|
That game needs a high point buy. Once I find players brave enough I will have to try my hand at running it.They could be using a much higher point buy than anyone else. Characters in my Shackled City game started with over 20 in a couple places. And if that's true, the other characters have little to complain about.
Or crafting. Yeah.
I went with 42-point buy on the 3.5 chart. Things have been interesting.
On-topic, this thread reminds me of the one complaining that the Radiant Servant of Pelor was too good at healing and turning undead.
They could be using a much higher point buy than anyone else. Characters in my Shackled City game started with over 20 in a couple places. And if that's true, the other characters have little to complain about.
Or crafting. Yeah.
We are accustomed to 32-pt buy in v3.5, so when we switched to Pathfinder we chose to go with the closest official equivalent of 25-pt buy (which roughly ends up being the same).
Believe you me, when your GM allows you to spend your starting funds on item creation (effectively getting most things at half price) the Craft Wondrous Item feat becomes a no brainer choice for most.
I have a player in my game with this. I do like it, but I won't allow them to go over the WBL by to much with it. In a game where magic items are strictly monitored its a great feat. In a game like mine, where adventurers are common, magic items are easy to find so the feat is not all that useful unless the players are strapped for cash.
I have a player in my game with this. I do like it, but I won't allow them to go over the WBL by to much with it. In a game where magic items are strictly monitored its a great feat. In a game like mine, where adventurers are common, magic items are easy to find so the feat is not all that useful unless the players are strapped for cash.They could be using a much higher point buy than anyone else. Characters in my Shackled City game started with over 20 in a couple places. And if that's true, the other characters have little to complain about.
Or crafting. Yeah.
We are accustomed to 32-pt buy in v3.5, so when we switched to Pathfinder we chose to go with the closest official equivalent of 25-pt buy (which roughly ends up being the same).
Believe you me, when your GM allows you to spend your starting funds on item creation (effectively getting most things at half price) the Craft Wondrous Item feat becomes a no brainer choice for most.
It's GMs that are so wrapped up in the WB/L guidelines that get my goat. For example, I've seen some people give their players LESS treasure just because one of the PCs took up item creation feats. Talk about screwing them over! That's like letting players take Power Attack, but then adding 50 hit points to everything they ever fight, or throwing everything in the book with fire immunity at the party just cause one PC is a fire bloodline sorcerer!
It's GMs like that, that cause all those posts on these forums about "item creation" being a waste of feats. Unless your GM is screwing you, it's not a waste.
The funny thing is, I've seen the same item creation-screwing GM let other players take up Leadership, complete with a cohort completely decked out in free shiny new magical items. Where is the sense in that!?
Sorry 'bout derailing the thread. /rant
I have a player in my game with this. I do like it, but I won't allow them to go over the WBL by to much with it. In a game where magic items are strictly monitored its a great feat. In a game like mine, where adventurers are common, magic items are easy to find so the feat is not all that useful unless the players are strapped for cash.They could be using a much higher point buy than anyone else. Characters in my Shackled City game started with over 20 in a couple places. And if that's true, the other characters have little to complain about.
Or crafting. Yeah.
We are accustomed to 32-pt buy in v3.5, so when we switched to Pathfinder we chose to go with the closest official equivalent of 25-pt buy (which roughly ends up being the same).
Believe you me, when your GM allows you to spend your starting funds on item creation (effectively getting most things at half price) the Craft Wondrous Item feat becomes a no brainer choice for most.
It's GMs that are so wrapped up in the WB/L guidelines that get my goat. For example, I've seen some people give their players LESS treasure just because one of the PCs took up item creation feats. Talk about screwing them over! That's like letting players take Power Attack, but then adding 50 hit points to everything they ever fight, or throwing everything in the book with fire immunity at the party just cause one PC is a fire bloodline sorcerer!
It's GMs like that, that cause all those posts on these forums about "item creation" being a waste of feats. Unless your GM is screwing you, it's not a waste.
The funny thing is, I've seen the same item creation-screwing GM let other players take up Leadership, complete with a cohort completely decked out in free shiny new magical items. Where is the sense in that!?
Sorry 'bout derailing the thread. /rant
It seems nobody is talking about smite at the moment anyway, and I don't have anything else to talk about.
More money equals better items, which equals more power. If the players don't mind me upping the challenge to compensate for the power increase then that is fine, but most don't want that. I could limit the time available to make items, but that also affects time to RP with NPC's and make plans. I don't think you have to stay directly in line with the WBL, but you should not let the players get 2 levels above it if you don't plan to compensate for it with tougher monsters. One feat should not give you the power to curb stomp encounters that are intended to be difficult.
In short: I don't really about the money. I do care about the power of the group as a whole.
PS: Your example with the power attack and fire sorcerer should be banned from DM'ing. The item creation one was bad also. He should not force players to make their own treasure just because they have the feat for it. He should only hold back on treasure once he realizes they have too much stuff. How much is too much? That depends upon the gaming group in question.
I'm tellin' ya, divorce the bonuses from the items and ditch WBL. It'll make you so much happier not having to do taxes to play the game.
Divorce the bonuses from the item? I need a translation.
As for WBL I am way to lazy to track what everyone has. I normally have a good idea of what a player should have. I don't mind if the player is "rich" for his level, but when the level 9 fighter has a +4 sword I know I slipped up somewhere*.*example only
|
|
Money should not equal magical power. Otherwise, you can't have castles of gold, because the PCs will dismantle them and sell them for another +1.
And all people are doing by decreasing treasure when the PCs have too much or increasing prices or other stupid things, is saying 'You can't have more goodies until you gain a level'.
Screw. That.
Throw out the BS accounting and just give them the items when you're ready for them to have them.
'I wanna craft the Sommerswerd.'
'Okay, I'll let you know when you finish it.'
'You got a Deathscythe for sale?'
'On backorder, have it for you in a week.'
Tell your players straight up when they can have it, don't play the passive aggressive jerk.
Divorce the bonuses from the item? I need a translation.
As for WBL I am way to lazy to track what everyone has. I normally have a good idea of what a player should have. I don't mind if the player is "rich" for his level, but when the level 9 fighter has a +4 sword I know I slipped up somewhere*.*example only
'At 3rd level, you gain a +1 resistance bonus to all saves.'
'At 4th level, you gain a +1 enhancement bonus to all attack rolls.'
'At 6th level, you gain a +2 enhancement bonus to one ability score.'
If the game requires the character to have a bonus at a certain level, put it in the dern character advancement rather than giving them a bloody Christmas ornament.
Divorce the bonuses from the item? I need a translation.
I think he means to have the bonuses that you WOULD HAVE BEEN getting from items come from some other source instead SUCH AS character levels.
That way, everybody keeps up on the power curve and magic items become little more than flavor.
At least, that's the only interpretation of his words that's coming to me right now.
EDIT: Ninja'd. Guess I was off.
Money should not equal magical power. Otherwise, you can't have castles of gold, because the PCs will dismantle them and sell them for another +1.
And all people are doing by decreasing treasure when the PCs have too much or increasing prices or other stupid things, is saying 'You can't have more goodies until you gain a level'.
Screw. That.
Throw out the BS accounting and just give them the items when you're ready for them to have them.
'I wanna craft the Sommerswerd.'
'Okay, I'll let you know when you finish it.''You got a Deathscythe for sale?'
'On backorder, have it for you in a week.'Tell your players straight up when they can have it, don't play the passive aggressive jerk.
I think the best thing to do is to let the PC's know how you view the intent of the item creation feats. I do like how games like SW saga has defense bonus which means most of the power is in the character, but I am too lazy to make new rules for such things and balance them out with the game. I have seen other attempts by posters online, but I did not like any of them. Now if you just hold back treasure, and they don't know why that seems like a trust issue. You should always be able to tell you players why you do certain things, IMHO that is.
PS: Some things like abilities would be hard to place.
I know that not everyone spends money the same so two characters could still be miles apart in terms of power so the WBL is far from perfect.
Edit:deleted the word "could"
|
|
PS: Some things like abilities would be hard to place.
I know that not everyone spends money the same so two characters could still be miles apart in terms of power so the WBL is far from perfect.
Mostly I only advocate putting the bonuses into the character class. If it makes you better at something, put it in character class. If it gives you a new option, put it in a magic item.
+1 swords are bad. Cloak of the manta ray is good.
On the archer/melee thing:
I'm not buying that the archer is better. It may appear so on paper, but not in practice. Going with the initial paladin vs. dragon example, the dragon closed with the melee paladin and got massacred. Substitute the archer paladin. The claim is the dragon would be owned even moreso, because now the paladin can massacre at range, and take away the dragon's fly superiority. Well, given the situation, having the dragon simply engage at close range is precisely how to negate the threat. With reach and an obvious melee advantage, the paladin will be at a serious disadvantage. With trip, sunder, disarm, (heck, even grapple) and other tactics, the dragon has a plethora of options to even the fight in its favor.
Archers don't do well at close range. There is the 5-foot step/full-attack, but several mundane tactics solve even that without resorting to a wind wall in every encounter . One that instantly comes to mind is 2 foes engaging said archer. Another is having reach. And of course, the sunder, trip, and disarm maneuvers. And step up, wind stance, and lightning stance. Cover and concealment.
Archers only dominate when they are able to consistently maintain range.
On the archer/melee thing:
I'm not buying that the archer is better. It may appear so on paper, but not in practice. Going with the initial paladin vs. dragon example, the dragon closed with the melee paladin and got massacred. Substitute the archer paladin. The claim is the dragon would be owned even moreso, because now the paladin can massacre at range, and take away the dragon's fly superiority. Well, given the situation, having the dragon simply engage at close range is precisely how to negate the threat. With reach and an obvious melee advantage, the paladin will be at a serious disadvantage. With trip, sunder, disarm, (heck, even grapple) and other tactics, the dragon has a plethora of options to even the fight in its favor.
Archers don't do well at close range. There is the 5-foot step/full-attack, but several mundane tactics solve even that without resorting to a wind wall in every encounter . One that instantly comes to mind is 2 foes engaging said archer. Another is having reach. And of course, the sunder, trip, and disarm maneuvers. And step up, wind stance, and lightning stance. Cover and concealment.
Archers only dominate when they are able to consistently maintain range.
I agree. There are several ways to take care of archers. I am also failing to see what the issue is.
I have a halfling paladin 2/sorcerer 13 (destined) who gets a +12 to his attack rolls and AC when smiting. He also has saving throw modifiers of Fort +31/Ref +28/Will +35 (+37 vs. fear), which all go up whenever he casts a personal spell or is attacked from hiding.
The other players hate that he is essentially invincible.
YOUR campaigns are known to be overpowered cheesefests, because you allow players all that "technically" is allowed. :p Yes, yes, I remember your threads well from the WotC Star Wars boards. ^^
Serious question, why does your sorcerer/paladin have a 34 Charisma? I can get to those values only at level 20, with a 18 starting, a +6 cloak, a +5 book and all points in Charisma.
*edit* Ah, you explained it later. Wait, your guy got 34 CHA at LEVEL 12? Oo
Hm, character wealth at level 12 should be 108,000 GP, crafting those two items takes 81,750 GP and 162 days of continuous work. Technically possible, but your campaign apparently has big in-game downtimes.
I have a halfling paladin 2/sorcerer 13 (destined) who gets a +12 to his attack rolls and AC when smiting. He also has saving throw modifiers of Fort +31/Ref +28/Will +35 (+37 vs. fear), which all go up whenever he casts a personal spell or is attacked from hiding.
The other players hate that he is essentially invincible.
YOUR campaigns are known to be overpowered cheesefests, because you allow players all that "technically" is allowed. :p Yes, yes, I remember your threads well from the WotC Star Wars boards. ^^
Serious question, why does your sorcerer/paladin have a 34 Charisma? I can get to those values only at level 20, with a 18 starting, a +6 cloak, a +5 book and all points in Charisma.
My guess:
If the players can afford it they can have it. I guess the DM gave them the time in game(120+ days) also to craft the tome, and the loot to buy it, which even at half price should probably be out of their reach when combined with the other items. I don't agree with all of it, but it is not my place to tell someone how to run their game. I look at it as the exception and not the norm. I only questioned him to find out if I had missed something. Everyone once in a while someone surprises me with a simple strategy that I can't beleive I never thought of.
PS:There are ways to get the item for about 60%+ off and to get it made in less than a 100 days, but it still requires a very kind-hearted DM.
YOUR campaigns are known to be overpowered cheesefests, because you allow players all that "technically" is allowed. :p Yes, yes, I remember your threads well from the WotC Star Wars boards. ^^
Serious question, why does your sorcerer/paladin have a 34 Charisma? I can get to those values only at level 20, with a 18 starting, a +6 cloak, a +5 book and all points in Charisma.
You are forgetting the +2 racial bonus.
I warn you. You are stepping awfully close to ending up on my ignore list.
OUR games aren't "overpowered cheese fests." They are grand adventures to which one's imagination is the only real limiter. How much depth could the stories told in YOUR group possibly have I wonder?
Please don't be insulting. It's rude and good will never come out of saying such things. Many of the stories from my groups on the WotC boards are heralded by many as being challenging, interesting, original, and fun. I find it odd that you seem so comfortable saying such negative things about our games. If your games are so "perfect" how come I've not heard of them as you have mine?
Answer that question or else apologize so that we may once again resume civil conversation.
YOUR campaigns are known to be overpowered cheesefests, because you allow players all that "technically" is allowed. :p Yes, yes, I remember your threads well from the WotC Star Wars boards. ^^
Serious question, why does your sorcerer/paladin have a 34 Charisma? I can get to those values only at level 20, with a 18 starting, a +6 cloak, a +5 book and all points in Charisma.
You are forgetting the +2 racial bonus.
I warn you. You are stepping awfully close to ending up on my ignore list.
OUR games aren't "overpowered cheese fests." They are grand adventures to which one's imagination is the only real limiter. How much depth could the stories told in YOUR group possibly have I wonder?
Please don't be insulting. It's rude and good will never come out of saying such things. Many of the stories from my groups on the WotC boards are heralded by many as being challenging, interesting, original, and fun. I find it odd that you seem so comfortable saying such negative things about our games. If your games are so "perfect" how come I've not heard of them as you have mine?
Answer that question or else apologize and we can resume civil conversation.
Yeah, I put the smiley in because I was TOTALLY serious.
But what I was referring to is that you have a tendency to, well, take rules to their logical extreme and then complain about them. I think you remember that thread about the stealth character in your Star Wars campaign, where the guy got something around a +40 to Stealth? One of the developers came personally to tell you that two items ( Shadowsuit + Shadowskin ? ) didn't stack and that applying common sense you couldn't put those two on together, but, IIRC, you insisted for about four pages that *technically* they stacked and common sense didn't apply, etc. etc.
I found that very instructive. And thanks for then questioning my ability to run games because I don't encourage rules abuses.
*edit* Ah, yeah, here it is.
But what I was referring to is that you have a tendency to, well, take rules to their logical extreme and then complain about them.
I rarely "complained" about anything. What I did was find problems and imbalances within the rules and then pointed them out to everyone in such a way that it was sure to get lots of attention. It's one of the reasons why I am referred to as the rules lawyer form hell--because I often butted heads with the game designers (in a friendly manner of speaking).
Did you notice just how much discussion was made about the stealth rules just because of that thread? I excel at drawing people's attention to things like that. What's more, however, my threads almost always lead to lots of discussion on how to fix the problems that are shown.
And yes, I disagreed with the Saga game designers, as I often did. It was part of our dynamic.
In my defense...
The way some folk are reacting to this (fascinating) thread, you'd think RavingDork was an unknown quantity here. This is what RD does for kicks - he repeatedly and ruthlessly interrogates the RAW with as much legal craziness as he (and allegedly his buddies) can come up with. He's the Defense Counsel from hell ("Are you seriously denying, Mr. Thomson, that my player can have a Stealth of +35 under the rules as you wrote them? Let the record show that the witness for the prosecution mumbled and claimed he was on medication"). When I first started reading RD's posts, back when Saga had just come out, they annoyed the heck out of me - I'm a GM of the 'rules are guidelines for having fun' school, and the ongoing cheesefest that he seemed to be advocating seemed like a nightmare. Why couldn't he just use common sense, rather than insisting on the letter of the RAW covering every situation? Then I started noticing things. RD was occasionally addressing rules problems I'd run up against myself, and coming up with good answers, thoroughly explained. He was starting threads that produced enormous volumes of story and encounter ideas as he pushed and prodded other contributors to come up with ways to cirucumvent apparent loopholes in the rules that only he thought were a problem. He pushed the idea of complete fairness between GM and player through playing by the same rules until he had me believing in it. In short, his constant niggling and and winkling out of the cheesiest possibilities of the min-maxing metagamer are literally inspirational - nothing helps me understand some aspect of the system better than watching RD push it beyond its intended limits. And just look at this thread to see the creativity that follows! It must drive Rodney and the devs mad to have the RAW treated like some low-level programming language, but I'm convinced that the net effect is a better game all round. He might not play my type of game, but watching him work his mischief helps my game too. Don't ever change, RD!
More than anybody it was Tordelback who was responsible for my title. He coined the term in the very thread you linked to. It's also worth noting that the game designer in said thread openly admitted to mis-quoting the rules do to having taken cold medication--which makes the above quote all that more funny.)
But what I was referring to is that you have a tendency to, well, take rules to their logical extreme and then complain about them.*sighs*
I rarely complained about anything. What I did was find problems and imbalances within the rules and then pointed them out to everyone in such a way that it was sure to get lots of attention. It's one of the reasons why I am referred to as the rules lawyer form hell--because I often butted heads with the game designers (in a friendly manner of speaking).
Did you notice just how much discussion was made about the stealth rules just because of that thread? I excel at drawing people's attention to things like that. What's more, however, my threads almost always lead to lots of discussion on how to fix the problems that are shown.
And yes, I disagreed with the Saga game designers, as I often did. It was part of our dynamic.
In my defense...
The way some folk are reacting to this (fascinating) thread, you'd think RavingDork was an unknown quantity here. This is what RD does for kicks - he repeatedly and ruthlessly interrogates the RAW with as much legal craziness as he (and allegedly his buddies) can come up with. He's the Defense Counsel from hell ("Are you seriously denying, Mr. Thomson, that my player can have a Stealth of +35 under the rules as you wrote them? Let the record show that the witness for the prosecution mumbled and claimed he was on medication"). When I first started reading RD's posts, back when Saga had just come out, they annoyed the heck out of me - I'm a GM of the 'rules are guidelines for having fun' school, and the ongoing cheesefest that he seemed to be advocating seemed like a nightmare. Why couldn't he just use common sense, rather than insisting on the letter of the RAW covering every situation? Then I started noticing things. RD was occasionally addressing rules problems I'd run up against myself, and coming up with good answers, thoroughly explained. He was starting threads that...
And I was saying the thing about "cheesefests" tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley ( the Paizo boards need an upgrade for real smileys, so they are more visible. >.< ). So it was meant in good humour.
Still, the question remains, your Paladin/Sorcerer got 162 days of off-time in-game to construct those items? The party doesn't have to keep some sort of schedule before the bad guys take over the world?
GAH! It ate my post!
And I was saying the thing about "cheesefests" tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley ( the Paizo boards need an upgrade for real smileys, so they are more visible. >.< ). So it was meant in good humour.
Still, the question remains, your Paladin/Sorcerer got 162 days of off-time in-game to construct those items? The party doesn't have to keep some sort of schedule before the bad guys take over the world?
I agree about the smilies. Moving on...
As for the creation time, my character could have done it in half the time simply by increasing the spellcraft DC by 5 and then taking 10.
In any case, it's moot. The character was made at 15th-level, and used his starting funds to create the items at cost BEFORE the game started. In other words, they are part of his background and he began play with them. He was able to get them for their creation costs because (1) he was actually making them and (2) his item creation feats would be almost useless otherwise, short of getting stuck on a desert island in the middle of a low magic campaign or something.
GAH! It ate my post!
And I was saying the thing about "cheesefests" tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley ( the Paizo boards need an upgrade for real smileys, so they are more visible. >.< ). So it was meant in good humour.
Still, the question remains, your Paladin/Sorcerer got 162 days of off-time in-game to construct those items? The party doesn't have to keep some sort of schedule before the bad guys take over the world?
I agree about the smilies. Moving on...
As for the creation time, my character could have done it in half the time simply by increasing the spellcraft DC by 5 and then taking 10.
In any case, it's moot. The character was made at 15th-level, and used his starting funds to create the items at cost BEFORE the game started. In other words, they are part of his background and he began play with them. He was able to get them for their creation costs because (1) he was actually making them and (2) his item creation feats would be almost useless otherwise, short of getting stuck on a desert island in the middle of a low magic campaign or something.
Ok. I think most of us assumed you played your way up to that level.
Details man, details. :)I had assumed the game moved on the PC's schedule which some DM's do.
Ok. I think most of us assumed you played your way up to that level.
Details man, details. :)
I had assumed the game moved on the PC's schedule which some DM's do.
I thought it was understood, seeing as many of the posters in this thread also posted in my "Which spellcaster would you play?" thread, in which I specifically said I was having trouble choosing between several 15th-level characters I had just made. I even talk about the same halfling paladin/sorcerer character by name in both threads. Oh well. It's just plum not safe to make assumptions around here I guess. I'll try and be more clear in the future.
GAH! It ate my post!
And I was saying the thing about "cheesefests" tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley ( the Paizo boards need an upgrade for real smileys, so they are more visible. >.< ). So it was meant in good humour.
Still, the question remains, your Paladin/Sorcerer got 162 days of off-time in-game to construct those items? The party doesn't have to keep some sort of schedule before the bad guys take over the world?
I agree about the smilies. Moving on...
As for the creation time, my character could have done it in half the time simply by increasing the spellcraft DC by 5 and then taking 10.
In any case, it's moot. The character was made at 15th-level, and used his starting funds to create the items at cost BEFORE the game started. In other words, they are part of his background and he began play with them. He was able to get them for their creation costs because (1) he was actually making them and (2) his item creation feats would be almost useless otherwise, short of getting stuck on a desert island in the middle of a low magic campaign or something.
Ok. I think most of us assumed you played your way up to that level.
Details man, details. :)
I had assumed the game moved on the PC's schedule which some DM's do.
+1
Totally off-topic: I always have problems with finding the balance between extended downtime and sense of urgency for players. While I hate the "from apprentice to archmage in one year" campaigns, I find it exceedingly difficult to keep the tension in a campaign where players have months of off-time. Oh, well, I am running CotCT right now, so it's more in the vein of fast leveling.
*edit* Uh, just looked up the item creation feats on the loo and stumbled upon a slight problem. Your 15th level sorcerer shouldn't be easily able to create a +5 book. You need Wish ( a 9th level spell ) and a 17th caster level. You can simulate the Wish by getting another +5 on the Spellcraft DC and *probably* the 17th caster level by another +5 ( not sure on that account ), but that raises the Spellcraft check to a DC 37.
Now, assuming that your sorcerer got a +6 INT enhancer, too, and a skill focus in spellcraft, and starts with an 14 INT, that'd make your spellcraft check a 29. And that is with the very best stats I can think of in your situation. Can you take 10 for creating a magic item? I would think being in danger of wasting 63750 Gold should count as a stressfull situation. :p
*edit the second* I looked up the char on the other thread ( pretty picture! ) and the total spellcraft modifier is +24 ( although it should be +25 if you maxed out the skill ranks ^^ ). So, if you took the +5 do craft faster into account, you can't reach the DC of 37. Not taking it into account, you need a 7+. As I said above, I don't know if you can take 10 on creating a magic item. ).
GAH! It ate my post!
And I was saying the thing about "cheesefests" tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley ( the Paizo boards need an upgrade for real smileys, so they are more visible. >.< ). So it was meant in good humour.
Still, the question remains, your Paladin/Sorcerer got 162 days of off-time in-game to construct those items? The party doesn't have to keep some sort of schedule before the bad guys take over the world?
I agree about the smilies. Moving on...
As for the creation time, my character could have done it in half the time simply by increasing the spellcraft DC by 5 and then taking 10.
In any case, it's moot. The character was made at 15th-level, and used his starting funds to create the items at cost BEFORE the game started. In other words, they are part of his background and he began play with them. He was able to get them for their creation costs because (1) he was actually making them and (2) his item creation feats would be almost useless otherwise, short of getting stuck on a desert island in the middle of a low magic campaign or something.
Ok. I think most of us assumed you played your way up to that level.
Details man, details. :)
I had assumed the game moved on the PC's schedule which some DM's do.+1
Totally off-topic: I always have problems with finding the balance between extended downtime and sense of urgency for players. While I hate the "from apprentice to archmage in one year" campaigns, I find it exceedingly difficult to keep the tension in a campaign where players have months of off-time. Oh, well, I am running CotCT right now, so it's more in the vein of fast leveling.
*edit* Uh, just looked up the item creation feats on the loo and stumbled upon a slight problem. Your 15th level sorcerer shouldn't be easily able to create a +5 book. You need Wish ( a 9th level spell ) and a 17th caster level. You can simulate the Wish by getting another +5 on the Spellcraft DC and...
I was curious about the taking 10 on crafting magic items also since there is still a good chance for failure. It is for purposes where rolling a one won't cause anything bad to happens since it assumes you rolled 10 times to get that 10.
On another note the item creation rules and the feat section don't agree on the rules for item creation. One is 5+caster level, and the other supports 10+ caster level. This is just something I don't know if you knew about so if you have items created in your games you can decide which one to go by.
I keep hearing well my experience is ____. Well then post your experience in detail. I don't debate just to inform. I debate to learn, and it seems neither one is taking place right now. The only time a paladin took out an outsider easily was when it was the party against one of them. Every time there were multiple opponents the battle was not so easy.
I dont think that archery is overpowered or Smite in and of them selves, when combine with the multi-attacks the smite dmg just seems to be overpowered. TriOmegaZero offered ways our DM needs to handle this, but for this encounter there was no windwall, and we kept the BBEG away from the archerdin.
My experience is with a Halfing Archerdin that just joined our grp, we are at Fort Rannick of the RotRL campaign.
Now while Im sure our GM could have handled or set up the battle better, he commented to be being the last 2 run ins with the other sister we got our butts handed to us, he just wasn't expecting the smack down the paladin issued. For the record, I don't want to steal paladins glory. I just rather they not steal all the glory in the BBEG fight. I prefer if they got a set increase to dmg to all evil things or rounded out the dmg to all the fights instead if being so potent in one fight. And when i look at it, I dont have problems with Melee paladins, just Archerdins.
@TriOmegaZero, I will direct our GM to your post, I think that those ideas will be much more fun than him coming down hard on the paladin's code.
I was curious about the taking 10 on crafting magic items also since there is still a good chance for failure. It is for purposes where rolling a one won't cause anything bad to happens since it assumes you rolled 10 times to get that 10.
On another note the item creation rules and the feat section don't agree on the rules for item creation. One is 5+caster level, and the other supports 10+ caster level. This is just something I don't know if you knew about so if you have items created in your games you can decide which one to go by.
The DC is 5+ caster level. It has been cleared up a couple times, but I don't really feel like searching for it.
You don't need to be the caster level of the item, you just need to be able to hit the DC. In this case, a spellcraft DC of 27 (5+17CL+5No Wish) I have seen 1st lvl characters who can hit that. By lvl 10 you can take 10 to do it and auto-succeed.
You don't need to be the caster level of the item, you just need to be able to hit the DC. In this case, a spellcraft DC of 27 (5+17CL+5No Wish) I have seen 1st lvl characters who can hit that. By lvl 10 you can take 10 to do it and auto-succeed.
Actually, the rules on page 460 (Magic Item Descriptions) and on the PRD (same section) say otherwise:
PRD -> Magic Items -> Magic Item Description -> Caster level:
"Caster Level (CL): The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item, indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item's saving throw bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic spell or similar situation.
For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell but not higher than her own caster level. For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the item itself. In this case, the creator's caster level must be as high as the item's caster level (and prerequisites may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator's level)."
Now, a GM could read this as a 'prerequisite not met = +5 DC for crafting the item' (and so, in your example, the DC would be 32), but the reading seems just straightforward to me. Want to craft a Tome of Intellect ? Fine, wait until you are Caster Level 17 OR you have the Master Crafter Feat (Craft Books) and 17 ranks in the Craft skill (...which require to be 17th level, btw).
Of course, YMMV.
|
Certainly the paladin has excellent saves but how does he have a better animal companion then a druid? Heavy horse doesnt even come close to the big cat in terms of combat strength. Or are you among those that allow the paladin to use most anything for a mount?
I think they should be able to go the whole hog.
You don't need to be the caster level of the item, you just need to be able to hit the DC. In this case, a spellcraft DC of 27 (5+17CL+5No Wish) I have seen 1st lvl characters who can hit that. By lvl 10 you can take 10 to do it and auto-succeed.
Actually, the rules on page 460 (Magic Item Descriptions) and on the PRD (same section) say otherwise:
PRD -> Magic Items -> Magic Item Description -> Caster level:
"Caster Level (CL): The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item, indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item's saving throw bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic spell or similar situation.
For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell but not higher than her own caster level. For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the item itself. In this case, the creator's caster level must be as high as the item's caster level (and prerequisites may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator's level)."
Now, a GM could read this as a 'prerequisite not met = +5 DC for crafting the item' (and so, in your example, the DC would be 32), but the reading seems just straightforward to me. Want to craft a Tome of Intellect ? Fine, wait until you are Caster Level 17 OR you have the Master Crafter Feat (Craft Books) and 17 ranks in the Craft skill (...which require to be 17th level, btw).
Of course, YMMV.
Sean Reynolds has said that this text is wrong. I can't get to the d20psrd faq from work, but it is in there. You can find him saying it here
Eh.
I continue to not see issues with archer paladins, and there is one in a game I'm playing.
So yeah.
Sean Reynolds has said that this text is wrong. I can't get to the d20psrd faq from work, but it is in there. You can find him saying it here
I had recently learned about the "CL as a perquisite" text quoted above, and hadn't simply managed to get aorund to checking some of the characters to make sure there items were within their skill check range.
Is the text really wrong? That would save me a lot of trouble! Is Sean one of the PATHFINDER game designers? Or is he just a game designer from elsewhere giving an opinion no more official than my own?
Sean Reynolds has said that this text is wrong. I can't get to the d20psrd faq from work, but it is in there. You can find him saying it hereI had recently learned about the "CL as a perquisite" text quoted above, and hadn't simply managed to get aorund to checking some of the characters to make sure there items were within their skill check range.
Is the text really wrong? That would save me a lot of trouble! Is Sean one of the PATHFINDER game designers? Or is he just a game designer from elsewhere giving an opinion no more official than my own?
I do believe he is a designer for Pathfinder. And his opinion is supported by the sheer madness of a hard requirement for pear of power 1s to require a CL 17 to create (as an example).
Sean Reynolds has said that this text is wrong. I can't get to the d20psrd faq from work, but it is in there. You can find him saying it hereI had recently learned about the "CL as a perquisite" text quoted above, and hadn't simply managed to get aorund to checking some of the characters to make sure there items were within their skill check range.
Is the text really wrong? That would save me a lot of trouble! Is Sean one of the PATHFINDER game designers? Or is he just a game designer from elsewhere giving an opinion no more official than my own?
Sean is one of the Paizo staff. To my knowledge, no other staff have commented on this issue.
I do believe he is a designer for Pathfinder. And his opinion is supported by the sheer madness of a hard requirement for pear of power 1s to require a CL 17 to create (as an example).
Sean is one of the Paizo staff. To my knowledge, no other staff have commented on this issue.
Yeah, I just noticed he has a developer credit. Awesome!
I'm not going to worry about THAT anymore.
Now, I just need to figure out my max possible check while taking ten, and upgrade all my item's caster level to THAT. Yes, yes, that is what I'll do.
j/k.
Sean Reynolds has said that this text is wrong. I can't get to the d20psrd faq from work, but it is in there. You can find him saying it hereYou don't need to be the caster level of the item, you just need to be able to hit the DC. In this case, a spellcraft DC of 27 (5+17CL+5No Wish) I have seen 1st lvl characters who can hit that. By lvl 10 you can take 10 to do it and auto-succeed.
Actually, the rules on page 460 (Magic Item Descriptions) and on the PRD (same section) say otherwise:
PRD -> Magic Items -> Magic Item Description -> Caster level:
"Caster Level (CL): The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item, indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item's saving throw bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic spell or similar situation.
For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell but not higher than her own caster level. For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the item itself. In this case, the creator's caster level must be as high as the item's caster level (and prerequisites may effectively put a higher minimum on the creator's level)."
Now, a GM could read this as a 'prerequisite not met = +5 DC for crafting the item' (and so, in your example, the DC would be 32), but the reading seems just straightforward to me. Want to craft a Tome of Intellect ? Fine, wait until you are Caster Level 17 OR you have the Master Crafter Feat (Craft Books) and 17 ranks in the Craft skill (...which require to be 17th level, btw).
Of course, YMMV.
In this case... not that this makes me very happy (I can easily houserule it, btw), but you were right.
All right, threadjack off, now we can start speaking of overpowered Paladins and/or Archers again ;D ...
I do believe he is a designer for Pathfinder. And his opinion is supported by the sheer madness of a hard requirement for pear of power 1s to require a CL 17 to create (as an example).Sean is one of the Paizo staff. To my knowledge, no other staff have commented on this issue.Yeah, I just noticed he has a developer credit. Awesome!
I'm not going to worry about THAT anymore.
Now, I just need to figure out my max possible check while taking ten, and upgrade all my item's caster level to THAT. Yes, yes, that is what I'll do.
j/k.
Well, that makes the only question remaining if you can take 10 on your check, since the DC would be now 32 with halved creation time and 27 without it. Although with a +24 to the check, a 27 ain't too tough to reach. BTW, any idea what happens to the crafting components if you still miss it?
I'm not buying that the archer is better. It may appear so on paper, but not in practice.
As I noted in my post on page 5, my experience with archers being a bit overpowered isn't based on theorycrafting or just running the numbers, it's based on hard, at the table playtest experience, both as a DM and as a player.
Going with the initial paladin vs. dragon example, the dragon closed with the melee paladin and got massacred. Substitute the archer paladin. The claim is the dragon would be owned even moreso, because now the paladin can massacre at range, and take away the dragon's fly superiority. Well, given the situation, having the dragon simply engage at close range is precisely how to negate the threat. With reach and an obvious melee advantage, the paladin will be at a serious disadvantage. With trip, sunder, disarm, (heck, even grapple) and other tactics, the dragon has a plethora of options to even the fight in its favor.
There are some problems with the underlying assumptions here. First, you're assuming that foes like the dragon will have time to get into melee. Any single big obvious target had better win initiative, or the archer is going to unload on them. Fighters (and paladins/rangers vs. their favored foes) that get the chance to make a full attack will often do enough damage (even at mid-low levels) to kill almost any single foe of a reasonable CR. If the BBEG does manage to get into melee, archers (and fighter based archers in particular) can frequently simply ignore the threat of attacks of opportunity, relying on their very high AC, high hit point totals, and hefty CMD to simply let them weather the AOO and keep right on attacking.
There are tactics that can put an archer at a disadvantage, yes, but where tactics like fly are relatively common and flat shut down melee characters, the anti-archer tactics are relatively rare and only somewhat effective.
Archers don't do well at close range. There is the 5-foot step/full-attack, but several mundane tactics solve even that without resorting to a wind wall in every encounter . One that instantly comes to mind is 2 foes engaging said archer. Another is having reach. And of course, the sunder, trip, and disarm maneuvers. And step up, wind stance, and lightning stance. Cover and concealment.
All of these once again assume the archer in question won't just shrug, take the hit, and deal his full attack damage in exchange. One AOO in exchange for one (or more) dead opponents is almost always a good exchange. As for the cover and concealment bits, archers are uniquely prepared to deal with those defenses, having feats and enchantments that negate both.
Archers only dominate when they are able to consistently maintain range.
Not based on my experience.
Dragons, while no excessive masterminds, have uniquely prepared lairs and mostly have scouts and cohorts roaming the surroundings. Basically, by the time an adventuring party reaches the dragon, they should be a little weary from previous fights, and the dragon probably buffed itself prior to the fight with relevant spells. Probably even scryed to get a view of its foes.
Preparing fields of force, traps, and using a terrain the party will hardly be able to catch on is also important. It is without saying that if the battle grid is but a flat, coverless space without emergency escape routes, it will be much easier for the PCs to overcome the Beast. Too easy, if you'll ask me; dragons are not the ultimate foes, but they sure pack a punch and brings glory and much of loot to the characters. It simply HAS to be a tough and epic fight.
And as is previously said, a couple of cohorts to distract the PCs help while the Dragon charges its breath attack.
They are really, really, grotesquely good. I think you've failed to do the math.
And really, isn't that the problem with the game? Not enough math. Would that I could reduce everything in this Hero's Journey to a simple equation.
Also: I don't really have a dog in this fight, but (historically) wasn't the longbow somewhat antithetical to the concept of the chivalrous knight in arms?
Zo
Another post for the sake of discussing the real subject now...
I must admit that the Paladin have impressive saving throws compared to other PCs from his Divine Grace.
Considering that his CHA modifier is always the most important for his abilities, be it Lay on Hands, Diving Grace, Spells and a bunch of skills. His allotment of stats points can be easily spared to STR DEX CHA, the others becoming quite dull for technical purposes;
- WIS doesn't serve for spellcasting as in 3.5,
- CON gives HP and Fortitude, but improved CHA instead gives saving throws and a monstrous amount of Laying on hands at higher levels (a 34 CHA score (+12) + 10 (Half the Paladin level) x 60 HP Recovery. 1320 points of healing available per day, and he can recover 60 HP per turn as a swift action using Lay on Hands. Very powerful.
- INT is fine, but doesn't need so impressive an amount to fit the Paladin's needs.
- DEX can even be let go by some Paladin, anyway, the smite evil provides Deflection Bonus to AC according to the CHA modifier.
When smite evil fails (And even when it doesn't) he can Rely on an innate ability to boost his weapons. Already magic weapons can use this also by adding extra abilities.
Basically yes... while he isn't necessarily the biggest DPR, he is the tank by excellence. He is powerful, but a DM has many tools in his clutches to make a paladin's oath complicated and challenging.
Personnally as a DM, I do not let any player play Paladins; I consider it a lesser Prestige Class by its own right, I require an intricate Character Background and rigor in roleplaying issues.
In the same point of view, I might lure the Paladin into wasting his Lay on Hands on purposefully wounded prisoners inside the Dragon's lair, or such devices. Imagination rules, and it is well known : A full equipped, rested party prepared for the fight usually wins big time. A dungeon is a concept where you can't rest much, and tire yourself all the way to the big boss, where you have restrained possibilities. I think it is what makes the game cool; finding reasons why your characters shouldn't sleep and finish the dungeon the faster they can.
A save point and the use of a Tent before the boss like in the good old FinalFantasy games just ain't suited for D&D.
Every time I've run a dragon by himself he got toasted quickly, add in a few followers and he lasts much longer and does more damage.
Solo monsters don't work well. The solo monsters CR is not an accurate measure of how much of a challenge is poses to a party of adventurers because the solo monster has a very difficult time overcoming the action deficit. Either add followers as mdt notes or else change the rules for solos. At a minimum, I recommend multiplying a solo monsters hit points by the number of PCs it faces and do not adjust its CR.
|
|
Pallys are great; a few times per day they put out "massive" damage, especially at mid-to-high levels when "Evil Outsiders" are the norm. Their swift-action healing effectively gives them more hp than any other class, and their saves are flat awesome.
But are they overpowered? Certainly not if compared to mages and clerics, especially at the high levels. Not even really compared to fighters, who output a ton of damage consistantly and have much better ACs (though I do prefer the Pally's "megasaves and hp" to AC at higher levels).
Regardless, I think their BBEG fighting power is "fine", especially if they don't go 3.5 on us and make "extra smiting a feat. And Knights with bows were typical in the middle ages, why not Pally with bow? You don't have to be stupid to be a pally, or even brave; just dedicated to fighting evil and bringing good to those around you.
When you're crafting or dealing with magic, you're always under threat, because magic is never a routine operation. It's skittish and downright dangerous and part of the difficulty is ensuring that you're not blowing yourself up instead. In short magical operations are never a casual skill that's why you can't take 10 or 20 on a Use Magic Device check.
I have never ever allowed anyone to take 10 on a magical operation unless the operation in question is specifically sanctioned to do so by a particular class or item ability. Even by standard rules taking 10 is when you're doing something under normal conditions, leaving out a prerequisite counts as experimentation, i.e. risky buisness, so the "Take 10" rule does not apply.Again, you are misunderstanding the take 10 rules and confusing them with the take 20 rules.
You *can* take 10 on skills where you might have a failure and consequences thereby.
You *cannot* take 10 when being threatened or the like. I highly doubt you are trying to craft items while in melee, so I think that you are off here...
-James
Interesting counter-argument. I hope we get a clarification on that in the errata or by a dev. :)