I can count on no hands the number of people who took that book seriously.
Personally I don't see any issue with the book aside from the fact that some options are more powerful than others... but no more than wizards compared to fighters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not just about power levels though, at least the way I'm defining such things in my game. Just like being able to fly doesn't make one a bird, being able to all the stuff 17th level wizards can do doesn't make one a god [in my setting].Well I try not to be that person who's always jumpin' in going "Hey, you want E6" or whatever but we're talking a leveled RPG system here. Levels are a representation of power on a scale that goes from normal dude (3 hp commoner) to stand-in for god (a solar that can literally not be killed except by destroying them with incredibly strong magical weapons and spells keyed to the energy diametrically opposed to its very existence, who can perform miracles casually, who can raise the dead, heal the sick, avert a comet, etc).
I don't see a need to continue inching the godly section of the scale ever higher to try and pretend that those climbing it are still just mortals, anymore than I see a need to try and make a CR 1/3 orc a relevant fear for a party of 8th level PCs. It's fighting against the power scales.
I also, still, do not get how one becomes more godly than godly. There comes a point where the only next reasonable step is narrative control over everything which doesn't work very well in a fantasy setting (especially one with multiple deities) and relegates them to either obscenely boring or so distant as to not exist at all (making them more of a legend but having no actual function).
If you don't want things to scale past a certain point, that's fine. E-whatever helps a lot in that regard. I just don't see the point in trying to stretch the scale ever onward with no real explanation as to what constitutes as "god+".
So at what point do you think a creature has godlike power (in any setting, really)?
I mean, I'm going by references from reality. Now I don't personally know what a god in your setting is but I am curious as to what defines one and I'd prefer details. Not "more powerful than a wizard" but actual examples of what constitutes as a god.
Your responses have seemed evasive and frankly confusing, especially since you commented that you didn't understand how a wizard could replicate all the acts of god in the bible, then when related dismissed them as rules shenanigans (when only one was rules questionable and another poster quickly clarified that you can just do it by casting the spell the ol' fashioned way) and remarked that wizards just can't do it, then that they could, but gods do it bigger. It seems very erratic.
Because for me, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck for all meaningful purposes. So when I see something that would be described as a god in our reality that looks like a god to me. When it does all of the things that actual gods in our lore are proclaimed to do by virtue of their godhood, that seems pretty godly to me.
Hence, again, how much more godly do you have to be to be appropriate godly? What sort of bar is raised that even our own gods of legend cannot reach, and if they cannot reach them, are you even talking about a god or something that hasn't been defined yet?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ITT: Some people actually want players to have worse characters than other players
I for one am disgusted
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ITT: Some people actually want players to have worse characters than other players
I for one am disgusted
That's how it feels, it's like a direct enforcement of Ivory Tower game design. Simple shouldn't equal worse, but the fighter's simplicity makes it a worse martial than literally any other full BAB class.
A lot of this has to do with a HEAVY overvaluing of at will, as has been seen in design more and more in Paizo, and has bled through into the Kineticist. Fighter and Rogue are the worst victims of this, but as true about 95% of the time, having resources to burn is better than not having resources to burn.
I don't want some magical perfect balance, but I'd like all characters to be able to contribute in a more meaningful way both in and out of combat. I want more varied combat from the martial side of things (being a large fan of TOB), and I can accept that some people are very happy with the 'full attack' mentality. I just don't see that is good game design for the long term.
I agree we should have some more simple classes, but I don't feel like simple classes should punish the player by making them less valuable, which seems to be the case with the mundanes.
On the topic here, I think the classes should be more balanced because when I see a 20th level wizard, that's all night and a half for me encounter wise. When I see a 20th level fighter, I wonder what I did to earn this XP piggy bank.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess the question is if you could pick an opponent based SOLELY on how easy they are (no claiming to pick the harder one because you like a challenge or whatnot), would you rather fight:
A: A 20th level fighter
or
B: A 15th level wizard?
Should the fighter REALLY be worth more XP? These two challenges are not remotely balanced against each other. I could even skew it to a 20th level fighter and a 20th level barbarian, the barb will 99.9% of the time put up a better challenge than the fighter with little thought put into its build.
HWalsh is missing the point.
I. Don't. Care.
Posturing and putting up scenarios like that has been pointless for the oh, last decade or so.
Someone put up a scenario and because I'm a cheeky git I did it for fun. And as nutty as possible. I figured that was clear.
So knock yourself out countering me. As none of that matters.
As more importantly than the range and terrain and whatever for a 1 on 1 duel is the dynamic of the group working together.
What should be concerning isn't whether or not the fighter could kill me, it's that I can reasonably perform about as well as the fighter while still performing a wizards role.
Whether or not they kill each other is meaningless.
I know you're relatively new to the boards man but but you should seriously take the time and read up on it.
And work out an honestly solid argument.
You've got a long way to go and a very large number of vocal minorities to convince.Edited because my blood sugar is kind of out there.
And you have a long way to go to convince me that this disparity exists so we are even. I have read up on it and I have found holes in the idea, not only from a play perspective, but just from a core viewpoint.
Playing a martial is difficult, yes, it isn't more challenging, but it is a different challenge, sure, it requires more skill and a willingness to not try to "dump optimize" as I call it.
However you can creatively do things that will amaze a group. I for one like it that way. Those threads are all made by the same core people not by an incredibly large group. Its the opinion of a small group of disgruntled players.
Nah, you've read a very small part of it. I can tell by the lack of veracity in the argument. AM BARBARIAN was far more convincing and that dude put in real work behind that. Arguments like that define how whole swathes of tables play their class of choice. I wonder what happened to Trinam anyway....
Anyway, if you haven't figured out already the small core exists over RPGnet, here, the old WoTC CharOp boards, 4chan, GiTP, Reddit, individual bloggers, it's been commented on by some very high name developers, by dozens and dozens of smaller unrelated boards.
Entire subsystems and house rule systems have been built around this very large tiny minority. Third party publishers, at this very moment, have made quite a bit of money either solving the issue or working around it.
If I had the time and money to go to every con ever I'd probably run a Poll merely out of professional curiosity as I freelance enough it's a legitimate piece of information to be informed about.
If it is, as you have surmised with zero support for the claim, a small minority of whiny players. They are incredibly dedicated over the past 15 years with both their time and their wallets.
Like I said, the argument is done. You can fix it, ignore it, or pretend it's not an issue but it's over. Those who will be convinced are and will handle things accordingly. The rest can do as they please.
The only things worth arguing now are if that's okay and if it's not what's the best way to get around to fixing it.
Some have determined that is' okay and run their games accordingly.
Some, like some of us here have decided it's not and are debating the merits of thigns like system overhauls, class tweaks, or flat out wiping out certain capabilities.
I'm not about to read 281 posts, so I thought I would reply to the OP.
In my opinion, you are wrong and right at the same time. It does use PvP mechanics... if the DM is using PC Races and Classes. But, in many cases that can be a false assumption. In many cases the DM has access to 4 Bestiaries, and bonus monster stats, and not to mention the entirety of 3.0 and 3.5 monsters that are very simply converted to the pathfinder system. Most DMs I know that aren't running a published module tend to use creatures instead of PC classes and thus PC rules.
Monsters break the rules all the time. How do you balance a fighter with a Naga? a wizard with a Naga? is the Naga a "class" that has a 20 level progression?
In that case, no the game is not PVP even though the game still uses the same underlying mechanics, because in no way do players have access to playing a Naga in a normal game. So there is no need to balance classes to that creature outside of certain system assumptions. That's what the CR system is for.
Is the CR system perfect? No. Is the CR system a good shorthand? I could even argue no here as well, as over or under optimized parties laugh at CR assumptions.
In the end the DM is more akin to a game developer or programmer on the WoW team rather than another player that you fight in the PVP arenas. PVP arenas that a developer created.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The game is PvP in another way.
Roleplaying is usually about invoking and executing your character fantasy. You make a character and there are scenarios you have in mind the character will interact with in ways you imagined in advance.
Someone might imagine being the big bruiser that crushes everything in his path with pure strength. "A door? I CRUSH AND CRASH THROUGH IT! RAR!"
And someone might wanna be the wizard who can bend the cosmos at his own will.
PvP happens when character fantasies conflict. It is very hard for most classes to step on wizard shoes and do something that he could do before him. But wizard can most of the time find a solution from his library of spells that becomes a solution to a problem some other player might had wanted to solve and have his moment. GM is in awkward situation. Wizard player is really creative with magic and you feel proud of him. On the other hand, you just made the puzzle master class player feel useless.
I always loved to see magic as something very powerful but very specific. Helps magic from overpowering others. Take video game Trine for example. Party of 3 heroes, one warrior, one rogue and one wizard. Warrior is best at combat, Rogue is best at platforming and Wizard is best at solving puzzles because he can only make boxes, planks and levitate objects.
So at what point do you think a creature has godlike power (in any setting, really)?
I mean, I'm going by references from reality. Now I don't personally know what a god in your setting is but I am curious as to what defines one and I'd prefer details. Not "more powerful than a wizard" but actual examples of what constitutes as a god.
Your responses have seemed evasive and frankly confusing, especially since you commented that you didn't understand how a wizard could replicate all the acts of god in the bible, then when related dismissed them as rules shenanigans (when only one was rules questionable and another poster quickly clarified that you can just do it by casting the spell the ol' fashioned way) and remarked that wizards just can't do it, then that they could, but gods do it bigger. It seems very erratic.
Because for me, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck for all meaningful purposes. So when I see something that would be described as a god in our reality that looks like a god to me. When it does all of the things that actual gods in our lore are proclaimed to do by virtue of their godhood, that seems pretty godly to me.
Hence, again, how much more godly do you have to be to be appropriate godly? What sort of bar is raised that even our own gods of legend cannot reach, and if they cannot reach them, are you even talking about a god or something that hasn't been defined yet?
I appear to be approaching the question from a totally different point of view than you. You're comparing what a 17th level wizard can do to what miracles are described in the Bible, whereas I'm not making any comparison between the game and real life. I mean, based on your definition even a 5th level wizard might be considered godlike - after all, such a person can conjure lighting and fire, fly, disappear from sight, understand any form of communication, read minds, etc.
Making comparisons to the Bible doesn't work for me when determining what constitutes a god and what doesn't in Pathfinder - at least in my homebrew setting, which is really the only one I care about. You ask what I think constitutes godlike power for any setting, but to me the question is nonsensical. Every game that is played exists in someone's setting, whether homebrew or some other published setting, and the nature of those settings will determine what is godlike and what isn't. Trying to declare some universal that applies to any or all of them seems pointless.
In my setting - which, again, the only setting where I've bothered to think of such distinctions and definitions - the magic of the gods and the magic of mortal spellcasters is fundamentally different. It doesn't matter that a 17th level wizard can cast wish, create demiplane, or whatever other spell. There are differences that, for all intents and purposes, cannot be overcome by your 17th level or 20th level wizard or 50th level wizard (I'm not using Epic Spellcasting from 3.0). Divine casters are even more removed since they get their spells directly from a deity - can't really become a deity when all of your power is directly derived and controlled by one.
I don't know how to make it any clearer than this. If you still don't understand where I'm coming from, I don't think you ever will.
Edit: Also, what kyrt-ryder said in his most recent post.