|
I missed two items out of 10,000 items in the Ultimate Equipment that should have been banned from the beginning. I spoke to the design team that agreed the bracers should be around 12,000 GP instead of 4,000 GP. An 8,000 GP difference is broken and is something that needed addressing. So, I've removed them until they can be fixed because they are vastly underpriced. There have been very, very few times i have removed something that was already legal in the 18 months I've been on the job. I bet you can count them on one hand. If that is what is called "liberally applying the ban hammer", then so be it. The archetypes that were removed were 7 months ago and were a rebalancing of things that should never have been allowed in PFS to begin with.
I don't ask a lot of questions on this, as I'm a lowly Melee Fighter who's items don't get banned very often, but last night at our table, we revealed that Falcon's Aim had been banned until the price can be errata'ed (errataied, erratored???). We pointed out this part of the thread, that basically the item is underpriced by about 8k, and that you've acknowledged this and that you're just waiting for the errata to come out that corrects this before making it legal again.
Their question, which I thought was fair, is this: "Why don't you just put in the Additional Resources, that the Bracers of Falcon's Aim for PFS play should cost 12k gp and then let people who own them decide if they're going to take the 4k refund or dole out the extra 8k to keep them? Rather than banning them, and then waiting for the errata?"
If this isn't in your power to do, I totally understand, but if it is, wouldn't it be infinitely simpler?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
@P33J
I'm not Mike, or even a Mike (and as I write this I get called Michael by mistake by a coworker, what timing), but I believe it is the goal to make not change the cost of items from the core rules. So he doesn't want to say "X is actually Y" until the rules say "what Y equals."
For example, what if the additional resources say Y = 12,000 and further round table decides to make it only 10k? OR ups it to 16? It's easier to ban and wait for errata.
|
As Kashka said. It is a lot more complicated to fix things than to remove them, especially when they are nonessential like this item. The scope of examining every single item to see whether the price should be changed or a rule tweaked is incredible.
Also, Additional Resources is confusing enough without ALSO having to provide rewritten prices or rules.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
No problem. It just seemed like this one occasion it would be much simpler than banning and waiting for errata.
Again, I'm melee, my wrist slots are to smite things.
I understand on both counts.
Talyn's needing to survive two more scenarios then he can use the cloak slot for cool things :-) (noqual armor + poison resistance = Cloak of Resistance being redundant.)
|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
...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.
In this case, isn´t the same true for bracers of archery if those others are banned. And after that for a belt of DEX?
As i get it bracers of the falcon or whats it called is better because it offers more than the other bracers for a better price. There are many spots if i remember right where people complain about bracers of archery being too expensive though.
So what about Snowball now? Banned or not banned?
I really would like to know because since i just got people from the north i´m about to change my precious sorcerer and considering taking this spell.
Is it on page 26 of PotN? If so then yes.
And of course you are going to take it. No sorcerer in their right mind that needed a single target damage dealing spell wouldn't take it.
|
So what about Snowball now? Banned or not banned?
I really would like to know because since i just got people from the north i´m about to change my precious sorcerer and considering taking this spell.Is it on page 26 of PotN? If so then yes.
And of course you are going to take it. No sorcerer in their right mind that needed a single target damage dealing spell wouldn't take it.
I'm probably not going to take it. But then, I'm only dipping a level or two into sorcerer for the elemental: cold bloodline. Most of my spells are oracle, so I'm saving the sorcerer slots for other things oracles can't get - grease and silent image.
The oracle power of Freezing spells renders the rider on snowball superfluous. Now you're just looking at the d6 damage... and I'm likeing burning disarm better.
|
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.
I applaud this ruling, and as I don't have a lot of PFS XP I didn't even suspect (until a discussion today) that this trait from the APG would ever have been banned. It makes some multiclass options more workable, IMO.
Unknowingly, I built my 2nd PC using this trait, and he has advanced mostly via GM credit. I only played him one scenario at 2nd level, a few weeks prior to your reversal of the ban here on 2/27. I didn't even want to play him that day, but another player said he wouldn't play if I played my 4th level character and thereby forced the party to play high subtier (so I capitulated so everyone could play). The GM did not alert me to any build issue, and the trait didn't really have any effect in that session (ranges were short and the few spells I had were instantaneous with damage that didn't depend upon CL).
If we had caught that the build wasn't legal back in January and "fixed" him prior to that session, my understanding is that he could not now be retrained to have the trait because he was played once at 2nd level. But we didn't catch it then, so what do I do? Can I just leave him as is? Or may I give back the XP and credit from that session to keep the character legal? Although I've only played him in two scenarios, he currently has 7 XP (which I don't want to completely abandon) and the build doesn't make sense to me without this trait.
FYI, my concept for the character is primarily a Wayang sorcerer (undead bloodline and necromancy focus) with a couple levels dip (at least) in ninja for some Ki powers, skills and sneak attacks that improve his ability to deliver shadow touch attacks and weird creepy effects. His spells are currently weak compared to a single class 3rd level caster, but when he gains spells with CL-dependant damage, magical knack would even things up a bit and make the mix worthwhile.
Lastly, It doesn't seem fair to have to burn an upcoming feat to get the trait back. For most starting traits, you have an entire level to make use of the trait before you have to settle on a PC build. In this case, there is no effect until you have levels in 2 different classes. Maybe PCs should be allowed to retrain for this trait prior to playing at level 3 instead of level 2. Of course, if I do GM a couple more times before playing this PC again, I'll have earned another feat and I could take Additional Traits instead of something else I had planned.
|
|
I'm in a similar boat where I just noticed that one of my characters only has one trait and I have little idea what the second trait would be. Magical Knack would be the best trait for this build, however I think it would be dishonest to pick a trait that I could not have possibly had to correct the absence of a trait on my sheet.
|
|
Mahtobedis: I think you're able to correct any errors such as this when they're discovered. So, you can pick a second trait today, based on the rules of today. It's on the honour system for people to not do this on purpose. My advice is to choose the trait you think would best reflect the way you've been playing your character up to this point.
|
|
Can't believe Bruno missed Grappling discussion. Wealth by level might be off, but here is possible Tetori build at 9th level (we'll say 23 xp to give fudge room for WBL).
22 STR (18 +2 from levels, +2 Anaconda's Coil)
Anaconda's Coil (+2 Str, +2 competence to Grapple)
Gloves of the Manuever Master (+2 untyped Grapple)
Dusty Rose Ioun Stone, slotted (+2 insight CMB/CMD)
Improved Grapple (+2 untyped)
Greater Grapple (+2 untyped)
Grab (+4 untyped)
+9 BAB
+6 STR
+2 Anaconda's Coils
+2 Gloves
+2 Ioun Stone
+4 Improved/Greater Grapple
+4 Grab
_______
+29 Grapple pre-buff without flanking
+34 if controlling Grapple
22 STR (18 +2 from levels, +2 Anaconda's Coil)
13 DEX
16 WIS (14 +2 headband)
Serpent's Pauldrons (+2 untyped CMD vs certain CMs)
Dusty Ioun Stone, slotted (+2 insight CMB/CMD)
Ring of Deflection +1 (+1 CMD)
Ring of Ki Mastery (+2 untyped CMD vs certain CMs if charged)
Snapping Turtle Shell chain (+2 shield bonus to CMD)
Dodge (+1 CMD)
Improved Grapple (+2 CMD)
+9 BAB
+6 STR
+1 DEX
+2 WIS
+2 Monk AC Bonus for 9th level
+2 Serpent's Pauldrons
+2 Ioun Stone
+1 Ring of Deflection
+2 Ring of Ki Mastery
+2 Snapping Turtle
+1 Dodge
+2 Improved Grapple
-------------------------
32 + base 10 CMD = 42 CMD pre-buff
|
|
I'm wondering if this should deserve it's own thread, but I just learned how ridiculous Lessons of Chaldira is. It's a trait that gives you a benefit worth about 2-3 feats.
It has the same reroll mechanics than Improved Great Fortitude, and its peers. Except that it can be used on any type of a save, and you can use it after you failed the save. And it's a trait. That doesn't have prerequisite feats, like the Improved saves feats.
Sure, it's still only 1/day. But how often would you use more than 1-2, if you had all the Improved saves feats? About as often as you benefit from the fact that you can reroll after you know the result. So, I'd say this single trait is about as good as having all three Improved saves feats.
Can we get rid of this, please?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I'm wondering if this should deserve it's own thread, but I just learned how ridiculous Lessons of Chaldira is. It's a trait that gives you a benefit worth about 2-3 feats.
It has the same reroll mechanics than Improved Great Fortitude, and its peers. Except that it can be used on any type of a save, and you can use it after you failed the save. And it's a trait. That doesn't have prerequisite feats, like the Improved saves feats.
Sure, it's still only 1/day. But how often would you use more than 1-2, if you had all the Improved saves feats? About as often as you benefit from the fact that you can reroll after you know the result. So, I'd say this single trait is about as good as having all three Improved saves feats.
Can we get rid of this, please?
Well at least you have to be a follower of the deity in question, but yeah, that looks a bit broken.
For Jiggy:
Trait: Lessons of Chaldira (Chaldira Zuzaristan): Your studies of Chaldira Zuzaristan’s exploits have given you a knack for avoiding trouble. Once per day, when you fail a saving throw, you can reroll the saving throw. You must take the second result even if it is worse.
(Faiths of Purity, pg 20)
|
My personal view is that those abilities are too costly as a feat. A once a day trait is more reasonable. I do think you should have to employ it's re-roll once you see the die roll before success or failure is determined, though. It may also have a counter balance of leaving the character staggered or shaken or sickened for a round after using it as well. That would balance it out nicely.
As written, however, I would consider it a very strong trait, but not one so powerful it needs removal.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
This trait really isn’t all that unbalancing. It only allows a single re-roll per day. Most scenarios have several saves per scenario, whether it be a trap or some sort of spell. And any scenario that has a BBEG spellcaster, they may be needing to make saves several times in one encounter.
Andrew,
I think the concern is that it basically allows one to choose Improved Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude once a day, at the time of the reroll. Here's Improved Iron Will for comparison.
Actually it's better. With the improved tree the language is "You must decide to use this ability before the results are revealed." vs. "Once per day, when you fail a saving throw, you can reroll the saving throw."
|
|
Actually it's better. With the improved tree the language is "You must decide to use this ability before the results are revealed." vs. "Once per day, when you fail a saving throw, you can reroll the saving throw."
Exactly. It's better than any of the Improved saves feats, doesn't have prerequisites (other than following Chaldira which can be hand-waved in PFS for non-clerics), and is only a trait (which should be half of a feat in power).
For example, Bracers of Falcon's Aim were banned within days because the item was about 8k too cheap. I consider my evaluation of this feat being worth of 2-3 feats pretty accurate. Which means it's two feats too cheap, or 8-12k too cheap using the mechanics the design team uses.
|
|
This is anecdotal evidence, but for what it's worth.
When I presented this trait to a group of friends of mine, three players started wondering how they could take this for their characters. The plans included additional traits for all, two alignment changes, and all characters changing the gods they worship - including a paladin.
|
|
"And any scenario that has a BBEG spellcaster, they may be needing to make saves several times in one encounter."
That's optimistic in my experience. PFS BBEG casters don't usually get the best support in the world, so after their first spell, they often get grappled, silenced, surrounded by pets, or hp reduced to 0. Or something else I'm not thinking of.
|
|
It's banned because of it's balance, or lack of it. When a trait becomes so good that no spellcasting multi-classer should ever NOT take it, then it's a sign that the trait is simply too good.
Magical Knack is banned, and this is not a good example of why it shouldn't be.
Huh?! This is a bit late, and way behind on things, as Magical Knack is no longer banned.
Additionally, I have plenty of multi-classed spell casters who don't plan on taking this trait.
|
|
(other than following Chaldira which can be hand-waved in PFS for non-clerics),Not so. You have to worship a deity to get a deity specific feat. Which means you'd have to be 1 step from the deity in alignment.
Exactly. Which leaves pretty much only clerics without access to that trait. Chaldira is a NG deity, so you can always be LG (for paladins and monks), or NG/N/CG for everyone else. You don't have to be halfling.
|
|
Pointing out how ridiculously powerful that single trait is.
In your opinion. As you have seen above other players/GMs (myself included) don't think it is any more or less unbalanced than Defensive Strategist. Is it a strong trait choice? Yes. Is it a "must buy/use" (like bracers of falcon's aim)? No.
There will always be options stronger than others in a game like this. (reference: see crossbows vs bows)
|
|
Samuli,
I'd suggest starting a new thread asking for review of the trait. List the reasons why you think it needs the nerf/banhammer. (I personally agree with you.)
Rather than alter or ban this trait, I would instead discuss the feats it is similar too. Those could do with a boost of some kind. Perhaps adding a line that says having those feats also means a natural 1 is not automatic failure.
As they stand, those feats are a pretty weak choice for anyone.
|
|
As they stand, those feats are a pretty weak choice for anyone.Aye, my assessment is that that trait isn't as powerful as a feat, and neither are those feats.
Re: Improved Will/Fort/Ref
For PCs, I agree. Maybe if it was another +2 and reroll (just like other feat trees lead to better feats.) Or maybe one free auto-save.For villains, I disagree.
But the trait is a great trait, and applicable to most builds.
There are also Rogue reroll tricks that don't measure up to it, and many tricks are feats.
BTW, I think it's only divine casters that have to be within one alignment of their deity, i.e. I could see merchants of all alignments appreciating Abadar, especially if they didn't like any other gods.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
Under the new rules, all characters must be within one step of their diety, regardless of class.
I think you're missing an important qualifier.
All characters [b]that receive divine power from a deity[/i] must have an alignment at most one step away from that of the deity in question.
I'm perfectly free to have my chaotic neutral rogue claim to be a follower of a lawful good deity. The deity may have a different opinion, but as this has no mechanical effect on the game it doesn't matter.