mdt |
Fair enough. I play more clerics and bards than wizards so include some armor in the equation, and they're mostly halflings or gnomes with 8 Str (no dump, but no points spent there, either). Small characters only get 3/4 of the carrying capacity of a Medium PC with the same Str, too. 19.5 pounds fills up pretty quickly with just armor, one ranged & one melee weapon.My anecdotal evidence is that most people who handwave encumbrance are shocked by how over the limit they are if they sit down and add it all up.
Yeah, I use encumbrance in my games. I don't do it every game, but I usually have people check their encumbrance every level (or sooner if someone is carrying a bunch of gold on them, most people forget how heavy gold is).
Halflings and gnomes do have issues with equipment, but halflings at least can get equipment at half weight. :) So that helps.
Aelryinth RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16 |
Benchak the Nightstalker Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8 |
<Plomp!> ... Antimagic Field
Now the 20,000gp weapon you saved 10% on (to become 18,000gp raw +3 bonus) works no better than a 300gp piece of crap versus that demon sorc. It's an even worse feeling if you're nearing Epic and starting to max out your weapons.
Ah, but is the Demon Sorcerer's DR (Ex) or (Su)? :D
Majuba |
Now the 20,000gp weapon you saved 10% on (to become 18,000gp raw +3 bonus) works no better than a 300gp piece of crap versus that demon sorc...
It's worth pointing out that Cold Iron weapon costs only 2000 gp additional once, whereas in 3.5 it was 2000gp extra each and every time it was enhanced. Hadn't seen this before
Diego Rossi |
Joana wrote:I've never seen a wizard or sorcerer anywhere close to their limit, unless they dumped STR down to 5 or so. They don't have armor or shield, so all they carry is clothes, weapon, pouch, and backpack. Less than 15 lbs of equipment generally.Mike Schneider wrote:My wizards always carry several ordinary melee and ranged weapons, and builds often contain one melee class dip at or near 1st level.Most of my casters are lucky to be able to carry one weapon each of ranged and melee and stay under a light load. Do you not play with encumbrance rules?
Spellbook 3 lbs, clothes 8 lbs, component pouch 2 lbs, backpack, 2 lbs, bedroll 5 lbs, quarterstaff 4 lbs.
24 lbs and our guy is still lacking water, food and a ranged weapon.
Crossbow and 20 bolts 5 lbs, water 1 lbs, rations for a couple of days 2 lbs.
32 lbs total. Light load limit for a str 10 character 33.
I hope he will never have to carry a second spellbook or any loot.
You can give the bedroll and food to another character and gain 6 lbs. But then he has better hope to never get separated from the group.
(or sooner if someone is carrying a bunch of gold on them, most people forget how heavy gold is).
50 coins for a lbs is approximately right for medieval coinage.
The 1rst/2nd weight was excessive.mdt |
Spellbook 3 lbs, clothes 8 lbs, component pouch 2 lbs, backpack, 2 lbs, bedroll 5 lbs, quarterstaff 4 lbs.
8 Pounds is an adventurer's outfit. Most wizards do the robes thing, a lot lighter.
Usually I also see most characters taking Darkwood staffs, halves the weight, cheap cost. That's a good 6 lbs there. Also, usually the wizard hands the bedroll off to his traveling companions, or he uses a low level spell like hidden rope to not need one.
24 lbs and our guy is still lacking water, food and a ranged weapon.Crossbow and 20 bolts 5 lbs, water 1 lbs, rations for a couple of days 2 lbs.
Again, I usually see darkwood stuff for weapons, so 2.5 lbs for the crossbow and bolts. And one of the first things I usually see purchased by everyone is a ring of sustenance, negating the rations. Until then, they usually let the druid/ranger scrounge food (or the cleric creates it).
32 lbs total. Light load limit for a str 10 character 33.I hope he will never have to carry a second spellbook or any loot.
You can give the bedroll and food to another character and gain 6 lbs. But then he has better hope to never get separated from the group.
If he is separated from the group, he's in a world of hurt above and beyond the bedroll and food. Usually by 2nd level, I'm seeing wizards decked out with darkwood components and coming in around the 20 lb mark. Each game is different though.
Troubleshooter |
Off the top of my head: Wizards.
A wizard would like nothing more than to keep one hand free for casting, and have a second hand available for a weapon. A wizard without a weapon does not threaten for attacks of opportunity -- and if he hits with a weapon that is not magical, then DR eats away from damage when monsters have DR/Magic, and that may be the difference between an untrained combat maneuver succeeding and failing against him.
But let's get more technical.
There are situations where a wizard needs more than two hands. He may want to have a hand free for casting, a hand for a weapon ... a hand for a torch ... a hand for a potion readied for an emergency ...
I'm playing a Bard in a game where the DM rules that one hand must always be used continuously for my bardic music (drumming), so I understand the constraints of having too few hands quite well. I want to attack with my rapier, cast spells, drum for bardic music, and benefit from my buckler. Alas I cannot.
I'll pop in if I think of any other benefits, besides things like not being disarmed or having to draw the weapon.
Diego Rossi |
Diego Rossi wrote:
Spellbook 3 lbs, clothes 8 lbs, component pouch 2 lbs, backpack, 2 lbs, bedroll 5 lbs, quarterstaff 4 lbs.
8 Pounds is an adventurer's outfit. Most wizards do the robes thing, a lot lighter.
Usually I also see most characters taking Darkwood staffs, halves the weight, cheap cost. That's a good 6 lbs there. Also, usually the wizard hands the bedroll off to his traveling companions, or he uses a low level spell like hidden rope to not need one.
I have done a bit of spelunking in the past.
Your wizard is mad if he go adventuring in a scholar outfit or something similar. :)It can weight less initially, but it will will get soaked at the first opportunity and the trailing hem of that kind of robe will gather a lot of mud in no time. All that will add to the weight of the robe and get to a final weight even higher that the adventuring outfit.
To make it worse that kind of gear don't offer any protection from thorns and bushes.
There is no "rule" to account for that kind of drawback but any adventure that require some wilderness travel should consider it.
Unless your guys are always adventuring in good weather during the late spring - early autumn period or only in cities choosing something different from a explorer outfit is a bad idea.
The darkwood part is a good idea. In my game we generally don't use that stuff but I will remember it to the players.
And one of the first things I usually see purchased by everyone is a ring of sustenance, negating the rations.
I don't like that ring. It make things too easy, especially the "only need to sleep 2 hours" part. It give too much for the price.
Mike Schneider |
I think he's talking about 'naturally occuring' antimagic fields as opposed to 'AMF-casting enemies'.Both, actually. There's also the "entire dungeon-crawl is a single run-on encounter" type of thing which is effectively AMF once your quota is depleted.
Of course, 'naturally occuring AMFs' are right there with 'Rocks Fall' on my list of DM Dickery.
Well, that's what rogues and dwarves are for. Never leave home without one.
(The dickery I despise is the ol' "stampede trampling you in the canyon which was such a great shortcut" BS. No AMF required.)
If that was the norm for Living Greyhawk, then I'm rather happy that the trend was not carried over to Pathfinder Society.
Oh, heaven's no. One-trick-pony min/maxers with 7s in two stats mustn't ever be denied the opportunity to out-shine the rest of the table, let alone be dragged kicking and screaming into the cruel, cruel world of flexibility...(But there's already several threads for that, so I digress.)
The most fun adventure I ever played involved my crotchety old wizard not being able to cast a single spell the entire session while an undercover initiate "peasant" in an evil cult (because he would have been immediately killed if caught). I had to do so much crazy improv -- it was great.
KaeYoss |
My anecdotal evidence is that most people who handwave encumbrance are shocked by how over the limit they are if they sit down and add it all up.
I handwave encumbrance and I am shocked by how little I care :P
"Of course you can carry that dragon's hoard! All 97385 coins plus stuff. I know the coins weigh almost 2000 pounds all by themselves, but the hoard will just write you a check. Take that, realism!"
KaeYoss |
Oh, heaven's no. One-trick-pony min/maxers with 7s in two stats mustn't ever be denied the opportunity to out-shine the rest of the table, let alone be dragged kicking and screaming into the cruel, cruel world of flexibility...(But there's already several threads for that, so I digress.)
Hyperbole much? You try to defend unnecessary expanses for what is usually a really rare type of encounter by ranting about overdone min-maxing?
The old "my extreme opinion is justified because the opposite is extreme, too!"
While I don't like characters with 7s in two stats, I also don't like GMs who enforce dumb character concepts like wizards who have to multiclass into fighters or they'll die.
There are situations where a wizard needs more than two hands. He may want to have a hand free for casting, a hand for a weapon ... a hand for a torch ... a hand for a potion readied for an emergency ...
Torch? Did he forget he can cast light at will? It's a cantrip. Cast it on the weapon. or on a ring on your finger. or on your wizard's hat. Arcane pit lamp!
Mike Schneider wrote:Now the 20,000gp weapon you saved 10% on (to become 18,000gp raw +3 bonus) works no better than a 300gp piece of crap versus that demon sorc...It's worth pointing out that Cold Iron weapon costs only 2000 gp additional once, whereas in 3.5 it was 2000gp extra each and every time it was enhanced. Hadn't seen this before
Did not! The formulation might have been unwieldy, but the rule was the same: One-time 2000gp surcharge.
Mike Schneider |
Hyperbole much? You try to defend unnecessary expanses for what is usually a really rare type of encounter by ranting about overdone min-maxing?Sure, because if they weren't mix/maxed to abject uselessness when momentarily deprived of their schtick, they wouldn't cry so much when they get in the "really rare" situation and berate and harangue the writers and organizers so that the "really rare" situations become even more rare. Shame! on the home game DMs who respond to whining by dialing up the painometer even higher, the horrible bastards.
The old "my extreme opinion is justified because the opposite is extreme, too!""Hypocrisy seeks its reflection, that it may admire itself."
While I don't like characters with 7s in two stats, I also don't like GMs who enforce dumb character concepts like wizards who have to multiclass into fighters or they'll die.
An elf with an adamantine longsword and a quiver full of cold-iron arrows doesn't need to multiclass. <shrug> You might as well complain that it's unfair that fighters have to go on adventures with annoying weak allies that they must drag along for healing and unscrewing their heads from time to time. Why, they should be allowed to solo.
mdt |
I have done a bit of spelunking in the past.
Your wizard is mad if he go adventuring in a scholar outfit or something similar. :)
That would come down to a game thing. I tend to not do a lot of dungeon diving. Most of my games involve either city stuff, travelling the countryside, or exploring old ruins. Therefore, a spelunker's outfit is not needed. In general, the robes or the lighter 'African Explorer' outfits (pith helmet, light shirt and khaki's) work a lot more practically than wearing heavy duty denim jackets and pants.
meabolex |
mdt wrote:Joana wrote:I've never seen a wizard or sorcerer anywhere close to their limit, unless they dumped STR down to 5 or so. They don't have armor or shield, so all they carry is clothes, weapon, pouch, and backpack. Less than 15 lbs of equipment generally.
Most of my casters are lucky to be able to carry one weapon each of ranged and melee and stay under a light load. Do you not play with encumbrance rules?Spellbook 3 lbs, clothes 8 lbs, component pouch 2 lbs, backpack, 2 lbs, bedroll 5 lbs, quarterstaff 4 lbs.
24 lbs and our guy is still lacking water, food and a ranged weapon.
Crossbow and 20 bolts 5 lbs, water 1 lbs, rations for a couple of days 2 lbs.
32 lbs total. Light load limit for a str 10 character 33.
I hope he will never have to carry a second spellbook or any loot.
You can give the bedroll and food to another character and gain 6 lbs. But then he has better hope to never get separated from the group.
mdt wrote:(or sooner if someone is carrying a bunch of gold on them, most people forget how heavy gold is).
50 coins for a lbs is approximately right for medieval coinage.
The 1rst/2nd weight was excessive.
The encumbrance rules are all but nullified in PF -- with muleback cords and ant haul, there's no reason for most non-armor wearing arcane casters to dump Str like a brick.
Even without the PF-specific encumbrance counters, there's always the concept of buying a mule and putting most weight on the mule. Or putting all your crap on the party's front-line character. . .
mdt |
Even without the PF-specific encumbrance counters, there's always the concept of buying a mule and putting most weight on the mule. Or putting all your crap on the party's front-line character. . .
In my current game (that I play in, no the one I'm running), my GM keeps giggling and stopping the game to laugh whenever I talk about my pet mule.
I don't know why she finds poor Meatshield so funny, he's a very loyal and worthy mule...
:)
Joana |
Joana wrote:
My anecdotal evidence is that most people who handwave encumbrance are shocked by how over the limit they are if they sit down and add it all up.I handwave encumbrance and I am shocked by how little I care :P
"Of course you can carry that dragon's hoard! All 97385 coins plus stuff. I know the coins weigh almost 2000 pounds all by themselves, but the hoard will just write you a check. Take that, realism!"
We used to handwave encumbrance. Eventually, we started to get tired of the one guy who would carry 5 sets of armor, 2 shields, 4 kinds of weapons, and 10,000 gold pieces simultaneously. And of course, now we have HeroLabs which does all the pesky math for us and tells us exactly how many skills are in the negatives because the PC is carrying too much.
Mules/mounts are good for some parts of the campaign, but I never know what to do with them when we go in a dungeon or how to justify them not being the first thing dead when the party gets ambushed. Honestly, I tend to avoid mount/familiar/animal companion classes because I don't know what to do with them most of the time.
mdt |
Mules/mounts are good for some parts of the campaign, but I never know what to do with them when we go in a dungeon or how to justify them not being the first thing dead when the party gets ambushed. Honestly, I tend to avoid mount/familiar/animal companion classes because I don't know what to do with them most of the time.
What I've had done in my games, or it came up as a solution but didn't get used.
1) Take the gear off the mule and bury it outside the underground ruins/dungeon. Then tie the mule to a stake in a clearing and hope for the best.
2) Same as 1, but petrify the mule before going down, then unpetrify it when you come back up.
3) Construct mule used instead of real one.
meabolex |
Mules/mounts are good for some parts of the campaign, but I never know what to do with them when we go in a dungeon or how to justify them not being the first thing dead when the party gets ambushed. Honestly, I tend to avoid mount/familiar/animal companion classes because I don't know what to do with them most of the time.
If the mule eats an attack or two, it's worth its weight in gold. Losing a mule is a setback but not a gamechanger.
And finally, a mule will go in dungeons.
Unlike a horse, a donkey or a mule is willing (though not eager) to enter dungeons and other strange or threatening places.
meabolex |
I don't know why she finds poor Meatshield so funny, he's a very loyal and worthy mule...
:)
I even draw up stat sheets for my mules. Some jerk GMs make me take ranks of handle animal to get a mule (what a steaming pile of crap), but I'd gladly give up one skill point for the ability to get mules.
OK, back on topic (:
At least DR/magic isn't like 3.0's magic DR. DR/+5 is a good way to make everyone carry around +5 weapons. . .
Joana |
Joana wrote:Mules/mounts are good for some parts of the campaign, but I never know what to do with them when we go in a dungeon or how to justify them not being the first thing dead when the party gets ambushed. Honestly, I tend to avoid mount/familiar/animal companion classes because I don't know what to do with them most of the time.If the mule eats an attack or two, it's worth its weight in gold. Losing a mule is a setback but not a gamechanger.
And finally, a mule will go in dungeons.
PRD wrote:Unlike a horse, a donkey or a mule is willing (though not eager) to enter dungeons and other strange or threatening places.
Which is fine, until you have to Climb. Or walk across a narrow ledge. Or jump across a chasm.
Plus, I personally feel guilty when I get an imaginary animal killed-on-paper, for whatever pathological reason.
And if we were high enough level to have petrify or a construct available, we'd just all have bags of holding or some kind of extradimensional space to store stuff. :)
Honestly, when it comes down to it, if my Small PC has something she can't carry, she'll just ask a stronger party member to hold it for her. They might draw the line at a golfbag full of various weapons, however. Really, if the party ever gets caught in an AMF, any amount of damage my 8-Str PC could do under the best of circumstances would be neglibible. Everyone's best bet is for her to just stay out of the way and not get killed.
meabolex |
Which is fine, until you have to Climb. Or walk across a narrow ledge. Or jump across a chasm.
* Reduce animal baby! (Note: I've never really seen this spell used for this purpose.)
* Throw the animal in a bag of holding. Transport animal for a few minutes over rough terrain. Take animal out of bag of holding. Hope the animal hasn't suffocated. Why even get a hauling animal if you have a bag of holding? *shrug*
Dragonsong |
Joana wrote:Which is fine, until you have to Climb. Or walk across a narrow ledge. Or jump across a chasm.* Reduce animal baby! (Note: I've never really seen this spell used for this purpose.)
* Throw the animal in a bag of holding. Transport animal for a few minutes over rough terrain. Take animal out of bag of holding. Hope the animal hasn't suffocated. Why even get a hauling animal if you have a bag of holding? *shrug*
Thats what those everfresh air things from the planar handbook in 3.5 were for keeping living things alive in an extra dimensional space
mdt |
meabolex wrote:Thats what those everfresh air things from the planar handbook in 3.5 were for keeping living things alive in an extra dimensional spaceJoana wrote:Which is fine, until you have to Climb. Or walk across a narrow ledge. Or jump across a chasm.* Reduce animal baby! (Note: I've never really seen this spell used for this purpose.)
* Throw the animal in a bag of holding. Transport animal for a few minutes over rough terrain. Take animal out of bag of holding. Hope the animal hasn't suffocated. Why even get a hauling animal if you have a bag of holding? *shrug*
Amulet of Adaptation. Keeps you surrounded with a layer of fresh air. You are safe in poison clouds, underwater, and even vacuum.
Dragonsong |
Dragonsong wrote:Amulet of Adaptation. Keeps you surrounded with a layer of fresh air. You are safe in poison clouds, underwater, and even vacuum.meabolex wrote:Thats what those everfresh air things from the planar handbook in 3.5 were for keeping living things alive in an extra dimensional spaceJoana wrote:Which is fine, until you have to Climb. Or walk across a narrow ledge. Or jump across a chasm.* Reduce animal baby! (Note: I've never really seen this spell used for this purpose.)
* Throw the animal in a bag of holding. Transport animal for a few minutes over rough terrain. Take animal out of bag of holding. Hope the animal hasn't suffocated. Why even get a hauling animal if you have a bag of holding? *shrug*
Too expensive the everfresh thing would do everyone in a portable hole for about half the price. You can fit a lot of mules in a portable hole.
mdt |
Too expensive the everfresh thing would do everyone in a portable hole for about half the price. You can fit a lot of mules in a portable hole.
It has a few things going for it.
1) It's PF core (which makes some difference, especially in PFS play).
2) If you're a rogue (like my character) then it can negate poison gas traps, in addition to certain spells that cause noxious vapors or special abilities of creatures.
3) Makes it a lot easier to sneak up on an encampment by using a river, just walk in up or down river holding a stone and move on down (and since you have a layer of air around you, you don't get wet!).
4) Keeps you dry in the rain (see point 3).
Dragonsong |
Dragonsong wrote:
Too expensive the everfresh thing would do everyone in a portable hole for about half the price. You can fit a lot of mules in a portable hole.It has a few things going for it.
1) It's PF core (which makes some difference, especially in PFS play).
2) If you're a rogue (like my character) then it can negate poison gas traps, in addition to certain spells that cause noxious vapors or special abilities of creatures.
3) Makes it a lot easier to sneak up on an encampment by using a river, just walk in up or down river holding a stone and move on down (and since you have a layer of air around you, you don't get wet!).
4) Keeps you dry in the rain (see point 3).
I am not disagreeing in regards to a character. I am speaking about keeping mule(s) alive in an extra-dimensional space.
The Non PF thing is the big reason why my GM will not allow it currently :)
mdt |
I am not disagreeing in regards to a character. I am speaking about keeping mule(s) alive in an extra-dimensional space.The Non PF thing is the big reason why my GM will not allow it currently :)
Ah, ok. :) If you have a bag, no need for a mule, so sum zero there. :)
I like it as a way to sneak an extra person into some place, provided you have a big enough bag to hold a person.
Dragonsong |
Dragonsong wrote:
I am not disagreeing in regards to a character. I am speaking about keeping mule(s) alive in an extra-dimensional space.The Non PF thing is the big reason why my GM will not allow it currently :)
Ah, ok. :) If you have a bag, no need for a mule, so sum zero there. :)
I like it as a way to sneak an extra person into some place, provided you have a big enough bag to hold a person.
In a 3.5 game I was in where due to plot events planar travel and teleportation were not available. I used the druid spell feathers form one of the earl 3.0 splat books to change everyone in the party and chorts into finches and put them in the bag wiht the everfresh item. Then I would wild shape and travel in a faster bird, elmental or dragon form, carrying said bag.
Diego Rossi |
I am not disagreeing in regards to a character. I am speaking about keeping mule(s) alive in an extra-dimensional space.The Non PF thing is the big reason why my GM will not allow it currently :)
Ah, ok. :) If you have a bag, no need for a mule, so sum zero there. :)I like it as a way to sneak an extra person into some place, provided you have a big enough bag to hold a person.
The smallest bag of holding has the carrying capacity of one body (my players have started defining the capacity of a bag of holding in the number of dead bodies they can stuff in several years ago).
With a minimum weight of 15 lbs for the smallest sack they don't help much the weak characters.
A Handy haversace (5 lbs) is way better.
[That would come down to a game thing. I tend to not do a lot of dungeon diving. Most of my games involve either city stuff, travelling the countryside, or exploring old ruins. Therefore, a spelunker's outfit is not needed. In general, the robes or the lighter 'African Explorer' outfits (pith helmet, light shirt and khaki's) work a lot more practically than wearing heavy duty denim jackets and pants.
It is not about going in a actual dungeon, but unless you are walking along a well travelled road when you move around in the wilderness a robe is very inefficient.
Old ruins are rarely better than a cave, thorn and bushes will damage it very fast, the shoes in that outfit are city shoes and so on.Unless you have the "adventurer season" (another old joke), starting when the good weather start in spring and ending in early autumn you will not always find that robe so appropriate. Think about what modern hunters wear.
The "African explorer" outfit work well when you are under the tropics, as the heat (and often the humidity) is your worse problem.
I am the only one that see Varisia on the map and think "The climate should be similar to northern Germany?
My PC are playing in northern Varisia at this time and the it is the 29 of Kuthona (December).
They had snowfalls and bad weather.
Happler |
mdt wrote:Usually I also see most characters taking Darkwood staffs, halves the weight, cheap cost.640 gp is cheap?
I was going to comment on that 2nd level character with a 640 GP quarterstaff and 355 GP light crossbow, what does he do with the other 5 GP he has left (out of 1000 GP average Wealth per Level).
mdt |
Majuba wrote:I was going to comment on that 2nd level character with a 640 GP quarterstaff and 355 GP light crossbow, what does he do with the other 5 GP he has left (out of 1000 GP average Wealth per Level).mdt wrote:Usually I also see most characters taking Darkwood staffs, halves the weight, cheap cost.640 gp is cheap?
I didn't say they had it at level 1 or 2. All I said was I see them getting it. As in, as soon as they can. In general, 1st and 2nd level characters have crappy equipment. I'm sort of shocked that that shocks both of you? Do 1st and 2nd level characters not have crappy equipment in your games?
Beyond second level though, it's pretty common. It usually hits between 1st and 2nd level for the crossbow, and between 2nd and third for a quarterstaff.
If the wizard wants to get a darkwood staff and treat it as a cudgel, then it's just 330 gp (club of darkwood, defined as a big stick). Walking sticks do not have to be quarterstaffs. A quarterstaff is a waste for a wizard. Give them a four foot long walking stick with a knobby head instead. That's a simple weapon, which they are proficient with.
EDIT : Oh, and if they take Rich Parents trait, then yeah, I could see them having both the darkwood crossbow and club at first level.
ChaiGuy |
So the Bhargest at the end of ROTRL has DR 10/Magic...how should I interpret this?
The whole write up for Damage Reduction is on page 299 of the Bestiary. In short though DR applies to weapon and natural attacks. A weapon or natural weapon (such as a claw) that hits a Bhargest that is not enchanted with a +1 enhancement or better, or considered magic for the purposes of overcoming DR does less damage than it should, 10 less to be exact.
For an example: A bhagest is hit with an attack from a greatsword with the wielder having an 18 strength. The damage is (2d6+6), let's say they roll average damage for a total of 13 damage. This is a non-magical greatsword, they deal 3 damage instead of 13 (13-10).
If they had been using a +1 greatsword (2d6+7) dealing on average 14, saying they roll average they would still do 14 damage since the magic enhancement of the sword bypasses the DR of the Bhargest.