jasonduke's page

Desferous wrote:

\/\/arlok wrote:

Desferous wrote:

1of1 wrote:

How does one counter a Hidden Paragon stabby man of save or die? I guess fumigating might work. Drop some blightburn covered in inhaled poison and glue the doors shut. But wait, he's a rogue, of course he got out before you. Maybe teleport away and hope the Schrödinger's rogue is actually dead?

Hmmm... as with all things pre test, and before release, we're probably missing something.

Maybe a wish will reveal him? It's always good when Rogues have more powerful magics than casters.

Right. Gotta keep those casters as gods above the non-casters. Otherwise we won't be able to b$%*+ about how much more powerful the casters are.

When you have a limited number of spells a day, they should have some benefit.

Sure. But the benefit should not be "trump everything instantly". For example, having a "entangle" like spell that grapple several monsters in a turn, is a decent trade off for the spell slot. A fighter can only grapple 1 guy, but can do all day long, a caster can grapple several in one round, but can only do once per day (or more, depending the number of times they prepare the spell).

What it's not fair is that, in exchange for only being able to use 1-3 times per day, the effect of the spell is "I auto-win". Because that renders everyone obsolete 1-3 times per day, and unless the GM keeps throwing them to the same challenge once and again until the spellcasters run out AND he get sure they can't simply sleep and recover the spells, then spells trump everything, and that's a problem.

Quote:

Logically, just like a rogue's poison will take out a wizard, a wizard's magic should reveal a rogue. (And we won't talk about a rogue being able to poison all day long, maybe it should be limited like caster spells?)

I'm pretty sure the power of the poison the rogue can get every day (which is not the same than to get an unlimited amount of poison everyday, for that matter, as I'm sure...

Thank you for the response! You make good points, and I kind of get it, but something still isn't right in my mind.

I get the entangle bit and with the stealth to a point.

The wizard has lower hit points and cloth armor and poor weapons to be able to do those super powerful things 1-3 times per day when compared to the warrior or rogue with their higher hit points, superior armor and saves, and better weapons.

I guess that gets to the auto succeed aspect you bring up. I'm starting to think that yeah with everything the wizard has given up for the limited number of times she gets to be "godly" it should work. If it is a questionable pursuit, then a warrior or rogue will always be a better class because they have repeatable attacks, defenses, etc.

In addition to the 1-3 times a day, there is the built-in restraint of "did you prepare that spell?" I can't see myself memorizing see invisible unless I think I may be in the situation to need it. So, the "can't be seen by spells x, y, z is an double protection for that ability because if a wizard did have the thought to memorize that spell, then yeah, I do think it should work.

On the other hand, if the rogue has chosen to use Hidden Paragon, why should it be revealed by the wizard's spell? My response would be because the wizard used a spell slot to prepare it. The wizard has given up defense or offense for utility. The rogue still has all of his or her defense and offense with the added bonus of utility.

I think that is the bump for me. Wizards give up a lot to do what they do. They are glass cannons (in effectiveness, I'm not talking about blasting).

How does one counter a Hidden Paragon stabby man of save or die? I guess fumigating might work. Drop some blightburn covered in inhaled poison and glue the doors shut. But wait, he's a rogue, of course he got out before you. Maybe teleport away and hope the Schrödinger's rogue is actually dead?

Hmmm... as with all things pre test, and before release, we're probably missing something.

Maybe a wish will reveal him? It's always good when Rogues have more powerful magics than casters.

Desferous wrote:

Honestly, most people have their own ideas of how spells should work, so let the RPG groups decide. Sure, groups will be different, and so what is wrong with that? Nothing, unless you are doing tournaments. Paizo could sell tournament guides for those that need numbers for nuances.

You really do want to see the forums burnt to the ground in the resulting flame wars.

Ambiguity in the rules is a bad. EVERYBODY will be convinced their interpretation is the correct one, with nothing to resolve the arguments.

Add in organized play, where players have an expectation of consistency from table to table, and you'll have riots in the streets and tables being flipped at conventions.

Lol, no I honestly don't, but it seems like there is quite a strong anti-magic sentiment on the boards, like the grass is greener. I am starting to notice some patterns as a few particular spells are mentioned repeatedly, but can't really speak to the anger yet.

That aside, why can't Paizo put up 2 or 3 options for how to handle magic? The groups could decide.

Someone on the boards commented that Pathfinder was for dungeon crawling, and I thought really? Because the only ones who get to keep crawling are the martial / melee characters. Do they forget how to use weapons after a fight? Nope. Anyway crawling in cloth with a dagger really is crawling or hiding in the back and watching.

Either or, I've never had a problem with the exploits people are naming. We always had casters who were out of spells and lame-ducks as the warriors and rogues carried the game.

I do see the out of combat utility issue, but again, everyone should have more options. Ah, the anti-caster movement just really bothers me because it doesn't make sense.

+1 for arcanist casting!

"A wizard walks up to some goblins and functionally kills them all with a color spray, but a fighter has to hack and risk injury one at a time."

Eh, that can happen a few times a day... if the spell is prepared.

A fighter can hack and be protected by armor all day.

A rogue can skill and poison every fight.

A caster has to hold a few spells and decide when to cast them.

I really am on the opposite side of the fence. From my perspective as a GM, stick-carrying, cloth-wearing casters are easily dealt with. They are powerful for a moment or two, but then fade quickly as the rogues and fighters carry the battles for the majority of the day.

I'm thinking about the game as an imaginative story experience. Others are seeing this as a min/max number crunching exercise. I suspect that is where the rift on casters starts to widen.

I am hoping the casters have a way to contribute more consistently incident to incident.