I have been thinking about running a campaign that did not include the various ability enhancing spells and perhaps items. I think I would leave the various Tomes in the game.
What I am trying to figure out is who gets hurt the most by this.
I'm guessing that characters who have multiple key attributes (such as the monk and paladin) would get harmed the most, although I'm not so sure.
If I was to do this, I would give a fairly generous point buy (with a low score limit of probably 10, and a high score of 15 before race.) or use an array heavily stacked towards the 12-14 range. I might also have to adjust a few things once play hits the 15+ level range, but isn't a pressing consideration.
I was also considering doubling the price of the stat boost items, and any item that contains one of the ability boost spells.
Well the spell casters get really screwed. Their DC's are exceedingly dependent on those stat scores, and at level 20 having only a DC 26 (10+9+7 *stat of 25*) really really hurts. The lack of extra slots also means that they will cast less and need more rest in general though this is highly dependent on other gear too (having 3 pearls of power of each spell level would certainly help this).
Fighters feel it a bit but I've done fighters before without stat boosters and they come out alright -- the exceptional damage isn't quite as exceptional, but still good enough for almost everything.
Monks suffer a lot as they really rely on their wisdom for AC and the boosts to strength for damage.
However I do have a suggestion:
Talk to speaker in dreams (he's around here somewhere) about it. I know he's running a (currently) magic light setting where he's using racial templates to help give some of the extra boosts that are lacking due to low magic. Such a thing could help your character's race matter more, and keep them from missing the stat boosters so much.
Well the spell casters get really screwed.
I think you would find spellcasters leaning towards one particular spell school (with Spell Focus + Greater Spell Focus) and/or spells without saves.
Personally, I think it would hurt "secondary" fighters (like monks, TWF rangers and rogues) the most. They already have a hard enough time hitting high AC enemies, in my experience.
Well the spell casters get really screwed.I think you would find spellcasters leaning towards one particular spell school (with Spell Focus + Greater Spell Focus) and/or spells without saves.
Necromancy and conjuration will be very popular.
|
I would hate this if I were playing in your campaign with my current character, which is a bard who is solely a skilled character that buffs.
Of course, bards have other buffs, but the stat buffs are a big thing. I would go with cutting magic items as those dont affect character creation or concepts.
In my opinion.
CC
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Necromancy and conjuration will be very popular.Agreed. A whole lot less fireballs and a whole lot more stampeding elephants
Or, a lot more "Save half" and "Save partial" spells rather than "Save negates" spells. More fireballs, less hold monster, confusion, and color spray.
Just drop monster's stats (saves, AC, to hit, etc) by 3 across the board and skill DCs by 3. That corrects everything in a simplified manner.
I have been thinking about running a campaign that did not include the various ability enhancing spells and perhaps items. I think I would leave the various Tomes in the game.
What I am trying to figure out is who gets hurt the most by this.
I'm guessing that characters who have multiple key attributes (such as the monk and paladin) would get harmed the most, although I'm not so sure.
If I was to do this, I would give a fairly generous point buy (with a low score limit of probably 10, and a high score of 15 before race.) or use an array heavily stacked towards the 12-14 range. I might also have to adjust a few things once play hits the 15+ level range, but isn't a pressing consideration.
I was also considering doubling the price of the stat boost items, and any item that contains one of the ability boost spells.
I have eliminated stat boosting items for the most part, but not the spells. To compensate, I run with a 15 point buy and PCs gain an ability point every 2 levels (starting at 2nd level) instead of every 4 (with the caveat that you can only increase an ability a maximum of 5 points from the original). It gives the feel of PCs who's beginnings are better than average and through experience, they gain in ability rather than through strapping on magical gear.
Keep in mind that we are talking about fairly expensive items, that only give an additional +1 stat modifier up until almost 10th level, then it jumps to +2, or +1 to three stat modifiers. The items that grant the +3 modifiers are not available until 14-15th level.
The characters are really only being judged against each other. The monsters are consistent losers (the Washington Generals of fantasy combat). Is the caster with only an 18 Int at level 10 really screwed if the rogue also has a dex of 18? I think we are really only talking about a 5% - 10% difference on most rolls. I know a +1 can often make the difference, but most of the time it doesn't matter.
And it is not like these characters can't do something else with that 4K, 16K, or 36K gold.
To me it seems the stat boost items are almost always used to boost the primary stat into the stratosphere, while the rest of the stats stay at commoner levels. Rogues automatically make saves, while clerics must roll a 20. Will save is the other way around. Without items, both classes are brought a little closer together, and neither becomes weaker then each other.
Well you aren't really talking about "just a +1~+3"
you are really talking about a +11 to a stat, which translates at 20th level into a +6 to your check/DC/AC/Etc.
Without that +6 you get hit more often, your spells fail more often and your hit less often for less damage.
The monsters do take into account that by level 20 a wizard could/should have around a 34~36 intelligence -- that's why their save throws are so high at that point ( before the monsters buff up with their at will spell like abilities, items, spells and so on).
Honestly one of the first stat boosters I look for as a fighter is a headband of wisdom. For mages I typically want a belt of Constitution.
Small books of +1~+2 to my off stats are usually rather welcome for any character (clerics could use a +2 to charisma, while wizards never say no to some more Dex or Con and a fighter really should look at a book of wisdom +2 as well).
Absent these things your players will probably try and start with the highest stat they can to help compensate for the "lack" of items later.
In net effect you'll *probably* simply make them want to start with better primary stats to compensate which means less of the "fluff" stats for that character since they "need" (in the player's opinion) what "little they get" to stay relevant.
One thing you might do is have enchanted rivers, temples, and other artifacts that can permanently boost the abilities of those who drink from it, get blessed by the priests there, achieve the quest of mightness and bravery, etc.
That way, the PCs don't need a belt to get them +2 strength, because he can pay 2,000 gold to the Temple of the Strength Goddess and get a permanent enhancement bonus, IF he is willing to do a little favor for the priestess.
Of course, that means that PCs get an extra magic item slot to use, but I hate magic item slots anyway, and plan to house rule "reasonableness rules" (e.g. UMD for trying to wear two belts at once, but that is a topic for another thread.)
Another thing that I've long done is grant PCs a +1 boost to their key ability stat at 2nd, 4th, 7th, 11th, and 16th levels. If multiclassed, they can choose which class to boost. My reason for doing this is to remove the pressure to use the regular stat boosts for you key ability; you can use them to enhance other areas of your character if you wish.
|
Keep in mind that we are talking about fairly expensive items, that only give an additional +1 stat modifier up until almost 10th level, then it jumps to +2, or +1 to three stat modifiers. The items that grant the +3 modifiers are not available until 14-15th level.
The characters are really only being judged against each other. The monsters are consistent losers (the Washington Generals of fantasy combat). Is the caster with only an 18 Int at level 10 really screwed if the rogue also has a dex of 18? I think we are really only talking about a 5% - 10% difference on most rolls. I know a +1 can often make the difference, but most of the time it doesn't matter.
And it is not like these characters can't do something else with that 4K, 16K, or 36K gold.
To me it seems the stat boost items are almost always used to boost the primary stat into the stratosphere, while the rest of the stats stay at commoner levels. Rogues automatically make saves, while clerics must roll a 20. Will save is the other way around. Without items, both classes are brought a little closer together, and neither becomes weaker then each other.
Actually, level up and the tomes are used more to boost primary stats into the stratosphere more then the bonus items as eventually your gonna get the multi-bonus items. If you wanna average things out more, remove the tomes and the wish spell ability to raise stats and change the level up stats so you can't just pump one stat or just remove it. To make more generalized characters I like to make the levels up be 4 and 12 is physical stats, 8 and 16 is mental. 20 is players choice.
|
|
Another thing that I've long done is grant PCs a +1 boost to their key ability stat at 2nd, 4th, 7th, 11th, and 16th levels. If multiclassed, they can choose which class to boost. My reason for doing this is to remove the pressure to use the regular stat boosts for you key ability; you can use them to enhance other areas of your character if you wish.
Unless you restrict it, all it does is make the primary scores even HIGHER...which is what fergie is trying to avoid.
The characters are really only being judged against each other. The monsters are consistent losers (the Washington Generals of fantasy combat). Is the caster with only an 18 Int at level 10 really screwed if the rogue also has a dex of 18? I think we are really only talking about a 5% - 10% difference on most rolls. I know a +1 can often make the difference, but most of the time it doesn't matter.
Well, looking at a sampling of CR 10 creature saving throws vs. a base DC of 17 (taking a mid range level of 3 + 4 stat mod):
Giant Flytrap
Fort +17
Ref +8
Will +5
Adult White Dragon
Fort +13
Ref +9
Will +10
Brachiosaurus
Fort +18
Ref +11
Will +9
Rakshasa
Fort +9
Ref +12
Will +8
I think a caster would be fine with an 18 at this level myself.
EDIT: I do think that the Monster Statistics by CR on p. 291 is a great tool for a GM in helping to answer these questions. The bestiary monsters land pretty close to the progression shown there.
I think a caster would be fine with an 18 at this level myself.EDIT: I do think that the Monster Statistics by CR on p. 291 is a great tool for a GM in helping to answer these questions. The bestiary monsters land pretty close to the progression shown there.
Wait the average monster there can save against a DC 17 on average with a 8 or better and on the good saves with a anything but a 1 and you think that's a good DC for the caster?
That's horrible. That's the level of "Why did I cast this spell? Oh yeah cause I wanted to be useless this round."
The Rakshasa and dragon also have spells to pump themselves more if they wanted too.
With an average fail rate of 65% for the caster I wouldn't want to cast anything with a save throw unless it had a good secondary effect.
By level 20 when everything has +20 or better on it's save throws (before magic) this gets even worse (the highest DC without stat boosting items is 28 and that's for a ninth level spell).
I have been thinking about running a campaign that did not include the various ability enhancing spells and perhaps items. I think I would leave the various Tomes in the game.
What I am trying to figure out is who gets hurt the most by this.
I'm guessing that characters who have multiple key attributes (such as the monk and paladin) would get harmed the most, although I'm not so sure.
If I was to do this, I would give a fairly generous point buy (with a low score limit of probably 10, and a high score of 15 before race.) or use an array heavily stacked towards the 12-14 range. I might also have to adjust a few things once play hits the 15+ level range, but isn't a pressing consideration.
I was also considering doubling the price of the stat boost items, and any item that contains one of the ability boost spells.
Is there a reason for this?
I think a caster would be fine with an 18 at this level myself.EDIT: I do think that the Monster Statistics by CR on p. 291 is a great tool for a GM in helping to answer these questions. The bestiary monsters land pretty close to the progression shown there.
Wait the average monster there can save against a DC 17 on average with a 8 or better and on the good saves with a anything but a 1 and you think that's a good DC for the caster?
That's horrible. That's the level of "Why did I cast this spell? Oh yeah cause I wanted to be useless this round."
The Rakshasa and dragon also have spells to pump themselves more if they wanted too.
With an average fail rate of 65% for the caster I wouldn't want to cast anything with a save throw unless it had a good secondary effect.
By level 20 when everything has +20 or better on it's save throws (before magic) this gets even worse (the highest DC without stat boosting items is 28 and that's for a ninth level spell).
That's a one-dimensional way of thinking to me
1) I didn't take the spell caster's highest level of spell casting, but a mid level spell2) Couple this with the ability to spam spells (via scrolls, wands, staves, rings, wondrous items)
3) Couple this with the plethora of spells that don't require saves at all
4) Couple this with feats that increase save DCs
In other words, the wizard will have a 65% fail rate if he doesn't focus on getting his DCs up.
Yes, a wizard with an Int of 18 at 10th level will do just fine if that's the expected ability level for the campaign. The question was:
Is the caster with only an 18 Int at level 10 really screwed if the rogue also has a dex of 18? I think we are really only talking about a 5% - 10% difference on most rolls. I know a +1 can often make the difference, but most of the time it doesn't matter.
And the answer is no, he is not screwed. He'll be just fine.
For starters:
He's limited on his highest level spells -- he will not be casting fifth level spells regularly, so those "mid level" spells are going to be his meat and drink -- if they don't put out then the wizard is in trouble.
Again see my earlier posts -- I agree there are spells that don't require saves -- however those are about the only spells the wizard is going to be using, which means it's going to get boring quickly for those involved ("You are casting that again?") in my opinion. There aren't that many of them.
The wizard isn't going to be "spamming" spells -- and if he's doing it with items that have the lowest DC possible against the creatures above he'll never get a spell off successfully.
Even including the feats the monsters are still saving on a 10+ as an average minimum save throw bonus.
The rogue with a Dex of 18 still can successfully do his thing -- the wizard has fewer slots, and lower DCs. By level 20 he's missing 6 points off his highest possible DC at least without stat boosting items. He's also lacking about 10~20 spells per day. This problem starts at about 8th level and just gets progressively worse from there. The rogue's class abilities are not significantly hampered by a Dex of 18 starting with no future increases.
The wizard's is.
I wonder if the following two would help the Wizard out in the situation where she is limited in her ability to boost her key spellcasting stat:
1. Random DCs for spell saves. I've been using 1d20 + modifiers for my homebrew game, which makes the DC to save vs a spell more unpredictable. On the other hand, there is as much of a chance of getting a lower DC as getting a higher DC to save.
Yeah the biggest problem is boosting DC is one of the hardest things to do.
Need more to hit? You can get a magical weapon, do stuff to lower their AC, and take a bunch of different items to raise your chances to hit.
Need more AC? again plenty of ways to do that.
Need more DC? Not so much. The only way in core to raise DC is to raise spell level or raise stats.
If you introduce items to raise spell DC's then you simply create a new version of the "Big 6" for spell casters.
The other choice is of course to lower Save throw bonuses by about 1 per 3 levels for monsters. That would leave the ratios about the same as they are with the stat boosters.
|
I guess my problem is that I'm questioning the premise.
To me it seems the stat boost items are almost always used to boost the primary stat into the stratosphere, while the rest of the stats stay at commoner levels. Rogues automatically make saves, while clerics must roll a 20. Will save is the other way around. Without items, both classes are brought a little closer together, and neither becomes weaker then each other.
This, as I understand it, is the premise behind making a change like this.
First, my opinions align nicely with Abe's on casters really getting the short end of this. Without boosted stats, save DC's on Wizard/Sorcerer spells are generally very easy to make. People talk a lot about how strong wizards are (and rightly so, in many ways), but there's not enough focus on the fact that wizards can and very often do spend a standard action in order to do nothing at all, or so close to nothing so as to make no difference. Just taking Fireball for instance: It's a very overrated spell, granted, but if enemies fail to save it can do some decent (just decent, no better) AoE damage. With every enemy that saves, the effectiveness of the spell (and thus, the action, and thus, the turn) drops drastically. The same concept can be applied even more so to any "save negates" spells. Spells "sticking" to enemies and having the desired effect is the caster's bread and butter - it's their core mechanic.
What it sounds like above (and if I'm not understanding the premise correctly, please forgive me and by all means clarify) is that you're looking at altering the effectiveness of the core mechanic for 3 or more of the core classes just to even out Saves. I would posit that if your biggest problem is that Rogues make Reflex saves and Clerics make Will saves but not the other way around, that's the game working the way it's supposed to. If you say, "But I don't like that aspect of the game," then fine - but I would strongly suggest finding other ways around the problem. Distribute items that raise Will saves for Rogues and Fighters, or let them just fail the Saves and place the responsibility for the buffs to prevent that situation (or the cleanup on aisle three once it happens) on the Cleric and/or Wizard with the uber Will save.
Just my two cents, of course, YMMV.
Another possibility: permanent enchantments that enhance a randomly chosen stat, in addition to normal stat boosting opportunities. This way, you could end up with a wizard who, due to his exposure to an enchanted lake, ended up with a Strength of 21.
I can't believe they took away the Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus feats. Those were ways to improve saving throw DCs, as well as flavor your spellcaster without having to make your character a specialized wizard. You could always restore these feats to the game.
Actually the more I look at the math the more I think you could simply reduce monster's save throw bonuses 1 point per 3 hit dice and everything will come out evenly. In the above examples this would reduce the monster's save throws by 2~3 points on average giving the mage a 50~55% better chance. If he uses feats to help his save throw DC for the schools of magic he uses the most often he'll get about a 55~65% chance that his spells will land which is good for his mid ranged spells. His best spells will have about a 10% better chance which is fine since he can only use them about 2~4 times a day.
Actually I have a link where I ran over most the math with someone else a while back:
In this link I discussed the fact that if the players have access to the same wealth and same point buy then the character classes stay rather even no matter what you take out or put in.
The biggest problem is monster save throws. These are typically 3~6 points higher than player save throws and in general monsters have more good saves that a same CR character would have. With better saves and more good saves monsters are what usually force the DC wars when it comes to spell casters.
Since the biggest problem is spell saves, I think you *can* do what you want, as long as you're willing to make a few other changes to help the casters out.
You'll need to be willing to increase the number of ways to get "extra" metamagic (especially, say, heighten spell) - so that instead of needing 20 rods, they have other toys that do the work for them.
And, 2, drop items that increase the DCs rather than the casting attributes. (These can be by class, a la "Celestial Holy Symbol", +2 DC on all clerical spells, or for specific schools of magic, a la"Black Staff of Necromancy", for instance.) This isn't the same as boosting the attributes because there's no effect on their saves, spell memorization, knowledge and social skills, etc, etc.
In other words - you can do it, you just need to be ready to "fix" the problem it creates.
I created a thread the other day having a look statistically at what happens to character vs appropriate CR monsters when you remove the 'big six' which includes stat items. This may be helpful to you as the first entry is regarding a wizard who is most hurt by missing stat boosting items.
Up to you to decide how much this does or doesnt mean to your game, but personally I think a lack of stat boosters means the wizard doesnt have a very good chance of success against level appropriate monsters.
Food for thought:
Here’s a chart that shows the percentage chance a wizard’s highest level spell for any given level will succeed vs. the poor save according to table I-I on p.291 of the bestiary. It assumes the following:
1) PCs based on 15 point buy with stats arrayed according to the elite array (15,14,13,12,10,8) with the score of 15 going into the PC's primary casting attribute as well as the +2 racial bonus, for a starting ability score of 17.
2) Only ability boosting due to leveling is factored and is added to the primary casting attribute.
Spell DC vs Monster Saves
Lvl/CR– DC– % chance
1– 14– 60%
2– 14– 60%
3– 15– 60%
4– 16– 60%
5– 17– 60%
6– 17– 55%
7– 18– 55%
8– 18– 50%
9– 19– 50%
10– 19– 45%
11– 20– 45%
12– 21– 45%
13– 22– 45%
14– 22– 45%
15– 23– 45%
16– 23– 40%
17– 24– 40%
18– 24– 35%
19– 24– 35%
20– 25– 35%
If you factor in Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus, as well as the attribute boosting tomes (such as the Tome of Clear Thought), at level 20 the percentage chance rises to 55%… the same as 6th level.
I'd be inclined to say that if this trend concerns the OP, then perhaps a solution such as fiddling with the Spell Focus feats would be a very simple patch: perhaps making them apply to all spells the caster casts, rather than one school or, giving them automatically to casters at given levels as class features. Also, what is the intended level limit of play? The trend doesn't really begin to start having a dramatic affect until 10th level.
To add: there is more going on than this chart or math in general shows. For instance, it doesn't take into account that going by the book, the percentage chances can automatically rise by using multiple creatures of lower CRs at higher levels of play (say 12th an up). This is due to the fact that currently, there are very few monsters in the higher CR brackets (see pp.318-319 of the Bestiary to see what I mean).
For example: to challenge a party of 14th level PCs, a GM only has 6 choices in the bestiary of single monsters with the requisite CR. There are plenty of choices still at CR 11. So building the encounter if the GM uses a requisite number of CR 11 monsters to make a CR 14 encounter for his PCs, the % chance increases to 55%
Well the spell casters get really screwed. Their DC's are exceedingly dependent on those stat scores, and at level 20 having only a DC 26 (10+9+7 *stat of 25*) really really hurts. The lack of extra slots also means that they will cast less and need more rest in general though this is highly dependent on other gear too (having 3 pearls of power of each spell level would certainly help this).
Fighters feel it a bit but I've done fighters before without stat boosters and they come out alright -- the exceptional damage isn't quite as exceptional, but still good enough for almost everything.
Monks suffer a lot as they really rely on their wisdom for AC and the boosts to strength for damage.
However I do have a suggestion:
Talk to speaker in dreams (he's around here somewhere) about it. I know he's running a (currently) magic light setting where he's using racial templates to help give some of the extra boosts that are lacking due to low magic. Such a thing could help your character's race matter more, and keep them from missing the stat boosters so much.
Making Save DC's = 10 + 1/2 caster level + primary stat mod would take away a lot of the sting from no stat boosters, and make low level spells from a 20th level caster stronger than from a 5th level caster in one fell swoop.
Casters are fine without the stat items (most focus on non-save spells anyway). Fighty types would be worse off by far (lower to hit-damage ratios). Also, those who fail to min-max will really feel the sting... You're basically encouraging everyone to start with a 19 / 20.
Incorrect on many levels. Firstly fighting types have an easy time hitting already. Secondly affecting your attack roll is one of the easiest things to do in the game. There are more items, spells, and feats that give bonuses to attacks rolls than anything else in the game (AC comes in second place).
Without stat boosting items you have no means to raise your DC other than 2 feats per school -- however everyone still has plenty of ways to raise their save throw bonuses (cloaks of resistance for example, luck stones, good hope potions/spells, protection from alignment, etc). Which means save throw bonuses are going much further up than save throw DC's are.
Which means the wizard must only cast spells that don't allow a save throw if he wants to be effective. This cuts over half his spell list out.
The fighter on the other hand (or any combatant that doesn't use spells for that matter) still has all his other bonuses to hit, and damage (truthfully the lack of +6 at most from strength is of little consequence in the long run).
|
|
Making Save DC's = 10 + 1/2 caster level + primary stat mod would take away a lot of the sting from no stat boosters, and make low level spells from a 20th level caster stronger than from a 5th level caster in one fell swoop.
Caution:
The 20th level caster's low level spells will have a higher DC simply via a higher ability score than a 5th level caster would have (99% of the time). So by adding half-caster level, you're increasing the DC from two directions making a greater power curve.Robert
|
|
First, my opinions align nicely with Abe's on casters really getting the short end of this. Without boosted stats, save DC's on Wizard/Sorcerer spells are generally very easy to make. People talk a lot about how strong wizards are (and rightly so, in many ways), but there's not enough focus on the fact that wizards can and very often do spend a standard action in order to do nothing at all, or so close to nothing so as to make no difference. Just taking Fireball for instance: It's a very overrated spell, granted, but if enemies fail to save it can do some decent (just decent, no better) AoE damage. With every enemy that saves, the effectiveness of the spell (and thus, the action, and thus, the turn) drops drastically. The same concept can be applied even more so to any "save negates" spells. Spells "sticking" to enemies and having the desired effect is the caster's bread and butter - it's their core mechanic.
How is this any different/worse than a non-caster making a move/charge to go attack and misses with the attack roll?
An attack roll is essentially a save for no effect. And most of the time a failed save is worse than a successful move/attack.
A fireball (and others like it) will have some marginal effect against something most of the time. A warrior may be at least marginally effective against something with a series of attacks during a full-attack.
I don't see a glaring difference - the mechanics are different, but in theory it's still random chance to do something, or nothing.
Robert
|
|
I have been thinking about running a campaign that did not include the various ability enhancing spells and perhaps items. I think I would leave the various Tomes in the game.
Here's what I have been doing for the past couple years - I started this when Pathfinder Alpha playtesting first began.
I removed the stat boosting items and buffing spells (owls, bulls, etc) from the game.
To compensate, I allow the "high magic" version of the stat generation system suggested by Pathfinder, and allow a stat boost at every even level. (So it's feats at every odd, and stats at every even).
Tomes are still available.
@ Freesword
Furthermore, in regards to the "big 6", I incorporated +1 Deflection bonus (to AC) and Resistance bonus (to saves) to everyone at every 4 levels, and a +1 natural armor bonus at every 5 levels.
This removes the rings of prot, cloaks of resist, amulet of nat armor, and the stat boosting items, and have had to make no changes to CR, ELs or other mechanics of monsters/encounters etc.
It has worked quite well - and it's provided much more variety and flavor in the character's magic items and builds.
The one thing you do have to change is NPC/monsters. Such as a powerful Barbarian Fire Giant or something - who wears a Belt of Giant
Strength +4, etc.
All I do instead: take the creature's current HD, and compare to the stock creature (listed in Beastiary/MM) and use the difference in HD to add the aforementioned per HD/level adjustments. So a FireGiant w/ 8 levels of barbarian would have a +4 to add to his stats, a +2 Def and Resistance to saves, and +1 Nat armor.
If such a creature was a highlighted NPC in the module, chances are he's going to have magical equipment worn that provide these bonuses anyways (if not, more). Then you can re-equip with other equipment that may benefit him instead - such as cold resistance cloak or something.
The creatures that do suffer a little are dragons - since their HD that goes up really isn't above the "stock" creature - it just puts them into the next age/size category. How to compensate for the Dragotha and Ilythanes of the campains that have rings of protection and cloaks of resistance and amulets of wisdom etc. I have found that if you add a +1 to a stat for each age category it's pretty balanced (not a +1 to each stat for each age category - just 1 point to add to any stat per age), and +1 to deflection and natural armor per 2 age categories, and you come out about right for the bosses BBEG dragon encounters.
Robert
:: Good stuffs ::
I don't see a glaring difference - the mechanics are different, but in theory it's still random chance to do something, or nothing.
Robert
The biggest difference is the more the wizard casts the less useful he is. The fighter doesn't lose usefulness just from using his ability (attacking). As the wizard loses effectiveness and spends more spells to get the same effect his endurance slacks off more too -- and the worse part is the more of his high level stuff he uses the less the rest of what he has is going to do in addition to being less likely to do anything.
The fighter swinging 2~7 times in one round (depending on build and level) has a greater chance of having some effect -- of dealing some damage, even if he doesn't hit with every swing. The wizard that casts a spell and doesn't affect his target gets nothing else -- he's done. No effect no usefulness and now he's weaker for the rest of the day due to lack of chance to try it again.
Now I'm not saying it can't be done -- but you have to tread very carefully when doing this in order to not end up with a case where the wizard is nothing but round after round of fail.
Freesword's above post where he suggests increasing the DC by 1 point every 4~5 levels would have almost the exact same effect as decreasing the monster's save throws by 1 for every 3 hit dice -- net effect is the same, but how the players feel about it will be different (one is "proactive" from their position the other is a condition of the campaign and therefore not as "player oriented").
Is there a reason for this?
Mostly that I don't find the items/spells very flavorful or interesting. Linking the animals to the ability is nice, but really we are talking about - "I cast +4 Str on the barbarian" - just numbers.
I also think that these usually just increase the vast disparity between characters. For example, why take any ranks in knowledge nature for your ranger, when the wizard has a +8 Int modifier? Why bother even having a 12 in an ability score when other party members have a 28? Why not just have a very narrow focus if you are going to be god-like at some things, and suck at others? I would prefer a game where everyone who puts in a little effort has a chance, rather then things just being On/Off.
From the responses so far it seems like many folks are in agreement that most classes don't need help doing what they do well already. Rogues can be sneaky, fighter types can hit things really hard, and casters can alter the fabric of the universe. I think saves against PC casters SHOULD become easier for monsters to make, because the spells themselves become more numerous, and INCREDIBILITY powerful. Monsters making their saves 75% of the time isn't so bad, because you are casting Whale of the Banshee (Yarrgh!), or Implosion! And if those don't work, you have 20+ other spells that are almost as good. Having a 25% chance to end an encounter with one spell is plenty powerful.
As I said in my original post, high level (15+) isn't much of an issue for me. I almost never play/GM that high, and won't be worried if characters had a +1-4 to their abilities by that point.
I think saves against PC casters SHOULD become easier for monsters to make, because the spells themselves become more numerous, and INCREDIBILITY powerful. Monsters making their saves 75% of the time isn't so bad, because you are casting Whale of the Banshee, or Implosion! And if those don't work, you have 20+ other spells that are almost as good. Having a 25% chance to end an encounter with one spell is plenty powerful.
As I said in my original post, high level (15+) isn't much of an issue for me. I almost never play/GM that high, and won't be worried if characters had a +1-4 to their abilities by that point.
You invalidate your own point (plenty of spells and they do so much compared to never even getting to those spells in the first place) and the casters aren't going to have "all those spells" in addition to the fact that the failing spells means more cast (and more failed) leading to more cast... finally no spells for the day with a bunch of fail going on round after round.
Wail of the Banshee and Implosion are highly unlikely to end a combat as it stands already --
And honestly do you as a player or DM want to be told 75% of the time "too bad you fail again."
You invalidate your own point (plenty of spells and they do so much compared to never even getting to those spells in the first place) and the casters aren't going to have "all those spells" in addition to the fact that the failing spells means more cast (and more failed) leading to more cast... finally no spells for the day with a bunch of fail going on round after round.
???
Wail of the Banshee and Implosion are highly unlikely to end a combat as it stands already --
And honestly do you as a player or DM want to be told 75% of the time "too bad you fail again."
I would say that a well placed 7-9th level spell can put a serious dent in an encounter. There are quite a few mid level spells that have serious encounter ending potential.
If I am casting stuff that blinds, holds, turns to stone, kills, etc. without even needing to put myself in harms way, then %25 chance of success is OK. If I want an "auto success" there are numerous fantastic spells that are indirect, allow no save, or have a decent effect even if the save is made.
|
|
The biggest difference is the more the wizard casts the less useful he is. The fighter doesn't lose usefulness just from using his ability (attacking). As the wizard loses effectiveness and spends more spells to get the same effect his endurance slacks off more too -- and the worse part is the more of his high level stuff he uses the less the rest of what he has is going to do in addition to being less likely to do anything.
The fighter swinging 2~7 times in one round (depending on build and level) has a greater chance of having some effect -- of dealing some damage, even if he doesn't hit with every swing. The wizard that casts a spell and doesn't affect his target gets nothing else -- he's done. No effect no usefulness and now he's weaker for the rest of the day due to lack of chance to try it again.
Great points Abraham; and I agree completely. But it's balanced by the fact that some or all of a fireball to a large number of critters, but fewer times per day is on par with 4 attacks in a full attack (no movement allowed) that will most likely do something to at least one creature.
And while a fighter spends his coin on armor and weapon upgrades to continue to act at the maximum potential, the wizard is hopefully spending the same amount of coin on wands and staffs to "fill in the gaps" so to speak for those rounds that he doesn't want to use his own resources or go nova in a combat.
My point is and was - there's not a whole lot of difference in the end when each character type still has a "wasted round" if you don't succeed in your action. The fact that fighter doesn't "waste resources with failed attempts" is offset by his successes are usually not as combat changing as the wizards' successes with his favorite tactics.
Robert
If I want an "auto success" there are numerous fantastic spells that are indirect, allow no save, or have a decent effect even if the save is made.
Name those "auto success" spells -- I think you'll find that you are lacking in choices in pathfinder.
Also I'm not saying "auto success" is needed -- indeed auto success is highly unlikely even with the big six however wanting at least a 45~60% rate for something you are limited to doing a few times per day and is going to have absolutely no effect if the save is made isn't an insane -- especially since once you are done you are weaker than before you started.
At Robert:
Yeah but a wasted round for the fighter doesn't mean he's weakened for having spent the round -- wands are a poor choice for combat and staves while nice aren't really going to get you any farther.
By the logic being suggested the wizard should be able to fireball at will since the fighter can swing each round -- and the fighter could do with a 75% failure rate since that's what is acceptable for the wizard -- except his rate of failure won't increase as much as the wizard's does without the stat boosting items.
|
|
By the logic being suggested the wizard should be able to fireball at will since the fighter can swing each round -- and the fighter could do with a 75% failure rate since that's what is acceptable for the wizard -- except his rate of failure won't increase as much as the wizard's does without the stat boosting items.
For the record - I never agreed or argued that a 75% failure rate for a wizard (or any other creature for that matter) is my idea of a fun game.
Finding that balance and sweet spot of what is acceptable is quite elusive. Make it too much and wizards can realy overshadow gameplay. At high level play - this is already a usual occurence. Make it too low and the wizard's player is going to be frustrated.
As for wands in combat - yes - bad choice - but spells that aren't level dependant, and/or spells that don't have a save or aren't being cast on the critters allow for more of the fireball et al spells to be in one's memorized repertoire.
Sorcerors have far more uses daily of those types of spells as a side note - where as wizards will tend to have more utilitarian spells to compliment his offensive power.
But concerns of the 15 minute adventuring day and wizards/sorcerers using their alloted daily power with failures (moreso than a fighter) is truly understood and I won't deny that.
For me personally - a balance would be 25% failure for the most potent spells and about 75% for the weakest (given a typical 10th level wiz). That sounds about right - finding the balance to get that to work is the tricky part.
Robert