ThePowerOfWar's page

So even though the rule book it self says 15 points is standard fantasy and 20 is high fantasy, your saying just because people prefer a 20 build so that makes it standard ....... so if I get a group together and want to start changing how things are written is ok so I can win a discussion is what you are saying.

Kobold I did for get about the +2 to 1 stat I will give you that but depending on the stat chosen it could change that but at least you try an actual retort rather than blatantly not contributing to the conversation by only making mocking comments. but I didn't say that he was not legal. back to the topic kind of, the fighter was said to be a standard fighter and not a high power fighter so that character still is stronger than this example was originally brought up.

So I am guessing that no one can read or do math with the point buy system that is in print or in the PDR for stats. 15 points is a standard fantasy, High fantasy is 20, and epic fantasy is a 25 point build. So if you look at the chart that fighter is a 25 point build. But if you need a page quote its on page 16 in the core book. So if your going to try and mock some one at least try and have your information correct.

ThePowerOfWar wrote:

So i do think that the wolf is a bit toned down as compared to its previous incarnations but how would a LV 1 fight do against 3 CR 1/3 orcs. its the same CR as the wolf but there would be No way the fighter could win even if he were to go first.

You might want to simulate this out before you start making statements like that.

A common orc has a single attack at +1, 5 hit points, and an armor class of 13. A not-particularly-optimized first-level fighter has two attacks at +3/+2, 16 hit points, and an armor class of 17. And better initiative if it comes to that.

Each orc has a 25% chance of hitting per round, which equates to roughly 58% of getting hit at all for Valeros. Barring criticals, it will take two hits to kill Valeros. In the other direction, Valeros will average 1.05 hits per round and can easily kill an orc in a single hit.

I don't think it would be unreasonable for the fighter to gain initiative and kill one orc at the end of the charge, be missed by both of the survivors, and then kill a second orc at the end of the second round. At this point a smart orc in survival mode would run away. While that scenario's not guaranteed, I think it's certainly plausible enough to make "No way the fighter could win" wrong.

Even if the (clearly overmatched) single orc doesn't win, he's still at a huge disadvantage against Valeros. A CR 1 fighter against three CR 1/3 orcs isn't supposed to be a cakewalk, and it's not -- a set of poor die rolls could easily kill Valeros. But it doesn't take exceptionally good die rolls to kill all 3 orcs.

OK, so that fighter is not and average fighter as far as the "Standard" fighter goes his stats are more of The "epic" build with max gold rather than the "Standard Fantasy" point build and average starting gold would allow like in a PFS type setting. Which is what it was we were talking about but if your going to start saying "Well if my LV 1 Fighter Has All 18s" the of course he is going to win against things that he would normally not be able to win against.

So i do think that the wolf is a bit toned down as compared to its previous incarnations but how would a LV 1 fight do against 3 CR 1/3 orcs. its the same CR as the wolf but there would be No way the fighter could win even if he were to go first. As for the wolf i do see that is is more of a early game Mage hunter than a fighter type monster like the orcs.

Rynjin i don't think you under stand what "CR" means. For your Pit Fiend is CR 20. That mean it is designed for a party of 4-5 players (and thats supost to be a balanced party ie. a melee tank/damage dealer , a support, a ranged, and a healer)to fight and it to be a moderately difficult fight. But with what you "example" is saying everyone All the time should be able to solo everything that their level is equal to CR wise reguardless of class.

So now its the buff they can cast. I am not familiar with Quick study(its not in the PDR as far as the search could find and its not in any book I have seen) But under normal circumstances if you caster has to prepare all utility spells then they are weak/useless in combat and as for spontaneous casting they suffer from they have a much smaller pool of spells to cast anyway so most focus on what their main role is and not a jack of all trades. But I would say its still falls to the GM to find a way to balance that ex: if your party has a buffing maniac counter with the monsters doing the same.

As for the "resting" if you walk out/teleport what's to stop the whole place from "resetting"/hunting the party down at that point. To me that's like some of the Worst GMing to allow that type of play.

its one thing to take it as easy mode to help a new player type party for a GM. But to say Things are too strong because the GM is using Kids gloves on a more veteran party in the first place when the powers they are using are meant to be used in a more challenging setting ......... the only thing I can say to that is you cant complain about it being to easy on easy mode play.

First of all i want to thank everyone for responding.

So lets see here. The reason that a lot of people here don't like casters is that the GM cant "GM" very well. By this i mean, the GM cant think outside of the Quest book and innovate to how the party grows and plays. (The part of this that i find funny in most groups i have GMed or played in the rouges are the ones that make it a challenge for the GM and not the casters.) As for thinking out of the box here is an example: As the Party gains levels and completes quest treat them as They are gaining Fame and notoriety so you change the "Random Encounters" to have Bounty hunters that are Mage hunter is in build rather than the Group of goblins that they would have ran into.

Now as for the caster spell/day limits goes back to BAD GMing. If you only have 4 encounters then you rest while Raiding a fortress/dungeon/cave full of monsters, the GM is bad. So the characters in Fortress are like"oh i am out of spells lets camp. I am sure no one noticed the big explosions and the guards that are supost to be on 15 minute patrols to keep the place secure that we just killed will be missed." And so they camp 8 hours without the whole fortress finding them and killing them in there sleep.......Bad GM.

So for an example On Items if they just made +5 swords of super smiting and you feel that its a bit too strong make him work to keep it as in rust monster, slads, thieves, or create opponents that disarm. But dont make it so its worthless(that would be Bad GMing) but make them work to keep it.

But if the GM cant handle it when things dont go as he planned then he is a bad GM.

On a side not for those who like the Low magic try and find the stuff on like the Black Sun setting from DnD. Its interesting to say the least.

I was wondering why there seems to be a lot of hate towards magic(casters and items) on this forum? From my many years of play in many different formats of tabletop RPGs that are "sword and sorcery" stile play i have not seen so much talk of Low to no magic wanting to be used but for that type of setting i would suggest a Midevil or a scifi setting would work better since this is a sword and SORCERY setting.

I have seen a few people stat that Casters are too strong. For me a Caster has strong Area of Effect(AOE) and some good burst and Crowd Control(CC) abilities but they run out of power fast. Non Casters have almost as strong damage capabilities but can sustain their damage output, have way more reliable CC but their AOE is limited. So for most roles they can be done either way Caster or non but both have a niche to fill a bit better than the other but neither are"stronger than the other as far as a general role filling goes as far as I can see. As for OP/Broken build i have see plenty for both sides as well.

For the Magic Items talk nothing i have seen other than "they are too Strong" with no real reason stated is what i have seen. But is it really the item or has the player built a character around maximizing the potential of the use of an item. Thus doubling or tripling the"power" that it seemed to have but then its not really the item but the character that is powering up the item then.

TOZ wrote:

If you use point buy, the MAD classes either don't have enough points to buy what they need, or the SAD classes get to have more points to spread around on non-important scores. So, not fair in practice.

That's completely fair. This is the design of the game. MAD classes are balanced around being mad. And no one has demonstrated how rolling is somehow more fair regarding this.

Like i was saying with the point buy the average stat is for the most part 12s across the board which hurts "MAD" classes bad, but where as with a "SAD" class you could dump everything into that one stat and get a max stat of a 17 with out gimping another stat. Now as for rolling you with the previous method of 4D6 remove the lowest the average is higher and the max stat is 18 but there is a chance of having a bad stat roll as well. But the potential for being stronger is there in rolling even if it is rare.

As for it being balanced/fair I feel that with everyone having different stats makes it so you can do more than with a cookie cutter build system were everyone is the same. If you truly feel that balance/fairness = same stat lines then why not use pregenerated characters only. To me, from what me and one of my friends have been theory crafting today based on the point buy system, it feels like that what equals out to or just as restrictive.

But to be fair the point buy system i could see being good for a brand new player. Quick and Easy.

The point-buy method has gained popularity in Pathfinder in particular because it's required for organized play. This is largely a balance thing; since there's no way to effectively control dice rolls it's this or a fixed array and point-buy offers more versatility.

I didn't realize that organized use the point buy system ...... Thanks for the heads up on that. But as for versatility point buy of 15 averages 12.5 per stat and using the method that i normally have used averages out to be 14 per stat.

I prefer point buy. And when compairing builds, it's really the best (arguably) method for cross class/race comparison.

I never liked the random rolls, partly for how it was presented to me at first:
1) you roll stats because not everything is about choice.
2) now, choose race, gender, and age. And background.

It also prevents fudging/cheating stats in organized play.

The whole "fudging/cheating" that you talk about sound like you take it as a competition between players and not a co-op type play. I have never ran into "cheating/fudging" with in the groups i have played in due to it being a co-op atmosphere and not a competitive one, and if there was any that happened that i was unaware of it never affected anything due to the co-op nature of the group.

Because it is not cool when Joe rolls 18, 17, 17, 17, 17, 15 while Jim is stuck with 14, 13, 10, 8, 6, 5.

Players like to see that their PCs are *capable* and when you have huge differences in stats, between PCs, one of the players is gunna feel left out.

But, at the end of the day, it is personal preference except in the case of organized play. :) I didn't come to Point Buy until I got into DDO a few years back.

I do see your point of a huge stat gap like that. But for the low stat line one you show for you example i have never ran/been in a group where I/GM have not told the person to re-roll a terrible set of stats like that. But that i guess goes with your GM's GMing ability to run/balance groups and not to be a jerk about how he handles things.

But as for players having different stat i love that due to it make a character unique and not a clone of a previous/someone else's character.
EX- "oh i am doing a elf fighter so i will just print out fighter build 22e."
For me that make the whole this 100% cut and paste and little to no thought.

I have noticed that a lot of people on here like to use the stat purchase method for building their stats. I have never used that method in over 20 years of play and was curios what methods are the most popular and why?

The method I have used for most of my characters has been the roll 4 D6 and remove the lowest and depending on the GM rolling up 3-6 sets and picking which one works best.

Thanks!!!

I want to use this weapon with dex for damage since it works with Weapon Finesse. Is there a feat or weapon augment that i could use to do that?

Knock is one of my favorite Level 2 spells. I cant count how many times we have frustrated our GM but using that to get in to places ahead of when we should be.

So i am trying to find out if there are meta-magic feats that can be used with a supernatural/spell like ability. I know 3.5 had some but i have yet to find them in pathfinder. Any help to find what feats there are and what books they are in would greatly be appreciated.