I'm done with this. When people are literally arguing that a spell or magic in general cannot be abused because the fictional people of a made up world don't abuse them, I think the thread has jumped the megalodon and pretty much the whole ocean.
Magic on the level of PF spells and abilities would break the world to the point that our ideas of economics, politics, war, culture, or the environment would simply be completely incomprehensible to us. I can explain it for people, but I can't comprehend it for them.
To give those of you who still seem incapable of understanding this fundamental concept, you should look up the "Singularity" and see how many noted philosophers, scientists and theologians believe that exactly that is about to happen to THIS WORLD in the very near future due to the impact of computers, biotech and robotic technologies.
Believe what you like. I'm outta here.
If a first-level caster can have unlimited 0th level spells, why in the world can't a twentieth-level caster have unlimited 0th through 8th level spells? Or at least unlimited 1st level spells, for goodness sake!
I'm not against the idea of spellcasters having some sort of unlimited-use minor magic. However, I would have liked it much better if the unlimited-use powers hadn't been lumped in with limited-use spells.
Maybe they could have done something like this: "By the time they have reached 1st level, spellcasters have learned how to call upon some minor powers at will. A 1st level caster gets to choose 5 powers from the Minor Powers List (the 0th level spell list) which the character can use at will, once per round, as often as desired. Every time the character gains a level, he/she can choose 1 additional power from the list..."
How about that? Now they're not spells, so the fact that they are unlimited doesn't clash with the fact that spells are limited.
To be honest... I think Pathfinder (and 3.x by default) nitpick and disect the rules too much as it is... It's VERY 'rule heavy'... and developing a whole new mechanic for something as minor as cantrips would have been more trouble than it's worth...
Also even in 2E Cantrips were spells... First level... but still spells. You wave your hand, something magical happens. if they weren't 'spells' then you'd have to deal with dead magic zones... and dispels... and a whole bunch of other effects that mean... They Really ARE spells and are affected as such.
This is the minor crap stuff that all wizards know before leaving the tower... light a candle, open a door... stuff that makes them look mysterious to common folk... But it's STILL magic.
So, do you understand that this argument is not constrained to Golarion? And that the argument that actual people would abuse these spells can't be rebutted with "Well, they don't in Golarion"?
Sure did. Did you catch the part where I said I didn't use Golarion myself? Guess not. I said that attempts to make major changes by high level magic would find opposition (your deity, an oppossing deity, another mage, whatever). I think that applies to most settings, including Golarion. You try to redraw the map and someone is going to find it in thier interest to oppose you.
It doesn't MATTER what they do in Golarion. Those are fictional people following the puppet plot lines of their writers. Other GMs running campaigns might choose to have people act more REALISTICALLY, and in those cases, magic can be abused. The argument that "Golarion is still standing" doesn't mean ANYTHING in the argument. It's a house of cards. It's standing purely by Deux Ex Machina. The people of Golarion don't abuse magic BECAUSE their WRITERS don't have them do it. That's all it means.
Realistically? After you said it was just a game setting? OK. In real life when a major power does something to make significant changes in the world what happens? Does everyone just sit there and clap? Or does it generate opposition? In a fantasy setting with various oppositional groupings (good vs. evil, law vs. chaos, racial conflicts, national conflicts, individual high level rivalries, etc.) it's going to generate opposition. Probably more and quicker than the "real world".
If you want to resort to the "it's just fantasy" bit, that's fine. I think the writers try for a higher level of versimilitude than that. It helps with immersion and gives the setting a cohesion that it otherwise wouldn't have.
My 2 cp.
*edit* I missed the departure. Ah well, another, fairly interesting, discussion bites the dust...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Purify water would be a huge boon to sea travel.
Yeah. Sea travel and desert travel are both made easier by create water and purify food and drink, with an increase in trade as a result, but they can't make the deserts bloom.
Purify food and drink on its own is equivalent to a mild increase in crop yields and a corresponding increase in population density, but hardly allows mass urbanization.
Mending reduces the effort spent in repair and replacement of relatively small objects, which creates a modest increase in overall wealth. But fixing your broken shovel with the spell requires an 8th-level caster, who probably could do something more worthwhile with his time, and thus our old economic friend Comparative Advantage means you just get a replacement handle or go to the smith to fix/replace the blade.
The reason the cantrips aren't a problem is that, even spammed massively in an attempt to change the world, they just aren't powerful enough. Net, the cantrips/orisons probably can cause the general standard of living to move up from medieval to Renaissance, or Renaissance to "Early Modern" (17th-century). Which means the peasants' lives aren't quite as short or wretched . . . at least before you account for the wealth-destroying and peasant-killing capabilities of the monsters that are all over the place.
Regarding Control Weather devastating the economy and living conditions of an area...
This is precisely the plot of a certain adventure (which I will leave unnamed so as to prevent spoilers). The simple spell being used for such a long time made the adventure writers add additional long-term effects (constant rain causing crops to fail, waterlogged buildings and equipment, riots and general health problems for the populace).
This was an evil druid causing all of this (don't lose powers if your whole point is that you "use and abuse" nature instead of defend it.. or use it to kill non-natural things).
In the end, it's the reason adventurers were there! The contention being that high level magic doesn't break the game because it has a response: adventurers!
I also believe that the cantrips, for the most part, don't ruin the game, but they do change it from "medieval with magic" to "modern day -> magic replaces technology" (sort of like Eberron with chained elementals powering transportation, etc).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Gailbraithe - it's good to know that most people can understand the difference between reasoned debate and cheap spin! :)
Back to the thread...
The economy of magic is tricky (essentailly getting something from nothing), but the game does account for it.
The standard market price a first-level spellcaster charges for casting a cantrip or orison is 5gp (Core book page 159). So it's very unlikely that any NPC without some alterior motive is going to just spam the same cantrip or orison over and over for free. Spending a minute spamming the create water orison means you've just handed out 50gp worth of your time and expertise for free. Doing so for an hour means you're down a potential 3,000gp, and spending a 10 hour working day (a bit more realistic than a 16 hour working day IMHO) spamming create water means you've given away 30,000gp worth of your valuable talents. That doesn't mean nobody will ever do that - after all, there are doctors (for example) who volunteer their services for free in the real world - but they'll do it for good, story-driven, plot-worthy reasons.
On the flip-side, despite the estimated value of your cantrip or orisin casting, that doesn't mean you can just spend a 10 hour day casting zero-level spells and expect someone to randomly pay you 30,000gp. You need customers for that, and your ability to attract cutomers and otherwise manage your spellcasting business is nicely covered in the rules under the Profession skill. So, our first-level spellcaster sets himself up as a guy who sells spells, sticks a rank in the Profession (spellcaster) (or whatever is appropriate) Skill, and generates, let's say, a total of a +5 bonus to his Profession Skill check at level one. After a standard week getting the word out that he's available to cast spells for cash he takes 10 on his check and finds out he's earning 7.5gp a week... Which means that, on average, only three people are wanting him to cast one of his cantrips or orisons for them every two weeks. It's a nice, steady, income to be sure, but it hardly breaks the game setting's economy (or discourages our spellcaster from jumping at the chance to go dig up an old tomb rumoured to be stuffed full of some ancient king's treasure...).
I have no problem with people just not liking the idea of unlimited zero-level spells (even though personally I think they're one of the simplest and best additions Pathfinder made to the game), but I'm a long way from being convinced that their presence could ever break the game.
Not a huge deal. It's always been an out of combat spell anyway, but makes it less useful to "open a tailor shop" or some such nonsense.Yeah I only noticed it a few months ago and was suprised by it.Also depending on how deep the water table is underneath expidous excavation. Also take into acount unskilled labor is cheap like one silver piece a day. Could a cleric do more useful things in his day than create water to earn money if someone could hire some commoners to dig a well. Also mending does not fix heavy tihngs read the description and takes ten minutes to cast.Never noticed the casting time of mending before.Well, ten minutes is not much time to fix an expensive suit of clothes or repair an expensive set of boots. A mage could repair six items per hour or 48 items in a typical 8 hour work day. We'll say 40 items with some breaks to rest those aching fingers. 200 items perfectly repaired per week. Of course since the mage's fixes don't require expensive materials, tools or skills, he/she would really only accept the very best items to fix. You know the items that make a tailor or cobbler's job profitable. So tailors and cobblers in the area are going to have to take nothing but the mage's castoff work while the mage is making ten gold a pop for fixing those fancy displacer beast hide boots and dragon hide armor items for the nobility. Figure 4,000g per week as long as there is demand, without even considering the special cases where the queen's jewel-encrusted chastity belt was jimmied open by the visiting Duke and needs to be repaired NOW and money is no object.
So, yeah, economic impact even at 10 minutes.
Touche. Not a bad living assuming you're the only one who has thought of this.
Thanks Gailbraithe - it's good to know that most people can understand the difference between reasoned debate and cheap spin! :)
Back to the thread...
The economy of magic is tricky (essentailly getting something from nothing), but the game does account for it.
The standard market price a first-level spellcaster charges for casting a cantrip or orison is 5gp (Core book page 159). So it's very unlikely that any NPC without some alterior motive is going to just spam the same cantrip or orison over and over for free. Spending a minute spamming the create water orison means you've just handed out 50gp worth of your time and expertise for free. Doing so for an hour means you're down a potential 3,000gp, and spending a 10 hour working day (a bit more realistic than a 16 hour working day IMHO) spamming create water means you've given away 30,000gp worth of your valuable talents. That doesn't mean nobody will ever do that - after all, there are doctors (for example) who volunteer their services for free in the real world - but they'll do it for good, story-driven, plot-worthy reasons.
On the flip-side, despite the estimated value of your cantrip or orisin casting, that doesn't mean you can just spend a 10 hour day casting zero-level spells and expect someone to randomly pay you 30,000gp. You need customers for that, and your ability to attract cutomers and otherwise manage your spellcasting business is nicely covered in the rules under the Profession skill. So, our first-level spellcaster sets himself up as a guy who sells spells, sticks a rank in the Profession (spellcaster) (or whatever is appropriate) Skill, and generates, let's say, a total of a +5 bonus to his Profession Skill check at level one. After a standard week getting the word out that he's available to cast spells for cash he takes 10 on his check and finds out he's earning 7.5gp a week... Which means that, on average, only three people are wanting him to cast one of his cantrips or orisons for them every two weeks....
I agree what is the demand for this and how it affects most areas of the game. Maybe in a metropolois you might get enough money but in a village I don't think there would be enough demand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Removed some posts. Let's get back to the original topic, please.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, ten minutes is not much time to fix an expensive suit of clothes or repair an expensive set of boots.
Sure. Now look at the rules for broken items—craftsmen will repair for 1/10th the price of the item. So repairing a noble's outfit costs 7.5 gp when you hire a tailor. Assuming no special time pressure, then, your wizard can't charge more than that for fixing the outfit, since otherwise they'll send it to a tailor.
But wait! That outfit is a whole 10 lbs, which is ten times what a first-level casting of mending can fix! So approximating the suit as ten sub-items each costing about 7.5 gp, the average your first-level character can charge per casting of mending part of a noble's outfit is 0.75 gp.
Hey, maybe a first-level wizard can't find any better work than using mending over and over for seven silvers and five coppers per casting, but my bet is that he can find something more profitable to do with his time.
On the create water topic, flooding a dungeon seems impractical, but what if you combined that with raise/lower water spell. Any body of liquid can be raises 2 feet/level. You just need a thin layer over a large area, cast this spell and boom, instant flood. Opinions?Create water also short circuits many environmental hazards, Desert no problem cast all the water you need. Fire, create water team to the rescue.
Its a small gripe, but as a DM it does limit a few things.
Just a reminder an Olympic sized swimming pool holds about 660,000 gallons of water. At two gallons/level for create water, well I'll let you figure that math out.
To give you some idea of how much water is created each level allows the caster to create one 7.7 inch cube of water. Every two levels fills a five gallon bucket to not overflowing full (four gallons in the bucket). If you want to play games with a decanter of endless water, get a decanter of endless water. A create water spell will not substitute. That sai, yeah great spell for a desert campaign as long as the caster doesn't die.
At the risk of getting boo-ed for resurrecting a dormant thread, this (unlimited orisons) is one of the few things in PF that absolutely drives me up the wall. Altering the game just a bit to adjust for this could be relatively simple. For one, just flat out say that orisons are limited to being cast once a day, but what else would be needed to counter-balance it?
I like the idea of the wizard school / domain power / bloodline being infinite in place of orisons a lot. I'm glad I came across this thread for this very idea, in fact.
Another thought: orisons are infinite, but every casting after the first requires a Spellcraft check of DC 10, increasing by +1 with each additional casting. Will require some bookkeeping, it shouldn't be too onerous.
Another idea: introduce a material cost (either escalating with each casting or not) to the orisons that bug you the most. I think the guilty culprits are Mending, Create Water, and Light.
Another idea that hit me: orisons are all finite, but you can pick one a day that is infinite. Perhaps for each 5 levels after the first, another orison becomes cast at will.
Personally, I like the first idea best, of using the school/domain/bloodline power as an at-will ability instead of orisons. I'm curious what you guys think, specifically those of you that aren't big fans of at-will orisons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Easier solution: If something bugs you because it's a 0-level spell and it's being cast constantly, make it a 1st level spell.
Create Water I could understand ... why Mending and Light would bother people, I have no idea.
I prefer at-will spellcasting to be there, because nothing makes me feel like less of a spellcaster than running out of magic.
At the risk of getting boo-ed for resurrecting a dormant thread, this (unlimited orisons) is one of the few things in PF that absolutely drives me up the wall. Altering the game just a bit to adjust for this could be relatively simple. For one, just flat out say that orisons are limited to being cast once a day, but what else would be needed to counter-balance it?
I like the idea of the wizard school / domain power / bloodline being infinite in place of orisons a lot. I'm glad I came across this thread for this very idea, in fact.
Another thought: orisons are infinite, but every casting after the first requires a Spellcraft check of DC 10, increasing by +1 with each additional casting. Will require some bookkeeping, it shouldn't be too onerous.
Another idea: introduce a material cost (either escalating with each casting or not) to the orisons that bug you the most. I think the guilty culprits are Mending, Create Water, and Light.
Another idea that hit me: orisons are all finite, but you can pick one a day that is infinite. Perhaps for each 5 levels after the first, another orison becomes cast at will.
Personally, I like the first idea best, of using the school/domain/bloodline power as an at-will ability instead of orisons. I'm curious what you guys think, specifically those of you that aren't big fans of at-will orisons.
The problem with making school/domain/bloodline powers infinite is that those abilities are MUCH stronger than orisons. Infinite dimension door? Sounds good to me. Infinte targetted blindness? Pretty legit. Infinite freeedom of movement? Sounds WAY to good...
The problem with making school/domain/bloodline powers infinite is that those abilities are MUCH stronger than orisons.
I should have been more specific. I think the notion originally floated in this thread was to take a single, 1st level ability listed for a school, domain or bloodline. So, as an example, for an Enchanter, you'd get the Dazing Touch at will. An Aberrant Sorcerer would have Acidic Ray at will.
Easier solution: If something bugs you because it's a 0-level spell and it's being cast constantly, make it a 1st level spell.
Create Water I could understand ... why Mending and Light would bother people, I have no idea.
I prefer at-will spellcasting to be there, because nothing makes me feel like less of a spellcaster than running out of magic.
You're making me consider a couple of things. If you look back into earlier posts in this thread, there is an issue with Mending that some folks have, which I won't repeat here. Light means your party most likely never has to carry torches or lanterns. I'm old-school, and darn it, I like torches & lanterns. PCs ought to have to buy that stuff, and carry enough oil, and keep up with things that get consumed. Just my opinion.
Don't get me wrong. I see the appeal of not tracking consumables. But convenience doesn't always translate into a quality experience. Yeah, you can eat a bagged salad and shredded cheese. Will it taste as good as lettuce you grew yourself or cheddar that you grated on your own? Maybe ... but, for me, no, it usually won't.
Another thing you mention, which was mentioned many times in prior posts in this threat, about being 'less of a spellcaster' after running out of spells. I'd point out a couple of things:
1) while low level mages are at risk of running out of spells, high level mages aren't typically at that same risk; casters' relatively low power early in their careers is counterbalanced by their extraordinary reach later in the game. It's an old school notion, and I hope that it's a theme that players still have some affection for it.
2) even after all spells are cast, mages still have ranks in Spellcraft or Craft or all kinds of Knowledge skills; clerics can still rebuke Undead or have KNO Religion. Druids can still talk to fauna and fowl. The lack of spells doesn't have to mean that the character's out of pizzazz.
3) Usually, in prior posts, when people complained about running out of spells, they brought up Acid Splash as an example. This ties into #2 to a degree. It saddens me that players only define what their characters can do in terms of combat ability, instead of considering the wealth of abilities that are defined in PF. I'm not accusing you of this, but it was an impression I got from reading old posts from other people.
I’m supprised that detect magic hasn’t been brought up in this thread. In the opening post Martin Kauffman 530 noted unlimited cantrips “… tends to make classes like the rogue less useful. …” In a game I ran a player proposed that since detect magic can be used at will that magical traps are completely useless. Also they stated that creatures hidden by the spell invisibility are no longer a threat. Finally it would weaken if not invalidate the enchantment school, someone acting strange? Cast detect magic, get the aura of enchantment, then you know the cause of the strange behavior.
In the end I asserted that since the people who created magical traps (including spells like the circle of X spell), invisibility, and the enchantment line of spells knew about detect magic and since they are not stupid, they made all of that non detectable by detect magic. The player was not entirely satisfied by that, but went with it. Is that a house rule, or how it generally works? Has anyone had problems with detect magic?
You're making me consider a couple of things. If you look back into earlier posts in this thread, there is an issue with Mending that some folks have, which I won't repeat here. Light means your party most likely never has to carry torches or lanterns. I'm old-school, and darn it, I like torches & lanterns. PCs ought to have to buy that stuff, and carry enough oil, and keep up with things that get consumed. Just my opinion.
I'd rather just buy an Everburning Torch or cast Continual Flame in a lantern and be done with it.
Cantrips and Orisons are one of the things that make me actually like PF, when I hate 3.5, to the point where I will never play it willingly. Perhaps it's just that I play almost exclusively at low levels, but it makes magic using classes actually seem magical at those low levels, without vastly increasing their power level. Can some things be abused? Like the "hit a lock with acid for 10 minutes"? Sure, but in practice, that never will happen. Beyond not tracking consumables like torches and lamps, it just fits with the flavor that I'd want. If I'm playing a wizard or a cleric, why shouldn't they use a light spell rather than a torch or a lamp. They're a magic-using class, after all.
Has anyone had problems with detect magic?
Yep, and for all the reasons you just mentioned.
I fully realize that people who like unlimited 0-level spells are the majority here. So, my reply truly wasn't aimed at them. I was hoping to engage folks who've had a problem with infinite orisons like yourself.
As a work-around, maybe calling for a Spellcraft check with an increasing DC after the first time the same orison is cast? How do you think that would work?
There's lots of ways to limit 0-levels again, but I'm not entirely sure what's the simplest, most elegant, least disruptive solution.
|
|
I’m supprised that detect magic hasn’t been brought up in this thread. In the opening post Martin Kauffman 530 noted unlimited cantrips “… tends to make classes like the rogue less useful. …”
Yeah, did you also notice that the OP, Martin Kauffman 530, hasn't responded to the discussion he started since he started it? Usually when you try to start a discussion on a subject you participate in said discussion, not toss out some flame-bait and watch the fire.
Hope he at least popped back to watch some of what his trolling has reaped.
There are no physics in Pathfinder. What you want is metaphysics.
Hear, hear.
i cant believe that orisons/cantrips abuse is really a issue i'm sure there some one out there trying to flood a room with create water but all it take is a dm just saying no not happening
i had more problems with this when it came to warlock in 3.5 as you could take acid for your rays and then use it as much as you want so here a player is hit a door with 5d6 acid and like why the door still there
some time you just got to look at players and tell them know your not going to acid a way ever door and wall in the place
i know it not the best way to do thing but some times it the only way
@ Ziltmilt: the increasing spellcraft DC check is interesting, it depends on the details. For example spellcraft DC 10 + 1 for time the cantrip is cast seems to be what is implied. Is this only for cantrips cast consecutively (round after round) or just casting the same cantrip in the same day? What happens if a spellcraft check is failed? I would imagine that if you’re going this route just not successfully casting the spell is quite enough IMO, there should be a time period to recollect ones thoughts to attempt again. It could be one minute, one hour, or even unusable for the rest of the day. I would have to think carefully to make the failed check matter without making it too punishing I guess.
@ Fake Healer: The main reason I mentioned the OP is because I was worried that some might think I was making an off topic response. Later in the thread the main vibe seemed to be how cantrips affect the world economy and not how it affected adventurers. I guess I didn’t see his opening comments as trollish, but maybe some could. I can see how not responding to your own thread could make someone look like a troll though.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the risk of getting boo-ed for resurrecting a dormant thread, this (unlimited orisons) is one of the few things in PF that absolutely drives me up the wall. Altering the game just a bit to adjust for this could be relatively simple. For one, just flat out say that orisons are limited to being cast once a day, but what else would be needed to counter-balance it?
I like the idea of the wizard school / domain power / bloodline being infinite in place of orisons a lot. I'm glad I came across this thread for this very idea, in fact.
Another thought: orisons are infinite, but every casting after the first requires a Spellcraft check of DC 10, increasing by +1 with each additional casting. Will require some bookkeeping, it shouldn't be too onerous.
Another idea: introduce a material cost (either escalating with each casting or not) to the orisons that bug you the most. I think the guilty culprits are Mending, Create Water, and Light.
Another idea that hit me: orisons are all finite, but you can pick one a day that is infinite. Perhaps for each 5 levels after the first, another orison becomes cast at will.
Personally, I like the first idea best, of using the school/domain/bloodline power as an at-will ability instead of orisons. I'm curious what you guys think, specifically those of you that aren't big fans of at-will orisons.
There is a limiting factor: laryngitis :-)
Seriously, cantrips have V components, so you need to speak magical words to activate them. You can't spend every seconds of a 8th hour shift speaking, even marathon speakers don't do that. They take pauses, drink water and so on. The "unlimited" use of cantrips work as the free actions. You can use a reasonable number of them in a day, where reasonable is a very large number.
That aside, I would agree that a limit to the total number of cantrips available in a day isn't unreasonable, but it should be a large number, like 100 or so. For sure not 4 to 6.
|
|
For Detect Magic there si this too:
Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras.
When using detect magic on a magic item you see only 1 school of magic, the strongest, even if spells from different schools have been used.
I would say that if you are detecting the magic on a person it work similarly, you identify the only the school of the strongest aura, all the other auras are a unrecognizable jumble.So, that invisible (2nd level spell) guy is the target of a Magic Circle against Evil (3rd level) spell? You detect a aura of the abjuration school. Not of the illusion school.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who runs all the specifics of abilities, including spells, correctly? In reality, something ALWAYS slips. We're humans. Not machines executing machine code. I've seen star GMs break action economy, forget some minor clause of a condition, etc. Stuff happens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The unlimited use is there to prevent the 15 minute workday effect. It basically allows even casters who are out of their normal resources to have SOMETHING to do. It also means things they commonly need to do like identify magic items or read new scrolls dont bring things to a halt, rest recover spells mode.
This.
I could never understand the 2E mentality that 1 first level spell is considered a PC. How did a character with one spell... and 4 hp expect to survive adventuring? Best case scenario... it was 1 magic missle. Then you were done.
Also having to waste that one slot for reading and/or detecting magic was painful...
A mage should have learned multiple minor magic effects in his training... 0 level spells show that BEAUTIFULLY... It was one of my favorite discoveries after switching to Pathfinder.
Ok, now I've heard this argument many times before. And frankly it stings. I had an MU in 2e start at level 1. Here's what I did:
1. used staff and dagger: no it wasn't particularly magical or epic and I didn't hit a lot, but there you go
2. used tactics: the rogue scouted alongside my familiar (my GM was nice) and so we knew what was coming. I then ducked behind/into something, even if the something I was behind was the fighter.
3. used my familiar: my owl had a double-claw divebomb attack that handled a single, low-hp foe just fine.
4. used my 1 spell wisely: I had rolled a sleep spell. This basically meant that after things were scouted it was my job to be in a position to catch the majority of our foes in the blast.
Yes, we were still stuck with a 15 min workday in 2e, and that sucked. But my 2e MU Arlyss the Gaunt is an example of making it work. Ex:
We entered a stable where there were 6 orcs looting. The rogue got to the 2nd story window, helped haul me up there, then our fighter created a "diversion" by smashing the front door using a heavy barrel as a ram. My character used sleep on a couple orcs who went down. The fighter then tore into another one.
He took heavy damage but survived round 1. The rogue came in on round 2 and backstabbed; I handed a lit lantern to my owl and had it drop the thing near the orcs. It didn't hit anyone but it spooked one of the horses that then busted free. In the chaos the fighter took out another orc (that's 3 dead, 2 unconscious) and the last one ran away.
The fighter used the barrel (filled with water) to put out the fire. We were almost killed by the horse but a dude came out of nowhere and calmed it down (our cleric joined our party then). Since my character had a lot of languages and orc was one we interrogated the 2 unconscious ones and found out about an orc lair on the outskirts of town.
Now if we'd just run in and gone toe-to-toe, yes I'd have died. But that's not how you played older editions of D&D. It was a 15 min workday because not only did you not have a lot of resources but the ones you did have had to count. As a player you spent half your time figuring out creative ways to take an action without wasting resources.
I only wish my players in current games of PF were as daring. Don't get me wrong; I LIKE playing PF versus AD&D and 2e but no one takes risks anymore. Everything is calculated. Six orcs versus 3 PCs in modern PF would be a hard fight, but that's because the PCs would follow the fighter in the front door.
Back on thread I like unlimited cantrips. Despite my rant I don't think these in any way contribute to a lack of daring on the part of PCs. I like that the casters at low level can feel magical and useful long after exhausting their main powers.
Thank you RigaMortis and Diego Rossi, I believe that your handling of Detect Magic is more nuanced than my own, I’ll have to try and run the spell that way next time I GM Pathfinder.
Detect magic to find invisible creatures, probably not too bad, since it would take at least 3 rounds of concentration, which can be inturupted and funtions in a 60' cone. That's large enough in a lot of situations, but not in all cases.
Detect magic for traps, while it doesn't defeat the trap it gives away it's location. I guess that in most cases continually DM everywhere your going will slow your pace significantly, that could be a limiting factor if time is important.
Detect Magic is also blocked by solid materials without that much effort, so you're not going to see around a corner with it in most cases, and any other location with obstructions between you and the source of the trap (see most dungeons without much effort) is going to be a problem for you as well. Combine that with nondetection, false aura, and lingering auras, and you can get a lot of false readings that limit it's usefulness for general scouting, not to mention having to be in front of the party so that their gear isn't muddling the results and having to concentrate for 3 rounds to get anything genuinely useful.
In the end, those kinds of reasons tend to be why unlimited cantrips don't particularly bother me. The thing to remember as a DM is that it's really, really easy to limit them or turn them against the caster if they try to abuse them that much. Light is great, but you can only have one at a time, which the party still needs other light sources unless everyone wants to cluster around that one light source, unless multiple people have it, and every single one of them is willing to spend a slot on it. Also, while there isn't technically anything in the rules that limits someone from casting them nonstop for 8 hrs, there is almost always good roleplay reasons, and worst case scenario, you pull out the fatigue rules; hope you didn't ignore constitution while building your character.
The challenge with PF, and really 3.x in general, is that many of the tactics and strategies that DMs learned and knew in older editions, but didn't need to start worrying about until really high levels, now come into play at basically level 1. Magic in general is no longer this extremely rare thing that only really comes into play as a high powered resource late in the game. It now serves to some extent as technology, with examples of it ranging from the very simple and common to the very rare and powerful. But, just like technology can only do so much in the real world, magic can only do so much, no matter how reliant you become on it. That does mean that you actually have to read and understand everything from the very beginning in order to understand it's limits. Likewise, the ability for players to simply sit down and not have to expect to do much of anything as far as reading the book is concerned for ten levels is largely gone. It is definitely a much more cooperative game from the very start where both DM and player have to understand the mechanics in play and have to work together to turn those mechanics into a solid story. Especially since that by now, many of the spells have gone through multiple iterations, even just within PF errata, and each person at the table may remember a different version, you need to communicate and make sure that everyone is on the same page from the very start, not just at level 10.
I agree with the loss of creativity, but that is wrapped up in the entire evolution of not just the game itself, but how gamers communicate with each other, and the expectations that both DMs and players bring to the table. Ultimately, the difference is that before being creative lay almost entirely in the hands of the players, who oftentimes had no other in character resource, whereas now, the DM must be an equal partner in creating the creative moments, since the actual characters are more fleshed out, giving the players more mechanic based options.
i cant believe that orisons/cantrips abuse is really a issue
Well, it can be, as evidenced by prior posts, depending on the nature of the game that you want to play or run. But, apparently, for most folks on these boards, orison abuse (I love that term!) is no big deal.
For example, I'd love to run a PF version of an old D&D module, 'Master of the Desert Nomads', but unlimited Create Water by a 5th level Wizard would take away much of the danger of desert travel, such as running out of water. You'll never have to worry about taking NLD from hot weather, because you can get doused in water anytime, as much as you need.
If being subject to this environmental rule is of little to no interest to you, then who cares? If you don't want PCs running the risk of being trapped underground without oil for their lanterns, then unlimited orisons per the CRB are good.
On the other hand, if you do enjoy a little more grit in your PF, it seems to me that a subtle tweak to orisons is all that's needed to restore heat danger or magical traps to become the obstacles that they used to be.
There are people who pine for the days when 1st level magic-users had ONE, count them ONE spell to cast for the day.
There are, but I don't recall anyone on this thread advocating this drastic of a change to PF.
There is a limiting factor: laryngitis :-)
Seriously, cantrips have V components, so you need to speak magical words to activate them. You can't spend every seconds of a 8th hour shift speaking, even marathon speakers don't do that. They take pauses, drink water and so on.
And they take time to browse the net on their iPhones ...
It's common sense, yes, but mechanically, there's nothing in the rules that I see that puts such a limit into place. It would be nice if there were some physical limit on spell casting to such a degree. 100 a day seems way too high to me, but again, just MHO.
Just a point about the 'flood the dungeon with Create Water' idea- holes/dirt walls, wet floor, nothing else. Most of the spamming can be stopped with similar logic
i cant believe that orisons/cantrips abuse is really a issueWell, it can be, as evidenced by prior posts, depending on the nature of the game that you want to play or run. But, apparently, for most folks on these boards, orison abuse (I love that term!) is no big deal.
For example, I'd love to run a PF version of an old D&D module, 'Master of the Desert Nomads', but unlimited Create Water by a 5th level Wizard would take away much of the danger of desert travel, such as running out of water. You'll never have to worry about taking NLD from hot weather, because you can get doused in water anytime, as much as you need.
If being subject to this environmental rule is of little to no interest to you, then who cares? If you don't want PCs running the risk of being trapped underground without oil for their lanterns, then unlimited orisons per the CRB are good.
On the other hand, if you do enjoy a little more grit in your PF, it seems to me that a subtle tweak to orisons is all that's needed to restore heat danger or magical traps to become the obstacles that they used to be.
So you're bummed out because magic solves problems?
Create water is not a wizard spell. Also, afaik it doesnt state the temperature of the water. Having it be as hot or cold as the surrounding air seems fair and prevents it from protecting against heat (so you need endure elements for that).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Create water is not a wizard spell. Also, afaik it doesnt state the temperature of the water. Having it be as hot or cold as the surrounding air seems fair and prevents it from protecting against heat (so you need endure elements for that).
Yeah, AFAIK, water has no effect on heat dangers outside of dousing fire and such. If it's 110o outside, it's still 110o outside by the rules.
As a GM, I'd probably be fine with it adding a circumstance bonus. The same way I'd give reprieve if the party stopped and made shelter to make some shade. But I'm not sure I'd want to trudge through the desert soaking wet either. It'll still be hot, now you're going to be humid, and your wet clothing is going to be really icky to trudge about in.
That's not a mechanical thing though. That said, in most of the desert-games I've played in or been a part of, the smart players all travel at night when it's cold anyway, and break during the day. At night it's easier for a good guide to ensure you're on course (because stars and such are cool like that).
Create water is not a wizard spell. Also, afaik it doesnt state the temperature of the water. Having it be as hot or cold as the surrounding air seems fair and prevents it from protecting against heat (so you need endure elements for that).Yeah, AFAIK, water has no effect on heat dangers outside of dousing fire and such. If it's 110o outside, it's still 110o outside by the rules.
As a GM, I'd probably be fine with it adding a circumstance bonus. The same way I'd give reprieve if the party stopped and made shelter to make some shade. But I'm not sure I'd want to trudge through the desert soaking wet either. It'll still be hot, now you're going to be humid, and your wet clothing is going to be really icky to trudge about in.
That's not a mechanical thing though. That said, in most of the desert-games I've played in or been a part of, the smart players all travel at night when it's cold anyway, and break during the day. At night it's easier for a good guide to ensure you're on course (because stars and such are cool like that).
Actually the water would cool you down. The dry air in the desert would quickly evaporate the water and it is the evaporation that cools you off.
I'm just tickled by: "they had a problem to overcome and they did it by using magic."*shakes fist*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I'm not sure I'd want to trudge through the desert soaking wet either. It'll still be hot, now you're going to be humid, and your wet clothing is going to be really icky to trudge about in.
I made the mistake of drenching myself in water to cool down in the middle of a hot (100 degree) day while I was working outside once.
ONCE.
1 minute of relief.
2 hours of torture.