stupid NPCs don't adapt as well.
GMs should prepare and casters should know their spells. That's common courtesy. I imagine there is GM prep even for 5th. Maybe not, though. To me, prepping is the fun part of GMing.
5th's organized play rules are quite poor, imo. That's a big obstacle to killing off PF, even if they capture over half the market share.
Storyteller could be used for fantasy. It's extremely adaptable, actually, because of its simplicity.
As I said, basically taking buffs out as a viable caster strategy is a deal breaker for me.
3.X feels a lot different to me than 1st and 2nd. Mechanically speaking. I guess there would be an inevitable backlash against 3.X, and 5th is it. To be honest, I was hoping that 5th would have been a true alternative to PF, because I agree some of it is clunky. But I'm not willing to throw out 80% of the game to get rid of a few things that annoy me. It's the exact same reason I didn't play 4th, even though I kind of respected what it was trying to do.
I don't think I ever said 5th is "wrong", just gutted, simplistic, and more arbitrary vs formulaic. People have made it very clear that they like the simplicity, whereas I like formulas.
I personally think they could have done a much better job of dropping some clunky things, but not stripping it down as much as they did. For example, I love buffs, and what they did with them, to me, is horrible. They could have thrown players like me a bone, but they didn't. Full-on gutting mode.
Except for those of us who find "advantage" and "disadvantage" limiting and boring as watching paint dry. The Ork needs power attack so the effect of it scales with the BAB of the Ork.
Monsters built like PCs level the playing field for both the players and GM. It also gives the GM opportunity to build some really cool mosnters!
Evidently. It happens to me in PFS in groups with optimized PCs, but not at all in homebrews. Totally different experience.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
SR went from shutting down spells to giving "advantage" on saving throws. Another gutted ability in 5th.
I'm mostly dismayed at how much play testing and development went into 5th and that the final result is so underwhelming.
But they didn't do that either. Most of the monsters I looked at hit like pansies. I guess the monsters got hit with the same nerf bat that was taken to everything in the game.
Except that druids can summon in even more creatures with an active animal companion, and most summoners can not do the same with the eidolon active.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
They have stripped out a lot of variety of monster abilities. Most monster powers I read give advantage or disadvantage. That's just boring to me. I know that others will think its great.
Monsters can't even be built with power attack as far as I can tell. It's just...meh.
The Rot Grub wrote:
One could have differentiated without stripping out 80% of the game. The Monster Manual is just a tragedy in how boring it is.
No players, no game. There's always Starcraft, too.
There was nothing disastrous about throwing off the shackles of 2nd ed. I gratefully trash canned all my 2nd ed stuff. I hadn't used it since 1994 anyway when 3rd ed came out.
I knew some fine people that became controlling jerks as soon as they put on their "DM" hat. Controlling and playing favorites. The two horsemen of the roleplaying apocalypse.
The whole DM thing is one of the reasons why I prefer wargaming to roleplaying.
The way is deal with that is be friendly and not adversarial as the GM. I frequently laugh along with my players at the some of the absurdly easy fights from early seasons and I don't care if my NPCs get crushed. Interestingly, players have been less interested in crushing NPCs since I have displayed no concern for it.
I also try to rule in the player's favor whenever it's possible. If the players know that I'm not going to try to "get them", then they are less likely to bring their 150 DPR PCs.
Lastly, I encourage solid builds, but try to steer players away from overpowering builds. If everyone is solid, then almost every scenario runs just fine.
When DMs start wanting that much control, I'd rather go read a novel.
I personally find items that merely make an existing number bigger to be absolutely the most boring items in the entire catalog of Magic items. Even (and especially) the vaunted "Big Six".
Making saves or hitting your opponent is never boring to me.
"Amulet of natural armour "
I have long since dumped this for a swarmbane clasp. The armor class isn't worth it.