I quite like my pathfinder books but myself and my players are noting alot of the 3.5 problems cropping up in Pathfinder. This has kind of ruined some of the Paizo APs at higher levels of ply (10+).
Anyway I have narrowed down the list to 3 big offenders.
1.Spell DCs.
2.Power Attack feat
3.Rapid shot feat.
These three things have been the big offenders since 3.0 in numerous power build options. 12 years of annoying the hell out of me. Do you think these are the big offenders in terms of the power level of higher level games? I'm considering some houserules for my games, not sure what they are yet.
what is it you don't like about spell DCs? Too high or too low or what else?
1. Spell DCs are not a problem. Just find out how high the Wizard PCs DCs are, and then bump your monsters by a notch or two to compensate. Another option is to simply say, "You use optimizing and Save or Sucks on me, I use them on you." Then do it.
2. Read the Power Attack rules for Pathfinder, it is far different from 3.5. If it still doesn't satisfy you, just remove power attack, and cease to have it be an option for characters and a requirement for cleave, etc.
Power Attack isn't too bad though, unless it is used in an uber-charger build or something like that.
3. Rapid shot is not a problem. If it really irritates you that a weak, pathetic class can shoot 2 arrows instead of 1, you can delete it.
Reading all three of these, I don't find any of them to be big offenders. One just lets you deal a bit more damage. One lets you shoot an extra arrow. And one can be fixed by any DM.
Weak pathetic class? What game are you playing? Archers are far from weak in pathfinder. though I wonder what class you are stepping on here since Rapid shot is in no way limited to one class. Archer paladins and inquisitors can more then hold their own and archer bards have their use.
-Edit- Left out Zen archer. Also far from weak.
what is it you don't like about spell DCs? Too high or too low or what else?
Spell DCs are to high. I want a 2nd ed feel to the game where things like fireball look alot better. Thinking of eliminating ability mods to DCs and buffing saving throws like Star Wars Saga. A level 20 fighters base saves would be 12/10/10 instead of 12/6/6. A level 9 spell base DC would be 19 not 19+ ability score mod.
Spells still scale with level but the DC getting higher via ability scores would not.
Delthyn Power Attack. Abused in bulids since 3.0 and PF power attack is better than 3.5 in terms of damage. Also loking at power attack vairent like deadly shot and piranha strike. PA probably -2+2 or -/+3 with a two handed weapon. Alot of PF monsters can't compete with the DPM in PF adventure paths of PCs. Looking at rapid shot adding an extra dice of damage instead of an extra attack like Star Wars Saga (longbow =2 to hit, 2d8 base damage).
It is the static damage modifiers that you can add onto PA and RS which break them. I'm also loking at critcal hits as well. I'm thinking the multiplier will only apply to the base damage.
1d8+5 longsword (X2) on a crit deals 2d8+5 damage
1d8+5 battleaxe (X3) crit deals 3d8+5.
what is it you don't like about spell DCs? Too high or too low or what else?Spell DCs are to high. I want a 2nd ed feel to the game where things like fireball look alot better. Thinking of eliminating ability mods to DCs and buffing saving throws like Star Wars Saga. A level 20 fighters base saves would be 12/10/10 instead of 12/6/6. A level 9 spell base DC would be 19 not 19+ ability score mod.
Spells still scale with level but the DC getting higher via ability scores would not.
Fireball was not that great in 2E unless you were fighting minions/mooks. It was a time saver not great or anything unless you were facing creatures weak like trolls, ice creatures, etc
2E had spells with save penalties.
Melee could specialize getting a damage boost on extra attacks (just like power attack)
2E spells like sleep, magic missile had time of 1 (meaning they were fast) were better. Yep in in 2E save or sucks were better than Fireball most cases.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering that the bad guys have, and use, these same options, I find it hard to consider them "broken" in any sense of the word in PF AP games.
Maybe you're just used to the smaller numbers of 2E. PF just has bigger numbers across the board (except for good old fireball, it's true), but it all comes out in the wash.
What he wants I suspect are mid and high level conflicts that last more than a round or two before they become a foregone conclusion. The damage output (counting SOS/SOD as 'damage') is really high as a ratio vs the damage resistance compared to previous editions. My suggestion is to either heavily constrain how 'optimized' your PCs are allowed to be (making sure to remember that magic user optimization is largely done at character creation, not so much in feat selection), or alternately go back to 1st or 2nd edition---which I do from time to time.
This. I don't want the 1-3 round rocket tag battles that 3.5 and PF tend to have after a few levels.
A 2nd ed fireball the other day was more or less a mass save or die. PF monsters have more hit points than 2nd ed ones though and DCs on save or dies are kinda high. I don't care if a disnterate spell kills somone out right and turns them to dust but its not looking good for the poor rogue who cops it (or the fighter who gets hit with dominate etc).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What he wants I suspect are mid and high level conflicts that last more than a round or two before they become a foregone conclusion. The damage output (counting SOS/SOD as 'damage') is really high as a ratio vs the damage resistance compared to previous editions. My suggestion is to either heavily constrain how 'optimized' your PCs are allowed to be (making sure to remember that magic user optimization is largely done at character creation, not so much in feat selection), or alternately go back to 1st or 2nd edition---which I do from time to time.This. I don't want the 1-3 round rocket tag battles that 3.5 and PF tend to have after a few levels.
A 2nd ed fireball the other day was more or less a mass save or die. PF monsters have more hit points than 2nd ed ones though and DCs on save or dies are kinda high. I don't care if a disnterate spell kills somone out right and turns them to dust but its not looking good for the poor rogue who cops it (or the fighter who gets hit with dominate etc).
Wait wait wait...so you don't want rocket tag so you want to go back to 2ed where you could rocket tag ancient dragons with 3rd level spells?!? I'm sorry...but I do believe you have absolutely no idea about game mechanics. Please learn more before making absurd suggestions like I want less rocket tag so let's go back to how it was in 2nd ed.
Tucker's Kobolds. Weak Warrior 1 Kobolds using Tactics and Terrain to terrorize a Party regardless of APL.
If you really have a Problem with 1-3 round encounters consider increasing the HP of the Enemies and adding a few more minions/mooks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick everyone! Fireball formation!
Wait wait wait...so you don't want rocket tag so you want to go back to 2ed where you could rocket tag ancient dragons with 3rd level spells?!? I'm sorry...but I do believe you have absolutely no idea about game mechanics. Please learn more before making absurd suggestions like I want less rocket tag so let's go back to how it was in 2nd ed.What he wants I suspect are mid and high level conflicts that last more than a round or two before they become a foregone conclusion. The damage output (counting SOS/SOD as 'damage') is really high as a ratio vs the damage resistance compared to previous editions. My suggestion is to either heavily constrain how 'optimized' your PCs are allowed to be (making sure to remember that magic user optimization is largely done at character creation, not so much in feat selection), or alternately go back to 1st or 2nd edition---which I do from time to time.This. I don't want the 1-3 round rocket tag battles that 3.5 and PF tend to have after a few levels.
A 2nd ed fireball the other day was more or less a mass save or die. PF monsters have more hit points than 2nd ed ones though and DCs on save or dies are kinda high. I don't care if a disnterate spell kills somone out right and turns them to dust but its not looking good for the poor rogue who cops it (or the fighter who gets hit with dominate etc).
PF Dragons have more HP than 2nd ed Dragons. In Kingmaker the encounters as designed were complete walkovers. I can design good enocounters if I have to but it takes time.
I wanted to know what the biggest offeneders are in Pathfinder in terms of inflating offensive powers and spell DCs, power attack and rapid shot were the main ones I could think of. I have been seeing archer and two handed weapon user builds being abused since about 2001.
You can do whatever you want in your home games. In my one I am considering changing these 3 things and playtest it and see how it works out. Just wondering what others think and if there soehitng else that is the bigger problem that can easily be house ruled. Rewrite 2 feats and cnacel the spell DC bonus from high ability scores is an easy rewrite and if its to severe a nerf its not to hard to undo it.
Quick everyone! Fireball formation!
All I could think of was the Roman "Tortoise" formation...
@Zardnaar: Are you planning to Also Nerf Deadly Aim (aka Ranged Power Attack)? What of Manyshot? I mean a Free second arrow with only a Single attack roll at no penalty?
& yes I am being sarcastic. The problem is just having to deal with Optimizers is all.
Vestrial it was an idea. I do know wha needs to be done in regards to spells but rewriting alot of them is more work than a half page of errata. If i do it maybe the game will suck, maybe it will be more fun IDK.
There are ways to boost fireball in PF if you invest in the right feats and/or magic items. You can boost both the damage and the DC. Plus, if you really want to, you can use feats and bloodlines to change the energy type to electrical, cold or even acid.
|
Just remember the point of this game is to play heroes, not rank and file soldiers that just happen to go out in small squads...
how sad would lord of the rings have been if legolas could only fire one arrow at a time, sure the encounters would of been more "balanced" but where's the heroic in it?
Likewise when you read about the big barbarian smashing, how sad is it that he only does marginally more damage than that mook over there?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait wait wait...so you don't want rocket tag so you want to go back to 2ed where you could rocket tag ancient dragons with 3rd level spells?!? I'm sorry...but I do believe you have absolutely no idea about game mechanics. Please learn more before making absurd suggestions like I want less rocket tag so let's go back to how it was in 2nd ed.What he wants I suspect are mid and high level conflicts that last more than a round or two before they become a foregone conclusion. The damage output (counting SOS/SOD as 'damage') is really high as a ratio vs the damage resistance compared to previous editions. My suggestion is to either heavily constrain how 'optimized' your PCs are allowed to be (making sure to remember that magic user optimization is largely done at character creation, not so much in feat selection), or alternately go back to 1st or 2nd edition---which I do from time to time.This. I don't want the 1-3 round rocket tag battles that 3.5 and PF tend to have after a few levels.
A 2nd ed fireball the other day was more or less a mass save or die. PF monsters have more hit points than 2nd ed ones though and DCs on save or dies are kinda high. I don't care if a disnterate spell kills somone out right and turns them to dust but its not looking good for the poor rogue who cops it (or the fighter who gets hit with dominate etc).
PF Dragons have more HP than 2nd ed Dragons. In Kingmaker the encounters as designed were complete walkovers. I can design good enocounters if I have to but it takes time.
I wanted to know what the biggest offeneders are in Pathfinder in terms of inflating offensive powers and spell DCs, power attack and rapid shot were the main ones I could think of. I have been seeing archer and two handed weapon user builds being abused since about 2001.
Stop...seriously...stop. You honestly seem to lack enough system mastery to be mucking around. Really. How does dragons having more HP is PF make it LESS rocket tag like again? And the third level spell I mentioned wasn't a HP based damage one (88 hp is still more then what a fireball or lightning bolt is capable of with max damage rolled...and there were no meta magic back then). Also fighters back in 2nd ed had pounce by default...could get 8 attacks a round...each doing full BAB attacks doing 1d20+29 damage...yeah you heard that right 1d20. Pathfinder and 3.5 if nothing else LOWERED the offensive options from 2nd ed...which really was rocket tag at higher levels.
Kingmaker boss encounters were a joke because the writers for some off reason broke the number one rule of boss encounter designs in D&D...even back in the 2nd and 1st ed era. NEVER USE SINGLE MONSTERS. Always have a partner or mooks. The fact that the one AP you used was badly done doesn't mean the system needs to be rehauled...it means you need to run a different AP. Also AP assumed a rather shocking low level of optimization. Look at the pre-gens. Are your players optimized more then that? If yes, you may need to up the encounters a bit. But that is once again, not really an issue with the mechanics of the system in all honesty.
I think after running 3rd ed/PF for 12 years I have system master worked out. I'm fully aware some spells will suck and I'm fine with that. Damage spells and no save spells get better along with debuff spells like enervatiopn. Save or Dies start to suck.
THe PCs are optimising their way through monsters without to much hassle. Power Attack has been abused since 2001, same with Rapid shot (cleric archer).
Tehe Save or suck and save or dies are alot better than direct damage spells (cone of cold vs dominate).
I'm a min/maxer from way back. I was one of the guys ewho put the cleric archer buld togather in 3.0 days on the WoTC boards so I think I know what I am doing with system mastery.
1. Spell DCs are not a problem. Just find out how high the Wizard PCs DCs are, and then bump your monsters by a notch or two to compensate. Another option is to simply say, "You use optimizing and Save or Sucks on me, I use them on you." Then do it.
I don't find Spell DC too high for the most part (except some uber specialized builds), but that said, this is a bad argument. "Nuclear weapons aren't too powerful, because both sides can have them" isn't an answer to those who seek for less global destruction. If the OP finds the game wrong (by his own standards) because high DC make the game too rocket tag, doubling the rocket tag won't help him at all. Au contraire.
Specifically PF has problems at the higher levels (10+ generally). Magic countering magic isn't really a good idea (lvl 17, initiative roll timestop win) as classes that lack magic are gonna be in trouble. Using my lack of system mastery we have never had a high level sorcerer cast 17 spells in one round.
If you don't like my ideas thats fine as it has 0% impact on your game that you can play however you like. Its not to hard to deal by level 6 in PF somehting like 2d4+20+1d12 damage with a 15-20 crit range. Thats what I'm trying to tone down as the monsters can't really handle it. I can design good encounters but it does take alot more time and effort to do so (and I have other things to do with mah time).
You know its really starting to sound like the game you want to be playing is not PF. Not sure what game would be better but clearly PF is not it.
Spell DCs are to high. I want a 2nd ed feel to the game where things like fireball look alot better. Thinking of eliminating ability mods to DCs and buffing saving throws like Star Wars Saga. A level 20 fighters base saves would be 12/10/10 instead of 12/6/6. A level 9 spell base DC would be 19 not 19+ ability score mod.
Unless you are getting rid of any bonus to saving throws, that means Spells are utterly useless.
A base save of 12/10/10 means that, with an average of +2 from stats, and a cloack +5 resistance (basic gear at that level), you succeed any saving throw with 2+. And that's without using other mods, such as bard's chants, cleric spells, stones of luck, save improving feats, racial bonus (like dwarf, gnomes or elfs), class bonus (such as barbarians), etc. Simply banning all the spells with save throw is faster and easier, and saves you a lot of useless math and die rolling.
More interested in making the game work better at level 12 than level 20. Short of a complete rewrite of the rules I don't think I can make the game work that well at level 20. 2nd ed you generally made your saves on a roll of 2+ at level 20 for most spells.
Its just an idea I am kicking around atm. There are plenty of spells the spellcasters can play with, if they suck a bit in combat meh. The non spellcasters still can't cast haste, fly, timestop, gate, etc so I don't think spellcasters will be ineffective by any means. They may have to use multiple blasting spells or use some debuffs first or look at spells like scorching ray.
If spells are your problem why not just use more monsters with SR or humanoid monsters with feats to buff their saves?
Magic is powerful. If it was real it would be one of those commodities that everyone wants but can't have. And 3.x and PF are very different animals when it comes to Higher Level Play. If you nerf Rapid Shot you nerf Archery Rangers, Fighters, Rogues, Etc. You nerf Power Attack you nerf Melee Clerics, Fighters, Even some Wizards.
If your group is Optimizers or Min-Maxers then you probably should run a Homebrew or a different AP. Kingmaker was badly designed. Try Carrion Crown or some such. The party will struggle to get to optimized in that.
Altering save progression to 1/2 level plus class bonus can definitely be a worthwhile change. Currently saves definitely don't keep pace with save DCs at higher levels of optimization even with the ever present cloaks of resistance which are boring. Honestly I don't have a problem with the other feats even going so far as to make power attack a standard option everyone has unlocked.
Hmm I might just look at redoing the save progression for my upcoming game.
More interested in making the game work better at level 12 than level 20. Short of a complete rewrite of the rules I don't think I can make the game work that well at level 20. 2nd ed you generally made your saves on a roll of 2+ at level 20 for most spells.
Its just an idea I am kicking around atm. There are plenty of spells the spellcasters can play with, if they suck a bit in combat meh. The non spellcasters still can't cast haste, fly, timestop, gate, etc so I don't think spellcasters will be ineffective by any means. They may have to use multiple blasting spells or use some debuffs first or look at spells like scorching ray.
So if I am getting your gist correctly, you want to make spells all but useless?
Why not just remove spellcasting from you game entirely? Making characters so powerful as to make all saves on a 2 or more is boring for the characters since magic becomes a joke.
Really I have to agree it sounds like Pathfinder and D&D are the wrong games for you.
Actually saves in 2e rarely got that good unless you were buffed to insane levels and had high end rings of protection.
In addition at high levels winning a battle with spells alone was very difficult due to the structure of spell resistance
Black raven that just makes things worse. Level 17+ is more or less initiative roll to see who gets timestop off first.
Gilfalas the idea is to make savce or dies less effective. There are still plenty of ways spellcasters can make themselves effective. I'll probably either buff the saves (done before) or remove abilites mod from spell DCs.
The main reaosn ius say at level 20 its very easy for a spellcaster to have DC 26+ spells and a bad save to be around +13 (6 base, +5 cloak, +2 ability score) with your best save being (assuming dex/wis/based character)+26. Most classes do not feed of dex/wisdom and to gt the saves any higer you are gonna have to start looking at feats (not that many people take iron wil) or finding multiple magic items with luck or whatever bonuses on them.
In 12 years DC25+ is probably a bit conservative (30+ being more or less default) as spellcasters can aquire the items need to buff save DCs easier than the classes that need the save bonuses the most as thye can make them.
|
|
I think after running 3rd ed/PF for 12 years I have system master worked out. I'm fully aware some spells will suck and I'm fine with that. Damage spells and no save spells get better along with debuff spells like enervatiopn. Save or Dies start to suck.
THe PCs are optimising their way through monsters without to much hassle. Power Attack has been abused since 2001, same with Rapid shot (cleric archer).
Tehe Save or suck and save or dies are alot better than direct damage spells (cone of cold vs dominate).
I'm a min/maxer from way back. I was one of the guys ewho put the cleric archer buld togather in 3.0 days on the WoTC boards so I think I know what I am doing with system mastery.
I don't care if you've played the game for 30 years. You have shown a distinct disregard for how the numbers work in the system. It's one thing to know how to optimize in a system...it's quite another to understand game theory and actual mechanics. You maybe a decent optimizer...but you are clueless about game theory and mechanics.
If you don't like my ideas thats fine as it has 0% impact on your game that you can play however you like. Its not to hard to deal by level 6 in PF somehting like 2d4+20+1d12 damage with a 15-20 crit range. Thats what I'm trying to tone down as the monsters can't really handle it. I can design good encounters but it does take alot more time and effort to do so (and I have other things to do with mah time).
If that is your view, why did you even bother to post? Your right, your idea does not effect us one bit as we are not your players...but if your not gonna listen then why waste the bandwidth? When pretty much every says it's a bad idea...ever get a clue that it JUST MAYBE A BAD IDEA? Sheesh.
Some of what he wants isn't a bad idea IMO, it's just a matter of how to achieve it.
If you don't like the power attack feat, either get rid of it, or halve the damage bonus it applies as another option. Whatever you do in this area i suggest you also apply to Deadly Aim on an equal level.
Spell DC's...this one is harder. Whatever you change here will impact some classes more then others. The increased save progression is..workable, but will have no impact on a monk, and a lot of impact on a fighter as example.
Another option is to speak with your group, let them know you wish to not use/allow certain spells (the big offenders in your mind) and allow swapping of known spells/feats to adapt from it.
If you and your players want the shift in style, it's not wrong or broken to do it.
"Normally we don't agree or like Cold Napalm, that is unless he is right. And right now I like him a lot."
I like Cold Napalm. I just couldn't help parody the quote from Garviel Loken from The Horus Heresy Series or Novels.
More interested in making the game work better at level 12 than level 20. Short of a complete rewrite of the rules I don't think I can make the game work that well at level 20. 2nd ed you generally made your saves on a roll of 2+ at level 20 for most spells.
Its just an idea I am kicking around atm. There are plenty of spells the spellcasters can play with, if they suck a bit in combat meh. The non spellcasters still can't cast haste, fly, timestop, gate, etc so I don't think spellcasters will be ineffective by any means. They may have to use multiple blasting spells or use some debuffs first or look at spells like scorching ray.
i didnt say spellcasters would be useless. I said spells with saving throw will be (and that includes most blasts, as a fireball that does a guaranted 5d6, and never damage classes with evasion, isn't very impressive at level 10). If you are going to completelly render save spells into uselessness, why not ban them? It's easier: "no spell which allow Save throw is legit". Done. Now you don't have to mess with flesh to stone, dominate person, hold monster, confusion, web, nauseating clouds or slow. It's the same than buffing everybody saves and removing stats to save DC, just faster and less math involved. Because if everybody saves on 2+, no PC is going to cast a spell with save, ever. They'd use those spells without saving throw, such as Maze, Bigby hand, telekinesis, Black Tentacles, reverse gravity, time stop or gate. Which are much more balanced as they don't have a high save DC.
At level 12 your spells will have DC 16 at best. Still an autosuccess for a lot of level 12 characters, specially if you improve the base saves. Not really a difference.
Lantzkev, I'm talking about the OP's suggestion to depower save & suck spells, which he explicitly said to remove the attribute. While he didn't mention about removing the feats as well, I suppossed that either:
1) he plans to do so, because it makes sense.
2) even if he doesn't, nobody would take them. Increasing your DC from 25 to 27 is very powerful, it means the opponent has to roll 19+ instead of 17+, but increasing from 16 to 18 isn't worth two feats, as the opponent now has to roll 4+ instead of 2+ (or maybe still 2+, if it's a strong save for his class)
May be 4+ but with things like empowered enervate it should be to hard to get that up a bit.
Cutting prices on defensive magic items could also help if I left spell DCs up. 3.5 MIC had cheap crystals that stacked with cloaks of resistence. Buff saves and cheaper defensive items might be a better option. THe power atack varients will also get hit (deadly shot, piranha strike).
|
Just remember the point of this game is to play heroes, not rank and file soldiers that just happen to go out in small squads...
how sad would lord of the rings have been if legolas could only fire one arrow at a time, sure the encounters would of been more "balanced" but where's the heroic in it?
Likewise when you read about the big barbarian smashing, how sad is it that he only does marginally more damage than that mook over there?
Pathfinder/D&D aren't novels so it's a bad comparison. Also, the meaning of 'hero' covers lots of things, not just someone with cool powers.
An empowered enervate is a high level spell. That high, you are already entering the realm of spells with no save (maze, reverse gravity etc), or that completelly destroy the opponent even if the save is made (a consecutive casting of 3 Irresistible Dance spells in a row, for example).
For what I've read, you and your group are fairly good optimizers. In such case, there's nothing you can do, I'm affraid, with this ruleset. Even if you render Save Spells into oblivion (like giving a free +10 to saves), you only will get your group to adapt the new situation, and break the game using a different optimization.
Spells like Telekinesis (+ true strike= instant free disarm the BBEG), reverse gravity (bye bye Tarrasque-like encounters), black tentackles, wall of force, bigby hand, time stop, mage's disjunction, maze, summoning celestial tyrannosaurus, Cloud Kill+wall spells, enervation, ray/wave of exhaustion, stacking fear (two shaken = frightened), sirocco, polar ray, wall of stone, Power Word Blind, Trap the Soul, Teleport (to dangerous zones such as a volcano or deep sea), then teleport back ...
A party of optimizers will always bend and break DM's perceived sense of balance. They'll just follow different approachs. As others have said, it seems simply that this ruleset is not what you are looking for. You should try some others rulesets, especially those without magic. This ruleset has far too much spells that break the laws of physics.
Optimizers do NOT break the rules. If someone is breaking rules they are not really an optimizer. Making a strong PC by breaking the rules is easy. "I hit for 50d6 +200 because I said so." no optimization needed. Someone is ONLY an optimizer if they work 100% with in the rules.
As for optimizers breaking the game which is something that gets thrown around a lot. Yeah no. Save or lose and other ways to quickly end some encounters has been in the system for a long damn time. Bad design? *shrug* perhaps but its not the optimizer breaking anything as they are intended parts of the game.
Will edit the post to change "rules" for "DM's perceived sense of balance".
That said, "intended parts of the game" and "parts of the game under the rules" aren't interchangeable. I doubt the intended design for a BBEG that is the apex of a 17th level AP is to die without taking a single action. It's legal, but it's an unintended subproduct of the rules bad design, not it's intended conclusion. For example, that you can defeat the tarrasque with a portable hole, a bag of holding, mage hand and minor image is legit, but it's not intended. Portable holes and bag of holdings weren't designed to be *offensive* nuclear weapons, that's a side effect of a rule made to avoid stacking dimensional bags ad infinitum.
Are you seriously comparing rules acrobatics combing a number of items and spells to someone using one save or die spell/ability?
These save or die things do what they do all by themselves. there is no "add this and this and this". There is no way someone writing a save of die spell did not know 100% that this would kill something outright. It most certainty was intended.
The fact is this system is not made for big long combats nor was it made for one BBEG combats.
The system is designed for a number of shortish combats and BBEGs not be alone. 15 min work days and single mob boss encounters are the problem more then anything.