I never ever ever allow people to use item creation feats to fudge the Wealth By Level guidelines. It's an entire subversion of the formula and just asking for trouble. If it's a one shot... I follow the PFS guidelines and ban all item creation feats period.
So when you do let them take them, do you make it clear that the only thing the feats do is give them the ability to craft items they can't find? They understand they are not actually saving any money?
Examples?
Because you get that 1/2X to spend on non-gear stuff.
Some examples of how my group handles lots of money, or how the Gm drains our cash in a montey hall campaign:
Castles: they're expensive to buy and maintain
Airships: see castles
buisnesses/investments: making the world grow
A jail, complete with interrogation room: first thing built in my kingmaker game, after 1st session, before kingdom building rules kicked in, at level 1
hiring mooks: assassins, spies, minions of all shapes and sizes
non-combat related magic items: chairs enchanted to be comfy, pens enchanted to have a comfortable grip and write smoothly
completely mundane jewlry/dress/suit
The largest block party the world has ever known (couple tons of magical fireworks imported from annother country, booze for 40,000 for a month)
At least 1/4 of the cash my current group has gotten has gone into non-combat related expenses. My worste geared PC once offered to pay annother PC 500,000 for an artifact at lvl 12 and was turned down. That character's gear was way below WBL for most of his carreer, but that was just 1/10 of the cash he could have thrown to get that item. Funding armies is expensive.
I never ever ever allow people to use item creation feats to fudge the Wealth By Level guidelines. It's an entire subversion of the formula and just asking for trouble. If it's a one shot... I follow the PFS guidelines and ban all item creation feats period.
So when you do let them take them, do you make it clear that the only thing the feats do is give them the ability to craft items they can't find? They understand they are not actually saving any money?
If it's a one shot delve then MIC is banned period. If it's a running campaign I pretty much spell it to them straight. that there are no money breaks for WBL caclucation and that all the feats will allow would be for future item construction.
I'm generally up front on this whenever starting a campaign beyond 1st level. I also will let them know that I tend to keep heroes busy and that to expect a premium on downtime for item crafting.
Time really is the bigger restriction in my mind. You could give the players all the money in the world, but if they don't get the downtime to craft it doesn't matter. Suddenly the wizard will be deciding if he wants to maintain a massive number of scrolls or get that new shiny headband of int.
Time really is the bigger restriction in my mind. You could give the players all the money in the world, but if they don't get the downtime to craft it doesn't matter. Suddenly the wizard will be deciding if he wants to maintain a massive number of scrolls or get that new shiny headband of int.
FWIW, PF's crafting rules allow the crafting of items while you adventure. If you have enough rest to prepare spells, you automatically have enough time to get some crafting done.
I'm not convinced this is a good idea, but there it is.
Crafthing magic items while adventuring is 4 times slower, and you can't accelerate it, so it can be up to 8 times slower.
the day i see an apg class solo an adult dragon thats 2 CR above it, i will believe any of them are overpowered, however to date, only a cleric, paladin, sorceror, and wizard in my gaming community have managed to pull it off
An Inquisitor can do it. In fact that's what they are designed for. Basically Monster slayers. Build Dragon Slaying Inquistor of LG god. With the use of Magic Vestment and Greater Magic Weapon with an inexpensive rod of extend spell and you can double the power of your armor and weapons. I'd go +1 on both the armor and weapon then add powers using those two spells to boost the enhancement bonus. Buff up a bit with spells and few potions and start kicking that dragon around the playground. Basically as good a Paladin for doing it.
Page and quote, please.
No, they don't.That's a common misunderstanding. The gold piece per level for characters doesn't get doubled just because you have a crafting feat.
The fact that it costs half as much to make an item has no impact on what your total gear cost is. It just means you end up with some extra gold you can spend on frivolous crap (a huge beer tab).
The rule is that the characters get what is on the WBL. There would have to be mentioning of an exception to that rule in order for the crafting feats to allow you to bypass it.
Speaking of wizards, btw, not only do crafting feats not allow you to break WBL, but your spell books and your back-up spell books DO count as part of your WBL. It's something to keep in mind when comparing wizards to other classes.
I have never counted spellbooks as part of the WBL because they are a class feature so I guess the arcane bond item, and the book start the wizard off in the hole.
I agree with you by the way, but I never really thought it about for some reason.
Summoner could too -- Inquisitor is likely too.the day i see an apg class solo an adult dragon thats 2 CR above it, i will believe any of them are overpowered, however to date, only a cleric, paladin, sorceror, and wizard in my gaming community have managed to pull it offThe Witch can probably do it. It has the best chance IMHO anyway.
Edit" +1 to what LT said also.
I honestly don't know the inquisitor class that well so I have no argument with which to confirm or deny that. I don't see the summoner beating a dragon though. Of course this also includes what some people would consider to be underhanded things, such as grappling the summoner and flying off. IIRC the Eidolon is dismissed if he is to far away. Another thing I seem to remember is that the hit point transfer ability is hindered by distance.
PS:I also admit my summoner knowledge is not that great either, but at least I have basic idea of how it works.
My basic thoughts were "spells and extra creatures" -- Lantern Archons are cheap, easy and deal good damage* with DR that the dragon doesn't automatically overcome. You spam a lot of them on to the field and basically "spray and pray" -- I would suggest using the eidolon as a front -- but remember I can recall him to me at that level too, invisibility and haste are good choices.
It is not any more ridiculous then that the wizard is not a powerful class because he can easily be defeated by one specific thing that must then always show up.Both sides seem to be using extremes and so both end up rather silly.
True. I brought up grapple just to illistrate a fairly easy to exploit weakness that wizards have -- it isn't the only one, or the most deadly, and it certainly isn't impossible to deal with on the wizard's end.
The wizard (like the fighter) isn't just a toady -- he isn't going to simply roll over and die (again neither is the fighter) but that doesn't mean he is impervious to the world around him either.
It is not any more ridiculous then that the wizard is not a powerful class because he can easily be defeated by one specific thing that must then always show up.Both sides seem to be using extremes and so both end up rather silly.
True. I brought up grapple just to illistrate a fairly easy to exploit weakness that wizards have -- it isn't the only one, or the most deadly, and it certainly isn't impossible to deal with on the wizard's end.
The wizard (like the fighter) isn't just a toady -- he isn't going to simply roll over and die (again neither is the fighter) but that doesn't mean he is impervious to the world around him either.
And if that is presented as a demonstration as to why the wizard is not a powerful class if must appear in a majority of encounters or else it does not accomplish what it is intended to.
Not to mention that if it is something a wizard can handle it is not really a good counter to a wizard being impervious.
I think the point is that the wizard is not as invincible as some try to make him look.
It is not any more ridiculous then that the wizard is not a powerful class because he can easily be defeated by one specific thing that must then always show up.Both sides seem to be using extremes and so both end up rather silly.
True. I brought up grapple just to illistrate a fairly easy to exploit weakness that wizards have -- it isn't the only one, or the most deadly, and it certainly isn't impossible to deal with on the wizard's end.
The wizard (like the fighter) isn't just a toady -- he isn't going to simply roll over and die (again neither is the fighter) but that doesn't mean he is impervious to the world around him either.
And if that is presented as a demonstration as to why the wizard is not a powerful class if must appear in a majority of encounters or else it does not accomplish what it is intended to.
Not to mention that if it is something a wizard can handle it is not really a good counter to a wizard being impervious.
You honestly believe that?
That the wizard level 13 is somehow even with a concentration check of +30 going to pull a DC 51 off easily? That somehow he will *always and forever* have freedom of movement available and running? That he'll *never* end up in a situation that he's been grappled by monsters that are quite capable of reaching and holding on to him?
The monsters I presented all can get to and grapple a wizard -- even one with a ring of freedom of movement since several of them have access to dispel (or greater dispel) magic.
The jokes people suggest are defenses against grappling (with the exception of freedom of movement -- which is not garuanteed to the wizard) generally show a lack of understanding of the grappling rules or the unrealistic expectation that somehow the wizard will *never* be in a situation where he's not ready -- or ambushed, or facing something that can close with him.
The real thing bothering me is all the people saying, "Oh yeah right the wizard will be prepared!" without anything to back up the claim. Somehow this mythical wizard has maximum Int (everytime), unlimited spells, Near unlimited wealth -- every spell he wants prepared or on a scroll that is immediately accessible, and facing monsters that are played like absolute idiots unless they are facing a fighter -- when they become tactical geniuses incapable of failure against a class that somehow can manage to do nothing right.
It's a false dichotomy that honestly shows a complete lack of thought process in my opinion.
****
AGAIN -- no one tactic is always going to be successful against a wizard -- however no wizard is always going to be ready for every tactic -- just like no fighter is going to fail at everything -- or even most things.
This doesn't mean that a GM should only target the current weakness of the wizard (whichever it might be) or that the fighter will win everytime -- both statements would also be false -- all I'm mantaining is that the wizard is far from the invulnerable Nigh-Godlike class that people suggest -- no matter what his level.
I find it amusing that, in order to prove the wizard isn't "invulnerable," all we've done is show that you need specialized tactics specifically built entirely based around going after the wizard.
He's not invulnerable, we just need extra particular and specialized means of dealing with him!
I find it amusing that, in order to prove the wizard isn't "invulnerable," all we've done is show that you need specialized tactics specifically built entirely based around going after the wizard.
He's not invulnerable, we just need extra particular and specialized means of dealing with him!
Um... no. Nothing I presented was "specialized wizard killer" stuff. It was monsters of CR (some lower) that are capable of maintaining a grapple -- which is not the only way to shut a wizard down.
Readied attacks hurt wizards too, environmental hazards (though less likely), swarms (which hurt everyone), tanglefoot bags (to a lesser extent but still ironically useful), continuous damage (available in a variety of ways), among many other more specialized means of "handling" wizards.
But again what I presented was monsters straight from the bestiary with no changes of with a range in CR of 3 under to 1 over.
Hardly "specialized" tactics -- and at minimum no less or more specialized than what people suggest for "handling the chump fighter".
I find it amusing that, in order to prove the wizard isn't "invulnerable," all we've done is show that you need specialized tactics specifically built entirely based around going after the wizard.
He's not invulnerable, we just need extra particular and specialized means of dealing with him!
grapple is a specialized tactic? Or a readied action?
Been watching for a bit now.. love the debate, really, but it seems a bit off-topic.
A bit?!
|
Been watching for a bit now.. love the debate, really, but it seems a bit off-topic.A bit?!
>.>
Yes.. considering the amount of my life I spent away from the boards until being directed to them, the amount of time I spend away from the boards, and the amount of time I will stay away from the boards due to RL issues.. I'm starting to ramble. Nevermind! ;)
I'm still trying to calculate the amount of posts it takes before a thread on these forums degenerates into attempts to win the internet.
It seems to depend a lot upon which subforum you look at.
Zero. It starts with the OP ;p
And yeah, grappling is a fairly specialized tactic. There's a reason you don't see a flood of "Guys help me make an awesome grappling character!" here. To top it off, all these theoretical grapples have been done by monsters or characters that've specialized in it.
Maye it's just me, but I don't have the majority of enemies in my game all be pro wrestlers (THOUGH THAT WOULD MAKE FOR AN AWESOME CAMPAIGN IN RETROSPECT)
With wis 13, improved grapple is 2 feats.
A level of monk if lawful.
A lot of monsters have grab. Druid can go this route easily too.
If your CMB is decent and your enemy suck at melee, you can try anyway and you are likely to succeed.
Agree on the campaign ;)
It seems to me that the "Wizard is God" theorists spend about 90% of their daily spells buffing themselves against things that might (but probably won't, in a normal session) happen.
It seems to me, that the "Wizard is not God" theorists never tried to calculate spell slots a high-level Wizards can expend on whatever he cares, while still retaining the capacity to end the normal number of encounters per day, much less to play an actual Wizard, with a eye towards effectiveness.
EDIT: At low levels, of course, the wizard cannot defend against everything, and might even not able to have a reliable, constant defence against most basic things, like physical attacks. Fragile cannon low-level wizards are not different from how it always was, and no one argues that at low levels wizards are fragile cannons. What many people refuse to notice, is the fact, that at mid and and high levels wizards gradually change from fragile cannons to flying bricks, thanks both to new spells and freedom in devoting their lower-level slots to defensive spells.
What these feats don't do is allow you to break the equipment by level guidelines. The equipment by level guidelines don't care -how- you got that equipment.
Page and quote, please.
Fragile cannon low-level wizards are not different from how it always was, and no one argues that at low levels wizards are fragile cannons.
On the contrary, I have seen way too many people argue that wizards make every other class obsolete starting at level 1.
AGAIN -- no one tactic is always going to be successful against a wizard -- however no wizard is always going to be ready for every tactic -- just like no fighter is going to fail at everything -- or even most things.
The wizard probably will not be ready for everything, until level 18 or so. But, as he can rebuild himself every day, and has information-gathering abilities, hitting them in the weak spot at two-digit levels either requires a dedicated attempt to get him from the GM, or will happen very rarely. Looking at official adventures, even monsters that can handle something as standard as flying and invisible opponents are always in minority.
The fighter, meanwhile, fails at everything but his chosen combat trick. If this trick is not archery, it will eventually fail, and so the fighter will fail at everything. The fighter has zero ability to adapt.
Page 400, "Table 12-4 lists the amount of treasure each PC is expected to have at a specific level."
What it does not say is "Table 12-4 lists the amount of gold each PC is expected to have to spend on equipment at a specific level." As anyone who has taken Accounting 101 can tell you, it's not the same thing.
They aren't, but the first quote does not in any way forbids PCs from using the treasure they are expected to have as they see fit. What it actually does not say is "Table 12-4 lists the GP value of equipment each PC is expected to carry"
I'm still trying to calculate the amount of posts it takes before a thread on these forums degenerates into attempts to win the internet.
It seems to depend a lot upon which subforum you look at.
I think it might be a function of when the OP stops posting, or at least when they stop posting on relevant issues.
How have people introduced the various new classes into play? I mostly used recon. I can see how some shaman, sorceress and clerics can be replaced by Oracles/Witches fairly easily; cavaliers can replace some fighters and paladins; the inquisitors seem like a group that would keep to themselves so they work in easily; and wizards guilds could easily include some summoners and alchemists. Anyone else have others ways they have worked these classes in?
|
I'm still trying to calculate the amount of posts it takes before a thread on these forums degenerates into attempts to win the internet.
It seems to depend a lot upon which subforum you look at.
I think it might be a function of when the OP stops posting, or at least when they stop posting on relevant issues.
How have people introduced the various new classes into play? I mostly used recon. I can see how some shaman, sorceress and clerics can be replaced by Oracles/Witches fairly easily; cavaliers can replace some fighters and paladins; the inquisitors seem like a group that would keep to themselves so they work in easily; and wizards guilds could easily include some summoners and alchemists. Anyone else have others ways they have worked these classes in?
Most campaigns seem to have herbalists and alchemists brewing potions and making sunrods. It's not hard to have some of these be a bit more powerful.
I like how alchemists have been presented by the latest Paizo Webfiction (Secrets of Rose and Glove) as being recruited into Galtan armies as artillery, splash damage is probably extra-effective against heavily armoured foes in massed ranks.
The potential weirdness of a summoner's beastie probably makes it harder to include but, yeah, wizard guilds all the way.
I think the Magus will be quite hard to do this with. Epic Backstory! will work for PCs but NPC magus' (magi?) are going to demand a place in human ecology that I am struggling to spot.
I'm still trying to calculate the amount of posts it takes before a thread on these forums degenerates into attempts to win the internet.
It seems to depend a lot upon which subforum you look at.
And yeah, grappling is a fairly specialized tactic. There's a reason you don't see a flood of "Guys help me make an awesome grappling character!" here. To top it off, all these theoretical grapples have been done by monsters or characters that've specialized in it.
Maye it's just me, but I don't have the majority of enemies in my game all be pro wrestlers (THOUGH THAT WOULD MAKE FOR AN AWESOME CAMPAIGN IN RETROSPECT)
I think it is just you :)
As a player, my fighter PCs grapple all the time against foes I know can't hit the broad side of a barn with an AoO. It's not hard. And I have yet to take Improved Grapple. As a DM, I set up maneuvers with groups of goons on PCs by drawing an AoO with one and attempting the maneuver with another. Or just trip/disarm/grapple archer/caster types. Bull rush through doors (no AoO) to create an opening when the PCs bottle neck. If you're looking for them, you'll be surprised how often you could safely use them without specializing. It makes things far more interesting than run up and swing with weapon.
Readied actions happen in the majority of combats I've run since the middle of 3.5. It actually gets annoying at times.
That he'll *never* end up in a situation that he's been grappled by monsters that are quite capable of reaching and holding on to him?
Not to seem like I'm tailoring a response to this particular situation, but grapple is legitimately the #1 thing I've seen contingency used for in-play.
For those guys, yeah, you really almost cannot grapple them even if you ambush them or catch them off guard.
Page and quote, please.
What these feats don't do is allow you to break the equipment by level guidelines. The equipment by level guidelines don't care -how- you got that equipment.
As PCs gain levels, the amount of treasure they carry and use increases as well. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game assumes that all PCs of equivalent level have roughly equal amounts of treasure and magic items. Since the primary income for a PC derives from treasure and loot gained from adventuring, it's important to moderate the wealth and hoards you place in your adventures.…
Table 12-4 lists the amount of treasure each PC is expected to have at a specific level. Note this table assumes a standard fantasy game.
It's quite easy for PCs to break out of their expected WBL for any given level. Item Crafting feats are not the only way. Just one of the best ways.
If a GM allows this to go on for an extended period of time, shame on him.
|
And yeah, grappling is a fairly specialized tactic. There's a reason you don't see a flood of "Guys help me make an awesome grappling character!" here. To top it off, all these theoretical grapples have been done by monsters or characters that've specialized in it.Maye it's just me, but I don't have the majority of enemies in my game all be pro wrestlers (THOUGH THAT WOULD MAKE FOR AN AWESOME CAMPAIGN IN RETROSPECT)
Gawd, there was this one shot game we played and the group was racing to stop the evil summoning ritual from being completed. All that is standing between us and the altar (with priests and the bodyguards) was a room full of cultists (~20+) vs. 4 PC's. Wait... all the cultists were 2nd level fighters with improved grapple! I don't know what we did to piss off the GM... but boy did we did really, really learn the intricacies of grappling in 3.5 after that encounter... especially with multiple opponents... along with ground fighting/crawling rules, etc... *shudder*
AGAIN -- no one tactic is always going to be successful against a wizard -- however no wizard is always going to be ready for every tactic -- just like no fighter is going to fail at everything -- or even most things.The wizard probably will not be ready for everything, until level 18 or so. But, as he can rebuild himself every day, and has information-gathering abilities, hitting them in the weak spot at two-digit levels either requires a dedicated attempt to get him from the GM, or will happen very rarely. Looking at official adventures, even monsters that can handle something as standard as flying and invisible opponents are always in minority.
The fighter, meanwhile, fails at everything but his chosen combat trick. If this trick is not archery, it will eventually fail, and so the fighter will fail at everything. The fighter has zero ability to adapt.
At 18th level I've seen wizards dominate most encounters but not all. The most powerful wizards I've seen work as a team with the group making the group much more powerful with buffs and battle field control spells and the odd direct damage spell. I've seen SOS focused wizards do well but fail miserably when the luck runs against them and it always does, it's just a matter of time. Also wizards are only as tough as the magic items they carry as shown when the party defeats 18th level wizards with ease but the party wizards is doing great. It's that NPC wealth vs player wealth.
Fighters are great with wizards as wizard is a fighters best friend. With a few buffs on and using battle field control going the fighter shines in the brightness of the wizard.
I noticed discussion about grapping a wizard at level 13, and how they had 30 intelligence at that level.
How does a wizard get 30 intelligence at level 13?
I am currently playing a level 13 wizard, and have 29 intelligence and am wondering if I missed something.
Starting 20 intelligence, + 3 permananent stas for levels (4,8,12)
+6 stat item = 29 intelligence at level 13. Did I miss something?
I noticed discussion about grapping a wizard at level 13, and how they had 30 intelligence at that level.
How does a wizard get 30 intelligence at level 13?
I am currently playing a level 13 wizard, and have 29 intelligence and am wondering if I missed something.
Starting 20 intelligence, + 3 permananent stas for levels (4,8,12)
+6 stat item = 29 intelligence at level 13. Did I miss something?
Yeah, he's not middle-aged. If he were venerable, you'd have your Int 30 and an extra 20,000 gp (or 10,000 if you crafted) to spend on a porch from which to yell at kids.
|
Although this is a little off topic, wealth by level should be a loose guideline that fluxes in play. I had a charactor that lucked out in killing the magic heavy assassins and ended up beyond expected wealth by level. and soon thereafter lost most of those expensive sword to trying to ground out a chain lightning and live.
Then completed some missions for his home city and was sitting on alot of extra portable weath. then assassinated a much more highly placed target than expected in an enemy city, and spent that extra wealth and more bribing the disgruntled thieives guild of the enemy city into aiding the party to escape when the escape routes we had been provided all dried up.
The AVP classes are mostly different rather than over or under powered in comparison.
And most class x vs class y discussions seem to treat the class as if they are the only person in the encounter, not a member of a functional group composed of multiple cooperating people.
my two cents from work.
That said, Alchemists may be the weakest class in the game.
I'd really like to hear the reasoning behind this. From my experience they're firmly a tier 3 class. Is it the bombs per day you've got problems with?
The wizard is not completely unbeatable but that does not mean that specialized tactics are a reasonable counter argument either since if they are necessary class balance has already been lost. Really if one needs to preform special handling for a specific class that rather makes the class of improper power level and like I said then those tactics are soemthing that must occur all the time or else the class balance is again lost.
Really you often come back to mentioning specialized tactics to challenge spell casters and that should not be necessary in the slightest. Having to do work to balance soemthing means that it is not balanced in the first place. And if your position was only that the wizard was not unbeatable you would not actually be disagreeing with me and so I must assume that that is not actually your position as you continue to say I am wrong while I agree with your presented position.
Grappling is NOT a specialized tactic. It is simply a tactic, just like flanking, charging, tripping, fighting defensively, feinting, readying an action, delaying, two-weapon fighting, and so on.
You CAN specialize in it. But when you have a good BAB and lots of strength and your opponent is a poor BAB with little strength, it doesn't matter if you are or are not. Combat maneuvers become a viable tactic to consider anytime a good BAB opponent faces a poor BAB opponent. A wizard is vulnerable to grapple attempts (really any combat maneuver) by anyone/anything decent in melee combat, specialized or not. A wizard's weakness to combat maneuvers is no different than a fighter's weakness to Will saves. How said classes go about covering this hole in their defense is different, but if they don't want to fall victim, they must address the weakness regardless.