I've *never* understood the reasoning that somehow they get to save a spell after they've been hit.
It doesn't make sense that getting a little cut on the arm somehow causes all the magical energy to dissipate - if you can ignore the pain and keep the spell alive, you should be able to finish casting it just fine.
Arguing otherwise is like saying a fighter shouldn't be able to make an attack if he's hit by an AoO while moving into position.
Pathfinder Combat:
Roll for initiative.
Roll to hit on your turn.
First person to hit wins.
I believe that Sean Reynolds mentioned on his site that Warforged should probably have been LA +1. In the Eberron games that my group plays, there's always at least one artificer and often more than one Warforged, so there's definitely something fishy going on.
I'd agree with that assessment. One reason among several I don't allow them in my games. But in PRPG the warforged is more comparable, and like the Aasimar it can do without a LA.
But don't get me started on Artificers. A wizard with an artificers monacle is bad enough...
But to get at why you're really asking this question, I think why some of us are clamoring for higher level adventures is b/c they are so few and far between. Plus, I like the epic scope of such things in general.
True... but it's also telling that the majority of the posts on this thread so far are, as I expected they would be, centering on 7th level.
But will Pathfinder RPG change that? Has it shifted the "sweet spot" higher or lower? It would be interesting to revisit this topic in a month or year to see what PRPG players feel.
No, that is pretty much impossible, which is largely my frustration with it. Take 10th level. Lets say the wizard got lucky on their stat rolls and had an 18 int, and has a +4 headband. +17 on the check. vs. a DC that can easily be 35. Many of these DCs are all but impossible for even a very high level spellcaster. I've been playing sort of a rough and tumble wizard with an 18 con for a while who's soaked up hits for the party in the past to save the fighters from death. That doing so now would pretty much make it impossible for me to be effective in combat is extremely frustrating (especially given how many monsters have Improved Grab in the STAP).
Yeah, I'm not real happy with the changes to it overall.
I kind of think it should be damn near impossible to cast complex spells when you are being bounced against a T-Rex's tounsels, bear hugged by a hill giant, or choked by a roper.
Kind of like how it's literally impossible for a greatsword-fighter to attack with his weapon while grappled. He has to reach for that dagger. Anything a fighter can't do in combat, a mage shouldn't get a better chance to do.
I understand what you are going for - I like the polymorph approach.
My own solution to the problem was to have merchants exchange common magic items at face value, with the PCs paying the base price and a small markup fee.
For example, Fighterguy wants to trade the +1 short sword for a +1 greatsword. He pays the cost for a greatsword, plus a 10% (100gp) transaction fee.
The rule applies as long as the type of bonus being traded is the same.
If it gives you any sort of bonus it should probably be a move action. Otherwise you will have every character moving, attacking, and then kneeling at the end of their turn. Unless kneeling is free, but standing from a kneel is a move action.
Seeing Broddigan's post, one must consider than when prone you not only have +4 AC but -4 to attacks. It's a bit easier to fall down than slowly lower to ones knees.
In the end the simplest thing to do is say it is a free action to kneel, but a move action to stand again.
Honestly... I think that the idea that any one character class must be balanced in all ways combat against any one other class is intrinsically flawed. Why have multiple choices and options in character builds if the game is trying to make all choices essentially identical?
Strive for balance in game play, but know when to call it in. Excessive balance makes things boring, and drives away players when their own preferences get overruled and crushed under the relentless march of game balance.
Here's a dangerous thought. Why not eliminate defensive casting altogether?
Simply keep the DC to cast a spell when taking damage (DC 10 + damage taken + spell level). If a mage wants to cast in combat, he gets scrapes. There are no rules to allow an archer to fire in melee (in fact, there are many to discourage it) so why allow the mage to do so essentially for free (now that it is not a skill). Spellcasting is easily the most complicated thing a character can do, and yet many other things automatically incur an attack of opportunity (such as moving).
I'm not advocating either way on this, just an idea. Feedback?
It's entirely possible that they have never been exposed or pushed enough to try roleplaying. Maybe they want to but don't want to stick their necks out.
XP bonuses are a good idea.
Work with what you've got. Talk to the "farmer" and the "gladiator" and prod some details in game. Have NPCs talk to them and ask them about their lives. Be patient with the answers. I would highly recommend inserting a DMPC into the party. I hardly ever run games without one now - they get no special treatment, but if the party ever gets stuck on a combat/puzzle/roleplaying encounter they are a handy way to keep the ideas and suggestions flowing in game. The more your DMPC talks, the more likely the characters will talk back, and hopefully to each-other.
At some point you can try the opposite tack - have the group turn against you by berating and insulting the party with your NPCs. Just be careful not to overdo it and make it clear out of game it is an act. Have your monsters make fun of them when they fumble - you'll be surprised at how defensive the group will get for each-other. Since your group likes combat, this may be your most consistently effective option. Having the party cheer for a critical and then hack up a monsters body for sale is just as valid roleplaying as talking to the barkeep for 2 hours.
My players love it when monsters get lippy and then get their comeuppance. Don't be afraid to fudge things to increase the drama if your group relies on the dice all the time.
a) As a player I love the mystery of making a new character and starting their new life as an adventurer. I enjoy the danger of potential death around every corner. Most of all I like the grittier play style where a mundane crossbow is still meaningful and powerful magic is something to aim for.
b) As a DM I love the simplicity of running adventures at low levels. Very few PC abilities to take into account, monsters are more numerous and diverse, and pretty much anything is a threat (like a rickety old rope bridge). It's easier to improvise varied-style adventure (ie. puzzle-solving, combat, roleplaying, etc).
James Jacobs wrote:
3) What's your favorite adventure, and what level was it for? Why is it your favorite adventure?
Not to sound ingratiating, but Red Hand of Doom (from around level 5 to about 11).
I loved how the location-based style let the players move around as they pleased.
Great NPC detail (roleplaying and combat)
Good layout.
Focused theme - encounters became predictable without being boring. The players knew they would mostly be fighting dragons and goblins rather than oodles of random oozes, giants, and aberrations.
Multiple branches of story and possible endings.
Online resources.
Suggestions for how to ease up or get tough on the players. (eg. Ozyrrandion being Adult instead)
Despite getting into higher levels, kept from becoming a "slog" - gave the PCs challenges that ate up time rather than class resources (do we stop the dragon or protect the walls?)
Probably many more. It's not without its problems, for example I hated flipping to the back for statblocks early on. Some of the geography could have been clearer. Minor complaints, obviously.
Just in reply to the remark that he can't compete against the cheaper pdf.
NONSENSE.
I love the cheap pdf - yes. $9.99 makes it so affordable. So I bought a pdf in addition ! to the hardbound copy. For that price I even started to buy pdf for my gaming group. I know most of them if they really get hooked will buy the book eventually as well.
Thod
You just reminded me of the big controversy when Paizo announed the pdf price. Many people thought it would have a bad effect on LGS sales. I'm guessing this was not the case considering the first printing sold out so quickly!
I decided to test-run the final version by buying the pdf. I enjoyed it enough to buy the hardcopy from my FLGS. Overall I probably spent an extra $20 doing this over getting the book from Paizo, but I like to diversify.
These classes follow my Pathfinder philosophy that a prestige class should allow the combination of two or more classes (like the mystic theurge) and allow unique combinations of abilities. Classes such as the dragon disciple are discouraged as they can be accomplished by tinkering with core class features. Feel free to comment, or post your own ideas or requests!
Rage Mage
The rage mage combines spellcasting with the rage ability, which normally does not permit such. In addition, the class has several unique features to offer such multiclass characters.
Spoiler:
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +5, rage ability, must be able to cast 2nd level arcane or divine spells.
HD: d8
BAB: As cleric.
Skill Points per Level: 2 + Int modifier
Class Skills: Acrobatics, Climb, Intimidate, Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft, Survival, Swim
Class Features
1 Rage magic, battlecaster
2 +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
3 Spellpower might, +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
4 +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
5 Rage power, +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
6 +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
7 Ragepower magic, 1 caster level of one spellcasting class
8 +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
9 Rage power, +1 caster level of one spellcasting class
10 Arcane/divine fury
Rage Magic (Ex)
At 1st level the rage mage chooses one spellcasting class with which he qualified for this prestige class. All class abilities apply to that class only. At 1st level the rage mage can cast spells from this class while raging. In addition, the rage mage gains +2 rounds of rage for every level of this class.
Battlecaster (Ex)
The rage mage may cast spells in any armor that he may wear while raging without arcane spell failure. In most cases this means light or medium armor. This ability does not apply to shields.
In addition, this ability grants the Eschew Materials feat as a bonus feat if he does not already possess it.
Spellcasting
Starting at 2nd level, and at every level until 9th, the rage mage continues to gain spells per day, spells known, and caster level increases as if he had taken a level in his chosen spellcasting class. He does not gain any bonus feats or special class abilities from this class.
Spellpower Might (Su)
Starting at 3rd level the rage mage can use his magic to enhance his rage. When he initiates a rage, he can choose to sacrifice one of his spells that day to enhance his Strength bonus from raging by an amount equal to the spell level. This effect lasts until the end of the rage and may be used only once per rage.
Rage Power (Ex)
At 5th level and 9th level the rage mage may select a rage power from the barbarian list. He adds his rage mage level to his barbarian level to determine which powers he qualifies for.
Ragepower Magic (Su)
At 7th level the rage mage has learned to channel his rage into his normal spellcasting. When casting a spell, the rage mage may sacrifice rage rounds to emulate any metamagic feat without increasing the level of the spell. The number of rounds sacrificed must be equal to the spells level as if increased by the metamagic feat.
Arcane/Divine Fury (Su)
At 10th level the rage mage channels his rage into his magic to exceed his potential as both a berserker and a magic-user.
The rage mage uses his current Strength score (after rage enhancements) in place of his normal ability score to determine spell DC when raging. In addition, if he casts a spell on himself it lasts until the end of the rage or its normal duration, whichever is longer.
Example of added value for any GS owners who might be reading: break up miniature boxes so that folks can buy singles.
My FLGS has done this from the beginning. When sales flagged from the change in product, they started repackaging minis in themed sets. I went in and bought minis for the first time in months.
I haven't seen anything personally, but I'll give it a crack:
Pathfinder Warforged Racial Traits:
+2 Con, +2 Int, -2 Wis (built tough, machine-like memory, no creativity)
All other traits remain unchanged.
Can choose any class as favored class.
Pathfinder Warforged Scout Racial Traits:
+2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Str (built for speed, machine-like memory, small size)
All other traits remain unchanged.
Can choose any class as favored class.
{In Pathfinder all races gain +2 to a physical and a mental stat and -2 to one stat, except human-based which gain +2 to any one stat. The warforged are not overly powered compared to other PRPG races, so they don't need the double penalties. I figure a machine will have a higher Int than normal, but may lack perception of the real world (except the scout version).}
Death roll is a new ability we gave crocodiles in the PFRPG Bestiary, due out in October. One of the things we really tried to do with several animals and vermin was to try to give them some more interesting abilities and attacks, based on how those creatures perform in real life.
The crocodile's death roll essentially consists of it grabbing a foe and then tucking in its legs and rolling rapidly, twisting off arms and legs and tearing the heck out of whatever it's grabbed on to. If I remember how the ability works right, it essentially inflicts bite damage again (kind of like constriction) and subjects the victim to a trip attempt.
How dare you apply real world logic to my fantasy game! In my campaign, "death roll" means crocodiles can play snare drums to kill their prey. ;)
Alignment: Any non-good.
HD: d8
BAB: As cleric
Weapon Proficiencies: Simple
Armor Proficiencies: Light, Medium
Skill Points per Level: 2 + Int
Class Skills: Appraise, Craft, Diplomacy, Disguise, Fly, Intimidate, Knowledge (arcana, religion, planes), Linguistics, Perception, Sense Motive, Stealth
Class Features:
1 Battle caster, spellfire, spellfire shape
2 Ritual magic +1
3 Planar servant
4 Spell circle
5 Battle caster
6 Spellfire shape
7 Ritual magic +2
8 Pact
9 Foe of good
10 Inverse ritual
11 Spellfire shape
12 Pact
13 Ritual magic +3
14 Battle caster
15 Spellfire shape
16 Pact
17 Foe of good
18
19 Ritual magic +4
20 Pact, final bond
Spoiler:
Spells
The warlock casts spells drawn from the warlock spell list (see below). The warlock knows all the spells on his list for each spell level he can cast. A warlock casts spells spontaneously as a sorcerer. The warlock can cast a number of spells per day based on the sorcerers spell progression, subtracting 2 off of all per-day numbers. A warlock may not cast a spell without having a Charisma score equal to or greater than 10 + the spell level. The save DC and bonus spells per day are determined using the warlocks Charisma score.
Battle Caster (Ex)
Starting at 1st level the warlock can cast arcane spells while wearing light armor with no chance of arcane spell failure. Only spells granted from the warlock class can be cast in this manner. At 5th level the warlock can cast his arcane spells while wearing medium armor. At 14th level the warlock can cast his arcane spells while wearing heavy armor. This ability does not grant the warlock proficiency with heavy armor.
Ritual Magic (Su)
Beginning at first level, the warlock can partake in ritual magic. This grants the warlock and any other arcane spellcaster he chooses within 30ft. a +1 bonus to their caster level and to Spellcraft checks. In addition, 1/day (per bonus granted by ritual magic) while using ritual magic, if the warlock sacrifices a number of hit points equal to 5 times the spell level, the warlock can apply the effect of any metamagic feat he knows without increasing the spells level or casting time. Activating ritual magic is a move action, and lasts until the warlock ceases to use a move action to maintain the effect.
At 7th level the bonus granted by ritual magic increases to +2. 1/day (per bonus granted by ritual magic) the warlock can now choose to inflict 1 point of Con damage to himself to increase the save DC of his spell by the bonus granted by his ritual magic.
At 13th level the bonus increases to +3. 1/day (per bonus granted by ritual magic) the warlock can use a single full-round action in place of the move action ro maintain ritual magic. Any spells cast before the start of the warlocks next turn, by creatures affected by his ritual magic, do not count against the casters normal daily allotment of spells.
At 19th level the bonus increases to +4. 1/day (per bonus granted by ritual magic) the warlock can sacrifice two spell slots during the casting of a single spell to overcome a single immunity of a single target creature or creature in the area of effect of his spell.
Spellfire (Su)
The warlock can sacrifice his spells to channel raw magical energy. The damage, duration, and target of this energy depends on his caster level and the level of the spell channeled. Activating spellfire channeling is a free action, though using the spellfire is a standard action. The spellfire channel lasts for 24 hours or until the warlock channels another spell as spellfire or has no more uses remaining. The warlock gains 1 use of spellfire plus 1 per spell level channeled, and each use of spellfire deals 1d6 damage plus the warlocks Charisma modifier. The warlock may apply multiple dice per use at the cost of his other uses per day. For example, the warlock uses a free action to channel a 1st level spell. He gains 2 uses of spellfire over the next day, which can deal 1d6+Cha damage each, or he may use both at once to deal 2d6+Cha damage. The warlock may not use 0th level spells to channel spellfire.
The warlock must choose at 1st level what form his spellfire will take, chosen one from the following list of spellfire shapes. At 6th, 11th, and 15th level he may choose another shape available to his level or lower. If a warlock knows multiple shapes, he must choose which shape to apply when he activates his spellfire channel.
1st Level Shapes: Touch, Ray, 10ft. Burst (save for half)
6th Level Shapes: 10ftx30ft Cylinder, 60ft. Line, 20ft. Radius (all save for half)
11th Level Shapes: 30ft. Cone, Weapon, 10ftx30ft Wall (lasts for 1 round per use of spellfire applied)
Planar Servant (Su)
At 3rd level, the warlock is granted a familiar by his associates in the planes. He may select a creature from the wizard familiar list and apply the fiendish template, or may select an imp, mephit or quasit. This ability otherwise functions as the wizard familiar.
Spell Circle (Ex)
At 4th level the warlock can create a summoning circle usable 1/day. Doing so requires 10 minutes of time and normal spell components. The warlock can use this circle to extend the duration of any summoning spell targeted in the circle to 24 hours.
Pact (Su)
At 8th level, and every 4 levels thereafter, the warlock gains knowledge of a pact. This is an ability useful to him in his pursuits and dealings with fiends or fey. Each ability uses up the summoning circle for the day unless otherwise indicated. The warlock may select a pact from the list below:
Absorb Spell: If the warlock is standing in the circle when a spell is targeted on him by another creature, the warlock is unaffected by the spell and instead gains a spell slot of equal value. This spell slot must be used within 24 hours or it disappears.
Bind: Any planar binding spell cast by the warlock is treated as being affected by an inward magic circle against evil spell. In addition, the DC to escape the binding is increased by 4.
Commune: The warlock can use an active summoning circle to communicate with a fiend of his lineage. Not only does this fulfill his Planar Bond, but the warlock may also ask of the fiends a single question with a yes/no answer. This functions as a commune with diety spell.
Fortify Spell: The warlock may use the circle to enhance any spell with a target of self. If the warlock casts such a spell while standing within the circle, the duration of the spell is increased to 24 hours.
Planar Unity: The warlock may call upon his planar allies to fortify him. He gains DR 5/good for 24 hours.
Sacrifice: The warlock can gain benefits from the death of a good creature within the circle. If the warlock is within 30ft. when this death occurs, he gains temporary hit points equal to his level which last for 24 hours or until lost.
Foe of Good (Su)
At 9th level and 17th level the warlock gains a special ability when combating good foes, selected from the following:
Final Death: Any good outsider slain by warlock must make a Will save (DC 10 + Warlock's level) or be permanently destroyed.
Bane of Good: The warlock gains +2 weapon damage against any creature with the good subtype, including creatures with a good aura.
Corrupted Soul: The warlock gains the ability to detect good at will, and an evil aura. The warlock's alignment becomes evil. This functions as the cleric ability.
Resist Temptation: The warlock gains a +4 bonus to saving throws against the special abilities, spell-like abilities or spells of creatures with the good subtype.
Inverse Ritual (Su)
At 10th level the warlock can choose to inverse his ritual magic. Each round he activates or maintains ritual magic, he can choose to apply his bonus instead as a penalty to the caster level and spellcraft checks of any spellcasters within 30 feet. He cannot use this ability in conjunction with his other ritual magic abilities.
Final Bond (Ex)
The warlock becomes suffused with raw magical energy. He gains immunity to poison, sleep, paralysis and stunning. The warlock no longer requires sleep (although still requires rest to refresh his spells) or to eat or breath. His body survives purely on the magical energy it produces. He may use his spellfire channel without sacrificing his spells. Each such use deals 2d6+Cha damage.
Ex-Warlocks
Spoiler:
At first level the warlock begins his long association with the creatures of the lower planes. A warlock may not willingly commit a good act, though he may associate with good creatures and even help them do good, so long as it also serves the warlock's ends. In addition, the warlock must make contact with a neutral or evil outsider or organization at least once per week. If he fails to do so, the warlock loses all his class abilities except weapon and armor proficiencies and his ability to cast spells. An atonement spell is necessary to restore these abilities.
I have been playing around with a similar idea. It really, really irks me to have the players finding cool and interesting magic items only to have them all sold for gold and then converted into belts of super-high stats, or rings of you can't hit me anymore. I haven't come up with exactly what I am going to do yet, so I am interested in hearing ideas from the rest of you. At the moment, I am only allowing my players to buy +2 stat boost items, protection items, and magic weapons. But they can buy cool and fun items almost at will, but I get to decide what is a cool and fun item. :) I would love to find a way to have them only get magic items from the adventure, but will need to come up with a way to transfer magic +'s on weapons and armor to other types of weapons and armor so that they can "keep" the items while transferring them to items they can actually use.
-Lisa
I've been trying my darndest to find it, but about a year ago someone posted their houserule system for replacing the "core" item bonuses (deflection, AC, natural armor, etc) with a level-based point-buy system. I can't seem to find the thread, and sadly do not remember who posted the information.
I still have the information on my hard drive, but I hesitate to post it until I can give credit.
A lot of people got burned by 4th edition and somehow have created an illusion in their minds that Paizo is secretly setting them up for the same kind of let down. Paizo has steted publily that their goal is to see to it that...
Like Kirth, your last point is also your best.
It would be insane for Paizo to base their strategy off of analysis of the fall-out from 4th Edition, and then to turn around and conduct business in the same way as Wizards and expect a different result.
My group just finished Part One (we heavily roleplayed for a good 3 hours before combat even started).
Spoiler:
They finished off each of the three groups with a moderate challenge - each character took some damage and used up most of their spells or abilities by the end. The most dangerous encounter was the last, as the ranger was dishing out as much damage as the party fighter. The dinosaur companion was very useful, dishing out and taking most of the damage along with the fighter. The cleric went through a few channel energy attempts to heal up the party instead of using his spells.
Overall I can definitely see a power bump from 3.5, but I think the dynamic and balance will work with 3 characters. If a fourth joins, as he said he may (as a fire-elemental sorcerer) I may actually need to increase the challenges.
The key of course is getting one. Not every paladin could assume that one was waiting for them in thier destiny, especially if you played a low magic campaign where weapons of that power either did not exist, or were items of fell evil that must be destroyed.
Agreed. It worked the same way across the board, too: the wizard's sole purpose in adventuring was to look for other wizards' spellbooks to loot, because he didn't get any free spells known just for "leveling up."
That was my favorite argument to use back in the Alpha phase. The fighter has to spend his wealth on weapons and armor. The wizard not only gets better weapons and armor in the form of spells, but he gets them for free every level and can then spend his wealth on more spells.
My guess is they gave wizards free spells to balance them with sorcerers and divine casters. But it did a disservice to the game as a whole. Unfortunately this problem is still evident (although less so with decent combat feats) in Pathfinder.
One of my (many) crusades is to try to encourage and support the idea that simply and only reading an adventure for entertainment is enough to get your money's worth out of it. You don't have to run EVERYTHING.
But I'm probably not a good example to go by, since I buy adventures simply to look at and have lots that I haven't even read yet sitting on shelves at home and at work and in the trunk of my car...
Paizo certainly makes this strategy viable. I might actually get to all my APs as either a DM or player, but even if not I still have:
The short stories to read for leisure.
Great new monsters to add to my existing games.
New options, magic items, feats, and rules (love the Tiefling work in Bastards of Erebus by the way, that's a lot of detail "for free")
And that's not even going into the great artwork and fun adventure ideas I get flipping through any module.
I don't disagree with your statement about "one true way". I'm not advocating that. My issue is more with the atrocious condescension aimed towards optimizers throughout this (and other) threads. I don't even count myself as an optimizer - my last two characters were a HoH Dread Necromancer (which, according to the WotC optimization forum, has lots of dead levels, and is useless past a certain point. That's fine, it probably does. At least that post wasn't rude or condescending, nor are most of them.), and prior to that, a core Fighter - no multiclassing, etc. I simply find the optimization threads interesting and potentially useful. I don't find the attempts to suppress them to be in the spirit of the game (either D&D or Pathfinder), nor in the spirit of this board.
I don't understand why so many people feel threatened by a forum that supports a style of gameplay, or by those types of players that, from reports, aren't even allowed in their game in the first place. People champion free thought and creativity, and then make comments of "I don't want my players even thinking about that!"
It's sickening.
There's a Play-by-Post forum here, something I (and likely others) find no interest in, but I don't see anyone petitioning for it's removal, and I'm sure quite a few people would be up in arms at the suggestion.
I know you said you were stepping away, and if you don't respond, that's fine. You said your piece, I'm saying mine.
I'll be honest, like a few others here and elsewhere I've been personally put off of the concept of optimization because of a few bad eggs, but I try not to judge. You've been a shining example of how to conduct a discussion.
I was thinking all day though:
1) "optimizing" - as you defined it is picking something good at the expense of something worse. Like you said, most of us do it at some point or another. For example, the other day I made a cleric and to maximize (read: optimize) his healing ability I took Extra Channeling.
2) "Optimizing" (captial O) - what James mentioned and what I was talking about, is maximizing something to the extreme so that no other choice is considered superior.
When we talk about optimizing, we're mostly talking about #1 and that is fine. But when people try to enforce #2 on the game table it's a nuisance unless everybody is into it. Does that make sense?
By the way, you could easily talk the same way about "roleplaying" and "Roleplaying".
It's sad because as human beings we should seek to better ourselves and provide our lives with rich and rewarding experiences.
And that's pigeonholing someone who optimize as not having a rich and rewarding experience.
Quote:
Sure, I'm not saying a person who Optimizes all the time is wasting their life - they are enjoying it the way they want. What I am saying is that there is more to life. Take a risk now and then. Maybe you'll enjoy playing a Sorcerer who only casts divination spells and fights with two weapons.
Because optimizers only play one character type?
Quote:
To go back to your candy bar analogy:
Non-optimization lets you choose what you want from the bulk section.
Optimization says that you must only buy [Peanut Brittle] because it [has the most varied ingredients per price point].
Where does optimization say that? ANYTHING can be optimized. As people have mentioned before, you're optimizing when you build any character. You put more points in one skill over another? Optimized. Why'd you choose that feat instead of the other one?
This attitude is exactly the same as the attitude people describe the optimizers as having.
I think we'd better just agree to disagree. Nobody wins in these debates. I'll just conclude my piece with this final thought:
My argument applies to ANY situation (even roleplayers). Anybody who thinks there is only ONE TRUE WAY to do something is living life in a bubble, and likely making a good many upset angry at the same time. I've told as many "roleplayers" that they cannot play the CN Kender Rogue for the sake of sanity as I have optimizers they cannot use a certain book or feat.
Not all that surprising, compared to the plethora of ways that portable computers have been portrayed inaccurately. Someone was bound to imagine something close to what we use (briefcase + typewrite - size).
Why is it sad? Why does it continue to be an issue, from either side of the fence, when people choose to play a way that is different from others? Almond Joy has nuts. Mounds don't.
It's sad because as human beings we should seek to better ourselves and provide our lives with rich and rewarding experiences.
Sure, I'm not saying a person who Optimizes all the time is wasting their life - they are enjoying it the way they want. What I am saying is that there is more to life. Take a risk now and then. Maybe you'll enjoy playing a Sorcerer who only casts divination spells and fights with two weapons.
To go back to your candy bar analogy:
Non-optimization lets you choose what you want from the bulk section.
Optimization says that you must only buy [Peanut Brittle] because it [has the most varied ingredients per price point].
You get the point. And the point is this: The act of having this debate, the very act itself, is ridiculous.
Do you drive around with the parking brake on?
I ask, because it's the modern day equivalent to walking around with a loaded crossbow. At some point it either breaks or something bad happens.
It's a legitimate concern for a gaming group. Players invariably want everything to go in their favour, so of course if the DM has a surprise encounter they all have their weapons available, drawn, and loaded...except when they don't. The OP was getting at situations when it would not be reasonable to keep a crossbow loaded.
It's interesting that the Char-Op defenders instantly assumed James was writing about messageboard or forum behaviour, when his rant was directed instead at the specific situation of an Optimizer criticizing another player character without concern for that players feelings or ideas.
I totally understand the purpose, need, and behaviour on Char-Op boards. And I agree that in some cases it serves an overall purpose to educate gamers (players and DMs alike). But pushing your singular view onto another player to the point of ruining their game is no fun for anyone.
I've had this happen both in game, and behind the non-optimizers back. I politely told the optimizer that it wasn't any of their business how the other players played the game and left it at that.
James' other point that I got was that if you are stuck optimizing, you sacrifice a myriad of other options that would make for really interesting and dynamic characters at the table (both in and out of combat). At that point, you ARE excluding creativity for the sake of optimization, and that's sad.
Classic D&D AND a single player CRPG. Totally faithful to the original module and you can control all 6 party members if you want to.
Just make sure to install the "Circle of 8 mod" (Co8) if you are going to play...(a link is at the bottom of the Wikipedia page)... as it makes everything better...
Cheers
Great game. First and most successful use of the full D&D 3.5 rules. You can even ready attacks, charge, cast teleport (awesome), and generally actually feel like you are playing ToEE AND D&D at the same time. Plus, it runs on most systems.
I think things are still okay when you factor in the relative ease of casting spells compared to editions before 3rd. Sure, a 10d6 fireball isn't as impressive as it once was, but it's much easier to cast successfully and repeatedly.
Healing during combat is like taking one step forward, two steps back.
Case in point of why I agree:
Our party comes across two Spawn of Kyuss. One member gets infected, they and three others run in terror. My cleric and the wizard are left to fight.
Option A: Let the wizard try to fight them with his Fiery Burst and Grease spell, run after the party member (at 2/3 her speed) into a dark dungeon, and figure out how to remove the worm.
Option B: Shoot the undead in the face with light of venya for 12d6 damage.
I chose B. Sure the infected character died, but it was that or the whole party one by one.
The only time my clerics heal in combat is when Joe the Babarian has a rage/power attack/adamantine thing going for him and he's the surest thing for victory. In my experience, healing in combat only provokes the enemy into wailing on an already fragile character.
"Woohoo! I'm back from -1 hit points and up to 17! And prone! What? That giant is still trying to hit me? Bye everybody!"
It would apply to any effect or spell that specifically mentions negative energy in its description (for example, enervation or inflict spells, or the effects of the negative energy plane).
It is a vague description, but it's intended as a catch-all. Got a draco-lich with a negative energy breath weapon? Nope.
No. A character would only become evil through willfull and continuous acts of evil (or perhaps a single horrendous willful act).
Aubrey is probably right about the Paladin - they lose class powers for intentional evil, or violating the code (says nothing about intentional or not).
uys always forget the xp charts. A 20th level cleric had 2'700'000 xp putting him in the same group as a 17 th wizard. Also recall that a 17th level wizard got 28 spells total while the 20th level cleric got 49 spells
so sure they had more powerful spells but cleric could wear armor, had blunt weapons could use shields and a d8 HD...if ya recall HD stopped at 9th level. Also a stiff wind stopped spells lol, and touch attack stopped your spells and you lost them. Clerics had em to spare
You're right. Their hit points and experience totals were actually very close to a fighters, so they were capable warriors. They also had to be very careful lest a DM take away all their spells.
I had one player, long time fan of 2nd Edition and disliked learning 3rd, comment that:
a) This was the first time he had ever played a druid, but he loved the changes and how easy everything was to find.
b) He hates doing skills. So much so it was a running joke for 10 years for him to "Do your skills!" He looked at me mid-creation and said "Holy crap, I'm done my skills!" and then "Cool! I get to pick skills for my dinosaur!"
c) He didn't want to play initially, but I bribed him. We played for 3 hours until well past midnight.
your party was under leveled and undermanned for that part of the adventure, its no surprise you got a TPK
I don't think it was such a foregone conclusion. Consider the following:
The adventure suggests the PCs should hit 3rd level after exploring much of Kelmarane. They had just entered the ruins. They had more XP than a normal party as there were only 3 of them.
The giant mamba is a tough CR 3, but rates as "Very Difficult" for 3 2nd level characters.
These 2nd level characters had:
Rolled ability scores, average point-buy value was 38.
Bonues items: 5th level wand of magic missile, adamantine scimitar, ring of feather fall.
Campaign traits.
Use of most splatbooks.
Finally, they overheard the gnolls talking about "who had to feed the beast in that building as it has killed many of us" and they still went in with no prep.
Frankly, throw all this together with the fact they did not fight intelligently and they got what they deserved.
The cleric needs a rewrite in my view, it's not a completed class as is in pathfinder. I am running RotRL now so I will start with the pathfinder gods. Planning out the base class abilities, the domain powers need actually planning and balancing, and the spell lists need cleaning up. I think domains are good, but not done right in either 3.x or pathfinder. They could be used for so much more to make various clerics stand out more from each other. I think a small standard list of spells that all clerics have is fine, but that at least half a cleric's list of spells is based on the domains he has. So that is the direction I will be trying at first, I may abondon it if it gets out of hand but I think it will make more interesting clerics. It may end up I have a cleric class and specialty priests, 2nd ed style. Who knows. When I am done I may post my cleric/priest class(es).
Maybe it's late and I'm tired, but while I agree those things were changed a great deal, and they are among many changes, what exactly about them was MMO-style?
The MMO style comes in to play when multiple changes were made per item, and that it was done so (overkill style) just to quiet a group of vocal people.
So, if I understand correctly:
You do NOT mean they made changes to PLAY like a MMO.
You mean they made changes like a MMO-programming team makes to keep certain groups of players happy; MMO's typically make a great number of small and willy-nilly changes with "unintended consequences".
Just making sure. It seems people on her thought you meant down the path of the first point.
Quote:
Maybe I'm too much of a cook. You can't "take back" spices, so you never add too much at one time to keep from hurting your dish.
Thanks for the clarification. Both posts helped me see what you were saying, and in some cases I agree (for example, the paladin) but I think that the changes, while perhaps many at once, fit into the existing scheme of the game (same example, basing Mercy on Lay on Hands).
My group quit Age of Worms after "Wormcrawl Fissure," and never got past "Into the Maw" for Savage Tide. They hated the fast-track advancement, and, worse, hated the fact that most APs seem to just degenerate into endless slug-fests at higher levels.
You're just not playing the game right. ;)
I agree with James. I would love a high-level, even Epic-level, AP. But not at the expense of a slow pace. I don't want characters going from 1st to 20th level in a matter of days. I don't know if that is possible to do well in a 6-volume AP.
That's a lot of letters. I'm not sure what changes you feel are MMO-style? The Paladin Smite Evil is about all I can think of.
I'll answer only if you agree to not accuse me of bringing he same arguments up. :-P
The Paladin
The Cleric
The Spiked Chain
Polymorph (again)
The Half-Orc
All of these things were "overdone." 12 changes (arbitrary number) when one or maybe two would have sufficed.
Maybe it's late and I'm tired, but while I agree those things were changed a great deal, and they are among many changes, what exactly about them was MMO-style?
(And no, I don't care if we rehash old posts - this is our discussion after all.)
It only falls below the power of a forth level spell if you are already hasted.
That isn't really true. Even with the additional attack it is a weak 4th level spell. It just isn't really bad if you can ensure you get that attack.
I disagree with your statement because I don't think it is a weak 4th level cleric spell. If haste is a third-level wizard spell, a similar combat spell for clerics is reasonable at fourth level.
Posts
