People Calling Skills Useless?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Mike Franke wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Climb, swim, disguise, get replaced very early by spells , a hat of disguise, or, well, a knotted rope. Acrobatics fades out as cmd rises faster than the skill.
Hey if your wizard wants to waste magic doing thing s a fighter or rogue does for free rather than being awesome and binding reality to his will...more power to you.

Waste magic? You mean by casting one level 4 spell that lasts longer than anyone can adventure at a stretch and is a cornerstone of typical wizardly defensive tactics?

Anyone can climb a knotted rope. Anyone can cross a non-flooding river with a guide rope. Most popular improved familiars fly and can drive a peg and tie a rope to it if the wizard doesn't like Overland Flight.

Yes...and none of your adventures last more than 7 hours?? You have a nice Gm. But you made my point. Anyone with the right skill can cross a river. Once you use that 4th level spell on overland flight(a good and useful spell I admit) you can't use that spell slot for anything else. Why waste a spell unnecessarily on mundane things.

Sure your wiz could cast invis and silence knock and arcane lock jump and spider climb then at the end of he day he can realize he just wasted half of his spells on things skills let other classes do for free.

Obviously I'm stretching things a bit but skills have their place in the game even if there are other ways of achieving the same things.

I can literally not think of a single published adventure that has a 7 hour adventure with no breaks. I'm sure there is one, but it is far and away the exception. Most "buff" spells will be cast just prior to entering the "Location serving as the adventure spot for today". And if it takes you 7 hours to get through Melkalik's Inner Sanctum, well I'm sorry for the upcoming TPK (but I'm really not).


I can't speak for published adventures, but in most of the in-the-flesh games I've played in (as opposed to ones done via virtual tabletop) it's been pretty common to have to camp 2-5 times in the dungeon before finally clearing it.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
I can't speak for published adventures, but in most of the in-the-flesh games I've played in (as opposed to ones done via virtual tabletop) it's been pretty common to have to camp 2-5 times in the dungeon before finally clearing it.

Exactly. A straight 7 hour adventure is unlikely in the extreme.


This topic makes me really wish that the 3.5 epic skills concept was officially a thing in Pathfinder.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
williamoak wrote:
Counter-example: stealth & perception: these are always useful, since you never want to be surprised, and high-level monster laugh at invisibility.

Until you can cast Mind Blank (admittedly, level 15-16 and only for certain classes) and you laugh at those monsters.

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)

I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.

Magic is great, and very useful. And depending on it to the exclusion of everything else is moronic and suicidal.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)
I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.

So, in order to to stop magic from being better than skills you rely on ... magic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jadeite wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)
I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.
So, in order to to stop magic from being better than skills you rely on ... magic.

If magic can negate magic and leave the skill useful, which is NOT negated by magic, why is that an invalid construction?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Jadeite wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)
I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.
So, in order to to stop magic from being better than skills you rely on ... magic.
If magic can negate magic and leave the skill useful, which is NOT negated by magic, why is that an invalid construction?

Because in 2 out of those 3 cases (anti, dead) you're going from, "The skillmonkey doesn't get to contribute," to "now the wizard doesn't get to contribute." I dunno about you but four hours of free time to sit down and play a game is HARD for my groups to get together. Being sidelined with nothing to do for part or most of the session is a bit rude.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Jadeite wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)
I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.
So, in order to to stop magic from being better than skills you rely on ... magic.
If magic can negate magic and leave the skill useful, which is NOT negated by magic, why is that an invalid construction?
Because in 2 out of those 3 cases (anti, dead) you're going from, "The skillmonkey doesn't get to contribute," to "now the wizard doesn't get to contribute." I dunno about you but four hours of free time to sit down and play a game is HARD for my groups to get together. Being sidelined with nothing to do for part or most of the session is a bit rude.

But effects that negate things are part of the game,whether that be conditions, environment, special feats, resistances or immunities ... You want to remove all of those from the game, along with dispell magic, etcetera?

And the fact that in one encounter or part of one encounter your ability to use an invisibility spell, for example, is negated doesn't mean you suddenly have no participation unless you have an absurdly specialized character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Franke wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Climb, swim, disguise, get replaced very early by spells , a hat of disguise, or, well, a knotted rope. Acrobatics fades out as cmd rises faster than the skill.
Hey if your wizard wants to waste magic doing thing s a fighter or rogue does for free rather than being awesome and binding reality to his will...more power to you.

Waste magic? You mean by casting one level 4 spell that lasts longer than anyone can adventure at a stretch and is a cornerstone of typical wizardly defensive tactics?

Anyone can climb a knotted rope. Anyone can cross a non-flooding river with a guide rope. Most popular improved familiars fly and can drive a peg and tie a rope to it if the wizard doesn't like Overland Flight.

Yes...and none of your adventures last more than 7 hours?? You have a nice Gm. But you made my point. Anyone with the right skill can cross a river. Once you use that 4th level spell on overland flight(a good and useful spell I admit) you can't use that spell slot for anything else. Why waste a spell unnecessarily on mundane things.

Sure your wiz could cast invis and silence knock and arcane lock jump and spider climb then at the end of he day he can realize he just wasted half of his spells on things skills let other classes do for free.

Obviously I'm stretching things a bit but skills have their place in the game even if there are other ways of achieving the same things.

Funny thing. When the cleric and wizard actually manage to run out/get low on spells, the party stops. Why? Because good luck trying to do anything without your full casters from mid to high levels.

Shadow Lodge

RDM42 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Jadeite wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


The alter self roflcopters the disguise skill. Its a +10 or +20 compared to the +8 of the skill. (and possibly negating the species factors on top of that)
I can think of many MANY situations where a mundane disguise will be far better than a spell to disguise someone. Not the least of whice involve one of the following: anti-magic field, detect magic, dispel magic, dead magic zone.
So, in order to to stop magic from being better than skills you rely on ... magic.
If magic can negate magic and leave the skill useful, which is NOT negated by magic, why is that an invalid mconstruction?
Because in 2 out of those 3 cases (anti, dead) you're going from, "The skillmonkey doesn't get to contribute," to "now the wizard doesn't get to contribute." I dunno about you but four hours of free time to sit down and play a game is HARD for my groups to get together. Being sidelined with nothing to do for part or most of the session is a bit rude.

But effects that negate things are part of the game,whether that be conditions, environment, special feats, resistances or immunities ... You want to remove all of those from the game, along with dispell magic, etcetera?

And the fact that in one encounter or part of one encounter your ability to use an invisibility spell, for example, is negated doesn't mean you suddenly have no participation unless you have an absurdly specialized character.

To build a bit on what was said above by RD he is completely right in that having main or easy options like these being both taken into consideration and even negated during a game is both a natural part of the game and fleshing out the world your players interact with. I mean if all it took to rule the world was a small handful of spells from 4th level or lower you'd think that every Tom, Frodo, and Grug Firebreather would run the show but they don't. In reality these people live in a world where (if you're following the core assumption) charms and spider climb are as much of the social zeitgeist as the internet and handguns are now so everyone most likely has an opinion and a strategy on how to deal with them and the bigger you are (I.e. powerful individuals and governments) the better you are going to be at putting that s##* down.

For example, lets say your party wants to break into a baron's keep and rescue their fair maiden friend who was kidnapped after a diplomatic excursion to said barony. Now said baron lives in your stereotypical castle, big moat, big walls, guards, the whole 9 stuff that would be difficult to beat by mundane means but WITH MAGIC should be a breeze. But the thing is that

1. Said baron wasn't born yesterday and
2. Baron rules a barony and the town that exists around his keep to maintain it.

So with this in mind and the fact that he both wants to continue his villainy and doesn't want to spend a fortune redecorating he does what any good despot would do, he bans public use or access to said spells. Now this does not mean that his people don't have them, far from it but it does mean that it is illegal to just wander around with said spells on a scroll or popping off bardic suggestions in the street. So now you've got laws that the people live buy and the guards enforce and your party decides to come in through the front gates of town. First thing your guards do is search their s@~~ while asking them if they have any contraband items like those mentioned above. If they say yes the guards confiscate them, taking any scrolls you might have, removing any spell pages you've devoted to scratching down some good swim spells, and taking that nice spider climb ring you've been wearing. After that the party is given a tag that marks them as guests of the barony and most likely as mages or magic users and told that their items are to be safely held by customs until they leave at which time they can pick them up here. Now if your party decides to lie about what they are carrying customs still gives them the run through but now they are less nice about it. The mages come out and scan you from top to bottom while someone combs your spell book. Meanwhile the other officials check your paperwork &stories for any inconsistencies and when they find your stuff (and they will since everyone is relying on spells here more then skills) they confiscate your gear forcefully and drop you in the clink.

Now you could try something fancy like trying to skirt the gates or scaling those walls into the town proper but again you run into the same problem of being in town illegally with contraband and no allies here to stash it which will only exacerbate the problem if you get caught. This only gets worse if the aforementioned tag functions as ID here since we can all make the safe assumption that most places aren't going to let strangers from out of town crash in their inn if they also don't have said tag.

See,their is a very easy (and most likely common) way that those things are quickly negated in a large chunk of your game world through a very mundane means. On top of that the normal people are probably a fan of it too since it gives normal people more ability to complete for and maintain their jobs while allowing the casters who can use said spells legally to keep their prices up since they have less magical competition in the market.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Doc, I don't think anyone disagrees in theory, but the rules don't agree in practice. Given the NPC level tables by settlement type, a mid-level wizard can directly and singlehandedly conquer a barony by himself, so he doesn't care if magic is illegal or whatever, unless he's just being very polite and cooperative. Yes, the DM can counteract this by making 10th level wizards be gate guards and stuff, but that has its own problems in terms of setting verisimilitude.

In a system like Victory Games' James Bond 007, fire combat is absurdly lethal to everyone, no matter how skilled they are, so a bunch of mooks shooting at you is a big deal. In a quardatic-power-by-level system like PF, a bunch of mooks shooting at you or telling you what's illegal is not a big deal -- once at mid-level or above, you can usually ignore it unless you're in some bizarre planar location like Sigil.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

Doc, I don't think anyone disagrees in theory, but the rules don't agree in practice. Given the NPC level tables by settlement type, a mid-level wizard can directly and singlehandedly conquer a barony by himself, so he doesn't care if magic is illegal or whatever, unless he's just being very polite and cooperative. Yes, the DM can counteract this by making 10th level wizards be gate guards and stuff, but that has its own problems in terms of setting verisimilitude.

In a system like Victory Games' James Bond 007, fire combat is absurdly lethal to everyone, no matter how skilled they are, so a bunch of mooks shooting at you is a big deal. In a quardatic-power-by-level system like PF, a bunch of mooks shooting at you or telling you what's illegal is not a big deal -- once at mid-level or above, you can usually ignore it unless you're in some bizarre planar location like Sigil.

You see, a baron or the like I probably don't hold to normal wealth by level tables; he has access to the resources of his barony. If he's part of a power structure he also could have some access to resources from his liege. The tenth level wizard doesn't have to be the gate guard. He just has to have cast permanency and see invisible or detect magic on the actual gat guards.or on one guard at the gate. Or any number of similar things.

Liberty's Edge

Kirth Gersen wrote:
Doc, I don't think anyone disagrees in theory, but the rules don't agree in practice. Given the NPC level tables by settlement type, a mid-level wizard can directly and singlehandedly conquer a barony by himself, so he doesn't care if magic is illegal or whatever, unless he's just being very polite and cooperative. Yes, the DM can counteract this by making 10th level wizards be gate guards and stuff, but that has its own problems in terms of setting verisimilitude.

Huh? By the default setting assumptions, there's someone capable of casting 4th level spells in every town of 250 people. Maybe higher level if the town's particularly religious or has a magic academy.

A large town at 2-5k has 5th level spellcasting, and thus people equal to him in level.

So...yeah, a 10th level Wizard is higher level than anyone in a podunk village of less than 2k people...but only by a level or three. The people in power there are likely to be some of the highest level, too, and a captain of the guard + noble + court wizard + chaplain all 6th-8th level are not something a single 10th level character can waltz through like they're nothing.

So...I'm pretty skeptical of most towns not being able to do anything about most people who might mess with them. Now, if you're talking 15th level or something, yeah anything short of a major city (or very powerful isolated town) is screwed...but the setting assumptions don't support 10th level being an "I Win" button.

He can absolutely walk by the level 2 Wizard doing Detect Magic on all his stuff to see if it's illegal, and the poor fellow and his level 2 Warrior compatriots can do little to stop him...but unless he kills them all (which will get noticed pretty quick) they'll call the baron about this ridiculously powerful guy who won't obey the law...and then you wind up fighting the Baron, his guard captain, and all the other most powerful people in the village all at once. And that's not a good idea for most people. Action economy being brutal and all.

I actually did a whole thread on level demographics by population if you want to look at it.


One guy hiding in an overlooking tower with a sending spell can bollox the whole thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to repeat what I said on the previous page, and just elaborate a bit.

I hate the suggestion that to stop magic from becoming too powerful in your game you need to make it so that the world is permeated by magic, and that every major power has magical defenses. I think it's a terrible solution to the problem because I don't believe it makes the wizard less powerful in the setting.

Not because it won't make life harder for the wizard or any other spellcaster. It certainly will. It just also, if you follow it to the logical conclusion, makes life impossible for anyone without spells. At least the spellcaster, in a situation where he is going to be surrounded by 10 wizards has a chance to teleport away, turn invisible, or do something else to try and get away. The character with the stealth or escape artist skill maxed out probably can't do much. Diplomacy might work because it's a "win button" when you invest enough into it.

If your in a world where everyone significant uses spells to defend their important property, that doesn't make spells any less useful. It makes them necessary for success. What is a character without knock or dispel magic going to do against a good lock with Arcane lock on it already? Unless you seriously buff the skill, disable device just isn't going to do it. In the vast majority of cases, you need spells to deal with spells, and spellcasters to deal with spellcasters.

It's a general truth in Pathfinder that mundane effects like skills simply don't interact with magic.


Anzyr wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Climb, swim, disguise, get replaced very early by spells , a hat of disguise, or, well, a knotted rope. Acrobatics fades out as cmd rises faster than the skill.
Hey if your wizard wants to waste magic doing thing s a fighter or rogue does for free rather than being awesome and binding reality to his will...more power to you.

Waste magic? You mean by casting one level 4 spell that lasts longer than anyone can adventure at a stretch and is a cornerstone of typical wizardly defensive tactics?

Anyone can climb a knotted rope. Anyone can cross a non-flooding river with a guide rope. Most popular improved familiars fly and can drive a peg and tie a rope to it if the wizard doesn't like Overland Flight.

Yes...and none of your adventures last more than 7 hours?? You have a nice Gm. But you made my point. Anyone with the right skill can cross a river. Once you use that 4th level spell on overland flight(a good and useful spell I admit) you can't use that spell slot for anything else. Why waste a spell unnecessarily on mundane things.

Sure your wiz could cast invis and silence knock and arcane lock jump and spider climb then at the end of he day he can realize he just wasted half of his spells on things skills let other classes do for free.

Obviously I'm stretching things a bit but skills have their place in the game even if there are other ways of achieving the same things.

I can literally not think of a single published adventure that has a 7 hour adventure with no breaks. I'm sure there is one, but it is far and away the exception. Most "buff" spells will be cast just prior to entering the "Location serving as the adventure spot for today". And if it takes you 7 hours to get through Melkalik's Inner Sanctum, well I'm sorry for the upcoming TPK (but I'm really not).

Undermountain? Well, you could have breaks every 7 hours...but if you play that you can't refresh spells but everyday....you'll still have a problem with wandering monsters in some instances.

Same could/might go for the D1-G1 series and perhaps the Temple of Elemental Evil in the main Temple and perhaps Castle Greyhawk (at least some renditions of it).

Of course, most of those would have to be converted to PF.


GreyWolfLord wrote:


Undermountain? Well, you could have breaks every 7 hours...but if you play that you can't refresh spells but everyday....you'll still have a problem with wandering monsters in some instances.

Wandering monsters? Hmm, we could either play D&D or go rock out to Twisted Sister while we wait for the A-Team to come on. Do you want to play with the Rubik's Cube, or one of the Choose Your Own Adventure books?

Wandering monsters have generally fallen out of use as a design element of adventures, and for good reason. In 1st Ed., they were a nuisance that did damage without substantial monetary (or XP) reward, so you wanted to minimize them as much as possible. In Pathfinder, and indeed 3.0, monsters are the primary source of XP (instead of treasure), so simply camping and waiting for wandering orcs is a very good if uncinematic way to pick up cheap experience.

Shadow Lodge

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Doc, I don't think anyone disagrees in theory, but the rules don't agree in practice. Given the NPC level tables by settlement type, a mid-level wizard can directly and singlehandedly conquer a barony by himself, so he doesn't care if magic is illegal or whatever, unless he's just being very polite and cooperative. Yes, the DM can counteract this by making 10th level wizards be gate guards and stuff, but that has its own problems in terms of setting verisimilitude.

Huh? By the default setting assumptions, there's someone capable of casting 4th level spells in every town of 250 people. Maybe higher level if the town's particularly religious or has a magic academy.

A large town at 2-5k has 5th level spellcasting, and thus people equal to him in level.

So...yeah, a 10th level Wizard is higher level than anyone in a podunk village of less than 2k people...but only by a level or three. The people in power there are likely to be some of the highest level, too, and a captain of the guard + noble + court wizard + chaplain all 6th-8th level are not something a single 10th level character can waltz through like they're nothing.

So...I'm pretty skeptical of most towns not being able to do anything about most people who might mess with them. Now, if you're talking 15th level or something, yeah anything short of a major city (or very powerful isolated town) is screwed...but the setting assumptions don't support 10th level being an "I Win" button.

He can absolutely walk by the level 2 Wizard doing Detect Magic on all his stuff to see if it's illegal, and the poor fellow and his level 2 Warrior compatriots can do little to stop him...but unless he kills them all (which will get noticed pretty quick) they'll call the baron about this ridiculously powerful guy who won't obey the law...and then you wind up fighting the Baron, his guard captain, and all the other most powerful people in the village all at once. And that's not a good idea for most people. Action economy being...

This gets even more difficult when you start to look at the idea of customs checks taking a few hours or even days. I mean considering most dangerous spells or nondetection spells have last times of hours or sometimes even days all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before and deprive you of any spells you were hoping to skate by by casting them ahead of time and disguising them. Now I will say sorcerers might be a little more defended from this but that just gives you more fertile ground for role play for players and more ground for other GMs to figure out.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:


Undermountain? Well, you could have breaks every 7 hours...but if you play that you can't refresh spells but everyday....you'll still have a problem with wandering monsters in some instances.

Wandering monsters? Hmm, we could either play D&D or go rock out to Twisted Sister while we wait for the A-Team to come on. Do you want to play with the Rubik's Cube, or one of the Choose Your Own Adventure books?

Wandering monsters have generally fallen out of use as a design element of adventures, and for good reason. In 1st Ed., they were a nuisance that did damage without substantial monetary (or XP) reward, so you wanted to minimize them as much as possible. In Pathfinder, and indeed 3.0, monsters are the primary source of XP (instead of treasure), so simply camping and waiting for wandering orcs is a very good if uncinematic way to pick up cheap experience.

Some of the PF adventures still have them...for example

Spoiler:

I believe the City of Golden Death actually has a wandering monster table


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Any GM of sufficient imagination and skill can make any allegedly worthless aspect of a character indispensable.

Shadow Lodge

Ellis Mirari wrote:
Any GM of sufficient imagination and skill can make any allegedly worthless aspect of a character indispensable.

Yes but again I echo my other sentiment, that focused investment on skills does petter out in value as you level up giving diminished returns. Now for most classes this is not a problem and in fact for many classes that are skill point light this is actually a boon since it allows them to catch up with other classes as they level. But to round back this can cause big problems for certain builds that do like rogue builds focusing primarily around skills. That I think is what most people get upset about that one of the primary draws of the rogue kind of loses its luster pretty quickly and you end up having not much to fall back on.


And there are still many GM's and players who think the 4 hour adventuring day is kind of silly and like to challenge themselves with an adventure that doesn't allow the characters to rest wherever and whenever they want and requires them to think and use their abilities wisely instead of always being at full power.


GreyWolfLord wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Climb, swim, disguise, get replaced very early by spells , a hat of disguise, or, well, a knotted rope. Acrobatics fades out as cmd rises faster than the skill.
Hey if your wizard wants to waste magic doing thing s a fighter or rogue does for free rather than being awesome and binding reality to his will...more power to you.

Waste magic? You mean by casting one level 4 spell that lasts longer than anyone can adventure at a stretch and is a cornerstone of typical wizardly defensive tactics?

Anyone can climb a knotted rope. Anyone can cross a non-flooding river with a guide rope. Most popular improved familiars fly and can drive a peg and tie a rope to it if the wizard doesn't like Overland Flight.

Yes...and none of your adventures last more than 7 hours?? You have a nice Gm. But you made my point. Anyone with the right skill can cross a river. Once you use that 4th level spell on overland flight(a good and useful spell I admit) you can't use that spell slot for anything else. Why waste a spell unnecessarily on mundane things.

Sure your wiz could cast invis and silence knock and arcane lock jump and spider climb then at the end of he day he can realize he just wasted half of his spells on things skills let other classes do for free.

Obviously I'm stretching things a bit but skills have their place in the game even if there are other ways of achieving the same things.

I can literally not think of a single published adventure that has a 7 hour adventure with no breaks. I'm sure there is one, but it is far and away the exception. Most "buff" spells will be cast just prior to entering the "Location serving as the adventure spot for today". And if it takes you 7 hours to get through Melkalik's Inner Sanctum, well I'm sorry for the upcoming TPK (but I'm really not).

Undermountain? Well, you could have breaks every 7 hours...but if you play that you can't refresh spells but everyday....you'll still have a problem with wandering monsters in some instances.

Same could/might go for the D1-G1 series and perhaps the Temple of Elemental Evil in the main Temple and perhaps Castle Greyhawk (at least some renditions of it).

Of course, most of those would have to be converted to PF.

Wandering monsters attacking your camp don't change anything. You cast Overland Flight for your active adventuring for safety. You encountered all those possible acrobatics, climb, and swim checks that you bypassed with flight and rope during your active adventuring. You camp and you've used the fourth level slot(s), but you would have used it/them whether or not it allowed you to bypass skill checks because Overland Flight is one of your primary long term defensive buffs.


The concept of randomly generated "wandering monsters" has pretty well gone out of use. However most adventures include descriptions of monster/enemy daily routines which will give one an idea of when something or someone might be patrolling the area the pcs are trying to camp in.
When Im running a campaign and the party elects to camp in hostile territory (inside the dungeon per se), you better believe I have a good idea of what will be actively hunting or patrolling in that area and how often it might come by the camp site. Not so much "wandering monsters" as "hunting or patrolling monsters".

On the magic vs skills debate in theory magic trumps skills in flash (bonuses and the ability to avoid situations that result in skill checks) but a skilled character is much harder to counter. Many defensive tactics and spells can effectively neuter a caster-scout while a skilled on will be only inconvenienced. And yes being invisible gives you a +20 Circumstance bonus to stealth but a number of simple tactics can easily negate that. Including just walking around doing whatever you like, the gm is well within their rights to assign circumstance bonuses to detection rolls if an invisible mage is blithely walking around in enemy territory.

Others have mention some common anti magic defenses but nobodies mention that a number of effects can be tied to Unhallow including dispel magic/invisibility purge targeted towards any number of triggers determined when cast. eg: "anytime someone who doesn't serve Vlarrbog, God of Unpleasantness enters this area target them with a dispel magic at my caster level."


doc the grey wrote:
[very, very elaborate scenario]

That is a thoughtful and well fleshed out world, and it has many legitimate reasons for its procedures (many based off of real life customs). It would need a bureaucracy that most medieval settings might be hard pressed to put in place...but hey, Cheliax literally worships the universe's most evil bureaucrats, and they had control of a lot of land before they lost control of it. So it would not really be that hard to find a place, even as a Lawful Good nation, that would have such strict controls since they could have been ingrained into their culture for a long time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
doc the grey wrote:
all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before

Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting this s@&~?


I've found skills to be indispensable at low levels and still quite relevant in the middle levels. Better yet, the skill monkey and the pseudo-skill caster work together to be better than either would be alone. As for flight being a cure-all, well, it ain't--fly is short-lived, overland flight is personal only, and magic items that grant continuous flight are a pretty heavy investment of wealth that I'd often rather spend on something more appropriate to the specific character or situation.

At high levels, it does get trickier; some skills become less useful as PCs get wealthier, high level magic becomes available,and lower level spell slots become more numerous. Some skills simply aren't going to be that useful except in areas where magic is made irrelevant. So most of the time, magic will suffice, but occasionally there will be situations where the skill monkey gets to shine, such as when the party gets captured, stripped, bound, gagged, and locked in separate cells hanging over a pit and the party rogue/bard/whatever saves them all with a series of ridiculous skill checks. The GM can have a lot of fun designing such situations.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mike Franke wrote:
And there are still many GM's and players who think the 4 hour adventuring day is kind of silly and like to challenge themselves with an adventure that doesn't allow the characters to rest wherever and whenever they want and requires them to think and use their abilities wisely instead of always being at full power.

Like many good stories, the narrative action in an RPG often works well when alternating long and short periods of activity. Sometimes the PCs have to carefully husband their resources as resting overnight is just not an option. Other times it's an 18-second adventuring day and the PCs can expect to supernova. Both extremes, and everything in between, have their place in a campaign, and different points on the scale make different builds shine.


NOte that sometimes magic is not the best option.

For example stealth. Invisibility is less useful when the mosnter start having see invisibility and true sight.

The same for disguise, a simple detect magic could ruin the spellcaster day.

Shadow Lodge

Pupsocket wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before
Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting this s+~~?

Lol why not? Your party gets a rest and the government does its due diligence. Hell they might have a nice little industry of "sanctioned houses right near the gates just for this. Hell it could be a great way for your party to start prepping for getting into said keep, chatting up guards, making contacts with others staying their, maybe even retrieving contraband they had the forethought to have the local thieves guild smuggle in before their arrival. The whole thing can be a great opportunity for role play with a clever party (and let's be fair, if your party was already planning out their assault with magic beforehand I hope they are clever) and maybe even walk out better than they would have just trying to fight their way in. Now if your party either doesn't like the wait, handles all that on their first day, or is generally opposed to fun or cleverness you can always have a time lapse, hit that final check, and be about their business.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mike Franke wrote:
And there are still many GM's and players who think the 4 hour adventuring day is kind of silly and like to challenge themselves with an adventure that doesn't allow the characters to rest wherever and whenever they want and requires them to think and use their abilities wisely instead of always being at full power.

There's a sensible middle ground between the five-minute adventuring day and the 24 hour adventuring day.

In particular, if you're actually doing something specific, as most adventures involve, you're unlikely to have more than four hours of encounters. If I'm going to storm the Tower of Eternal Peril and slay the mysterious Shadow Wraith that inhabits it, it will probably not take more than two or three hours, tops, from the time I cross the moat to the time I'm counting the loot.

Some quick back of the envelope math: a typical fight is a minute or less. Moving from room to room in a normal-sized tower is also typically a minute or less -- the time it takes to open the door and step in -- but we'll assume I spend a lot of time searching, so it takes me three minutes between encounters.

Neuschwanstein Castle, in Bavaria, is one of the largest and most garish examples of neo-gingerbread fairy tale architecture, has only about 90 rooms. That's 270 minutes, four hours and change, to wander through every room in the castle and kill anything that moves.

Of course, normally no adventure would involve nearly that complex a castle to explore. In the real world, Harlech Castle has about thirty rooms. The Pale Tower in the Reign of Winter adventure path has something like twenty-five rooms and a dozen encounters, which is still (by guidelines) enough to level up.

A party could and should be able to do the Pale Tower, without resting, in three hours of Golarion time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
doc the grey wrote:
Pupsocket wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before
Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting this s+~~?
Lol why not? Your party gets a rest and the government does its due diligence.

That would destroy trade for the government.

It basically takes verisimilitude, turns it over its knee, spanks it until it's bottom turns blue, steals its lunch money, and blackens its eye for good measure.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Pupsocket wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before
Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting this s+~~?
Lol why not? Your party gets a rest and the government does its due diligence.

That would destroy trade for the government.

It basically takes verisimilitude, turns it over its knee, spanks it until it's bottom turns blue, steals its lunch money, and blackens its eye for good measure.

I don't know. I like the idea that Level 1 and 2 spells would require governing powers to try and turn their (mostly agricultural) lands into Orwellian police states to maintain a moderate level of safety.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Except this isn't even Orwellian police state. This goes all the way to dysfunctional.

Any reasonably large town is going to need a constant influx of food and other perishables. The local milkman comes in and they hold him and his goods for forty-eight hours? Who's going to drink the milk after this?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's partly an era issue. I believe we're running into a "gotcha" to where we're expecting more well-rounded classes and characters. This newer expectation runs heads-on versus the old system, where 2 skill points per level was, previously, fairly acceptable because it wasn't a fighter's role. ...likewise, your rogue wasn't a nerfwhingyterribadawful (according to the forums), because they had their own role.

In the new and more generalized style, the class with 2 skill points per level has no place. The fighter as a /concept/ has even less place, because, going with the idea of "everyone has a way to contribute, just differently," every class should have a combat advantage and capability--just a different one.

Likewise, under the new style which has been emerging, the rogue as its concept exists has no place.

The inquisitor, witch, and similar classes personify this new style and new era. They're flexible in a multitude of areas. I imagine were Paizo able to rewrite the core classes, many of them would take on more robust, "new style" flavors.

This is in addition to points other posters have made. It is fairly easy to get a skill boost. When it comes down to it, a skill is just a number, which makes the idea that 15 ranks equals an epic level of discipline harder to swallow.

If we wanted skills to have a greater impact, they would need to be more robust, and bonuses to skill rolls would need to be more limited and controlled.

Finally, we would also need to re-adjust older classes, to bring them to the design preference of the newer era.

Liberty's Edge

Orfamay Quest wrote:

Except this isn't even Orwellian police state. This goes all the way to dysfunctional.

Any reasonably large town is going to need a constant influx of food and other perishables. The local milkman comes in and they hold him and his goods for forty-eight hours? Who's going to drink the milk after this?

I think the thought process was more at the borders of countries. And doing so could be done on a selective basis (ie: Detect Magic first to see if there's any on them, and a quick physical search for spell-books, and only those carrying magic of some sort are detained, and that'll let the vast majority of people through with minimal inconvenience right there).

That said, it still seems a bit excessive. It's easier and simpler to invest in magical defenses of various sorts, and in hiring magical detectives/bounty hunters (not all of whom need actual magic...though there probably needs to be a guy) to hunt down those who use forbidden magics. That second one is a great story-hook for almost any PC group one way or another, too.

Shadow Lodge

Orfamay Quest wrote:


Of course, normally no adventure would involve nearly that complex a castle to explore. In the real world, Harlech Castle has about thirty rooms. The Pale Tower in the Reign of Winter adventure path has something like twenty-five rooms and a dozen encounters, which is still (by guidelines) enough to level up.

You wanna be very careful with absolutes, dude.

Castle Greyhawk
Castle Blackmoor
Undermountain
Rappan Athuk
Castle Whiterock
Dragon's Delve
Purple Mountain
Castle of the Mad Archmage
Stonehell Dungeon

Megadungeons are a time-honored part of the game.


Ruggs wrote:

It's partly an era issue. I believe we're running into a "gotcha" to where we're expecting more well-rounded classes and characters. This newer expectation runs heads-on versus the old system, where 2 skill points per level was, previously, fairly acceptable because it wasn't a fighter's role. ...likewise, your rogue wasn't a nerfwhingyterribadawful (according to the forums), because they had their own role.

In the new and more generalized style, the class with 2 skill points per level has no place. The fighter as a /concept/ has even less place, because, going with the idea of "everyone has a way to contribute, just differently," every class should have a combat advantage and capability--just a different one.

Likewise, under the new style which has been emerging, the rogue as its concept exists has no place.

The inquisitor, witch, and similar classes personify this new style and new era. They're flexible in a multitude of areas. I imagine were Paizo able to rewrite the core classes, many of them would take on more robust, "new style" flavors.

This is in addition to points other posters have made. It is fairly easy to get a skill boost. When it comes down to it, a skill is just a number, which makes the idea that 15 ranks equals an epic level of discipline harder to swallow.

If we wanted skills to have a greater impact, they would need to be more robust, and bonuses to skill rolls would need to be more limited and controlled.

Finally, we would also need to re-adjust older classes, to bring them to the design preference of the newer era.

I wish I could favorite this post more than once - I really think you've nailed the main issue with the largely unchanged rogues and fighters compared to more contemporary classes.


Kthulhu wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:


Of course, normally no adventure would involve nearly that complex a castle to explore. In the real world, Harlech Castle has about thirty rooms. The Pale Tower in the Reign of Winter adventure path has something like twenty-five rooms and a dozen encounters, which is still (by guidelines) enough to level up.
You wanna be very careful with absolutes, dude.

I stand by what I wrote. If you consider those to be "normal,"... well....


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Pupsocket wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
all they need is to put visitors up in a holding in for a few days after initial searches and they are now more likely to catch anything they missed before
Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting this s+~~?
Lol why not? Your party gets a rest and the government does its due diligence.

That would destroy trade for the government.

It basically takes verisimilitude, turns it over its knee, spanks it until it's bottom turns blue, steals its lunch money, and blackens its eye for good measure.

I don't know. I like the idea that Level 1 and 2 spells would require governing powers to try and turn their (mostly agricultural) lands into Orwellian police states to maintain a moderate level of safety.

Well generally, if you are basing your setting off of medieval Europe, then my understanding is that people need special leave to move from place to place. I am basing this off of half remembered history from a theater class though... so grain of salt.

Still, it would not be completely unreasonable to require merchants to have certification and basic checks. This would allow them relatively easy entrance (and it would provide an opportunity for the PCs to sneak in, possibly disguised as hired help). But everyone else? Well, the accommodations did sound rather reasonable...

Although, thinking about it, with just a basic detect magic pat down, you would absolutely be getting the TSA glove treatment. I mean, your average mid level PC (and this is the benchmark where people argue that skills become 'useless', right?) have a dozen magical items on their person, boosting stats and other such numbers. And those give off at least a faint aura, so it would be hard to hide completely during a basic search The average peasant though? 0 magical items are on them. So you are raising red flags right there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:

Except this isn't even Orwellian police state. This goes all the way to dysfunctional.

Any reasonably large town is going to need a constant influx of food and other perishables. The local milkman comes in and they hold him and his goods for forty-eight hours? Who's going to drink the milk after this?

I think the thought process was more at the borders of countries.

Well, here's where the idea of this kind of scan was suggested:

Deadmanwalking wrote:


A large town at 2-5k has 5th level spellcasting, and thus people equal to him in level.

...

So...I'm pretty skeptical of most towns not being able to do anything about most people who might mess with them.

He can absolutely walk by the level 2 Wizard doing Detect Magic on all his stuff to see if it's illegal, and the poor fellow and his level 2 Warrior compatriots can do little to stop him...but unless he kills them all (which will get noticed pretty quick) they'll call the baron about this ridiculously powerful guy who won't obey the law...and then you wind up fighting the Baron, his guard captain, and all the other most powerful people in the village all at once. And that's not a good idea for most people.

If you really think that a town is going to be able to impose this level of security without destroying the local economy, think again. Securing a country is another issue, of course; while it's possible that customs checks could be as obnoxious as they like, that will greatly cut into international trade,.... and, frankly, just make smuggling that much more popular and prevalent, as there's no way to secure every meter of the border with a detect magic spell. (Not to mention the possibility of simply using teleport, flight, or other transportation magic to get past the guards.)

I suppose an isolated island kingdom might be able to pull something like this off, but it would be difficult. For an ordinary land border, it would be next door to impossible.


lemeres wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
I don't know. I like the idea that Level 1 and 2 spells would require governing powers to try and turn their (mostly agricultural) lands into Orwellian police states to maintain a moderate level of safety.
Well generally, if you are basing your setting off of medieval Europe, then my understanding is that people need special leave to move from place to place. I am basing this off of half remembered history from a theater class though... so grain of salt.

You're probably thinking of serfs, which aren't the standard for all peasants of late medieval or early renaissance Europe. Certainly central and eastern Europe, Russia being the most obvious example of a nation practicing serfdom long past Western Europe. Most peasants would be tied to their land less due to laws and more out of economic means and the need for protection.

Also keep in mind that for much of medieval history towns and the land around them operated under different laws, partly because nobility had such trouble actually enforcing their laws inside the cities. I find it hard to imagine that nobles who couldn't enforce their laws inside cities would be able to enforce TSA stops on their borders. Less perhaps out of desire, and more due to lack of finances to afford those services, and the lack of a centralized bureaucracy to keep those checks perform in a uniform way.


Yeah, it's not that they weren't 'allowed' to travel, but that traveling was dangerous, expensive, and for the average peasant completely unproductive.


Slightly tangential, 101 New Skill Uses by Rite Publishing has gotten a rave review by Endzeitgeist and has been cited to help make skills more interesting, useful and relevant. Together with Rogue Glory it is one of the oft suggested rogue fix products.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
I don't know. I like the idea that Level 1 and 2 spells would require governing powers to try and turn their (mostly agricultural) lands into Orwellian police states to maintain a moderate level of safety.
Well generally, if you are basing your setting off of medieval Europe, then my understanding is that people need special leave to move from place to place. I am basing this off of half remembered history from a theater class though... so grain of salt.
You're probably thinking of serfs, which aren't the standard for all peasants of late medieval or early renaissance Europe. Certainly central and eastern Europe, Russia being the most obvious example of a nation practicing serfdom long past Western Europe. Most peasants would be tied to their land less due to laws and more out of economic means and the need for protection.

Of course, the flip side of that is that even if 90% of the population is tied to the land and needs special passes, the remaining 10% is even more crucial for the economy precisely because that's the only way news and needed goods can travel. If you're going by the settlement rules that suggest that every village of a few hundred souls still has a potion maker, that means that most people who are able and willing to travel, such as the wealthy merchants that you so desperately need to provide silks and spices for His Lordship's manor, will also have a few magic items and spellcasters of their own.

Make it too difficult for the merchant to sell you his silks and spices and he simply won't offer them to you.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
I don't know. I like the idea that Level 1 and 2 spells would require governing powers to try and turn their (mostly agricultural) lands into Orwellian police states to maintain a moderate level of safety.
Well generally, if you are basing your setting off of medieval Europe, then my understanding is that people need special leave to move from place to place. I am basing this off of half remembered history from a theater class though... so grain of salt.

You're probably thinking of serfs, which aren't the standard for all peasants of late medieval or early renaissance Europe. Certainly central and eastern Europe, Russia being the most obvious example of a nation practicing serfdom long past Western Europe. Most peasants would be tied to their land less due to laws and more out of economic means and the need for protection.

Also keep in mind that for much of medieval history towns and the land around them operated under different laws, partly because nobility had such trouble actually enforcing their laws inside the cities. I find it hard to imagine that nobles who couldn't enforce their laws inside cities would be able to enforce TSA stops on their borders.

How would it be hard? Assuming that there were basic city walls, it would be easy enough just to post a bored wizard apprentice to cast detect magic one everyone going through the gate. Once he gets a ping, he tells the guards, and they stop the people from going through the gates before so and so procedures are taken. It is a lot easier than tracking down a vague description of a thief that was "this guy with black hair dressed in rags" in a city of hundreds to thousands.

And even without that very basic screening, would you let your typical adventuring party through the gate? A man covered in armor and wielding a sword as big as he is? A man with a bow, dozens of arrows, and a wolf the size of a horse? And none of them traveling as part of a trade caravan or special political delegation?

And now I remember the thing about actors. Quoting wikipedia (I know, sources, sources, but it still gives references on the site, and it is still relevant)

from Playing Companies wrote:
The prevailing legal system in England[12] defined "masterless men" who travelled about the country as vagabonds, and subjected them to treatments of varying harshness. Local authorities tended to be more hostile than welcoming toward players; the Corporation of London, from the Lord Mayor and aldermen down, was famously hostile to acting troupes, as were the Puritans. Noble patronage was, at the very least, the legal fig leaf that allowed professional players to function in society.

This is how the England's legal system treated people if silly clothes (admittedly, there was a weird religious thing involved). How would random mercenaries covered in dangerous magical items get treated? Wouldn't basic disguise checks and bluff checks be useful for smoothing things over?


lemeres wrote:


How would it be hard? Assuming that there were basic city walls, it would be easy enough just to post a bored wizard apprentice to cast detect magic one everyone going through the gate.

Well, let's think about that. First, detect magic takes six seconds just to tell you someone walking through the gate is magical; it takes a lot longer than that to tell you anything useful (like which person it was). Second, bored apprentices are notoriously succeptible to being bribed, intimidated, fast-talked, or simply making mistakes. Third, any wealthy merchant is going to have at least one 25gp potion.

Historically, enforcing laws in the city was a real problem precisely because you can't control everyone going in and out. Magic won't change that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
lemeres wrote:


How would it be hard? Assuming that there were basic city walls, it would be easy enough just to post a bored wizard apprentice to cast detect magic one everyone going through the gate.

Well, let's think about that. First, detect magic takes six seconds just to tell you someone walking through the gate is magical; it takes a lot longer than that to tell you anything useful (like which person it was). Second, bored apprentices are notoriously succeptible to being bribed, intimidated, fast-talked, or simply making mistakes. Third, any wealthy merchant is going to have at least one 25gp potion.

Historically, enforcing laws in the city was a real problem precisely because you can't control everyone going in and out. Magic won't change that.

Bribing, intimidating, and fast talking all sound like diplomacy, intimidate, and bluff to me...

I wouldn't say the time thing is a problem for detect magic. A couple minutes of questioning by a guard should at least tell you if there is a ping worthy of further searching. And one of those questions might be "do you have anything to declare? Such as any items of a magical nature?" If they do, it goes in a box for further inspection (another bored apprentice) while they scan just to see if there are any more pings.

101 to 150 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / People Calling Skills Useless? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.