|
Seriously, you should read the Pathfinder books before posting. The rest of us have. It'll help you discuss this issue as an equal.
To take one example, my monk has a CMB of 20 at 13th level. Your wizard has maybe a 6? I've got a +11 on my init and a 23 on my Per. You've got, maybe, a +6 on Init (assuming you took Improved Init) and a 13 on Per. I'm almost certainly going to attack before you do. If I do a dirty trick, my CMB goes up to +22 (because I've got improved dirty trick). Before you even get a chance to act, I'm almost certainly going to blind you for 4 rounds. You want to fly? How, exactly, are you going to target your spells when you're blind? You want to assume you're already flying when the combat starts? I can dimn door as a move action to...
At various points his Wizard had a 29 intellegence, a 20 Con, and now apparently a 30 dex as well...
Look, he's not going to post a build, and if you never have any baseline to pin him down to he can always jerry rig a scenario where he has all the right abilities, spells available (and cast) with all of the optimized feats.
It's pointless. He just wants attention.
|
|
You assume a Wizard would only have a +6 init, instead of the much more accurate +26 or more. As such there is nothing to discuss with you, as you aren't talking about your Mook beating a Wizard. You are talking about your Mook beating a scarecrow with a shirt embroidered to say Wizard on it.Care to explain where all that initiative comes from? No 3.5 sources; PF only.
As I said below, at various points throughout he has posted his wizard as having a 20 con, 29 int, now a ridiculous dex. And he probably can figure a way to have one of these things at a given optimized time when build specifically for that purpose, if you take all the feats, pre-cast all the spells regardless of durations, get all the equiptment regardless of cost and slots...etc.
Until he posts a build, just flag and move on.
|
You assume a Wizard would only have a +6 init, instead of the much more accurate +26 or more. As such there is nothing to discuss with you, as you aren't talking about your Mook beating a Wizard. You are talking about your Mook beating a scarecrow with a shirt embroidered to say Wizard on it.Care to explain where all that initiative comes from? No 3.5 sources; PF only.Where's that line at again? Something about backwards compatibility... Not that it matters much as PF gives away large init bonuses to casters for free.
Though really, even if he does go first it will go like this:
Mook jumps up to Wizard, and tries to give him a hug. Wizard has any number of means to shove it to the beatstick, but only needs one of them... and it's already ready.
The Mook slips off without being able to grab hold. He kind of hangs there, until he looks down and falls like a cartoon character. The Wizard then pulls some kind of DBZ stunt and hits him with a spell as he hurtles towards Earth. Game over.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFuMpYTyRjw
We're discussing Pathfinder here, not 3.5. The baseline assumption (at least in my group; it may vary in yours) is that we stick to Pathfinder content. If you include piles of 3.5 splat, you're not talking about Pathfinder, you're talking about 3.5 splat. So, aside from being a level 20 Diviner, how does a Wizard achieve +26 initiative in Pathfinder?
|
|
We're discussing Pathfinder here, not 3.5. The baseline assumption (at least in my group; it may vary in yours) is that we stick to Pathfinder content. If you include piles of 3.5 splat, you're not talking about Pathfinder, you're talking about 3.5 splat. So, aside from being a level 20 Diviner, how does a Wizard achieve +26 initiative in Pathfinder?
On another thread, he argued thieves were entitled to the epic level feat Perfect Weapon Fighting at 10th level because it didn't say they couldn't have them. You can check, it's in his posts on the second to last page under "Balance Matters".
When called on it, he said "No statement of needing to meet the prereqs = no statement of needing to meet the prereqs."
And in the same post when asked if that meant he could take any epic level feat, he said, and I quote.
"They would be game breakers... except the other Epic feats don't offer a whole lot either. The only thing epic about them is the meh response they elict. Kind of like a certain game that spawned a certain greeting based catchphrase."
Like I said, flag and ignore.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
Still arguing about some stupid f-ing wizard vs. Monk fight?
Again, if you actually contributed to the topic, I thank you, please continue to add to the discussion.
I know how funny it is when Mr Green gets going with his unbeatable theoretical wizards, but please take that to a different thread, I don't want to derail this one anymore then it already has been.
I have to note earlier in the thread they posted a reverse gravity/prismatic wall/sphere combo as being lethal, in effect forcing the character to fall through the sphere twice.
That doesn't work, either. The prismatic sphere cuts off all magic. It will literally slice the reverse gravity in half, and it would only apply 'above' the sphere where the gravity can pull to infinity. Below the sphere, the effect would be cut off, and there'd be no effect.
even if you rule it the other way, the effect would go right up to the sphere and stop...people would fall up, hit the edge of the sphere, stop, and then fall back down...without being forced through it, they'd take no damage from it at all.
==Aelryinth
|
|
I have to note earlier in the thread they posted a reverse gravity/prismatic wall/sphere combo as being lethal, in effect forcing the character to fall through the sphere twice.
That doesn't work, either. The prismatic sphere cuts off all magic. It will literally slice the reverse gravity in half, and it would only apply 'above' the sphere where the gravity can pull to infinity. Below the sphere, the effect would be cut off, and there'd be no effect.
even if you rule it the other way, the effect would go right up to the sphere and stop...people would fall up, hit the edge of the sphere, stop, and then fall back down...without being forced through it, they'd take no damage from it at all.
==Aelryinth
Good point.
Fair question. And thank you for mentioning Charm Person. I find the line about charisma checks to leave open all sorts of options.
("You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. ...it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.")
The spells I considered to be the most powerful, (note that overpowered was in parentheses with a question mark) was based solely in comparison to other spells of similar level, with added value given to the lowest levels of spells. The focus on lower level spells is because of the ease of access to these spells with limited investment. You can memorize a bunch of them, scrolls potions and wands are cheap, UMD checks are lower, and you can even have special magic items made up for fairly little cost.
My point is that you don't need to even be a wizard to UMD a wand of mirror image, and it is probably more powerful in the hands of a fighter or rogue then a mage. This thread isn't about high level casters power (yes, they are very powerful) but rather about the spells that can change an encounter because someone UMD'd a level 1 wand - Protection from Evil - for example.
|
|
He's actually a sorcerer with the dreaded DragonBall Z bloodline. He can adjust his power level at will to ..... OVER NINE THOUSAND!
Seriously, you should read the Pathfinder books before posting. The rest of us have. It'll help you discuss this issue as an equal.
To take one example, my monk has a CMB of 20 at 13th level. Your wizard has maybe a 6? I've got a +11 on my init and a 23 on my Per. You've got, maybe, a +6 on Init (assuming you took Improved Init) and a 13 on Per. I'm almost certainly going to attack before you do. If I do a dirty trick, my CMB goes up to +22 (because I've got improved dirty trick). Before you even get a chance to act, I'm almost certainly going to blind you for 4 rounds. You want to fly? How, exactly, are you going to target your spells when you're blind? You want to assume you're already flying when the combat starts? I can dimn door as a move action to...At various points his Wizard had a 29 intellegence, a 20 Con, and now apparently a 30 dex as well...
His wizard goes to 11...
As to the thread, so far in my play the spells are pretty balanced. Some are awesome and seem overpowered in specific situations, but when you read the spell you realize how situational the use it.
3.5 had some problem spells (orbs for example, in addition to the instant death spells) but so far in my games the nerfs have come where they belong.
I removed more posts. Please act like adults. I'd also recommend that the wizard vs. monk discussion please go to another thread.
Edit: I'd like to add that this isn't the place to discuss what the moderating staff should and shouldn't do.
|
|
I removed more posts. Please act like adults. I'd also recommend that the wizard vs. monk discussion please go to another thread.
Edit: I'd like to add that this isn't the place to discuss what the moderating staff should and shouldn't do.
Ross, it's a thankless job normally so I thought I'd let you know: I appreciate your efforts, and I'm sure I'm not alone.
Or the Wizard. Planar Binding isn't exactly risk free - particularly for Wizards.
Reread the spell. It is. If GM prefers common sense, you can nearly always find an outsider who will be glad to help your cause anyway (because you can pick from the whole multiverse). If GM prefers RAW, the dangers are trivial for a prepared wizard. If GM prevents to screw you arbitrarily, instead of honestly accepting that Planar Binding is broken and unusable, you don't want to play with him anyway.
I find it breaks the bonds of believability to assume that the Wizard will spend the rest of his life flying and invisible.
What an obvious strawman.
Spending the rest of his adventuring missions flying and invisible is quite easy, though.
As for mirror image, do you really believe that a character who gets 8 attacks per round is going to be seriously hindered by mirror image?
1-2 attacks per round, counting AoOs. You need to reach the wizard first. And then the wizard moves away, and/or you drop dead/disabled.
There are others, but one is an Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location.
This joke is not funny. Just as a flat DC 19 caster level check is not difficult at two-digit levels.
Another is the monk's own SR.
Which, at best, protects him 50% of the time, so the wizard can just recast the spell. Not like he's threatened at the moment, or something.
The wizard, meanwhile, is nearly perfectly safe from any attempt to ambush him whlie he is not ready for combat. And monk has no tools that can add "nearly" to "perfectly safe".
Just to preempt further strawmen, the wizard will not use the paranoia suite every time. Just whenever being ambushed when he's unprepared is an actual possibility.
Stealth?
I find it breaks the bonds of believability to assume that the Monk will spend the rest of his life stealthing.
Thanks for all the work Ross, we all really appreciate it. I'm with Mr. Geraint Elberion on this one.
It never actually made that claim. What Paizo said is that Pathfinder has levels of compatibility in the following descending order.1. Pre-Pathfinder Adventure Paths published by Paizo under the 3.5 set.
2. Basic D20 SRD for the 3.5 rules.
3. Everything else was lumped into a distant third. They made no claim that all or any of the non core 3.5 splat was balanced for it.
Level of backwards compatibility is like levels of pregnancy. Either your game can be used with 3.5 materials (those which aren't superceded by the PF core rulebook, you know), or it can't.
Level of backwards compatibility is like levels of pregnancy. Either your game can be used with 3.5 materials (those which aren't superceded by the PF core rulebook, you know), or it can't.
It never actually made that claim. What Paizo said is that Pathfinder has levels of compatibility in the following descending order.1. Pre-Pathfinder Adventure Paths published by Paizo under the 3.5 set.
2. Basic D20 SRD for the 3.5 rules.
3. Everything else was lumped into a distant third. They made no claim that all or any of the non core 3.5 splat was balanced for it.
Um...no. I allow 3.5 feats on a case by case basis only.
9. EnervationNo save and it stacks means a focused build with this can autokill almost anyone without a ward.
I was not aware of this spell until a wizard used it recently in a PFS game. I can not believe that this is not in the number one spot!!!!
This is a 4th level spell people! You make your attack roll and you can crit the 1d4 level drain!
Compare this spell to the 9th level energy drain... why the heck would you ever learn it. The 4th level version is better.
Yeah, this spell is sick. My group and I really dislike the notion of necromancy = no saves that seems to be a prevalent theme for those spells. Assuming you are going up against, say, a level 7 Necromancer using this and he is a boss (meaning you could be level 5ish) if he crits with this spell you are probably dead (2d4, avg 5 levels lost). In the same scenario, if he simply focus fires and targets the same guy twice (which he should) he wins if he gets a second turn on average.
Level of backwards compatibility is like levels of pregnancy. Either your game can be used with 3.5 materials (those which aren't superceded by the PF core rulebook, you know), or it can't.
Not at all.
You can use them, but the game you get isn't balanced. The PF core rules book can't fix a thousand 3.X books of crazy crap. It just can't.
(As an aside, women who have actually been pregnant would disagree with your understanding of pregnancy as a boolean condition.)
9. Enervation
This is a 4th level spell people! You make your attack roll and you can crit the 1d4 level drain!
I don't think you can crit with enervation.
From PRD:
"If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit."
Negative Levels from PRD:
"In addition, the creature reduces its current and total hit points by 5 for each negative level it possesses. "
Doesn't deal damage, means it doesn't qualify for crits.
I personally would specify "damage" as "hit point damage", but that is kind of left open in the rules.
Enervation is one of my favorite spells, but I think it's power level is about right for a 4th level spell. It is amazing if you roll a 4, but pretty weak if you miss, or roll a 1.
And again, shout out to Dire Mongoose on that post. Super win. Sorry it was deleted.
Nah, I think the deletion was pretty fair. It was a gotcha post more out to win the conversation than be constructive, even if it was a fairly good gotcha post.
|
RE: Enervation
Doesn't deal damage, means it doesn't qualify for crits.
Maybe I'll be corrected by one of the developers, but I was under the impression that if a spell requires an attack roll and has a quantifiable effect (as opposed to a merly qualitative effect) then it can result in a critical hit. Thus, hit point damage, ability damage, ability drain, negative levels, and the like can be doubled via a crit...but something akin to Ray of Exhaustion cannot result in a critical hit.
Not at all.You can use them, but the game you get isn't balanced. The PF core rules book can't fix a thousand 3.X books of crazy crap. It just can't.
Not only 3.X books are, on a whole, more balanced, the PF core rules totally could do that, by, you know, not giving the Big Three even stronger class chassis, instead of remaking them in the vein of classes that appeared later in 3.5 run. They just chose not to.
RE: Enervation
Doesn't deal damage, means it doesn't qualify for crits.Maybe I'll be corrected by one of the developers, but I was under the impression that if a spell requires an attack roll and has a quantifiable effect (as opposed to a merly qualitative effect) then it can result in a critical hit. Thus, hit point damage, ability damage, ability drain, negative levels, and the like can be doubled via a crit...but something akin to Ray of Exhaustion cannot result in a critical hit.
A crit only occurs for actual damaging spells, not energy drain, or ability damage. This was brought up in the faq, as linked below.
Not only 3.X books are, on a whole, more balanced,
We'll have to agree to disagree, then.
I can see the argument for the wizard -- it didn't really need more hp, bonded object, and PF specialization in exchange for seeing almost all of its best spells nerfed, but there it is.
But the cleric and druid? I don't see how there's even a coherent argument for that. The 3.5 druid was so poorly designed and overpowered that it had Con as a dump stat.
And any Cleric not using Divine Metamagic.
Which doesn't exist in a core PF game, or really in any game with a DM who has the remotest grasp of game balance.
If DMM isn't the most broken feat in the history of the game, I'm not sure what would be.
And any Cleric not using Divine Metamagic.Which doesn't exist in a core PF game, or really in any game with a DM who has the remotest grasp of game balance.
If DMM isn't the most broken feat in the history of the game, I'm not sure what would be.
Now, DMM wasn't really broken. Persistent spell and allowing you to use alternate sources of turning, like elemental turning, were the broken parts. Even DMM quicken isn't bad. There are magic items that pretty much do the same.
Now, DMM wasn't really broken. Persistent spell and allowing you to use alternate sources of turning, like elemental turning, were the broken parts. Even DMM quicken isn't bad. There are magic items that pretty much do the same.
I've seen a 3.5 cleric whip out 500 points of melee damage in a round and follow it up with a DMM-quickened miracle without any of that. If that doesn't seem broken to you I'm not sure what would.
Now, DMM wasn't really broken. Persistent spell and allowing you to use alternate sources of turning, like elemental turning, were the broken parts. Even DMM quicken isn't bad. There are magic items that pretty much do the same.I've seen a 3.5 cleric whip out 500 points of melee damage in a round and follow it up with a DMM-quickened miracle without any of that. If that doesn't seem broken to you I'm not sure what would.
And a metamagic rod of quicken will let them do the exact same thing.
500 damage at what level? 20? That's nice, but not amazing.
Sure.
I should qualify: 17, with a base 10 strength and few if any combat feats. This was a cleric with a decidedly non-optimal build designed to play support rather than take the spotlight most of the time.
And a metamagic rod of quicken will let them do the exact same thing.
Except:
1) The rod takes a hand, which tends to preclude that level of melee beatdown in the same round, and
2) A greater metamagic rod of quicken is expensive. It's not literally the most expensive item in the game, but it's probably the most expensive item you'd actually be willing to buy or craft.
To put it in perspective, at level 13 a cleric with DMM could quicken a level 7 spell. The rod that would duplicate that costs more than all his WBL. For the level 17 character doing 9th level spells that way, it would be around half his WBL.
You don't think a feat that you would need to spend a chunk of your wealth ranging from 'over 100%' to 'about half' to duplicate 3 times a day is crazy overpowered? If I put a feat in the game that let you keep all things from harming you for six minutes a day you'd call me insane, and yet a cube of force is drastically cheaper than a quicken rod.
17, 20, there's actually little difference in enemy stats at this point. Sounds more like a problem with Persisting 20+ spells than being able to Persist at all.
Given the feat tax, DMM: Persist had better be doing something awesome. It only gets stupid if you let Nightsticks stack, which is a problem with Nightsticks, not DMM: Persist. If there were other things actually worth using turn attempts on it would affect them just the same.
Persist not available in that particular game, FYI. Organized play. I don't think Nightsticks were either.
Then in that case it probably had nothing to do with either DMM or Nightsticks, but rather normal buffs and shapechanging. Since you did say 17.
No shapechanging; and yes, DMM has everything to do with why you can do that and also cast a 9th level spell in a round, especially without burning half your wealth to do so.
We're way off topic and I'm going to let it go there.