|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Communal 10/level spells are poor choices because 10/min level is significantly better than 10/min/level/target.
For an imminent danger to your entire party, would you rather spend four+ rounds and all your level two spell slots or one action and one level three spell slot?
Communal spells are overpowered in my opinion. In one round, you can give your entire party near immunity to a specific threat, which is crippling to many kinds of opponent. With a lesser rod of reach they don't even need to stand together.
Level 3 Spells: This might be the worst spell level of all lists, in the entire game. There are less than 4 spells you'd ever want to prepare on a normal adventuring day and they are all spells from a previous edition which didn't get nerfed.
Blindness, Daylight (or Deeper Darkness for a group with darkvision), Dispel Magic, Invisibility Purge, Magic Circle against Evil, Magic Vestment, Prayer, Stone Shape, Summon Monster III, Wind Wall, and the Communal versions of Delay Poison and Resist Energy all seem like useful spells to have prepared. Which nine of those are you saying are spells I'd never want on a normal adventuring day? And that's not to mention Remove Blindness/Deafness, Remove Curse, Remove Disease and Water Breathing which you can leave a slot open for.
The economics of it are complicated by the fact that spin-offs can provide a significant income, meaning that even if RPG rulebooks & adventures run at a loss, they can often make the money back.
D&D is a valuable intellectual property providing income from miniatures, movies, novels, 1980s cartoons, comics and videogames.
Similarly, superhero comics make very little money, but so long as superhero movies make billions, it hardly matters.
He can actually write four scrolls a day (they take 2 hours if under 250 gp)
There is a (weird) rule in the magic item creation section which doesn't seem to make any exception for scrolls or potions: "Regardless of the time needed for construction, a caster can create no more than one magic item per day."
K177Y C47 wrote:
What do you think your fighter/rogue is doing? If you are not the only martial in the party (which you probably are not) then they are probably right there with you, so someone in reach is not that hard
Not incredibly hard (assuming the enemy is standing on the ground close to the martial ally with nothing in the way), but to avoid giving the enemy a chance to be woken up, you need a combo like:A: Fighter charges the enemy.
B: Enemy gets a round to do whatever he wants - retreat, kill the fighter, turn invisible, etc.
C: If the enemy and fighter are still adjacent, Warpriest moves in and double-touches the bad guy.
D: Fighter inflicts coup-de-grace.
Quite a lot of things could go wrong between A & C.
It's an effective technique, but not an instant kill. If you have a third ally who can teleport the fighter to the right position, it gets easier.
It's not a combo you can pull off effortlessly, though. You need to have conserved your blessings for the purpose. You need a healthy ally with a weapon already in reach of the BBEG. You need to time it such that your ally acts immediately after you, so no allies of the BBEG can intervene to wake him up before the CdG. You need to land two melee touch attacks (sometimes easy, but what about the flying mirror-imaged wizard?). You, presumably, need to penetrate spell resistance twice? You need the BBEG not to know this is your technique or he could have an ally standing by with a readied action to wake him up should he fall asleep in combat...
The 3.5 Codzilla thing was because clerics and druids who picked the right combination of options could outperform martials in melee while remaining full casters. They're still top-tier classes but I don't see them winning the DPR olympics. (Unless there's a wild-shape option I'm forgetting about.)
I find it helps to think that only adventurers level up by adventuring; it's their personality type.
(Some psychologist divide people up into 'Auditory Learners', who can learn from listening to lectures, 'Visual Learners', who can learn by watching or reading, and 'Kinesthetic Learners' who can only really learn by doing.)
So the heir to the throne would level up just by having tutors intensively train him. Someone who's been trained by the best swordsmen in the kingdom for fifteen years ought to be better at fighting than a level 1 barbarian.
If you want to have a Lex Luthor genius who is dangerous, but not through his own personal power, the nearest you can come in the Pathfinder rules is probably a high level aristocrat/expert. A low level character is always going to be weak willed and incompetent compared to a high level character.
The only ruler you could really represent as a low level character is a fairly feeble one - either a fool who received his position through inheritance and is unlikely to last long, or a figurehead with a high level guy behind him who is the real ruler.
Wizards are only guaranteed access to two spells per level, they are reliant on chance and GM fiat for all the rest, neither of which are guaranteed.
Not guaranteed, but cheap scrolls being available in every town is the normal game assumption.
The differences I've noticed:
Sorcerers take a while to get going. You get to level 4, and you finally get to learn one, and only one, second level spell. A wizard could be casting three different level two spells a day at level 3.
With wizards and other prepared characters, if you cast a spell, you no longer have that spell. For me that makes casting spells a stressful decision. If I cast Fly now, and I only prepared it once, I won't have access to it for the rest of the day, which could be fatal. That leads me to try to save all my spells for emergencies. (Most people don't seem to have this issue. It can also be mitigated with Pearls of Power.)
Ipslore the Red wrote:
Also, if you take 50 damage in a fight, you then have to make the party wait five minutes before continuing. This will cause buffs to run out, give enemies a chance to regroup, etc.
Ah, binary chop technique. In English, you can identify a single letter with five yes or no questions.
Ah, the old 'Fighters with swords and shields are overpowered' problem.
With something like a Skeletal Champion, you're free to play them as crazed life-hating undeads with no survival instinct who attack whoever seems easiest to murder.
If you can, don't let any one PC get too high AC. It makes fights silly. What intelligent enemy is going to keep fighting if they can't land a hit? Then you get a situation where everyone is running all the time.
Beyond that, I wouldn't worry too much, as long as the players are having fun.
Intelligent enemies should make similar decisions to the PCs. If there's an enemy who seems dangerous but easy to hit, you should probably target them.
There might be other considerations - some foes may think, "I am going to challenge the strongest enemy, to demonstrate my invincible power!"
If you're unsure, rolling a dice openly is usually acceptable. "On a 1 or 2, he attacks the cleric. On a 3 or 4, he moves to attack the fighter. On a 5 or 6, he provokes an AoO from the cleric and runs past him to attack the witch."
Kirth Gersen wrote:
If you're going to repost this, you might want to edit the tone of that one. If I ban some of the more abusable magics (Simulacrum and teleporting to places you've only scried on and dazing metamagic, etc) and ensure that the fighter finds an intelligent magic weapon that gives him some cool abilities, and it results in a game that seems balanced, that's not 'storytime hour', whatever that is. It's Pathfinder with houserules. And who plays Pathfinder without houserules?
Things I'd do in preference to rolling 1d6 and multiply it by 40 for Disintegrate damage:
I'd never roll 100d3 (I'd get a computer to do that for me) but rolling one dice and multiplying isn't normal and skews the random distribution. Taking 10d6 damage rarely produces a number outside the 25 to 45 range. If you rolled one dice and multiplied it by 10, there's a good chance you'd take 60 damage, which makes sudden death a lot more likely.
Since this dead thread was just linked to I'll note that the specific Bestiary rules for energy drain say:"If a negative level is not removed before 24 hours have passed, the affected creature must attempt a Fortitude save. On a success, the negative level goes away with no harm to the creature. On a failure, the negative level becomes permanent."
How much difference is there between three 1200XP enounters and one single 3600XP encounter?
Depends on environmental factors. If it's the difference between 'fighting as a team against one owlbear' and 'fighting three owlbears who are all attacking at once', then the latter is massively more dangerous. The party will be taking three times as much damage per round, and will have to inflict three times as much damage to win. One owlbear is a CR 4 encounter and three is a CR 7 encounter.
But if you can get in a situation where three owlbears are stuck in a corridor and can only attack one at a time, it's not much more dangerous than three separate encounters.
Yes. In the scenario described, the wizard spends the first two rounds of the combat casting two spells on himself, then can start casting offensive spells on round three. The archer fighter, meanwhile, can be doing full attacks on every one of those rounds. It's not exactly a clear-cut case of superior caster narrative power.
Some would call that a role-playing problem. I would call it a role-playing opportunity.
if you are ambushed on a shakey rope bridge with enemies on either side of you shooting arrows. The fighter can pull out a bow and shoot back, the rogue and make acrobatics rolls to make his way to one end and stab someone. The Wizard casts fly and calmly floats above the battle attacking with offensive magic
Unless he has first cast an 'immunity to arrows' spell, that really isn't going to end well for him.
There is a contradiction though. One says "unless noted otherwise" whereas the other says "unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description."
They're not inherently contradictory. If the second one is the correct one, the first one is merely being annoyingly vague - it could be taken to mean "unless noted otherwise, for example in the spell description".
I find that relying on CLW wands to heal the party adds up really quick. If you have a party with, say, a Barbarian and an Anti-Paladin on the frontlines getting pounded all day long, you chew through CLW and Infernal Healing wands like nobody's business. And in-combat healing isn't even an option with them, and that's needed sometimes.
It's about 270GP per 100HP. It's a valid option, depending on WBL assumptions and party makeup. If your GM is pressuring you into fighting ten combats a day, it's probably the best option, since it saves your cleric spells for in-combat healing and other emergencies.
The Ranger who's invested in a sack of wands of cure light wounds doesn't tend to run out of (out-of-combat) healing.
Days and sessions can be independent from one another. You could have a day that lasts five gaming sessions involving ten battles, and dozens of role-playing encounters.
The only real way to stretch a caster's resources at higher levels is to make them participate in five or more combats a day, consistently, which means most of your days just consistent of combat.
I don't think the last part of that sentence is true. If I make you fight ten combats one day, and each takes ten rounds, that's still only ten minutes of the day spent in battle. Anything could happen in the other 23 hours 50 minutes.
Do I even need to mention how crucial Dispel Magic is beyond 10th level? Oh, it doesn't come up often, but when you need to cast it, you NEED to cast it, either that or run away because you can't hit the BBEG even on a nat 20 due to displacement combined with absurd AC boosting spells.
I've played through APs where that never happens. Optimized martials with buffs always seem to be able to keep up with enemy ACs. Spells like True Seeing can overcome Displacement, or you can just overwhelm it by attacking them enough times. Dispel Magic seems like a '50% chance of negating one enemy action, 50% chance of nothing happening' spell.
Simon Legrande wrote:
No, they only suck at HELPING the rest of the party...
I'm currently playing a humans-only campaign. I don't miss the other races at all.
Reading this thread I get the impression that both side think the same thing, but are misrepresenting the other side so that they can Win the argument. Unless anyone really thinks that the best action for a cleric is to Top up the parties HP in the middle of combat when they are not likely to go down that round?
Sometimes it is, if (a) it might prevent a party member from dying three rounds later, and (b) you can't think of anything better to do with your action.
Is your 9th level wizard going to use his one 5th level spell for Teleport?
A 9th level wizard with Int 20 and Arcane Bond can cast three 5th level spells per day.
And if your party is bigger than 4, how does he decide who to leave behind?
The fighter, if you don't have a rogue.