Selgard's page

Highlevel wizards are balanced IF you sandbag

I just realized that the title ends with sandbag and not douchebag as I was reading. Oh well, I can throw away my well constructed post about wizards with no self awareness...

I had a character who didn't take Power Attack until 6th level. Am I a bad person?

The Pathfinder is a system, TOZ. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Minmaxers, roleplayers, rulelawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it. Were you listening to me, TOZ, or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?

This is a major falacy.

First, of all they are taking up an entire round to try to do something creative, i.e. not defined in the rules.

And this is your major fallacy. It is covered in the rules, they've even given it a name: Deflect Arrows.

Whenever there is a situation that is simple, like this one, and a player wants to do something creative - let them. This gives them a chance to think of even more creative solutions to problems - it's called roleplaying.

I agree, but for what you're suggesting, why bother with rules at all? Just act out stories, because the rules just seem to be suggestions to you. Why bother with feats or class abilities at all?

This can be a DMs best friend, because it becomes a memorable moment in your game when a player goes "remember that time when..." It also makes up for all the Nos that a DM is likely to say to the outrageous questions players will ask.

Let me finish that sentence for you: "Remember that time when Biff wasted two feats to get deflect arrows, and the GM completely slapped him in the face by letting me do it for free?"

You may think that's an example of great GM'ing, but some of us disagree. And don't try to make this out to be more than the issue being discussed. There are times when there are situations that really aren't covered in the rules (this not being one of them), where GM's will let the players get creative. But to screw others over because someone else thinks a move is "cool", is just wrong.

Second they are taking possibly an entire round, not damaging an enemy or casting a spell to knock an arrow out of the way. Sure there is a feat for it, but with that feat one is able to take a full round action and still bat away an arrow. The feat serves it's purpose. If someone wanted to ready an action to bat an arrow away, they can't

Okay, while we're talking about fallacies, let's talk Slippery Slope: If I'm a 20th level mage, and I swing my staff with +20 BAB? I mean if I take a full action for it. A fighter gets to make a lot of attacks at +20 BAB, the Wizard will only be taking 1 a round, that's fair right?

And the fighter, if he spends a whole round rolling sulfur in a ball, can he cast fireball? A wizard can do it as a standard action, so if the fighter takes a full round, it's balanced right?

Does my PC knows that he/she even exists? Is existence subjective or objective? What is truth? Do I have to learn about truth to know it's meaning? Why are some things things?

*imagine vitriol-laced diatribe disparaging your group here*

Just so we observe proper internet protocol without wasting our time with more empty arguing. :)

Alternatively, if it's to the point where he makes the rest of the party useless in combat, just take him aside and ask him to tone it down a little. Let other people shine from time to time. If he's a decent person, he'll have no issues letting other people shine in combat at times.

Monk