I'm a bit lost at the second... are you doing a wizard or a sorcerer?
Either way I would go ahead and take mage armor for the time being. It lasts a good while (you only really need about 10~12 hours total for an adventuring day) and until you can get much more expensive gear it does the job well.
Later (as a sorcerer) you can trade it out for magic missile (or grease/mount/whatever) once you have access to mirror image and what not.
I'm a bit lost at the second... are you doing a wizard or a sorcerer?
Either way I would go ahead and take mage armor for the time being. It lasts a good while (you only really need about 10~12 hours total for an adventuring day) and until you can get much more expensive gear it does the job well.
Later (as a sorcerer) you can trade it out for magic missile (or grease/mount/whatever) once you have access to mirror image and what not.
I am a 2nd level Sorcerer, and at the moment, with Magic Missle and Mage Armor. What I am thinking about doing is switching our Mage Armor for Colorspray (DM would have to allow, but I think he will), as I have rarely casted MA and I feel Colorspray will be more beneficial. Also, since Mage Armor is only lasting me 2 hours at the moment out of that 10 hour adventuring day, it is becomes a combat spell.
What's your bloodline? And current spells known (obviously Mage armor and magic missile but what's your other spell?)?
I chose the Arcane Bloodline. I am not sure what you mean by other spell? At 2nd level, a Sorcerer only is allowed two 1st level known spells and my bonus bloodline 1st level spell is not until level 3.
That's right, keep forgetting that only the oracle gets nice things.
Anyways the reason I asked about bloodline: If you say elemental(air) or aberrant or what not you would have those rays to use so losing magic missile wouldn't have hurt quite as badly, also with some of the other powers to either lead into or follow up with color spray or some other spell would be a nice combination effect.
As is:
I would say that if your party is working well together to cover each other you can probably get away without mage armor.
Honestly if mage armor is a situational spell for you right now you would probably be better off with shield (same bonus different type, and blocks magic missiles), but that would be later on.
Color spray is a HORRIBLE spell.
It has crappy range, allows for a save AND spell resistance, AND it has a low, low DC. What's more, it only really works on creatures with low HD. At high levels, the only thing its really good for is disarming weak opponents of their handheld items.
There are better spells that deal with fewer resistances, last longer, have longer range, effect more creatures, or are more crippling.
Color spray is a HORRIBLE spell.
It has crappy range, allows for a save AND spell resistance, AND it has a low, low DC. What's more, it only really works on creatures with low HD. At high levels, the only thing its really good for is disarming weak opponents of their handheld items.
There are better spells that deal with fewer resistances, last longer, have longer range, effect more creatures, or are more crippling.
... at level 2?
Did you even read the original post?
I would say that if your party is working well together to cover each other you can probably get away without mage armor.Honestly if mage armor is a situational spell for you right now you would probably be better off with shield (same bonus different type, and blocks magic missiles), but that would be later on.
Well, if I am going to switch out Mage Armor (which technically I shouldn’t be doing, but I am sure my DM won’t have an issue with it), I am not going to do it with another +4 to AC spell. Granted, Shield protects from MM, but I’d rather just keep Mage Armor, I can deal with not blocking MM as we haven’t run into casters yet who have used it.
Besides, as I was saying, I have been finding I haven’t been casting Mage Armor as it technically is only a combat spell right now, due to the duration is only 2 hours. I would be in the same situation with Shield (in it only being cast for combat, as I believe it is minute per level).
The question I am asking is should I risk switching out an AC spell for an offensive spell in Colorspray.
Color spray is a HORRIBLE spell.
It has crappy range, allows for a save AND spell resistance, AND it has a low, low DC. What's more, it only really works on creatures with low HD. At high levels, the only thing its really good for is disarming weak opponents of their handheld items.
There are better spells that deal with fewer resistances, last longer, have longer range, effect more creatures, or are more crippling.
Well, any other suggestions for 1st level spells instead? As Dire Mongoose indicated, I am only level 2, so the saving throws don’t need to be terribly high as the opponent’s saves won’t be that good, either.
|
Color spray is a HORRIBLE spell.
It has crappy range, allows for a save AND spell resistance, AND it has a low, low DC. What's more, it only really works on creatures with low HD. At high levels, the only thing its really good for is disarming weak opponents of their handheld items.
There are better spells that deal with fewer resistances, last longer, have longer range, effect more creatures, or are more crippling.
I really don't get this kind of hatred of the spell. Until it begins to lose some of its power by fighting things with 5+ hit dice, I cannot think of a single spell that can wreck as much havoc as color spray can.
It's range of 15 feet is similar to other low-level AoE spells (like burning hands, which is well regarded as one of the best anti-swarm spells) but that's a total of seven 5' squares (usually getting at least a few opponents). There might be a save involved, but the (likely) 15-16 save DC isn't going to be resisted much when you compare it to the average will saves of CR 1-5 creatures. Sure it has spell resistance, but at the levels it will be cast regularly, spell resistance isn't an issue. Even when you take all this into account, at level 10 when you're up against a bunch of non-SR low will-save types (fighters anyone?) you've got a good chance to stun your opponents for a round (and stunning even one opponent usually means you made a return on how you invested your action).
Sure, once you start getting your level 3 and 4 spells things start to change, and color spray loses a lot of its luster, but for the vast majority of players out there (because as has been mentioned before, most play occurs between 1-10), color spray is a viable and powerful spell for quite some time.
In all my low level play with my wizard, I eventually stopped taking color spray simply because it tended to make encounters trivial. With a save DC of 16 against things up to 4HD, it cut swaths of destruction through my opponents. Being asleep, blinded, and stunned (or even just stunned) is disgustingly powerful at those levels. Sure it requires that you don't mind getting your hands dirty by getting a little more in the fray, but that's the risk vs. reward of the spell. I get not liking it for a variety of reasons, but it absolutely positively is not a "horrible" spell.
I’m just curious, how are you getting save DCs for a 1st level spell (as a 1st level character) at 16? 18 primary stat and Spell Focus?
Color Spray is one of the better options out there, especially if you're looking to be nonlethal in your response. And I've had modules and barroom fights where that mattered.
This is true, though at low levels, sleep is better for this. At high levels, everything else is better.
EDIT: Sleep is just as disabling, but has longer range. In fact, the ONLY thing color spray has on sleep (at low levels) is its faster casting time.
Not quite true. Waking someone out of sleep is a standard action. Waking someone out of color spray is more difficult.
Yup.
Additionally, there are things that are immune to sleep that aren't immune to color spray, and color spray doesn't take you a full round to cast, so it's much less trivial to interrupt.
On the other hand, sleep does have awesome range for a level 1 spell.
Neither is strictly better; both have their upsides and downsides. All things being equal I'd pick spray.
Neither is strictly better; both have their upsides and downsides. All things being equal I'd pick spray.
I agree, though I would choose sleep first. It's the safer option (hard to interrupt spellcasting when you are so far away). At low levels, you NEED the safe options just to survive to later levels.
I’m just curious, how are you getting save DCs for a 1st level spell (as a 1st level character) at 16? 18 primary stat and Spell Focus?18 primary stat + racial mods. Since it's super easy to get your DCs up, you have no reason not to start with a 20.
Again, really depends on your ability stat generation. With the games we have played, it is tough enough getting to 18, and that is having the +2 racial modifier.
So even though I appreciate your input, please stop assuming that just because something is easily attainable or “a must” in your campaigns, it is automatically the same way with other campaigns.
Ok, maybe it would be ok for you to sacrifice your remaining stats to get your 18 and 16, which is exactly what you would have to do, especially that 15 PB.
A lot of us like to keep our stats above 10, except maybe one dump stat. So no, it’s not a ‘must’ or 'obvious' for us. Quit acting like just because it’s something you don’t mind doing, it is what we should do or want to do, as well.
“Meaningless” stats? Ok, so going by your earlier example of an 18 Int and 16 Con for a Wizard. Your 3 7’s are going to be in either Str, Dex and Cha or Str, Wis and Cha. So either way, you are going to take -2 to one of your saves. (Reflex or Will) Nevermind you won’t be able to carry even base supplies. And I don’t like having to cast spells just to carry my own equipment, it’s a waste (IMO) or have to always put them on my horse.
And who said my other stats would all be at 10s? Here is a 20 pt build for my Sorcerer:
Str 12
Dex 15
Con 12
Int 14
Wis 10
Cha 16
(includes +2 Dex & +2 Con racial modifiers)
So, a few of those stats would make a lot bigger difference than a -2 on the skill check/saving throw.
But if that is ok with you in lowering your stats that much, then that is great. But my whole point is, just because it is ok for yourself, doesn’t mean it’s a no brainer and automatically everyone else should do the same. It is far from a ‘must’ in starting with those high stats and taking those kind of hits.
|
“Meaningless” stats? Ok, so going by your earlier example of an 18 Int and 16 Con for a Wizard. Your 3 7’s are going to be in either Str, Dex and Cha or Str, Wis and Cha. So either way, you are going to take -2 to one of your saves. (Reflex or Will) Nevermind you won’t be able to carry even base supplies. And I don’t like having to cast spells just to carry my own equipment, it’s a waste (IMO) or have to always put them on my horse.
And who said my other stats would all be at 10s? Here is a 20 pt build for my Sorcerer:
Str 12
Dex 15
Con 12
Int 14
Wis 10
Cha 16(includes +2 Dex & +2 Con racial modifiers)
So, a few of those stats would make a lot bigger difference than a -2 on the skill check/saving throw.
But if that is ok with you in lowering your stats that much, then that is great. But my whole point is, just because it is ok for yourself, doesn’t mean it’s a no brainer and automatically everyone else should do the same. It is far from a ‘must’ in starting with those high stats and taking those kind of hits.
With a 20 buy, you absolutely should have 18 and 16. Not even because it's "optimal", but just because your prime abilities require it. Higher DC means harder to save spells, which keeps you alive. Higher is better.
I pump my good stats upto 16 first (so the race bonus can pump to 18), and the fill in the rest. Rarely do I need to take -1 mod. If I still have points, I pump my prime to 18 and start with 20.
|
While it's tempting to view Strength as 'meaningless', please note that a low-strength character will be moving at a speed of 15-20 feet most of the time. Their 'light load' tops out at 23 pounds, which is pathetic. Spell component pouch and spell book are 5 pounds, clothes are around 5 more pounds, and a dagger is 1 pound. If you want rope, a light source, or a bag of holding, that's even more weight.
This doesn't make a character unviable, but it is a tactical consideration that should be brought up.
Low-charisma casters will have some options unavailable or very difficult, such as charming people or dealing with outsiders.
Low-wisdom characters obviously suffer Will penalties, and Dex goes right into Reflex and AC. Not all casters can afford to ignore these things.
Hobbun's caster looks very well-rounded and especially good at ray attacks with that high Dex. Perhaps you should look into Ray of Enfeeblement?
Clothes don't count as part of your weight limit.
The line saying that starting clothes are free and don't weigh anything was omitted in Pathfinder.
Sorry dude, but it does matter.
08 lb. - Explorer's Outfit
05 lb. - Handy Haversack
05 lb. - Rod, Staff, or some other "need it out to matter" item
03 lb. - Spellbook
02 lb. - Spell Component Pouch (not counting spares you might want/need)
23 lb. - Total weight
Even if you assume you are wearing a peasant's outfit and keep your spellbook in your haversack most of the time, you are still looking at 14 lb. easy. God forbid you wear a lot of wondrous items such as bracers, cloaks, vests or anything else that needs to be worn to function.
With a 20 buy, you absolutely should have 18 and 16. Not even because it's "optimal", but just because your prime abilities require it. Higher DC means harder to save spells, which keeps you alive. Higher is better.I pump my good stats upto 16 first (so the race bonus can pump to 18), and the fill in the rest. Rarely do I need to take -1 mod. If I still have points, I pump my prime to 18 and start with 20.
Once again, I disagree with the 'absolute' or 'must' people are insisting with builds. I certainly do see your point on the benefits your primary stat gives you in higher DCs and agree that higher is better. But do you 'must' need that stat at 18 or 20? Hardly.
I much prefer a more balanced character instead of the 7 10 10 10 18 16 (not necessarily in that order). If I can pick a race where it will give me a benefit in my primary stat I would do so, but unfortunately I don't know of any low CR monster races that give a bonus to Cha.
|
|
I can't believe I'm doing this.
Clothes don't count as part of your weight limit.
Not true any more, as pointed out by RD.
Wizards get Dancing Lights at will.
Dancing lights doesn't work in Darkness effects, unlike mundane light (which is actually quite common in PF), and only lasts for a minute. You have to spend ~10% of your time casting it to have light. The light spell is better, but still doesn't work in Darkness effects. You need to have a backup of some kind. Not to mention the fact that wizards only get 4 cantrips. If Dancing Lights is one, Detect Magic another, you only get 2 more. Many of those cantrips are actually very useful. Alternately, you could be a half-orc wizard or a dwarf, but then you're still limited to 60 feet of vision without light.
Haversack weighs less than a BoH.
True. It also carries less. It cannot carry anything over 80 lbs., and carries 100 lbs. of loot. And it doesn't carry anything you need to equip.
Cha only matters for Charm if you give them a command that goes against their nature. Dealing with Outsiders is either something you will fail at anyways or succeed at anyways depending on if you use the Curse/Curse/Geas/Water trick.
Not true - Charm makes people default to Friendly, not Helpful, and it certainly doesn't place them under your control. You can't command charmed creatures. You have to make a diplomacy, charisma, or other persuasive check to make the friendly person actually help you.
Cursing and Geasing outsiders not only takes up a lot of resources that day, but is also an easy, easy, easy way to make lots of enemies in the extraplanar world. It'll work - I'm not saying it won't work. It'll work very well. But if you GM doesn't provide some consequences for that kind of behavior, then he's not running the kind of game I want to play in.-2 Will saves is an actual penalty, but is quite surmountable.
It is. But it's a 10% chance of failing every single Will save that comes up. Surmountable? Yes. But it'll bite you in the butt some day.
*snipped snippy statement about AC and Dex*
Obviously, your games are different from mine. Very much so in the usefulness of Dexterity.
Ray of Enfeeblement will screw you just as bad with a 10, or a 12 as it will with a 7.
Ray of Enfeeblement isn't something a wizard has to worry about much, now that it's a "penalty to Strength" and not "Strength damage". Shadows and strength poisons, on the other hand, are more commonly faced by adventurers, and more likely to kill/incapacitate low-strength characters.
A character with: 10, 10, 10, 10, 18, 16
is possible with 20 point buy if you have at least a +2 to place into it your second 16.
That being said: While there are plenty of creatures with low will saves, there are also plenty of creatures with good will saves at all levels -- in addition to creatures that are flat out immune to most if not all the SoD spells -- again at all levels.
This doesn't mean that color spray is not a good spell at low levels (and with the right builds at high levels too), it just means that like all things in this game it has it's place and time.
The idea that "this is the only way to play a wizard/sorcerer/witch/etc" is flat stupid and wrong.
What is very funny is if someone *did* dump their wisdom with a color spray using character then failed their save throw against a color spray themselves.
While it's tempting to view Strength as 'meaningless', please note that a low-strength character will be moving at a speed of 15-20 feet most of the time. Their 'light load' tops out at 23 pounds, which is pathetic. Spell component pouch and spell book are 5 pounds, clothes are around 5 more pounds, and a dagger is 1 pound. If you want rope, a light source, or a bag of holding, that's even more weight.
This doesn't make a character unviable, but it is a tactical consideration that should be brought up.
Low-charisma casters will have some options unavailable or very difficult, such as charming people or dealing with outsiders.
Low-wisdom characters obviously suffer Will penalties, and Dex goes right into Reflex and AC. Not all casters can afford to ignore these things.
Hobbun's caster looks very well-rounded and especially good at ray attacks with that high Dex. Perhaps you should look into Ray of Enfeeblement?
Thank you. And not in regards to just the build but that I also I agree with you in everything you said. As I indicated in my prior post, I much prefer to have a more balanced character than to have a bunch of low stats and one very high and another decently high stat.
If I put an 18 in Cha and 16 in Con (could be a 14 due to my race), then I won't get the bonus to my Int for my extra skill points or a higher Dex to add to my AC. And Green, where you feel a -2 Will save is not insurmountable, maybe so, but I feel it isn't something that needs to be surmounted. I would just much rather leave it at 10 and not have a penalty, never mind the penalties I would have on my untrained skills that use Wis.
Back to Lyrax in regards to Ray of Enfeeblement, I loved the spell in 3.5. But now with a saving throw and the change in how the damage is distributed, it became a very undesirable spell to me. And with the already good selection of 1st level that I can't even cast due to my limited spells known, RoF isn't really in the running.
Shadows and strength poisons, on the other hand, are more commonly faced by adventurers, and more likely to kill/incapacitate low-strength characters.
I gather that in GreenWorld, shadows or poisonous monsters in the levels before Death Ward and Heroes Feast (or getting the drop on the players somehow) is the equivalent of "Rocks fall, you die" instead of something that realistically happens repeatedly in the low levels and that some kinds of characters are better equipped to survive than others.
Hey, the game plays a little different for everyone based on DM style. That's only a problem when someone starts asserting that what works or doesn't work in their particular game is universally correct.
|
|
...In regards to Ray of Enfeeblement, I loved the spell in 3.5. But now with a saving throw and the change in how the damage is distributed, it became a very undesirable spell to me. And with the already good selection of 1st level that I can't even cast due to my limited spells known, RoF isn't really in the running.
Understood. Ray of Enfeeblement is much less powerful now, though I still recommend Scorching Ray as soon as it comes up. It's a hefty chunk of damage, and you could easily have a +5 to hit with it at 4th level. Which, for a touch attack, is reasonably certain to hit.
At 25 PB you can take 1 8, 3 10s, a 16, and an 18.
And just check your PHB. There's 3 or 4 of them that are +2 to any stat.
And as I said, my DM has used 20 pt. buy. I agree, much easier to get your 18 and 16 with more points, but a moot point with our campaign.
PHB? Do you mean Bestiary?
There may be monsters in there with a Cha bonus, but probably at a minus at other stats. As I said, I much prefer balanced characters than having to optimize my primary ability. Hobgoblins gave a +2 to two stats with no minuses, so that worked for me.
If someone is able to point out that a 'low CR' (and I stress low (1-3), with Cha bonus, without taking a big hit in other stats, then I will stand corrected on my Hobgoblin choice.
|
I don't have any mods or APs. The question was not that unreasonable and I was only asking for confirmation.Now is creating a 1st level character considered as 'gaining' a level and therefore you are able to apply the favored class bonus? The way our group has done it, we did not apply the favored class bonus until 2nd level, as we didn't consider creating our characters at 1st level as 'gaining' a level. Is that incorrect? If so, I will let the rest of our group know during our next session.Take a look at the first level characters provided with any intro mod or new AP and backward engineer for an answer to this question.
No, it's a reasonable question.
You can just answer your question yourself by going to the source material. Try this, go download the pregens off of the PFS section. You can look at some examples there also.
If I put an 18 in Cha and 16 in Con (could be a 14 due to my race), then I won't get the bonus to my Int for my extra skill points or a higher Dex to add to my AC. And Green, where you feel a -2 Will save is not insurmountable, maybe so, but I feel it isn't something that needs to be surmounted. I would just much rather leave it at 10 and not have a penalty, never mind the penalties I would have on my untrained skills that use Wis.You mean the skills you'd fail at anyways, 0 modifier or -2 modifier? And lol AC. The Will save is a good point but that's about it.
As for the other stuff, Shadows are a level independent means of killing people, so it's Death Ward or die regardless. And poisons are going to fizzle all the time, since you have good saves.
Um... no poisons are *not* going to fizzle all the time. Considering that your "good" save is all of a +3 at level 2 (oh yay! +4 at level 3!) and the DC's scale the more poison that gets into you.
A lot of the poisons also deal Con damage so each time you don't save you take HP damage and your chances of making the next save go down.
Shadows are CR 3 which means you are facing them *before* you have access to death ward -- hope you can take more than one hit from them -- or that your touch AC is good.
********************************
Mistah Green why not show us a "good" spell chucker (20 point buy and 1 trait) across a couple of different levels? Explain why you make your choices and why you don't choose differently on some of it. Say levels 1, 6, 11, 15? This would give an idea of what you are talking about instead of just making blanket statements without anything to give indication that you know what you are talking about.
You mean the skills you'd fail at anyways, 0 modifier or -2 modifier? And lol AC. The Will save is a good point but that's about it.
Well, let's see. I have a +6 Stealth for my Sorcerer, even before any ranks. (+2 Dex, racial modifier). Our party does a lot of stealthing, why take a -1 or -2 if I don't need to?
And AC? With no armor and having a Dex below 10...maybe you like having a 9 AC for your character, I sure don't. At that point you are basically 'forced' to take Mage Armor otherwise you are always going to get hit.
Now I don't make a point of going into melee with my Sorcerer, but ranged fire, that is something I have found myself in a lot so far at 1st level. And with a 9 AC, you can bet on getting hit. But wait, that's right, ranged attacks are not a factor for you as enemies only use spears at low level.
No, I really do mean PHB.
Gnome: +2 con/cha, -2 str.
Halfling: +2 dex/cha, -2 str.
Human/half orc/half elf: +2 to any one stat.5. 3 if you really care about meaningless -2s.
And shadows do 1d6 damage. It will take 2 hits vs 7 Strength, 3 vs 10, 4 vs 12. Except combat lasts two rounds.
Did you even read my post at all? I was referring to monsters not base races. As I said, I don't know of too many low CR monsters that have a Cha bonus. Are we clear now?
Look, we will just have to agree to disagree on what we look for in our characters. You prefer to optimize your primary stat to the extreme, I prefer a more balanced character. Neither one is wrong or less optimal, it just depends on what you are looking for.
Except combat lasts two rounds.
Huh? I must have missed that rule. Could you please cite it?
Just a point on Ray of Enfeeblement, the only difference I see is that it now allows a save.
Ray of Enfeeblement
School necromancy; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect ray
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Fortitude half; Spell Resistance yesA coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject's Strength score cannot drop below 1. A successful Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half. This penalty does not stack with itself. Apply the highest penalty instead.
Ray of Enfeeblement
Necromancy
Level: Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect: Ray
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: YesA coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject’s Strength score cannot drop below 1.
So, PF added a Fort save for half, and clarified that it doesn't stack with itself. I don't think the intent was ever for it to stack with itself, but I do know some groups ran it that way in 3.5. Ours never did. Doesn't seem like a big nerf to me.
Just a point on Ray of Enfeeblement, the only difference I see is that it now allows a save.
Ray of Enfeeblement
School necromancy; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect ray
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Fortitude half; Spell Resistance yesA coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject's Strength score cannot drop below 1. A successful Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half. This penalty does not stack with itself. Apply the highest penalty instead.
So, PF added a Fort save for half, and clarified that it doesn't stack with itself. I don't think the intent was ever for it to stack with itself, but I do know some groups ran it that way in 3.5. Ours never did. Doesn't seem like a big nerf to me.Ray of Enfeeblement
Necromancy
Level: Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect: Ray
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: YesA coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject’s Strength score cannot drop below 1.
Our group never ran with RoF being able to stack with itself, either. That isn’t what I was referring to in different damage distribution for PF.
What I meant is in 3.5, let’s say you were casting RoF on an a fighter with a 16 Strength, you roll a 6, which at first level, gives you a 7 total on the Strength damage. So, the fighter’s Str drops to 9. Where in PF, the Str damage dealt is based on what you roll, not the target’s end Str. Meaning, in the same example, the fighter would only receive a -3 modifier on his attack and damage rolls, where in 3.5 it was a swing of 4. In PF, the actual modifier is worked by how much you lower their Str. So in this case, you lower it by 7, it is only -3. You would have needed to lower it by 8 for the fighter to receive a -4. I know it was a bit wordy, but does that make sense?
Also, in regards to the added saving throw, it is a huge nerf, in my opinion. Where before you could cast RoF on an ogre, giant or other large creature at full dice Str damage, now casting it on those same creatures they are pretty much guaranteed to save and therefore cutting the Str. damage in half. I mean the whole point is to cast it on the creatures who have high strengths to soften their blows and those monsters always have high fortitudes to go along with it. So yes, I do feel the saving throw alone is a big nerf, but also the way damage is dealt, now makes it a spell not worthy of my very limited known spell selection.
|
What I meant is in 3.5, let’s say you were casting RoF on an a fighter with a 16 Strength, you roll a 6, which at first level, gives you a 7 total on the Strength damage. So, the fighter’s Str drops to 9. Where in PF, the Str damage dealt is based on what you roll, not the target’s end Str. Meaning, in the same example, the fighter would only receive a -3 modifier on his attack and damage rolls, where in 3.5 it was a swing of 4. In PF, the actual modifier is worked by how much you lower their Str. So in this case, you lower it by 7, it is only -3. You would have needed to lower it by 8 for the fighter to receive a -4. I know it was a bit wordy, but does that make sense?
I don't know where you're reading that.
The difference a drop of 7 Str makes to the target is exactly the same in PF as 3.5. A penalty of -3 to related checks, if they started with an odd value, or -4 if they started with an even value.There is a reduction in the total, if the save succeeds, where a penalty of -7 Str is reduced to -3 Str (round down). That -3 to the Str score would make a difference to checks of -1 (from an odd Str) or -2 (from even Str).
So targets who have gone the extra distance to obtain more than the bare minimum even stat for their intended bonus can reduce the effective penalties from ability drain/damage/enfeeblement, but I don't see a problem with that.
The difference a drop of 7 Str makes to the target is exactly the same in PF as 3.5.
Actually, it’s not. In 3.5, it actually dropped your ability score(temporarily) when taking damage, therefore someone with an even ability score who takes an odd number of ability damage will drop it one more, like in my example above.
But for PF:
For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.
As you see, the minuses you lose is strictly from the damage you take, your ability score is not factored in at all. So you need to take at least 2 points of ability damage to lose one modifier. So again, taking 7 points of ability damage is only a -3, not -4, like it would be in 3.5 if you started with an even ability score.
|
|
I think that's someone's incomplete attempt to summarise the rule.
Effectively, you recalculate your new stat modifiers, using the new temporary total.
For some, that's a pain, and it's easy to remember that 'Hey, I'm at -8 Str, that's....-4 to hit, damage, etc', rather than go throught the character sheet with an eraser.
The second quote doesn't contradict that; for every full 2 points of drain/damage/penalty, you do take -1 to related checks; they just missed out the fact that sometimes the odd numbers can make a difference, too.
I don't know how your GM does things, but if a caster has his sand in hand and announces he enters a room ready to cast, anything visable that tries to hit them gets the spell in their face.
I think that's someone's incomplete attempt to summarise the rule.
Are you referring to myself? I just am going by RAW.
Effectively, you recalculate your new stat modifiers, using the new temporary total.
For some, that's a pain, and it's easy to remember that 'Hey, I'm at -8 Str, that's....-4 to hit, damage, etc', rather than go throught the character sheet with an eraser.
The second quote doesn't contradict that; for every full 2 points of drain/damage/penalty, you do take -1 to related checks; they just missed out the fact that sometimes the odd numbers can make a difference, too.
That is a pretty big assumption. The RAW are pretty clear on how ability damage is figured out. It doesn’t hint at the developers “missing the fact that odd numbers make a difference.” If the RAI are that you still lose -4 on a roll of a 7, then great, but that is not how the RAW are.
As of the RAW right now, there is a difference on the rules for ability damage from 3.5 to PF.
The difference a drop of 7 Str makes to the target is exactly the same in PF as 3.5.Actually, it’s not. In 3.5, it actually dropped your ability score(temporarily) when taking damage, therefore someone with an even ability score who takes an odd number of ability damage will drop it one more, like in my example above.
But for PF:
For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.As you see, the minuses you lose is strictly from the damage you take, your ability score is not factored in at all. So you need to take at least 2 points of ability damage to lose one modifier. So again, taking 7 points of ability damage is only a -3, not -4, like it would be in 3.5 if you started with an even ability score.
And here I thought you were new here Hobbun.
Good job!