Lol @KuntaSS
All of these people issuing their judgments on the gming styles of others (regardless of whether they work or not) is entertaining to see and frustrating to be subject to. I don't want to gm under their rules of entitlement. So I don't. They cannot prove their argument as any sort of fact, only personal opinion based on their personal preference. Yet, this seems enough to warrant a universal label to all those who don't follow their belief system. Didn't realize this was Sunday church.
Being told I am a not very nice person because I don't do a particular thing in a particular way that a few people would prefer I do those things can be really aggravating when those people in other respects present themselves as intelligent and able minded individuals who can understand how that view is entirely wrong, narrow-minded and limiting. But as I described in my example a couple of posts up- sometimes you just can't get someone to see something, accept something or understand something, despite however much logic, reasonable discourse or fairness is given.
Apparently, though, it is not enough for some people to let other people do and enjoy things in the way they do and enjoy them. They want their flavor to be the flavor of your pie because they like that flavor-in this case it doesn't seem to matter much to them if you or anyone else likes it or not.
But it won't stop me from surprising a party with repeated night encounters that start with rust monsters eating their unattended gear followed by imperial soldiers chasing the monsters down and running into the PC's who are now weaponless and who were fleeing such province for being wanted for crimes they didn't commit. I do that crap. I do it intentionally. I make unfair encounters and then villains who can be bullied around by the pc's. I have dragons that are cake walks and gargoyles that will tpk. My players don't give me flak for these things and don't call me a douche. But they do call me. They call me to ask me when the heck will I...
Agreed.
Without the challenge, without the danger, without the unexpected twists and turns, whats the point?
I might as well go play God of War on easy mode.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh? This isnt about challenge or danger. Its a debate on intelligent enemy actions, primarily when considering attacking a familiar putting out 4th level or lower spells or killing the caster its attached to and taking it out as well.
Sundering a spellbook does nothing for your situation at hand. Its a tactic thats purely suicidal in 90% of the situations and requires knowledge that the wizard simply doesnt have backups. Something Id say is fairly known worldwise that wizards keep copies of their spellbooks. Its like arriving to a dungeon on a horse and the enemy targets your horse instead despite you clearly not needing it anymore and it serves absolutely no purpose in killing you. And the Wizard likely has another waiting on him.
That said, there are times where it does make sense but those are few and far between.
I always liked summoning 15' x 15' black puddings over the party and just f@@&ing melting every one of them when one of the players looked at me the wrong way. You're saying this is illegal?
I always liked summoning 15' x 15' black puddings over the party and just f&%!ing melting every one of them when one of the players looked at me the wrong way. You're saying this is illegal?
Yep. You can't place a summoned in a place it'll fall.
Also...what's to stop the PCs from summoning a large flying creature like...nothing comes to mind at the moment...my boy the Oni, like 350' in the frikking air...and just having it do a massive butt-bomb on a four square radius by letting itself fall? Assuming you speak, like, Oni, you could totally order it to do this. Huh? Where does the munchkinism end? I need a RAW ruling on the Oni butt-bomb for Society play.
I'm going to 35D6 the next PC whose player forgets to bring chips with the Oni butt of death. Muhaha?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also...what's to stop the PCs from summoning a large flying creature like...nothing comes to mind at the moment...my boy the Oni, like 350' in the frikking air...and just having it do a massive butt-bomb on a four square radius by letting itself fall? Assuming you speak, like, Oni, you could totally order it to do this. Huh? Where does the munchkinism end? I need a RAW ruling on the Oni butt-bomb for Society play.
I'm going to 35D6 the next PC whose player forgets to bring chips with the Oni butt of death. Muhaha?
You can do the same thing if you summoned him next to you and had him fly over. Note the summoning distance of close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) though. Even if you COULD, the chances of hitting anything on a 350' free fall is next to 0%.
For those wishing to squash things from the stratosphere, im pretty sure the wall apells work in the air (except wall of stone i think), its where the "pillars from god" strategy comes from.
Fly/teleport up, spam wall of iron or stone, let gravity do the rest of the work for you.
I find it odd people don't believe a creature can be summoned into another creature's square. The text says clearly that it can't appear inside another creature or object, not that it cannot occupy the same square as another creature. A square is not entirely occupied by a creature.
There is a difference between punishing and intelligent opponents targeting the wand-wielding monkey.Besides seeing the wand monkey as a cheesy, cookie-cutter solution that would surely be punished by any intelligent DM...ANY GM who feels the need to PUNISH his players is not only a MAJOR douche, but is missing the point of the game entirely.
Yes, there is. I was speaking against the general tone and attitude of the post, which seemed to convey the notion that GMs should punish players that they disagree with, not the specific tactic of attacking a dangerous wand-wielding familiar.
Some of this stuff comes from a disconnect between "crunch" and "fluff".
Lots and lots of people get bullied a bit, no matter what they grow up to be; but there are a lot of other ways to explain hyper-quick reactions...the paragon from the inner sea region does the same thing without having to tailor a backstory for some people who treat fluff like holy writ.
The problem is mainly the result of a poor design decision by the Paizo developers. The initiative-boosting traits should have never been put into the game because they are simply too strong compared to the other options, besides niche stuff like Magical Lineage. Creating a system in which one option dominates the rest encourages the players to come up with cookie-cutter solutions in which option_x is an expected part of any build because not taking option_x is essentially intentional gimping. Option_x then becomes little more than a tax, in this case an "initiative tax", which sucks the meaning out of the original mechanic.
This is completely irrespective of fluff. The ubiquity of certain imbalanced builds also throws off the whole balance between PCs and monsters, which in the case of initiative, was worked out and fixed before the APG and traits were part of the game. Monsters don't get traits, and when most of the PCs are rolling with +2 initiative through a trait, the ultimate effect is simply slower monsters. The fact that all of the monsters in the game suddenly got relatively slower because most of the PCs were beaten as children is just something I find funny, but the fluff is really not at issue here.
The munchkins are to blame for being munchkins, but such creatures will always exist. The developers are really at fault here for introducing a single mechanic into the traits system which is far superior to the others.
All of this is why the initiative-boosting traits (and a few other imbalanced ones) should simply be removed from the game, and the players allowed to fluff the mechanics of their traits as they see fit. This is what I let my players do, and I actually quite like the ability to spread class skills around in non-standard ways, which traits let the players accomplish. The traits system is conceptually a good idea, IMO; Paizo just shot themselves in the foot by putting a dominant option in the mix and not explicitly stating that the mechanics could be re-fluffed to fit character concept.
@ Everyone:
You are now far off topic. Take these discussions to new threads and let this one either get back on track or die.
My two cents: The Exploiter is a viable generalist. Maybe it is as powerful as a school wizard, but it isn't as crazy powerful as some felt it was at first glance.
I think that this will depend on whether the exploiter wizard can take greater exploits or not.
I'd be interested in seeing a sort of exploiter wizard vs school wizard battle (same level, same point buy, no or low magic items, etc.)... despite those never going well due to variables. At least it might be entertaining.
I'm still on the fence, I want to see the exploiter in action a few times because as much as I think the school wizard is better off, I'm still so tempted by the exploiter. I would just play one, but finding games and spare time around here is next to impossible for me.
|
How would exploits work for a multiclassed Arcanist/Exploiter? The RAW for Bloodline Development and School Understanding state that arcanist levels stack with levels from another class that grants a bloodline or arcane school. An Exploiter Wizard has no arcane school class feature by default, but can gain one through School Understanding.
Is each class being individually supplied its own class feature by the same exploit? Would School Understanding then fulfill its own criterion for granting full access to the selected school?
each has it's own and no, the exploit isn't enough to power the other exploit to being full level, though if you take the arcanist archetype that does actually give them a bloodline then it works.
|
|
each has it's own and no, the exploit isn't enough to power the other exploit to being full level, though if you take the arcanist archetype that does actually give them a bloodline then it works.
So the prohibition on a Blood Arcanist selecting Bloodline Development can be bypassed by selecting it as an Exploiter first?
each has it's own and no, the exploit isn't enough to power the other exploit to being full level, though if you take the arcanist archetype that does actually give them a bloodline then it works.So the prohibition on a Blood Arcanist selecting Bloodline Development can be bypassed by selecting it as an Exploiter first?
What are you asking?
What I said was that if you take the Blood Arcanist archetype or the School Savant archetype that give you a full bloodline or arcane school respectively that those can meet the conditions for the exploiter to combine the levels with the bloodline development exploit.
If you are an exploiter wizard 5 and a normal arcanist 5 and pick up bloodline development then you'll have 2 copies of the bloodline and can pump a point to treat your level as lv5 for the 1st level power.
|
|
each has it's own and no, the exploit isn't enough to power the other exploit to being full level, though if you take the arcanist archetype that does actually give them a bloodline then it works.So the prohibition on a Blood Arcanist selecting Bloodline Development can be bypassed by selecting it as an Exploiter first?What are you asking?
What I said was that if you take the Blood Arcanist archetype or the School Savant archetype that give you a full bloodline or arcane school respectively that those can meet the conditions for the exploiter to combine the levels with the bloodline development exploit.
If you are an exploiter wizard 5 and a normal arcanist 5 and pick up bloodline development then you'll have 2 copies of the bloodline and can pump a point to treat your level as lv5 for the 1st level power.
Thanks for the clarification. My mind's always looking for loopholes, probably why this archetype calls out to me. Either that, or I'm just paranoid that the GM is going to tempt me with a Faustian contract or a Jackass genie.