Small area, numerous opponents. even with only 3 players wasn't a whole lot of area for him to go even if he'd not wanted to be in melee. Without the changes to concentration he'd have been effective for those 5 rounds doing damage while the fighter got the bad guys off his back. as it was he sat there TAKING damage and having to have the cleric heal him 3 times until he finally managed to get his spell off. If i hadn't let him at least retain his spells he would have been hosed.Why was the wizard in melee? I know everyone has their own play style but going from a d4 to a d6 is not an invitation to sit in the front row.
Did he not have room to take a 5 ft. step?
Could he not have used tactics to lure his opponents into making an AOO before he cast?
Could any of the other players (the cleric or fighter for instance) have done anything to get the opponents off his back (bullrush, disarm, sunder, etc.)?
Having to consider tactics and work together is part of the fun for a lot of groups.
+1.
FLY and INVISIBILITY EXIST so wizards can survive combat. Which means, after five rounds, the player actually started acting like a wizard!
OMG!
;)
and if the character can't get off a fly or invisibility off because of the new rules to concentration? sorry, still back to the original problem :P But I realize I won't get any support here for it, least beyond what I got in my initial responses. Still have a few things I can try. However RAW will not work for my group
|
and why should I have to spend 2-4 rounds before i can do anything to contribute? name any other class that is required to sit on thier A** for half the fight before they can participate? This leads to two problems. The character is ineffectual for most of the fight, and then the character isn't much use if theres a second fight later on. So to use your perspective the wizard is a one trick pony.
Sorry, you just lost your own argument right there. The wizard used tactical sense and got the h*** out of combat. Then he was effective.
Obviously you (and your players) want your wizard to be a front line fighter. That is not the class, not it's purpose.
The rogue, if he cannot get into flanking position, comes to mind.
One thing that bugs me about people who play wizards these days. Why do they think they need to contribute every round, or even every combat? Wizards, well, at least before PfRPG took the nerf bat and beat them silly, were the artillery/nuclear option/combat-enders extraordinaire, not the mook killers. Fighters can handle mooks. Let them shine for the first part, and kick butt when you're really needed.
This goes hand in hand with the "15 minute adventuring day". It's all about the spellcasting players needing to do something every round. Why? Kick back, cadillac, and pull out the whoopass when it's really needed!
|
|
Bad analogy. It's more like AD&D = Boss 302 Mustang in cherry condition, has it's warts, doesn't handle well, and guzzles gas, but, damn it's sexy, and 3x = boring old 2005 Corolla that runs great, gets wonderful mileage, and bores the hell out of you ;)Wow, it's amazing that casters somehow managed to dominate quite a bit of the time way back in the dark ages (OD&D/AD&D) when a sneeze could make them lose a spell.
I guess it's another one of those "old school/new school" things...
Well, admittedly I never actively played in those days. I played in a couple 1e games but at that time I was just learning and was a lowly fighter :)
Guess compared to olden days the wizard has it good, but just because my toyota is better than the model T my great great whatever had doesn't mean it can't use some work :)
Right I'll get everyone to roll initiative against HD before attacking. All you young'ns can roll d20+something. HD I'm afraid you get this d6...
S.
Ah, but you forget, low number wins in 1e ;)
and why should I have to spend 2-4 rounds before i can do anything to contribute? name any other class that is required to sit on thier A** for half the fight before they can participate? This leads to two problems. The character is ineffectual for most of the fight, and then the character isn't much use if theres a second fight later on. So to use your perspective the wizard is a one trick pony.
Sorry, you just lost your own argument right there. The wizard used tactical sense and got the h*** out of combat. Then he was effective.
Obviously you (and your players) want your wizard to be a front line fighter. That is not the class, not it's purpose.
You shouldn't have had to wait half the fight. It seems the wizard was played poorly or had the wrong spells for that day*. You may have needed one buff, probably fly if you had no where to go on the ground, but if you were outside hiding in the back is the place to be.
Rogue's normally need a flanker to get sneak attack so they may have to wait 2 or 3 rounds to get that depending on how the fight is set up.
* I know this is all speculation since I was not at the table, but casters are not fairing so poorly in other people's campaigns or there would be complaints about it so I can only assume something is going on at your table that is not happening at other peoples' tables.
|
|
and if the character can't get off a fly or invisibility off because of the new rules to concentration? sorry, still back to the original problem :P But I realize I won't get any support here for it, least beyond what I got in my initial responses. Still have a few things I can try. However RAW will not work for my group
+1.
FLY and INVISIBILITY EXIST so wizards can survive combat. Which means, after five rounds, the player actually started acting like a wizard!
OMG!
;)
If the player can't get off a fly or invisibility, maybe he shouldn't be in the front of the marching order. Or, maybe he should find a fighter for the party who knows what his job is...
Did he not have room to take a 5 ft. step?
Could he not have used tactics to lure his opponents into making an AOO before he cast?
Could any of the other players (the cleric or fighter for instance) have done anything to get the opponents off his back (bullrush, disarm, sunder, etc.)?
Having to consider tactics and work together is part of the fun for a lot of groups.
Not after the first one he took no. That in fact is how he got off his first spell, a blur which is likely the only reason he survived the encounter. Fighter DID attempt a disarm, but it failed.
Not after the first one he took no. That in fact is how he got off his first spell, a blur which is likely the only reason he survived the encounter. Fighter DID attempt a disarm, but it failed.
Did he not have room to take a 5 ft. step?
Could he not have used tactics to lure his opponents into making an AOO before he cast?
Could any of the other players (the cleric or fighter for instance) have done anything to get the opponents off his back (bullrush, disarm, sunder, etc.)?
Having to consider tactics and work together is part of the fun for a lot of groups.
Sounds like the encounter was essentially designed to force him into melee immediately and keep him there, which, since you're the one DMing, would be on your doorstep.
Even then, if he was able to get out of melee by taking a 5 ft. step, he could easily have lead off with invis or fly, which you've already stated he eventually used to escape the melee. So it sounds to me like he just made a bad decision (cast blur, hope I can hold in melee despite being a cloth caster vs. cast invis or fly now, spend one round moving to a more effective position, and then rain hell upon them).
I'm not saying the wizard should be dealing OMGWTF damage every round, but they should be able to contribute SOMETHING. When there is only 3 players at the table noone can afford to just sit around. Since the problem has not come up until the change to concentration I think its obvious where the problem lies.
Apparently either other groups are not having this problem, the ones that are are not speaking up or apparently according to some my players don't know what the hell they are doing.
Thanks for the imput. It has been most illuminating. I DO offer sincere thanks to the initial posters in the thread for offering some potential solutions to the situation, which I will be testing out and see which ones work for my group.
and why should I have to spend 2-4 rounds before i can do anything to contribute? name any other class that is required to sit on thier A** for half the fight before they can participate? This leads to two problems. The character is ineffectual for most of the fight, and then the character isn't much use if theres a second fight later on. So to use your perspective the wizard is a one trick pony.
Sorry, you just lost your own argument right there. The wizard used tactical sense and got the h*** out of combat. Then he was effective.
Obviously you (and your players) want your wizard to be a front line fighter. That is not the class, not it's purpose.
The rogue, if he cannot get into flanking position, comes to mind.
One thing that bugs me about people who play wizards these days. Why do they think they need to contribute every round, or even every combat? Wizards, well, at least before PfRPG took the nerf bat and beat them silly, were the artillery/nuclear option/combat-enders extraordinaire, not the mook killers. Fighters can handle mooks. Let them shine for the first part, and kick butt when you're really needed.
This goes hand in hand with the "15 minute adventuring day". It's all about the spellcasting players needing to do something every round. Why? Kick back, cadillac, and pull out the whoopass when it's really needed!
WotC took the nerf bat first (sorta). After that, I dunno. I'm of mixed opinions about some of the changes to wizard spells in PfRPG. But thats a different topic, so I'll shush on that one.
And yeah, Wizards contribute more than spells. To paraphrase someone else...we try to do everything by magic in a game these days, instead of treating it like what it originally was treated as...a live explosive (type varies by level, check your local manufacturor =)) in a fantasy setting, to be used when the $*&! hit the fan.
Thanks for the imput. It has been most illuminating. I DO offer sincere thanks to the initial posters in the thread for offering some potential solutions to the situation, which I will be testing out and see which ones work for my group.
So be it, I've done my best to make some helpful suggestions about ways your casters might be able to handle things a little more effectively (with or without the change to concentration, control/disabling spells are frighteningly effective, and using some group tactics can really help get them off), but, as I said before, it's your game, and whatever makes it the most fun for you and your group is the right thing to do.
Not after the first one he took no. That in fact is how he got off his first spell, a blur which is likely the only reason he survived the encounter. Fighter DID attempt a disarm, but it failed.
Did he not have room to take a 5 ft. step?
Could he not have used tactics to lure his opponents into making an AOO before he cast?
Could any of the other players (the cleric or fighter for instance) have done anything to get the opponents off his back (bullrush, disarm, sunder, etc.)?
Having to consider tactics and work together is part of the fun for a lot of groups.
Sounds like the encounter was essentially designed to force him into melee immediately and keep him there, which, since you're the one DMing, would be on your doorstep.
Even then, if he was able to get out of melee by taking a 5 ft. step, he could easily have lead off with invis or fly, which you've already stated he eventually used to escape the melee. So it sounds to me like he just made a bad decision (cast blur, hope I can hold in melee despite being a cloth caster vs. cast invis or fly now, spend one round moving to a more effective position, and then rain hell upon them).
Opinions vary. But if every fight the wizard puts forth his most powerful spells off first, whats the point in having them along later? Up til now he'd been quite successful spreading out his spells over the day putting his lower level ones and the ones on his wand against the mooks and interim oppenents and playing support against the heavier hitters. Perhaps the blame is on me, but the problem never occurred when I was writing my own adventures or even with the APs before this change
Thanks for the imput. It has been most illuminating. I DO offer sincere thanks to the initial posters in the thread for offering some potential solutions to the situation, which I will be testing out and see which ones work for my group.So be it, I've done my best to make some helpful suggestions about ways your casters might be able to handle things a little more effectively (with or without the change to concentration, control/disabling spells are frighteningly effective, and using some group tactics can really help get them off), but, as I said before, it's your game, and whatever makes it the most fun for you and your group is the right thing to do.
I do appreciate the advice you have offered, and you have indeed been courteous. My players will be shown the results of the thread and who knows...they may take something from it as we try to work something out.
Opinions vary. But if every fight the wizard puts forth his most powerful spells off first, whats the point in having them along later? Up til now he'd been quite successful spreading out his spells over the day putting his lower level ones and the ones on his wand against the mooks and interim oppenents and playing support against the heavier hitters. Perhaps the blame is on me, but the problem never occurred when I was writing my own adventures or even with the APs before this change
I never said he had to use his most powerful spell (I hadn't realized the invis was one of his highest level memorizations for the day).
For a lower level caster, I might have gone with Glitterdust or Gaseous form instead, or maybe Grease or Web if he's really tight on spells. Hypnotism is another one that can be surprisingly useful in those sorts of situations, though targets do get a +2 to their saves if they're in combat. Color Spray, Cause Fear, and Ray of Enfeeblement are all other good 1st level options, depending on the circumstances.
I do appreciate the advice you have offered, and you have indeed been courteous. My players will be shown the results of the thread and who knows...they may take something from it as we try to work something out.
You're welcome, and I hope any difference of opinions you've had here don't drive you off, things get heated on certain subjects, and the removal of concentration/caster balance has been the biggest heated subject of all ever since the Alpha.
Since the problem has not come up until the change to concentration I think its obvious where the problem lies.
Apparently either other groups are not having this problem, the ones that are are not speaking up or apparently according to some my players don't know what the hell they are doing.
Thanks for the imput. It has been most illuminating.
I cant tell if that was sarcasm or not, but if it was I can only add that we are not trying to upset you. We just pointed out what we saw, and we can only go by our own experiences when responding to any post.
|
|
I'm not saying the wizard should be dealing OMGWTF damage every round, but they should be able to contribute SOMETHING. When there is only 3 players at the table noone can afford to just sit around. Since the problem has not come up until the change to concentration I think its obvious where the problem lies.
Apparently either other groups are not having this problem, the ones that are are not speaking up or apparently according to some my players don't know what the hell they are doing.
Thanks for the imput. It has been most illuminating. I DO offer sincere thanks to the initial posters in the thread for offering some potential solutions to the situation, which I will be testing out and see which ones work for my group.
If you only have three players, I would consider scaling the adventures (if you're using published works) or tailoring things a bit for the group (if you're doing homebrew stuff).
One suggestion, though. If a wizard has any kind of dex, the light crossbow isn't an unreasonable option for some situations. No, they're not going to be as good as the fighter, but they're not going to be that bad, really.
Wizards, well, at least before PfRPG took the nerf bat and beat them silly, were the artillery/nuclear option/combat-enders extraordinaire, not the mook killers. Fighters can handle mooks. Let them shine for the first part, and kick butt when you're really needed.
I don't see how Paizo nerfed the wizard. Defensive casting is harder but that's not a huge loss (My wizard almost never used it), other than that what did they nerf? A few spells are a bit less effective, but overall the class is still solid. Specialists are a little nicer now. Arcane bond gives them an alternative to the familir. Overall I'd say the class is a touch upgraded if it weren't for the spell nerfs.
This goes hand in hand with the "15 minute adventuring day". It's all about the spellcasting players needing to do something every round. Why? Kick back, cadillac, and pull out the whoopass when it's really needed!
I agree completely. Past the lowest levels my wizard wouldn't even carry a crossbow. He would generally launch a couple spells to nerf the enemies and control the battlefield a bit then break out the wand of magic missiles to pick off the weak enemies.
|
|
Wizards, well, at least before PfRPG took the nerf bat and beat them silly, were the artillery/nuclear option/combat-enders extraordinaire, not the mook killers. Fighters can handle mooks. Let them shine for the first part, and kick butt when you're really needed.I don't see how Paizo nerfed the wizard. Defensive casting is harder but that's not a huge loss (My wizard almost never used it), other than that what did they nerf? A few spells are a bit less effective, but overall the class is still solid. Specialists are a little nicer now. Arcane bond gives them an alternative to the familir. Overall I'd say the class is a touch upgraded if it weren't for the spell nerfs.
Ever since you sent me the 1e stuff, I can't help but read the spell descriptions and weep. Sorry.
You know, like:
"Disintegrate disintegrates stuff? Death spells kill stuff?
Wow!"
;)
|
|
You also have to consider that melee is NOT a wizards friend. I'm please that pfRPG has made that mechanically clear now.
We had a situation with a 2H sword "build" (I so hate that term) Fighter was unable to reach the enemy. The wizard kicked butt and the fighter stood around (didn't even have a bow). But as a wizard you can fly, teleport, go invisiable, change shape, etc, etc you take these things in a non-combat context and fighter just plain sucks. Seriously you come to a stone wall and need to get on the other side, you have a 10th wizard and 20th fighter - who is more useful?
My point is there will always be situations where class A or class B won't be at their best and others where they will shine. Job of the DM is to balance these out over the course of the adventure.
If I read into something that more than likely isn't there... You issues are not doing damage which I suggest stems from the path D&D has taken - combat is where ALL the real fun is. If you want a spell caster effect each and every round you I would suggest you look to 4e. It does this very well, each round has everyone doing something always. Don't take this as me being rude, I am serious, have you tried 4e? It may be your answer for having more fun in an RPG session - and fun is why we play right?
Cheers,
S.
You also have to consider that melee is NOT a wizards friend. I'm please that pfRPG has made that mechanically clear now.
We had a situation with a 2H sword "build" (I so hate that term) Fighter was unable to reach the enemy. The wizard kicked butt and the fighter stood around (didn't even have a bow). But as a wizard you can fly, teleport, go invisiable, change shape, etc, etc you take these things in a non-combat context and fighter just plain sucks. Seriously you come to a stone wall and need to get on the other side, you have a 10th wizard and 20th fighter - who is more useful?
My point is there will always be situations where class A or class B won't be at their best and others where they will shine. Job of the DM is to balance these out over the course of the adventure.
If I read into something that more than likely isn't there... You issues are not doing damage which I suggest stems from the path D&D has taken - combat is where ALL the real fun is. If you want a spell caster effect each and every round you I would suggest you look to 4e. It does this very well, each round has everyone doing something always. Don't take this as me being rude, I am serious, have you tried 4e? It may be your answer for having more fun in an RPG session - and fun is why we play right?
Cheers,
S.
We have tried 4e....and I like playing it in moderation but really dislike DMing it, and I don't have a lot of time to write my own campaigns as much as I'd like to for the most part. I may give it another try since as I currently DO have a bit more free time than i'm used to.
One suggestion, though. If a wizard has any kind of dex, the light crossbow isn't an unreasonable option for some situations. No, they're not going to be as good as the fighter, but they're not going to be that bad, really.
A Crossbow IS an option, but a wizards poor BAB makes it a subpar choice compared to magic missile or a ranged touch spell. Least the bolt won't fail to leave the bow however. Not a great solution, but perhaps an interim one. Suppose we got too attached to the Pathfinder at wills. The RPG gods giveth and they taketh away...back to the drawing board :)
Ever since you sent me the 1e stuff, I can't help but read the spell descriptions and weep. Sorry.
You know, like:
"Disintegrate disintegrates stuff? Death spells kill stuff?
Wow!";)
Ah... hehe. Don't know what to say about that. Even with the spell nerfs wizards are still king of the hill as far as I can tell.
|
|
A Crossbow IS an option, but a wizards poor BAB makes it a subpar choice compared to magic missile or a ranged touch spell. Least the bolt won't fail to leave the bow however. Not a great solution, but perhaps an interim one. Suppose we got too attached to the Pathfinder at wills. The RPG gods giveth and they taketh away...back to the drawing board :)
One suggestion, though. If a wizard has any kind of dex, the light crossbow isn't an unreasonable option for some situations. No, they're not going to be as good as the fighter, but they're not going to be that bad, really.
Like Stefan said, if you like classes to be able to perform their role with little dipping outside (like having to fall back on the crossbow), 4e really is a good system. It lets every character do something thematically within their role every round, and, with the 3pp companies cranking out adventures (and Kobold Quarterly offering some 4e content), there is quite a bit out there to make DMing easier without having to get a DDI subscription.
Pathfinder took a step in the other direction, where the characters more or less have to pick their spots to shine, and sometimes a particular skill set may not have an application in certain situations.
Just depends on how you want to have fun. Both systems can be a blast, just in different ways.
You also have to consider that melee is NOT a wizards friend. I'm please that pfRPG has made that mechanically clear now.
We had a situation with a 2H sword "build" (I so hate that term) Fighter was unable to reach the enemy. The wizard kicked butt and the fighter stood around (didn't even have a bow). But as a wizard you can fly, teleport, go invisiable, change shape, etc, etc you take these things in a non-combat context and fighter just plain sucks. Seriously you come to a stone wall and need to get on the other side, you have a 10th wizard and 20th fighter - who is more useful?
My point is there will always be situations where class A or class B won't be at their best and others where they will shine. Job of the DM is to balance these out over the course of the adventure.
If I read into something that more than likely isn't there... You issues are not doing damage which I suggest stems from the path D&D has taken - combat is where ALL the real fun is. If you want a spell caster effect each and every round you I would suggest you look to 4e. It does this very well, each round has everyone doing something always. Don't take this as me being rude, I am serious, have you tried 4e? It may be your answer for having more fun in an RPG session - and fun is why we play right?
Cheers,
S.We have tried 4e....and I like playing it in moderation but really dislike DMing it, and I don't have a lot of time to write my own campaigns as much as I'd like to for the most part. I may give it another try since as I currently DO have a bit more free time than i'm used to.
The Reserve feats from Complete Mage are not bad option if you want to do something magical every round.
I will also add being effective over the course of the day is more important than being effective for one fight. What I mean by this is if the party has things in hand, there is nothing wrong with not casting a spell. That spell may be better served in a later fight.
Ever since you sent me the 1e stuff, I can't help but read the spell descriptions and weep. Sorry.
You know, like:
"Disintegrate disintegrates stuff? Death spells kill stuff?
Wow!"
Heh, of course, back in the day by the time the wizard had reached a level where they could cast most of those death spells, the rogue and fighter in the party were two or three levels ahead.
|
|
We have tried 4e....and I like playing it in moderation but really dislike DMing it
Birds of the feather. I like playing 4e, but I really, really (continue reallys for at least another 6 or 7) dislike DMing it. pfRPG is the reverse, couldn't be bothered checking out "optimised build A" vs "optimised build B" hence can't be buggered being a player, but love (lot's of love) DMing it.
S.
|
|
Heh, of course, back in the day by the time the wizard had reached a level where they could cast most of those death spells, the rogue and fighter in the party were two or three levels ahead.Ever since you sent me the 1e stuff, I can't help but read the spell descriptions and weep. Sorry.
You know, like:
"Disintegrate disintegrates stuff? Death spells kill stuff?
Wow!"
That was what we called balance back then...
That was what we called balance back then...
Bah! We didn't even mention balance back then! Sure the elf in the party could only get to 9th level, and after that he's just stuck, but that was ok, because it was about ROLEplay, and the role was to tell him to "suck it you damn pointy eared soulless hippie! Now roll up a new one like everyone else."
(Seriously, elves 1st edition, no souls. Go look it up.)
|
|
That was what we called balance back then...Bah! We didn't even mention balance back then! Sure the elf in the party could only get to 9th level, and after that he's just stuck, but that was ok, because it was about ROLEplay, and the role was to tell him to "suck it you damn pointy eared soulless hippie! Now roll up a new one like everyone else."
(Seriously, elves 1st edition, no souls. Go look it up.)
Some people will fault your opinion/discription here. I myself am just nodding remember my Halfling Fighter/Thief...
:)
I stopped to take a look at this thread and all I could think was "why the h*** did the wizard get into a melee in the first place? Like, who fell down on the job? Did the fighter(s) have a stroke? Did they hate the wizard? Did they use Int as a dump stat and forget who they were supposed to protect? Then I thought, maybe the wizard was suicidal...
Honestly, 3.0 / 3.5 / PF is far more survivable than older editions, but even now the magic users in the party have to know better than to get into the thick of combat. In my game if the melee reaches the magical types it's only because everybody else has bought the farm or bugged out.
It should be a desperate situation before the magical types get into the hand to hand fighting. And yeah, wizards are lucky to get off a spell when somebody hits them with a weapon. As others have mentioned, in the old days, poof, no spell. Even in 3.5 I can think of a situation where 6 or 8 orcs were chucking bricks and rocks at a low level magic user to break his concentration while others engaged the melee types... I know my players remember that one :D
That was what we called balance back then...Bah! We didn't even mention balance back then! Sure the elf in the party could only get to 9th level, and after that he's just stuck, but that was ok, because it was about ROLEplay, and the role was to tell him to "suck it you damn pointy eared soulless hippie! Now roll up a new one like everyone else."
(Seriously, elves 1st edition, no souls. Go look it up.)
Some people will fault your opinion/discription here. I myself am just nodding remember my Halfling Fighter/Thief...
:)
And I'm still trying to decide whether I should laugh or cry when my human Fighter 7/Thief 8 died and blew his res survival roll (hey, who else misses those? =) ). Most irritating since I had just popped to 8th level the session before, was about to go to college...
Ah, good times.
|
|
And I'm still trying to decide whether I should laugh or cry when my human Fighter 7/Thief 8 died and blew his res survival roll (hey, who else misses those? =) ). Most irritating since I had just popped to 8th level the session before, was about to go to college...Ah, good times.
It's all kid-glove these days. Reserrection on demand, healing spells each level, hit points so high you would think they were talking about the US's debt. These young folk don't know how good they got it!
And I'm still trying to decide whether I should laugh or cry when my human Fighter 7/Thief 8 died and blew his res survival roll (hey, who else misses those? =) ). Most irritating since I had just popped to 8th level the session before, was about to go to college...Ah, good times.
It's all kid-glove these days. Reserrection on demand, healing spells each level, hit points so high you would think they were talking about the US's debt. These young folk don't know how good they got it!
Yeh...its jumping ahead an edition, but I wonder how well alot of people these days would react to Dragon Mountain. I still retain a rabid hatred of kobolds...
It's all kid-glove these days. Resurrection on demand, healing spells each level, hit points so high you would think they were talking about the US's debt. These young folk don't know how good they got it!
It's not all kid-gloves these days, at least in my campaigns, last one I ran, sure, it might have been possible to get a raise dead or two from time to time, but there just happened to be a militant heretic wing of the local god of light that believed all "returned souls" were in fact servants of the lower planes, and did their damnedest to return them whence they came. Definitely made it much more interesting trying to find a priest willing to raise a fallen PC.
...
And of course it made things even more interesting that the militant heretic clerics were right, and the one PC that got raised I was feeding notes with secret orders from his hellish masters. Heh. Man I loved that game.
|
As DM of these adventure paths, and running Second Darkness, where alot of encounters have monsters from every angle, I have made the wizard suffer. However there are several things I do that make the encounters a lot less lethal, and dangerous for casters. Try these rules..
1) Let the wookie win...(kinda)
These adventure paths are disgustingly brutal at times. Understand that you are holding the lives and fun of the players in hand. Because of this, intelligence must be taken into account. Sure a 10 intelligence guy knows that he should beat up the guy in robes, but he's not going to be sure about how to combat these guys. He won't ready an action to disrupt a spell casting attempt.
What he WILL do is charge the wizard and smack him a good one. Take your hit points out of casters early and often. If the wizard doesn't do something on his own to improve the situation, he will cause himself alot of heartache.
This creates the same harrowing experience, but unless the NPC has the feat step up (Which to date I have YET to see someone with it. Granted this was an AP printed before PFRPG which 4/5 are.) you aren't going to be as lethal to these caster's utility. Same harrowing experience, not as much frustration. If the wizard gets stuck in a corner, you beat the hell out of him and make him pray to whatever god he serves.
In short, don't kill casters unless they're stupid to not fix their mistake. This will teach them their place, not on the front line. Shocking grasp is a good last ditch effort to get that minion out of the way, but you don't use your "use in case of emergency" every round.
2) Conversely, beat the wookie and make him feel smug about it.
Keep in mind, sometimes a wizard as a punching bag is a good thing. If a guy is desperate to disrupt the spell caster, he may do something stupid, like trigger a fighter's second AoO. NPC's have no clue as to the powers of the players, and do stupid things. In fact here's an example;
Boss mob has a hand crossbow, is next to the Paladin, and is hoping that the paladin will fail their fort save and take a good old nap from a poisoned bolt. She takes a five foot step back, triggering the paladin's step up. Paladin steps up, and since I had already declared she was going to shoot, I didn't change the action. She had pulled away before with a five foot step and the paladin had not done so. So, in my mind she figured it was safe to do so, until the Paladin got his attack of opportunity and dropped her because she tried to fire a bolt into his face.
Now, lets say that down the road, this boss mob returned by GM fiat. (something I'm considering...) She would knwo full well what the NPC's were capable of, and would act accordingly, no longer falling prey to the same trick. Why would the NPC's see a fighter has Combat Reflexes, unless he has seen the fighter trigger it. Also, some mobs might think they're invincible, and attempt to provoke that attack, figuring there is no chance they'd be hit.
My point? Let the wizard turn himself into bait. In that case, the other party members can learn to expect such tricks, and learn how to benefit. The wizard contributes, even in the worst case scenario, and the party learns to function as a unit, rather than individuals, who happen to kill stuff in the same area.
Now, if you encounter someone who has ranks of spell craft, then you use smart tactics, as he obviously knows how a spell works, and how to disrupt them. But Billy Joe Bob the nameless thug, has no clue that if he hits the wizard during a spell he could stop it. Instead he's going to beat said wizard down before they can even cast, figuring that route is better.
Then those concentration rules are pulled out to make things harrowing, and the disruption they bring is feared. It also means they aren't as frustrated, as when they do five rounds of nothing.
Because honestly, you'd have to be a dick of a DM to send every mob, regardless of consequences against said caster, to the point they HAVE to fly and turn invis to get the ability to even be useful. If it comes to that point, perhaps you're playing captain cutthroat too much. What mobs are you using?
|
Because honestly, you'd have to be a dick of a DM to send every mob, regardless of consequences against said caster, to the point they HAVE to fly and turn invis to get the ability to even be useful. If it comes to that point, perhaps you're playing captain cutthroat too much. What mobs are you using?
While I'm a big proponent of the 'wizards should act smarter' camp, I think this is rather harsh.
At the low levels, this can be true. But even then, it's only true if every mission involves a trip down a 5' to 10' wide corridor.
The rules simply don't allow the front-line to act as blockers, without an investment in feats (such as Combat Reflexes), and even then, these methods are limited by the Dex mod, not one of the priorities for the typical 'Tank'.
It doesn't take too long before the opponents have access to fast movement (to circle round the back), flight, burrowing, tumbling, Mobility, teleport, etc. Or just say 'Screw it, I can survive an AoO, so let's run through the front line.'.
So, given that most opponents can get through the hard outer shell, to feast on the soft centre, that means they always should, right?
Well, no.
I will run monsters and NPCs according to their intelligence and personality, and that goes both ways.
Unintelligent undead, unless they're being actively controlled, aren't going to form a conga-line, to file through a 5' gap after the caster, ignoring the delicious brains of the other PCs. They'll just take the shortest route to the nearest victim, then any that can't get into melee will shuffle round the edge of the room, looking for a gap.
Cowardly humanoids, working for a master who rules via bullying, probably won't take needless risks, or act on their own initiative.
"No, Boglog, our job is to defend this stairwell, not to chase intruders into the barracks. Bang the gong, and let Grublick's bastards deal with it."
Remember, too, that killing an enemy mage is only one half of the job. The question is, can you then get back to safety?
NPCs should have the same drive for survival as a PC, possibly more, if they didn't choose a dangerous life.
That wizard may be squishy, but he's stood within 10' of a raging dwarf, who'll cut your head off next round.
Let someone else charge into the centre of the room, and make themselves a target.
Glory's no good if you don't live to enjoy it.
Go pick on that henchman instead. Look busy. Live to fight another day.
As a player, the new concentration haven't been a big concern. I've played 6 sessions now and I haven't had to make a single concentration check. Most opponents are not intelligent and cannot make it to the casters in one piece. Having said all of that, my parties are fairly large and low level (4 or less).
On the DMing side, the new concentration rules pretty much suck. My players are smart and more often than not BBG casters don't get to do very much unless I setup a contrived situation. God help them if they encounter the party in an open field.
I don't think the new concentration rules were very good for BBGs. Casters just aren't up to snuff anymore, imo. In any case, old modules are no longer backward compatible because they just can't be played in the same fashion as before. Now they need bodyguards, to be up in some unreachable location, or they need to be "flyig invisible" (which gets old, fast).
Bleh.
I'll change the rules eventually, but what I'm thinking is that your highest level spell should have a 25% failure of casting defensively, irrelevant of stats. It decreases by 5% for each lower spell level. Combat Casting would reduce this by 5%. I think that would be fair. 55-60% failure at low levels isn't fair, to me anyway.
I know this was made so that high level spellcasters would still be challenged, but it hasn't worked out that way. Also, keep in mind most people do not play the game at levels 16-20, most people play D&D at the level 1-10 range and the concentration rules are too restrictive at this level.
|
|
Because honestly, you'd have to be a dick of a DM to send every mob, regardless of consequences against said caster, to the point they HAVE to fly and turn invis to get the ability to even be useful. If it comes to that point, perhaps you're playing captain cutthroat too much. What mobs are you using?While I'm a big proponent of the 'wizards should act smarter' camp, I think this is rather harsh.
I played a game, where the guy made use of things the mosnters had no possibility of knowing. Granted this was a 4th edition game, but the monster did things like, hide in my cloud of darkness because no one else could see it there, attacked downed characters despite there being up players trying to wail on them, and rushing the softer players regardless of consequences.
I'm sorry, but that game soured any desire to play my monsters anyway beside the dumb brutes they are and I think anyone who makes goblins have a degree from westpoint is a dick.
A lot of the debate here illustrates one thing to me: in any of the rules sets (1e/2e/3.0/3.5/3.PF), player skill counts as much as character power if not more when it comes to performance. When the wizard picks touch spells and tries to mix it up in melee, that player is doing a poor simulation of that wizard's supposedly incredible intelligence.
Although the rules are poor in actually spelling this out, it's worth putting in italics: playing a caster absolutely REQUIRES intimate knowledge of the game rules and a respectable degree of experience on the part of the player. Without these, he'll seem sub-par, especially at lower levels. With them, he can easily dominate game play, especially at higher levels.
Whenever I see posts wailing about the "nerfing" of casters and other posts replying "WTF?", I see a group of relative newcomers being answered by a bunch of old-timers: "You think casters have it bad now? Why, you kids get everything! Back in my day, we couldn't FLY to wizard school, we had to walk, uphill both ways...!"
|
|
concentration rules are too restrictive at this level.
This is probably one of those paradigm shifts. We have gone from "I'll almost never get a spell off in combat" (1e) to "I might get a spell off in combat" (2e) to "I almost certainly will get a spell off in combat" (3/3.5e) now back to "I might get a spell off in combat" (pfRPG).
Wizards (or spell casting in general) was never envisioned to be something people would be doing while another person was trying to cut your head off. It was never envisioned that a spell caster would have some sort of "right" to cast spells in every situation. If you are wearing a dress (sorry robe) and are within the reach of a sharp pointy object, unless you are prepared, you are standing in the "wrong place". You may not agree if this, and if so you are indeed moving away from "D&D" as designed (originally).
The need to make a concentration check means either (a) you were surprised or (b) you foe is smart and you should be thinking outside the "move/attack" tactic.
This is how D&D was and now has moved back towards.
S.
A lot of the debate here illustrates one thing to me: in any of the rules sets (1e/2e/3.0/3.5/3.PF), player skill counts as much as character power if not more when it comes to performance. When the wizard picks touch spells and tries to mix it up in melee, that player is doing a poor simulation of that wizard's supposedly incredible intelligence.
Although the rules are poor in actually spelling this out, it's worth putting in italics: playing a caster absolutely REQUIRES intimate knowledge of the game rules and a respectable degree of experience on the part of the player. Without these, he'll seem sub-par, especially at lower levels. With them, he can easily dominate game play, especially at higher levels.
Whenever I see posts wailing about the "nerfing" of casters and other posts replying "WTF?", I see a group of relative newcomers being answered by a bunch of old-timers: "You think casters have it bad now? Why, you kids get everything! Back in my day, we couldn't FLY to wizard school, we had to walk, uphill both ways...!"
"...through nasty enchanted woods filled with all kinds of critters wanting to eat us, and not a cantrip to our name. Man, woulda been nice to even be ABLE to strap on armor to try and keep the lumps down. Sheesh..."
Wow...I feel old...
and why should I have to spend 2-4 rounds before i can do anything to contribute? name any other class that is required to sit on thier A** for half the fight before they can participate? This leads to two problems. The character is ineffectual for most of the fight, and then the character isn't much use if theres a second fight later on. So to use your perspective the wizard is a one trick pony.
Sorry, you just lost your own argument right there. The wizard used tactical sense and got the h*** out of combat. Then he was effective.
Obviously you (and your players) want your wizard to be a front line fighter. That is not the class, not it's purpose.
Name any other class that can :
Planes travel
Fly
Teleport
Go invisible
cast any of the other umpteen thousand spells.
Oh,
And to answer your question :
Druids, Bards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Paladins, Rangers all have to worry about concentration checks if casting in combat.
What you are saying is that you want a spellcaster to be able to not only open up like a blasting cannon in combat, but have no negatives either. Sorry...
|
|
Personally, I'm all for making concentration more difficult. It discourages casters (friendly and enemy alike) from just acting as static weapons platforms and forces them to think tactically by taking advantage of cover and avoiding melee while casting spells.
It also gives melee types an actual hope in Baator of spoiling spells cast in combat. My greatest frustration as a player up against 3.0-3.5 NPC casters is that they NEVER failed concentration checks. Now, there's a very real chance of a flubbed spell if they do something foolish.
This actually happened on the first night we switched over to PRPG from BETA. An NPC bad guy tried to hit the figher with a spell while threatened and lost his spell from a flubbed roll. We also checked against the BETA rules to see what would have happened, and he would have made it by a longshot, instead he failed by a small margin.
"...through nasty enchanted woods filled with all kinds of critters wanting to eat us, and not a cantrip to our name. Man, woulda been nice to even be ABLE to strap on armor to try and keep the lumps down. Sheesh..."
Wow...I feel old...
And druids these days! If you can even call them druids. Why, I hear they even have levels past 14, and there's more than one of them at that level to boot!
Uppity treehuggers! I remember when even thinking about touching a scimitar would lose them all their spells for the day, now we've got crazy bear-ape-elemental men running around willy nilly, shifting to and fro like there's no tomorrow. Who said you could use my polymorph you damn thief! You're a bloody sub class! Go steal some of Cleric's stuff! Get off my lawn (and stop trying to awaken it)!
|
|
Whenever I see posts wailing about the "nerfing" of casters and other posts replying "WTF?", I see a group of relative newcomers being answered by a bunch of old-timers: "You think casters have it bad now? Why, you kids get everything! Back in my day, we couldn't FLY to wizard school, we had to walk, uphill both ways...!"
Haha! Good one.
Also back in the day we didn't have this fancy internet with all these forums for asking questions. We could just play the game and interpret the rules ourselves. A lot of people seem to get hung up on every rule and how it is all worded nowadays.
So the next question is if Rangers can take Favored Enemy (those darn neighbourhood kids)?Get off my lawn (and stop trying to awaken it)!An awakened front lawn...now that would be awesome! :D
Would that count as an organization, or are Darn Kids a humanoid subtype?
|
|
and why should I have to spend 2-4 rounds before i can do anything to contribute? name any other class that is required to sit on thier A** for half the fight before they can participate? This leads to two problems. The character is ineffectual for most of the fight, and then the character isn't much use if theres a second fight later on. So to use your perspective the wizard is a one trick pony.
Sorry, you just lost your own argument right there. The wizard used tactical sense and got the h*** out of combat. Then he was effective.
Obviously you (and your players) want your wizard to be a front line fighter. That is not the class, not it's purpose.
Name any other class that can :
Planes travel
Fly
Teleport
Go invisible
cast any of the other umpteen thousand spells.Oh,
And to answer your question :
Druids, Bards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Paladins, Rangers all have to worry about concentration checks if casting in combat.What you are saying is that you want a spellcaster to be able to not only open up like a blasting cannon in combat, but have no negatives either. Sorry...
Totally agree!
Wizards are anything but a one trick pony. If you're playing one to fight in melee, methinks you chose the wrong class. You prepare your defences up front and/or use your intelligence to use spells in more constructive ways. Yes you may have to spend a round or two getting extra things prepared, that's because you don't know what's coming, but you're overall effect, if done right, is huge. That's the fun of it!
You do have to be patient playing wizards, but you also have to play them with the intelligence they need. It's just more challenging to get right and therefore more fun!
Making all classes equal all the time doesn't promote the game, it promotes only melee. That's a shame and a direction I dislike about 4th Ed., hence I don't play it. That's not to say it's wrong, just that this move to everything being equal removes a huge element of challenge, fun and teamwork from the game. These are to me the fun things.