Creeping Power


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


So I feel I've seen a lot of people complaining about "Power Creep" when options for "inferior" choices get a buff.
Example:
OMG I hate the power creep in familiar folio, having familiars maybe be useful with an investment!? It's to much.

So I'm curious about two things.
1) If the rogue got a buff of some sorts to make it "worth playing" (like getting full BAB, especially pre-ACG) would people see that as power creep?

2) How would you define power creep?

My answer to number 2 is:
Power creep would be when new choices are always better than old choices but it's not obvious that it is better. Or if "things to good to be true like sacred geometry and Divine Protection" become common.

Scarab Sages

I defy that there is power creep when any example given of it for classes is not as powerful as a CRB wizard and any example of a feat is not as powerful as Leadership or Craft feats.

What is seen as power creep is usually just martials having nice thing for a change, until a FAQ comes along and nerfs them.


You want to see real power creep?

Go into an unoptimized party with an 18 strength Fighter using a greatsword and power attack. Blow minds.

Then when everyone else has either re-rolled or respected to keep up, you then re-roll/re-spec into a real class. Blow more minds.

You end up with people not playing paladins that struggle to have enough strength to qualify for power attack.

Ta-da POWER CREEP via optimization. Devs publish more material, the potential for optimization gets higher. More and more combos become "sub-par". Do not fear the power creep. Fear power creep via exploits, because that is when the game starts breaking down.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Power creep is when the current best options become worse (even if by a small amount) than the new options.


Rhedyn wrote:


Ta-da POWER CREEP via optimization. Devs publish more material, the potential for optimization gets higher. More and more combos become "sub-par". Do not fear the power creep. Fear power creep via exploits, because that is when the game starts breaking down.

Optimization I wouldn't say is power creep. And having more ways to optimize doesn't make power creep to me either. Having the best most awesome familiar isn't better than a lot of other options. So the potential to do that is good I feel.

I'm not sure what you mean by power creep via exploits. Do you have some examples?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Power Creep is when the old choices *are* obvious in my opinion. See the Investigator and Slayer for an example.

While on that subject, those two class are my proof that power creep can be done well. The Rogue is the weakest class in the game (at least Monk has Zen Archer.) So these two classes come and fix the problem.

Many wouldn't call it power creep because it is welcome. Power creep is certainly more noticeable when it replaces a more liked option. Many people got on the Gunslinger and Arcanist's cases because they thought it would replace Ranger/Ranged Fighter and Wizard/Sorcerer respectively. We know now that both classes have their advantages and disadvantages compared to the older material so it's okay.

To give a clearer example, I have to switch games. Marvel Avengers Alliance, a mobile game featuring playable Marvel heroes, has the worst problem with power creep I've ever seen. Many old heroes got left behind int eh dust until the creators could get around to buffing them. Some are still left behind.

The Thing, for example, pales in comparison to later big bruiser type characters. Some people still love the Ever-Lovin', Blue-Eyed Thing so it hurts more than a class being left behind int eh dust. You could always rebuild a character with the same personality, backstory, traits, etc. in the new class. Fans of the Thing may not like replacing a character they love with Hercules (a far superior option mechanically.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Power creep comes in two varieties. Game level power creep comes naturally as new options are published, used and evaluated. A good example of this can be found in the wizard guides. A God Wizard will probably lose to a Blockbuster Wizard, but only because a Blockbuster Wizard is using feats from APG and UM and the God Wizard isn't.

The other kind of power creep is at the tables. It happens when someone makes a character that is more optimized than the others. Then an escalating cold war starts where the goal is to grab your 20% of the face time (or however much) and the only way to do it is to be more effective than your team members. You see this at PFS and in home games, though it often is more pronounced when you play with the same people for multiple campaigns.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How would I define power creep? Rifts splatbooks.


Petty Alchemy wrote:
Power creep is when the current best options become worse (even if by a small amount) than the new options.

Does that even happen? I t always seems like I reach outside the Core rulebook for flavor over power. I know there are some things but it usually involves an option that was more 'least terrible' than 'best'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree that I don't think power creep has happened for the game. The rogue class being replaced by combat rogue and skill rogue that can still combat to me isn't power creep. As they aren't overwhelmingly more powerful than ever other full bab or 3/4 bab classes. They are good solid classes, which the rogue isn't as much.


Marvel Avengers Alliance Talk:
Larkos wrote:

To give a clearer example, I have to switch games. Marvel Avengers Alliance, a mobile game featuring playable Marvel heroes, has the worst problem with power creep I've ever seen. Many old heroes got left behind int eh dust until the creators could get around to buffing them. Some are still left behind.

The Thing, for example, pales in comparison to later big bruiser type characters. Some people still love the Ever-Lovin', Blue-Eyed Thing so it hurts more than a class being left behind int eh dust. You could always rebuild a character with the same personality, backstory, traits, etc. in the new class. Fans of the Thing may not like replacing a character they love with Hercules (a far superior option mechanically.)

To be fair, Hercules also costs three times as much as Thing (or four times? Been a long time since I bought Thing). While cost isn't a clear descriptor of power in that game (Loki, here's looking at you), it certainly plays a factor, and all of the heroes released after launch, with only a single exception in Quicksilver, have cost at least as much as the most expensive starting heroes (starting heroes cost 90 CP at the most; every new hero is 90, 135, or 200 cp).

Power Creep is when old options are totally invalidated by new ones. If I have no reason to play any of the old Core classes because newer ones exist, then we have power creep.

Now, as was mentioned above, power creep is not inherently bad. The Investigator/Alchemist/Slayer vs. Rogue is as excellent example of power creep that is not bad. The Qinggong Monk is another.

Partial invalidation is also not bad. I'm sure that if you somehow managed to acquire the statistics of how popular classes are, after the ACG's release the Barbarian would have dropped in popularity because the Bloodrager is a thing. But as long as the Barbarian is still useful (which it is), the Bloodrager is not an example of power creep.


MORE Marvel Avengers Alliance Talk!:
kestral287 wrote:
To be fair, Hercules also costs three times as much as Thing (or four times? Been a long time since I bought Thing). While cost isn't a clear descriptor of power in that game (Loki, here's looking at you), it certainly plays a factor, and all of the heroes released after launch, with only a single exception in Quicksilver, have cost at least as much as the most expensive starting heroes (starting heroes cost 90 CP at the most; every new hero is 90, 135, or 200 cp).

While it is true that the Thing is less expensive, he's still basically useless even with his alt costume. So save up for someone good or throw god after bad are your options there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If no one here has played the Pokemon TCG, that game is the DEFINITION of power creep. They would release new sets of cards every couple months, and half of those completely invalidated previous cards. You couldn't even claim the "I use Charmander because I like him" bit, because they have multiple versions of each pokemon, and the newest version of Charmander is almost certainly going to be better than your old one.

Really it's more of a "power sprint" but you get what I mean.

I don't think PF has ever had a power creep simply because the only real examples anyone has for an obsolete class—the monk and rogue—were pretty obsolete from the get go. Bards, rangers, and illusion-focused wizards were always more beneficially to have around than rogues, and monks were just never very good, even in the pre-PF days.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me, there has not been power creep. If you didnt compare invididual options against eachother, but instead gave an objective (this is theory) 'power rating' to each option presented in each book since the core rulebook, I think both the average and the standard deviate would be roughly the same.

In every single book, we have had some options that were probably too powerful, a good chunk that were just about right, a majority that are just bellow par, and then a few that are really poor. Both the spread of the power of all the options in the game, and the ceiling and floor have remained the same. If you take a core optimized party through and published adventure, it will rofl stomp it just as hard at pretty much everything currently available. Particularly if you (as I do) consider the advanced players guide as part of the core rules, since that is pretty much what set the tone of the whole of pathfinder.

What has changed, is that more concepts have good options. Things like a fighter mage (magus, bloodrager), or the rogue (slayer, ninja, investigator, or various bard archetypes), or the dashing swashbuckler (swashbuckler), can be done pretty well at this point, where as early on if you wanted ot play with that concept, you struggled. To me that isn't power creep, thats gameplay improvement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malwing wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Power creep is when the current best options become worse (even if by a small amount) than the new options.
Does that even happen? I t always seems like I reach outside the Core rulebook for flavor over power. I know there are some things but it usually involves an option that was more 'least terrible' than 'best'.

It has in certain areas. If you wanted to play a dex based highly skilled swashbuckler type, you have waaay better options now then you did in the core rules, or even the core+apg.

But is there something in the game that is going to outclass an optimized combat druid with natural spell and a pouncing companion? Nope. I dont think so. You might be able to match it with a different concept, but not outclass it.


Having played many game systems I'd say Path Finder has good control on power creep compared to many others. There is power creep it's been about 6 years now. 6 years and power creep where it is very impressive that it has gotten out of control.


Kolokotroni wrote:
Malwing wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Power creep is when the current best options become worse (even if by a small amount) than the new options.
Does that even happen? I t always seems like I reach outside the Core rulebook for flavor over power. I know there are some things but it usually involves an option that was more 'least terrible' than 'best'.

It has in certain areas. If you wanted to play a dex based highly skilled swashbuckler type, you have waaay better options now then you did in the core rules, or even the core+apg.

But is there something in the game that is going to outclass an optimized combat druid with natural spell and a pouncing companion? Nope. I dont think so. You might be able to match it with a different concept, but not outclass it.

I think that falls under least terrible rather than best.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am horribly disappointed this thread isn't about a new Creeping Power that characters could get.


thejeff wrote:
I am horribly disappointed this thread isn't about a new Creeping Power that characters could get.

I dunno, the assassin works pretty well as a creeper. He does lack much in the way of power, though. EDIT:clarity

Scarab Sages

I find the solution to the power creep is Chris Hansen telling someone to take a seat.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Creeping Doom used to be much more powerful than in Pathfinder, is that reverse power creep?

1st Edition Creeping Doom:

Creeping Doom (Conjuration/Summoning)
Level: 7 Components: V, S, M Range: 0 Casting Time: 9 segments Duration: 4 rounds/level Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: Special
Explanation/Description: When the druid utters the spell of Creeping Doom, he or she calls forth a mass of from 500 to 1000 (d6 + 4) venomous, biting and stinging arachnids, insects and myriapods. This carpet-like mass will swarm in an area of 2" square, and upon command from the druid will creep forth at 1" per round towards any prey within 8", moving in the direction in which the druid commanded. The Creeping Doom will slay any creature subject to normal attacks, each of the small horrors inflicting 1 hit point of damage (each then dies after their attack), to that up to 1,000 hit points of damage can be inflicted on creatures within the path of the Creeping Doom. If the Creeping Doom goes beyond 8" of the summoner, it loses 50 of its number for each 1" beyond 8", i.e. at 10" its number has shrunk by 100. There are a number of ways to thwart or destroy the creatures forming the swarm, all of which methods should be obvious.


Big Lemon wrote:

If no one here has played the Pokemon TCG, that game is the DEFINITION of power creep. They would release new sets of cards every couple months, and half of those completely invalidated previous cards. You couldn't even claim the "I use Charmander because I like him" bit, because they have multiple versions of each pokemon, and the newest version of Charmander is almost certainly going to be better than your old one.

Really it's more of a "power sprint" but you get what I mean.

I don't think PF has ever had a power creep simply because the only real examples anyone has for an obsolete class—the monk and rogue—were pretty obsolete from the get go. Bards, rangers, and illusion-focused wizards were always more beneficially to have around than rogues, and monks were just never very good, even in the pre-PF days.

Almost all card games run into it, really. Pokémon... yeah, I still remember the days of Haymaker, and Hitmonchan and Scyther being the Best Things Ever. Yugioh definitely; running an old-school beatdown deck is pure suicide now and even most of the stuff from a year back can only barely keep up. Yugioh's is actually kind of fun to watch just by looking at the banlists over time.

MtG is interesting with it. Not entirely unlike Pathfinder, there are some early options that are ludicrously strong and others that nobody would even give a second glance now. After the first few, power's trended upwards but slowly, and it's yet to reach the highs of some of the early set stuff (dual-mana lands are probably the easiest place to see this).

MAA still:
Larkos wrote:
While it is true that the Thing is less expensive, he's still basically useless even with his alt costume. So save up for someone good or throw god after bad are your options there.

This is true, but my point is that that one less about the power creep than it is the costing. PD seems to want you to pay at least 90 CP for any hero that's good, whether that be with a lower cost hero + an alt, like War Machine gets, or a fancy expensive Spec Ops hero, or the season two uniform stuff.

Though it can get subverted to hell and back even there. My primary PvE team when not training is... Dr. Strange and Human Torch. Neither one's been refactored upward since I started playing (right around the game's one year mark on Facebook; Strange actually ate the nerfbat after my first PvP season but neither's been touched since). My PvP team at level 300 is War Machine + Iron Fist. All four of those are heroes dating back to launch, though the PvP ones have gotten reworked since. Strange got a solid E-iso but that's it, and Human Torch was just in a position to uniquely benefit from the basic A-isos, as his unique E-iso is... not worth much. So Thing's problem is really just that he's the Thing, and has pretty much always been bad. He actually got a really, really good unique e-iso, but it's not enough to bring him out of mediocrity.

But as another point of comparison, Invisible Woman got nothing but an e-iso (the same as Thing got) and is extremely viable.

Where that game really power creeps is in the weapons. There aren't many 'old' weapon that are still worthwhile, and every now and then we get a new weapon that becomes pretty close to an auto-include. I remember when I used the Neurotrope, the Blade of the Guardian, the Sinister Sceptre... now those are all mediocre at best. The Scroll of Angolob and arguably the Warbringer Axe are the only really old weapons that are worthwhile these days... and even the Scroll is starting to fall off, what with all the magic-immunities floating about.


Power creep occurs when players make choices Purley for the effect it has on the game mechanics.
This leads to some odd characters with strange class choices taken Purely because having a level in A will give you access to X.Y.Z
And the more options you have gives players more ways to achieve this and the Internet allows for people to share this with a larger audience of people
And sadly when one person does it in a group others will copy it's what I call the
"Gamer see Gamer do" Mentality

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Creeping Power All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion