|
The larger point of my post was that as a martial Captain America is better then anyone we've every met in real life. He can out fight our best martial artists. However, he doesn't hold a candle to someone like Ruby from RWBY. Neither of those characters relies on magic (though both rely on particular weapon), but on combat prowess. But Captain America simply isn't able to do the kinds of things Ruby is capable of.
And in the same vein, Ruby isn't capable of the kind of things Cu Cuchulain is capable of. I attribute this to the differences in their levels. Which creates a continuum as follows:
Cu Cuchulain is higher leveled then;
Ruby who is higher leveled then;
Captain America who is higher leveled then;
World's Best Possible Martial Artist.The levels don't have 17-19, 10-12, 8 and 6 like I personally subscribe to. But the levels should fall into a similar continuum.
I mostly agree with your hierarchy, though I'd add that Cu Cuchulain is pretty clearly Mythic as well...and that the distinction is relevant.
And, come to think of it, I'm not sure Ruby is any more badass than Captain America (at least as he's portrayed in the movies), she's stylistically different, but I'm not sure if she's any more effective or does much of anything he can't duplicate at least the power level of.
I'd probably slot most action movie heroes in above real-world humans between them and superhero-types, too.
So my chart would flow something like this (and note that these are minimum necessary levels...you can make a lot of 'em higher if you want):
16+: Ridiculous movie superheroes or legendary heroes...many in this category would also be Mythic (the movie version of Thor or Superman, Cu Cuchulain, Hercules, Vash the Stampede, Alucard from Hellsing)
12-15: Default movie superheroes and similarly powered people (the movie version of Captain America is probably here to be honest, Ruby and the rest of the cast of RWBY, Spider Man, Iron Man, most characters in Gungrave or Hellsing)
10-11: 'High octane' action movie heroes, many mid-powered anime characters, or pretty low-level supers (the protagonists of John Woo movies, The Bride in Kill Bill, most Jedi Knights in Star Wars movies, Nicholas D. Wolfwood from Trigun, Ruroni Kenshin when he gets going, the movie version of Batman, River Tam from Serenity)
8-9: 'Low key' action movie (or TV show) heroes (John McClane in later Die Hard movies, most Bruce Lee characters, James Bond, the main characters in 300, Agent May in Agents of SHIELD, the protagonist of Arrow, Marv from Sin City, Indiana Jones)
6-7: Peak human ability. Scariest people around in 'realistic' shows ala Game of Thrones (The Mountain would be this level, as would Jaime Lannister and Loras Tyrell, or to go real-world Miyamato Musashi, Simo Häyhä, or Audie Murphy)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it would be helpful if the game actually told you, "the best-trained human person on Earth would be level X, and anything beyond that is superhuman beyond what any real person in Earth's history has attained."
Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that. Unfortunately, that same game also says that 0 level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, when it comes to magic -- with or without mythic -- but that gets ignored "because magic."
I tend towards the same viewpoint, but it's also important that the game cater to other viewpoints. There's no reason why it can't do both, by providing alternatives and delineating them somehow (which is easily done via both the {Su} tag and Mythic rules), and similarly there's no reason why (if you decide you want to allow it) the PC Fighter can't have a storyline justification for being different to every NPC fighter in the world in the same way a Mythic character can. A {Su} justification can be done very similarly to gaining Mythic power.While I know it's the unpopular opinion, and according to this thread, I'm apparently everything wrong with Pathfinder...
I don't really like my fighters with Supernatural abilities. I do like cool, Charles Atlas-styled Extraordinary abilities and love seeing cool maneuvers for martials. Something like Kirth's Tactical Acumen would be cool (except maybe less totally shutting down illuisions, but perhaps depending on a Perception roll to bypass it), flavorful, and not really all that magic. But, I think when we start getting into the realm of demigod-like powers of myth (or to keep it modern, fighting in some anime), I tend to shy away from that. Demolishing mountains, slicing the air to attack people from afar... it doesn't really do it for me. Unless it's Mythic. The genre of Mythic allows me to accept Supernatural and spell-like abilities since it reminds me of Exalted or Nobilus. Mini-gods and legends doing god-like things. I guess that has always been my preference. It doesn't mean that I hate martials or don't want them to have nice things.
Don't really have a problem with doing both, except that I feel by having the clearly superior option to do Supernatural things, it'll fuel this mindset that anyone that doesn't take or use those abilities is somehow "playing the game wrong". It'd be akin to playing a two-handed fighter without grabbing Power Attack. And we already have enough of that on these forums. Hell, even this topic, there's people already doing that.
Personally, though, I don't give in to that pressure, so I'm okay with having the option for both. I am always in favor of more options of anything to cater to different types, from Asian weapons to psionics to guns to futuristic tech. But I get tired of people assuming that I hate martials because I simply prefer a different type of fighter. I had hoped that the topic being done by one of the ex-developers would have a more reasonable dialogue about this topic. But after reading the first five pages, it's clear that because I don't want to play a fighter that has supernatural abilities, I hate fighters and am the cancer that's killing martials. So why bother explaining a different point of view when nobody wants to consider it?
I think the best way to reign in casters is to take the route of the 3.5 Base Classes like the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer (Not the War Mage though... ugh...) and make it so spell casters aren't combination Abjurers/Conjurers/Diviners/Enchanters/Evokers/Necromancers/Illusionists/Tr ansmuters. Wizard in particular is guilty of this.I... really don't want to see most of the narrative power leave magic to be honest.
There are some things I'd like to see toned down here or there I suppose (and I agree that Magic should replace skills [as opposed to compliment them] as close to never as possible) but in general I'm fairly ok with the level of narrative power casters have. In fact, one additional point of narrative power I'd add to them is dramatically ramping up the environmental devastation available to Evocation (Meteor Storm ought to be a Town Buster at least, possibly a City Buster)
That being said, non-casters need FAR more narrative power than they currently have, and it should come in the form of being able to DO awesome s!$+, and not having many if any limitations on said awesome s*%#. Let people restore huge chunks of HP and raise the recent dead with the heal skill, use a cross-section of BAB and skill ranks to determine how fast/far one can move (in all movement modes, including Jump and digging), use a cross-section of BAB and Strength to enable high level martials immense feats of physical strength like instantly redirecting rivers or slashing holes in geography.
By level 20 characters have outgrown the material plane and have the potential to thrash it. See Superman, he has to actively hold back lest he shred the place while fighting in it. This is why many of the high level adventures are either politically oriented or set in supernatural planes.
I'd like to take this idea, but simply keep it within one class. So, you can be a wizard and choose a school, but choosing a school makes you much more limited in the type of spells you can cast. Like, moreso than it does now. Remove the concept of opposite schools and simply make all spells that aren't your school your opposite school. Or something like that.
Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that. Unfortunately, that same game also says that 0 level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, when it comes to magic -- with or without mythic -- but that gets ignored "because magic."
This, plus you can also drag out pretty much any game rule and use it to justify that normal human limitations are X, only to find out that if you use a different rule they're closer to Y.
I'd much rather have a narrative justification for it. "At level 10 characters are smiled upon by whatever innate power is present in the universe and transcend the normal limitations for a mortal member of their race." - but again, that's pretty much the very definition of Mythic...
I... really don't want to see most of the narrative power leave magic to be honest.
There are some things I'd like to see toned down here or there I suppose (and I agree that Magic should replace skills [as opposed to compliment them] as close to never as possible) but in general I'm fairly ok with the level of narrative power casters have. In fact, one additional point of narrative power I'd add to them is dramatically ramping up the environmental devastation available to Evocation (Meteor Storm ought to be a Town Buster at least, possibly a City Buster)
I am not convinced that the portion of dms that like control over their game would ever except the required narrative power to be placed in the hands of martial characters by non-magical means. I'm honestly not opposed to what high level magic can do, but I do think it brings complications to the game. Its that narrative power that makes the wizard 'quadratic'.
I think the answer is giving dms and players the ability to dial up and down the narrative power. Want to play lord of the rings/game of thrones? Sure use these classes and these rules. Want to play Justice league fantasy style? Use these classes and these rules. Want to mix them? Sure, go for it, just know and understand that you are putting Hawkeye without the cool gadgets on the same team as superman.
That being said, non-casters need FAR more narrative power than they currently have, and it should come in the form of being able to DO awesome s*&@, and not having many if any limitations on said awesome s~%#. Let people restore huge chunks of HP and raise the recent dead with the heal skill, use a cross-section of BAB and skill ranks to determine how fast/far one can move (in all movement modes, including Jump and digging), use a cross-section of BAB and Strength to enable high level martials immense feats of physical strength like instantly redirecting rivers or slashing holes in geography.
Agreed. I really think being able to hit hard, and skills (bab and skill points) are not given the weight they ought to have. Mostly because the game doesnt identify the disparity and address it. I think you effectively need 2 games. One where magics narrative power is dialed down heavily, and leave martial characters as they are. And another where you significantly ramp up the narrative power that comes out of high base attack bonuses, and skill points. Especially the physical and social skills. Just got a 40 diplomacy? Turns out that guard at his post just fell in love with you with a wink, or you've put together a far reaching information gathering network that lets you find stuff out all around the region. That 45 acrobatics? Well that jump was actually a swift action, so you can full attack at the top of your jump if you want. Go for it.
But you cant put that sort of stuff in the lord of the rings game some people want to play, where walking through the woods is a key part of the adventure even among the worlds mightiest heroes.
By level 20 characters have outgrown the material plane and have the potential to thrash it. See Superman, he has to actively hold back lest he shred the place while fighting in it. This is why many of the high level adventures are either politically oriented or set in supernatural planes.
Adventure design is also going to come into play. Its one of the bigger issues in the grand scheme of things, where people dont understand that when you go to like 12th level your playing a completely different game then you were at level 4. So you need to tell a different kind of story.
Ofcourse if you cut into the narrative power of magic, you can keep telling that same kind of story, just with slightly more badass opponents.
I think the best way to reign in casters is to take the route of the 3.5 Base Classes like the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer (Not the War Mage though... ugh...) and make it so spell casters aren't combination Abjurers/Conjurers/Diviners/Enchanters/Evokers/Necromancers/Illusionists/Tr ansmuters. Wizard in particular is guilty of this.I... really don't want to see most of the narrative power leave magic to be honest.
There are some things I'd like to see toned down here or there I suppose (and I agree that Magic should replace skills [as opposed to compliment them] as close to never as possible) but in general I'm fairly ok with the level of narrative power casters have. In fact, one additional point of narrative power I'd add to them is dramatically ramping up the environmental devastation available to Evocation (Meteor Storm ought to be a Town Buster at least, possibly a City Buster)
That being said, non-casters need FAR more narrative power than they currently have, and it should come in the form of being able to DO awesome s!$+, and not having many if any limitations on said awesome s*%#.....
By level 20 characters have outgrown the material plane and have the potential to thrash it. See Superman, he has to actively hold back lest he shred the place while fighting in it. This is why many of the high level adventures are either politically oriented or set in supernatural planes.
You're going to want to brace yourself. There's a fair population on these boards who would throw a FIT at the idea of limiting the Wizard's conceptual potential.
Naturally, the Wizard class can conceivably be reigned in to a certain extent by weaknesses from older editions (fewer spells per day, easy spell interruption, difficult spell acquisition, sluggish spell preparation) but with the sole exception of the spell interruption, these are mostly things that are considered 'fun killers' (and even spell interruption is likely to have a pretty vocal base of...
Ya that it is possible that some people might not like it, but in my opinion its the best way to limit casters power without relying on excessive spell nerfs or the "fun killers".
@ Odraude: I would probably break it up into things like Beguiler and Dread Necromancer. It's a little more manageable that way and I think would allow for each to have flavorful classes abilities that synergize with their brand of magic. Definitely that and not that I would want to "pad" my class roster as it were. I'm sure a single classed version with something like the school powers could work though.
Don't really have a problem with doing both, except that I feel by having the clearly superior option to do Supernatural things, it'll fuel this mindset that anyone that doesn't take or use those abilities is somehow "playing the game wrong". It'd be akin to playing a two-handed fighter without grabbing Power Attack. And we already have enough of that on these forums. Hell, even this topic, there's people already doing that.Personally, though, I don't give in to that pressure, so I'm okay with having the option for both. I am always in favor of more options of anything to cater to different types, from Asian weapons to psionics to guns to futuristic tech. But I get tired of people assuming that I hate martials because I simply prefer a different type of fighter. I had hoped that the topic being done by one of the ex-developers would have a more reasonable dialogue about this topic. But after reading the first five pages, it's clear that because I don't want to play a fighter that has supernatural abilities, I hate fighters and am the cancer that's killing martials. So why bother explaining a different point of view when nobody wants to consider it?
I'm trying to look at that as people just not wanting something they'd like to see in the game held back from being put in because of opposing viewpoints. I'd really like to hope it was possible to throw everything in everyone could possibly want, and just leave it to us to sort out which bits we want in our games. In reality, I know that it isn't, so I just try and mentally block out anyone saying anything too offensive, for the sake of those who really are trying to have a polite conversation about it here.
I deal with the issue you've described by telling myself "I know what I like at my table, I really couldn't care less how anyone on the Internet that I'm unlikely to ever have at that table feels about it."
Which doesn't make it any less hurtful, I know.
The other side of the coin is - this is exactly why we need enough viable alternatives from the {Ex} side of things to balance it out and ensure a character built that way isn't seen as inferior. That can be tricky without resorting to supernatural explanations, but as Kirth illustrated earlier it's far from impossible.
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it would be helpful if the game actually told you, "the best-trained human person on Earth would be level X, and anything beyond that is superhuman beyond what any real person in Earth's history has attained."Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that.
I mean it would be helpful if the game explicitly said in the rules, "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level; any character of a higher level than that is more skilled than any human in the entire history of the planet."
And yes, I think it's probably around 6th level, given how the math works out for skills and such.
Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that. Unfortunately, that same game also says that 0 level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, when it comes to magic -- with or without mythic -- but that gets ignored "because magic."This, plus you can also drag out pretty much any game rule and use it to justify that normal human limitations are X, only to find out that if you use a different rule they're closer to Y.
I'd much rather have a narrative justification for it. "At level 10 characters are smiled upon by whatever innate power is present in the universe and transcend the normal limitations for a mortal member of their race." - but again, that's pretty much the very definition of Mythic...
My problem with this is that it forces a certain flavor on people (because many GMs don't approve of re-fluffing rules.)
Simply state that they DO transcend, and allow the players to choose how they wish to flavor it, whether it's via spending a year training as deep as they could safely go in an active volcano, or meditating under a waterfall surrounded by snow, or 'smiled upon by X part of the universe'
This is pretty much something that was done in 4E right? A clear division of the 'tiers' of the game. Something to keep in mind for those that played it alot. How did that impact the game? Did it impact the game? Is such a division by level useful?
I definately think we are seeing a rise of the 'e6 generation' in pathfinder. More then I've seen before. And its not a bad thing. I'm playing in an E6 game, and I like it quite a bit. I wonder if the game wouldnt be well served by formalizing it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean it would be helpful if the game explicitly said in the rules, "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level; any character of a higher level than that is more skilled than any human in the entire history of the planet."
And yes, I think it's probably around 6th level, given how the math works out for skills and such.
Now you're talking my language, Sean. I totally agree, on both counts.
For the record, from my house rules:In order to make some sense of the powerful abilities that high-level characters possess, some conceptual framework is helpful. General level equivalents are summarized below, based on the challenge rating of the character.
1st–5th: Journeyman
6th–10th: Hero
11th–15th: Champion
16th–20th: Demigod
A journeyman character is a competent adventurer of no great worldwide fame. [This level is for "normal" real-world people.]
A hero has established a great reputation for mighty deeds, and is likely to be known in songs and legends; pseudo-historical figures such as Charlemagne’s paladins, Robin Hood at the peak of his career, and so on, are presented in legend as hero-level characters. This is the maximum level range for any “realistic” framework.
Champion-level characters operate on a scale that cannot be modeled in real-world terms, and leave real-world expectations largely behind. For this reason, many groups will prefer to stop play sometime at or before reaching this level. A champion-level character is one of the greatest adventurers in the world, and will be called upon to save nations, invade other planes, etc.
A demigod-level character’s power eclipses any reasonable analog. Characters at this level can be expected to save or conquer entire worlds, contest with demon lords, and foil the machinations of gods.
In general, it is assumed that only a modest number of adventurers survives and progresses through each tier. Adventuring is a dangerous profession, and the mortality rate for journeymen adventurers and heroes is high. Those who are not killed will generally settle down, establish strongholds, and retire before reaching Champion level. Very few champions are able to find enough challenges suitable to allow them to acquire demigod-like power.
Simply state that they DO transcend, and allow the players to choose how they wish to flavor it, whether it's via spending a year training as deep as they could safely go in an active volcano, or meditating under a waterfall surrounded by snow, or 'smiled upon by X part of the universe'
Oh, that works. It's just how to separate that particular "ascension" from the Mythic one within my narrative-oriented head-space. What makes the one different to the other? ;) What do you *call* it? :D
I suppose you could term it the "Adventurer to Hero" transition. I don't know if that works for everyone, though.
Now you're talking my language, Sean. I totally agree, on both counts.I mean it would be helpful if the game explicitly said in the rules, "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level; any character of a higher level than that is more skilled than any human in the entire history of the planet."
And yes, I think it's probably around 6th level, given how the math works out for skills and such.
It doesn't help me quite so much. I want to know what level the highest-level human in Golarion history, using nothing but their innate experience and skills and no external power, was ;)
Division of the game into tiers is not in and of itself a bad idea. I'm not sure I liked how 4th Edition handled it, but there are ways to divide the game into tiers different from that I would be on board with. To some extent the game already does that. Characters after 10th level don't see a vast chasm as a challenge. They should be able to overcome that. The game may not be explicit about it but the difference in tiers is there already in Pathfinder to some extent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that. Unfortunately, that same game also says that 0 level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, when it comes to magic -- with or without mythic -- but that gets ignored "because magic."This, plus you can also drag out pretty much any game rule and use it to justify that normal human limitations are X, only to find out that if you use a different rule they're closer to Y.
I'd much rather have a narrative justification for it. "At level 10 characters are smiled upon by whatever innate power is present in the universe and transcend the normal limitations for a mortal member of their race." - but again, that's pretty much the very definition of Mythic...
My problem with this is that it forces a certain flavor on people (because many GMs don't approve of re-fluffing rules.)
Simply state that they DO transcend, and allow the players to choose how they wish to flavor it, whether it's via spending a year training as deep as they could safely go in an active volcano, or meditating under a waterfall surrounded by snow, or 'smiled upon by X part of the universe'
This is pretty much something that was done in 4E right? A clear division of the 'tiers' of the game. Something to keep in mind for those that played it alot. How did that impact the game? Did it impact the game? Is such a division by level useful?
I definitely think we are seeing a rise of the 'e6 generation' in pathfinder. More then I've seen before. And its not a bad thing. I'm playing in an E6 game, and I like it quite a bit. I wonder if the game wouldnt be well served by formalizing it.
The "tiers" of Adventuring definitely felt right in 4E. For instance, when you got to 20th level, there was a tier option to be officially recognized by a god, granting you some very powerful martial abilities, turning you into basically a Herald. It felt right, since by the time you were a 20th level fighter, the gods probably should recognize you, and even want to compete to lay claim on you. At level 20, you are basically stronger than any of their CR 15 Heralds. I see no reason why a 20th level Cleric of Asmodeus wouldn't be contacted by the big man himself, or by a archduke of hell to basically "cheat" the system, and not have to be turned into a Lemure. Why wouldn't Erastil was to befriend a 20th level Ranger who hunts only the greatest of game? Its hard to imagine that someone could become 20th level, or even reach 17th level, without any God caring.
Formalizing the divisions in adventuring would be incredibly handy, and I'd approve very much.
I think it would be helpful if the game actually told you, "the best-trained human person on Earth would be level X, and anything beyond that is superhuman beyond what any real person in Earth's history has attained."Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that.
My point is that the rules heavily indicate that "20th level is the best-trained Golarion-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic,". But yeah, having something official that says one way to the other would be nice. I am not 100% wedded by my assertion, it's just that the Mythic rules and such seem to indicate that's the RAI.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simply state that they DO transcend, and allow the players to choose how they wish to flavor it, whether it's via spending a year training as deep as they could safely go in an active volcano, or meditating under a waterfall surrounded by snow, or 'smiled upon by X part of the universe'Oh, that works. It's just how to separate that particular "ascension" from the Mythic one within my narrative-oriented head-space. What makes the one different to the other? ;) What do you *call* it? :D
I suppose you could term it the "Adventurer to Hero" transition. I don't know if that works for everyone, though.
A mythic ascension requires connecting to our at least activating some power source.
Going from 6th to 7th level doesn't actually 'transit' anything. It just means you're cooler than an human who ever lived (on Earth.)
Look at it this way, getting from 6th to 7th level is like running a 4-minute mile. Long regarded as impossible, but one day a British guy decided he was going to do it any way, and he succeeded. Nothing was 'ascended'. He just broke some records. It's a matter of degree, not kind.
Don't really have a problem with doing both, except that I feel by having the clearly superior option to do Supernatural things, it'll fuel this mindset that anyone that doesn't take or use those abilities is somehow "playing the game wrong". It'd be akin to playing a two-handed fighter without grabbing Power Attack. And we already have enough of that on these forums. Hell, even this topic, there's people already doing that.Personally, though, I don't give in to that pressure, so I'm okay with having the option for both. I am always in favor of more options of anything to cater to different types, from Asian weapons to psionics to guns to futuristic tech. But I get tired of people assuming that I hate martials because I simply prefer a different type of fighter. I had hoped that the topic being done by one of the ex-developers would have a more reasonable dialogue about this topic. But after reading the first five pages, it's clear that because I don't want to play a fighter that has supernatural abilities, I hate fighters and am the cancer that's killing martials. So why bother explaining a different point of view when nobody wants to consider it?
I'm trying to look at that as people just not wanting something they'd like to see in the game held back from being put in because of opposing viewpoints. I'd really like to hope it was possible to throw everything in everyone could possibly want, and just leave it to us to sort out which bits we want in our games. In reality, I know that it isn't, so I just try and mentally block out anyone saying anything too offensive, for the sake of those who really are trying to have a polite conversation about it here.
I deal with the issue you've described by telling myself "I know what I like at my table, I really couldn't care less how anyone on the Internet that I'm unlikely to ever have at that table feels about it."
Which doesn't make it any less hurtful, I know.
The other side of the coin is - this is exactly why we need...
Well that makes one reasonable person, but that still doesn't change the fact that even if I like having multiple options for everyone, I'm still ruining martials because I want to play a mundane fighter. So it's disappointing when there's a dialogue opened by an ex developer, and people are still too busy demonizing and misunderstanding those that aren't keen on Su
My point is that the rules heavily indicate that "20th level is the best-trained Golarion-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic,". But yeah, having something official that says one way to the other would be nice. I am not 100% wedded by my assertion, it's just that the Mythic rules and such seem to indicate that's the RAI.I think it would be helpful if the game actually told you, "the best-trained human person on Earth would be level X, and anything beyond that is superhuman beyond what any real person in Earth's history has attained."Given that people are making the argument that "20th level is the best-trained Earth-normal human, and anything beyond that is Mythic," a case could be made that the game does say that.
I think people in Golarion who can get past 6th level are already special in some way. I really doubt everyone is born with the potential to reach level 7.
A mythic ascension requires connecting to our at least activating some power source.Going from 6th to 7th level doesn't actually 'transit' anything. It just means you're cooler than an human who ever lived (on Earth.)
Look at it this way, getting from 6th to 7th level is like running a 4-minute mile. Long regarded as impossible, but one day a British guy decided he was going to do it any way, and he succeeded. Nothing was 'ascended'. He just broke some records. It's a matter of degree, not kind.
Mmm, but that leaves us back with "Level 20 is the ultimate innate human potential from experience and training alone, without having access to any kind of external power"
Which, if that is what the game is trying to tell is, is fine. But if it isn't, I need know what the difference is between whatever happens to break that barrier and a Mythic ascension, in order for it to all make sense in my head.
It probably doesn't help that I come from a BECMI D&D background where Level 36 former gladiators with nothing but talent and experience were running empires. Really, I just want to know how to map that in Pathfinder, and if it is lower than L20 how to narratively justify moving beyond it. Well - the latter, I and my players can do for ourselves, but still need to know *where* to do it, as it kinda matters for modelling the rest of the game world ;)
|
***Sedentary designers who wrap a mouse cord around their arm, drop the mouse, try to catch it on the bounce, and declare, "The use of weapon cords by highly-skilled martials is totally unrealistic." ***To be fair on this one, the weapon cord is a cheap item available for next to nothing, and anyone can use it. You don't just balance an item to the higher end of the game and a specific class, it has to be balanced at the low end for everyone as well. Considering they left the core mechanic related to the weapon cord problem intact, but it requires a magic item to get the full on weapon juggling thing going, I'm actually pretty okay with this.
The quality of the cord itself barely matters. It's the opinion that I, a sedentary game designer, can't do this within a couple of tries. Therefore, it's absolutely impossible that a highly trained warrior capable of cleaving demons in twain with a single strike of his sword could EVER do this.
High level spellcasters are apparently only limited by the developer's imaginations. So why the hell are high-level martials being limited by what some guy who sits in an office in front of a word processor all day can actually achieve in real life?
Mmm, but that leaves us back with "Level 20 is the ultimate innate human potential from experience and training alone, without having access to any kind of external power"
Not really. Even the Core Rulebook has rules for exceeding 20th level, even in a single class. There is always the possibility of being 'turned up to 11'.
Not really. Even the Core Rulebook has rules for exceeding 20th level, even in a single class. There is always the possibility of being 'turned up to 11'.
True, but those rules are optional, not really recommended for use, and not applicable to the world of Golarion as presented in modules, etc.
PCs aside - what level should my "most talented individual in the world" NPC be? ;)
(The problem being that the game doesn't explicitly define that, and we have an array of opinions on this board as to where that point should be and what represents "going beyond into the realms of superhuman ability")
To be honest- well trained, expert SCA light and heavy weapons fighters can't do it either. Not to mention cords break.
And if you tried it with four heavy revolvers, as was the issue, well- FAIL! You just don't run around with a couple extra 5# weights tied around your wrists- which are full of explosive powder. It was a completely stupid idea, and the nerfing was well and truly deserved. Josey Wales would hurt himself laughing.
Making fun of a dev because he actually, you know, tried it, is being a jerk.
Air walk? MonksI'm not aware of that option.
Spider walk? Monks, rangers.Or that one.
There's ways for a Monk to do it.
S%@$ty versions, that are limited to his Slow Fall distance (Capped at 100 ft., not Any Distance), and require TWO FEATS to pull off, but technically he's right I guess.
Design Manager
|
***Sedentary designers who wrap a mouse cord around their arm, drop the mouse, try to catch it on the bounce, and declare, "The use of weapon cords by highly-skilled martials is totally unrealistic." ***To be fair on this one, the weapon cord is a cheap item available for next to nothing, and anyone can use it. You don't just balance an item to the higher end of the game and a specific class, it has to be balanced at the low end for everyone as well. Considering they left the core mechanic related to the weapon cord problem intact, but it requires a magic item to get the full on weapon juggling thing going, I'm actually pretty okay with this.The quality of the cord itself barely matters. It's the opinion that I, a sedentary game designer, can't do this within a couple of tries. Therefore, it's absolutely impossible that a highly trained warrior capable of cleaving demons in twain with a single strike of his sword could EVER do this.
High level spellcasters are apparently only limited by the developer's imaginations. So why the hell are high-level martials being limited by what some guy who sits in an office in front of a word processor all day can actually achieve in real life?
So, lets assume that the mouse-cord thing wasn't a joke and move on to the rest of the point. They didn't take anything away from high level martials. They took away something from a cord that any 0 level commoner had access to. Gunslingers can still TWF with double-barreled pistols, they just need a Glove of Storing or the Gun Twirling feat now. The weapon cord errata literally had nothing to do with high level martials, it had to do with the relative expedience of leather cords.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PCs aside - what level should my "most talented individual in the world" NPC be? ;)
Depends on your adventure and the story being told, to be honest. Personally, I'd cap NPCs at 17-18th level. I'd make it lower, but someone had to scribe those scrolls of wish that percolate around. And there's probably not more than a few of those around at a time. 19th and 20th levels are 'overflow' for world-shattering NPCs (like the BBEG). If those were real levels, a new spell level would be unlocked at 19th for wizards and 20th for sorcerers, and such a thing is not there.
Pathfinder (and D&D before it) have always been kind of schizophrenic that way. On one end, the skills system and the CRs of various real-world creatures tell you that 'mere mortals' probably reach the top of the curve around 5th level. On the other end, a wizard is only getting his interesting powers with 3rd level spells, and the amount of wealth and high level NPCs put into the setting to challenge the PCs indicate that lots of people in Golarion at least reach 10th level, and enough reach higher levels to make sure the world never runs out of scrolls of plane shift and whatever.
Gunslingers can still TWF with double-barreled pistols, they just need a Glove of Storing...
This is the part I don't like: "It's okay now because magic!"
Another guideline, using the PRD, could be that NPC classes top out at 10th level. This maybe comes closer to what many of you were thinking. I could buy that NON-adventurers top out at 10.
To be honest- well trained, expert SCA light and heavy weapons fighters can't do it either. Not to mention cords break.
And if you tried it with four heavy revolvers, as was the issue, well- FAIL! You just don't run around with a couple extra 5# weights tied around your wrists- which are full of explosive powder. It was a completely stupid idea, and the nerfing was well and truly deserved. Josey Wales would hurt himself laughing.
Making fun of Sean because he actually, you know, {i]tried it[/i], is being a jerk.
I have to state here that I'm far more appreciative of a designer that *did* actually try it than one who just made up a rule and said "yeah, that'll do".
Obviously, getting a trained individual to try it would have been better. However, Sean (or Jason, or whoever it was!) still went beyond what most designers would have done in order to see if an item of equipment was capable of doing what the rules said it could, and I'm very appreciative of him making that attempt.
I do have an expectation that things we do have real-world equivalents of will work the same way (such as backpacks holding their interior volume worth of contents, an anvil causing damage if it gets dropped on my head from a great height, and shoes tending to be an item of clothing that is worn on the feet), unless there's a narrative justification for why they don't. "It's not our world" isn't enough for me. "It's not our world, it has _______ which makes that work differently, however, is."
Making fun of Sean because he actually, you know, tried it, is being a jerk.
For the record, I think it was Jason, not Sean. And I wouldn't personally try wading through lava for 6 seconds, even though I think it's cool for a 20th level barbarian to survive it for 1 round without having to resort to protection from energy.
PCs aside - what level should my "most talented individual in the world" NPC be? ;)Depends on your adventure and the story being told, to be honest. Personally, I'd cap NPCs at 17-18th level. I'd make it lower, but someone had to scribe those scrolls of wish that percolate around. And there's probably not more than a few of those around at a time. 19th and 20th levels are 'overflow' for world-shattering NPCs (like the BBEG). If those were real levels, a new spell level would be unlocked at 19th for wizards and 20th for sorcerers, and such a thing is not there.
Pathfinder (and D&D before it) have always been kind of schizophrenic that way. On one end, the skills system and the CRs of various real-world creatures tell you that 'mere mortals' probably reach the top of the curve around 5th level. On the other end, a wizard is only getting his interesting powers with 3rd level spells, and the amount of wealth and high level NPCs put into the setting to challenge the PCs indicate that lots of people in Golarion at least reach 10th level, and enough reach higher levels to make sure the world never runs out of scrolls of plane shift and whatever.
Mmm, again we're into martial/caster disparity :D Wizards can be 18th level just by continuing to study more difficult spells ;)
I'm quite happy, however, that those rare 17-18th level NPCs got there by doing something to tap into abilities they wouldn't normally have, while "normal" NPCs hit a firm-ish cap around 10th level (or 6th, or whatever!)
I guess it isn't even so much wanting a cap, as a point at which crowds in the capital city (presumably used to the fact that magic exists and that the occasional fireball flying by is more a case of getting ready to put the fire out than standing there gasping in shock) are going to start staring and muttering "I... I can't believe I just saw someone *do* that!" Having the game - or at least, the Golarion setting - define that point (even roughly) of "going beyond what people believe to be normal limits" would be a huge help.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The weapon cord thing was Jason, not me, and although he did try it out, I think he mainly did it as a joke, and was not intending it to be a reasonable test of whether or not a skilled gunslinger (which Jason is not) could use a weapon cord (which is not a mouse cord) to drop and catch a pistol (which is not a mouse) accurately and reliably enough to make it part of his attack routine.
Air walk? MonksI'm not aware of that option.
Spider walk? Monks, rangers.Or that one.There's ways for a Monk to do it.
S&@%ty versions, that are limited to his Slow Fall distance (Capped at 100 ft., not Any Distance), and require TWO FEATS to pull off, but technically he's right I guess.
I found them all just in class description, without using any feats. However, there's no use posting them as he'd just move the goalposts again from "this can't be done without spells" to "Spells can do it better", which is moving from a objective to subjective argument.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and was not intending it to be a reasonable test of whether or not a skilled gunslinger (which Jason is not)
So, uh, Kickstarter to send Jason on a firearms course, anyone? ;)
|
|
Gunslingers can still TWF with double-barreled pistols, they just need a Glove of Storing...This is the part I don't like: "It's okay now because magic!"
Uh...the Gun Twirling Feat also works. And isn't magic.
So, it's not "It's okay because magic!" at all. And Ssalarn noted that in the post you quote.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Awhile ago, I realized that the game already sorts itself into tiers based on the available spells, roughly every 4 levels.
By which I mean, usually even-leveled spells pretty much do what the last level's spells do, but better. Odd numbered spell levels generally get the 'new' effects. 9-level spellcasters get a new spell level every 2 levels, so they get a new 'tier' of powers every 4 levels.
1st-4th level, spellcasters can do some weird stuff, but nothing that couldn't be done the old fashioned way.
5th level, wizards get fireball and fly. These are sort of the base things people think of when they think of wizards, so this might be the place that a relatively diligent wizard can expect to reach during his career. (Also, getting a score above 15 is rare in NPCs, so a lot of wizards pretty much cap out here, even if they have more levels.)
We stay in that 'better than ordinary, but not earth-shattering' groove until level 9, when wizards start to be able to teleport and clerics start raising the dead or visiting Hell in person. Any semblance of 'normal' pretty much ends here.
Above 9th level, you can call Outsiders, visit other planes, travel the world instantly, and have beaten death itself. You're very special. And you're also rare enough that these abilities aren't so available as to warp society.
At 13th level, you get 7th level spells, you can heal any malady, or raise the dead from a lock of hair. You can create your own demiplane.
And at 17th level, you get wish, which sort of says it all.
So to answer the question:
I'm quite happy, however, that those rare 17-18th level NPCs got there by doing something to tap into abilities they wouldn't normally have, while "normal" NPCs hit a firm-ish cap around 10th level (or 6th, or whatever!)
That depends on your personal taste. It really does. Think of the most powerful non-story NPCs (the BBEG cheats) around. The deans of wizard colleges, archbishops, barbarian kings, that kind of thing. If you want it to be a safe assumption that you can go to a temple in a major city and be raised from the dead, then NPCs should be able to reach 9th level. If you think the head of a wizarding college should have his own demiplane instead of a private office, they should reach 13th. And so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean it would be helpful if the game explicitly said in the rules, "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level; any character of a higher level than that is more skilled than any human in the entire history of the planet."
And yes, I think it's probably around 6th level, given how the math works out for skills and such.
But is the math credible?
I maintain that it's not. Don't take this as an attack. It's ludicrously difficult to come up with a game system that comes even close to approximating the "mechanics" of the real world. At the end of the day, though, Pathfinder math isn't credible for most concepts proposed by the game.
Let's ignore the examples mentioned so far. Combat is, well, central to this game, but when we say "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level" we're basically saying that the greatest human warriors in the history of this planet were capable of making a single melee attack in six seconds.
Hockey games disprove that idea - never mind fighting events (boxing, MMA, etc.) where even low- to mid-table competitors deliver combinations of successfull, punishing blows in that same span of time.
And that doesn't take into account that we'd have to ignore the fact that Golarion's supplements abound with NPCs that exceed this peak of our development - NPCs that aren't central to the story, and who by no means engage in the kind of activity that might justify this.
If this game were to explicitly say in the rules, "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level; any character of a higher level than that is more skilled than any human in the entire history of the planet," then it needs to include a heck of a lot more qualifiers about a heck of a lot more abstractions. ;)
1st-4th level, spellcasters can do some weird stuff, but nothing that couldn't be done the old fashioned way.
5th level, wizards get fireball and fly. These are sort of the base things people think of when they think of wizards, so this might be the place that a relatively diligent wizard can expect to reach during his career. (Also, getting a score above 15 is rare in NPCs, so a lot of wizards pretty much cap out here, even if they have more levels.)
We stay in that 'better than ordinary, but not earth-shattering' groove until level 9, when wizards start to be able to teleport and clerics start raising the dead or visiting Hell in person. Any semblance of 'normal' pretty much ends here.
Above 9th level, you can call Outsiders, visit other planes, travel the world instantly, and have beaten death itself. You're very special. And you're also rare enough that these abilities aren't so available as to warp society.
At 13th level, you get 7th level spells, you can heal any malady, or raise the dead from a lock of hair. You can create your own demiplane.
And at 17th level, you get wish, which sort of says it all.
That is a very, very helpful list - thank you! (also a very useful one for balancing everything else in the game world around)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's ignore the examples mentioned so far. Combat is, well, central to this game, but when we say "The highest-level human in all of Earth history was no more than 6th level" we're basically saying that the greatest human warriors in the history of this planet were capable of making a single melee attack in six seconds.Hockey games disprove that idea - never mind fighting events (boxing, MMA, etc.) where even low- to mid-table competitors deliver combinations of successfull, punishing blows in that same span of time.
I think you can explain the latter examples as being "a single melee attack which consists of a flurry of blows", when translated into the abstractions of the combat system.
While I know it's the unpopular opinion, and according to this thread, I'm apparently everything wrong with Pathfinder...
I don't really like my fighters with Supernatural abilities. I do like cool, Charles Atlas-styled Extraordinary abilities and love seeing cool maneuvers for martials. Something like Kirth's Tactical Acumen would be cool (except maybe less totally shutting down illuisions, but perhaps depending on a Perception roll to bypass it), flavorful, and not really all that magic. But, I think when we start getting into the realm of demigod-like powers of myth (or to keep it modern, fighting in some anime), I tend to shy away from that. Demolishing mountains, slicing the air to attack people from afar... it doesn't really do it for me. Unless it's Mythic. The genre of Mythic allows me to accept Supernatural and spell-like abilities since it reminds me of Exalted or Nobilus. Mini-gods and legends doing god-like things. I guess that has always been my preference. It doesn't mean that I hate martials or don't want them to have nice things.
I am right there with you, Odraude.
I want Martial Classes and characters to be amazing when they get higher-level, too. Making them "magical" without making them Mythic, though, just takes away from the spellcasters (in my humble opinion). I think there are so many untapped avenues of extraordinary displays of pure skill and tactical awareness that need to be explored before we start worrying about Fighters who can leap fifty feet into the air or split dimensions with their sword.
So, lets assume that the mouse-cord thing wasn't a joke and move on to the rest of the point. They didn't take anything away from high level martials. They took away something from a cord that any 0 level commoner had access to. Gunslingers can still TWF with double-barreled pistols, they just need a Glove of Storing or the Gun Twirling feat now. The weapon cord errata literally had nothing to do with high level martials, it had to do with the relative expedience of leather cords.
You can only store and bring out ONE pistol with the gloves, and you can NOT wear two. Not to mention it cost 10000 gps and takes up a valuable slot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Matt,
I would offer you my closing point, from earlier:
... then it needs to include a heck of a lot more qualifiers about a heck of a lot more abstractions. ;)
Beyond that, though, forgive me but I'm not going to take the out that you're offering. I appreciate your effort to reconcile the game's mechanics with the real world. The two really don't correlate, though, and that's precisely why we shouldn't be comparing them to one another.
|
|
You can only store and bring out ONE pistol with the gloves, and you can NOT wear two. Not to mention it cost 10000 gps and takes up a valuable slot.
So, lets assume that the mouse-cord thing wasn't a joke and move on to the rest of the point. They didn't take anything away from high level martials. They took away something from a cord that any 0 level commoner had access to. Gunslingers can still TWF with double-barreled pistols, they just need a Glove of Storing or the Gun Twirling feat now. The weapon cord errata literally had nothing to do with high level martials, it had to do with the relative expedience of leather cords.
Gun Twirling still works, though.
Matt,
I would offer you my closing point, from earlier:
... then it needs to include a heck of a lot more qualifiers about a heck of a lot more abstractions. ;)
Oops, my apologies then!
Beyond that, though, forgive me but I'm not going to take the out that you're offering. I appreciate your effort to reconcile the game's mechanics with the real world. The two really don't correlate, though, and that's precisely why we shouldn't be comparing them to one another.
Personally, I'm not willing to suspend my disbelief *that* much, but - to each their own :)