Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Player just had his sword sundered and now he's mad at the DM


Gamer Talk

251 to 300 of 697 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Alitan wrote:

Hey. Lumiere. Something you seem to have overlooked.

The PRD said:

Untrained: Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.

...according to the CRB.

Also...

PRD wrote:

Profession

(Wis; Trained Only)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Alitan wrote:

Hey. Lumiere. Something you seem to have overlooked.

The PRD said:

Untrained: Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.

...according to the CRB.

Also...

PRD wrote:

Profession

(Wis; Trained Only)

Y'know, I didn't even think to check THAT part; good catch.

And finally >he said, hammering in another nail on the coffin-lid< taking 10 is only possible when one isn't stressed-out by the possibility of penalties for failure... I should THINK that the grim prospect of not being able to eat or losing your comfy bed would qualify. So, really, taking 10 to meet your cost of living should be out.


Alitan wrote:

Hey. Lumiere. Something you seem to have overlooked.

The PRD said:

Untrained: Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.

...according to the CRB.

profession wrote:

Check

You can earn half your Profession check result in gold pieces per week of dedicated work. You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession's daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems. You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher.

if untrained laborers only earned a silver piece per day. they wouldn't even be able to afford the cheapest of lifestyles. the check session supersedes the untrained error.

untained means average skill. the guy with the rank is an expert that made a career out of it. i doubt in a world where your average commmoners living expenses are 10 gold pieces per month, that people really live on a silver piece a day. it's an economical inconsistency that serves as an oversight in the rules.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:

if untrained laborers only earned a silver piece per day. they wouldn't even be able to afford the cheapest of lifestyles. the check session supersedes the untrained error.

untained means average skill. the guy with the rank is an expert that made a career out of it. i doubt in a world where your average commmoners living expenses are 10 gold pieces per month, that people really live on a silver piece a day. it's an economical inconsistency that serves as an oversight in the rules.

A silver a day for 30 days? Looks a lot like the 3gp/mo for a poor standard to me. And destitute is an even cheaper lifestyle.


Alitan wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Alitan wrote:

Hey. Lumiere. Something you seem to have overlooked.

The PRD said:

Untrained: Untrained laborers and assistants (that is, characters without any ranks in Profession) earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.

...according to the CRB.

Also...

PRD wrote:

Profession

(Wis; Trained Only)

Y'know, I didn't even think to check THAT part; good catch.

And finally >he said, hammering in another nail on the coffin-lid< taking 10 is only possible when one isn't stressed-out by the possibility of penalties for failure... I should THINK that the grim prospect of not being able to eat or losing your comfy bed would qualify. So, really, taking 10 to meet your cost of living should be out.

This misconception will probably never disappear.

Failure has nothing to do with being able to take 10 or not. You can't take 10 when distracted, with combat being the bar for what counts as a distraction.


Bill Dunn wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:

if untrained laborers only earned a silver piece per day. they wouldn't even be able to afford the cheapest of lifestyles. the check session supersedes the untrained error.

untained means average skill. the guy with the rank is an expert that made a career out of it. i doubt in a world where your average commmoners living expenses are 10 gold pieces per month, that people really live on a silver piece a day. it's an economical inconsistency that serves as an oversight in the rules.

A silver a day for 30 days? Looks a lot like the 3gp/mo for a poor standard to me. And destitute is an even cheaper lifestyle.

your average untrained farmer makes 5 gold pieces a week due to their purely average ability. they aren't useless enough for a silver piece a day. the least you can make taking 10 (requiring a wisdom of 1) is 2 gold and 5 silver a week. still enough for an average lifestyle with nothing else.

the expert farmer with a 13 wis, 1 rank, and a +3 class skill bonus, is making (taking 10) 7 gold and 5 silver per week.

if untrained laborers only made a silver piece a day and all lived poor or destitute lifestyles, the nobles of the region wouldn't even be able to afford their extravagant lifestyles.

extravagant, is 1,000 GP a month and the standard of nobles.

if we assumed the untrained laborer with the average lifestyle (5gp a week) payed 10gp in lifestyle expenses and half were taxes, it would take 200 people to support one noble. if a the people were poor and made 3gp a month, and 1 of it were taxes, it takes 1,000 people. pathfinder settlements just don't have that many people until you reach metropolis territory.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
Failure has nothing to do with being able to take 10 or not. You can't take 10 when distracted, with combat being the bar for what counts as a distraction.

One can face serious distraction many ways outside of combat... And that failure can most definitely mean death...

If you fail to build that posh merchant's house in the city within the required time given you, your boss might simply fire you. You fail to build that cabin in that wilderness that you're stuck in before winter; and oh look, it's already beginning to snow... Well, you have some serious distraction now...


I actually kind of agree with DE here. If the stakes on a specific job are high enough, I think taking ten should be impossible.


Digitalelf wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Failure has nothing to do with being able to take 10 or not. You can't take 10 when distracted, with combat being the bar for what counts as a distraction.

One can face serious distraction many ways outside of combat... And that failure can most definitely mean death...

If you fail to build that posh merchant's house in the city within the required time given you, your boss might simply fire you. You fail to build that cabin in that wilderness that you're stuck in before winter; and oh look, it's already beginning to snow... Well, you have some serious distraction now...

but there is only a finite number of people you can reliably choose from to hire, and sometimes you have to make due with a less gifted employee based on a variety of factors, such as desperately needing workers to sustain the business, the more skilled/experienced applicants may possibly want a bigger salary than you are willing to offer, or it may be a region of relatively lousy education.


Digitalelf wrote:


I know we all have differing play styles (and that's cool, to each their own I guess), but this is just SO foreign a concept. I'm sorry, but I just cannot wrap my head around playing like this...

I know people who treat RPGs like strategic combat games. Sort of like a small-scale miniature wargame (possibly without the miniatures). I could totally see some of those treating their characters this way.

Completely alien concept for me.

(But that's not to say that I couldn't see trying something different if your character died off. I have hundreds of potential character ideas roaming around in my head, sometimes death is just the excuse you need to try one of them. Also, our campaign world doesn't have easy access to resurrection.)

Edit to add: Usually, those guys eventually realize that video games actually does the whole strategic combat thing much better than an RPG ever could, and never look back. Hence actually playing with them is blissfully rare. :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:


your average untrained farmer makes 5 gold pieces a week due to their purely average ability. they aren't useless enough for a silver piece a day. the least you can make taking 10 (requiring a wisdom of 1) is 2 gold and 5 silver a week. still enough for an average lifestyle with nothing else.

the expert farmer with a 13 wis, 1 rank, and a +3 class skill bonus, is making (taking 10) 7 gold and 5 silver per week.

if untrained laborers only made a silver piece a day and all lived poor or destitute lifestyles, the nobles of the region wouldn't even be able to afford their extravagant lifestyles.

extravagant, is 1,000 GP a month and the standard of nobles.

if we assumed the untrained laborer with the average lifestyle (5gp a week) payed 10gp in lifestyle expenses and half were taxes, it would take 200 people to support one noble. if a the people were poor and made 3gp a month, and 1 of it were taxes, it takes 1,000 people. pathfinder settlements just don't have that many people until you reach metropolis territory.

Your average untrained farmer isn't making 5 gp a week because he only makes a silver. But then, the average farmer has at least 1 rank in farming. One rank doesn't make the farmer an expert, nor does he have to be an expert to have one rank in farming. I consider the single rank to be the equivalent of a journeyman level of education, about the training a person would have coming of age in their profession, not some special expert ability.

So I think your estimation of the support a noble requires, or even he lifestyle he leads, falls apart. He isn't depending on just untrained laborers, but on farmers and other professionals with reasonable ability. Plus, if he did rely on a couple hundred untrained laborers, he shouldn't be able to afford an extravagant lifestyle. There are poor nobles out there and their lifestyle levels should reflect their resources..

I don't know where you're getting the idea that you only get 1000 people until you start getting to metropolis territory. That's small town size in the GMG. And that's a lot fewer people than a 25,000 person metropolis.


Slaunyeh wrote:
Digitalelf wrote:


I know we all have differing play styles (and that's cool, to each their own I guess), but this is just SO foreign a concept. I'm sorry, but I just cannot wrap my head around playing like this...

I know people who treat RPGs like strategic combat games. Sort of like a small-scale miniature wargame (possibly without the miniatures). I could totally see some of those treating their characters this way.

Completely alien concept for me.

(But that's not to say that I couldn't see trying something different if your character died off. I have hundreds of potential character ideas roaming around in my head, sometimes death is just the excuse you need to try one of them. Also, our campaign world doesn't have easy access to resurrection.)

((neither does mine))


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
I actually kind of agree with DE here. If the stakes on a specific job are high enough, I think taking ten should be impossible.

I don't know about that. I think the intent is for the distraction to be more immediate, more proximate, than fairly long term repercussions of failing to deliver on time. I would certainly consider things other than combat, but probably not threats that won't be carried out in weeks.


Bill Dunn wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:


your average untrained farmer makes 5 gold pieces a week due to their purely average ability. they aren't useless enough for a silver piece a day. the least you can make taking 10 (requiring a wisdom of 1) is 2 gold and 5 silver a week. still enough for an average lifestyle with nothing else.

the expert farmer with a 13 wis, 1 rank, and a +3 class skill bonus, is making (taking 10) 7 gold and 5 silver per week.

if untrained laborers only made a silver piece a day and all lived poor or destitute lifestyles, the nobles of the region wouldn't even be able to afford their extravagant lifestyles.

extravagant, is 1,000 GP a month and the standard of nobles.

if we assumed the untrained laborer with the average lifestyle (5gp a week) payed 10gp in lifestyle expenses and half were taxes, it would take 200 people to support one noble. if a the people were poor and made 3gp a month, and 1 of it were taxes, it takes 1,000 people. pathfinder settlements just don't have that many people until you reach metropolis territory.

Your average untrained farmer isn't making 5 gp a week because he only makes a silver. But then, the average farmer has at least 1 rank in farming. One rank doesn't make the farmer an expert, nor does he have to be an expert to have one rank in farming. I consider the single rank to be the equivalent of a journeyman level of education, about the training a person would have coming of age in their profession, not some special expert ability.

So I think your estimation of the support a noble requires, or even he lifestyle he leads, falls apart. He isn't depending on just untrained laborers, but on farmers and other professionals with reasonable ability. Plus, if he did rely on a couple hundred untrained laborers, he shouldn't be able to afford an extravagant lifestyle. There are poor nobles out there and their lifestyle levels should reflect their resources..

you are talking about a setting where education was uncommon. if 1 rank meant journeyman farmer, that you think should be from the point of coming of age, then your farmer went from making a silver piece a day to 7 gold pieces a week, just because he turned 16.

the half your result in gold pieces, (5GP a week for untrained) represents more than raw cash, it also represents other resources that contribute to survival, such as (for a farmer) the successful raising and trade of resources such as crops and livestock, (trade goods), the wise deals on mundane expenses, and your skill in preserving food. you may have 1 silver piece a day in cash. but you have 5 gold pieces a week in farming related trade goods (including the silver)


Charlie Bell wrote:
If you don't like the penalties for death, play it smart and safe. Adventuring is a hazardous profession.

And if your DM is determined to kill you?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:


you are talking about a setting where education was uncommon. if 1 rank meant journeyman farmer, that you think should be from the point of coming of age, then your farmer went from making a silver piece a day to 7 gold pieces a week, just because he turned 16.

No, I'm talking about a place where formal schooling might be uncommon, but that's not the only way to gain an education, particularly in a profession where apprenticeships or family training would be the norm. And he doesn't have a rank because he's 16, rather he has it because he's got training in that profession at a level consistent with the base level of independant competence, someone out of their apprenticeship but not of master skill. And that fits about the time of the character's coming of age.


Icyshadow wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
If you don't like the penalties for death, play it smart and safe. Adventuring is a hazardous profession.
And if your DM is determined to kill you?

If he is determined to kill you in the next week or so, you can Take Ten. Otherwise, you'll have to roll and hope for the best. ;D


Digitalelf wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Failure has nothing to do with being able to take 10 or not. You can't take 10 when distracted, with combat being the bar for what counts as a distraction.

One can face serious distraction many ways outside of combat... And that failure can most definitely mean death...

If you fail to build that posh merchant's house in the city within the required time given you, your boss might simply fire you. You fail to build that cabin in that wilderness that you're stuck in before winter; and oh look, it's already beginning to snow... Well, you have some serious distraction now...

You're stretching it, severely. The bar is combat. The danger of losing your liferight now, not 5 months from now. You can twist and contort, you can house rule it differently if you like, but that isn't RAW or RAI per designer comments on taking 10. Your interpretation is to basically exclude the take 10 rule. Since as adventurers, they could always die tomorrow, they can never take 10.

Failure has nothing to do with take 10. Only major distractions, with the minimum bar being someone trying to cut your head off with a sword.

It doesn't matter that failure will displease the merchant. You can still take 10, because the failure is irrelevant. The only reason you wouldn't take 10 is if the DC is higher than you can achieve with a 10. Or if you're doing crafting and want to go faster. Or if he demands that you build it while someone swings a sword at you.

You can even take 10 when the threat of death is immediate, such as when climbing. I would however adjudicate that something like a thunder storm would be a sufficient distraction as to disallow the take 10 rule.

Silver Crusade

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
i'd rather include the compensation loot within the next 2-4 hauls than have the barbarian complain.
I'd just get rid of the barbarian.

And you would be sitting out of that campaign.


Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?

Silver Crusade

Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Alitan wrote:

Lumiere said:

"once you have drank a potion or burned out a wand, it shouldn't count towards WBL anymore because it is no longer useable. WBL is a measure of immediately usable adventuring wealth. in other words, permanent bonus providing equipment.

at the same time, diamonds wasted on a Resurrection are no longer usable wealth either. and thus should no longer count."

* * * *

Uh, no. WBL is a guideline about how much wealth an adventuring character ought to have accumulated in the course of their career, allowing higher-than-1st-level PCs to be built.

If someone spent their wealth on a tower and walled estate, rather than adventuring gear, they have just as much wealth as a character who went down to the magic mart and geared out for dragon-hunting.

It is not "a measure of immediately-usable adventuring wealth." I promise you you misread that.

some items shouldn't count toward WBL because there is no real way to milk an adventuring related bonus out of them. such as mansions and titles.

i merely read WBL not as written, but how i think it was intended by the writers. in other words, immediately useable adventuring wealth. it doesn't matter how many millions you have within the vaults of your estate when you cannot even access it to aquire goods.

WBL is AFTER spending gold on consumables, selling items for half price, replacing sundered goods, ETC. or else, the treasure per encounter would if calculated, far exceed the wealth by level charts. and some groups exceed the charts anyway.

WBL doesn't care whether you bought the item, stole it, nor found it in a horde, though crafting feats give a discount on starting gear and future gear because of the investment of feats. which may lead to being allowed to slightly exceed the guidelines.

a PC isn't magically born at 1st level or any level when someone dies. a higher level PC might be a more experienced former adventurer who joined at APL, or...

You aren't meant to be walking around at all times with a certain amount of wealth. The WBL is a guide that represents what wealth PC'S have accumulated during their career depending on their level. If you buy nothing but consumables and you use them all then you are SOL.

Silver Crusade

Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?

Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Silver Crusade

I don't know about you but this is a team game and in our games the other party members will help you out with spare gear and extra buffs until you get back on your feet.


shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Well, if you're not giving them back the wealth over the next 2-4 levels, when are you sending them after the next challenge?

Magic items are part of the parties resources and power. The loss of lots of items would represent a reduction in the parties overall power. Would you expect them to be able to deal with the same difficulties as they could before if you removed all their gear?

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
It doesn't matter that failure will displease the merchant. You can still take 10, because the failure is irrelevant.

No, no... You misunderstood that part of my example. The part concerning the posh merchant's house was meant to illustrate no real threat; failure in that instance would be the boss may just fire you (so no real big deal, take 10, it doesn't matter), but failure to build shelter for yourself where death is a real threat should (IMO) be a big enough distraction to warrant not being able to take 10...

So no, I am not advocating that adventures cannot ever take ten because they could die tomorrow (Talk about stretching things severely... LOL)


shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.

Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving (or running away if it's Haste or Expeditious Retreat), but you will probably never win in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR while you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Icyshadow wrote:
victory won't be assured in that situation

Victory should NEVER be assured no matter the situation!!

There should ALWAYS be a chance for failure, no matter how small...


Cute, but rather underwhelming strawman argument.

Please reread my post before you try twisting it like that.

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.


shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.

Do tell me, how many rounds does it take to get all that up?

Oh right, far too many to really make a difference in that situation.

Also, I think Barkskin was self only, and who the hell carries back-up armor?

Digitalelf wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
Cute, but rather underwhelming strawman argument.

Not a strawman...

No matter what toys and magical doo-dads a character may have, there should always be a chance of failure...

Still twisting my words, still a strawman argument.

Again, read my previous posts more carefully before replying.

The dice always ensure a chance of failure, so there are no absolutes.

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.

Do tell me, how many rounds does it take to get all that up?

Oh right, far too many to really make a difference in that situation.

Also, I think Barkskin was self only, and who the hell carries back-up armor?

Seeing how those three can come from three different casters then they could be up in a round, god forbid if you have to wait a round to fight.

If not then the smart thing to do is sit down with the casters, find buffs that last a long time and cast those first, then wait until battle to have the short term ones cast on you.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Icyshadow wrote:
Please reread my post before you try twisting it like that.

Well, you changed it... You said initially that "victory won't be assured"...

I read the rest of the post, but no matter what the circumstances are, victory should never be a sure thing...


And with that I agree, but even the developers have said that it's the default to tip the scales slightly in the players' favor.

There are people who do the opposite, but it's usually assumed the players are okay with such a playstyle, so there's also that.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Icyshadow wrote:

Still twisting my words, still a strawman argument.

Again, read my previous posts more carefully before replying.

The dice always ensure a chance of failure, so there are no absolutes.

I deleted the post you just quoted, but before you changed your post, you said the word assured, which by definition (in the context in which you used it) means guaranteed...

So no, I did not twist anything. I used your exact words...

And why such a confrontational tone??


shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.

Do tell me, how many rounds does it take to get all that up?

Oh right, far too many to really make a difference in that situation.

Also, I think Barkskin was self only, and who the hell carries back-up armor?

Seeing how those three can come from three different casters then they could be up in a round, god forbid if you have to wait a round to fight.

If not then the smart thing to do is sit down with the...

Not every party has three casters, especially if it's a default 4-man party.

And who said the DM will let you sit down and prepare? You're just waiting to be ambushed.

If a DM is cruel enough to apply Sunder that viciously, it would not surprise me if he did that as well.

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.

Do tell me, how many rounds does it take to get all that up?

Oh right, far too many to really make a difference in that situation.

Also, I think Barkskin was self only, and who the hell carries back-up armor?

Digitalelf wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
Cute, but rather underwhelming strawman argument.

Not a strawman...

No matter what toys and magical doo-dads a character may have, there should always be a chance of

...

Also, what's wrong with going this route anyway? If you succeed then awesome, if you fail then you die and you get to make another character, or is it more about the gear than the actual character?


shallowsoul wrote:
Stuff...

What would Arthur be without Excalibur?

The hero's gear is a part of his legend, you know.

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.
Their buffs won't fix the fact that you're swinging with improvised weapons, without armor, and are probably being rended to death by a Troll or pounced to death by a Dire Tiger. Sure, the buffs might help in surviving, but victory won't be assured in that situation when you're up against creatures of a fitting CR when you're at such a disadvantage, which is very possible after an encounter with a Rust Monster or a sunder-happy bunch of humanoid foes.

Oh really?

GMW on a club, Haste, Barkskin, back up set of armor with Magical Vestment cast on it, and various other spells that spellcasters possess. I don't have my books in front of me at the moment.

Do tell me, how many rounds does it take to get all that up?

Oh right, far too many to really make a difference in that situation.

Also, I think Barkskin was self only, and who the hell carries back-up armor?

Seeing how those three can come from three different casters then they could be up in a round, god forbid if you have to wait a round to fight.

If not then the smart thing to

...

Then you go with the second option that I presented.

Honest question. How long have you been playing overall D&D?

Silver Crusade

Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Stuff...

What would Arthur be without Excalibur?

The hero's gear is a part of his legend, you know.

King of Camelot along with his knights.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

How long I've played has nothing to do with this argument.

Now would you please try and keep this civil instead of being elitist?


shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Stuff...

What would Arthur be without Excalibur?

The hero's gear is a part of his legend, you know.

King of Camelot along with his knights.

With their sundered armour, because fighters shouldn't be allowed nice things. They should be a liability, that requires 3 Casters to buff into any kind of competency ;P

Seriously: No-one is saying that you shouldn't Sunder, just that players should be warned.


Digitalelf wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
It doesn't matter that failure will displease the merchant. You can still take 10, because the failure is irrelevant.

No, no... You misunderstood that part of my example. The part concerning the posh merchant's house was meant to illustrate no real threat; failure in that instance would be the boss may just fire you (so no real big deal, take 10, it doesn't matter), but failure to build shelter for yourself where death is a real threat should (IMO) be a big enough distraction to warrant not being able to take 10...

So no, I am not advocating that adventures cannot ever take ten because they could die tomorrow (Talk about stretching things severely... LOL)

You can take 10 when jumping over a chasm, even if you have 10 HP and the chasm is 200' deep. So no, your example is wrong, the threat of death months in the future is not relevant.

Taking 10 has NOTHING to do with failure. It only has to do with the conditions in which you are operating. It must be a condition where focusing on what you're doing could cause you harm. Like not paying attention to the guy swinging a sword at your head. The threat of failure itself is not a distraction, otherwise the take 10 rule would be pointless.

Take 20 is affected by failure, not take 10.


shallowsoul wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Just curious, if you've sundered and stolen all of a characters equipment, say at level 10, would you expect them to be able to handle the same level of challenges?
Why would I immediately send them off to the next CR equivalent challenge?

Because that's apparently what people here expect the DM to do.

Ignore the fact that half (or 80%) of their gear is destroyed and just send the same CR monsters at them again.

It's not like they have an immense penalty in that encounter and will most likely die, costing even more resources and weakening them further.

If you have spellcasters in the party then nine times out of ten they could more than likely give you enough buffs to help you with the next encounter if need be.

So your response to my original question is no. You would consider characters with no gear to have the same resources and therefore capable of handling the same challenges.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
shallowsoul wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
i'd rather include the compensation loot within the next 2-4 hauls than have the barbarian complain.
I'd just get rid of the barbarian.
And you would be sitting out of that campaign.

That's amusing considering I was the DM in the example you are referring to.

Sure, if the whole group agrees with the barbarian's player, I'll roll with it. But if it's just him? Sorry, outvoted.

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

Icyshadow wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
If you don't like the penalties for death, play it smart and safe. Adventuring is a hazardous profession.
And if your DM is determined to kill you?

Then it's probably time to find a different game. I dislike GMs that take out petty personal grudges on characters.


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
Josh M. wrote:

I disagree on the "wealth penalty" thing. Your character's in-game wealth is a finite resource. Things are going to happen in-game that are going to make your character spend that resource on staying alive; potions, curse removals, food, etc. Repairing broken equipment is pretty standard fare for any profession, and when your profession involves hitting things as hard as you can with your "tools," sometimes you have to spend a little gold to keep things working.

Honestly? The whole "wealth penalty" idea reeks of entitlement. As if from day 1, your character's wealth can and will ONLY be spent on better stuff and never to shore up weaknesses and keep equipment viable. I call shenanigans.

Is spending gold in town to get a Restoration spell cast on you a "Wealth penalty" as well? Are CLW potions a "wealth penalty?" How about food?

As a DM, I don't even like the idea of sundering a PC's gear, but it's a legal, viable combat option and it can come up whenever the DM damn well feels like it. A polite DM warns players ahead of time that tactics like this exist in the setting, but there's no contract anywhere or any rule that says "The DM must not do anything that might affect anything on a PC."

Considering that WBL is in the core rulebook as a measure of the magically enhanced equipment that one has, and any destroyed irreplacable weapons or...

Gonna stop ya right there. You can repair broken magical weapons. i.e.; not irreplaceable. Unless the weapon was somehow completely exiled from existence, you can repair it.

And WBL is "Wealth By Level,", not "Gear By Level." Part of having any significant wealth is spending necessary expenditures to ensure your gear and tools are repaired and in working order, which might possibly include getting a broken magical weapon repaired.


Charlie Bell wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
If you don't like the penalties for death, play it smart and safe. Adventuring is a hazardous profession.
And if your DM is determined to kill you?
Then it's probably time to find a different game. I dislike GMs that take out petty personal grudges on characters.

Most of us do, but some complain that a DM who doesn't do that is being too soft on the players.

Andoran RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

Monsters being determined to kill the PCs is different than the GM being determined to kill the PCs.

Monsters can try really hard and still fail. The GM cannot.

251 to 300 of 697 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gamer Life / Gamer Talk / Player just had his sword sundered and now he's mad at the DM All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.