What is broken / overpowered now?


Advice

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

I also would recommend the Trailblazer "Combat Tactics" feature given for free to rogues, or at least as a rogue talent.

+1 to attack rolls when conditions would allow sneak attack that increases by +1 at 5, 10, 15, and 20. It lets the rogue semi-emulate the full BAB in situations when the rogue is supposed to shine.

Dark Archive

They did a much better job on keeping the upper limit from going up, and buffed some of the lower tier options to be closer to the higher ones.

There are still tiers in the power and usefulness of classes though.

Druids and Summoners are about comparable power, and they're still better than everything else, though not by as much as in 3.5. Druids are still basically gestalt ranger wizards with an animal companion. Pass them to someone who doesn't know what they're doing and no problem. But in the hands of a minmaxer, they can still dominate everything else.

Blaster focused mages still kindof suck. They're focused on damage output, and behave as glass cannons, but they generally dont do enough cannon, and are mostly like a glass slingshot still.

There's still the linear/quadratic issue, but the linear is closer to the quadratic than it used to be. A wizard or sorcerer with poor spell selection (like going 100% blaster) is still crappier than a non-magic type though.

And Rogues and Monks are still bottom of the barrel. They have awesome maximum potential, but they rarely get anywhere near that, and mostly perform at crap capacity. Neither are worth more than a handful of levels, if that.

If you want a rogue, you're better off taking a bard or ranger and using alternate class abilities to build a better rogue.

If you want a monk: Accept that you're going to still have to rely on armor, and make an unarmed focused fighter, if you want to be particularly good at more than running away.

If you want to know what to watch out for, its the occasional totally underwhelming ability which might look like its actually reasonable. I've said this a few times:

Paizo does a good job keeping a consistent upper bound on power levels. They don't do a good job keeping a lower-bound on power levels, and some options are so bad they serve no purpose other than to waste space, slow down experienced players trying to decide what they want, and allow you the possibility to make a character incapable of doing anything useful.

And there are a few things that while mechanically sound, the implementation just makes me cringe, and one which I hate the implementation so much that I ban them at the table, and won't play in games that allow them. and while I won't get into the *why* of it here (use the search if you want to see why) - Gunslingers & Firearms.


The most broken thing I can think of is 1 level Barb/1 level Alchemist/x level Synthesist summoner. Crazy strength!


Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
The most broken thing I can think of is 1 level Barb/1 level Alchemist/x level Synthesist summoner. Crazy strength!

But only for a few rounds a day. In order to keep that strength for a whole fight/more than once a day, you have to spend lots of feats and levels bulking up that combo.

That's what I like about Pathfinder: You can still get amazingly high numbers, but there's always a trade-off/limit. It's less about breaking the game as it is just deciding what you want to be awesome at today.

Silver Crusade

Also, synthesist replaces your physical stats, so it is useless to improve your own stats.


AdamMeyers wrote:

Few things are overpowered, but I will say the Rogue is underpowered. Still an amazingly fun class to play, but with advanced options and archetypes like Urban Ranger, Vivesectionist Alchemist, Cryptbreaker Alchemist and Archeologist Bard in the mix, there's little mechanical reason to take a Rogue.

I for one think this is a strength in Pathfinder, no single class has a monopoly on any function.

Just like there are several classes to choose from if you want a melee fighter (Cavalier, Fighter Barbarian and Paladin) there are several classes that can fulfil most of a roughs classical functions.
This is a good thing, not a weakness.


Helic wrote:
Kalyth wrote:

Things I wish had been address for balance reasons.

Long and Shortbows vs all other ranged weapons. Bows win! : (

And really, they should. Nothing better came around until cased-ammo firearms, really, in terms of accuracy and rate of fire. Some weapons are just better than most others, and trying to 'balance' that is IMO a strange concept.

Not in reality, Slins were better, cheaper, but took more training. They shot farther, just as fast, and dealt just as much damage in real life.

So enough with the bow fanboyish that designers get.

A sling is not a sling shot. Slings do not take extra time to load or swing to get momentum (in fact too much momentum is bad).


I think Dazing spell is pretty cheesy RAW.

Antagonize is also more effective than it probably should be.

There are some pretty crazy spell combos that could derail things too.

Eidolons can also be broken pretty easily.


Starbuck_II wrote:
Helic wrote:
Kalyth wrote:

Things I wish had been address for balance reasons.

Long and Shortbows vs all other ranged weapons. Bows win! : (

And really, they should. Nothing better came around until cased-ammo firearms, really, in terms of accuracy and rate of fire. Some weapons are just better than most others, and trying to 'balance' that is IMO a strange concept.

Not in reality, Slins were better, cheaper, but took more training. They shot farther, just as fast, and dealt just as much damage in real life.

So enough with the bow fanboyish that designers get.

A sling is not a sling shot. Slings do not take extra time to load or swing to get momentum (in fact too much momentum is bad).

Right, were to begin?

No, slings were not a superior weapons to ”bows”, their accuracy was worse, they were not practical to use in formation and they do not have the same power a bow can have (as much depends on the bow).
Also, there is no need to swing them around to build momentum, take a look at the heaps of videos one can find on youtube.

As for bows vs. crossbows, that is a debate that can fill an thread (if not forum) of its own, sufficient to say that if one wants comparisons then a bow (of whish there are loads of types for different fighting styles) can be compared to Pistols and SMGs, while crossbows would be mausers and .50 rifles.

Like in most games, crossbows are not fairly represented in Pathfinder IMO.


I think the most unbalanced thing in the game compared to 3.5 is the Human race, honestly. It's by far and away the best race to select unless you're going for something very specific.

But then again, the result is mostly human parties, which reflects a human centric game world, which isn't all bad. So it's not really a 'flaw' in the design in my opinion, just an imbalance.


beej67 wrote:

I think the most unbalanced thing in the game compared to 3.5 is the Human race, honestly. It's by far and away the best race to select unless you're going for something very specific.

But then again, the result is mostly human parties, which reflects a human centric game world, which isn't all bad. So it's not really a 'flaw' in the design in my opinion, just an imbalance.

I don't think it was a huge deal until the favored class bonuses came out. Now every spontaneous caster is a human.

Besides that I think for many builds the half-elf and Orc are great choices with similar flexibility.


Syntesist - is IMO overpowered. Too much dam, to much AC and spellcasting that get spells earliere than normal classes.

You need to work on NOT being much better than all other melee classes. I consider them broken/overpowered.

Shadow Lodge

Bigtuna wrote:

Syntesist - is IMO overpowered. Too much dam, to much AC and spellcasting that get spells earliere than normal classes.

You need to work on NOT being much better than all other melee classes. I consider them broken/overpowered.

While I agree that the Synthesist is very easy to break (and hideous when you do) - I'm curious for your reasons why.

Since it's not a first-tier caster, it's on a much slower spell progression than the full casting classes. Druids (which also get a pretty powerful companion) are on a much higher progression. If you're talking about getting things like Wall of Fire at level 3, the class still doesn't get it until level 7 (the same as the full casters), and its save DC will always be a step lower.

As for the AC, this seems to be no more out-of-the ordinary than most melee classes. You have a limited number of evolutions, and a limited number of times you can take the Natural Armor evolution.

I could be wrong, I'd like to know why.

Silver Crusade

Despite looking/being strong, a synthesist is weaker than the base summoner since it gets less actions/round.
I still don't understand why the developers came back to the 3.5 wildshape mechanic and didn't do the synthesist mantle as a bonus to stats instead of their full replacement.


Spells:
Haste: summoner get it at lvl 4 - Wizatd at lvl 5.

Ï don't even wanna go through the numbers of how easy it is to have a crasy AC as a summoner. It just makes me depressed. Just assume mage armor and barkskin...

Damage - if a caster makings him self large he get what +2 or +4 size bonus to str. Summoner get +8 ALL DAY (an oracle can get that using a 8 lvl spell - and it's only 1 round/lvl).
He has full dam on all his primary weapons - why would he take an evolution that gave him a secondary attack.

Utility- need to be good at any skill? +8 racial bonus to what ever skill you want - for a 2 lvl spell...


Bigtuna wrote:

Spells:

Haste: summoner get it at lvl 4 - Wizatd at lvl 5.

Summoners take longer to get haste than wizards. If a summoner is "broken", spellcasting is not the reason.


blahpers wrote:
Bigtuna wrote:

Spells:

Haste: summoner get it at lvl 4 - Wizatd at lvl 5.
Summoners take longer to get haste than wizards. If a summoner is "broken", spellcasting is not the reason.

No, summoners get haste 1 level early. Haste is a 2nd level spell for summoners, and a 3rd level wizard spells. Summoners get 2nd level spells at 4th level, wizards get 3rd level spells at 5.

Now 1 level and 1 party friendly buff IMHO is not a major imbalance, but it does make potions of haste cheaper if you make them as a summoner (how many summoners actually take creation feats?).

Summoners are fine, even the synth isn't any more unbalanced than a similarly min/max character that isn't a rogue or monk. The AC argument is also overblown, nearly any class can get that high if they really want, I'm dealing with an oracle that tanks at AC 40, and CR 14 stuff can't ever hit other than the default 5%

Where summoners get dangerous is their action economy, 1 nearly full caster, 1 nearly fighter level eidolon, and the ability to full round cast good summon spells means there is potentially a bunch of actions from 1 PC, something that can overshadow the party, and quickly out action the enemy. Syths, the build that people complain the most about, are stuck with the same action economy that bards or fighter/mage types, they can cast or fight, but not both at the same time. Syths are poor fighters, and underpowered sorcerers.


notabot wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Bigtuna wrote:

Spells:

Haste: summoner get it at lvl 4 - Wizatd at lvl 5.
Summoners take longer to get haste than wizards. If a summoner is "broken", spellcasting is not the reason.
No, summoners get haste 1 level early. Haste is a 2nd level spell for summoners, and a 3rd level wizard spells. Summoners get 2nd level spells at 4th level, wizards get 3rd level spells at 5.

Bah, you're right. Was thinking of a different spell or something. I plead no-coffee.


Korpen wrote:


Right, were to begin?
No, slings were not a superior weapons to ”bows”, their accuracy was worse, they were not practical to use in formation and they do not have the same power a bow can have (as much depends on the bow).
Also, there is no need to swing them around to build momentum, take a look at the heaps of videos one can find on youtube.

Facts:

http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html
Slings can be loaded 1 handed in reality( but not in PF, you need both).
"Arrows can be seen raining down upon an enemy, and even when they are flying on a fairly flat trajectory, are visible to an enemy expecting them. Sling stones are much more difficult to see in flight, especially from a distance. It is also more difficult to judge which way they are going, as they are seen as a dot rather than a line. Sling bullets, which are cast lead shot, are especially difficult to see"

"The effective range of slings seems to be in excess of 360 yards. Assyrian reliefs show slingers attacking cities from further away than the archers. Perhaps this is because the archers were used to shoot straight at defenders on the walls, while slingers dropped stones into the city, or perhaps it is just another clue to the greater range of slings. "

Serioiusly, slings had better accuracy (regarding air resistance) and they had more power because sheer force beats piercing regarding armor (maces are better than rapiers vs armor in same aspect).


hogarth wrote:
Kalavas wrote:
hogarth wrote:
meabolex wrote:
hogarth wrote:
I'd say that a metamagic rod of Persistent Spell is a little too good for the price.
What about rod of dazing spell. . . a non-mind-affecting daze? Huh? Errata please ):
I'm relatively indifferent to Dazing Spell.

I think that both rods are powerful. Persistent Spell is a more powerful metamagic feat than Dazing spell, because its only 2 lvls higher.

The fact that almost nothing in all 3 Bestiaries is immune to dazing makes the rod an unbalancing force in many situations.

I just realised that I said I was relatively indifferent to the idea of a metamagic rod of Dazing Spell in this thread, whereas I said I thought it was overpowered in another thread. I'm a seething nest of contradictions. :-)

Now that I'm playing a spellcaster, maybe the daze in dazing spell is fine. Yeah. At least until I finish playing this character. . . . (:


Gorbacz wrote:
Kalyth wrote:

Things I wish had been address for balance reasons.

Long and Shortbows vs all other ranged weapons. Bows win! : (

Crossbow Mastery takes care of xbows in this (granted, you have to blow a feat but hey, you have more of those anyway).

Poor slings are still poor slings, unless you use Halflings of Golarion.

All slings need to be viable past 6th level is the ability to full attack.


Starbuck_II wrote:
Korpen wrote:


Right, were to begin?
No, slings were not a superior weapons to ”bows”, their accuracy was worse, they were not practical to use in formation and they do not have the same power a bow can have (as much depends on the bow).
Also, there is no need to swing them around to build momentum, take a look at the heaps of videos one can find on youtube.

Facts:

http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html
Slings can be loaded 1 handed in reality( but not in PF, you need both).
"Arrows can be seen raining down upon an enemy, and even when they are flying on a fairly flat trajectory, are visible to an enemy expecting them. Sling stones are much more difficult to see in flight, especially from a distance. It is also more difficult to judge which way they are going, as they are seen as a dot rather than a line. Sling bullets, which are cast lead shot, are especially difficult to see"

"The effective range of slings seems to be in excess of 360 yards. Assyrian reliefs show slingers attacking cities from further away than the archers. Perhaps this is because the archers were used to shoot straight at defenders on the walls, while slingers dropped stones into the city, or perhaps it is just another clue to the greater range of slings. "

Serioiusly, slings had better accuracy (regarding air resistance) and they had more power because sheer force beats piercing regarding armor (maces are better than rapiers vs armor in same aspect).

Pretty much. I'm a big fan of bows, but slings were awesome weapons.


Maxximilius wrote:
I still don't understand why the developers came back to the 3.5 wildshape mechanic and didn't do the synthesist mantle as a bonus to stats instead of their full replacement.

+1

Given how Paizo has otherwise tried to consolidate around similar mechanics, 'bringing back' 3.5 polymorph stat replacement just seems bizarre-o. and it pretty much inherently promotes extreme min-maxing. the point of synthesist seems to be 'design your own monster suit', but that can be achieved while conforming to PRPG-style polymorph norms, e.g. stat bonuses not replacement... not to mention not creating the raft of problematic issues with different HP pools, etc.

Silver Crusade

Quandary wrote:
the point of synthesist seems to be 'design your own monster suit', but that can be achieved while conforming to PRPG-style polymorph norms, e.g. stat bonuses not replacement... not to mention not creating the raft of problematic issues with different HP pools, etc.

You're preaching the converted. :p


After playing a Bard I believe the Saving finale is GREAT! Is it in balance with the game? I'd like to hear from you guys.

Too powerful: Cacophonous Call & Aquaeous Orb. (spelling)

Pits are cheesy IMO.


Why give demi-humans Dark vision?


Aretas wrote:

After playing a Bard I believe the Saving finale is GREAT! Is it in balance with the game? I'd like to hear from you guys.

Too powerful: Cacophonous Call & Aquaeous Orb. (spelling)

Pits are cheesy IMO.

Cacophonous Call isn't THAT good. Hideous Laughter makes it so they can't do anything (not even move) and the bard gets it at level 1. The one thing Cacophonous call does have is that you don't get to save every round. The mass version is underwhelming when you consider spells like Stinking Cloud which is available to other casters several levels earlier.

Aqueous Orb is one of the better spells for pushing people around. It's good, but you get plenty of opportunity to jump out of it. After all it only entangles them, which means they can just move out on their turn.

Pits are very nice. Not very effective when more things are flying though.


Aretas wrote:
Why give demi-humans Dark vision?

Dark Vision is nice when it comes up, but it seems to me like many DMs don't bring it up very often. That's just my experience though, maybe your DMs are lighting effects obsessed.

It's kind of like Material Components or Encumbrance. Some DMs make you keep more track of things, and others ignore stuff like that.

Besides, it's relatively easy to get a hold of Darkvision. That and most caster classes can cast the light spell.


I my group there was a player focused on pits. The master consider them to overpowered. So everytime they meet an arcane caster he made sure the caster had pits on his spelllist. - Since it's such a "nice a balanced spell" - players soon agreed pits are not something we use...


When the better pits are available spells to fly and teleport short distances are also available.
Sure, the spells aren't nice if you can't cast those fly/teleport spells and fall into the pit, but the same goes for failing a save against for example color spray, stinking cloud or Resilient Sphere. Those all pretty much end your participation in the battle.

I don't see how the pit spells are different from those kind of spells power wise.


Bigtuna wrote:

I my group there was a player focused on pits. The master consider them to overpowered. So everytime they meet an arcane caster he made sure the caster had pits on his spelllist. - Since it's such a "nice a balanced spell" - players soon agreed pits are not something we use...

A high reflex avoids pits outright.

A decent climb skill gets you out pretty well.

The Wizard who is casting these pits could have Dimensional Steps (8th level conjuration power), or at level 7 just cast Dimensional Door if an enemy uses it on him.

DC20 fly check gets you out with a fly spell you could have at level 5.

And since the pit is an extra dimensional space, Dispel Magic also gets rid of it pretty nicely. This is one that you could use as a DM.

It's certainly powerful compared to some of the other Crowd Controls, But I don't think it's so powerful that it should be banned. Heck, as far as the squishy caster goes, Web has almost as much of an effect on him with his likely strength score.


It's diffent because it target reflex save!

Ask your GM to try adding it to all arcane casters...

By saing a TIER 1 class as the wizard could handle a pit doesn't make it "fair" or balanced.
Ask the fighter in a fullplate how fun the fight was - if he makes it out of the pit.

Think of how many encounters DON'T have an arcane caster in it.

What if the man who made the pit throws fogs? Add solid fog or stinking cloud or later cloud kill to a pit. See how fun it is to be a player in the pit.

Create pit - lvl 2 - DC 25 climb check. If you can't fly, cast spiderclimb how do you get out? What level would you be before you could get out of that pit without taking 20 or just 10? - perhaps with a robe and a grappeling hook - thats's 2-3 rounds. Combat over - what fun...

Spiked Pit -lvl 3 - okay easiere to get out of (DC wise) but you take damage! And it's up to 50 feet deep. How many round would that take you to get out? - climb is one-quarter your normal speed, ½ your normal speed if you take -5 on the skill check...

Acid Pit lvl 4- Climb DC went up! And it breaks your items! This isn't BFC anymore - it's Save or die! That target reflex saves!

Now this is save or die for prepared players. Now look at it from the GM's point of view. How many monsters carry robe and a grappling hook?
How many monster have maxed there climb skill?
How many monster have a lousy reflex save? (most)

If you consider this a "certainly powerful compared to some of the other Crowd Controls, But I don't think it's so powerful that it should be banned" - then ask you get to try it on your party. Your character might have way out - but ask the ones that fell into the pit if the spell should be banned. And if they say no - ask them again the second time they end up in a pit... And so on...


Every class has its weakness. Should I ban grappling because many casters can't do anything about it?

No, I shouldn't.

And casting Spider Climb on the fighter is definitely a viable option for getting him out of the pit. Better yet, cast levitate on him. That's a spell worth memorizing every day anyway.

Even if you don't have a "Tier 1" class, you could carry along a stake and a knotted rope to throw down to the fighter and give it to the character with the high reflex.

Once you hit level 5 it's extremely easy to counter the pit, like the aforementioned Dispel Magic.

Also, Acid Pit has the awful side effect that the loot could be effected! The humanity!

Do you know what REALLY sucks for the players? Confusion. If you fail your save you've got a 25% chance of doing anything worthwhile and you get NO chance to negate the effects until the duration is up. You could dispel confusion too, but unlike the pit spells, each individual is affected by the spell so short of a 6th level greater dispel magic you're stuck only dispelling key players. Your fighter has about as much chance of succeeding against confusion as he does the created pit, and he could be VERY dangerous 25% of the time too.

And if you're the DM dealing with all these players using create pit everywhere, use more rogues, have more flying creatures that are flying BEFORE they cast the spell, or have more invisible creatures you can't as easily target (and make them wish they memorized Glitterdust instead.) There are plenty of these options even at low levels, and they're basically the norm at higher levels.


Chelish Diva's Scathing Tirade

Broken in so many ways it ain't funny.

No save, frightened for at least 1d4+1 rounds (1d4+3 rounds if you have lingering performace). Don't even need a touch attack either. Just use one round of bardic music, and you've removed from the fight for awhile anyone who isn't immune to fear. Even the 8th level wiz/sorc spell irresistable dance pales in comparison. The kicker? The 8th level bard can use this as a move action, and choose new targets just by maintaining her performance.

Here's the link, it's at the bottom.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo---bard-a rchetypes/chelish-diva


Starbuck_II wrote:


Facts:
http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html
Slings can be loaded 1 handed in reality( but not in PF, you need both).
"Arrows can be seen raining down upon an enemy, and even when they are flying on a fairly flat trajectory, are visible to an enemy expecting them. Sling stones are much more difficult to see in flight, especially from a distance. It is also more difficult to judge which way they are going, as they are seen as a dot rather than a line. Sling bullets, which are cast lead shot, are especially difficult to see"

Which also makes it almost impossible for the slinger to see were his shot goes…

Quote:

Serioiusly, slings had better accuracy (regarding air resistance) and they had more power because sheer force beats piercing regarding armor (maces are better than rapiers vs armor in same aspect).

As for more power, like I said, they can have more then, it depends on the bow, different bow for different ways to fight.

In general however, sling historically seems to mainly have been skirmishing weapons, not long-range “artillery” weapons.

Liberty's Edge

FiddlersGreen wrote:

Chelish Diva's Scathing Tirade

Broken in so many ways it ain't funny.

No save, frightened for at least 1d4+1 rounds (1d4+3 rounds if you have lingering performace). Don't even need a touch attack either. Just use one round of bardic music, and you've removed from the fight for awhile anyone who isn't immune to fear. Even the 8th level wiz/sorc spell irresistable dance pales in comparison. The kicker? The 8th level bard can use this as a move action, and choose new targets just by maintaining her performance.

Update: At FiddlersGreen's prompting (I think) James Jacobs has since noted this as a mistake (and he has reason to know, being the guy in charge of Inner Sea Magic). There should be a Will Save to resist this ability.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Master Summoner archetype yet. He summons as a standard action, and he can have unlimited summons active at one time.

I think the general example used is the lv 9 summoner with 10d4+20 lantern archons.


About the pits...

As a Gm I hate having to consider what the players can do to make an encounter that is any kind of challange for the players.
If I have to make encounters for a specifik party then I end up nerfing a players power... Better to tell the player you can't do that pick something else to do with your char.

Confusion - your still in the fight. You get a chance every turn. Pit's game over...

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / What is broken / overpowered now? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice