|
This is more an issue of genre that isn't suited for D&D Pathfinder than good or poor DMing. This is where D&D / Pathfinder fails to please a minority (yet significant portion) of roleplayers by being a bit too high-fantasy. Aside from "play another game" or "play E6", people look for solutions (which again i don't see as a sign of poor DMing). The best would be, as you mentioned, a low-fantasy guide (ideally an official one).
Don’t hold your breath and expect Paizo to put something out to address the issue.
What I did to fix the spell (and yes, it needs fixing - my sort of fixing) is I kept the current duration and added a few 1st/2nd ed elements: add an extra 1d6 minutes as a bonus (secret) duration. When the spell ends you fall. If the spell is dispelled, you fall.
Now the players use Fly only when they need to and not as a substitution for walking. They now also need to back things up with Feather Fall (another slot) as insurance - a relatively minor change, but enough of one to throw in a risk element to the use of the spell.
Same goes with Teleport, Scry, and a slew of "pure reward" spells. Just a few tweaks and casters are put promptly back in their place (as risk takers). All you have to do is incorporate a Risk vs. Reward paradigm back into casting (vs. the pure Reward model of 3rd ed) and the situation is solved (mostly). Spells keep most of their power but now the caster has to decide how much risk he wants to take to achieve a desired result. In most cases when faced with a magic (risky) option vs. a mundane choice the casters tend to go with the latter.
The low-fantasy part comes in when spells are used less, there is a greater risk in using spells or a greater danger to cast (longer casting duration times - full actions, etc). Low fantasy arrives as a consequence.
To the OP: Sounds like you need to play with more 3-d thinking DMs. Maybe they're trying to pen&paper-ify MMOs or something.
It is internally consistent. There are lots of things in the game and in the lore that fly without actual locomotion. The classic example was/is the beholder, but there are also things like a Will-o'-wisp which 'bobs gently in the air' with no evidence of locomotion.
The wisp also has a place in lore, as does irrational flight. How many myths include people driving chariots or riding horses through the air (Apollo, Thor, etc). Mind you I can understand your dislike of the flavor, but to say that there isn't consistency or genre/lore based trops around the concept of purely magical flight is I believe incorrect.
Actually, for the level in which it's introduced, it's not consistent. We're not talking Epic-level play (Apollo, Thor, etc.), we're talking about a 5th-level arcane caster. As for the Will-o-Wisp, I don't equate a magical aberration (designed for higher level encounters) as representative of a 5th-level arcane caster's mastery of magic. Now if we're talking about 10th or 15th level characters, I've got much less of an issue.I do hope one of these days paizo puts out a guide to low fantasy...
Lord knows, so do I!
No such thing as stealthing while flying (short of invisibility)
I agree with most of that post MDT but not this part. Those flying predators should be using stealth. In fact, fliers are the primary case for stealth being usable in bright glare (but that may have more to due with the shortcomings of stealth as written and compounded by really no support for 3 dimensional combat, what are we here Kahn from Star Trek 2?), flying at night is generally under concealment so should be all good.
Your rule while understandable makes me sad as you can't have the "Ohh SHIII!!!!" moment when the Wyvern swoops down from out of the sky to poison one of the characters.
Not my rule, the rules as written in the books. I don't write them up, I just point out the consequences. Per the rules in the book, you can't stealth while flying unless people can't see you for some reason. Such as fog, invisibility, or darkness.
The problem with fog and darkness is that you can't see either. Low-Light doesn't work, and darkvision is too short ranged. In fact, it's really easy to get lost flying at night unless you have a know direction spell going.
It's not that I don't agree, I'm just pointing out that per the rules, there's no stealthing while flying (not in any way that's useful) short of invisibility.
As to the Wyvern, I would suggest that a Wyvern is generally swooping around the side of a mountain, or down out of the trees. In which case, there's no stealth involved as you can't draw line of sight to the wyvern until he's in range to attack, due to full cover from the mountain or the tree.
Besides, do you really need a sneak attack if you're a wyvern to get that 'OH SH***' moment? I mean, let's assume the characters had 2 rounds to prepare before it swooped down and attacked them. I think what you'd get is 2 whole turns of 'oh *****' followed by 'Here it comes!'. :)
|
I learned a very good lesson about player capabilities and encounter design early on in my DMing career.
I had been invited to a game my DM ran on the side, and when talking about how to introduce me, I suggested I run the encounter. I was trying out the Chameleon prestige class for this character, and being that I was basing it off of Gogo the Mimic, I thought 'why not go full bore?'
So the party is warped into this enclosed dimension and wanders through the challenges I pulled straight from the game. The lesson came from the antimagic room with broken bridges crossing a pit. Obviously there would be no flying. I knew they were 10th level, and I needed to deal with that. However, I misjudged how far the platforms needed to be for their jump checks.
The monk crossed the gap in one move action. Most of the rest of the party had little trouble, save for one heavily armored character who actually had to contend with the green golems trying to push him off the platforms. Quite hilarious, since the fall was only 60ft or so, and also awesome when he beat the Str checks of the golems.
So I learned that jumping pits is not a huge challenge for 10th level characters, and moved on.
|
|
Not according to PF Core. PFRPG has the "compassion edition" bonus features.
Should the spell duration expire while the subject is still aloft, the magic fails slowly. The subject floats downward 60 feet per round for 1d6 rounds. If it reaches the ground in that amount of time, it lands safely. If not, it falls the rest of the distance, taking 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet of fall. Since dispelling a spell effectively ends it, the subject also descends safely in this way if the fly spell is dispelled, but not if it is negated by an antimagic field.
So nothing short of the very common antimagic field can bring down the caster, even if dispelled 10 times in a row.
By the time my PCs are high enough to freely use Overland Flight and/or have flying mounts, I've usually upped my own game past "You are lost in the forest".
Being stuck on the ground is so 4th level.
As for the Invisible flying around.
Don't care.
That's a two-way street.
I consider it a tactic, and one the party will occasionally be rewarded by using.
But then again, so will my monsters.
I have 4 good levels to keep my players on the ground.
Another 4-6 levels to keep them pretty much on the ground with a few limited aerial tricks they can use.
At 9+, they're HEROES!
So I let them be Heroes.
The idea is make it so that the party is forced to ask themselves, "Is this really a good use of magic, or should we save it and try something else?", not to stop the party from using magic completely. If you can do that, than suddenly planning defenses becomes easier because the city doesn't have to routinely line their entire walls with counterspell experts, although they may be standing by on alert, because the chances of the cost of using a particular spell, or any spells, in that scenario usually isn't worth the cost. The cost to benefit ratio is a key limiter that many forget about. Ultimately, it is what allows the presence of such powerful magic to not overwhelm most of the world. A good real world example is the atomic bomb; it's a great deterrent to have and to be able to point to, but very, very few people actually consider it's use to be practical in 99% of real life situations that come up. I tend to see 8th and 9th level spells like this. They have their place, but you aren't going to waste them to accomplish a routine political assassination.
That breaks Evil Overlord Rule 40.
@ LilithsThrall
By 9th level they are superheros/villains, of at least the low end of the superheros power level. They bend reality, talk people into things they'd NEVER agree to in real life, lead a army, teleport (as what the word means not just the spells), survive falls from 10 stories up, and fights monsters that can level a city. Pretending that someone who has a reasonable chance of going toe to toe with a Young Adult Blue Dragon is going to become over powered because they can fly for a few minutes a days seems... well crazy.
You aren't flying far, and you wont be flying fast.
Remember guys, 2/3 of a mile flight at L5, 1 1/3 miles at level 10.
And at the astonishing speed of a three legged donkey.
Thats not a very good distance, and slow as a wet week at that.
Actually, for the level in which it's introduced, it's not consistent. We're not talking Epic-level play (Apollo, Thor, etc.), we're talking about a 5th-level arcane caster. As for the Will-o-Wisp, I don't equate a magical aberration (designed for higher level encounters) as representative of a 5th-level arcane caster's mastery of magic. Now if we're talking about 10th or 15th level characters, I've got much less of an issue.
In the post I was responding to the poster was talking about how he didnt like the fact that fly let you fly without some means of locomotion and that it was entirely inconsistent in game and thematically. That was what I was objecting to, not what level fly comes, thats a totally different argument and one I'd have to give strong consideration to.
My point was there are lots of points in the game, and in myths, legends and lore, where things fly without physical things that make them fly (like wings), so it's not inconsistent for fly to just let you fly like superman.
You are talking about 2 different issues here. (snip)
The former, ignores the existance of magic in and of itself. Lots in the woods, traped without water in the desert are not mid level challengesI don't think it is bad DMing to *want* those to be mid-level challenges (and thus many have a problem with Fly as a 3rd level spell, among others).
But you are otherwise correct, coherency within the system makes that such mundane challenges are easily avoided by mid-levels, and DMs should prepare their games accordingly.
This is more an issue of genre that isn't suited for D&D Pathfinder than good or poor DMing. This is where D&D / Pathfinder fails to please a minority (yet significant portion) of roleplayers by being a bit too high-fantasy. Aside from "play another game" or "play E6", people look for solutions (which again i don't see as a sign of poor DMing). The best would be, as you mentioned, a low-fantasy guide (ideally an official one).
'findel
You are right, dnd isnt a low fantasy game. But it was never meant to be. Dragons are right there in the title. 2 of the 4 original character classes are walking miracle workers (wizard/cleric). This was never meant to be a low fantasy game. Calling it a failure in that it doesn't appeal to low fantasy fans is being rather harsh. Thats like saying a Minivan failed to post a good lap time at the track. Thats not what it was made for.
I do think a low fantasy guide would be a hardcover book along the lines of the size of the APG. There are a lot of changes you have to make to the game and to the classes, and the overall style of the game. I am thinking the behemoth that was the Game of thrones D20 rpg, which more then half of it was toning down d20 rules to make sense in a low fantasy setting. You have to completely re-evaluate the way you play the game in terms of pace, challenges, and the way you create and run encounters.
One thing i want to make clear. I dont have any problem with someone trying to create a low fantasy game out of pathfinder/dnd. Make changes to the rules, create new versions of classes or new classes. Change how magic works, how injury works, whatever you see fit (hopefully with playtesting and careful consideration). But do this BEFORE THE GAME. Set whatever limitations you want, its your game after all. But present these to the players before the first session.
This isn't bad gming, its neutral dming, its just dming a specific kind of game. The players can work within these new rules and sort out what they want to do in such a game.
What is bad dming in my opinion, is being reactionary. Playing with the normal rules, which are decidely high fantasy, and trying to tell a low fantasy story by forcing a character to not use their high fantasy options. That isn't remotely fair to the players. If no one brought winter cloaks or took survival because the wizard could cast endure elements on everyone and the cleric has create food and water, and when you realize this you try to punish them or arbitrarily try to make it not work, then that is classic antagonistic and just plain bad dming.
This was never meant to be a low fantasy game. Calling it a failure in that it doesn't appeal to low fantasy fans is being rather harsh. Thats like saying a Minivan failed to post a good lap time at the track. Thats not what it was made for.
Words might have been chosen carelessly: I meant no disrespect for the game or its creators from Gygax to Bullman.
Only meant to say that players looking for a game with the magic dial turned on 7 have a hard time finding their niche in most popular and widely distributed systems (most cater either for rather low fantasy or rather high fantasy).
'findel
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are right, dnd isnt a low fantasy game. But it was never meant to be. Dragons are right there in the title. 2 of the 4 original character classes are walking miracle workers (wizard/cleric). This was never meant to be a low fantasy game. Calling it a failure in that it doesn't appeal to low fantasy fans is being rather harsh. Thats like saying a Minivan failed to post a good lap time at the track. Thats not what it was made for.
Utter nonsense, the game was also not originally made to emulate superheroes either. You had stat requirements to get into classes, hp caps, and your own spells could easily kill you (haste, gate, teleport, wish). In earlier editions PC were powerful at higher levels, but nowhere close to the "supers" level provided by the no consequence spells and upped hps of 3rd edition.
This a third edition fallacy to explain in-game inconsistencies that that PCs are default superheros. That line of thinking falls apart when a high CR guard or no-name knight can survive the same effects (a high fall) and live, hell you could make a whole squad of NPCs (mid level commoners even) that can jump off of cliffs chasing PCs with little damage and no hindrance. So what is this superworld, or case poorly thought out rules and actions with no consequences or drawback?
It isn't a default game of superheros but more a combination of bad rules/spells with no consequence. The falling example illustrates poor falling damage rules and poor rules for consequence of action (deciding to fall down 50ft, crippling or instant death).
4e is closer to a game of superheros because the PCs at least have one set of rules and the NPC have a set of another (and derived stats).3rd ed just has poor rules with the supers sheet thrown over to explain it away.
You are right, dnd isnt a low fantasy game. But it was never meant to be. Dragons are right there in the title. 2 of the 4 original character classes are walking miracle workers (wizard/cleric). This was never meant to be a low fantasy game. Calling it a failure in that it doesn't appeal to low fantasy fans is being rather harsh. Thats like saying a Minivan failed to post a good lap time at the track. Thats not what it was made for.
Utter nonsense, the game was also not originally made to emulate superheroes either. You had stat requirements to get into classes, hp caps, and your own spells could easily kill you (haste, gate, teleport, wish). In earlier editions PC were powerful at higher levels, but nowhere close to the "supers" level provided by the no consequence spells and upped hps of 3rd edition.
I did not say high power, i said High fantasy. There is a MASSIVE difference. It has been a loooong time and I was literally a child when I played the original game so I wont comment on the power level. But in terms of it having high fantasy elements, it did. Plain and simple. There is a strong distinction between what I said and what you are arguing against.
This a third edition fallacy to explain in-game inconsistencies that that PCs are default superheros. That line of thinking falls apart when a high CR guard or no-name knight can survive the same effects (a high fall) and live, hell you could make a whole squad of NPCs (mid level commoners even) that can jump off of cliffs chasing PCs with little damage and no hindrance. So what is this superworld, or case poorly thought out rules and actions with no consequences or drawback?
What on earth does CR and the powerlevel of the game have anything to do with the fly spell or with my statement that the original intent of the game was to create a high fantasy game?
It isn't a default game of superheros but more a combination of bad rules/spells with no consequence. The falling example illustrates poor falling damage rules and poor rules for consequence of action (deciding to fall down 50ft, crippling or instant death).
Actually what it is, is a tiered game without bothering to tell anyone. Levels 1 to 5 is very much in the realm of what actual people can do in terms of jumping off cliffs and such. Level 5 is the pinacle of real world human ability. Albert Einstein was a level 5 expert in physics. Record setting olympians are levels 4 or 5. The game actually does a pretty decent job if you operate with that understanding. 6-12 is the realm of super heroes. You are batman, wolverine and green lantern. They fall off high stuff all the friggan time. You arent in the realm of human ability anymore. 13-20, welcome to demigodhood.
But still, this has nothing to do with my actual post or what the op was talking about.
4e is closer to a game of superheros because the PCs at least have one set of rules and the NPC have a set of another (and derived stats).3rd ed just has poor rules with the supers sheet thrown over to explain it away.
Yea um, what? what do the stats have to do with a super hero game? Wouldn't sinestro have similar stats to the green lantern?
My impression is that 3rd edition indeed upped the 'superhero-ness' of D&D one or two notches.
I don't pretend that 3rd edition created incoherence between genre and rules or created the gear/magical dependency, but it did solidify it and 'hard-wired' it into the system to unprecedented levels. I remember many Forgotten Realms games that were considered outrageously generous and magical back then, which now do not even come close to what the default assumption of wbl allows for PCs of the same level...
Before 3rd edition, more was left to the campaign setting. It was easier to say that 'this world has more' than it is now to say that 'this world has less'.
This is too bad because given the modularity of the rules, it would have been easy to work 2 or 3 tiers of magic-ness or fantasy-ness into the core of the game, each simply adding to the precedent.
I think we can agree that 3e D&D/PF is mainly a game of fantasy superheroes. Whether it really carries the genre(s) of previous editions is a different debate than whether fly is overpowered or not (although one might be a consequence of the other).
'findel
4e is closer to a game of superheros because the PCs at least have one set of rules and the NPC have a set of another (and derived stats).3rd ed just has poor rules with the supers sheet thrown over to explain it away.When I say that I don't like 4e, people whine and say that this forum isn't about 4e. So, why do I keep seeing people promoting 4e around here?
I've been wondering the same thing for quite some time.
And for the record the PC rules / NPC rules divide is one of the facets of 4e that I despise.
4e is closer to a game of superheros because the PCs at least have one set of rules and the NPC have a set of another (and derived stats).3rd ed just has poor rules with the supers sheet thrown over to explain it away.When I say that I don't like 4e, people whine and say that this forum isn't about 4e. So, why do I keep seeing people promoting 4e around here?I've been wondering the same thing for quite some time.
And for the record the PC rules / NPC rules divide is one of the facets of 4e that I despise.
I only played briefly, but I was thoroughly unimpressed with 4E. I would be quite happy if that game simply faded into obscurity. ALthough I saw it on an episode of Eureka, so it looks like they have sponsorship. ;-(
|
|
4e is closer to a game of superheros because the PCs at least have one set of rules and the NPC have a set of another (and derived stats).3rd ed just has poor rules with the supers sheet thrown over to explain it away.When I say that I don't like 4e, people whine and say that this forum isn't about 4e. So, why do I keep seeing people promoting 4e around here?
Explaining a difference in mechanics is not "promoting" 4e, I don't like the system. You need to check your rabid knee-jerk response whenever anyone mentions another system on these boards.
We should be able to talk about other editions/rules/mechanics without things degrading to a edition war.
Except your argument WAS edition wars - you started it by making a false statement about how 4e worked. 4e is NOT closer to a game of superheroes. The NPCs are more powerful than the PCs and no one gets remotely as powerful as they do in 3.X/Pathfinder.
The only problem with 4e is everyone is knee capped at the same level of power while the NPCs are immensely more powerful.
|
|
I did not say high power, i said High fantasy. There is a MASSIVE difference. It has been a loooong time and I was literally a child when I played the original game so I wont comment on the power level. But in terms of it having high fantasy elements, it did. Plain and simple. There is a strong distinction between what I said and what you are arguing against.
High power tends to trend with high fantasy. Not talking about half-unicorn towns and rainbow bridges used to transport goods, I'm talking about raw power creating more fantastic situations and available actions. High power = high fantasy just by the sheer impact high power abilities have on affecting the world.
As far as the original game being high fantasy as default, no, it wasn't. Greyhawk was not high fantasy, neither was 1st ed Forgotten Realms.
What on earth does CR and the power level of the game have anything to do with the fly spell or with my statement that the original intent of the game was to create a high fantasy game?
It was a general response to the "players are superheroes" nonsense. Not specifically directed at you. The common excuse is "players are superheroes" line. No one apparently told the NPCs or the rules that.
Actually what it is, is a tiered game without bothering to tell anyone. Levels 1 to 5 is very much in the realm of what actual people can do in terms of jumping off cliffs and such. Level 5 is the pinacle of real world human ability. Albert Einstein was a level 5 expert in physics. Record setting olympians are levels 4 or 5. The game actually does a pretty decent job if you operate with that understanding. 6-12 is the realm of super heroes. You are batman, wolverine and green lantern. They fall off high stuff all the friggan time. You arent in the realm of human ability anymore. 13-20, welcome to demigodhood.
But still, this has nothing to do with my actual post or what the op was talking about.
No, you are not batman, wolverine or the green lantern – that or you are and everyone else is also.
Taking (on average) 10.5 points of damage from a 30ft fall is plausible? Because Einstein was a 5th level expert he should be able to survive that 30ft fall with half his hp intact, with zero chance of actually dying? Right, I love to see people flail as they defend the indefensible.
Would make more sense to just come out and say the hp/damage system is nonsensical vs. "because they are heroes" line of defense. At least that would be honest.
Except your argument WAS edition wars - you started it by making a false statement about how 4e worked. 4e is NOT closer to a game of superheroes. The NPCs are more powerful than the PCs and no one gets remotely as powerful as they do in 3.X/Pathfinder.
The only problem with 4e is everyone is knee capped at the same level of power while the NPCs are immensely more powerful.
4E changed the powercurve so it's hard to judge from my limited experience whether or not it's a game of superheroes, but the thing that stood out to me was every other edition I tried, there was a real sense of a journey from barely above a commoner to superpowerful. 4E removed the extreme end of the superpowerful, but also removed the barely above a commoner. It's like they took levels 5 through 15 of 3.x and made that the entire game. So to that extent, it is more superheroish; you start out already effectively a superhero, and while you get more powerful, you never transcend being a superhero. In 3.x superhero is one stage of the progression; in 4E, it's the entire game.
|
|
Except your argument WAS edition wars - you started it by making a false statement about how 4e worked. 4e is NOT closer to a game of superheroes. The NPCs are more powerful than the PCs and no one gets remotely as powerful as they do in 3.X/Pathfinder.
LOL, good old troll!
4e:
PCs have different rules from NPCs
PCs have different powers than the NPCs
PCs are default "heroes" vs all the other NPCs which populate the world (points of light, superior and more detailed than NPCs, etc, etc).
Gets your facts straight before you spew.
Hercules, Samson, Gilgamesh, I would put these guys on the levels for superheroes as well as high fantasy campaigns, or heck even medium fantasy.
Superheroes are today's myths. Also, superman is over powered, DC knows this, everyone knows this, also, Batman with a green lantern ring is OP.
Magic is also over powered in general. Magic is a way of saying screw reality, screw physics, this works.
Why is anybody talking about 4e on a pathfinder forum, I thought that was the point of pathfinder. :p My problem is 4e is that a character is restricted to his class. If you want any RP, your class cant technically reflect that. For example, you grew up as a thief /level 1 rogue/ you decided to join the militia/2 levels fighter/ You where a great tracker /2 levels ranger/ you found the travel God, or found out magic was in your vain /6 levels of cleric or sorcerer /, you like casting fly on your self, not that anyone would make a character like that though.
So the main argument right now is that a fighter with fly casted on him will act like superman. It sounds really comic booky. A lot of myths I read sound the same way. He does'nt hit any harder, I guess you could cast enlarge person and some other nice buffs on him too.
If you want to play a low magic campaign though, I can understand why any magic buff would be over powered. Any "convectional" means would be hard press against someone who could fly away. At low levels I mean. Technically once you fit level 10 you can already buy you own city, or have your own army. You shouldn't think as health as actual human toughness where you have to stab someone in the head 5 times to kill them, but more like, after 5 swings you manage to strike a killing blow.
Think about what a coup de grace actually is.
I mean, a level 1 raging barbarian with a greataxe, lets assume he wants a high stat of 18 on strength since he is a barbarian after all, can do 63 damage on a crit. Which would be a single "solid hit to the head" even at level 10, a lot of characters at average health would have a hard time surviving that, and that was done by a level 1 character. Also, he was hired by a Cleric who casted fly and enlarge person as well as some other nice buffs on him for added effect.
If you want to say magic is overpowered in general, I can't disagree with you, every spell is practically a middle finger to physics.
I did not say high power, i said High fantasy. There is a MASSIVE difference. It has been a loooong time and I was literally a child when I played the original game so I wont comment on the power level. But in terms of it having high fantasy elements, it did. Plain and simple. There is a strong distinction between what I said and what you are arguing against.High power tends to trend with high fantasy. Not talking about half-unicorn towns and rainbow bridges used to transport goods, I'm talking about raw power creating more fantastic situations and available actions. High power = high fantasy just by the sheer impact high power abilities have on affecting the world.
As far as the original game being high fantasy as default, no, it wasn't. Greyhawk was not high fantasy, neither was 1st ed Forgotten Realms.
I am not talking setting, I am talking game. Lets keep the goal posts right where they are. 2 of the classic 4 class are full spell casters. They are miracles on legs. You cannot have a full dnd style wizard as a main character in a low fantasy story. Dragons, the core example of high fantasy (a creature irrational from a biological standpoint, steeped in magic and mythic lore) is in the title of the game. A game of thrones, this is not.
What on earth does CR and the power level of the game have anything to do with the fly spell or with my statement that the original intent of the game was to create a high fantasy game?It was a general response to the "players are superheroes" nonsense. Not specifically directed at you. The common excuse is "players are superheroes" line. No one apparently told the NPCs or the rules that.
Actually what it is, is a tiered game without bothering to tell anyone. Levels 1 to 5 is very much in the realm of what actual people can do in terms of jumping off cliffs and such. Level 5 is the pinacle of real world human ability. Albert Einstein was a level 5 expert in physics. Record setting olympians are levels 4 or 5. The game actually does a pretty decent job if you operate with that understanding. 6-12 is the realm of super heroes. You are batman, wolverine and green lantern. They fall off high stuff all the friggan time. You arent in the realm of human ability anymore. 13-20, welcome to demigodhood.
But still, this has nothing to do with my actual post or what the op was talking about.No, you are not batman, wolverine or the green lantern – that or you are and everyone else is also.
This statement makes absolutely no sense. Characters build with PC rules (and npcs build with pc classes) are super heroes after 6th level. You may not WANT them to be, but that doesnt change the fact that they are. This is the reality of the current system. Your desire does not reflect the reality of the game which is what I was pointing out. And yes normal people (low level npc classes) can exist in the same world as the pcs. The distribution is entirely up to the setting and the dm. But in the end there is no reason why the two cannot co-exist. There are hotdog vendors in gotham city just as much as there is the joker and bane.
Taking (on average) 10.5 points of damage from a 30ft fall is plausible? Because Einstein was a 5th level expert he should be able to survive that 30ft fall with half his hp intact, with zero chance of actually dying? Right, I love to see people flail as they defend the indefensible.
At the peak of his career, Einstien was an elderly man. Lets say old age category. He certainly wasnt a particularly stout man, so that put his constitution at at most a 7 by old age. Since npc's get average hp, that puts his HP at 7.5 (17.5 - 10 for low con), lets say 8hp. Suddenly a 3d6 damage fall for an average of 10.5 damage has a very good chance of killing the famous physist or at least puting him in negative hp.
Would make more sense to just come out and say the hp/damage system is nonsensical vs. "because they are heroes" line of defense. At least that would be honest.
While the hp system has serious flaws, its not nonsensical. It works just fine so long as you accept the base assumptions. Level 5 is the pinacle of human ability, and characters with PC classes are exceptional, not the norm. The abstraction of hp is problematic at times, but its good at what it was meant to be. An abstract resource that can be tracked easily, without having to re-write your character sheet every time you take a hit. DnD could never have been as combat heavy as it was if some of the other common injury systems were used.
Except your argument WAS edition wars - you started it by making a false statement about how 4e worked. 4e is NOT closer to a game of superheroes. The NPCs are more powerful than the PCs and no one gets remotely as powerful as they do in 3.X/Pathfinder.LOL, good old troll!
4e:
PCs have different rules from NPCs
PCs have different powers than the NPCs
PCs are default "heroes" vs all the other NPCs which populate the world (points of light, superior and more detailed than NPCs, etc, etc).Gets your facts straight before you spew.
I'm not debating PCs and NPCs work on different rules and have different powers. They do. And they rapidly start coming down on the side of the NPCs, not the PCs.
I'm all for the fly spell...
I agree with the logic that a DM should cause his players to react to his story and setting with their powers, as opposed to the GM reacting to his players' powers.
Utter nonsense, the game was also not originally made to emulate superheroes either.
Well you could be right but in the original game 8th level fighters were called, by the RAW, superheros.
|
|
Utter nonsense, the game was also not originally made to emulate superheroes either.Well you could be right but in the original game 8th level fighters were called, by the RAW, superheros.
Only to be capped by Lord.
Also the original names for the wizard went through all the specialist types plus a few 3rd ed classes -Evoker, Conjurer, Enchanter, Warlock, Sorcerer and Necromancer to be capped by Wizard.
Yeah, those names made alot of sense. Good argument.
Reading through most of this thread I am slightly surprised at how many people have trouble with the spell fly. A 5th lvl wizard or a 6th lvl sorcerer can cast fly, so what? Its only for 5 or 6 minutes and its only one person per casting. For the 5th lvl wizard, he cant even cast fly on his whole 4 pc party.
At 5th level they can manage a distance of 2/3 of a mile in 5 minutes - the blisteringly fast airspeed of 7mph; about the pace of a jogger.
I think people assume Fly = superman speeds or something, and have visions of ripping along like a human jet fighter.
|
|
No, people just make very poorly thought out encounters and get mad when PCs overcome them with ease.
Like having the McGuffin on a platform surrounded by a pit of slavering monsters, thinking the party will climb down and brave the beasts to climb the spire in the middle. And then the wizards casts fly and has the McGuffin in two rounds, and they nerdraeg.
That's not an encounter, thats some bad challenge from a 90's gameshow.
They deserve to get disappointed :P
|
To be fair, it's not always easy, and rarely detailed in published material.
True story! I'm looking at part six of Kingmaker getting ready to run it and the first part features a lot of encoutners that are completly negated by flight (and all of my group can fly all day long). Its gona take a bit of encouter redesign.
No, people just make very poorly thought out encounters and get mad when PCs overcome them with ease.
Like having the McGuffin on a platform surrounded by a pit of slavering monsters, thinking the party will climb down and brave the beasts to climb the spire in the middle. And then the wizards casts fly and has the McGuffin in two rounds, and they nerdraeg.
I just think magic in PF and especially the utilitarian magic is extremely jarring to the point that PF is nothing like classic fantasy or myth at all, trying to mix those elements into a basic PF game quickly lead to disappointment. This is not just spellcasters but also the christmas tree of assumed magical items being guilty of such. I would welcome a well done book by Paizo or 3rd party publisher to make gameplay possible without loss of that gritty flavor beyond level 6 or so.
Why can they fly all day long?
And are they all flying along at the breakneck normal flight speed of 7mph?
By the SIXTH part of an Adventure Path wasn't it expected that people who can do the awesome and heroic Ub3r stuff would have stopped being pedestrians by then?
I just think magic in PF and especially the utilitarian magic is extremely jarring to the point that PF is nothing like classic fantasy or myth at all, trying to mix those elements into a basic PF game quickly lead to disappointment. This is not just spellcasters but also the christmas tree of assumed magical items being guilty of such. I would welcome a well done book by Paizo or 3rd party publisher to make gameplay possible without loss of that gritty flavor beyond level 6 or so.
Might I suggest that while playing a game made in the 21st century you look at modern fantasy writers rather than classic fantasy to draw inspiration for ways to create challenges that account for that and allow for more grit by taking those utilitarian high fantasy into account. Modern writers have the advantage of literally more generations of refining of their genre and as Kolokotrani suggested may have a gamers background therefore write to account for those magics. There are ways to create "grit" even if you give each player a dragon to ride at first level.
Nit-picking rant:
To be fair, einstein-as-a 5th-level-expert is 3.5 and would probably have 5d6-10 hit points. Nothing indicates beginning with above-average constitution, and old age gives a total of -3 constitution. That gives an average of 7.5 hit points, so a fall of 30 ft. would probably leave him dying on the ground. Since PF characters are more powerful due to skill system, improved races and so on, he'd probably only be a 4th level human expert in PF - which gives 4d8-8=10 average hit points. In other words, on average he'd be dying after a 30 ft. fall here too.
I don't know what the average lethal fall height is, but I think it's more than 30 ft.
Might I suggest that while playing a game made in the 21st century you look at modern fantasy writers rather than classic fantasy to draw inspiration for ways to create challenges that account for that and allow for more grit by taking those utilitarian high fantasy into account. Modern writers have the advantage of literally more generations of refining of their genre and as Kolokotrani suggested may have a gamers background therefore write to account for those magics. There are ways to create "grit" even if you give each player a dragon to ride at first level.I can imagine few things more unpleasant than reading stories which use traditional RPGs as inspiration.
I think Steven Brust and Jim Butcher both put out novel lines that are rather good actually. You probably ought to have a look.
Only to be capped by Lord.
Also the original names for the wizard went through all the specialist types plus a few 3rd ed classes -Evoker, Conjurer, Enchanter, Warlock, Sorcerer and Necromancer to be capped by Wizard.
Yeah, those names made alot of sense. Good argument.
You are side stepping the issue. You have claimed that in earlier versions of the game PCs were not as powerful as they are now. This is simply not true of the default versions of the game, although it may have been in some settings.
Earlier versions of the game assumed that high level PCs would become literal Gods. High power levels are nothing new to the game. Even in the earliest versions of the game you played characters who could fight dragons, kill giants, level a city, or challenge Gods.
I can imagine few things more unpleasant than reading stories which use traditional RPGs as inspiration.
I love how you make the assumption that because they played an RPG or know of one that they use them as inspiration, not what i said.
Alternatively, what kind of sad state is your hobby if there have never been a story that was crafted around your table that you thought was a good story.
If you aren't reading Brust, Butcher, Tad Williams I think you are missing out on some good writing and perhaps some inspiration on how to deal with the question before the table.
I think Steven Brust and Jim Butcher both put out novel lines that are rather good actually. You probably ought to have a look.Might I suggest that while playing a game made in the 21st century you look at modern fantasy writers rather than classic fantasy to draw inspiration for ways to create challenges that account for that and allow for more grit by taking those utilitarian high fantasy into account. Modern writers have the advantage of literally more generations of refining of their genre and as Kolokotrani suggested may have a gamers background therefore write to account for those magics. There are ways to create "grit" even if you give each player a dragon to ride at first level.I can imagine few things more unpleasant than reading stories which use traditional RPGs as inspiration.Dresden isn't particularly great fiction. It is only moderately acceptable. Still, it doesn't have RPG game mechanics poking through it like, say, Dragonlance does.
At the end of the day, though, I'd rather read Howard, Lovecraft, Poe, L'Engele, or King over Butcher.
Can't fault that list of authors for enjoyment but if the others provide some insights into how to address a system where wizards and other casters are not limited to BBEG or the semi-adviser but are central active participants in the story as protagonist. Or even if one is not a member of the ensemble of protagonists dealing with a world where there are far more of those folks walking around than in Howard for example. These authors who I am sure also read their Howard, L'Engle, Lovecraft, and Poe can help address what seems to be the underlying issue with this topic of how quickly (level wise) the fantastical elements begin to trivialize environmental type hazards.