Grundhu the Derhii

Frustaro's page

79 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

It would be interesting to have an alternate bonus and the parer of a developer or something to know which is the level of power of an alternative (for example I think something like fighter's weapon training for bows/arrows or two weapon would be too strong?)

they are not constant because no developer ever thought that some crazy nerds would start such an argument! I would say this is totally gm decision because according to the rules you can interpret it in 2 different ways (reading this I can't say Seeker is wrong or it is so clear how it is wrote)...
I personally see it kinda as cheating, or forcing rules. Which I would not like to do, but in occasional games you see also players cheating dices so everyone has a different approach, as long as it satisfies you as ridiculous as it can be it's always ok.

I like those ideas, I think making the standard action more worth for martial classes is a good starting point to get things more balanced...

It's tricky to have races like werewolves and vampires in the party, but in the end it could be easily houseruled to make them not too powerful or they could have some character level disadvantage compared to the others.

Assassin class needs an assassin guild? I don't think it's so strange to have a character 'working' alone and having some assassin levels...

About factions I don't know, if you like to do the story and stuff you could create your factions and character!

The most important things in being a DM, I speak from my personal experience, is to be fair and to do things with good sense. Don't get too lost in rules if you see the game is crippling, maintain the same meter of evaluation for every character and situations. Imagine when you describe things if there was in real life such a monster / device / view whatever how would it look like!
Same thing, when you write things for example factions, imagine how they would work in real world and they could be like, what interests they have etc... The main point is to bring to the player a verosimil, even if fantasy, world where they can play / explore etc.

Good luck!

Most probably since some bonuses never stack they will not. So that barbarian 2 ranger 5 would have +4 / +2, so he better took another enemy.
This is my opinion as GM and for what I know of rules and how they generally work.

You could add something similar to the archetypes to the Fighter and other martial classes (I'm thinking of monk and rogue), so that they would gain some extra customization and extra small options: I would focus those "archetypes" more on extra class skills than sheer numbers (I don't like the derive that forces all the rpgs to produce new books always with better numbers: growth is not always possible! Let's face the future and stop that starting from pathfinder! :P

For example, a monk could choose between some particular weapon fighting styles (a monk that scales some weapon damage or somehow is not forced to use unarmed strikes all the time) or stances or particular martial schools (I'm thinking of Okuto no Ken and a monk able to strike as melee from afar like Nanto school - not that I did not put a NPC like that in one of my campaign); rogues would be about trapper assassin (who might eventually lead to the assassin death attack skill) or evasive skills (I know it's very cliche, just could not think of anything more original right now); fighter can have for example pit fighting (something to be effective also unarmed) chivalry (to gain bonuses with animal handling and riding skill/feats) or tactician (who could get the famous expertise without requirement?)...

With the money you need for a full plate mail you can almost get a half plate and a +1 large shield... if your character lacks dexterity it might be money better spent

It's not true that is less effective, if you multiply for every attack (first and second hand) the bonuses of weapon focus (later improved), weapon training, weapon spec (imp.), critical focus and various extra effects... Immagine doing it with a kukri, you have kind of a warmachine, that slice things like a mini pimer and crits on both hands with 15 blinding the target etc...

...Unfortunatly you have to invest like crazy into dexterity, which sucks! If I had to fix something, more than the fighter I would fix the dex requirements of two weapon fighting!

That being said I personally prefer to play ranger, because I like skills and all these cool stuff he has, and I prefer using two handed weapons because to be effective you only need power attack and few other things, and I can spend the feats I spear into useful things (like Iron Will and Improved iron will) and the bonus feats of ranger into the archery tree (so I can shoot, melee and ignore the dex requirments, investing instead in strength).

Just a fast digression on using more than one style, use weapon fighting:

The fighter using two weapons can use same weapons in each hand (let's say, short blade weapon training and short sword as weapon -the difference between using a long sword instead of a short is just 1 damage average), getting the bonuses of weapon training / weapon focus / spec / crit etc on both, putting together all the bonus and spearing some feats. The talents to be a dual wielder are nothing too impressive as numbers, but are a bit pain in the neck for ability score requirements (17 dex etc).
Along with two weapon talents he can pick some shot talents, and select bow as second weapon training.

A human at 9 level he would have 11 feats! (3 feats for various two w.; 3 for w focus, w spec and improved crit; power attack and we are at 7. Still 4 feats aviable, if you want they might be point b shot, rapid shot and deadly aim and manyshot?).

I just used core book and just thought about it very rapidly, but it gives a scheme and for sure you can be effective in both melee and ranged with such a character, other than having a very good AC.

What I meant is that is a roleplay game and not a videogame. For what concernes me, dying is one of the way a character can go out of scene: they can retire, become a landlord or a merchant or whatever, or die... There is no cartoon style ghost walking from respawn point to claim the corpse, recovering gold and items; your group might want to resurrect you and keep your stuff for you, not that is easy to resurrect someone.

I totally agree with Shallowsoul

I think the point of augmenting all the time the numbers does not make things more balanced. I think numbers are balanced as they are. The risk of augmenting too much numbers on the fighter's side (because they can't cast fly etc) is that the scaling of numbers will lead to a slippery slope where they will be the only one able to fight. It's nice for them to be the best at it but not to be the only ones.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

ah my bad I did not see the int prerequisite... well it's really useless as it is. You could use it for some extra skill points, but if you already have 13 int most probably you will not need them.
Crap indeed.

The wolf had better AC and was really useful in combat, hitting and tripping around while taking many foes attention on him and survived... the barbarian was a new player, had 16 strength and could not really make the difference. I'm not saying it's general experience, but on the other hand, something can be 'overpowered' but compared to what? Roleplay as my experience goes is more a matter of solving situations and adapt to what you encounter!

Fast learner is not so bad also, it can be kinda useful... Imagine for example a lv1 ranger or monk: you can put a 7-8 int, gaining more pb to spend on str dex etc and still can get all your sp due to +1 human and +1 fast learner, and not give up the useful extra hp.

Death or Glory is really really bad. Why in hell you would like to not have all your attack but a single one with +4? That also costs you an extra attack from the monster? Is almost senseless, maybe in some very circumstancial situation... I think it qualifies for one of the worste talents ever.
Prone shooter has no sense, but maybe it has with firearms? Is there a penalty to fire with firearms while prone?

I see a very good option in fighter / rogue multiclass. But if you put together the 5 AB, the weapon training, the weapon focuses and specializations, in the end the difference in numbers is pretty huge, even with an improbable same strength value. Also the rogue will have despite his probably high dex a much less AC, since the armor penalties would kill him (while the fighter can almost sleep in his full admantium platemail).

love this one: "Each +1 enhancement bonus on a weapon only overcomes 5 points of DR/magic, the all or nothing rule doesn't feel right to me."

Here are some house rules I use in my games:

-Character generator: I used 15 pb, and I am switching to 17 or 18 for next time have not decided yet.

-Alignment: the character chose a background according to campaign settings and an alignment. Dungeon Master has right to change it according to character behave (characters caring only for rewards, killing everything just caring for personal xp and coins... move towards evil!). The Dungeon Master should give some hints about the conduct of the player changing his alignment for him to be aware.

-2 consecutive 20 rolls mean threat for instant death: if the third roll is a successful hit, the enemy instantly dies.

-Power Attack can be used on thrown ranged weapon (such as javelins) to increase damage and viceversa Deadly Aim can be used with piercing weapons such as short swords and rapiers to increase damage (prerequisite for this last option is the weapon finesse feat).

-You can use Manyshot with a crossbow (you need to make a small modify on the crossbow).

-Create water creates only the amount wrote on the book in total per day, divided in how many casting the Character wants.

-I have a different point of view on richness of character according to level, and tend to have much poorer Characters and NPCs in my campaigns.

I would suggest a 12-16-12-10-7-14 build or a 12-14-12-10-7-16, depending if you want to be more an archer or more a 'caster'... Skill focus could go both in acrobatic (to get out of trouble), perform, perception (very solid choice always, also considering your -2 wisdom modifier)...
I see a lot of difficulties, being lv 1 means risk life all the time, so I would suggest the 16 in Dex, to better attack from distance and better CA.
Good luck!

Knowing what are you going to encounter is in real game, as far as my experience goes, very unlikely. Druid can transform and fly / summon / crawl / climb / dig according to the situation without any spell prepared, they can prepare a variety of spells and spontaneously substitute them with a summon, choosing a different creature according to what is needed.

I think druids are a very good and adabtable class.
OP? I played once with a friend which knows the game rolling an elf druid and a new player with a human barbarian; the armored wolf, animal companion of the druid, was outstanding the barbarian in combat, not to mention the spells and arrows coming from the elf. That time you could say druid was overpowered.

I just have ideas and concepts I want to try...
I like skills and to be versatile.
My next character will be a strength based half-orc monk, of an organization we put in our campaign called 'Black Sun', I spear you further details... :D
Also I have in mind a Halfling Ranger.
I like to try unusual builds and to make good character out of normally considered crap choices. Building powera and maximized character is overrated and boring, I like concepts and challenges.

I think you are confusing pathfinder with world of warcraft....

Speaking about balance...
I think that Fighters have the better AC and AB and possibly dmg in the game, if we talk of martial classes.
The weapon trainings along with weapon specialization make their blows stronger of anyother (expect maybe a Ranger with equal strength hitting a favored enemy, maybe), the armor training let them go around with adamantium full platemail without any speed reducing and with almost no check penalties.
They are very good in combat maneuvers (they have high strength, full bab and plenty of feats to take them). Trip is possibly the best combat maneuver, that is why it has a "crazy" prerequisite (which is totally understandable from my point of view). Monks can take that feat ignoring prerequisites, so trip is one of the few things they can do easier than a warrior! I would leave them this advantage in the global picture.

Speaking about extra feats, I think is a very good bonus. I have never had a warrior or another martial class that I did not know where to put an extra feat in use (there are so many feats you will want, but you have to plan carefully which feats you want that are not warrior bonus feats -such as iron will and improved iw- to take them as your character level feats).

I personally find the Fighter a good option and a good dual class option, I see it combining very well with the Rogue class for example, as you can take advantage both of some extra d6 dmg during flanking and of all the class skills (with 3 levels you would get 2d6 SA, many class skill and SP, trap spotter and loose 1 BAB).

I played once a Fighter/Bard in one group, he was average effective into combat (Just enough CHA for spells, better physical stats, Dazzling Display) and Extremely useful in all other situations!

If you don't want your Fighter to be a boring character, don't make it boring!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of limited number but very powerful spells. I don't think any wizard or sorcerer could complain about pathfinder being to harsh on them. Also at lower level, sleep kicks ass more than any rapid shot.
I think the balance here in pathfinder (3.75) is pretty solid and should be more or less kept this way.

How can you say that CE is useless and that trading attack bonus for AC for a fighter is bad?
Have you ever played a role play game? There is an infinitive number of situations in which CE is useful. If not for the 13 Int requisite, almost every full-BAB character would take it.
There is a time for smashing DR with PA; there is a time to hold the line with CE.

blackbloodtroll wrote:
As I said, I took a good amount time considering the pros and cons of my actions. I also found out I wasn't the only one considering it.


cup-de-grace! cup-de-grace! cup-de-grace! cup-de-grace!

"I thought about making Use Magic Device a rogue-only auto-advancing class ability, which would create rogues that can use the funky stuff that the party loots but nobody can activate, granting them a mix of strange tricks and aces up their sleeves, giving them some of their situational control back via scrolls and wands."

This is a very nice idea I think the staff should take it into consideration. Bravo! Something like wild empathy, so it would save skill points to the rogue to spend in other skills (as if it needs lol).

Anyway, it's hard to make perfectly balanced classes leaving complete freedom to players. In a video game is easier, because you have restrictions that make rules easier, it's just a matter of maths to make balanced classes. Here is different, how much can be valuated the ability to have high stealth, perception, bluff, diplomacy and disguise? Using these skills could allow you to avoid completely a fight, that could have been deadly. Than you are better than a warrior that would have to fight and die there?
I mean this is role play. With most GMing, stealth is a skill you use vs perception to be undetected. I don't know what are the RAWs that make this a non-viable option, but if it's like this I'd say RAW sucks.

Also, spell casting IS AWESOME. It's hard to make balanced 'fighter' classes (or 'not caster' if you prefore the term) in comparison with spell casters, because with levels they will be basically able to do whatever they want with spells. And I think this is pretty a fact. I also think that Pathfinder has done a lot to make non-casters classes more competitive (the ranger example comes to mind).

As for bards... Honestly I don't see why bards should be so much better than rogues. First of all, no multiclass with bards (otherwise you just split powers with no synergies). They rock in out of combat, more than rogues, but they don't have high perception (or are you making a bard with high WIS, almost the only dumpable ability for bards?), in a 1v1 he would probably be surprised, stabbed and sneaked by a rogue, before starting the combat and be able to cast out a modest spell (given that he passes his concentration check).
The save on their spell is modest, and they don't have sneak attack (imagine a rogue without sneak attack what a poor damage dealer would be: this is more or less a bard).
Maybe I'm missing some extra content from some strange book with awesome bard talents and archetypes that let you use your CHA modifier insted of STR DEX COS and WIS, but guys please this is like with 'Magic the gathering' or 'yugiho', to sell you have to give always more powerful options to all users, otherwise who would buy a new set of cards/rulebook?
My suggestion is not to mix role play with marketing or videogames.
If it's a matter of class balances, than I would nerf casters more than powering rogues, and give to spells the importance they deserve, like it was in the original warhammer roleplay game I'd say. I think I'm starting a new thread about this :)
Yo goodnight!

So, assuming your 10° level rogue out damaged... Let's look at him this way: 15 point buy: 18 15 12 10 10 7 at 10°: 19 16 12 10 10 7
Human, 9rogue 1fighter, Weapon focus, power attack, toughness, improved initiative (you can consider a skill focus: acrobatics), Vital strike (yes vital strike!), improved critical, critical focus, this kind of stuff.
You should have, at 10° level, at least a +4 str and a +2 two handed sword. Your dmg output flanking would be +15 (7 BAB+ 5 str + 2weapon +1 w.focus +2 flanking -2 PA) for 9d6 +15 +5 bleed damage. Next level you will be hitting for +15, 10d6+18+6. On single hit.
I think you will be not be outdamaged so often with this setup.
reaching 3° fighter level grants you armor training (mithrall breastplate with no penalty), 4° weapon focus, 5° level weapon training!

With these abilities you can try to use the intimidate feats (weapon focus, dazzling display etc, there is no need for intimidating prowess) maybe with a weapon with reach to stay a little bit out of troubles?
And, what about 1 level of sorcerer to cast some useful stuff like 'shield' 'true strike' (that has no somatic component)? Just had the idea... It could be worthwhile in the early game and a bit sucky later on.

I try to avoid the division of roles in the party as if we were in a video-game like WOW (the tank, the healer, the damage dealer...). Role play is about playing a character, trying to successfully complete an adventure or what goals your character has (it also depends on the campaign of course).
If I had to divide characters, I would make two big categories: 'casters' (divine or arcane) and 'fighters'. In the 'fighters' etiquette I also put monks and rogues.
Compare Rogue to Fighter: they both get a talent each 2 levels, but since Rogue benefits from sneak attack, 8 skill points against 2 and a wide selection of em, evasion, uncanny dodge... of course he has to lose some (in terms of BAB, damage, hp, CA).
Of course you can't think of a Rogue as only a skill dealer, you have to build it in order to be able do something else efficiently (archer / stabber / fighter, whatever suits you), or maybe multiclass it (rogue is one of the best 1 level classes).

Traps can be nasty, and yeah a Rogue (or an Archeologist or whatever it is, never played or seen one in my whole experience or roleplayer) is the best class to deal with them, but it's not that is necessary to have a Rogue just for that (as it's not necessary to have any particular class to reach a specific goal,it's enough that the party's competences vary), there are many ways to get past a particular devastating trap also if it has infinite 'resets' (thus a little crit activating it would not be enough): you can hire a rogue to disarm it, you can pass through the walls with a spell, maybe it would be enough a spell to reveal traps to know where they are and walk past them, or it might be a fly spell used to reach the other side of the room avoiding that particular area, and so on.

Yes, they scream PALADIN indeed! Would be perfect for it.
Also you can put 17 in dex and be a ranger!
For a Barbarian most probably you would need the 17 in COS

I would use a ranger on a 2man group, maybe with a rogue level (skills, animal companion, and almost a fighter).
Back at the date with D&D 3.0 I ran a home made adventure for 2 players, it was a kind of 'eye of beholder' or 'diablo' dungeon, always going downwards... I would build something specific if I were you, or look for 1-1 adventures to adapt.

Wow, there is a lot of nasty ideas!
I can add a few I've put along my dungeons as GM:

The party (4°) is in a ancient tomb / ruin. At this point crosses a narrow (acrobatics dc 10) metal footbridge over a pit full of spikes. A couple of traps activate passing on specific points of the bridge, casting gust of wind (that potentially throws the character in the pit) [my group tied ropes around the bridge and themselves at this point]. At the end of the footbridge, there is a narrow ceremonial room with an altar in the end and on top of it an item that the party needed. The room is designed with paintings etc, and strange black holes are scattered among the walls to melt with the background drawings unseen. As the weight of the item is removed from the altar (like Indiana Jones!) a poisonous gas starts to flow out, and two previously sealed secret doors that were looking like corridor's walls start to rise, just on the other side of the footbridge. Behind these doors there are large skeleton champions, two archers (with large composite bows, 1d10 + str) and two armored ones with tower shields that stay on front.
The room starts to get full of gas, forcing the party to move away from this dead end towards the bridge. The archers start to shoot the party taking cover behind the tower shields. Firing back at some skeleton (5/bludgeoning covered by a tower shield) looks completely useless, and the only way is passing this very narrow bridge again while shot and not tied (unless you want to tie ropes while skeletons pierce your back).

The challenge was tough but the group managed.

It's late, but more to come!

Does he sleep in a cabin on the boat? Does this cabin have a kind of opening / glass / window? Slip into his room during night, coup de grace him, throw the corpse out of the window (the sea will take care) than go back to sleep. The next morning, you have no freaking Idea of what happened to mr turtle. You were just sleeping.
It can be very funny to kill a character in game. My evil ranger killed twice our rogue / shadowdancer (well, it was not intentional, I was just swinging a cursed berserk sword while she was around flanking) and we had a lot of laughs (and our cleric casted a bunch of spells to repair the loss).

this is sick! by the way, what AM stands for?

Look for treatmonk's guide to ranger, switch hitter. You get pretty much the idea of an awesome ranger archer build.
Well the nice thing is that it's a very good archer, and when unaware enemies approach to engage him in melee, he's even better as a two-handed swinger. Sweet!

The role of the rogue is an archer / melee support, with a lot of skills to cover relevant aspects of the game (acrobatics, bluff, sleight of hand, perception, disable devise, stealth, use magic device etc.) and with the opportunity to strike for considerable damage in given circumstances.

If we talk about 'balance' of the rogue in the game, I would say keep it 8 hd and 3/4 BAB and focus the game more on skills. This is an aspect subject to the DM approach to the role play but... Skills are a relevant part of the game, not a miscellaneous aspect. When you have fighters firing 7 arrows in 6 seconds, and wizards teleporting around, is unfair to leave physic law restrictions only regarding skills!
You have +20 in stealth? You can try to hide in an empty illuminated room. God knows how you do it, maybe you are just so fast that you are always behind the poor guy's face.
Anyway even if a DM very strict on rules, you can have pretty fun and have always something to do with a rogue.

@Crimson Sirius: Here are my suggestions: half orc / human, focused on str, falchion (or two handed sword) + PA, most probably weapon focus, later on you will be looking for improved critical and a mithral breastplate for defense (count as light for movement, keeps until +5 dex, which is more or less the dex you are aiming at with bonus included). The 15point buy as I wrote above might be 18-15-12-10-10-7. Toughness and dodge would be appreciated; Vital strike could be effectively used. A middle game rogue, with a +2 breast plate, a +2 ring and dodge feat would have 8a+5dex+2r+1d= 26 AC plus natural armor bonus... It's pretty decent, considering that you will be able to avoid some thanks to acrobatics and that you are almost taking zero damage from fireballs and the alike.
Considering that fighter as a class gives you nice proficiency and other things you need, you might take a few levels in it. Example: 5 fighter levels. You get armor training (at 3°, with armor training 1, you would have 0 penalty check on mithral breastplate, and 6 max dex), weapon specialization and weapon training. You would lose overall 2d6 sneak attack (7dmg on a sneak attack hit), but getting to a BAB of 16 you would gain an extra attack and a +2 to hit (1BAB 1 / +3 dmg (+1 w. training +2 w. focus) on every hit compared to a full rogue. And you still have all your skills!
Hope this gave you some inputs!

imagine the same Rogue hitting while flanking after an acrobatics check (done with at least +19) for 10d6+21+6 bleed damage. It's not a spell, it's just a standard action with standard equipment: 22 strength (+4 from a belt of physical might), a [+3] two-handed sword, power attack, vital strike, 6d6 sneak attack, bleeding attack.
It's not a bad option. Considering that you have all the skill points you could ever need, evasion, a decent AC and awesome mobility on fighting ground.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, just to give some input to the rogue role... Take a half orc. Your attributes are Str and Dex (8 sp is enough without int bonus), Cha is your low ability (18-15-12-10-10-7 might be a good 15 point buy start). Get a falchion, get power attack, get at some point toughness, dodge, medium armor proficency -with a mithral brestplate?-, improved critical (you could also think about a fighter level); make them bleed with your snakes attacks and hit when they don't expect with a two handed!

You have a lot of skills anyway, you sacrifice charisma and related skills (this kind of character would be probably best in a party where there is a paladin / sorcerer another 'face' of the party), but you can still cover a lot of situations and you hit HARD. You can acrobatically jump in position, deliver one massive snake attack (maybe with vital strike later on) with a nice dmg output: your buddy will be flanking on his round, you can deliver another snake attack on your next turn and acrobatically find your way out of trouble if needed.
Your use magic device would not be optimized, maybe you won't be the best character for later on gaming (as any non-spellcaster class is) but still very effective. You can also add an assassin level just to try a death attack as combat starter (the CD will be ridiculously low, but it's gonna kill anyway rarely; you don't get 1 BAB but you have a plain 1d6 SA bonus for 1 lv into assassin. Consider well if it's the case).
Most probably rogue / fighter is the natural develop of such a build.
Human would also be a nice choice for this kind of character, but keep in mind that if you play a human, 1 fighter level is almost a must to get all the proficiency.

Completely agree with Samuel.
I don't think creating a feat like "quick sheathing" would be game breaking, of course, and I think it might add flavor to some characters (I can picture perfectly a samurai doing it). It might be the same "quick draw" to allow you to do it, if your GM agrees.
It can't be a simulation of reality, neither it would be fun if it was, it's a fantasy role play game!

The key is to chose spells that cover various types of enemies, if you face a demon, well black, tentacles could be a valid spell to cast on him (of course depends on the demon etc.). With a talent you can also change the kind of elemental damage your spell does, and anyway you better not focus on a single element theme or you will be often in trouble!
If you take lightning bolt and shocking grasp, get a scorching ray at least to vary! :P

You lose your spell due to the sneak damage, next round you are aware of the danger and you can move behind a barrel (it's just an example, imagine being in a dead end, in the slum district of the city, cornered by robbers) and cast a spell that otherwise would be forfait: that was the point.
I'm not interested in lowering the level of this stimulant dispute.

Of course you have to built a proper sorcerer, with for example black tentacles lightning bolt and fireball you can damage on area, change element, control the battlefield, as much as you have spells, and you have plenty. A wizard could prepare one of those, 2, than just watch.
A sorcerer can take still and silent spell and actually use them with profit. It's a different concept, the bloodlines abilities I think are the good compromise between enhance spontaneous spell casters and the impossibility of giving them the spell progression of a wizard.

As the oracle, ok maybe he knows just 4 2° spell, but he does not have to learn any restoration, and doesn't have to rely on spontaneous healing. I gave a Half Orc oracle (6° now) as an npc to my group, he's a tough melee character with 18 strength (15point built), he has at the moment those spells
1) cure light wounds, divine favor, shield of faith, remove fear + enlarge person from mistery
2) lesser restoration, bull's strenght + fog cloud (m)
3) cure serious wound + magic vestment (m)
he's doing a lot of damage with his great sword, can control, can heal, can remove ability damage. I can say he's a successful character indeed. It is another concept, but I don't think if he was a Cleric he would be dong much better.

what I'm getting at is: why the ranger does not cast like a druid? He does not transform into a huge elemental, he has just 1/4 BAB less and 1pf per level, so let's give him the same spell capability as a Druid. Sounds as crazy to me as giving the same spell progression to sorcererr

@abraham: wizard: cast d. door - prepared arrow on him from a hidden archer, concentration check failed, no more d. door.
see also: wizard: cast prepared black tentacles, uops they are flying, wops I did not prepare any lightning bolt and those red dragon whelps look pretty resistant to fire... Wait me 20 minutes while I prepare my very flexible lightning bolts.

If you ask me, there could be a "war crossbow" for martial weapon users, it might be just like a light cross bow, with the opportunity to make it "mighty", it costs a lot and it needs ONE talent to be used effectively (to reload it as a free action. The talent could be a custom "war crossbow mastery" for example).
So you have a bow, with 19-20 x2 crit instead of x3, slightly better than a bow for the crit but with a shorter range, that needs an extra talent to be effectively used.
This is how I house ruled the crossbows in my campaigns and it works fair enough.

I don't think getting spells one level after is a price too high to pay

Maybe... But is the advantage of casting whatever spell you like without preparing it less or more valuable than a +1/4 BAB and 1 HP per level?

@Liam Warner
I assume that there are druids and clerics, and adepts, and that they can all cast create water. I assume that even the poorest of those who could cast create water at will could compensate and substitute every of the aspects I highlighted in my post (the routs and oasis, the goatskins, the camels), and that in a world where one cleric can create water at will none of those skills and knowledge would exist (who would bother with all that stuff if you could just get a cleric that creates, the poorest cleric of all, one liter of water per second?).
That is the reason why I house ruled it (and I honestly recommend the manual would do the same), to put a stop at the water that can be conjured. I think that for a 0° spell slot, and a 1° character, 7.5 liters of water per day is a fair amount; I don't feel a tyrant or to nerf anyone, it just makes more sense to me (not to mention that conjuration should not be something to be done slightly and at will).
I don't want to bring on the table the aspect of the Desert Gods that don't want him to cast, I consider it a bad dungeon master way out.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The flexibility that the wizard has?
I really don't see this.
From my experience of dungeon master and player, sorcerers are way ahead as flexibility. In my actual 2 groups... I appreciate the efforts the wizard puts into using the spells he prepared, but the sorcerer of the other group is a more efficient and reliable damage dealer and controller.
I think it depends on how strict is the dungeon master and how much information 'out of role play' the characters receive...
If you don't know what you are going to face, even with a ring of sustenance you still need some minutes to prepare free slot spells (not something you can do in combat), while the sorc can blast / control whatever according to the situation, always effectively.
Clearly it's two different classes, power and planning versus reliability and flexibility.
I honestly would never give the same spell progression to wiz and sorc, it would be like giving the same spell progression to ranger and druid.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>