|
I've played plenty of high-level characters of all classes, and I'm not the least bit frustrated when I'm playing a high-level fighter.
I'm going to have to disagree with you. almost every game I have run or played in almost always the spellcasters seem to dominate the game. Unless the fighter picks the right feats or the combat situation benefits him he imo just get outclassed all the time.
While the cleric and wizard huddle in the corner for an hour, coordinating their spell selections for the upcoming dungeon, I can spend my time chatting up NPCs, gambling at the inn, and otherwise having fun doing roleplaying stuff that doesn't require the use of any class abilities whatsoever.
Well I make sure to tell my players to have at least an idea of what they want to do before the game starts. of course one can't plan for everything yet the spellcasters in my games either as a DM/Player can do all the things above. It should not take them an hour to come up with the right spell selection imo.
And if there's a minute or two where the GM has to cut me loose while he arbitrates some complicated divination spell the cleric just cast, I can take a quick break from the game to grab another beer and chat with my girlfriend.
What does this have to do with how effective fighters and spellcasters can be? Do you think that because one plays a spellcaster in D&D he cannot do the above things you mention. Please tell me your above point is not supposed to be a valid counterpoint because experiences differ greatly.
Then the cleric and wizard finally come back to the table, announce the Big Plan (TM) to buff this, scry that, teleport the other, but I don't have to sweat any of the details. I just ask, "What you want me to kill?", and start rolling dice when we hit the dungeon.
Just how long do the players who play spellcasters in your game take to develop tactics? No way would the above happen in my game. From what your telling me their trying to anticpate every move the DM plans to use every creature...everything. It has never happened in one of my games. No wonder you have the wrong impression that being a spellcaster requires huge amounts of planning. They don't imo. Those in your group are spending too much time trying to be able to do everything. The DM imo should really impose a time limit.
Then the enemy spellcasters step in and start doing stuff that puts the Big Plan (TM) in jeopardy. The cleric and wizard start flipping through their spell lists to find the Perfect Spell (TM) to fix things. Meanwhile, I just lean back and start dreaming up a creative insult to shout at the guy I'm beating down when I hit him again next round, content in my knowledge that all of the complicated spell vs. spell battlefield control stuff is being handled by someone else.
As I said I think the players in your game are trying too hard to be the best at everything. The system imo does not allow it. Fortunately it has never come up in our games because if it did it would make the game grind to a halt. In this case it's not the system it's the players.
Right up until the Maximized fireball hits; it's much more fun to play Valeros with 77 hp than it is to play Seoni bleeding out on the dungeon floor.
She may not have as a high an AC or hp as Valeros yet when Valeros is attacked ny something that requires a Will save who is the one able to actually do something when the fighter more often then not fails his save. Seoni. She has a hell of a lot more option then Valeros ever will without having to take a whole bunch of feats to do so.
|
|
No. Put spellcasters in a royal court where spellcasting is forbidden by law, but honorable duels are acceptable, and they'll become quite useless.
The above is an extreme example imo. Not to mention a great way for a spellcasting class to be screwed over. Who in his right mind would play a spellcasting class in such a game world.
They also have very little to contribute when standing in an anti-magic field.
The Fighters feats maybe unaffected for the most part in an anti-magio field. His shiny new magic weapons, armor items will putting him at a disadvantage also.
N
The Fighters feats maybe unaffected for the most part in an anti-magio field. His shiny new magic weapons, armor items will putting him at a disadvantage also.Disadvantage maybe, but look at mr spellcaster who is now spelless, has a weapon that cant do much and the lowest ac in the group now....Yeah they are running while the useless fighter kills the damned thing
Ok,
I stayed silent as long as I could. Honestly, each class has advantages and disadvantages. If the spellcasters are vastly outshining the nonspellcasters at high levels, the DM is at least partly at fault.
I had a game with some level 16 characters. The spellcasters were out-damaging the melee fighters, in one combat. But please, they have a limit to how long they can be godlike, and it's not hard to drain their spells.
They were trying to track down and destroy a vampire that was behind a bunch of problems in the local area. The vampire had minions. When he was tired of them interfering, he sent his minions out with very specific orders.
First: Scry on people around them (not them directly). So followers, people they considered friends, etc. Then they got a lot of info about the players. They also bribed people around the player characters to bring them information.
Second: Raid the village one of the characters grew up in. Guaranteed to draw them in. Picked the one farthest from the city they were based out of. Kidnap his relatives, send a note with one of the relatives heads to prove he has them. Meet him in the village, or he vamps the rest of the village.
Third: Send out the minions to hire lots of low-level grunts. Offer 10 gold apiece for anyone who raids the player characters while they travel. No need to fight, just race in, fire arrows, flee. They send these grunts (mostly 2 hit die goblins) with poisoned arrows. They raid them every 1 to 4 hours, fire off 5-6 arrows, and then leave. They do this 24 hours a day, so the PC's can't get rest, so after two days, the healers and wizards are out of spells. They can stop to rest in a town, but if they do, they won't make the deadline. After the third day, the only people who were still effective were the fighters, and they were fatigued.
By the time they got the village, they were running severely low on healing equipment (a couple of wands and a handful of potions). They had little spells (again, handful of wands). The wizard was all but useless in the fight, the cleric was ok at fighting (he could turn the small fry vampire spawn at least). The vampire wasn't even all that powerful one on one, but he took their big spellcaster and healer out of the fight before it started, and it was mainly the fighter and rogue that got him. The fighter ended up dead, the rogue had single digit hit points, and the cleric was stable at -8 hitpoints. The wizard had 15 or so hit points left.
Note that there was no reason to 'anti-magic' them, just draw them into situations where they either choose, or have, to expend spells. Going through a dungeon shouldn't be at their pace, it's at the pace the dungeon wants. Oh, the wizard/sorcerer blew their magic in the first 3 skirmishes? Well, seems that is the time for a counter-attack by the dungeon residents. The cleric used up all his spells healing? Great, send some mid-level golems in with ranged attacks, and have them target the wizard (who has the lowest AC now that his spells are gone). He'll be begging the melee types to save him, and kissing their butt when he does.
The high level casters in my group at the end of the Age of Worms AP spent a week (our usual break between games) working out how we could stand a chance against a god or demigod or whatever Kyuss was. It eventually came down to a complex series of actions which included the summoning of two of those hundred-armed god killer things, attaching the hand of vecna to somebody, and (I think) the liberal application of Time Stop.
I actually didn't pay that much attention to the fight, I was a rogue and not much help.
Snip
How does he scry on people around them anyway? Just scry on a guy randomly, see if they are around, if not move down in the phonebook?
Anyway, Scry + Greater Teleport(or just teleport really) + Mage's Magnificent Mansion renders the entire low level grunt tactic ineffective. Greater Teleport means they get there as soon as the group is finished buffing and scrying. Mage's Mansion means that if they want to rest, they rest and none of your 10gp throw away mooks can stop them.
You said level 16. That is one level away from Time Stop or Gate. Level 16 is a group of superheroes, and your entire tactic relies on DM fiat to stop a simple use of 3(or 2 if they really want) spells.
|
|
We've never had a problem even at higher levels with melee people being able to compete if not exceed spellcasters as far as damage goes.
Now, we haven't had someone really do CORE classes all the way up though, so that might have something to do with it. However with the new setup, at least you're looking to see Rogue's overall damage stay high and crazy, especially if they duel wield with the way sneak attack works on most everything now (good change).
As for fighters, we've had two handed Dervishes, Ghostwalkers with full hate, Dragon Disciples (all that strength damage is NICE), and my own love which is the Duelist (now this is more for an AC standpoint but the damage is still pretty nice).
The old Weapon Master/Kensai from oriental adventures is still an awesome class (wizards say they updated it but the new kensai is crap. The old version works much better and I never saw a balance problem with it). My wife plays a rogue/ninja spy (also from Oriental Adventures) and even though you sacrafice a little bit of sneak attack, all the extra goodies you get is nice and worth it. She also duel wields ninja-to and now with changes for more sneak attack usage, she'll do even MORE crazy damage.
So, all in all, ever since prestige classes hit the shelfs I've never seen the issue of melee classes having a hard time competing.
|
Assuming for a second that the melee classes are seriously outstripped by the spellcasters at higher levels, what do you guys think of this?
Taking whatever final melee classes Paizo gives us in the PFRPG and adding token pools from Iron Heros (understanding of course that we have no way of knowing if they even need this assistance until its release). Only the token pools. Each melee class would have a token pool or a number of pools to choose from depending on their character concept.
As an example . . .
Fighers can choose between Aim, Armor or Weapon.
Rangers could choose from Aim or Tactical.
Barbarians could use the Fury token pool.
The toke pools give them more options which I think is where spellcasters actually trump the melee classes at the higher levels.
Just examples of course, certainly not a refined idea.
Tam
I've always meant to get around to playing some Iron Heroes, but never managed. Is it as good as I've heard?
SnipHow does he scry on people around them anyway? Just scry on a guy randomly, see if they are around, if not move down in the phonebook?
Anyway, Scry + Greater Teleport(or just teleport really) + Mage's Magnificent Mansion renders the entire low level grunt tactic ineffective. Greater Teleport means they get there as soon as the group is finished buffing and scrying. Mage's Mansion means that if they want to rest, they rest and none of your 10gp throw away mooks can stop them.
You said level 16. That is one level away from Time Stop or Gate. Level 16 is a group of superheroes, and your entire tactic relies on DM fiat to stop a simple use of 3(or 2 if they really want) spells.
Uhm,
No need to be so attack oriented on me. I did mention he had minions and spys around the PC's? Just took a few of them to identify their followers and ta-da! Now we know who to scry on when they are out of town.Yes, Scry + Greater Teleport/Teleport + Mage's Magnificent Mansion does make a nice combination. They used it before. Until they almost got killed from doing it. It's a little disconcerting to exit your Mangnificent Mansion and have the baddies be set up in a circle around you with ballista's. That's pretty hard on the ol hit-points. Especially when you're asleep and someone dispels the mansion, so you appear, on the ground, asleep, in the center of a circle of ballista's, which fire, while you are flat-footed, asleep, and usually out of armor.
I'm not sure what gave you the idea I used a GM fiat at any point? I just didn't go into the entirety of their long game run (which started at 8th level).
|
|
I've always meant to get around to playing some Iron Heroes, but never managed. Is it as good as I've heard?
Iron Heros is great. Especially for those who want a lower magic setting than standard D&D. I really like the Token Pools for spicing up melee combatants and maybe some of the feats. But I am still hoping that the PFRPG melee combatants don't need it.
Tam
Put melee focused classes in a situation where attacking an enemy won't work, and they'll become so weak. Put spellcasting classes out of their focus... and odds are he/she will still find a way to contribute.No. Put spellcasters in a royal court where spellcasting is forbidden by law, but honorable duels are acceptable, and they'll become quite useless.
They also have very little to contribute when standing in an anti-magic field.
Quite frankly I think anit-magic feilds are well...somthing I'm not too sure I can say on the forum. It's a "You get no class features" field, and if you plan on using them they should be as common as rust monsters (or rust monsters should be more common even, since it's alot harder to get rid of an anti-magic feild). Beholders are made simply to be overpowering, you can't relay on them as any kind of basis for balance. And the other is in the ELH for a reason.
Also in your example while it might be illegal to cast, that doesn't always have to stop them. Trying to engage in martial combat on the streets is often illegal too, does that mean combat classes are automatically useless in any city?
Even then, there are spells which still function in an anti-magic field, so a prepered spellcaster can still handle it.
And what I said is true, what can a melee focused character do in a situation where hitting a foe just plain doesn't work? Throw a transmutator against a group of dopplegangers and his offensive transmutations won't work, won't stop him or her buffing the party of useing spells like Stoneshape, throw an illusionist against foes with true seeing, there isn't anything to stop him or her throwing off a colour spray which will still work.
You know, a while back I read a guide online "How to kill a Tarrasque at level 11". As you probably guessed from the name, it listed several ways to kill a Tarrasque at level 11. Every single method required spellcasters, it was simply not a realisticlly acheiveable task for martial characters. What's more the majority of these methods were actually viable, the kind of things players could actually use. One in particularly showed not only a way to kill it ,but gain two partially real tarraques under your control in the processs. Put multiple fighters at much higher level against the tarraquse and even if they win, it will not be anywhere near as easy a victory as spellcasters can get.
Use skills, activate magic items, solve puzzles, engage in dialog, ask an intelligent sword to cast spells, instruct a cohort to do something
Being non-spellcasters does not enable them to do any of these better...and strangly most of these options boil down to "Get someone/somthing else to do the job for you". I wouldn't consider cohorts or intellegent items a balancing aspect for a character (particularly since any character can use/gain them). In fact, since most spellcaster's have a high will save it means that they can control more powerful intellegent weapons more easily.
If you assume that class abilities are the only resources that a character can use, then of course you'll get bored with melee characters. You are ignoring a large percentage of the options that the game makes available for melee characters to use.
I'm not assumping that martial options are the only ones avalible, but given that the subject in question is martial characters I don't see what's wrong with assuming being good in combat is their main focus.
The point I'm trying to make isn't that being good in combat isn't a bad thing, it's just that it's too easy for spellcaster's to have multiple areas to focus in. If a spellcaster focuses on only one thing (which is somthing I feel is hard truthfully, I feel they would need to out of their way to make sure all the spells essientially just do the same thing) then of course, they'll be weak at higher levels too.
Which stems back to the "High Level Play jsut plain doesn't work" point, which I feel is the strongest. I don't see the "Melee isn't as good at high level" arguments as a result of bad design on the part of the classes, I see it as a fault in the system as a whole, I just don't feel the game works at all past a certain point. My pen'n'paper group rarely has issues with casters dominating, but it's rare for us to go higher than level 14 or 15, and even then, we somtimes see one or two characters shinning a little more than the rest.
Meanwhile, a PBP group I played with only played 18 level+ games. While admittidly I didn't game with that particualar group for long, I found that even without trying the spellcaster's would dominate very easily. Regardless of whether or not the "melee is weaker at high level" arugment has merit or not, it was a big factor for that particular group, and since they're the only group I've played with that focuses so much on higher levels thats the one I look to with regards to a high level play discussion.
The DM isn't fairly building encounters or considering the enjoyment of their players if this is happen with any frequency - really, how often is it truly impossible to do physical damage?
To be fair, I feel that in some cases building specifially for a party can be very difficult. Even trigger happy mages seem to have a good reserve of spells at higher levels, and alot of people forget just how useful low level spells can be. The last time I played a sorcerer I was still using 3rd level spells at 17th level, and they were still useful.
2) This is a common complaint that was raised against Psionic classes back on the old 3.5 WizO boards. The problem is not the class, it is the encounters per day.
Again, the main stream of those complaints came from players who didn't have that good a look at the psion rules - stating that a psionic character cannot spend more power points on a single power higher than his or her manifester level. Though this in itself did provide a bit more of a balancing factor for psions, since if a psion turns trigger happy and runs out of PP, thats them for the day. A wizard or sorcerer out of 9th, 8th and 7th level spells still has 6 other levels to play with. This is also partly the reason why I like psionics - it's easier to force psions into a "Preserve power or go all out" diliema than it is for core spellcasters.
Though the rest I agree with completely
2) This is a common complaint that was raised against Psionic classes back on the old 3.5 WizO boards. The problem is not the class, it is the encounters per day. If you let your casters nova and burn all of their spells on one encounter per rest cycle of course they will outshine the classes that are built to go more than a few rounds. However, if you give your players multiple encounters per day the non-casters are just as effective throughout the day and the casters are forced to conserve resources bringing them back into line with the other classes.
I find this to be so true in our high-level game. The casters in my group often conserve their spells… using them sparingly, while the melees do most of the damage dealing. Why? Because the melees ( 2 fighters and a ranger) are quite able, reliably putting out boatloads of damage every round. The casters save their most potent spells for crucial moments. They need to in the Age of Worms campaign. Especially at high level (currently 19th). There is no time to go Nova and rest… Kyuss will be free in less than a week…
In my experience, I haven't seen the melees outclassed by the casters at all. Sure, the casters off a foe with a flick of their wrist on occasion. (And this is never with a 10d6+ style spell. In fact, one of the casters has started putting empowered magic missiles in his 3rd level slots because they are more reliable) But the melees have slain far more foes over the long run.
|
|
Disadvantage maybe, but look at mr spellcaster who is now spelless, has a weapon that cant do much and the lowest ac in the group now....Yeah they are running while the useless fighter kills the damned thing
Unless the fleeing spellcaster is out of spells all he has to do is run far enough away and the magic items start working again and then has to position himself in such a way as to not be affected by the field. Then he cast spells from long range.
Also guys I wote 10D6+ damage is noting to sneeze at. Not just 10D6. A 15th level spellcaster can fling a 15D6 spell a 20th level a 20D6. Or are you now going to tell me that 15D6 and 20D6 damage is nothing at all.
10d6 is nothing to sneeze at, no. But it's level appropriate for a 10th level caster.
15 and 20d6 are certainly better, but they only average 53 and 70 damage, respectively. (Unless my math is off, I just rolled out of bed.) That's not SO much given that it's a full round of actions. Even if they managed to quicken or twin a spell laying out that much damage they'd only net 140 on average, right?
I got a full-fighter build worked out for Pathfinder that averages 232 damage a round with no crits and lowest attack bonus = +29. Doesn't make 70 damage useless, but makes it look a lot more manageable.
Unless the fleeing spellcaster is out of spells all he has to do is run far enough away and the magic items start working again and then has to position himself in such a way as to not be affected by the field. Then he cast spells from long range.
Umm maybe I am wrong but does not spell effects stop once they enter an anti-magic field?
|
|
Maybe the issue isn't the game. Maybe the issue is that a sword swinger would have to jump through hoops or run and hide to compete with or survive against an arcane caster with the power that standard D&D caster's have. I cannot imagine this relationship and imbalance being another other than near realistic. Imagine yourself with a sword and a wizard of comparable level competing in real life. Seems kind of on par doesn't it? But you know that going in. So I still don't see a problem.
Doesn't mean I still won't try to tinker with the melee classes. But my players will understand the situation before playing the characters and then it is their decision. The idea of a perfectly balanced game is kind of boring actually.
Tam
snip
So, you have enemies just wandering around with truesight or detect invisibility up? The door is invisible once closed. Or if the party really wanted safety, the good cleric could just Plane Shift them to lower celestia to get a good night's sleep.
Or Plane Shift to Celestia, and then use MMM to get some shuteye.
It is good for story, but would have been more believable if the PC's were level 8-9, rather than 16.
Also guys I wote 10D6+ damage is noting to sneeze at. Not just 10D6. A 15th level spellcaster can fling a 15D6 spell a 20th level a 20D6. Or are you now going to tell me that 15D6 and 20D6 damage is nothing at all.
These spells hurt the monsters, but they certainly aren't battle winners. Once they are used up, the caster's used up all his high damage potential. Also, most are subject to spell resistance and saving for half damage (both of which happen all-to-frequently). And in our particular campaign, so many monsters seem to have energy resistances of multiple sorts.
The following spells have proven far more deadly and decisive in our campaign:
Forcecage… only one opponent has escaped this prison before perishing
Gate… they summoned a Solar
Haste… on everyone, but especially the melees. The caster indirectly does far more damage with Haste than a 20d6 spell. Automatically beats spell resistance and there is no saving throw against the damage.
My players have gotten far more mileage out of enhancement style spells used on All party members rather than direct damage and even save-or-die style spells.
snipSo, you have enemies just wandering around with truesight or detect invisibility up? The door is invisible once closed. Or if the party really wanted safety, the good cleric could just Plane Shift them to lower celestia to get a good night's sleep.
Or Plane Shift to Celestia, and then use MMM to get some shuteye.
It is good for story, but would have been more believable if the PC's were level 8-9, rather than 16.
Ah,
I see, so I'm lieing? Well, whatever you wish then. This is my last post on this subject, since I'm considered a liar.1) I did say that they had had issues with respite spells before being surrounded, I didn't say it happened at level 16, only that they had problems before and were gunshy.
2) Any of the respite spells (mansion, hut, house, etc) are just that, spells. They create a pocket dimension with a doorway back, so can be dispelled. I'm nice and dump the players back on the plain, I don't have them be stuck in a pocket dimension forever, since that ruins the story.
3) Already mentioned the scrying on the cohorts, easy to find where they went into the hut/house/mansion/etc.
4) They didn't think of going to the other dimension. However, I should note, if the bad guys are the same level, easy enough to port to the other dimension too, dispel, and then cast banishment on them banishing them back to where they came over.
5) Something done to me, in a different game, but is just as effective, was someone put a rune of scrying on the inside of my magic armor while I slept. I was a fighter, not a mage, so I couldn't sense the scrying or stop it in any way. Someone was bribed to do it to me.
Of course, all the above is a lie, and no bad guy can ever hoodwink the valiant 16th level characters because they infallible and immortal and I'm tired of this conversation, so go live in your MMM.
Ah,
I see, so I'm lieing? Well, whatever you wish then. This is my last post on this subject, since I'm considered a liar.
Don't sweat it mdt.
I'd say you were in good company, but I don't know if you would consider me good company. ;-)
|
We have all heard numerous times how overshadowed melee classes are in 3.5 by their caster counterparts. However, I am now hearing that Pathfinder doesn't really address this much or even attempt to. Can any of you that have played Pathfinder enough to have a melee character or know of one in your group into the higher levels please talk a bit about how they play out in the high levels? Do they get overshadowed by casters? I am a bit encouraged in the fighters get feats at every level, etc. and hope this is not the case.
Well, I am currently playing a 3.5 Fighter 20/Rogue 2. Not only is the Fighter over shadowed, but he is 98% dependent upon the casters to even have an a chance to sort of contribute.
The things I am finding that are limiting have never been addressed as far as I know.
In order to be effective the Fighter must have maneuverability to stay up with the enemy. Being reduced to 20 feet movement at higher levels almost eliminates him from combat. Without the ability to stop his enemies movement he is never able to use his iterative attacks which is where his damage is.
He is unable to defend himself at high levels and is dependent upon buffs from casters to stand up in a fight.
None of these things have I seen addressed. As long as you fight basic, simple monsters then you are fine. Get into the supernatural and I think these limitations will still remain.
The fighter is dependent upon using the iterative attacks, but lacks the mobility to really make use of them and will nearly always be reduced to a single standard attack or forced to wait several rounds while the casters do their buffs (and let's face it, if the casters had been casting damaging spells instead the fight would have been over before the fighter was even ready).
|
|
snipSo, you have enemies just wandering around with truesight or detect invisibility up? The door is invisible once closed. Or if the party really wanted safety, the good cleric could just Plane Shift them to lower celestia to get a good night's sleep.
Or Plane Shift to Celestia, and then use MMM to get some shuteye.
It is good for story, but would have been more believable if the PC's were level 8-9, rather than 16.
The bad guys, almost ALWAYS have better resources than the PCs. If they don't then the GM really doesn't know how to tell a story. And since See Invisibility is easy to make permanent, umm yes, as is Arcane Sight. If the bad guy doesn't have these up and running ALL the time he needs to go back to BBEG 101.
The door is invisible and yes the BBEG SHOULD have See Invisible ALWAYS, and his Arcane Sight allows him to see ALL magical auras, so yeah he can see that too. If the PCs can go to Celestia to get some shut eye, the BBEG BETTER have the ability to go there to and/or prevent them or force them back. If not, he needs to go back to BBEG 101 or the GM needs to learn how to run a game before tackling high level play.
If you are fighting level 16, you better believe the BBEG can do all that kind of stuff and more. It would be more believable if you were level 16 and the BBEG was level 8, that he could NOT do these things.
And don't even get me started on the Magic Items he should have and be using... if a BBEG doesn't have MORE items at his disposal then he is NOT a BBEG worth playing against.
Sorry, but maybe the games you have been in just aren't able to keep up with the power curve of higher level gaming.
Sorry, won't bother coming back to this useless topic now. But before you call someone a liar, or something, maybe take a minute to actually learn about the game first.
|
Ah,
I see, so I'm lieing? Well, whatever you wish then. This is my last post on this subject, since I'm considered a liar.
Actually to be fair I don't think he was trying to call anyone a liar. I believe what he was trying to say is the higher lvl pc's become the harder it becomes to catch them off guard
|
|
Anyway back on topic at the end of the day if the pc's want to build and or find a near indestructible place to make a campsight they can. However In order to do that the pc's have to use up spells the more spells you use the secure the area. So yes a group of pc's could use magic to planeshift, magnificent mansion, Block scrying, Alarm and multiple other spells to turn a camp area into a small fort but using up half your spells just so you can relearn the other half seems somewhat counter productive at best.
Personally I have found nothing beats a good locked door and the non casters taking turns to keep watch while the others get there sleep
2) This is a common complaint that was raised against Psionic classes back on the old 3.5 WizO boards. The problem is not the class, it is the encounters per day. If you let your casters nova and burn all of their spells on one encounter per rest cycle of course they will outshine the classes that are built to go more than a few rounds. However, if you give your players multiple encounters per day the non-casters are just as effective throughout the day and the casters are forced to conserve resources bringing them back into line with the other classes.I find this to be so true in our high-level game. The casters in my group often conserve their spells… using them sparingly, while the melees do most of the damage dealing. Why? Because the melees ( 2 fighters and a ranger) are quite able, reliably putting out boatloads of damage every round. The casters save their most potent spells for crucial moments. They need to in the Age of Worms campaign. Especially at high level (currently 19th). There is no time to go Nova and rest… Kyuss will be free in less than a week…
In my experience, I haven't seen the melees outclassed by the casters at all. Sure, the casters off a foe with a flick of their wrist on occasion. (And this is never with a 10d6+ style spell. In fact, one of the casters has started putting empowered magic missiles in his 3rd level slots because they are more reliable) But the melees have slain far more foes over the long run.
This is exactly my point of view. Sometimes people seem to forget that the strength of martial characters lie in multiple encounters per day... if the adventure is set so that there is only a couple of encounters and nothing else, it's easy to outstrip the classes who cannot go Nova.
Has anybody ever played to the old Capcom's 'D&D: Shadow over Mystara' videogame (for people who doesn't know what it is, see here)? The game is a fast-paced side-scrolling Beat'em Up (Final Fight style) with A LOT of components from RPGs. In that game, a martial character like the Fighter sweeps through the whole level like a breeze, while the casters (like the Magic User - not Wizard, it was based on D&D BECMI...) face a true hell - unless they unleash their spells, but again, then the final battle with the boss is a true pain; on the contrary, when facing the boss (often aided by a lot of respawning minions), the martial characters have a hell of a day, while the casters - going nova - face it like a breeze (unless they are short of spells, and in that case they are TOTALY SCREWED, no buts and no ifs). And in the game, there is no 'oh, sorry, ended my spells, have to rest', you have to endure and go on (or you can always die and insert coin - you have only ONE LIFE).
To face the challenges, players have to cooperate (in a Beat'em Up !), sharing money, items, potions, and so on. Using items accordingly (the Spectre near the end of the game is a pain, unless you have casters or you have saved Rings of Lightining Bolt during the game). Protecting each other.
Sometimes, I wonder if we have lost such spirit and all in our TTRPG games...
snip for space
The BBEG does almost always have better resources than the party, but anybody who can be persuaded to harass somebody for some a shiny 10gp isn't the type that has arcane sight or see invisibility. BBEG's as a whole, though there are a few exceptions, are not the type that go trotting through the woods and swamp tracking pc's. That is why they have mooks and more powerful followers.
The entire point of going to Celestia is that any BBEG(Evil, is right there as the third letter) is going to attract a lot of very powerful, very unwanted attention from Plane Shifting into Celestia. The infinite celestial host would not take well to evil people just popping in to attack good adventurers.
Also the vampire in this case has two problems, he can most certainly not go to Celestia himself and he wants to stay with the hostages so he can do his BBEG taunting when the heroes get to him.
In fact, if he knows that they have in fact shifted to another plane(via scrying on cohorts) his best move is to cast Gate, attempting to call one of the party members. And if he doesn't come through the gate, well the vampire in question still has the adventurer's family. He knows that if they have plane shifted to sleep, they are low on resources anyway.
mdt even said that the vampire in question is not really that strong in a fight, he just attempted to take the cleric and wizard out of the battle before engaging. The problem is that he should not have been able to find a whole lot of capable people willing to harass a group of heroes for 10 gp. I wouldn't care how evil or mercenary I am, you aren't going to persuade me to shoot at the Justice League for 10 gp.
The pc's wake up in the morning(the head was sent to them directly, so they had been in one place for awhile), receive the head of poor old aunt Gladys and greater teleport(or teleport if it is the wizard's hometown) to a clearing in the forest next to the village to do recon.
I did not call anybody a liar, but maybe take a minute and learn about the game first, since you see no problem with a BBEG(a vampire, no less in this case) plane shifting to Celestia(which has a minor positive energy alignment amongst other things).
Edit: On topic, the problem with melee is that, while they can swing as many times per day as they need to, without spells or the rest of the team to back them up they die to most monsters their level. If the party is level 10 for example. The party has had a rough day of it, 4 encounters already and the wizard and cleric are both out of spells. If the fighter wants to go on, he will be taking a lot more damage because the wizard stands there and shoots his crossbow or uses his weaker wands instead of using his real spells. The cleric can't heal, and can't buff the fighter(or himself) into a god. If the iceworm eats the fighter, they rest of the party has basically no damage(unless the rogue wants to be eaten too), and the fighter can no long use his greatsword due to his now cramped conditions
Anyway back on topic at the end of the day if the pc's want to build and or find a near indestructible place to make a campsight they can. However In order to do that the pc's have to use up spells the more spells you use the secure the area. So yes a group of pc's could use magic to planeshift, magnificent mansion, Block scrying, Alarm and multiple other spells to turn a camp area into a small fort but using up half your spells just so you can relearn the other half seems somewhat counter productive at best.
Personally I have found nothing beats a good locked door and the non casters taking turns to keep watch while the others get there sleep
You do have a point, but if the DM is going to use such hardball(dispelling it and dropping you in front of a gang with a ballista a few levels ago) tactics to prevent you from getting your spells back altogether, you do whatever it takes. Since even if you are using your own spells, the Cleric doesn't have to use as many. And you can both recover your spells from you using a few of yours the day before.
Not only is the Fighter over shadowed, but he is 98% dependent upon the casters to even have an a chance to sort of contribute.
Sorry, but maybe the games you have been in just aren't able to keep up with the power curve of higher level gaming.
...maybe take a minute to actually learn about the game first.
And people say that irony is difficult to define.
No one has mentioned fighter mobility because it's not really an issue. No one forces you to use heavy armor, there's tons of ways to increase your speed (without even demeaning yourself by asking another member of your party to haste you) and there are whole feat trees built around things like Spring Attack.
As for being unable to defend yourself at high levels... that's not very specific and contains no information about WHY you have trouble defending yourself. AC, saves, hp total? What's the problem?
I have trouble understanding the issue, because I have a fighter moving at 15 feet, can't run, rarely gets hit, and is the largest damage dealer in the party. Except a cleric who can only match me by "going nova" with self-buffs.
Anyway, it was nice of you to try and stick up for mdt, he's a delightful poster.
I love those games!
The second one was far and away the superior of the two. It included several more classes, the ability to dual wield, and more fighting moves. There were even two character models for each class, so you didn't have to play looking like a tool.
A 14th-level fighter with a +1 flaming frost shocking greatsword can deal 9d6+28 damage in one hit.
Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't allow the Frost ability to be added to a weapon with Fire or Electricity, or in any combination. Stacking different elements on the same item is, imo, daft and not as intended.
Our fighter archer kept dominating combats until the very last session, when the mage suddenly began casting maximised empowered time stops and ripped two lvl 20 opponents to shreds in one round. The mage had prepared his tactic for over two weeks, though, so I guess that evens it out.
In any case, fighters seem to be fine. For melee, mobility will always be a problem, but that archer did monstruous damage since about lvl 8 until the very end.
They were pretty good about saying when things didn't stack, especially when they changed to 3.5. In fact, I think there have been more than a few WotC/Dragon created NPCs that had multiple elemental effects on a single weapon.
Saying something can't be fire/cold is understandable, if a little stilted, in my opinion. Saying something can't be fire/acid or whatever just seems curmudgeonly.
|
There is a small problem with melee characters and tacticle movement. I think it is partially based on a lot of people being used to older editions without a gridmap. The truth is, though, there are a lot of ways for melee characters, fighters, paladins, clerics, whoever, to get around the field, without casters moving/aiding them.
What your are really blaming the Wizard for is not buying you boots of striding/jumping, or a boots/cloak/broom of flying. A flying carpet. Fairly cheap potions. I'm not trying to be harsh, but that's the truth of it. If the problem is that the fighter is only getting a fight or two a day, (than first you need to talk to the DM about this being a problem and you are not enjoying it), than potions seem like a real easy fix, cheap, and a lot of the time encounters will replace your stash for you.
I personally have had the oposite problem. My main group, thinks Fighters are the best class there is. Barbarian is 2nd best, Casters suck and Monks are ok. It is because their playstyle, and it is hell trying to change that. So when I came in wanting to play a Cleric, they just didn't get why. So we'd get into an encounter, and I would sit back and conserve spells wisely, and they would all charge in Power Attacking for max, and expecting to great cleave through the encounter before they gave opponents a chance to even hit back. Nearly every big fight would drop a few potions of healing, and they never fought magic creatures that would give a party of melee characters a big problem. Dragons didn't fly or cast spells, they sat in a corner, breathed and than moved to full attack. It isn't that I couldn't Nova. Its that I am still used to the idea of having to save abilities until needed (and big fights being over in a round so that the Fighters specifically think they are so bad*ss). In this group, I can't talk to the Dm's, because they are so convinced that that is how the game really works. I've tried, they just don't comprehend why everyone else is wrong. . . So talking to the DM may not help, but still, it's worth a try first.
Hmmmm. You might suggest some time that when there's a big battle planned your DM let you play one of the major NPCs. If you can illustrate for him some tactics that he's missing out on, he just might change his mind.
It sounds like you've got a DM who prefers fighters to spellcasting. That's just a guess, but in my past experience someone who prefers to play melee characters has trouble adapting to spellcasting monsters.
|
|
Very true. Part of it is that they played the game from a young age and just didn't use the rules at all. So now that they are older, they are just set for that one style of play. Another side is that hey don't like complicated, and Fighters are not complicated. Another side is that we often play just lower levels, and Fighters are overpowerful at early levels, and they think thats how it always is.
I've played with different groups, and they all have their pros, cons, and individual rules.
We have all heard numerous times how overshadowed melee classes are in 3.5 by their caster counterparts. However, I am now hearing that Pathfinder doesn't really address this much or even attempt to. Can any of you that have played Pathfinder enough to have a melee character or know of one in your group into the higher levels please talk a bit about how they play out in the high levels? Do they get overshadowed by casters? I am a bit encouraged in the fighters get feats at every level, etc. and hope this is not the case.
I'll try to demonstrate ways that Pathfinder has tried to address the melee vs. caster debate. I don't know if any or all of these have been successful to the point of satisfying those who feel there is a real problem between melees and casters, but I just want to point them out to continue the conversation. Also, we don't know exactly what stuck from the Alpha and Beta rules and what didn't.
1) Spells: many of the spells have been tweaked from 3.5 versions. For instance, Save-or-Dies have been for the most part been converted to damage spells. Some of the cleric spells that enhance their melee capability have been toned down (the Divine Favor/Divine Power combo for example). Polymorph spells have been redone.
2) Feats: Everyone gets more feats. This IMHO benefits non-casters slightly more than casters, because there are a slew of combat feats. Several feats have been proposed to address common drawbacks to melees in high level combat (some examples: Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, Pinpoint Targeting, Step Up, Shall not Pass, the critical feats, Fleet, Lunge, Master Craftsman, Improved Iron Will). Of course several feats that were fine for melees have been nerfed (Power Attack and Combat Expertise for instance).
3) Monsters: Paizo has said that they are reworking monsters for the new bestiary.
4) Casting: Casting on the defensive is probably going to work differently. It sounds like it's going to be based on a caster level check, which by all rights should be more difficult for casters than 3.5's concentration check system.
5) Classes: All classes got something new. Melees in particular got several new options. Some examples: Paladins can have a bonded weapon, and smite evil sounds like it will be better; the fighter gets more mileage out of weapons and armor than anyone, the barbarian and rogue get several new combat oriented abilities. And animal companions have been tweaked.
I'm sure there are more I haven't thought of.
I think it is hard to say whether or not melees will still be considered "overshadowed by casters", based on the rules changes at this point. But Pathfinder certainly has tried to address them in the playtest.
|
|
I'm not pointing fingers or anything, just making an observation. It seems funny to me that over on the "what does psionics mean to you" topic that a lot of people say that it isn't psionics that's broken, just the way individuals play their games. But here, we have the same basic problem, and most people seem to go the opposite route. Just an idle thought.
4) Casting: Casting on the defensive is probably going to work differently. It sounds like it's going to be based on a caster level check,...
HOLY CRAP. Really? Because if the caster can't just pump skill points in until he's unable to fail the check, it will be a serious boon to melee characters.
Oh god... I'm going to hit Vlad's cleric SO hard...
being used to older editions without a gridmap....
Alright I think I've stopped laughing. Which older editions were those? The ones that measured ranges and movement in inches? :D
I never used em in 2e, and do not use grid map or mini's with 3.5 or pathfinder myself.
|
|
being used to older editions without a gridmap....
Alright I think I've stopped laughing. Which older editions were those? The ones that measured ranges and movement in inches? :D
Wow, now I feel old. Didn't everyone used to play 1st and 2nd Editions without all the pretty accessories like vinyl maps and painted figures and tea-cozies?
[waves cane]
We used to use our imaginations, goshdarn whippersnappers, before 3.5 when people's movements started being measured in 'squares!'
Well, I am currently playing a 3.5 Fighter 20/Rogue 2. Not only is the Fighter over shadowed, but he is 98% dependent upon the casters to even have an a chance to sort of contribute.
The things I am finding that are limiting have never been addressed as far as I know.In order to be effective the Fighter must have maneuverability to stay up with the enemy. Being reduced to 20 feet movement at higher levels almost eliminates him from combat. Without the ability to stop his enemies movement he is never able to use his iterative attacks which is where his damage is.
He is unable to defend himself at high levels and is dependent upon buffs from casters to stand up in a fight.
None of these things have I seen addressed. As long as you fight basic, simple monsters then you are fine. Get into the supernatural and I think these limitations will still remain.
Mobility is easy to fix: 1-2 levels of barbarian (I usually prefer 2 for Uncanny Dodge) gives +10 ft to base movement (untyped, so it stacks with enhancement bonuses) in light/medium/no armor. Make it a dwarf barbarian 2/fighter 20 in mithral full plate with boots of striding and springing and you maximize your possible armor bonus (+8 plus enchantment), still get a +3 Max. Dex bonus, AND a have normal movement of 40 ft (60 ft when under the effect of haste). If Evasion is desired, a human barbarian 2/fighter 18/rogue 2 in a mithral breastplate (+5 plus enchantment, +5 Max. Dex) or a mithral chain shirt (+4 plus enchantment, +6 Max. Dex) with boots of striding and springing can move at a fast 50 ft. All of this is core 3.5, not requiring splatbooks.
Stopping movement requires use of feats like Combat Reflexes, Improved Grapple, and Improved Trip; works best with a reach weapon and/or enlarge person. Nothing requires you to make a "normal" attack with an AoO, you can easily initiate a grapple or a trip attempt instead. PF also has the Shield Slam feat, allowing you to initiate a free bull rush on a successful shield bash.
At high levels, everyone is dependent on buffs; it's an expectation built into the 3.x system. The non-spellcasters can be proactive and invest in some potions, X-times per day items, etc. and/or the party can pool some money for some wands of often used spells (much like many parties pool money for wands of cure x wounds).
In high-level play, melee types can usually out-perform spellcasters against small numbers (1-3) of tough opponents. It's not that difficult to make a high-level melee character who can deal over 200 points of damage on average with a full attack (counting the decreasing hit percentages from iterative attacks). Spellcasters usually do better against larger numbers (4+) of equivalent or weaker foes. Most of the SoD/SoS spells are a bit of a wash, since most can be completely negated with certain protections, are affected by SR, and require a saving throw (good for mooks, but not often useful against a prepared BBEG).