Roughly 20% of your HP? From a Magic Missile? Maybe if you were level 10 still, but you said 20. So do explain the manner in which the Magic Missile does 46 damage.
Technically, maximized intensified Magic Missile would do 50 every time.
That takes a 5th level spell slot and a 19th level caster, but at level 20 that's hardly unreasonable.
I can't believe everybody missed this. That's a 4500gp item, well over half the appropriate treasure value for a 3rd level character. The damage output from this would have ended a lot of encounters quicker than it should have, throwing things off more.That's a good catch, except I think the appropriate treasure value for a 3rd level character is actually 3000gp.
Fully charged, that alone would put the character as having half-again the treasure he's supposed to have -- but he did say it wasn't fully charged, too.
Whoops, you're right, I had 4th level on the brain because my character just spent a lot of time there. That's even worse!
If the character FOUND the wand with 17 or fewer charges, that's not so bad. If the player made the character with a wand with fewer than full charges, which I don't see as specifically forbidden (but not specifically allowed, either....) by the rules, I would consider that dirty pool.
Wow, that well never goes dry!
Oh, this is my fault. I used it as an hyperbole in an inane discussion with him, and now he learned it.
The same for his overuse of "Hi Welcome". He started to use it after 3 posts someone "welcomed" him that way (because of his pleasant way to expose his opinions).
I apoogize for the "Boolean". Very sorry, forum.
|
Oh and HP is a Boolean.Tried googling it, got a whole bunch of different things. Please explain.You either have it or you don't. It's explained in plain english right there in the core book.
Effects of Hit Point Damage: Damage doesn’t slow you down until your current hit points reach 0 or lower. At 0 hit points, you’re disabled.
What I meant is that I had never come across the word 'Boolean' before.
I thought that was obvious, that being the unusual thing in the quoted sentence.
Ah well, I'll have to explain in more detail next time, at least I'm not the only one.
I agree, it's not a bad idea, but it's not how the system was intended to work - and I think that if it's total damage, then it needs to be one check at the end, not many, otherwise your player can be rolling dice all combat and slowing things down. That said, although I hear about concentration checks being too easy, I've yet to have a caster take damage in mid-cast - a five-foot step is just too easy to do.
I don't understand why out of the two interpretations, the one that seems the most realistic/reasonable, and the one that takes casters down a small notch, is assumed to be the wrong intention. Why can't it be the way it was intended if it works better?
Likewise, if you're the target of a spell, and roll a saving throw, do you consider that too many extra rolls? It is essentially adding a check in addition to the effects of the normal attack, which is no different than making a saving throw (in fact, disruption weapons force saves every strike, even in a full-attack, against undead).
I've seen casters take damage mid-cast frequently. 5ft steps are a caster's best friend, but there are far too many people wielding reach-weapons in our games for it to be foolproof. A simple warrior with a longspear and armor spikes pretty much lets the caster know he means business; no special feats or tricks required.
Likewise, you can't 5ft step ranged attacks. If you're fighting a caster, readying an action to shoot them is an ideal method since not only will you deal damage (as if you had attacked them when you did), but you'll also threaten to interrupt their spells.
But One More Time
Exactly why is it, that out of our two interpretations, the one that allows a spellcaster to get his with half a dozen arrow in the span of 3-6 seconds and it have no more effect on their concentration than a single arrow must be the "intended" way?
What I meant is that I had never come across the word 'Boolean' before.
I thought that was obvious, that being the unusual thing in the quoted sentence.
Sorry! In some fields boolean is a pretty standard word. It didn't even occur to me that someone wouldn't know it even though now that you point it out it's obvious that most people wouldn't have any need for it.
Basically it refers to anything that only has two states, true/false, yes/no, etc. with no degrees or shades of grey in between.
YOU HAVE TWO CLERICS IN YOUR PARTY. AND A PALADIN.
Don't forget the partridge in the pear tree.
Hi Welcome predates my arrival on this forum. Nice try though.
This does not make your use of it less annoying and nonsensical.
.
..
...
....
.....
This is a Citizen Service Announcement
HAIL!
Such assertions can take many forms. Are you aware?
In non-related news, popcorn and chilled beverages are available at all official BIFTech Supply Stations. Wednesday is 'Double Points Day' so be sure to have your Loyalty Cards ready!
BE STRONG - BE GOOD - BEHAVE
OT: If they did we haven't noticed anything our end - have you checked your notes?
Right now this is all interpretation, take a deep breath and make an FAQ request.
No point going round in circles.
Before I begin, how do I go about making an FAQ request? I've overlooked it, perhaps.
Back to what I was saying, I dropped the "argument" portion of the subject a little while back (when I said arguments aside, since there are multiple interpretations) and issued a question; a question I don't think has been answered yet.
That question is simple: "Why out of the two interpretations is the one that trivializes the concentration check and makes the least sense logically the one that must be intended, and not the other one?"
My question is not as a debater, but as a gamer/designer. I want to understand the mentality and thought process behind this. Why would anyone choose to read it as "guy gets hit with 6 arrows and can concentrate like it was 1 arrow" instead of "guy gets hit with 6 arrows, it's much harder to concentrate"? One continues the 3.5 problem Pathfinder has apparently been trying to alleviate (trivial concentration checks) while the other makes it more dangerous to cast without some backup/cover/assistance.
That was my question. Can you answer it?
|
Roughly 20% of your HP? From a Magic Missile? Maybe if you were level 10 still, but you said 20. So do explain the manner in which the Magic Missile does 46 damage.Technically, maximized intensified Magic Missile would do 50 every time.
That takes a 5th level spell slot and a 19th level caster, but at level 20 that's hardly unreasonable.
Unless I missed some errata (entirely possible), you can't Intensify a Magic Missile spell.
.
..
...
....
.....
Before I begin, how do I go about making an FAQ request? I've overlooked it, perhaps.
Citizens may find the FAQ button at the top right of the posting box, near FLAG and LIST.
Those wishing to make a FAQ request are advised to click on the FAQ button of the appropriate content-related post.
Have a good day citizen.
.
..
...
....
.....
Happiness is mandatory, eh BenignFacist?
Damned straight!
Happiness is mandatory, eh BenignFacist?
"Well if a man date makes you happy who are we to object?"
Unless I missed some errata (entirely possible), you can't Intensify a Magic Missile spell.
You might well be right. I don't have the book with me at the moment to check the wording of it.
Roughly 20% of your HP? From a Magic Missile? Maybe if you were level 10 still, but you said 20. So do explain the manner in which the Magic Missile does 46 damage.
Normally it does not deal 46 hit points (although we've seen a simple example of one dealing more). A 20th level Wizard will probably not have more than 182 hit points. 20d6, high average (4/die after 1st) & max 1st die yields 82 hit points (76 +6) - the other 100 derive from a 20 CON (14 base +6 enhancement). If that belt is shut down or destroyed, the Wizard is probably/hopefully leaving PDQ (losing 60 hit points off the bottom).
25 hit points is 13%, so I was high-balling it. A 9th level spell is a DC 44 (10 +25 +9), against which the Wizard has a +35 bonus at 20th level (20th +13 INT bonus +2 trait). Natural 9 required, 40% chance of failure. Odds of success improve with lower spell levels being cast. But - how often do characters cast their lower level offensive spells first?
The Intensified Maximized Magic Missile clobbers the Wizard with 50 hit points - 27% of his 182 hp total. Concentration DC is now unbeatable: 60 + spell level. With a +35 bonus, you cannot succeed. Moment of Prescience - unless errata'd - does not help concentration checks (since they are caster level-based checks, which that bonus cannot be applied towards). It is not skill-based, so there are no items of significance that are able to assist in dealing with getting walloped by 50 points that interrupt your spell. Magic Missile is not attack-roll dependant, so the AC bonus is of no use.
Since these particular spells are available well before 20th level, they remain a viable method of disrupting spell casting throughout almost any campaign - unless the targets are smart and make use of the shield spell or a brooch of shielding when available. And such foes do show up fairly often in published adventure paths and modules...
EDIT (twice): Intensify Spell increases the damage cap (maximum number of dice - in this case, missiles - are raised by 5 levels). Normal magic missile = 5 missiles at 9th level.
Intensified once increases the damage cap from 9th to 14th. 6th missile at 11th, 7th missile at 13th. Maximized (5th level slot) yields (7d4 = 28 +7 =) 35 damage, concentration DC of 45 + spell level
Intensified twice increases the damage cap from 9th to 19th. 8th missile at 15th, 9th missile at 17th, 10th missile at 19th. Combined with Maximize equals a 6th level spell against which there is neither need for an attack roll, nor is a saving throw permitted to mitigate the damage. Voila!, 50 points of force damage. Indeed, the only (personal) defenses are (a) SR - not reliable, although potentially useful; (b) spell immunity (from your cleric/oracle buddy); and (c) the trusty shield spell (immunity without hassling your cleric/oracle).
|
.
..
...
....
.....
Before I begin, how do I go about making an FAQ request? I've overlooked it, perhaps.
Citizens may find the FAQ button at the top right of the posting box, near FLAG and LIST.
Those wishing to make a FAQ request are advised to click on the FAQ button of the appropriate content-related post.
Have a good day citizen.
LOL
I've removed some posts. I'm reminded of a lesson we all should have learned as children. "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
Also, "Flag it and move on."
woh Ross changed his avatar.
Normally it does not deal 46 hit points (although we've seen a simple example of one dealing more). A 20th level Wizard will probably not have more than 182 hit points. 20d6, high average (4/die after 1st) & max 1st die yields 82 hit points (76 +6) - the other 100 derive from a 20 CON (14 base +6 enhancement). If that belt is shut down or destroyed, the Wizard is probably/hopefully leaving PDQ (losing 60 hit points off the bottom)Roughly 20% of your HP? From a Magic Missile? Maybe if you were level 10 still, but you said 20. So do explain the manner in which the Magic Missile does 46 damage.
20 Con is the number he'd have at level 10. At level 20, try 24 (16 base 6 enhancement 2 inherent) and favored class. Which is 6 + (3.5 * 19) + 160 = 232. By comparison a 3.5 Wizard would have 151-191 due to a combo of smaller HD, point buy system less friendly to SAD characters, and no favored class bonus.
Just to really drive the point home a standard 3.5 Fighter runs 214 HP.
Yeah, when I repeatedly call Pathfinder Caster Edition and such, that's not hyperbole.
How has your 16 Con/18 Int base stat character survived to 20th ? That is 27 points for any campaign using the point-buy system - and that system caps at 25 points. How many ability scores are tanked? You still need a decent DEX and WIS - presuming you dropped CHA in the drink, you have 29 points - 2 of which are available for STR, DEX and WIS. None unless you are in a 25 point buy game or getting pretty lucky on a 4d6 rolling system.
Presuming the 25 point buy, you tank CHA and STR to 7 (getting 8 points for a total of 33). 27 are spent on CON and INT. 6 points gets you a 13 in DEX and WIS, a 14 in either DEX or WIS (and an 11 in the other one of the pair). If you only tank CHA to 7, STR to 8, you have 4 points - enough to put DEX and WIS at 12 or one of the two at 14. A bit of a problem there, even if a divination specialist. (25 +6 = 31 - 27 = 4).
Even in PFS play you're not starting with those unless you torpedo both STR and CHA. Which gives you ... 1 point (20 +8 from STR and CHA at 7 = 28 -27 for CON 16, INT 18) to put into DEX and WIS. Gets you an array of 7 STR (-2), 11 or 10 DEX, 16 CON, 20 INT, 10 or 11 WIS, 7 CHA at 1st using the 20 point array.
I did indeed forget favored class - but not everyone dials that bonus into hit points, so erred on the side of "I only have 2 +INT bonus skill ranks per level, and my chucklehead adventuring buddies expect ME to sink most of them into Knowledge skills" and left them out.
The combination of favored class, 2 points more CON and a +2 book puts a reasonable hit point total at 242 hit points (+3 per level). An impressive total.
Under the same principle, one expects the higher hit die-sized characters to probably be built more or less the same way (primary offensive stat starts at 20 & gets the +5 inherent along with all of the level advancement points, CON gets a 16 with a +2 inherent bonus): d8's end up with 262 hit points, d10's at 282 hit points & d12's at 302 hit points.
Toughness across the board tacks on another 20 per character for this comparison, so the resulting high-averaged hp totals are: (d6) 262 / (d8) 282 / (d10) 302 / (d12) 322 - more when raging, of course.
Now, are we done with comparing hp total ? 'cause we were discussing concentration checks and the matter of getting riddled with volleys of magic missiles and how much it can rain on the parade ... :)
Hrm ... interesting, Mistah Green.
I think this goes to show what the differences are in play expectations/experiences between us. Not a bad thing, not at all.
What I see my players do more often than not is attempt to shore up DEX at least a bit and WIS as much as they can. Seems that they're not fond of taking involuntary naps, getting feebleminded, that kind of thing.
I was using "high-average" (round the .5 up instead of down) and max first hit die, so my math is probably still off a few points on the higher hit die sizes. It still gives me a number to digest when coming up with higher-end encounters.
As far as the non-inherent bonus accessible characters: your Wizard is going to help his buddies, right? Like ... Mr Meat Shield ... and Mr Healbot ? And Mr Trapfinder? ^_^
EDIT: And just in case I was/am unclear: absolutely blast the BBEG off the map first. However, if he's a jerk and playing hard to see (ethereal, whatever), some times the readied action is all you get.
Or, you're parleying and stuff and some one feels antsy ... :)
That question is simple: "Why out of the two interpretations is the one that trivializes the concentration check and makes the least sense logically the one that must be intended, and not the other one?"
My question is not as a debater, but as a gamer/designer. I want to understand the mentality and thought process behind this. Why would anyone choose to read it as "guy gets hit with 6 arrows and can concentrate like it was 1 arrow" instead of "guy gets hit with 6 arrows, it's much harder to concentrate"? One continues the 3.5 problem Pathfinder has apparently been trying to alleviate (trivial concentration checks) while the other makes it more dangerous to cast without some backup/cover/assistance.
That was my question. Can you answer it?
It may seem logical to you from look at the results. From a rules at the table perspective, having each attack resolve a single check based on that attacks damage is faster and easier to resolve. For several attacks that are happening at the same time (IE, prepared magic missile or scorching rays or similar spells) it is easy to keep track of the cumulative damage. For a big fight with lots of stuff going on, with a full round spell (like summon monster) having to track damage over a longer period of time can be cumbersome.
The problem is the ambiguity of language. The rule isn't written in a computer language, and clearly different people come to different conclusions as to the results. I can see the logical steps each result comes from.
The more I think about it the more I prefer a single check when the spell is about to be resolved that is based on the total damage during spell casting. It keeps things down to 1 check, but does make things harder if he'd pelted by a half-dozen arrows during that time. I'm not suggesting that this is Rules As Intended, but it works for me and my game.
@OP
Ok Mr. Fishy is in a hurry.
Fiendish rust monster. [Fire resistance]
Have trio of fiendish rust monsters wrangled by a ogre with a wooden club. WHAM! PC cakes. The party should win the fight but it help if the wealth is to high. Give the orge a potion of mage armor if you feel sadistic.
Good Luck. One more thing Color spray? Glitterdust? A big ass magnet?
There are ways. Confusion, charm person and an illusion turns friends into foes.
Never underestimate the crazy of a PC.
Deeper Darkness add Advanced Maxed HP wraiths with Advanced maxed HP ghouls with the Variant Zombie that explodes and does ability damage. put them in a small room. The lights go out, the PCs go down.
A pitch black room with enemies that can see in darkness with tons of hitpoints and the PCs have no idea where to turn and what is hitting them and sucking their life force out.
Just for giggles, make the area profane. Go ahead and blast your Channel Energy, doesn't matter, the zombies will explode when you kill them and splatter you full of poisonous goo that will rot you from the inside out.
Remember, what doesn't kill you today has the chance to kill you over the course of the next several days.
If that doesn't work, Advanced Max HP phase spiders. Say 5 of them with whatever webbing traps you feel like giving them and lots of pits for the PCs to fall through.
There is a limited range group. I had this problem, I started using archers and ranged so the PCs picked up ranged classes. Now I'm using incorporeal critters that do Touch attacks and they can't hit them, so they beefed up their healing with another healer. I swapped over to AoE attacks, I won't kill them all but I will hurt them severely, they decided to spread out more. Ability drains on the PCs made them stock up on items that allowed them to restore lost stats.
Do you see what is happening there? I put out a challenge and the PCs move and adapt to my challenge. I have to be one step ahead of them for the next challenge for them. They can't prepare for EVERYTHING I throw at them so you mix it all up. All part of the job as a DM!
Hrm ... interesting, Mistah Green.
I think this goes to show what the differences are in play expectations/experiences between us. Not a bad thing, not at all.
What I see my players do more often than not is attempt to shore up DEX at least a bit and WIS as much as they can. Seems that they're not fond of taking involuntary naps, getting feebleminded, that kind of thing.
Difference between 10 Wis and 12 is +1 Will saves. At low levels everyone has a good shot of failing Will saves, your only real defense is to go first and throw your own Color Spray before they can. At higher levels Wisdom will not be your primary source of Will saves as an arcane caster. You will either have medium or high Will saves regardless depending on if SC is in or not.
The few Reflex save based effects that were worth caring about in core got nerfed. And surprisingly there isn't many outside of core.
As far as the non-inherent bonus accessible characters: your Wizard is going to help his buddies, right? Like ... Mr Meat Shield ... and Mr Healbot ? And Mr Trapfinder? ^_^Nah, not those losers. He might help Mr. Fellow Wizard, Mr. Lawbringer, and Mr. Nature's Wrath though.
*Laughs and laughs, and laughs some more*
Me likely.
The characters were created with I think 25 point buy for slightly better powered characters than the base 20. I wanted the characters to be powerful enough to handle threats at low-levels; apparently they are too effective.
I think the base is 15 point buy, not 20 point buy, so 25 point buy is powerful indeed... :\