Balance...


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
2/5

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Looking only at snowball--

Snowball is the best single-target damage dealing spell at level 1 from level 1 to 5 for certain. In fact, it's strictly superior to the second level spell scorching ray from levels 4 to 6 (cold is less resisted than fire and also has more ways to build off it, like the Rime Spell feat). On top of that, it ignores SR. On top of that, it has a staggered kicker (and staggered is a very nice condition). On top of all that, it's conjuration, which is already the strongest school, and it's impinging on evocation's main shtick (damage-dealing spells).

Now, due to snowball's extreme power for its level, there's going to be a lot of builds that capitalize on this with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage. But even if you don't take those traits, Intensified Snowball is the undisputed most powerful single-target damage-dealing spell up to level 10, even without ignoring SR or the staggered kicker. In fact, the only other contender (scorching ray), is saddled with the fact that it loses out big-time to energy resistance of any sort, so snowball is honestly a better choice even at level 11+ against many monsters. Take a demon, for instance, which has resist 10 to both fire and cold. Scorching ray with three rays does 12d6-30 (around 12), and intensified snowball does 10d6-10 (around 25). And it also ignores SR and has a staggered kicker. And of course, with magical lineage or wayang spellhunter, this intensified version is actually a 1st level spell (more a fault of those two traits being overpowered though).

Anyway, I recommend banning snowball so that choosing evocation as an opposition school means more (if conjuration has the best blasts, then why fret evocation?).

Did you serious recommend banning something because, with metamagic support, it will average out to 25 damage versus a demon if you hit at level 10? Any Demon you face at level 10 will have a ton of hp. A CR 10 horned demon has 125 hp for example and a +10 fort save to boot.

25 damage is nothing to scoff at, but it is significantly lower than what a decent front liner would put out at that level each and every turn.

Banning something because, if you optimize it, a level 1 spell can remain useful at level 10 doesn't seem like the best thought out argument.

4/5

Furious Kender wrote:


Did you serious recommend banning something because, with metamagic support, it will average out to 25 damage versus a demon if you hit at level 10?

No, I didn't. Please read the entire post and take that bit of information in context. It was no more, no less than a comparison to the other best damage dealer at its spell level (and notably, evocation's best).

In order to be a bad idea to include in the game with respect to all other damaging spells, a spell need not do more damage than a martial character. It need merely be overpowered for its level, compared to other spells. My post demonstrated that snowball is, and worse yet it's a conjuration.

EDIT: Besides, if you want to optimize it, you're probably talking about 55 damage per hit at level 8 or so with a 1st level slot on a sorcerer who has plenty such slots. That's about on par with an alchemist with Fast Bombs, but the sorcerer can keep it going much longer. But the true point of the problem is in comparison to other spell options, rather than to martials.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Snowball is very powerful through level 5.

It becomes less powerful after level 5, and by the time the spell should be truly overpowering, other 1st level spells, like Magic Missile have caught up to it.

It isn't a problem.


Well, other than the whole "make the enemy lose half their turn" thing.

4/5

Cheapy wrote:
Well, other than the whole "make the enemy lose half their turn" thing.

Indeed--and more than half for many creatures with many natural attacks (granted they usually make the save, but sometimes it'll happen). Not to mention SR: None, not blocked by the shield spell, and Conjuration school (making it easy to be opposed to Evocation).


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Furious Kender wrote:


Did you serious recommend banning something because, with metamagic support, it will average out to 25 damage versus a demon if you hit at level 10?

No, I didn't. Please read the entire post and take that bit of information in context. It was no more, no less than a comparison to the other best damage dealer at its spell level (and notably, evocation's best).

In order to be a bad idea to include in the game with respect to all other damaging spells, a spell need not do more damage than a martial character. It need merely be overpowered for its level, compared to other spells. My post demonstrated that snowball is, and worse yet it's a conjuration.

EDIT: Besides, if you want to optimize it, you're probably talking about 55 damage per hit at level 8 or so with a 1st level slot on a sorcerer who has plenty such slots. That's about on par with an alchemist with Fast Bombs, but the sorcerer can keep it going much longer. But the true point of the problem is in comparison to other spell options, rather than to martials.

I don't know who it was who decided that conjurers needed better blast spells than everyone else gets with the orb spells, etc., but they clearly work at Paizo now, and are once again up to their old tricks, and MUST BE STOPPED!

Silver Crusade 4/5

Jiggy wrote:
Fromper wrote:
I agree that not all ranged touch attack is a ray, but the consensus in previous threads was that anything with an attack roll gets treated the same way.

For bonuses to "attack rolls", yes. For bonuses to "weapon damage rolls", no. I'm not sure what threads you're thinking of, but the FAQ specifies that bonuses which apply to "weapons" only apply to spells if the spell is a ray or a "weapon-like" spell. That makes it pretty clear.

Quote:
and they're both affected by Inspire Courage.

Snowball and (for instance) ray of frost are indeed both affected by Inspire Courage. Just not to the same degree.

Inspire Courage grants a +1 bonus to attack rolls. Both snowball and ray of frost use attack rolls, so they both receive that bonus.

Inspire Courage also grants a +1 bonus to weapon damage rolls. Ray of frost is a ray, which counts as a weapon, so it gets the damage bonus. Snowball is not a weapon in any way, and therefore does not get that bonus.

Under the effects of Inspire Courage, snowball is at +1 to hit while ray of frost is at +1 to hit AND +1 damage.

Here's the thread where I first learned that there's a general consensus that the Pathfinder definition of "weapon" is "anything that uses an attack roll to hit". I still haven't seen an official ruling from Paizo though. It still bugs the heck out of me that a Paizo employee did respond to the FAQ flags on that thread with a claim that a response isn't necessary.

Here's another related thread.

I know I've seen this come up in at least half a dozen other threads. But apparently, 3.5 was clearer on this than Pathfinder, and the majority seems to assume that the 3.5 rule of anything with an attack roll being a weapon for the purpose of all feats, spells, traits, etc still applies.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fromper wrote:
I still haven't seen an official ruling from Paizo though.

What, the Official FAQ I linked earlier doesn't count? It tells you exactly what kinds of things count as weapons: rays, and certain "weapon-like spells" (their words, not mine). That makes it pretty clear that spells/effects which are neither rays nor "weapon-like spells" are therefore not treated as weapons.

What's still unclear?

EDIT: Looks like this same FAQ was the end of the first thread you linked. Perhaps that's why Paizo marked the thread as "no response required", eh? Also, your second link doesn't work.

5/5

Can I just say that I'm really glad someone pointed this spell out to me? My conjurer is going to enjoy using this.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've argued that magical knack should be legal until I've been blue in the face, so I doubt I have made any points that haven't been heard before.

But we now have Paths of Prestige, a book chock full of flavorful Golarion specific prestige classes. There are nine new Golarion specific prestige classes that suffer loss of caster level. But there is no method to mitigate that caster level penalty. Mitigating penalties is what feats and traits are all about.

Apart from that, Jiggy put it best. In every other case, an option has been banned because it would have hurt the campaign. Magical knack can not hurt the campaign.


That's a really good point. This half-feat lets you ignore part of the the balancing factor for a number of prestige classes.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

caster level loss for prestige classes is a balancing factor. If you notice, on all prestige classes that are not full caster level, the power you get at the level in which you lose a caster level is a fairly significant one.

Grand Lodge 4/5

So do you think Great Fortitude should be banned as it ignores part of the balancing factor for a number of spellcasting classes? That follows your reasoning rather accurately, wouldn't you say?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't see caster level losses for prestige classes being a balancing factor otherwise magical knack would not be available in the general rules. Its already been said that increasing caster level is not like getting a class level. You lose all the accoutrements and only gain some minor increases in the caster-level dependent parts of spells. I think that's a far cry from a limiting/balancing factor to keep multi-class and/or PrC characters "in line." Especially since we're taking about a trait that only grants its full benefit at level three (at the earliest) and more than likely much later than that.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Andrew Christian wrote:
caster level loss for prestige classes is a balancing factor. If you notice, on all prestige classes that are not full caster level, the power you get at the level in which you lose a caster level is a fairly significant one.

With great respect, I must disagree. Speaking strictly from my personal power-based perspective, there is not a single ability granted from any spellcasting class or prestige class that is worth the loss of progressing your spell level - and by that I mean progressing toward higher level spells + 1 caster level, just not the +1 caster level. Many of these abilities are vibrant, flavorful, interesting, and even powerful in their own right - but not one of them is worth giving up +1 caster level and 4th level spells for. Or 5th level. Or 6th level...ect., you get the idea.

On topic though, I am neither for nor against that trait being legalized. I think their are perfectly valid arguments on both ends. I do not think it would be unbalancing to legalize it, however, due to the above argument. Keeping caster level equal to character level is very great, but if you need this trait to do so you are already behind the curve because you are 1 or more levels behind maximum spell level as your peers.

Just my 2 cents.

Shadow Lodge

Grick wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Why would you take Boon Companion for a Cavalier, when after 4th level you can take Horse Master?

Horse Master (Combat): "Prerequisites: Expert trainer class feature (Advanced Player's Guide 33), Ride 6 ranks."

6th level, not 4th. And the Beast Rider, Fell Rider, and Strategist archetypes all trade out Expert Trainer.

Which brings up another question... if a feat requires a class feature that PFS replaces with something else (in this case, PFS cavaliers get Skill Focus (Handle Animal) instead of Expert Trainer), do characters still qualify for that feat, if they otherwise would have gotten that class feature?

EDIT: I see that this particular feat was actually called out in the Additional Resources page, effectively granting access to it to anyone who would've been able to take it, effectively making the question moot...

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Looking only at snowball--

Snowball is the best single-target damage dealing spell at level 1 from level 1 to 5 for certain. In fact, it's strictly superior to the second level spell scorching ray from levels 4 to 6 (cold is less resisted than fire and also has more ways to build off it, like the Rime Spell feat). On top of that, it ignores SR. On top of that, it has a staggered kicker (and staggered is a very nice condition). On top of all that, it's conjuration, which is already the strongest school, and it's impinging on evocation's main shtick (damage-dealing spells).

Now, due to snowball's extreme power for its level, there's going to be a lot of builds that capitalize on this with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage. But even if you don't take those traits, Intensified Snowball is the undisputed most powerful single-target damage-dealing spell up to level 10, even without ignoring SR or the staggered kicker. In fact, the only other contender (scorching ray), is saddled with the fact that it loses out big-time to energy resistance of any sort, so snowball is honestly a better choice even at level 11+ against many monsters. Take a demon, for instance, which has resist 10 to both fire and cold. Scorching ray with three rays does 12d6-30 (around 12), and intensified snowball does 10d6-10 (around 25). And it also ignores SR and has a staggered kicker. And of course, with magical lineage or wayang spellhunter, this intensified version is actually a 1st level spell (more a fault of those two traits being overpowered though).

Anyway, I recommend banning snowball so that choosing evocation as an opposition school means more (if conjuration has the best blasts, then why fret evocation?).

And hence why snowball has been removed as an option in the next update of Additional Resources.

4/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Looking only at snowball--

Snowball is the best single-target damage dealing spell at level 1 from level 1 to 5 for certain. In fact, it's strictly superior to the second level spell scorching ray from levels 4 to 6 (cold is less resisted than fire and also has more ways to build off it, like the Rime Spell feat). On top of that, it ignores SR. On top of that, it has a staggered kicker (and staggered is a very nice condition). On top of all that, it's conjuration, which is already the strongest school, and it's impinging on evocation's main shtick (damage-dealing spells).

Now, due to snowball's extreme power for its level, there's going to be a lot of builds that capitalize on this with Wayang Spellhunter and Magical Lineage. But even if you don't take those traits, Intensified Snowball is the undisputed most powerful single-target damage-dealing spell up to level 10, even without ignoring SR or the staggered kicker. In fact, the only other contender (scorching ray), is saddled with the fact that it loses out big-time to energy resistance of any sort, so snowball is honestly a better choice even at level 11+ against many monsters. Take a demon, for instance, which has resist 10 to both fire and cold. Scorching ray with three rays does 12d6-30 (around 12), and intensified snowball does 10d6-10 (around 25). And it also ignores SR and has a staggered kicker. And of course, with magical lineage or wayang spellhunter, this intensified version is actually a 1st level spell (more a fault of those two traits being overpowered though).

Anyway, I recommend banning snowball so that choosing evocation as an opposition school means more (if conjuration has the best blasts, then why fret evocation?).

And hence why snowball has been removed as an option in the next update of Additional Resources.

Wow, you rock Mike! You got rid of both quickrunner's shirt and snowball very quickly and efficiently after judging the evidence in both cases. Thanks for listening. While I have your ear, any chance we can get rid of wyroot (and the nearly unlimited ki points and magus arcane pool points it grants)?

Dark Archive 4/5

On snowball, here are the pros/cons IMO:

Pros:
- same damage as shocking grasp
- conjuration school
- fort save or stagger
- the fort save does not reduce damage
- cold damage is one of the better choices

Cons:
- requires Precise Shot to be reliable
- cannot hold charge like with shocking grasp
- short range

Is it better than shocking grasp? Possibly slightly, although a magus still won't use it. I have a level 5 conjurer, and he probably won't be using it because he'll miss all the time. Grease is still a better spell.

On Magical Knack, I don't think an eldritch knight requires it, although it would certainly help some fringe builds. However, making ridiculous comparisons between a splatbook spell and a trait that has not been legal for YEARS does not help your case.

EDIT: Wow Mike, way to make my post completely irrelevant! :P

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

26 people marked this as a favorite.

After reading Jiggy's reasonings, and speaking with John (our awesome new developer), I have removed Magical Knack as a banned trait in the campaign. Additional Resources will be updated tomorrow, and it will be a legal option to take. And no, you may not retrain your character unless you fall under the retraining rules or get a boon at Gen Con.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Michael Brock wrote:
And hence why snowball has been removed as an option in the next update of Additional Resources.

I have been F5ing Additional Resources all day!

Dark Archive 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Jiggy is the hero of the day. Thanks Mike. :D

5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
And hence why snowball has been removed as an option in the next update of Additional Resources.

dislike

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

Rogue Eidolon wrote:


Wow, you rock Mike! You got rid of both quickrunner's shirt and snowball very quickly and efficiently after judging the evidence in both cases. Thanks for listening. While I have your ear, any chance we can get rid of wyroot (and the nearly unlimited ki points and magus arcane pool points it grants)?

I added wyroot already. It was already in red 3 weeks ago and just waiting for Additional Resources to update.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

Dragnmoon wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
And hence why snowball has been removed as an option in the next update of Additional Resources.
I have been F5ing Additional Resources all day!

It will be tomorrow before it is updated.

4/5

Michael Brock wrote:
After reading Jiggy's reasonings, and speaking with John (our awesome new developer), I have removed Magical Knack as a banned trait in the campaign. Additional Resources will be updated tomorrow, and it will be a legal option to take. And no, you may not retrain your character unless you fall under the retraining rules or get a boon at Gen Con.

....WHHHAAATT??? So awesome.

It's time to make that magus (hexcrafter)/monk I've been thinking about, now.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Michael Brock wrote:
After reading Jiggy's reasonings, and speaking with John (our awesome new developer), I have removed Magical Knack as a banned trait in the campaign. Additional Resources will be updated tomorrow, and it will be a legal option to take. And no, you may not retrain your character unless you fall under the retraining rules or get a boon at Gen Con.

Ok I guess I will stop F5ing today and change it to tomorrow... ;)

4/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:


Wow, you rock Mike! You got rid of both quickrunner's shirt and snowball very quickly and efficiently after judging the evidence in both cases. Thanks for listening. While I have your ear, any chance we can get rid of wyroot (and the nearly unlimited ki points and magus arcane pool points it grants)?
I added wyroot already. It was already in red 3 weeks ago and just waiting for Additional Resources to update.

Fantastic! I look forward to getting back the 1000 gold on my monk (or even not getting the rebuild if that's how it goes--it's more than worth the gold spent in order to have been able to playtest it and give good data that it was broken, and I already was just not using it if the GM didn't want anyway, after giving them a little walkthrough about it and asking their opinion).

Shadow Lodge

Dragnmoon wrote:
Ok I guess I will stop F5ing today and change it to tomorrow... ;)

Good, you were clogging up the tubes!

EDIT:
Welp, there goes a viable level 1 magus spell for that myrmidarch archer I've been planning on playing; don't think that leaves any level 1 ranged touch spells to use with Ranged Spellstrike...


Jiggy wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Feel free to offer your reasonings why you think Magical Knack should be made legal if it is a new argument.

Well, just to take a stab at this, my argument would be this:

** spoiler omitted **...

Excellent post, Jiggy. I don't usually pay attention to PFS threads, but the title caught my interest and I'm glad it did. +1 to you!

EDIT: I see now that you succedded in getting the trait removed from the band list, earning you another +5. Have a nice day cutting through DR/epic. :)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Yayyy, it would appear that most will be pleased that Magical Knack is finally being added to legal content. I may use it, but wasn't really concerned about it either way.

However, I am dismayed at snowball getting the axe. Personally, I don't see it as significantly better than other spells, at least not enough so to warrant the banhammer. To be fair, I do have a dog in the race; been diligently working on an ice mage/oracle(winter)/mystic theurge concept and it was one of his staple of spells. I suppose I can at least use Magical Knack to improve his blasting.

I thought most banned material was because it didn't fit the world of Golarion or the language was too ambiguous. I'm fearful when we ban rules/mechanics just because it appears "better" than something existing. Using that logic, we could ban a lot from books post-CRB.

Maybe I need to send John an email. He seems to have a lot of influence these days :-)

Grand Lodge 4/5

Finally got a level one cold spell with a DC to up... Cast it once. Farewell snowball.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **

How the?!? I seriously wasn't expecting either to really happen. But both...well I'm happy :) . Thanks jiggy and rogue for your excellent posts :) .

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Feel free to offer your reasonings why you think Magical Knack should be made legal if it is a new argument.

Well, just to take a stab at this, my argument would be this:

** spoiler omitted **...

Want to take a shot at Thassilonian Specialist?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *** Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant

Michael Brock wrote:
After reading Jiggy's reasonings, and speaking with John (our awesome new developer), I have removed Magical Knack as a banned trait in the campaign. Additional Resources will be updated tomorrow, and it will be a legal option to take. And no, you may not retrain your character unless you fall under the retraining rules or get a boon at Gen Con.

Or have a bonus trait boon that you've been figuring out which character/trait to use it with... :)

4/5

Does that mean bracers of falcon's aim will get the ban hammer for being three feats for 4k gp.... The must have item for every archer...

If a snowball is overpowered...

4/5

Kashka wrote:

Does that mean bracers of falcon's aim will get the ban hammer for being three feats for 4k gp.... The must have item for every archer...

If a snowball is overpowered...

Those bracers are another excellent candidate for banning, considering that they cost less than lesser bracers of archery and are strictly superior (same attack bonus but also a free keen and a small perception bonus) if you have the bow proficiency (our home group calls them the "bracers of OP"). I think one reason the bracers were lower on the priority list is that they don't fundamentally influence the balance of two schools of magic like snowball does.

Lantern Lodge 5/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, South Dakota—Rapid City

Score one for the lil dragon!

5/5

Well I have never or will ever made the kind of character that would be able to optimize a level one spell to this point I am disappointed with snowballs removal as I was looking forward to adding it to the spell options of my witch.


aw darn... Here I was hoping to get back to making my blaster winter witch...

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

It was a sign! A sign of doom!

DOOOM!

The Replayers will be out in droves and demanding their due. I won't be able to hold them off, anymore...

Spoiler:
I kid, of course. I'll happily take on any and all requests and arguments for replay until my fingers are bleeding from the typing.

Grand Lodge 4/5

*jumps up and down excitedly*

Silver Crusade 5/5

Two people I have always had a lot of respect for when it comes to Pathfinder mechanics. Jiggy and Rogue Eidolon. They seem to have the mechanics down to a fine art.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:

It was a sign! A sign of doom!

DOOOM!

The Replayers will be out in droves and demanding their due. I won't be able to hold them off, anymore...

** spoiler omitted **

They can come out in droves all they want. This is one rule that is not changing anytime in the foreseeable future.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kashka wrote:

Does that mean bracers of falcon's aim will get the ban hammer for being three feats for 4k gp.... The must have item for every archer...

If a snowball is overpowered...

Thanks for pointing it out. I will have a look at it tomorrow.

1/5

Great scott! I leave this thread for a few hours to play with my son and the whole flippin' world of Golarion turns upside down.

I am happy and utterly surprised to see Magical Knack released from the ban list. I will be playing around with some options that I previously thought of as B list due to a lower that normal caster level. While the mystic thurge is the obvious victor in this fight, I think I will try a rage prophet first. I do love my Barbarians.

I am a little surprised to see snowball banned, though excellent cases were made. In the past we all thought that bans were based on their interference with the campaign. However, recent additions have brought bans because they were obviously overpowered. While I didn't think this particular spell was worth the ban and I am a little worried of the precedent being made by all the "overpowered/doesn't cost enough" bans, I do trust Mike to make decisions in the best interest of PFS and our community.

5/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Kashka wrote:

Does that mean bracers of falcon's aim will get the ban hammer for being three feats for 4k gp.... The must have item for every archer...

If a snowball is overpowered...

Thanks for pointing it out. I will have a look at it tomorrow.

Please don't. I've been using them for some time on my grenadier/archer and I like them because they have some actual flavor, instead of just being "bracers of shooting good." They're also the only real way--imo--to have a chance of being effective as an archer without class features that let you ignore feat prerequisites.

Edit: not that I'm actually all that effective as an archer compared to a ranger or such. But still. :p

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lab_Rat wrote:
...recent additions have brought bans because they were obviously overpowered.

I don't think that's the way this stuff should be viewed. The way you should be seeing it is actually the way Magic looks at how they ban a card:

If the card is so good that no deck can afford to either a) not play it, or b) not be prepared to play against it, then the card was obviously an error that should not have been introduced to the metagame.

In Pathfinder Society you are looking at character options, of course. Had Quickrunner's Shirt been left on the list of available options there would not have been very many players who didn't purchase it. I would actually argue that the only people who didn't get it for their characters would have been people who were merely unaware of the option. So, looking at what Kashka said about the bracers you can apply that same idea. Every archer MUST have them, by virtue of the cost for what they provide. If an archer doesn't have it, the player will be told, "You should consider these" by any other player who meets him. Eventually, he'll get it. That's the embodiment of something that shouldn't have been introduced to the game.

Admittedly, +1 weapons go this same route, but that's kind of like saying basic lands should be banned in Magic. Some things have to be a part of the game.


Any chance we will ever learn why Magical Knack was originally banned? :)

Silver Crusade 5/5

Well put Drogon. That's a Ban/Not Ban philosophy I can get behind when it's looked at strictly for mechanical value.

51 to 100 of 375 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Balance... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.