|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Matthew Downie wrote:
As long as you throw out the cr system, because its meaningless right now.
Straw man. No one said the wizard was useless if you ban a few spells, just that trimming their spell list has an impact on their power, obviously.
A bipolar class who isn't particularly good at the persona it occupies at any one time. It is either a poor man's combatant or a decent face character, but good grief don't get caught in the wrong one.
It's kind of like getting to play a gestalt character with a slower experience track than everyone else in the party and you can't use one side of the gestalt unless you take a minute to change, which kind of makes you ask yourself why you chose to gestalt in the first place.
To be fair, I personally have issue with the balance assumptions of the game as well. I post here because the community is full of people who are far better at it than the developers(in my opinion). It is a great place to work on the system and figure out how to polish your home brew. I have far more faith in the opinions of my fellow posters than the people who gave us the jewel that was the ecclisitheurge class.
It probably is a great tool for GM's, but the social aspect can, at the very least, be accommodated in a class with a solid chassis like the slayer. It's certainly not going to perfectly emulate the social persona, but with some planning you can get pretty close, which is why I think a number of posters question the validity of the class.
Just having a hat of disguise on a slayer checks off a number of boxes which is worrying.
Rhedyn isn't wrong here, this is an appeal to tradition, which invalidates the argument.
That said, the premise of a class that has two separate personas that basically can't interact in the same scenario does make me question the general weakness of each persona on its own.
The class basically comes down to being a poor man's gestalt that allows for both a social character and a combat character on one chassis, but by making each persona far weaker, you end up always being second fiddle in everything you try to accomplish.
In the end, I guess I don't have issue with the idea behind the class the way cbh does, but the fundamental balance assumptions its built upon.
Does that help?
? Im not sure how you could say that. Are you constantly hurting yourself to keep that going for some reason? How is this relevant to game balance when this will literally never happen?
I feel like you missed the point entirely. the guy is saying that there is an objectively correct answer, not that he had that answer to give.
Heh, am I the only one who read this as math doesn't matter?
Heh, I read the last few sentences about the crossbow archetype and my slushy came out my nose. I think there may be a definite perception gap between us if you consider the crossbow fighter and the druid to function on the same landscape. :)
Feat scaling is a good start. I wouldn't give tonnes more feats because it becomes a game of book keeping after a while. I would definitely give martial classes a second good save and extra skills, then open up other, more fantastic, uses of skills after a certain rank investment. This does effect casters some, but it really is kind of a drop in the bucket for them and a pretty significant buff to non casters(with their larger pool of ranks). Basically every non caster without sixth level casting or more gets two more ranks to work with.... Fighter could probably use four more.
So this is basically the funny version of what I've been trying to say(and clearly failing, by all accounts).
I... well, I kind of assumed we were talking about pathfinder. I mean, if I change all wizards so that their most powerful display of magic was a rainbow rabbit puppet dance, then I guess your average street tough could take them out. I was trying to take your argument in the best light I could.
Okay, I'll be super explicit then. If you have spell casters as capable as the ones that currently exist within the game that we are actually discussing(because why would we be talking about any other sort), then someone who is great with a sword in a realistic(non mythic hero/anime) way will not be equivalent.
If that is true, then the above mundane swordsman is not a hero within the context of the game because of the issues that naturally stem from someone having a binary choice like can I stab it? yes/no While another player in the same game has an effect on the narrative of the story in as many areas as he/she cares to dabble in.
I... am really at a loss as to how your missing my point. Are the magic users in any of the instances you mention anywhere remotely as powerful as full casters in this game? Will cleverness and gumption work out more often than not if you are a good sword fighter engaging someone flying, invisible, and summoning the Seven friggin incarnations of all hell to crush you?
I don't care what happened once in a story somewhere, its not relevant because we aren't playing story time. There is no way for a fighter to face down a wizard with that kind of power and win in any sort of realistic sense, so throw realism to the curb so that we can play out the narratives of the stories you mention without feeling like we had to throw the game rules out the window to make it happen.
of course there are fantasy heroes in novels without magic, but we aren't playing a novel. The reason the magic user in a lot of novels don't ultimately defeat the hero are pretty contrived in most cases, and you'd be hard pressed to make that fly at a gaming table without a number of players feeling pretty butt hurt about it afterwards.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Im just pointing out that if you want to use this game specifically while also living within a basic gritty realism focused narrative, then you cant use the casting classes presented. You can't even use mundane classes beyond a certain level due to the falling from space while punching rhino's to death issue.
I think I mostly have an issue with people talking about a game system and conflating it with a fantasy narrative that they read in your average novel, when the two really are very dissimilar(within the context of pathfinder) if you care at all about equivalent experience of the player base.
Just gonna put this here
* Jiggy drops the mic and walks away*
I can't imagine heroes in a world whose very nature, and thus its physics, are tied to something like magic not being supernatural. I find the idea of a totally mundane(in the real world sense) person even existing in such a place breaks my suspension of disbelief. How does a species like that survive in that environment without some extremely heavy handed intervention? And really, who would put themselves out constantly to keep these terribly adapted creatures from extinction?
This needs to be quoted for the sake of its awesomeness.
Why does it matter that a dex fighter would take it anyway?
I really wish feats did interesting things on the whole, but that isn't really the state of the game. The reason why I was suggesting not to overdue the multiclass thing is precisely because of the effectiveness you mention. That said, if your dead set on it, go for it. Does skald rage interact with urban barbarian rage or do the two overlap? I haven't read the specifics in a while, but I worry that it may just default into a standard strength bump and run of its own rounds. I would want to iron out that detail before going any further.
Edit: Raging song looks like it would work separately, so maybe just jump into bard if you want to keep buffing your to hit... It'll have action economy issues though.
I played with the idea of a feat that allowed you to increase your critical threshold with finesse weapons in lieu of straight damage bonuses. It seemed like a more thematic way to approach dex to damage, but I would have to run numbers to figure out how critting most of the time instead of having straight damage bonuses would play out. If you had a +5-7 modifier in strength at end game, but got a critical threat on every swing that was likely to hit your opponent, it would emulate that sort of savvy combatant that everyone is trying to make.
Thats perhaps a touch hyperbolic. I think that the fighter is still pretty much boned with all of the feats you mentioned due to action economy and poor saving throws. The elephant in the room is clearly the arcane and divine full caster that just ruins your day, you get a shot at taking one of them out. Not a fantastic shot, but its there.