Giant Frog

OgreBattle's page

145 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Blakmane wrote:

This thread makes me sad. OP hasn't even commented, but in case he's not a troll but simply away and comes back to this flamewar confused:

OP, the sole reason synth was banned in PFS was because the rules were extremely messy and complex, which was slowing down society play. PFS does not traditionally ban based on power or percieved 'OP-ness'.

I'm surprised to find a "how to generate stats" debate here hahah, but yeah I haven't taken a good look at the Synthesist and didn't know about the rules being so confusing that they often came with errors that slowed down society play.

As for rolling random stats, my favorite way of doing that is the DM rolls a set of stats and the players choose whichever ones that suits them.
-Everyone chooses from the same set, so no party disparity
-Random generation leads to interesting results that may inspire a quirky character
It's the best of both worlds. I've played games of ACKS using that method and it worked out.

*Though another HUGE DIFFERENCE was that in AD&D era the difference between 10 and 15 in most stats was piddly if non-existant and an 18 gave you a lot less. +1 to hit and +2 damage vs +4 to hit/damage is a BIG difference.

AD&D characters are also generated very quickly and have less mechanical parts so sometimes the only difference between two Fighters is their stats and gear.

Besides you aren't suppose to name an AD&D character until he hits 4th level :p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ParagonDireRaccoon wrote:


I explained how I could fire blind without risking the gaze attack, and explained statistically how long it would take to kill the basilisk. The GM wouldn't allow it because the rules never spell out how to average attack rolls and miss chance. I said I could fire acid splash at the ceiling above the basilisk until it collapsed and killed the basilisk. The GM said there was no rule for that and it wouldn't work. The GM didn't allow for creative solutions to work...

There ARE rules for those actions.

http://paizo.com/prd/glossary.html#_blinded
The basilisk has full concealment if you're firing blind.

There ARE rules for using acid splash to eat away at the ceiling, depending on its material and thickness it has a hardness rating and number of hitpoints.

"Asking the DM if something is allowed" is system neutral. He could have refused your plan playing AD&D just as easily with any explanation he wants because he's the DM, while in 3e/Pathfinder the rules for giving your clever plan the greenlight DO exist. I've had games of D&D3e where the DM making stuff on the fly like "That horrible fire melded your armor to your body, -1 CON but you now have natural AC+1" or "Your hand gets cut off!" just because.

The DM can do whatever he wants in any edition of D&D. If he wanted his basilisk to kill all of you, then you are going to die.

*If I was DM'ing that encounter, I'd probably have the Basilisk try to smash through the iron bars ('cause there's rules for that) in response to its prey just out of reach splashing it with acid, or go wander off because it's not worth the trouble. Then you can collect everyone's corpses with a feeling of suspense, or the basilisk broke through the bars and you die too. That DM you had just sucked.

----

What I like about AD&D was how treasure was distributed pretty much randomnly. If the only +3 weapon you have is a dagger, then you pull that out when you have to stab a golem. 3e's magic item wishlist and WBL kind of took the magic out of finding magical loot.

Monsters also had less hitpoints so a high level fighter could realistically cut through swaths of them. A Red Dragon had like 88 hit points so an archer could just kill it in a single volley if he had enough attacks that round. Hitpoint damage stayed relevant in AD&D.

My favorite retroclone is Adventurer Conqueror King, it's well presented and character generation is fast. The artwork is also stylish.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sohei->Empyrean (WIS)Sorceror->Eldritch Knight makes for a nifty arcane ninja that casts with wisdom.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So why is that Summoner Archtype banned from pathfinder society games? It doesn't seem any stronger than a regular summoner. Sure turning into a big magical monster is neat, but Clerics and Druids (and Wizards sometimes) can pull that off too.

I'd also like to hear comparisons between a Synthesis Summoner vs a shapeshiftin' Druid, is the SynSummoner really that much stronger to warrant banning?


Aelryinth wrote:

A city that can afford an AMF can also afford to planar bind air elementals, invisible stalkers and other creatures to guard its airspace, in addition to having mounted troops of its own, and ways for sentries to detect the invisible, ranging from bats to See Invisible areas excluded from the AMF.

There are SO MANY ways to shut down your piddling little mage who if he is very very lucky can barely get into position to do his damage with one spell

How many ways don't require being a full caster yourself? I thought this was a "how to beat casters without being a caster" argument.


If you want to play AD&D, why not play AD&D? PF is for PF. It's not like AD&D stopped existing, the rules are still out there and very easy to find.


Bruunwald wrote:


I think anybody who is into Manga and Anime with any seriousness, and also understands 3.x/Pathfinder well, has a good understanding that the two do not match up well in most cases. Characters in Manga and Anime tend toward overpoweredness and often possess random powers and suddenly manifesting powers that cannot always be duplicated in a standard class format under normal RPG rules.

They only seem 'overpowered' if you're comparing them to fighters and rogues. A mid level cleric is versatile enough to replicate the abilities of many anime characters.


So Marthkus, what's your view of monks and fighters since you started this thread last year?


Erick Wilson wrote:


You see why I didn't want to start talking about Record of Lodoss War?

I like it when Circle of Protection is actually a forcefield radiating from the caster instead of a passive bonus. I guess the way to represent that in d20 is some kind of force wall sustained by the caster's focus.


EvilPaladin wrote:
So, have we decided about whether or not Barbarians are unbalanced yet?

Yeah, you can tell by which replies get the most upvotes:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qt2q&page=1?OK-Im-just-going-to-say-it-Bar barians-are

This one has the most upvotes, at 17

Lemmy wrote:

What's wrong is that Barbarians are the only martial class that get Pounce. (At 10th level. After investing 3 Rage Powers. Meanwhile, Druids get it for free at 6th level and Summoners at 1st level for a single evolution point).

Martial classes losing 90% of their effectiveness because they dared to move 10ft is one of the biggest flaws with the system.

This one has 12

Deadmanwalking wrote:

First Paladins, now Barbarians. Are Martials suddenly not allowed to have nice things by the fandom even when Paizo gives them some?

More seriously, any Superstition Barbarian has this unfortunate problem where they cannot be healed by spells while raging and if they stop raging without getting healed when they need healing, they're likely to die. There are ways around this...but they're not as easy as all that. They also have less utility options than, well, any 6 or 9 level caster class or those with more skill points (which is around 3/4 of existing classes).

I love Barbarians, and they are very good at hitting things until they die...probably better than anyone else vs. non-Evil targets (they fall behind Paladins vs. Evil stuff), but that's all that they're the best at. Let them have the win.

You can go look for the rest yourselves, but the ones that go "Barbarian is fine, others need to catch up and here's why:" are the popular posts.


Yeah that's a good change for the levels most commonly played.
Nobody is 'mundane' after level 6 though, further ahead is when Paladins start sprouting wings.

I love the Conan novels, but I also know that Conan is not a 20th level character concept. Coincidentally the levels where Conan is a valid concept (1-6, a bit higher with a stretch) are the levels I like the most. But after a certain point Conan will need to pick up Thor's Hammer and gain godly powers to go beat up Crom.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DSs2bX13hVc/S8CebyJMNtI/AAAAAAAAB_c/XZJTN1MkoeI/s 1600/conanthor3.jpg


Sindalla wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is why Syntheist Summoners are banned, lol.

How would a Master Summoner have done?


You need to direct that guy to a game of AD&D set in Krynn so he can play as a kender, then watch his PC get murdered.


I was wondering if there's any info out there on what levels pathfinder's designers usually play at and have played up to, and with what classes. Do they have any favored classes themselves?

With D&D, I remember reading somewhere that 3e's designers barely played anything at level 15+.


Matt Thomason wrote:


I removed AoOs (the Beginner Box combat rules don't use them either, just as an FYI), I'm told that invalidates quite a few character builds, but the people I play with don't go in for "character builds" anyway, so there's no harm done.

Here's an example of something like a 'trust issue' you mentioned. You have a wizard and a fighter, the wizard is squishy. There are some hobgoblins attacking them. As the DM do you just never have the hobgoblins walk past the fighter to stab the wizard?

Or you have a hobgoblin wizard standing behind a fully armored hobgoblin knight with a giant shield. What do you do if your PC says "I charge the hobgob wizard" What do you do as the DM, make a ruling?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Karl Hammarhand wrote:


Nope not confrontational at the beginning. It gradually moved that way. I saw it creep in and that with the lowering of trust made adversaries of the GMs and the players. Also the fact society openly mocked honor and fairplay made it almost inevitable. Making the 'most popular roleplaying game' more like a video game shoved it hard away from spontinaety, cooperation, and trust. Sorry for the spelling on a mobile.

There's a nice post from the Grognardia blog about how (at least for him) D&D adventures were viewed in the 70's

http://grognardia.blogspot.com/2008/09/retrospective-tomb-of-horrors.html

"Of course, you have to remember why the module exists at all. The story goes that the diehard core of D&D fans regularly complained to TSR that the modules produced to date had been "too easy." Some people who don't remember those days might have a hard time understanding this, because of the shift that's occurred in the way gamers look at modules. Back then, a dungeon was something to be "beaten." Gamers looked at modules sort of like the way video game players look at new releases -- they wanted to get as many hours of gameplay out of them as possible. So Gary Gygax took this as a challenge to his design skills and the result was Tomb of Horrors."

Heck, they even ran tournaments where your individual characters could be slotted in like an MMORPG raid group to win loot that they can then use in other tournament dungeon raids. The DM was the guy who ran the monsters trying to kill you.

Considering that D&D predates videogames (obviously), it's more that videogames borrowed from D&D than modern D&D being 'too videogamey'. Stuff like the Tomb of Horrors only exist as a difficult mechanical challenge for high level characters to beat or die.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's pretty easy to return to AD&D, just remove feats and skills from the game. If your players want to do something, have them describe it and you just say yes or no or roll a d20 behind a screen for a sound effect and then say yes or no, based on how you feel about it.

That's all there is to it. The only wordy rules left with guaranteed effects are spells.

Becausein D&D, spells came before skills
Before there was a thief class for percentile dice sneaking there was the invisibility spell. Before there were rules for making people like you or scaring them based on what you say, there were spells for charming and scaring. Before there were rules for weather effects, there were rules for shooting storms out of your hands. And so on and so on.

Just keep in mind that if you're going back to AD&D, it's only Wizards and Clerics who are able to dramatically shape the world without your approval*, everything else is a 'mundane' plan that you get to veto.
...and once your players have an idea of what they can and can't do based on your on-the-spot rulings, those rulings become house-rules and you wind up with a proto-skill system, which is pretty much what happened with D&D through the 70's onward.

*Well the DM has absolute authority so you can always throw in arcane static or 'your god is not happy with you' to say "no" to casters too.

**I suggest FATE as a good system that's more narratively driven with less fiddly parts than Pathfinder, check it out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Karl Hammarhand wrote:


I can understand magic being limited. It's magic. Otoh can you think of a physical or mental ability you can only use 'once per day'?

Sure. This is written mostly for 4e Fighter powers but applies somewhat to PF. Our bodies have their limits and peak performance really does have a limited daily use in real life.

----
1) narrative, this is when the spotlight shines on you. When Conan swipes off the giant snake’s head in a single blow, Robert E. Howard was using his PC’s Daily. It’s the PC using his own token of agency to affect his fantasy world.

2) ‘realism’. I don’t really want to use that word for Fantasy Dragon Dungeoning… but crazy athletic feats can get pretty tiring. Hitting a monster 9x harder than you normally can is one of those tiring things.
When arguing with someone and trying to change their mind though, it’s good to have proof, so this thread is about some ‘proof’. I remember reading something about how human muscles use 3 energy sources, the time it needs to recharge for peak performance, etc.

Three systems produce energy in the human body, one aerobic and two anaerobic. They are:
· ATP/CP system - anaerobic.
· Lactic acid (LA) system - anaerobic.
· O2 system - aerobic.
The ATP/CP system.
It is anaerobic because whilst using it, oxygen is not supplied from the air breathed in. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) is a compound necessary for muscular contraction. The compound is stored in the muscles and a very quick contraction, lasting only a fraction of a second uses it all. For an exercise lasting longer than this, another compound called creatine phosphate (CP) is used. CP can provide a muscle with virtually instant energy without the need for oxygen. It is the muscle’s emergency system, but it is stored in only very small amounts and so is depleted very quickly.
In an untrained person ATP/CP is exhausted in about 8 seconds. Through proper training it can be made to last only a few more seconds. Anything requiring short bursts of energy at maximum intensity relies heavily on this system. (like an encounter or daily power)
It takes about three minutes of complete rest to get a fairly full restoration of ATP (so, once per encounter). Proper training to maximize ATP/CP would be short bursts of 15 seconds or less at maximum intensity, with rest periods between short bursts of three minutes or more.
2. The lactic acid system (or the anaerobic lactic system) - LA system.
This system can also supply the muscle with energy in the absence of oxygen. But it uses glycogen and because of the lack of oxygen, lactic acid is formed. Intense activity of a muscle causes this system to operate at a high level until eventually the build up of lactic acid inhibits the muscles action and causes it to slow down. The blood system removes lactic acid to the liver where it is detoxified. During a recovery period the muscle regains its ability to function. The period of time that the muscle can support this type of effort is up to two minutes. An example of an activity of the intensity and duration that this system works under would be a 400 m sprint (or perhaps an Encounter with a dragon)

3. The aerobic system (O2 system).
This system utilizes breathed in oxygen in the muscle and thus interacts with the cardio respiratory system. The presence of oxygen in the muscle allows stored foodstuffs (mainly glycogen but also protein or fat for very long duration exercise) to be transformed into muscle energy by a series of reactions which avoid the production of lactic acid. The O2 process can therefore continue for as long as the energy demands of the muscle are within the capabilities of the oxygen delivery system and the food store. Lactic acid may well have been built up in previous work bouts because the LA system may have been used first. But in this case transferring from the LA system to the O2 system will allow the lactic acid to somewhat dissipate.

This can be used to explain the difference between an At-Will and Encounter power.

So we could say a 100meter dasher is somebody with a movement Encounter/Daily power

a 400meter runner is someone who has an at-will movement enhancing power
a marathon runner has skill training Endurance or some other power that enhances daily travel limits.

As for dailies, well note that even with a 3 minute rest you don’t get absolutely 100% restored, nor is strain removed. Athletes have some pretty intense, lengthy recovery processes after games like massages and ice baths. The body can only take so much strain, and will fail when pushed too far (For example, power lifters have been documented crapping out their intestines when their bodies can’t take the strain of the weights they’re trying to lift). There is also mental fatigue to consider.

*(In something as stressful as combat sports, it’s often months before the fighter’s next match to make sure they’re close to peak performance)
I’m not saying ‘4e is completely super realistic’, but there is some real-world relevance to how it goes about things. If it helps in the immersion of your fantasy dragon murder-looting, then enjoy.
-----

I don't think pathfinder rogue abilities are good enough to deserve daily limits though and a lot of it is "talky stuff" rather than physical strain. I prefer "encounter/short rest" recharge to dailies anyways.


Barbarians are able to be built in a way where they can resist level appropriate magic as well as wreck stuff in melee, notably being able to pounce at level 10.

How can other 'martial' melee classes be brought up to the level of this iconic Barbarian?


This is falling into the Crane Wing trap. A certain kind of Barbarian being strong and effective for being a melee brute does not mean it's overpowered, it means other options and comparable classes are UNDERPOWERED.

The question should be "How can I make other martial dudes as useful as a supersticious barbarian?"


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Full Attacks bring up an interesting tactical situation where if you charge the troll he tears you in half on its turn, so how do you get the troll to move and attack you instead?

...but I also want pounce on everything after a certain level heh.


What spells support archery for clerics?


The Cleric domains is already a good model for how you can add specialization within a single class, in Naruto Ninjas fall into categories like...
-Healing: also used offensively like Tsunade's super strength and Kabuto's chakra disrupting strikes
-Sensing: never get surprised, or even possess people with advanced skills
-Genjutsu: A Uchiha specialty
-Ninjutsu: fireballs and lightning cutters and earthen walls oh my! (would break down into 5 elemental sub categories)
-Ken/Taijutsu: Swinging around giant swords and firing of furious flurries
-Summoning: dogs, snakes, toads, slugs, bugs, all kinds of specialized subcategories to break down into

Rock Lee and Guy would be a good Barbarian variant actually, unlocking gates is like a form of frenzy that leaves the user fatigued after it wears off. So putting together an unarmed/unarmored combat Barbarian archtype would fit.


There's no equivalent from Paizo publishing, so is Tome of Battle considered too powerful for Pathfinder games?

Is Pathfinder backwards compatible enough for ToB classes to just be dropped into the game?


SmiloDan wrote:
I made some NPC half-orc scarred witchdoctor witches, and they have hit points comparable to some tanks of their level that I made. Makes me want to make a melee witch, actually.

I've been keen to try out a close combat Witch that vomits spiders/bees on people


The traditional image of a cleric is swinging around a mace, but how about shooting a bow? Is there a viable build to make cleric archers in pathfinder?


Quote:
(Think of Itachi versus a fighter. Ya...)

Now think of an illusion and charm focused Wizard vs a Fighter, heheh.

Naruto characters are more like Druids and Clerics than fighters, and should be balanced to that level. A Trickery domain cleric is already able to make shadow images, and eventually teleport, hop through trees, and summon monsters to his side.

But the prepping of spells doesn't match, Ki points do though. A Naruto ninja class would basically be a BAB3/4 full caster that uses ki points instead of vancian magic memorization.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
Raith Shadar wrote:
andreww wrote:
I have seen a group composed of all full Casters. It was a scary scary thing and just got more dangerous with every level.
Must have had a few druids or clerics built for melee. I'd like to see a group of cloth casters survive past the first four or five levels. That would be funny.

All they've really gotta do is compliment on spell selection and make it to 3rd level and they're golden, my friend. Levels 1 and 2 are rocket (well, nerf) tag no matter what happens, but once you get to that threshold at 3rd level...

Well the terror begins and it just never ends.

"These guys in robes with glowing badgers just came in and wrecked everything!"

-Surviving kobold guard


Simple question, what do you see as the Fighter's niche that the Ranger is unable to imitate?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ellis Mirari wrote:


What do you think about restricting classes based on player experience level? Personally, I feel that Fighter and Sorcerer are the two most straight-forward classes there are, and seem to be what most new players, who's only RPG experience comes from video games up to this point, are expecting it to be like. In the future, I think I'm going to restrict new players to choosing one of those two.

Fighter and Sorceror should be restricted to experienced players only.

The fighter needs a very high level of system mastery to get to a level where their contributions are meaningful. The Sorceror needs a strong understanding of the entire spell list to really understand what choices they are making when they are putting their limited spell list together.

For first time players I recommend the Barbarian. The Barbarian is out-of-the-box more effective than a fighter and pretty straight forward with raging to kill hard to kill things.

And the Cleric. The Cleric can change what spells he memorizes with every day, the Cleric is durable, able to hold his own in melee or range if your deity allows it. The Cleric is able to cure himself of ailments that would leave a fighter dead. Playing as a cleric also familiarizes the player with the broad range of powers in D&D and gives you an understanding of what kind of abilities are expected to meet the challenges of the level they're at.

*If you want to help a player ease into cleric, give them index cards with suggested spells to memorize for that day, from combat buffing to problem solving.


xavier c wrote:
give a example or the themes of a Prestige Class you want to see in pathfinder

Reduce the barrier of entry for Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster so you can enter at 3rd level. There's no good reason that I need to wait 6+ levels to have my character work the way I want it to.

An equivalent for Warriors and Thieves who want to take levels in Cleric and Druid would also be good.


When discussing balance it's best to compare the class to the monsters they'll be facing.

At levels 1-6 Paladins pull their weight, but at higher levels you're running into more and more monsters that can fly, teleport, attack at range, disable you with spells that hit your FORT/REF/WIL, and so on.
If Paladins had a high level ability to sprought angel wings that would be thematic and useful.


A campaign where full casters like Wizard, Druid, Cleric are not allowed; if you want to use magic you have to go with Bard, Inquisitor, Magus types.

From levels 1-5, 6-10, 11+, have you run games with these restrictions before? Or had games where noone showed up with a full caster?

How's the balance of PF society and adventure paths without full casters in the party?

*Monsters with sorceror spell progression and the like would still work as opposition, just nothing can take full caster CLASS levels.


gamer-printer wrote:

I can see creating a ninja-like ranger replacing spellcasting with ki pool, but I agree with others in this thread that ki pool is a rather major class feature, so if you want to give it to samurai, I imagine replacing Resolve with Ki pool is roughly equivalent, or if you were really talking fighter as in the title of this thread replacing armor training or parts of fighter training. Replacing a minor class feature with ki pool is just not equivalent.

And why would you title a thread about changes to samurai with the word "fighter"?

It's a bit confusing, but I expected the Samurai to be a Fighter+Ki in the way that Ninja was a Rogue+Ki, so this is based on my idea of what a Fighter+Ki=Samurai would look like.


I was kinda dissapointed to find that the Samurai was not a Ki Point Fighter like the Ninja was to Rogue, so here's my take on a Ki based Samurai(the goal is to make the tradeoff rougly equal to Rogue->Ninja):

Samurai are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, plus the katana, naginata, and wakizashi. Samurai are proficient with all types of armor (heavy, light, and medium), but not shields.

Lvl1: Trade "Bonus Feat" out for Improved Initiative (Iajutsu!)
Lvl2: Trade "Bravery" out for a Ki Pool:

At 2nd level, a samurai gains a pool of ki points, supernatural energy he can use to accomplish amazing feats. The number of points in the samurai's ki pool is equal to 1/2 his samurai level + his Wisdom modifier.

By spending 1 point from his ki pool, a samurai can make one additional attack at his highest attack bonus, but he can do so only when making a full attack. In addition, a samurai can spend a point of ki to give himself a +4 dodge bonus to AC for 1 round. Finally, a samurai can spend 1 point from his ki pool to give himself a +4 insight bonus on Intimidate checks for 1 round. Each of these powers is activated as a swift action.

The ki pool is replenished each morning after 8 hours of rest or meditation; these hours do not need to be consecutive. If the samurai possesses levels in another class that grants points to a ki pool, samurai levels stack with the levels of that class to determine the total number of ki points in the combined pool, but only one ability score modifier is added to the total. The choice of which score to use is made when the second class ability is gained, and once made, the choice is set. The samurai can now use ki points from this pool to power the abilities of every class she possesses that grants a ki pool.

Is this roughly balanced to what Ninja is to Rogue?


Quandary wrote:
Archetypes.

Could you give examples of what these archtypes do that Ninjas don't?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:


a full attack shouldn't require a full round action and full attacking while moving shouldn't require a special class ability. nor should iteratives get so progressively less accurate to the point the 3rd and 4th attacks are guaranteed misses.

There's a D&D3.5 patch called Trailblazer, they had a great solution of iteratives

BAB+6: You can make two attacks at -2 to hit
BAB+11: You can make two attacks at -1 to hit
BAB+16: You can make two attacks at no penalty

Easy to keep track of and roughly similar output.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I could see someone going Rogue for roleplaying reasons (because they don't want 'Ninja' on their character sheet, etc.), but it just seems to me like Ninja is a Rogue with Ki points, losing very little in the exchange.

Since character backstory and flavor is a personal thing, I'd only like to talk about mechanical differences between the classes. What does a Rogue do that the Ninja can't?


The game often begins with "Walk to the dungeon and find stuff!" but the higher level you go the more options open up: underwater, castles in the sky, trips to separate planes of existence (some perpetually on fire even), going to the underworld, and more.

What are the most exotic locales you've adventured to? But what I'm most curious about is HOW you GOT there (a spell, a magical portal, a flying mount, etc.)


Crane Wingers

It's one of the few things Paizo's game designers have called out as too overpowered for D&D.


Goldenfrog wrote:


I have Clerics casting fireballs left and right,Wizards with whatever type of energy needed for a encounter on tap,Fighters with sky high AC's and barbarians with AC in the single digits but ungodly DR making high level casters look like low damage dealers.Even the monks are flitting about the battlefield seemingly untouchable.

You don't need to look any further than the core book to reach ultimate power.

Your party is made up mostly of people that do hitpoint damage and resist hitpoint damage. I don't see you mentioning any battlefield control effects from the casters, so I'll assume that they are blasting all the time.

Throw save-or-suck/die effects at them. Have them fight an enemy wizard who has grease, Web, Hideous Laughter, Stinking Cloud, Ray of Exhaustion, sleet storm, black tentacles, cloudkill, feeblemind (for the casters) and so on.

When the blasters casters are caught up in your horrible debilitation effect send in a swarm of bees


CY_Method wrote:
So, the first thing you're thinking is "what kind of monk?" Well, I'm looking to make the best possible unarmed melee monk possible.

Be a Sohei, so you have martial weapon proficiency. Take the Sorceror archetype that lets you cast with WIS. Take Eldritch Knight after that if you really want BAB bonuses.


Play a support character who buffs others. Everyone likes being powered up.

Ex: Be a cleric, buff the fighter, debuff the foes so the buffed fighter can whack it good, battlefield control so the fighter can attack the flying foe, etc.

Think of yourself as Gandalf, your job is to lead Aragorn to his destiny and keep the hobbits alive, you only really go to max power when a Balrog shows up.


Draco Bahamut wrote:

The way i use summoners in my campaing can be resumed in only one word: PERSONA !

Have you seen the related series Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga? Think of them as the 'Synthesist summoner' counterpart to SMT: Persona.


What monsters were designed to wreck wizards (and Clerics to a lesser degree)?

Either by design intention ("The golem is immune to magic!") or in your own experience as a DM or player.


A straight up Cleric with a domain like Trickery is rather sneaky


Summoner+Necromancy focused Wizard or Cleric
Minions, minions everywhere!


Here's basically an essay about the 'caster disparity' problem felt by non magic users in D&D:
http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Talk:Races_of_War_(3.5e_Sourcebook)

It presents new core 'warrior' classes and scaling combat feats as a solution, but keep in mind that they're geared towards the power level of optimized clerics and wizards.

Core Classes:
http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Races_of_War_(3.5e_Sourcebook)/Warriors_with _Class#Fighter

Scaling Feats:
http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Races_of_War_(3.5e_Sourcebook)/Warriors_with _Style#The_New_Feat_System

They may be too powerful for your game expectations, but they're a good look at how bonkers D&D does get at higher levels.


Ogrork the Mighty wrote:


So for a minimum qualifying user that means a DC 26 Fort save every time an opponent gets hit.

Then look at the effects of being stunned. No actions for 1 round and drop everything in your hands. So even if you save next round you're weaponless and have to rearm.

Ok, but do you know what a level 16 warrior is expected to face?

Here's an example of CR16 foes:
Ancient Black Dragon: Fort +20, AC 38
can fly, teleport, blind, blur, turn invisible, black tentacles, create walls of force, darkness
Perception +34, stealth +23

As you can see, if the black dragon doesn't want to be hit by a dude in melee, it has many many many ways to avoid being struck by a melee guy who may not even have pounce.

Planetar Angel: Fort +19, AC 32
Can fly, power word STUN (no save against foes under 151hp), turn invisible, plane shift, create barriers of blades and wind, etc.

As you can see, if the Planetar doesn't want to be hit by a dude in melee, it has many ways to avoid them.

Horned Devil: Fort +18, AC 35
Can fly, teleport at will, create persistant illusions, and has a spiked chain that STUNS WITH EVERY HIT

Stun (Su) Whenever a horned devil hits with a spiked chain attack, the opponent must succeed on a DC 27 Fortitude save or be stunned for 1d4 rounds. This ability is a function of the horned devil, not of the spiked chain. The save DC is Strength-based.

As you can see the horned devil has a completely superior version of "stun with a melee attack"

When a PC is level 16, they are basically a CR16 threat. As you can see "take a PENALTY to hit for a chance to stun at DC26" is actually weaker than what some CR16 monsters can do at-will, all time every day.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Let the monk turn into a dire tiger

Monks have more fun when they can pounce, and level 12+ is a fine place for them to wear a magic amulet that lets them morph into a dire tiger

Artifact Swords are the solution to any problem

If you find any particular party member is lacking high level abilities, give them an artifact weapon that fills in the gaps, like it lets them teleport or scry (sword of omens!)

High level play is zany and the least playtested part of the game so it requires a lot of DM intervention and care.

1 to 50 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>