Dreamslinger's page

Vancian magic system; I find it more balanced that a point system. We tried the point system and SO many things in the rest of the game were suddenly out of balance. We found a very easy fix for out group's biggest pet peave, memorizing the same spell more than one.

Spell memorizers got to memorise the number of spells per day as normal, THEN then got a number of spell slots for the day equal to the same number. (a Wizard has 3 spell slots, memorized 3 different spells, then he can cast each spell once, 1 spell 3 times, or any combination).

That's exactly how my group handled it back when we were playing D&D, 1e and 2e.

Then 3e brought the Sorcerer class and screwed everything up :) .

BigNorseWolf wrote:

memorax wrote:

As the thread says what do you think are the bad elements of Pathfinder. Please keep the topic civil.

It didn't fix the caster/melee power discrepency at higher levels. It moved away from save or die, but still left one save or die spell in at most levels.

Honestly how can you fix caster/melee issues.

I mean a fighter is mundane and limited. Caster are virtually unlimited.

Personally I don't see the problem. The fighter is still fun to play at high levels even when the Casters are bending reality all around you.

If you fix the caster/melee balance issues you end up with 4e. Magic is no longer magical, it's just fluff that exists to make Wizard powers different from Fighter powers.

As the thread says what do you think are the bad elements of Pathfinder. Please keep the topic civil.

I've always disliked how common magic items are expected to be.

While it's not something I dislike about the system I don't really care for the style of the art and the glossy pages in the books.

Regardless of the player's skill (whether they be highly charming or Al Gore style charismatic), it is the skills of the character which determine success.

Player skill and involvement should be important. I'm not interested in playing Spreadsheets & Statistics where the formulas and rules dictate everything that happens. I don't need other people to play that game.

I don't care how high their stats are or how many ranks in something a character has, if a player can't describe what the character is doing or explain why they should be allowed to use a skill/power to get something done they haven't gotten to the point that we even need to bother getting dice out.

A player with a good and creative idea should be rewarded out of combat as well as during combat. A player that gives a description of a stunt or manuever that they are attempting in combat they should get some sort of an edge from it.

Dreamslinger wrote:

I don't see how keeping players from abusing rules qualifies as arbitrary decisions as a DM.

I'm not a fan of a player having their character walk up to a guard and say "I bluff him to get him to let me by".

I don't think it is that simple. She probably makes a generic statement that gets the point across and rolls the dice at worst. Some people are not good RP'ers(myself when I started). That does not mean I should suffer penalties as long as a make a real attempt and I don't say something stupid.

I totally agree.

Making the attempt is what matters. Having some sort of plausible rationale as to why you should get to make the skill check is what I'm looking for. Whether it's given in first or third person doesn't make a difference to me. Based on what the player describes that they are doing I'll set the difficulty of what they are attempting.

"I bluff the guard so he let's us pass" - doesn't fly.

"I tell the guard that we were supposed to meet with the court physician (whose name was learned earlier and gets dropped in the conversation) near the rose garden but that we can't seem to find it and were wondering if he could give directions" - roll away.

The second one didn't take a lot of roleplaying skill but gets the job done.

So, no, I don't think it's likely that a cohort is going to get upset by the fact that he's got a cushy job which keeps him from getting into danger.

I'd argue that that really depends on the personality of your cohort and what his motivation for throwing his lot in with you was. That's something that is very GM dependent.

I don't remember what level you said your cohort is, but it looks like he should probably be about 11th level. So you've got a Wizard back at the keep who is able to cast level 6 spells, whose intelligence dwarfs yours, that knows you depend on him for a certain amount of your power. He's also probably busy slaving away making your scrolls instead of expanding his personal power, being guarded by an extra-dimensional entity who hates you ( who also has an intellect that dwarfs yours ).

I would be very careful how you word instructions to your bound entity. Any command to "take care of", "look out for", etc. your scroll-monkey maybe interpreted by your bound critter as looking out for his interests. Which easily translates into a knife in the back.

.

*List*

Another advantage that Sorcs may have is with couterspelling.

If they know the spell that is being cast and have an open slot, they can counterspell.

If they take Improved Counterspell they can counterspell as long as they know a higher level spell of the same school as the one that they are trying to counter ( and have the slot to cast it ).

How useful counterspelling actually is is debatable but that is a discussion for a different thread.

BenignFacist wrote:

LazarX wrote:

A lot of the arguments in this thread seem to imply that unlimited item creation is avaialable. what if item creation is not an option for PCs or thier cohorts?

Then you cross off 'Better at crafting' from The List and continue to make your choice based on your personal evaluation on the proposed pros/cons of each class! :D

*shakes fist*

It really depends on -why- magic item creation is not an option in the campaign. For example, if it is due to lack of down time, the Sorcerer gains the advantage via a cohort crafter.

Once again that is GM dependent. A cohort that isn't gaining XP may decide to hit the road. The high crafting skill cohort may custom craft you some items at his cost but chances are he's going to be spending a lot of his crafting time crafting items that he can sell for to people wanting to pay full retail.

In a lot of campaigns your cohort is an NPC sidekick that takes direction from you but is ultimately played by the GM. He's not a PC-Jr. or a slave.

Sorcerers due to their high charisma will tend to have a higher leadership score than a wizard. That's a true statement.

Sorcerers being better at crafting because they can have a cohort sweatshop running 24/7 is something that may or may not fly and shouldn't be counted as an advantage of the class.

Dreamslinger wrote:

I guess that this is where I favor roleplay over roll play. For anything other than a simple quick service where the creature is trading the service for quick release, I would expect the player to make a reasonable offer or a credible threat of destruction in order to even get a chance to roll.

That's not "favoring roleplay". It's favoring arbitrary decisions by the GM.

My sorcerer (who is Lawful Neutral), for example, is deliberately played as a bit of a dick who sees nothing wrong with moving people around like pawns on a chess board. That kind of manipulation by spell casters (good guys and bad guys) is a pretty common trope in fantasy lit.

First of all I'd like to be clear that if you are having fun, your group is having fun and your GM lets it fly more power to you.

I don't see how keeping players from abusing rules qualifies as arbitrary decisions as a DM.

I'm not a fan of a player having their character walk up to a guard and say "I bluff him to get him to let me by" and expect the dice and the rules to do all of the work. It don't care if he gets +30 to his bluff checks and is allowed to take 20. It should fail.

Planar Binding should be handled the same way. The player should make a proposal to the entity that he's trying to bind. This proposal should be the requested and service and then some form of enticement. The rules even go so far as to specify that. The spell description also goes so far as to say:

If the creature does not break free of the trap, you can keep it bound for as long as you dare. You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward. You make a Charisma check opposed by the creature's Charisma check. The check is assigned a bonus of +0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward. If the creature wins the opposed check, it refuses service. New offers, bribes, and the like can be made or the old ones re-offered every 24 hours. This process can be repeated until the creature promises to serve, until it breaks free, or until you decide to get rid of it by means of some other spell. Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to. If you ever roll a natural 1 on the Charisma check, the creature breaks free of the spell's effect and can escape or attack you.

Like I said earlier, I'd interpret anything but a quick service with no real chance of death ( and keeping with the creature's nature ) with no recompense or threat as unreasonable and automatically refused. Through persistence I might eventually grant the roll as the creature realizes that it's not getting free anytime soon unless it strikes a bargain.

With amount that your character meddle in the business of entities beyond his ken there really should be in campaign consequences. There should be a deity that comes looking for his servant that has gone missing while carrying out orders. Even if you just look at the Couatl itself you are asking for trouble by binding them.

Str 20, Dex 16, Con 20, Int 17, Wis 19, Cha 17

You are summoning a creature that is much smarter than you are ( much higher intelligence and wisdom )that can read minds and charm your other minions out from under you. It can also go ethereal or invisible at will. For there to be no repercussions is kind of silly.

As for your Sorc moving people around like pawns, that seems kind of unreasonable for the stats he's got. He's got sheer magnetism and the ability to motivate people covered ( high charisma ) but he's got average mental faculties ( average wisdom and intelligence ). He's no Machiavelli, he's not even Bill Clinton. He's a good BS artist or motivational speaker, he's Tony Robbins or Sawyer from lost. He isn't a big picture think 5 moves out. It's likely that the apothecary WTFPWNS him at a friendly game of chess.

A character with those stats isn't the guy behind the guy. He's the guy. He may have a delusion of being the mastermind and pulling all of the strings but he's really the puppet.

Anyways - you seem to be having fun with your character which is awesome. I assume that goes for everyone else in your group. I'm not trying to tell you that you're having fun wrong. This thread has turned into a discussion about you and your unique situation and but about how Wizards and Sorcs compare.

BenignFacist seems to be trying to get this thread back on track. I'll stop contributing to the derailment now.

P.S. It kind of sucks that this forum doesn't support the [code][/code] tags.

Dreamslinger wrote:

I'm curious what is being offered in return for the service of the creature being bound. If there is no payment for service being offered Planar Binding is risky.

No, Planer Binding is always risky. Offering something in return doesn't change that. My Sorcerer makes it a point not to summon anything that has the ability to track him down and he keeps nondetection up all the time. The risks are minimal. Still, my Sorcerer knows the risks he's taking.

Are you constantly on the move without a home base that the creature has seen? Do all of your known associates keep nondetection on themselves 24/7?

Dreamslinger wrote:

I would think that being commanded to be a meatshield with nothing offered in return would be an unreasonable command,

I think you misunderstood. Meat shields are typically charmed monsters or the like. The occasional Tanker is summoned, but only from such creatures whose creature type enjoys fighting.

What is the sort of task that you commonly have a creature bound for? If it's not being your bodyguard I would think that they would stand by and cheer on your attacker, possibly even providing indirect tactical advantage that didn't directly break their bargain with you.

If you want to claim that your Sorcerer should be assumed to have an entity bound at any given point in time, for what service should we assume that it has been bound?

Dreamslinger wrote:

Even if you did convice the creature to agree to the bargain it would be considered an open ended command and the creature would be free in 13 days. So you'd have to summon once every fortnight.

Yes, that's true. Fortunately, the Sorcerer has a +17 on his opposed charisma roll.

I guess that this is where I favor roleplay over roll play. For anything other than a simple quick service where the creature is trading the service for quick release, I would expect the player to make a reasonable offer or a credible threat of destruction in order to even get a chance to roll.

BTW - What's your alignment? The cuatl is a lawful good creature that usually is in the service of a good diety. Not only would I think that you are running the risk of angering their masters but habitually pressing them into your service definately seems to be a non-good act.

Dreamslinger wrote:

During the days that you are trying to convince the creature to be your slave for nothing in return it get's its SR against caster level and a charisma check to try to get free. It also has a 5% of automatically getting free when you make your daily proposal.

It only takes days if the charisma check doesn't succeed right away. Mine almost always will (due to that +17 I mentioned earlier). My Sorcerer makes it a point to use only the Deluxe version of the Magic Circle Binding Circle, so SR isn't relevant.

See the last point as for why I believe that you shouldn't be instantly getting the creature to agree to your terms, no matter how high your charisma.

I agree that you are benefiting from a lenient GM when it comes to Planar Binding based on the information that you've provided. I would think that a major campaign theme in a campaign with a character that acts in the manner you describe is the the party is always trying to stay one step ahead of the extraplanar entities that are looking for revenge. I would also expect the chracter to have many unexpected derailings due to divine interference while attempting to achieve his goals (a la Odysseus).

Keeping the critter from bampfing away shouldn't be that hard. If the caster takes the time to make a diagram (with DC 20 spellcraft check) it will deny the creature the ability to use SR to break out of the circle. It will also let a Dimensional Anchor cast on the circle last for 1 day per caster level.

Absolutely unrelated and even further off topic: I'm not really sure how Banishment or Dismissal would work on a bound creature that was less than enthusiastic about the arrangement. It might not even bother to save against the spell.

Umbral Reaver wrote:

"Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions."

So while you're out making yourself the most hated being in all the planes, you're forcing some very intelligent beings to be your diplomats. Is that really such a good idea?

I think your DM is being absurdly generous with the effects of planar binding.

I'm curious what is being offered in return for the service of the creature being bound. If there is no payment for service being offered Planar Binding is risky.

I would think that being commanded to be a meatshield with nothing offered in return would be an unreasonable command, which the spell description says are never accepted.

Even if you did convice the creature to agree to the bargain it would be considered an open ended command and the creature would be free in 13 days. So you'd have to summon once every fortnight.

During the days that you are trying to convince the creature to be your slave for nothing in return it get's its SR against caster level and a charisma check to try to get free. It also has a 5% of automatically getting free when you make your daily proposal.

If at anytime a hair were to fall across the circle or a small critter disturbed the drawing there would be a free and irrate extraplanar creature free in your sanctum. An extraplanar creature with lots of extrplanar friends that are bound to resent the hubris of a mortal that dares to enslave them.

If your enemies knew that you were in the middle of negociations with your next perspective thrall I'd imagine that would be a fine time to attack. I'd also imagine that if they disturbed the circle they'd find themselves with an ally.