Mythic Fighter vs Wizard!


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 1,830 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CWheezy wrote:
Also building a level 20 wizards takes forever? Building a fighter is whatever, but a wizard is like, a million statblocks of all your minions, describing your plane, all your permanent buffs, etc

That doesn't take ANY time. Because wizurd players don't actually define any of those stats until circumstances require a definition. And when they do bother to define something, it only last for 1 round before that definition expires, and can be completely redefined.


And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.


While the wizard is binding outsiders, the Fighter is busy not pissing off the entire cosmos.

Easiest win all thread. Wizard pisses off a deity and dies from its sheer unstated might.


Shadowkire wrote:
And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.

Rule citation that you get those with your kingdom needed.


Marroar Gellantara wrote:

While the wizard is binding outsiders, the Fighter is busy not pissing off the entire cosmos.

Easiest win all thread. Wizard pisses off a deity and dies from its sheer unstated might.

Please, diety smiety. Caster can already roll on Cthulhu. Just wait til they get statted.

Shadow Lodge

Artanthos wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I picked it as one of my spells during level up. It's really that simple. As per the rules, my research on my new spells per level happened off screen.
He also spent several hundred thousand of his unlimited WBL on strength enhancing items, so he could actually use it without killing himself.

The fighter sends his aunt Gertrude, a 1st level commoner, to kill the wizurd while he's paralyzed due to having a 0 STR.


Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.
Rule citation that you get those with your kingdom needed.

Sidebar on 241 of Ultimate campaign:

Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:

While the wizard is binding outsiders, the Fighter is busy not pissing off the entire cosmos.

Easiest win all thread. Wizard pisses off a deity and dies from its sheer unstated might.

Please, diety smiety. Caster can already roll on Cthulhu. Just wait til they get statted.

Its true, they will be stated long before your wizard is.


This is really silly. I think that, while the fighter may(emphasis on may) win this fight, the fact that you have to have literal immortality and ten mythic ranks says loads about why this is pointless to debate.

Shadow Lodge

LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Rules:

CRB wrote:


A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice.
Blood Money is a 1st level spell. I choose it. There is no rule that prevents this.
GM not allowing can do so. GM's are not required to accept avery spell in all of Paizo's non-core books. He can especially argue that his games are not set on Golarion and that spell IS setting-specific. He can also specify that the only strength a caster can burn for that spell is his own non-augmented total.

The fighter's patron god centered a 2.5-mile radius dead magic zone on the fighter.

There's no rule saying that can't happen.


Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.
Rule citation that you get those with your kingdom needed.

Sidebar on 241 of Ultimate campaign:

Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.

Ok. That's not a rule that lets you recruit dragons.

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
This is would be fiat. "The GM can..." is an empty argument in a rules discussion. Whether it is setting specific is irrelevant as we are talking about all the Pathfinder rules not a particular subset.

Then only spells from the RPG line are allowed. So Blood Money (as well as Aroden's Spellbane) are verboten.


Kthulhu wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Rules:

CRB wrote:


A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from his opposed schools, if any; see Arcane Schools) plus three 1st-level spells of his choice.
Blood Money is a 1st level spell. I choose it. There is no rule that prevents this.
GM not allowing can do so. GM's are not required to accept avery spell in all of Paizo's non-core books. He can especially argue that his games are not set on Golarion and that spell IS setting-specific. He can also specify that the only strength a caster can burn for that spell is his own non-augmented total.

The fighter's patron god centered a 2.5-mile radius dead magic zone on the fighter.

There's no rule saying that can't happen.

The rules say you can select Blood Money. The rules don't say your patron god can center a dead magic zone on you. Citation needed.


Kthulhu wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
This is would be fiat. "The GM can..." is an empty argument in a rules discussion. Whether it is setting specific is irrelevant as we are talking about all the Pathfinder rules not a particular subset.
Then only spells from the RPG line are allowed. So Blood Money (as well as Aroden's Spellbane) are verboten.

Where do the rules say that only spells from the RPG line are allowed? Citation needed.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

This remind anyone else of those little kid arguments?

"I killed you!"

"Nuh uh - I killed you first! You missed!"

"No way! I..."


Oh I agree Trogdar(edit: and Charon's Little Helper) and, my mission in this thread is to show how silly most Caster vs. Anything threads get. Because the caster rarely gets stated and has metaknowledge vs a stated opponent.

The method by which I do this is to argue as if running a character with no defined stats, capable of anything and everything within the rules(i.e. a god).

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:

While the wizard is binding outsiders, the Fighter is busy not pissing off the entire cosmos.

Easiest win all thread. Wizard pisses off a deity and dies from its sheer unstated might.

Please, diety smiety. Caster can already roll on Cthulhu. Just wait til they get statted.

Caster can roll Cthulhu if the GM is spineless.


Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.
Rule citation that you get those with your kingdom needed.

Sidebar on 241 of Ultimate campaign:

Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.
Ok. That's not a rule that lets you recruit dragons.

It says I can recruit a monster army, therefore I can.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:

This remind anyone else of those little kid arguments?

"I killed you!"

"Nuh uh - I killed you first! You missed!"

"No way! I..."

Eh. This would be true if people (like me) weren't citing the rules.

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
This is would be fiat. "The GM can..." is an empty argument in a rules discussion. Whether it is setting specific is irrelevant as we are talking about all the Pathfinder rules not a particular subset.
Then only spells from the RPG line are allowed. So Blood Money (as well as Aroden's Spellbane) are verboten.
Where do the rules say that only spells from the RPG line are allowed? Citation needed.

You're the one arguing that Golarion-specific lore shouldn't be allowed to exist. If you rule out Golarion for the negative bits, you don't get to keep the positive bits.


Shadowkire wrote:

Oh I agree Trogdar, my mission in this thread is to show how silly most Caster vs. Anything threads get. Because the caster rarely gets stated and has metaknowledge vs a stated opponent.

The method by which I do this is to argue as if running a character with no defined stats, capable of anything and everything within the rules(i.e. a god).

To be fair, full casters are actually capable of accessing meta knowledge, which is one of the reasons they are so powerful.


I'd say the fighter would win every time. I just wrapped WotR and the party quashed caster with easy. It was the mythic melee oriented bad guys that caused the party a challenge even with two full casters.

It's not about who is more powerful it's about who goes first. Fighters tend to go first over wizards so the fighter wins.

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
I can assure you that no kingdom's army is a threat to a Wizard who can bind outsiders to their will, let alone cast Simulacrum for free.

Sounds like the famous last words of an arrogant dead wizurd.


Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
And I can assure you that this army is a threat what with paladins, dragons, wizards, clerics, bards, etc.
Rule citation that you get those with your kingdom needed.

Sidebar on 241 of Ultimate campaign:

Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.
Ok. That's not a rule that lets you recruit dragons.
It says I can recruit a monster army, therefore I can.

No it doesn't say that. It says you can't simply recruit them because you've found one.


Kthulhu wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
This is would be fiat. "The GM can..." is an empty argument in a rules discussion. Whether it is setting specific is irrelevant as we are talking about all the Pathfinder rules not a particular subset.
Then only spells from the RPG line are allowed. So Blood Money (as well as Aroden's Spellbane) are verboten.
Where do the rules say that only spells from the RPG line are allowed? Citation needed.
You're the one arguing that Golarion-specific lore shouldn't be allowed to exist. If you rule out Golarion for the negative bits, you don't get to keep the positive bits.

What lore am I saying doesn't exist?


Anzyr wrote:


Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.
No it doesn't say that. It says you can't simply recruit them because you've found one.

"Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires a special quest or adventure;...not just because you know they were there." Who says the Fighter didn't quest for dragons? Not the rules.

BTW it says USUALLY, meaning not all the time. and a kingdom ruled by a mythic fighter certainly would be an unusual case.

Shadow Lodge

Gimme an H!
Gimme an A!
Gimme an N!
Gimme a D!

Gimme a W!
Gimme an A!
Gimme a V!
Gimme a E!

What's that spell?!?

Schrodinger's Wizurd!


Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.
No it doesn't say that. It says you can't simply recruit them because you've found one.

"Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires a special quest or adventure;...not just because you know they were there." Who says the Fighter didn't quest for dragons? Not the rules.

BTW it says USUALLY, meaning not all the time. and a kingdom ruled by a mythic fighter certainly would be an unusual case.

Quests aren't in the rules.


Anzyr wrote:


What lore am I saying doesn't exist?

His argument is:

Blood Money's source is an AP set in Golarion. In that AP the spell is long forgotten. If you say you got the spell at level 1 it is not long forgotten, therefore you are not in the world of the AP. Therefore you are not in the world were Blood Money even exists, unless GM fiat(and you don't accept that).

Not my argument, just my interpretation of his.


Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


Quote:

Recruiting Armies

If you are a leader of a kingdom, that fact is sufficient for
you to recruit armies from your citizens. If you are not
the leader of a kingdom, the GM may decide that you
need to achieve some sort of in-game accomplishment
to earn the respect and renown needed to raise an army.
Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires
a special quest or adventure; you can’t simply recruit an
army of goblins to serve you because you’ve found a
tribe of goblins or know they live in your kingdom.
No it doesn't say that. It says you can't simply recruit them because you've found one.

"Being able to recruit a monster army usually requires a special quest or adventure;...not just because you know they were there." Who says the Fighter didn't quest for dragons? Not the rules.

BTW it says USUALLY, meaning not all the time. and a kingdom ruled by a mythic fighter certainly would be an unusual case.

Quests aren't in the rules.

And "usually can't" doesn't mean can't.


BTW I love how this has become about whether I can have a dragon in my army, not about a wizard vs fighter.


Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.


I must admit I only skimmed the thread, but I want to say that geas would not work as well as was earlier argued. It has a casting time of 10 minutes. This is why it has no save, it is intended to be cast on helpless, or for some reason willing targets.

Shadow Lodge

Strict rules with absolutely no lore or flavor/fluff/etc is sort of antithetical to how the game is meant to be played. It's essentially stripping all the imagination, creativity, and fun out of the game.

If that's how the game was really meant to be played, it never would have evolved past being a wargame. You wouldn't be playing Pathfinder / D&D / (insert RPG here), you'd be playing Chainmail / Warhammer / (insert wargame here).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu


Hogeyhead wrote:
I must admit I only skimmed the thread, but I want to say that geas would not work as well as was earlier argued. It has a casting time of 10 minutes. This is why it has no save, it is intended to be cast on helpless, or for some reason willing targets.

It would. Because no one is casting Geas. They are casting Limited Wish which duplicates Geas/Quest and has a casting time of 1 standard action.


What I find odd is that no one has a level 20 wizard just lying around.

I know I had this fighter just siting in my doc drive.

Oh, if the fighter ever does get in melee the wizard is dead. Greater blind-fight will reduce all non-AC defenses like mirror image to a 4% miss chance. No amount of DR can save the wizard. This is not 3.5 so the wizard's AC will be far too low.

If the wizard get's blood money, then the fighter gets a level 18 wizard cohort through leadership. Wizard cohort teleports fighter next to enemy wizard. Enemy wizard dies.


Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu

I play Pathfinder with a character sheet. Explaining to people that a level 13 Wizard should be able to easily beat a level 20 Mythic 10 Fighter is not playing Pathfinder though. And presenting a build has never in my experience made explaining that any clearer.

Shadow Lodge

Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu

It's hard to get away with the kind of stuff he posts about if you have either.

Shadow Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu

I play Pathfinder with a character sheet. Explaining to people that a level 13 Wizard should be able to easily beat a level 20 Mythic 10 Fighter is not playing Pathfinder though. And presenting a build has never in my experience made the discussion clearer.

How often, in your experience, has the refusal to present a build made the discussion more clear?


Kthulhu wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu

It's hard to get away with the kind of stuff he posts about if you have either.

Neither of those things would help explaining why even with Mythic Tiers a Fighter does not stand much of a chance against a Wizard. The GM being able to change, houserule, ban, nerf, or otherwise adjust the rules would not make the issue clearer. It merely be an appeal to the Oberoni Fallacy.


Wow. I'm gone for an hour and this thread goes to the Abyss. My point was only that it wasn't 100% to go to the wizard, that a correctly built fighter could win. I lean towards the wizard winning more often, sure, but I'd say it's more like 60-40 or maybe 70-30. Of course, Anzyr sounds like the type of player that only plays a wizard and believes that all other classes should just bow down and worship him. So I'd win, cuz I'd never play with him. :)


Kthulhu wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Regardless the rules don't say anything about what you actually can recruit in terms of levels/race/type, so all of this would fall under GM fiat.

Kind of weird how you play Pathfinder:

No character sheet...

No GM...

[edit] ninja'd by Kthulhu

I play Pathfinder with a character sheet. Explaining to people that a level 13 Wizard should be able to easily beat a level 20 Mythic 10 Fighter is not playing Pathfinder though. And presenting a build has never in my experience made the discussion clearer.
How often, in your experience, has the refusal to present a build made the discussion more clear?

Right now. We are still focused on what a Wizard and Fighter can do, instead of one person's build.


Anzyr wrote:
Hogeyhead wrote:
I must admit I only skimmed the thread, but I want to say that geas would not work as well as was earlier argued. It has a casting time of 10 minutes. This is why it has no save, it is intended to be cast on helpless, or for some reason willing targets.
It would. Because no one is casting Geas. They are casting Limited Wish which duplicates Geas/Quest and has a casting time of 1 standard action.

Still never saw that air-tight command.

If you don't want the lawyer-ing skill to decide it, then you somehow have to with the limitations of English, create a binding command with no legal precedents to depend on for meaning. Any gaps at all are filled in by ME the player. If the command turns out to be invalid for the spell, then it just fails and your silly wizard is in close range.


Anzyr wrote:


Right now. We are still focused on what a Wizard and Fighter can do, instead of one person's build.

Up PAGE were were arguing about whether I can recruit dragons, not about fighters and wizards.


Bradley Mickle wrote:
Wow. I'm gone for an hour and this thread goes to the Abyss. My point was only that it wasn't 100% to go to the wizard, that a correctly built fighter could win. I lean towards the wizard winning more often, sure, but I'd say it's more like 60-40 or maybe 70-30. Of course, Anzyr sounds like the type of player that only plays a wizard and believes that all other classes should just bow down and worship him. So I'd win, cuz I'd never play with him. :)

Not even a little bit. Out of my last four characters only 1 was a Wizard. I am just able to set my opinions on what classes I like to the side and limit myself to examining their abilities compared to one another. I don't think Wizards are powerful because I like them. I think Wizards are powerful because the rules say they are. If Fighters were stronger then Wizards in the rules I'd say that instead.

Shadow Lodge

Except the build defines what the character can do.

Even a wizurd can't do everything all the time. Otherwise, there would be no point to playing the game past character creation. One person would pick wizard, and the GM would declare they they had won, everyone else had lost, and the campaign was over.

That type of game might appeal to you (the more I read of your posts, the more I think it might), but that would put you in an EXTREME minority.


Shadowkire wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


Right now. We are still focused on what a Wizard and Fighter can do, instead of one person's build.
Up PAGE were were arguing about whether I can recruit dragons, not about fighters and wizards.

Ah, but that was about Fighters. Specifically, whether the rules said fighters could recruit dragons.


Kthulhu wrote:

Except the build defines what the character can do.

Even a wizurd can't do everything all the time. Otherwise, there would be no point to playing the game past character creation. One person would pick wizard, and the GM would declare they they had won, everyone else had lost, and the campaign was over.

That type of game might appeal to you (the more I read of your posts, the more I think it might), but that would put you in an EXTREME minority.

We are not playing a game right now. We are discussing the abilities that certain classes have and how they compare versus one another. A build does not help with this. If discussing the abilities that certain classes have and how they compare versus one another is how you play Pathfinder, then we play very different games.


Anzyr wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

Except the build defines what the character can do.

Even a wizurd can't do everything all the time. Otherwise, there would be no point to playing the game past character creation. One person would pick wizard, and the GM would declare they they had won, everyone else had lost, and the campaign was over.

That type of game might appeal to you (the more I read of your posts, the more I think it might), but that would put you in an EXTREME minority.

We are not playing a game right now. We are discussing the abilities that certain classes have and how they compare versus one another. A build does not help with this. If that is how you play Pathfinder, then we play very different games.

You claim the wizard will win initiative. There may be a spell to boost it's chances, but without a build you can't make that claim.

201 to 250 of 1,830 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Mythic Fighter vs Wizard! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.