I wonder how the numbers come out when you swap the Fire Giant with a Golem....
Different, but not that different.
Unfortunately, there are too many useful SR: No spells.
It's a worse fight for the wizard, but there are a far more bad fights for the fighter.
I'm not arguing about how the game should be; I'm arguing about how it actually is.
I'd have to argue against that. Slow, Stinking Cloud and Glitter Dust are all spells where a succeful save negates the effect.
Haste will never fail to work.
However, if you cast Slow on multiple brute monsters, in practice, it will not fail to work. It won't work on everything, but it will work on something, and that's still immensely powerful.
If you'd like to make extra sure, a metamagic rod of persistent spell (APG) forces everything to make two Will saves or be slowed for the low, low price of 3k GP.
I would say that haste IS one of the best 3rd level spells, but like almost everything, it is highly situational. In some groups/situations, it can make or break a combat, but most of the time it is a fairly subtle difference. I would say that it would be fine as a 4th level spell, but probably underpowered for a 5 or 6th level spell.
If you really want to get the most out of it/stretch the game, the best way is to summon a bunch (1d3) of creatures with a single nasty natural attack each. In 3.5 the no-competition choice was dire wolf. Haste not only makes the things rocket ships, but it also slightly more then doubles their attack power. If you do this, have a melee type or two in the party, and get a selective channel going, things get very easy quickly.
As for the fire giant, there are a million ways to beat it without an unbuffed/debuffed slugfest. (Fighters aren't THAT stupid) Saying this creatures DPR equals a 3 round kill vs. blah blah blah tells us almost nothing about how humans would play the game. Hint - target that grease spell on it's weapon...
Note: Summoned creatures can't teleport.
|
To the OP: Sorry to have contributed to the somewhat off-topic commentary up thread. As far as haste (or any other issues), it’s your game; if you find haste over powered, then change it. I don’t think it’s overpowered, I do think it’s very good though. Obviously, as you can see from this thread, opinions range from ‘it’s too powerful’ through ‘it’s fine’ to ‘it’s useless’.
You’re unlikely to get a consensus, so if I were you I would go with my gut on what seems appropriate for your game.
To the OP: Sorry to have contributed to the somewhat off-topic commentary up thread. As far as haste (or any other issues), it’s your game; if you find haste over powered, then change it. I don’t think it’s overpowered, I do think it’s very good though. Obviously, as you can see from this thread, opinions range from ‘it’s too powerful’ through ‘it’s fine’ to ‘it’s useless’.
You’re unlikely to get a consensus, so if I were you I would go with my gut on what seems appropriate for your game.
Well I didn't expect to get any consensus to begin with, I just wanted to hear your opinions on the matter. I must say that I'm glad to see that this thread is full of pertinent commentaries.
After reading your comments, I think that it will be better, in my campaing, to let the spell as it is. Since the only arcane caster among the PCs is a bard, they'll need it!
As a side note, while the +1 bonus to attack rolls, AC and reflexe saves is not game breaking, it's still a good bonus to have because it will stack with everything that is not a "speed" bonus. So, maybe that +1 to AC is not a big deal, but when you had shield of faith, bark skin, or cat's grace to the party, you get a decent AC bonus. The same thing goes for the +1 to attack rolls that stacks with inspire courage, rage or bless. It's with a lot of +1 that you get a +5. :)
|
|
Well I didn't expect to get any consensus to begin with, I just wanted to hear your opinions on the matter. I must say that I'm glad to see that this thread is full of pertinent commentaries.
After reading your comments, I think that it will be better, in my campaing, to let the spell as it is. Since the only arcane caster among the PCs is a bard, they'll need it!
As a side note, while the +1 bonus to attack rolls, AC and reflexe saves is not game breaking, it's still a good bonus to have because it will stack with everything that is not a "speed" bonus. So, maybe that +1 to AC is not a big deal, but when you had shield of faith, bark skin, or cat's grace to the party, you get a decent AC bonus. The same thing goes for the +1 to attack rolls that stacks with inspire courage, rage or bless. It's with a lot of +1 that you get a +5. :)
No problem.
Yeah, I agree with you regarding the bonuses, they are small but they stack with everything – it all adds up, and it is great to be able to give (usually) your whole party those bonuses.
I am in two games where we have bards in the party, and haste is a typical spell for them, it is cast almost every battle. It may not be the potential fight ending spell that others can be, but it helps the whole party contribute to the situation, and I often find it more versatile than some of the other spells that have been mentioned in this thread.
Haste is not only useful in almost every combat situations, it is also useful if you want to flee from the battle !
Also, the speed bonus will help rogues and warriors to get into flanking position. So even if they don't get their extra-attack in the first round of haste, they still gain a tactical advantage from it.
It's a worse fight for the wizard, but there are a far more bad fights for the fighter.
.Well that was exactly my point.
For ever situation a wizard excels in, there's another, I'd rather be a fighter.
Robert
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't intentionally misread me.
I'm saying, especially by level 10, the number of situations in which it's better to be the fighter is a much smaller number than the number of situations in which it's better to be the wizard.
|
|
For a clay golem, the wizard casts Summon V to whip up d4+1
Assuming of course the wizard just happens to have that spell in memory at the time of the encounter AND has a way to keep from getting ker-chunked by the golem for the full round it requires to release said spell.
The fighter OTOH needs no memorization to cast "kick-ass sword swinging" and can begin with said kick-assing immediately.
Once again I completely disagree that warrior types are hands down a weaker character.
And I did not misread your other post - intentionally or otherwise. You said it was a worse fight for a wizard, and that was the point I was making: Not every combat is a package cookie cutter big bruiser type with low will saves and vulnerabilities to certain magic.
I think that in earlier editions, wizards were game-destroying world-stomping dudes, but the variable by-class xp chart helped mitigate the differences. 3rd edition closed the gap significantly, and Pathfinder I feel made leaps and buonds towards making all character classes/types have an equal and adequate contribution to the game and combat.
In a hypothetical arena such as that olympics thing, it is far too easy to find discrepancies; but the game as a whole incorporates and encompasses so many more elements than just PvP dynamics. A well-rounded fully fleshed campaign setting - like the various APs that have been written, all character classes/races/types find a plethora of situations that they are invaluable, diminishing any concerns that one character class is more powerful than another.
If it doesn't, either the DM is failing to provide ample opportunities for other character types to shine, or the players of said "weaker" creatures are merely not utilizing their characters with a degree of proficiency. As I said: Operator-errors.
Robert
|
|
Robert, clay golems are SLOW (20 movement). Mages are usually pretty fast. Getting the clearance you need to cast this spell against a slow monster that can't fly and has no ranged attacks shouldn't tax the average mage too much.
Summon monster is also one of the best spells around and if you're the most common sort of god-archetype mage (the conjure specialist), you're almost certain to have a summon 3, 4, or 5 prepared. The chances of a decent level 10 mage not having one if he's going into an apocalyptic fight (which is the equivalent of cr+4 for a party, a near even match where you've got almost 50/50 odds of a tpk) seems pretty slim. Granted, a blaster mage would be in deep trouble unless he happens to have scrolls around with a few of the spells that actually work on clay golems.Here's my bottom line---presently your non-casters are in a circumstance where their level of partnership in a party steadily decreases as the party gains levels. At level 10, you're already seeing a strong swing in the direction of the caster--frankly, that swing probably started around level 5 or so, but it's very noticeable at level 10. It's not just in combat, the stuff a caster can do out of combat is frankly world altering. Therefore it is strongly incumbent on the GM to avoid perturbing the balance yet FURTHER towards the caster. Haste is a spell for melees---it's on their side of the balance beam. Nerfing it is a really bad idea IMO. To keep your fighter types equal partners in the firm we call an adventuring party, you also need to avoid doing other things with your setting that systemically hit them more than they hit the casters in your party. In practice, this means having your thumb on the scale in favor of the noncasters instead of vice versa.
Still a full round action to cast - no move allowed at all even if the golem can only move 20ft.
And just because a wizard will typically have it in his arsenal doesn't mean he hasn't already used it that day. A 10th level wizard only has 2 5th level spells. Once again you address the situation with the best case scenario for the wizard.
A warrior in contrast never runs out of sword-swings.
That's all I'm saying.
I'm not saying that fighters are better (or worse); just that no character class is an island or an amry of one.
Fighters that don't spend 25% of their gold on diversifying their arsenal in consumable magic items etc will definitely struggle more often than one who does.
I have played many warrior types to mid teen levels and rarely have I found myself in a situation where I feel I was worthless. Now there were many times that I needed some spellcasting to assist me - and at the same rate, there were just as many times that If I wasn't there to bail out the spellcaster with my armor or hit point aborbing ability, he would have been dead many times.
I simply disagree with the assessment. I have played and DMed on both sides enough times to know that a good player can make up any perceived shortcomings.
A mage who goes nova due to DM running one combat in a game will be more powerful I will grant you that. But as I said a number of times, a campaign is far more than a single solitary PvP scenario in the olympic arena. I simply do not have the same game-playing experience as you - and no amount of olympic comparison is going to convince me that that is the ticket towards proper game design with which balance should be based on.
EDIT: I will add this anecdote; perhaps Haste doesn't need to be nerfed; however my group consists of 7 players - and with that along w/ animal companions, haste over balances the games - but this is personal to my experiences. I'm sure if I had the traditionally considered 4 players I would perhaps feel differently about the spell. So it was changed to evolve it towards my game group; which has always been 6 or 7 players.
Robert
|
|
Robert, clay golems are SLOW (20 movement).More importantly golems are DUMB. Mindless thugs will always favor those that don't go toe to toe with them.
-James
Yup. without a doubt. And on a big open space like that, hands down wizard has nothing to worry about.
Of course, we haven't even brought terrain and obstacles in to this.
what happens if/when the wizard is caught in a small chamber w/ golem with no chance to get that powerful summon monster V spell off....?
That's what I've been trying to explain - just comparing math doesn't tell the whole story at all.
That wizard would be praying he had a fighter there to give him some cover from the inevitable beating.
Robert
Therefore it is strongly incumbent on the GM to avoid perturbing the balance yet FURTHER towards the caster. Haste is a spell for melees---it's on their side of the balance beam. Nerfing it is a really bad idea IMO. To keep your fighter types equal partners in the firm we call an adventuring party, you also need to avoid doing other things with your setting that systemically hit them more than they hit the casters in your party. In practice, this means having your thumb on the scale in favor of the noncasters instead of vice versa.
This explains pretty well my feelings as well.
It's not that the fighter is useless; it's that his ability to contribute is balanced somewhat precariously and it's very, very easy if you're not careful to make a change that pushes them down too far.
The threads about low-magic-item-availability are a great example of this -- it's clear, when you really think about it, that if you (for example) never give out magic items and make no other corresponding changes, this impacts casters somewhat but impacts non-casters heavily -- but this is rarely the first thing that occurs to someone who has the idea of running a "low magic" campaign.
To keep all the classes fun and playable, the DM by default needs to round in favor of the non-casters, and if s/he's making a decision that goes the other way, s/he needs to think really hard about it and make sure it's a good idea.
|
|
Robert---you're not following here. Because he moves at 20, and you move at what...30'
I'm following just fine. In a big empty flat field where the wizard can fly around aerial assualt and pepper the bad guy yada yada....I get that. Hands down --- advantage wizard.
If every combat occured in a big empty void chess board it would get awfully bland, though, I'm afraid.
My imagination and my games I run just seem to have a significantly more amount of ingenuity than that I guess. In such events, I have to say that it's impossible to truly consider one thing is hands down better than another.
The math in a vacuum simply doesn't do the whole system justice. You can't base it on some theoretical apples to apples comparison. Role playing games just don't work that way. There's too many variables. Too many scenarios and circumstances. At least not well played ones.
Works for Magic the Gathering though. I never did enjoy that game much.
Robert