Druids kick-ass. I made a half-orc druid with 18 STR + 2 racial = 20 at 1st, had him take Craft Wondrous as a feat so he made a belt of STR +6, then took +1 STR at 4th and 8th... STR 28 before wildshaping... in huge animal form, STR 34... had him take Craft Arms and Armor as well so next move is to improve his Dragonhide Plate to +5, his heavy shield to +5, then after that, he's going to save his pennies to craft a book of STR +5, for STR 39 in huge animal form... then have the bard in the party cast rage on ya for an extra +2 and I'll be at STR 41...
By level 16 this druid would be STR 43 with all the above accounted for... I think this is the maximum STR score you can achieve in the game, as a druid, with the allowable wild shapes... at level 17 the druid gets access to the shapechange spell which may grant forms (such as form of the Giant II) which would raise his STR to 45 or more... but as a druid, without shapechange, I think 43 is the highest (which includes rage spell)
If anyone else knows how to raise the STR higher please let me know...
Cheers,
PDK
Your DM must love giving you guys tons of down time. :P
|
Actually, most magic items that have a continuous function continue to function. That little blurb about becoming nonfunctional does not exist in pathfinder. Armor bonuses cease to function (unless you have the Wild enchantment, which is actually rather expensive), but all other items that do not need to be activated continue to function.
Also, to put my opinion in here- It seems like this guy was optimizing while the rest of the party wasn't. You said he got bored and attacked, which means he probably only has fun during combat so he made his character a monster during combat. It's no fault of the Druid class, because fighters can deal very large amounts of damage and they can do it reliably from range as well if they wish. 3.5 druids were broken, but now you actually have to worry about your physical stats.
...
Other problem that the guy's DM forgot. Magic items go bye bye when the druid wildshapes. they meld into the form and become NONFUCNTIONAL. And hopefully the DM does not make the mistake of allowing the wild enchant or anything like it.
...
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor bonuses, which cease to function). Items that require activation cannot be used while you maintain that form. While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon. Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion). If your new form does not cause your equipment to meld into your form, the equipment resizes to match your new size.
Hmmm, shield bonuses are not listed as an exception, but I would think that if they came from a physical object that was not part of the new form that it would cease to function.
Druid kicks a lot of ass, but until you get wild armor, you are rocking a 10-16 AC which is pretty pathetic at that level.
Use Pathfinder rules for Druid wildshape. or PH2. problem solved.
Other problem that the guy's DM forgot. Magic items go bye bye when the druid wildshapes. they meld into the form and become NONFUCNTIONAL. And hopefully the DM does not make the mistake of allowing the wild enchant or anything like it.
UNLESS they are constant effect, like all the items your melee druid is gonna have....
Regarding Wild enchantment calling it a mistake to use a rule, which have been kept in the rules eventhough the protests has been numerous, is a tad harsh. It actually think it is a necessity if you are going to build a druid with a good AC, and even with wild armor he is still gonna been at least 5 points of AC below the fighter (and properbly quite more).OP: I think you've encountered the druid at his worst. At mid-levels he is a very dangerous meleeist if spec'ed that way. However his primary advantage from wildshape is multiple attacks. He doesn't get much more out of wildshape than he has got at the moment, and as a meleeists is peaking at this level. Other melee classes will progress a lot faster from here on.
The main problem is actually that you have a water-based campaign where he has been allowed to meet a giant squid. They are the creme-de-la-creme of druid potential.
Potential solutions: Consider however using larger ships in the game. His 30 feet reach might not be enough there.
Also, the fact that his body must be submerged in water might make it really difficult for him to see whats happening above deck. Either require him to guess where the enemies are, or at the minimum give them full concealment will quickly mitigate the problem.
Regarding the math of druid wildshaping, I'm beginning to think the player in question needs to read up on the rules regarding that ability, because I think he forgot to gimp himself on several accounts.
Agreed.
As long as he got enough attacks, he could grapple 3 of them without much struggle. Next round he gets a +5 bonus to Maneuver them all into the sea, where they then drown. at least that's how I see it going down.
Except of course, he has to take -20 to his grapple attempts to grab more than one of them.
Except of course, he has to take -20 to his grapple attempts to grab more than one of them.
I'm not sure where this rule came from.
The only -20 I can find anywhere is the penalty to initiate a Grab without gaining the Grappled condition, so I am assuming you're referring to that penalty and applying a rule that the squid/druid cannot grapple a second (or third, fourth, etc.) target if he is himself grappled.
But I can't find that rule. As far as I can tell, you can be grappled and still initiate a grapple against anyone or anything you can reach.
The rules for Grapple state that you can make a grapple maneuver with just one hand. Humanoids take a -4 penalty if they use only one hand, but the squid is not humanoid, so it wouldn't even take the penalty. Furthermore, under the Grappled condition, it states that you take a -2 penalty on all Combat Maneuvers except those to grapple or escape a grapple. Technically, that means you don't even get the -2 to grapple a different enemy while you are already being grappled by something else, but I don't think that the intent is such (I think the intent is referencing only your existing grapples, new grapples you try to initiate probably were not intended to be covered under this exemption). Either way, that's a far cry from -20.
So, if I have missed something about grapple, please do enlighten me.
Except of course, he has to take -20 to his grapple attempts to grab more than one of them.I'm not sure where this rule came from.
The only -20 I can find anywhere is the penalty to initiate a Grab without gaining the Grappled condition, so I am assuming you're referring to that penalty and applying a rule that the squid/druid cannot grapple a second (or third, fourth, etc.) target if he is himself grappled.
But I can't find that rule. As far as I can tell, you can be grappled and still initiate a grapple against anyone or anything you can reach.
The rules for Grapple state that you can make a grapple maneuver with just one hand. Humanoids take a -4 penalty if they use only one hand, but the squid is not humanoid, so it wouldn't even take the penalty. Furthermore, under the Grappled condition, it states that you take a -2 penalty on all Combat Maneuvers except those to grapple or escape a grapple. Technically, that means you don't even get the -2 to grapple a different enemy while you are already being grappled by something else, but I don't think that the intent is such (I think the intent is referencing only your existing grapples, new grapples you try to initiate probably were not intended to be covered under this exemption). Either way, that's a far cry from -20.
So, if I have missed something about grapple, please do enlighten me.
It takes a standard action to initiate a grapple. It also takes a standard action to mantain a grapple unless you have the Improved Grapple feat. If on round one you hit a creature and initiate a grapple, on subsequent rounds it would require a standard action to perpetuate it disallowing you from initiating further grapples. If you didn't have the grappled condition you would at least be able to take attacks of opportunity and grab with them, but otherwise I don't see how.
I'm trying to figure out how anything would ever initiate a second grapple while grappling. Even if you take the -20 to grapple and free up your other limbs, I see nothing in the grab description that allows you to maintain a grapple with a less than standard action. Even if you had made normal attacks against multiple opponents with a full attack, and gotten a free grapple check with grab, wouldn't he have to only maintain the grapple with one of them as a standard action? Or can you maintain a grapple with everyone you're grappling with as a single standard action?
You know, I though they were supposed to make the grappling rules simpler, but they're just smurfed.
Except of course, he has to take -20 to his grapple attempts to grab more than one of them.I'm not sure where this rule came from.
...
So, if I have missed something about grapple, please do enlighten me.
Nope - I missed something. Being grappled no longer prevents you from threatening an area (though you cannot take attacks of opportunity still). If you didn't threaten, you couldn't continue to make further attacks was my point, but that no longer applies.
What meatrace mentioned about maintaining the grapple with multiple targets still applies though.
Except of course, he has to take -20 to his grapple attempts to grab more than one of them.I'm not sure where this rule came from.
...
So, if I have missed something about grapple, please do enlighten me.Nope - I missed something. Being grappled no longer prevents you from threatening an area (though you cannot take attacks of opportunity still). If you didn't threaten, you couldn't continue to make further attacks was my point, but that no longer applies.
What meatrace mentioned about maintaining the grapple with multiple targets still applies though.
Check out the grab monster ability, it explains a lot
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
I haven't looked at the Paizo Druid much, but this thread pretty much nails why I just about always banned Druids in my 3.5 games.
Ken
They don't even play the same. It's not even a valid to compare a 3.5 druid to a PF druid.
|
Your DM must love giving you guys tons of down time. :PDruids kick-ass. I made a half-orc druid with 18 STR + 2 racial = 20 at 1st, had him take Craft Wondrous as a feat so he made a belt of STR +6, then took +1 STR at 4th and 8th... STR 28 before wildshaping... in huge animal form, STR 34... had him take Craft Arms and Armor as well so next move is to improve his Dragonhide Plate to +5, his heavy shield to +5, then after that, he's going to save his pennies to craft a book of STR +5, for STR 39 in huge animal form... then have the bard in the party cast rage on ya for an extra +2 and I'll be at STR 41...
By level 16 this druid would be STR 43 with all the above accounted for... I think this is the maximum STR score you can achieve in the game, as a druid, with the allowable wild shapes... at level 17 the druid gets access to the shapechange spell which may grant forms (such as form of the Giant II) which would raise his STR to 45 or more... but as a druid, without shapechange, I think 43 is the highest (which includes rage spell)
If anyone else knows how to raise the STR higher please let me know...
Cheers,
PDK
He does. Our last downtime was 169 days, and my druid crafted 168,000gp's worth of stuff for himself and the party. :)
Our last downtime was 169 days, and my druid crafted 168,000gp's worth of stuff for himself and the party. :)
Good God! What was he doing on the 169th day? Resting?
How come he didn't up the DC on his projects by +5 to cut the time in half? He could have made twice as much! (Provided you all had the funds of course.)
You need to put your druid to work. He's been slacking off!
It takes a standard action to initiate a grapple. It also takes a standard action to mantain a grapple unless you have the Improved Grapple feat. If on round one you hit a creature and initiate a grapple, on subsequent rounds it would require a standard action to perpetuate it disallowing you from initiating further grapples.
Hey, that's a great observation. I hadn't thought it through that far, and it's never come up in play (I've never seen a combat with one combatant trying to grapple to foes at once come up in any of our game sessions).
I do believe your analysis is correct.
Unless someone can point me to a feat or ability somewhere that changes either the initiating effort or the maintaining effort to something that isn't a standard action (a move action, for example), then I don't see a way for any combatant to initiate a second grapple while maintaining an existing one, nor for a creature to initiate more than one grapple in a single round.
Ergo, it's impossible for that druid, even with 10 tentactles, to grapple a group of pirates all by his lonesome squidly self.
Check out the grab monster ability, it explains a lot
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
OK, I've checked it out. It's been discuessed in this threads and other threads.
You know, that might change things again, though there might be an interesting DM ruling required here.
So with the Grab special ability, initiating a grapple is a free action, but maknig the three grab attacks is a Full-Round attack action. This means old Squidworth the Druid can grapple all three pirates, assuming they're all within reach, and assuming he uses a full round to make his multiple grap attacks.
Great.
Now, the three pirates all thrash and squirm but they don't break free, and it's now Squidworth's turn in the next round. This is the awkward part.
It's a standard action to maintain a grapple. This means Squidworth has to take three standard actions to maintain his three grapples. Impossible. He would have to choose one pirate to maintain his grapple and consequently must release the other two.
Now, a DM might rule that one standard action can be used to maintain all current grapples, so Squidworth could, with this ruling, maintain all three grapples in one standard action.
Me, I wouldn't rule it that way. One, it makes multi-attack grabbers insanely deadly. Two, if it's a Full-Round attack to hit multiple foes, then it's fairly counter-intuitive to maintain multiple attacks with a mere standard action. A houserule might be set up to maintain multiple grapples as a single Full-Round action, but clearly there is nothing in the Grapple rules allowing this type of action. In fact, it's clearly stated to be just a Standard action.
Granted, such a houserule might seem justified, but it is still a houserule - unless there is yet something else I've missed in these simplified grapple rules...
It takes a standard action to initiate a grapple. It also takes a standard action to mantain a grapple unless you have the Improved Grapple feat. If on round one you hit a creature and initiate a grapple, on subsequent rounds it would require a standard action to perpetuate it disallowing you from initiating further grapples.Hey, that's a great observation. I hadn't thought it through that far, and it's never come up in play (I've never seen a combat with one combatant trying to grapple to foes at once come up in any of our game sessions).
I do believe your analysis is correct.
Unless someone can point me to a feat or ability somewhere that changes either the initiating effort or the maintaining effort to something that isn't a standard action (a move action, for example), then I don't see a way for any combatant to initiate a second grapple while maintaining an existing one, nor for a creature to initiate more than one grapple in a single round.
Ergo, it's impossible for that druid, even with 10 tentactles, to grapple a group of pirates all by his lonesome squidly self.
Here's the thing with the new grapple rules though. He can make an attack against each of them, grappling them as a free action with a pretty hefty modifier (easily 20+). Those creatures are still grappled and have to break free on their turns. Then its squiddy's turn again and he drops them all as free actions and attacks them ALL again grappling them as a free action AGAIN. This can happen every round, denying all the pirates their actions other than struggling to get out, unless one of the pirates beats the squid's CMD AND instead of leaving the grapple decides to take control of the grapple so that the squid has the grappled condition and has to break out himself. Mechanically this is really wonky and realistically what kind of crazy pirate is going to try to counter-grapple a squid!
In conclusion: PF grappling rules are borked!
HAHA DMB you and I came up with almost the same conclusion, minus the dropping a grappled creature as a free action bit.
We actually had this happen with a dire bear and it REALLY wasn't pretty.
However, when the squid first grapples, regardless of its reach, has to move that creature to a square adjacent to the body of the squid. He might drown! But when he's released he will be in the water staring that guy in the mug!
HAHA DMB you and I came up with almost the same conclusion, minus the dropping a grappled creature as a free action bit.
We actually had this happen with a dire bear and it REALLY wasn't pretty.
However, when the squid first grapples, regardless of its reach, has to move that creature to a square adjacent to the body of the squid. He might drown! But when he's released he will be in the water staring that guy in the mug!
Funny thing, I did think of that too, but figured my post was way too long already, and we were disucussing grappling for effect, not grapple/drop/regrapple for denial-of-action.
Your point is valid.
However, being clever pirates, they have heard all the cautionary tales about giant squids, and they know that the way to survive is to "play dead" - in game terms that means they ready an action for when the squid releases them, and they all then poke him with their pointy cutlasses before he can regrapple. No actions denied that way...
|
|
Our last downtime was 169 days, and my druid crafted 168,000gp's worth of stuff for himself and the party. :)
Good God! What was he doing on the 169th day? Resting?
How come he didn't up the DC on his projects by +5 to cut the time in half? He could have made twice as much! (Provided you all had the funds of course.)
You need to put your druid to work. He's been slacking off!
He did up the DC by 5... see: 8 hours spent adventuring, transport via plant back home (he keeps several maples, oaks, firs, spruces, pines, willows and birch trees in top shape in an acreage backing his property... people also wonder why he imported several cartloads of sand to create a small island in the middle of a nearby river just to plant a few palm trees, cactii and pesh trees... :) ), 4 hours spent crafting, 2 hours spent chatting/hunting with his awakened large mountain lion, 2 hours spent helping the local farmers fight a major blight and perhaps accept a cold one or two in exchange for his spells and wisdom, and 8 hours spent sleeping, transport via plant back to the party's camp in time for the cleric's heroe's feast... :)
|
|
Our last downtime was 169 days, and my druid crafted 168,000gp's worth of stuff for himself and the party. :)
Good God! What was he doing on the 169th day? Resting?
How come he didn't up the DC on his projects by +5 to cut the time in half? He could have made twice as much! (Provided you all had the funds of course.)
You need to put your druid to work. He's been slacking off!
...but you're right... he does look like he's been slacking off... I shall find ways to double his output... lazy a-r-s-e hippy 1/3 ork druid!!! :P
Something to note (since I've recently had to look up squid rules for a game I'm running).
The Squid entry doesn't indicate 10 attacks (or rather, 8 tentacles and 2 arms, to be anatomically correct). It in fact only mentions a single bite, the two arms (which DON'T have grab by the way), and then "tentacles".
So, you'd get a grand total of one attack that allows the grab option, which allows you to, with a -20, make a regular grapple attempt (not a grab on damage) with one of your two "arms".
That doesn't sound too overpowering to me really. If it were 10 chances (8 tentacles and 2 arms) all with grab... that'd be devastating.
With a -4 Dex, his AC would likely be fairly low (in the teens at best), which means that even if he was able to grapple the main bad guy in the first round, the other NPCs should have been hitting him on nearly every attack (Huge monsters with a drop in AC and no armor are easily hit, even with the +6 natural armor AC), so he wouldn't have been staying in that position without assistance for long.
.
An 8th level Druid who focused on Strength for being a wildshaping brute would have sacrificed quite a bit on other stats to get this. Is he a complete moron and social disaster (Int 7, Cha 7)? A wildshape focused druid simply won't be as effective at spellcasting... so his wildshaping SHOULD be main thing he brings to the table. He's probably going to have to rely on magical items just to get a high enough wisdom to cast higher level spells (touch of idiocy could mean no spellcasting for this guy).
Don't get me wrong... it's a good build idea if that's what you are going for, however it isn't without it's faults or weaknesses.
|
|
If you want a build focused on divine spellcasting, go for cleric, or high dex druid specializing in small/tiny/diminutive animal builds (i.e. bat is my fave, as it gets blindsense)
But verily, where the PRPG druid truly shine is high STR medium WIS build, as you have pointed out.
...oh, and you might want to check the Giant Octopus... :)
...oh, and you might want to check the Giant Octopus... :)
Yeah, that one has the extra attacks, which is why the Squid shouldn't (differences in the attack entry).
That could be an issue along the lines that DM_Blake was talking (forcing shutdown of actions), however the actual damage/cmb involved isn't so bad (it's only a Large creature, so less overall bonus, and constrict is only 1d4 damage, not 4d6).
It takes a standard action to initiate a grapple. It also takes a standard action to mantain a grapple unless you have the Improved Grapple feat. If on round one you hit a creature and initiate a grapple, on subsequent rounds it would require a standard action to perpetuate it disallowing you from initiating further grapples.Hey, that's a great observation. I hadn't thought it through that far, and it's never come up in play (I've never seen a combat with one combatant trying to grapple to foes at once come up in any of our game sessions).
I do believe your analysis is correct.
Unless someone can point me to a feat or ability somewhere that changes either the initiating effort or the maintaining effort to something that isn't a standard action (a move action, for example), then I don't see a way for any combatant to initiate a second grapple while maintaining an existing one, nor for a creature to initiate more than one grapple in a single round.
Ergo, it's impossible for that druid, even with 10 tentactles, to grapple a group of pirates all by his lonesome squidly self.
Here's the thing with the new grapple rules though. He can make an attack against each of them, grappling them as a free action with a pretty hefty modifier (easily 20+). Those creatures are still grappled and have to break free on their turns. Then its squiddy's turn again and he drops them all as free actions and attacks them ALL again grappling them as a free action AGAIN. This can happen every round, denying all the pirates their actions other than struggling to get out, unless one of the pirates beats the squid's CMD AND instead of leaving the grapple decides to take control of the grapple so that the squid has the grappled condition and has to break out himself. Mechanically this is really wonky and realistically what kind of crazy pirate is going to try to counter-grapple a squid!
In conclusion: PF grappling rules are borked!
I think... It can't grapple someone as a full attack because after it chooses to grapple, it's grappled them with all of its appendages and can't make any more attacks. That's why it can choose to grapple with one appendage at a -20 and continue to make grapple checks at -20, each to hold one person with one hand.
I've always assumed that once the enemy with grab or improved grab grapples a character, their full attack actions stop-- because it can't attack with its hands if it's grappling. On the other hand, if they have a light natural weapon, they could continue... am I spot on with this or is this just something I've been assuming?
stuff
I think you're just assuming that I'm afraid. But again, the grapple rules aren't terribly specific on this corner case. Yours is a valid interpretation, and I'd be behind it if you were DM, but there's certainly enough to argue the other way.
IIRC it used to be that once you were grappling you no longer threatened adjacent spaces, but that's no longer true, you just can't take attacks of opportunity. So what used to stop you from attacking outside the grapple was gone, and I see no reason why you couldn't grapple a bunch then drop them.
However it was pointed out that giant squid only has one attack which it can grab with, so the point is moot.
1) After using a spreadsheet to compute the effective values for Wildshape options, I found out that Dire Tiger form isn't much more effective than regular Tiger... mostly because you don't get the monster's standard feats when you use polymorph. So, take Dire Tiger, remove its multiple INAs, update your character's stats according to the spell, and the two shapes are pretty much alike. Only difference is an increase in weight. This is IMHO, AFAIK, and IIRC, of course.
2) Sure, the bashing guy had his moment. He might have lost an opportunity to recover something/someone hidden away by the pirates. And, if you had a meeting with the King and his numerous and heavily armed bodyguards, the druid wouldn't try the same tactics, now would he? There are times where social skills are a must, and this character was obviously not made for these. So don't complain if you felt bored for one session, it happens to all of us - hey, your bashing-happy friend was bored too for a while, wasn't he?
3) "Druid are overpowered." This gets old fast. Having played druids before, I agree that druids have good survivability and good potential for dealing damage. But so are rogues, clerics, rangers, and paladins... in a different way.
I think it was James in a recent thread that said that Pathfinder grappling is less about crawling all over the person greco/roman style, and rather more about holding onto one limb/appendage/body part with one hand.
This is why you need only one hand (or grasping appendage) free to grapple without penalty.
So if you are a Giant Octopus (the only underwater animal listed with 8 tentacle attacks that have the grab option), then you can try grappling up to 8 people in a round. The remaining 7 attempts after the first will have a -20 if my understanding is correct.
How that translates into maintaining those grapples afterwards is a bit tricky. The standard rules were written without the Grab's "-20 and you can grapple more people) rule in mind, I suspect, so it's something of a DM call to decide that the Giant Octopus can or can't maintain all those grapples with that standard action.
Note that Greater Grapple allows maintaining as a move action, which would technically mean two grapples could be maintained in a round no matter how you read the rules, although most people don't have the option of grappling a second target (no rules for it outside of the Grab entry).
|
3) "Druid are overpowered." This gets old fast. Having played druids before, I agree that druids have good survivability and good potential for dealing damage. But so are rogues, clerics, rangers, and paladins... in a different way.
I wouldn´t say that. I too have played druids often. And in 3.5, they were just broke right out of the box. In PF...less broken, but the power level of druids is way beyond core difficulty. What I mean by that, is run an AP with just all druids and compare to one run with a standard party. I did this...the druid party made the AP ridiculously easy. In 3.5 it was the later part as 3.5 druids tanked their physical stats so the early parts was basically the animal companion show and the later parts were stupidly easy...in PF it was more balanced overall since if you wanna effectively wildshape, you can´t tank your physical stats...but still, it´s pretty easy. An all rogue, ranger, paladin(3.5 only), fighter, barbarian, wizard/sorcerer party TPKed. An all cleric and PF paladin party did fine. We did not even bother with an all monk group. This was against rise of the runelord. I have issues when a party composed of one class can run through a 1-20 AP...much less make it a cakewalk.
I wouldn´t say that. I too have played druids often. And in 3.5, they were just broke right out of the box. In PF...less broken, but the power level of druids is way beyond core difficulty. What I mean by that, is run an AP with just all druids and compare to one run with a standard party. I did this...the druid party made the AP ridiculously easy. In 3.5 it was the later part as 3.5 druids tanked their physical stats so the early parts was basically the animal companion show and the later parts were stupidly easy...in PF it was more balanced overall since if you wanna effectively wildshape, you can´t tank your physical stats...but still, it´s pretty easy. An all rogue, ranger, paladin(3.5 only), fighter, barbarian, wizard/sorcerer party TPKed. An all cleric and PF paladin party did fine. We did not even bother with an all monk group. This was against rise of the runelord. I have issues when a party composed of one class can run through a 1-20 AP...much less make it a cakewalk.
3) "Druid are overpowered." This gets old fast. Having played druids before, I agree that druids have good survivability and good potential for dealing damage. But so are rogues, clerics, rangers, and paladins... in a different way.
But that's just it you used an AP, an AP is not designed with an all druid party in mind. So essentially you were breaking one of the basic assumptions of the adventure. That is where the dm should come in and adjust things. Add more traps, change how monsters/enemies behave, change terrain, do what you need to do to make sure your party is challenged.
Strictly adhering to an AP with a non-standard party is just plain stupid. Its like saying to 4 wide receivers they need to block the opposing defensive line. It's not what they are meant for, so switch things up.
|
|
But that's just it you used an AP, an AP is not designed with an all druid party in mind. So essentially you were breaking one of the basic assumptions of the adventure. That is where the dm should come in and adjust things. Add more traps, change how monsters/enemies behave, change terrain, do what you need to do to make sure your party is challenged.Strictly adhering to an AP with a non-standard party is just plain stupid. Its like saying to 4 wide receivers they need to block the opposing defensive line. It's not what they are meant for, so switch things up.
That doesn´t help gauge the power of a class. The whole purpose was to gauge the power of the classes against a standard of difficulty. Note that only the druid, cleric and PF paladin made it all the way from 1-20. The druid was the only one that had it easy...that says something about the power level of the class. While 4 high level wizards may blow through the last couple books of the AP, they can not survive past the first book as written...the fighting classes have the opposite issue. The party of rogues die if they can´t kill something VERY quickly...like say the scarecrow (in 3.5). That means each of those classes need a mix to make it from 1-20. As for in combat healing...well that wasn´t really done in any of the groups and healing belts took care of out of combat healing for the most part...even in the all druid/paladin/cleric group (remember divine casters don´t get back spell slots used within 8 hours of their prayer time).
That doesn´t help gauge the power of a class. The whole purpose was to gauge the power of the classes against a standard of difficulty. Note that only the druid, cleric and PF paladin made it all the way from 1-20. The druid was the only one that had it easy...that says something about the power level of the class. While 4 high level wizards may blow through the last couple books of the AP, they can not survive past the first book as written...the fighting classes have the opposite issue. The party of rogues die if they can´t kill something VERY quickly...like say the scarecrow (in 3.5). That means each of those classes need a mix to make it from 1-20. As for in combat healing...well that wasn´t really done in any of the groups and healing belts took care of out of combat healing for the most part...even in the all druid/paladin/cleric group (remember divine casters don´t get back spell slots used within 8 hours of their prayer time).
But that's just it you used an AP, an AP is not designed with an all druid party in mind. So essentially you were breaking one of the basic assumptions of the adventure. That is where the dm should come in and adjust things. Add more traps, change how monsters/enemies behave, change terrain, do what you need to do to make sure your party is challenged.Strictly adhering to an AP with a non-standard party is just plain stupid. Its like saying to 4 wide receivers they need to block the opposing defensive line. It's not what they are meant for, so switch things up.
Whether or not they survive has a lot to do with the ability of the players, and the DM also. I once had a very talented group of players play all casters(arcane), and live to tell about it. My homebrew was harder than most AP's except for SCAP or AoW. The reason for the druid having a good chance is it is on an even keel for most of its level. What I mean is a wizard starts off weak so it will have trouble at lower levels, but later on it should be ok. A melee type does well at the beginning, but tapers off later on when it has to deal with a variety of situations. A druid is a decent melee combatant early on, and it gets spells to help it in combat later on. I still don't see it surviving an AP on its own though with any of my group's DM's running it.
|
|
Whether or not they survive has a lot to do with the ability of the players, and the DM also. I once had a very talented group of players play all casters(arcane), and live to tell about it. My homebrew was harder than most AP's except for SCAP or AoW. The reason for the druid having a good chance is it is on an even keel for most of its level. What I mean is a wizard starts off weak so it will have trouble at lower levels, but later on it should be ok. A melee type does well at the beginning, but tapers off later on when it has to deal with a variety of situations. A druid is a decent melee combatant early on, and it gets spells to help it in combat later on. I still don't see it surviving an AP on its own though with any of my group's DM's running it.
Well yes, player ability matters...but this was with the optimizers of the area. Since we care about the rules, this was very much a rules exercise. We didn´t exactly play the entire AP...we just played all the encounters (for speed of testing)...and since mechanical balance is what we were interested in. We only used one AP, and it was run just as written, no DM deviation, no fudgin...just plain old RAW as much as possible. I do realize that almost NO game is run this way, but from a game balance PoV, this is what matters...which I know is very odd.
That doesn´t help gauge the power of a class. The whole purpose was to gauge the power of the classes against a standard of difficulty. Note that only the druid, cleric and PF paladin made it all the way from 1-20. The druid was the only one that had it easy...that says something about the power level of the class. While 4 high level wizards may blow through the last couple books of the AP, they can not survive past the first book as written...the fighting classes have the opposite issue. The party of rogues die if they can´t kill something VERY quickly...like say the scarecrow (in 3.5). That means each of those classes need a mix to make it from 1-20. As for in combat healing...well that wasn´t really done in any of the groups and healing belts took care of out of combat healing for the most part...even in the all druid/paladin/cleric group (remember divine casters don´t get back spell slots used within 8 hours of their prayer time).
There is no 'standard difficulty'. Different things are difficult to different classes. A pit trap with a low dc but that MUST be bypassed, is cake to a rogue, but dangerous to a fighter. encounters with hard hitting high hp brutes are right up the righter/paladin's alley, but will be very dangerous to the relatively low hp and ac druid. The adventure path is DESIGNED with the expectation of a 'normal' party. It isnt meant to handle 4 druids. So the fact that the druid happens to be the one to break it the best has more to do with the adventure then the game itself.
I am not saying druids are not at the top end of the power curve, I believe they are still up there, I am just saying the fact that 4 druids can blow through an AP doesnt mean much. I also think that it's ok to have a power curve. If we worry about making everything perfectly balanced we end up with classes that are not unique enough (in my opinion). I'd rather the power curve, and let a little optimization and dm treatment (in adventure and encounter design) do the evening out of things.
|
|
There is no 'standard difficulty'. Different things are difficult to different classes. A pit trap with a low dc but that MUST be bypassed, is cake to a rogue, but dangerous to a fighter. encounters with hard hitting high hp brutes are right up the righter/paladin's alley, but will be very dangerous to the relatively low hp and ac druid. The adventure path is DESIGNED with the expectation of a 'normal' party. It isnt meant to handle 4 druids. So the fact that the druid happens to be the one to break it the best has more to do with the adventure then the game itself.
Unless every single encounter in the AP is a pit trap that must be passed, I don´t agree with you there. I´m not talking about individual encounters here, but the entire AP. The reason rise of the runelord was chosen was because it had such a diverse encounter list. And considering your saying that high HP brutes are so deadly to druids and the AP has quite a few of those, you would expect the druids to have a hard time then no? But they didn´t. In anycase, the it´s not an argument about if an individual encounter can be made biased against a class, it´s about if there is anything in the AP that will cause a party of same classes to TPK...and for most classes, the answer is yes. When 2-3 classes answer no over the same variety of encounters, we may just have a class balance issue...just maybe.
Unless every single encounter in the AP is a pit trap that must be passed, I don´t agree with you there. I´m not talking about individual encounters here, but the entire AP. The reason rise of the runelord was chosen was because it had such a diverse encounter list. And considering your saying that high HP brutes are so deadly to druids and the AP has quite a few of those, you would expect the druids to have a hard time then no? But they didn´t. In anycase, the it´s not an argument about if an individual encounter can be made biased against a class, it´s about if there is anything in the AP that will cause a party of same classes to TPK...and for most classes, the answer is yes. When 2-3 classes answer no over the same variety of encounters, we may just have a class balance issue...just maybe.
But you are assuming the classes are meant to work independantly, which is not the case. There are different roles for each. The druid happens to be able to fill most of those roles (though I do not believe it can fill them all at once). It is one of the most flexible classes (I think only the APG summoner is more flexible), which is why 4 druids can handle what other classes cannot. Its not 'power' its flexibility. Each of those classes that died is likely better then the druid at it's specialty, but it cannot handle the other specialties. The adventure assumes the basic roles will be covered, so there are challenges for each of those roles. The druid can handle most if not all (particularly if the focus is spread out between the 4 druids), the other classes cannot. That doesnt mean the druid is a better fighter then the fighter, better wizard then the wizard, or a better rogue then the rogue.
|
|
But you are assuming the classes are meant to work independantly, which is not the case. There are different roles for each. The druid happens to be able to fill most of those roles (though I do not believe it can fill them all at once). It is one of the most flexible classes (I think only the APG summoner is more flexible), which is why 4 druids can handle what other classes cannot. Its not 'power' its flexibility. Each of those classes that died is likely better then the druid at it's specialty, but it cannot handle the other specialties. The adventure assumes the basic roles will be covered, so there are challenges for each of those roles. The druid can handle most if not all (particularly if the focus is spread out between the 4 druids), the other classes cannot. That doesnt mean the druid is a better fighter then the fighter, better wizard then the wizard, or a better rogue then the rogue.
Okay even assuming that, it shouldn´t be EASY then if the druid is flexible but not a better fighter then a fighter, better wizard then a wizard and better rogue then a rogue. This is compared to running through with 2 wizards, a fighter and rogue or even the classic wizard, cleric, fighter and rogue (which was a bit harder then the two wizards after the first book). The fact that the AP becomes a cakewalk does mean that druid is a better fighter then the fighter and a better wizard then the wizard and a better rogue then a rogue.
Then there is the cleric and paladin...which play one of 4 iconic roles...and still has the flexibility to survive...while the other don´t. Being able to do your role and then some is more powerful compared to classes that can just do their role no?
Okay even assuming that, it shouldn´t be EASY then if the druid is flexible but not a better fighter then a fighter, better wizard then a wizard and better rogue then a rogue. This is compared to running through with 2 wizards, a fighter and rogue or even the classic wizard, cleric, fighter and rogue (which was a bit harder then the two wizards after the first book). The fact that the AP becomes a cakewalk does mean that druid is a better fighter then the fighter and a better wizard then the wizard and a better rogue then a rogue.
Then there is the cleric and paladin...which play one of 4 iconic roles...and still has the flexibility to survive...while the other don´t. Being able to do your role and then some is more powerful compared to classes that can just do their role no?
Bad logic is bad logic.
Unless you are running a druid who has an 18 strength, con, dex, and wisdom, gets 2 feats every level, and is allowed to take fighter only feats that isn't going to happen.
A druid who optimized for melee combat can replace the fighter when fully buffed. They will be busy clawing things and use all their buffs on themselves so they will not even be close to a wizard in nuking or battlefield control. Even in a sneaky form they will not have the skills to outsneak a rogue. Their healing will be pretty much limited to wands of cure so they won't even come close to a cleric there.
So a fully buffed melee focused druid is a fighter + half a rogue. Without buffs they are 3/4 of a fighter.
Well yes, player ability matters...but this was with the optimizers of the area. Since we care about the rules, this was very much a rules exercise. We didn´t exactly play the entire AP...we just played all the encounters (for speed of testing)...and since mechanical balance is what we were interested in. We only used one AP, and it was run just as written, no DM deviation, no fudgin...just plain old RAW as much as possible. I do realize that almost NO game is run this way, but from a game balance PoV, this is what matters...which I know is very odd.
Whether or not they survive has a lot to do with the ability of the players, and the DM also. I once had a very talented group of players play all casters(arcane), and live to tell about it. My homebrew was harder than most AP's except for SCAP or AoW. The reason for the druid having a good chance is it is on an even keel for most of its level. What I mean is a wizard starts off weak so it will have trouble at lower levels, but later on it should be ok. A melee type does well at the beginning, but tapers off later on when it has to deal with a variety of situations. A druid is a decent melee combatant early on, and it gets spells to help it in combat later on. I still don't see it surviving an AP on its own though with any of my group's DM's running it.
Even just using RAW two DM's can run an encounter differently. Having the social encounters also determines how many encounters you may or may not have in an adventuring day, and how those encounters are split up. The druid may be more powerful for your group, but when something is considered more powerful in one group than it is for other groups it is usually the group dynamic that makes it that way, and it is not normally the class/feat/etc that is the issue.
Now, the three pirates all thrash and squirm but they don't break free, and it's now Squidworth's turn in the next round. This is the awkward part.
I think people might be missing the obvious:
Maintaining a grapple is a standard action, sure, but what if the giant squid simply lets go in its turn and uses a full-round attack action to re-establish the holds (with free-action grabs, as before).
But you are assuming the classes are meant to work independantly, which is not the case. There are different roles for each. The druid happens to be able to fill most of those roles (though I do not believe it can fill them all at once). It is one of the most flexible classes (I think only the APG summoner is more flexible), which is why 4 druids can handle what other classes cannot. Its not 'power' its flexibility. Each of those classes that died is likely better then the druid at it's specialty, but it cannot handle the other specialties. The adventure assumes the basic roles will be covered, so there are challenges for each of those roles. The druid can handle most if not all (particularly if the focus is spread out between the 4 druids), the other classes cannot. That doesnt mean the druid is a better fighter then the fighter, better wizard then the wizard, or a better rogue then the rogue.Okay even assuming that, it shouldn´t be EASY then if the druid is flexible but not a better fighter then a fighter, better wizard then a wizard and better rogue then a rogue. This is compared to running through with 2 wizards, a fighter and rogue or even the classic wizard, cleric, fighter and rogue (which was a bit harder then the two wizards after the first book). The fact that the AP becomes a cakewalk does mean that druid is a better fighter then the fighter and a better wizard then the wizard and a better rogue then a rogue.
Then there is the cleric and paladin...which play one of 4 iconic roles...and still has the flexibility to survive...while the other don´t. Being able to do your role and then some is more powerful compared to classes that can just do their role no?
The Factotum from 3.5 could probably do well if one or two of them were focused on melee. That class is far from being overpowered. It is a good number of skills, can cast arcane spells, can be a decent combatant, and it can heal.
Druids can't do their role and then some because they don't have a primary role assigned to them. They are secondary combatants, secondary utility, and secondary healers. All you have to do is have each druid in a party of druids have a focus, and unless RotRL has a trap that gets the entire party in trouble* just use summon nature's ally to set them off without too many problems.
*The constricting room trap, or the trap that sets off an AoE is an example of this.
As for the power issue they are more powerful, than the melee classes, IMHO, but every other full caster is also.
Now, the three pirates all thrash and squirm but they don't break free, and it's now Squidworth's turn in the next round. This is the awkward part.I think people might be missing the obvious:
Maintaining a grapple is a standard action, sure, but what if the giant squid simply lets go in its turn and uses a full-round attack action to re-establish the holds (with free-action grabs, as before).
I think you might be missing the obvious. We already talked about that.
|
|
Bad logic is bad logic.Unless you are running a druid who has an 18 strength, con, dex, and wisdom, gets 2 feats every level, and is allowed to take fighter only feats that isn't going to happen.
A druid who optimized for melee combat can replace the fighter when fully buffed. They will be busy clawing things and use all their buffs on themselves so they will not even be close to a wizard in nuking or battlefield control. Even in a sneaky form they will not have the skills to outsneak a rogue. Their healing will be pretty much limited to wands of cure so they won't even come close to a cleric there.
So a fully buffed melee focused druid is a fighter + half a rogue. Without buffs they are 3/4 of a fighter.
1) Your missing part of the post...this is partly about 3.5 druid. 3.5 druid did not need str or dex. Yes the PF druid is more balanced...that is NOT in argument.
2) Your forgetting the animal companion. A class feature that was worth a fighter in 3.5...less in PF, but still notable.
3) Wands...pft. We used healing belts or did you not bother with reading that part? Even the all cleric party used them for out of combat healing. In combat healing...barring the heal spell is quite sub-optimal and rarely comes up as a valid option.
4) Who said the PF druid party was all wildshapers? I did mention that one was a wild shaper, one a hybrid and 2 were casters no? The caster druids can take over BC/Buffs/De-Buffs quite well thank you very much. With the hybrid guy doing mostly buffs.
5) In 3.5 your right, a druid can´t outsneak a rogue. In PF...oh HELL yeah they can. Diminutive size gives you a rather large bonus that the flat +3 to stealth that rogues get for it being in class and dex prime stats can´t make up for. Assuming the druid has 10 dex and keeps stealth maxed like the rogue, that means unless the rogue has 28 dex, the druid is a better sneak. Not including magic items as both can have the same magic item.
|
|
I may be missing something here, and forgive me if this has been covered, but I present the rules for Total Concealment
Total Concealment: If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).
You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.
Now if the druid was wild shaped and underwater, reaching his tentacles and arms up around the hull to attack, then he definitely has attack range and definitely doesn't have line of sight. That's a 50% miss chance right there.
Also, as mentioned before, if he doesn't have Multiattack, he's taking -5 on some of those attacks.
Between those two factors, the squid fight shouldn't have been nearly as 1-sided, unless he was REALLY hot on the dice, which is hardly the Druid's fault.
As for the other combat, if they were clumped up just asking to be Pounced, the DM should re-evaluate basic combat tactics. Even drunk pirates aren't quite THAT stupid when a bloody massive cat comes running at them.
Bad logic is bad logic.Unless you are running a druid who has an 18 strength, con, dex, and wisdom, gets 2 feats every level, and is allowed to take fighter only feats that isn't going to happen.
A druid who optimized for melee combat can replace the fighter when fully buffed. They will be busy clawing things and use all their buffs on themselves so they will not even be close to a wizard in nuking or battlefield control. Even in a sneaky form they will not have the skills to outsneak a rogue. Their healing will be pretty much limited to wands of cure so they won't even come close to a cleric there.
So a fully buffed melee focused druid is a fighter + half a rogue. Without buffs they are 3/4 of a fighter.
1) Your missing part of the post...this is partly about 3.5 druid. 3.5 druid did not need str or dex. Yes the PF druid is more balanced...that is NOT in argument.
2) Your forgetting the animal companion. A class feature that was worth a fighter in 3.5...less in PF, but still notable.
3) Wands...pft. We used healing belts or did you not bother with reading that part? Even the all cleric party used them for out of combat healing. In combat healing...barring the heal spell is quite sub-optimal and rarely comes up as a valid option.
4) Who said the PF druid party was all wildshapers? I did mention that one was a wild shaper, one a hybrid and 2 were casters no? The caster druids can take over BC/Buffs/De-Buffs quite well thank you very much. With the hybrid guy doing mostly buffs.
5) In 3.5 your right, a druid can´t outsneak a rogue. In PF...oh HELL yeah they can. Diminutive size gives you a rather large bonus that the flat +3 to stealth that rogues get for it being in class and dex prime stats can´t make up for. Assuming the druid has 10 dex and keeps stealth maxed like the rogue, that means unless the rogue has 28 dex, the druid is a better sneak. Not including magic items as both can have the same magic item.
Wait so we we are talking about 3.5 here? Or are we? Can we pick one system and have our argument, I am fairly confused. Was your experiment in which 4 druids tore through an AP using 3.5 druids or pathfinder druids?