And enervation is a wonderful spell. It can lower saves without provoking a save and kill opponents without touching their HP. If you haven't found a use for it, then I can't really trust your expertise as a D&D/Pathfinder caster.Evervation is a terrible spell. Considering how just about every spell is better, I understand.
Black Tentacles is situational. If you have melee fighting guys who insist on positioning themselves so that you can't use the spell effectively, then I can see how you don't get a lot of use out of it.
I mean, that's my whole point. It actually takes more spells per fight to support fighting guys than it takes to just win the encounter without them.
LOL! Enervation does as much damage as a Magic Missile, except it can miss. It also tosses on save penalties so low you might not even notice them.
Sure, after you cast 4-5 those save penalties are meaningful.... but you could have just killed them twice over with the same number of slots.
But I'm still going to give you a chance to show me otherwise. Tell me: what kind of spells (levels 1-4) are so brilliant that they can reliably win encounters without the support of fighting characters? I'll give you some specific encounters, to be more realistic.
- An Erinyes ambushes you from above. Assume she has a surprise round and wins initiative on the first round, and attempts to summon two bearded devils in the surprise round. CR 8 encounter.
- Two Hill Giants (CR 9 encounter) attack you in the woods. You win initiative, but they are able to close into melee range with a single move action. They are coming from opposite directions. One of them is holding an item that you need...
OK, so you are strawman arguing me because I was talking about spellcaster parties (four spellcasters like Wizards for example).
That being said, I can still do it solo or in a party.
Erinyes: The solo caster casts Dimensional Door. Encounter beaten because killing the Erinyes wasn't needed. If he really wants to kill the thing, he can just stay 120 away from it and cast Long Range killing spells from under the cover of Improved Invisibility since he's out of range of True Seeing. Magic Missiles would do the job.
The party of casters could just fire off various killing spells, but four Charm Monsters on the Erinyes would end this encounter since one will almost assuredly get through her SR and weak save.
Hill Giants: The solo caster casts Invisibility, then Fly, then Summon Monster III for a Lantern Archon, then Grease on the object(maybe more than one). When the object slips free, the object is teleported over by the archon (I assumed it weighs less than 50 lbs.).
The party of casters cast four Scorching Rays on the first giant for 32d6 fire damage (no save, average of 112), and he dies. The other one gets one attack as he moves up. On round two, he gets killed by rays.
Trolls: The Trolls are just easy. Everyone casts Invisibility and Blink. They walk through the wall around the door and no one ever knows. The trolls can smell that someone was there, but since Scent can't pinpoint location the trolls can't do anything about it. They could spend several hours using Survival checks to track the party by Scent, but they'd have to abandon their post and they still could not pinpoint the party. Works for a party or a solo. Add Fly if your DM is being a tool about Scent.
Also, four Fireballs from long range should also work and destroy the door as well. You might need a second round of Fireballing for the trolls as they run up. If the door isn't destroyed, cast Shatter.
----------------------------
Now, if you had melee fighters with you they'd want to melee it up with all of these monsters and you'd spend at least as many slots healing them AND buffing them AND trying to keep them from getting insta-killed. Those trolls are particularly nasty.
Hill Giants: The solo caster casts Invisibility, then Fly, then Summon Monster III for a Lantern Archon, then Grease on the object(maybe more than one). When the object slips free, the object is teleported over by the archon (I assumed it weighs less than 50 lbs.).
Random nitpick o' the day: Creatures summoned via Summon Monster can't teleport.
Hill Giants: The solo caster casts Invisibility, then Fly, then Summon Monster III for a Lantern Archon, then Grease on the object(maybe more than one). When the object slips free, the object is teleported over by the archon (I assumed it weighs less than 50 lbs.).Random nitpick o' the day: Creatures summoned via Summon Monster can't teleport.
Fair enough. Change that then to "Summon 1-3 small Air Elementals who bring the object to you."
Edit: Using CE and PA at the same time? How are you doing this?
Nothing in the rules even suggests you can't use both at once. In and of themselves both are non-actions that are activated when you attack, and nothing in either of them (or anywhere in the rules) even so much as suggests that it isn't possible. People normally don't do it because of the stacking penalties (which are bad enough -- even with the trait I'm -5 to hit with both of them active -- that hurts even the fighter) but nothing says you can't use both at the same time.
Random note -- all the monsters with power attack do not include the use of power attack in their stat blocks, so the CR 11 monsters like dragons/outsiders/giants/etc that have it should typically be subtracting 3~4 from their attack bonus and adding 6~12(depending on method of attack) to their damage -- IF they use power attack. Most of the CR 11 monsters however don't have the attack bonuses to use it against people with ACs over 35.
EDIT: Thoughts on enervation:
Enervation is nicer on things with class levels than normal monsters because of the following line in negative levels:
The creature is also treated as one level lower for the purpose of level-dependent variables (such as spellcasting) for each negative level possessed.
The following are all level dependent:
Smite evil damage and uses per daySneak attack damage from class levels
Monk unarmed strike damage, AC bonus, movement bonus
Cleric channel energy
Ranger favored enemy
The effects of most wizard school abilities
Inspire courage
Cavalier challenge damage
Fighter Weapon training
and so on.
Reducing these bonuses can make a fight against a class level opponent much easier -- and against another caster can reduce the effectiveness of his spells.
This is on top of the -1 to all checks, CMD, and -5 HP per negative level.
With the average enervation spell you give the target -2 on attack, saves, skills, ability checks, combat maneuvers, CMD, drop 10 hit points off of it (which cannot be healed) and reduces the above class features (possibly more, I didn't look up all possible class features) too.
As a softening spell it does it's job fine. Crushing Despair can be a better choice -- depending on target(targets), the lack of a save throw on enervation however can be a real boon too. It's a matter of having the right spell for the right target.
Personally I'm rather fond of Calcific touch myself -- it's non-necromatic so it works on Undead, has secondary effects, opens them up more for future follow up to be easier, and can handle the target completely by the end of the spell. I'm better with it using reach spell but this is just because of that whole "stay out of melee" thing.
Also: K Scent can pinpoint, it just doesn't negate the 50% miss chance -- basically it's a weaker version of blindsense.
Finally: It's kind of pointless to set up senerios for an all caster party without the all caster party put into place. The best way to test the idea would be to have 4 people make up the casters (one per person) and have a fifth person make up the encounters -- both sides wouldn't know what was coming until the day the posts went up, ideally with a third party watching to make sure everyone posted at the same time without inference or knowledge of the other side, and then having both sides hash out the outcomes with the standard rules.
Without the party (or caster) actually hammered out and for everyone to see it's a case of "hypothetical wizard" -- the guy always has everything because he isn't real and doesn't have to actually worry about what he does or doesn't have prepared since he can just say "well of course I have the spell prepared, and that feat, and these items".
Basically put without the character up it didn't happen and doesn't exist.
Finally: It's kind of pointless to set up senerios for an all caster party without the all caster party put into place. The best way to test the idea would be to have 4 people make up the casters (one per person) and have a fifth person make up the encounters -- both sides wouldn't know what was coming until the day the posts went up, ideally with a third party watching to make sure everyone posted at the same time without inference or knowledge of the other side, and then having both sides hash out the outcomes with the standard rules.Without the party (or caster) actually hammered out and for everyone to see it's a case of "hypothetical wizard" -- the guy always has everything because he isn't real and doesn't have to actually worry about what he does or doesn't have prepared since he can just say "well of course I have the spell prepared, and that feat, and these items".
Basically put without the character up it didn't happen and doesn't exist.
That's not even a good enough test, honestly, though it's closer -- what you need is a real campaign.
To be effective, casters need to pick spells well; prepared each day, spontaneous as part of their build. You give me a dude making random encounters and I'm not going to pick all that well, but give me an actual campaign in which the GM style is consistent and the encounters follow some kind of semi-logical story and I'm going to pick spells much, much better. That changes how good those classes look a great deal.
The fifth person(s) can pick certain parts of AP's at various levels. I suggest 3,8,13,18, if this is actually done.
I ran a game for all casters once, and the first levels were based more on my niceness than their ability to overcome anything. As they got to higher levels they pretty much began to hold their own.
3 because you can take a hit, and things start to become less swingy
8 just a random number honestly
13 high level where DM's start to get headaches, and many characters have filled out pretty well.
18 everyone can get 9th level spells assuming they don't MC.
That's not even a good enough test, honestly, though it's closer -- what you need is a real campaign.To be effective, casters need to pick spells well; prepared each day, spontaneous as part of their build. You give me a dude making random encounters and I'm not going to pick all that well, but give me an actual campaign in which the GM style is consistent and the encounters follow some kind of semi-logical story and I'm going to pick spells much, much better. That changes how good those classes look a great deal.
Granted that would be best, however I would point out that even in the best of the APs paizo has presented so far (and in many ways they were the best ones produced because of this) the range of enemies faced was rather broad, even in the course of a single day -- many times with little indication that they would be there. So while the theme of the campaign might give some clues as to what might be useful, there is little to no garantuee that this information would be enough to correctly guess all your spells for the day.
|
Translation: Your Wizard didn't expect to deal with anything remotely like that opponent, so you couldn't. Ok. Most Wizard players keep a more broadly applicable spell selection. They're also better about save DCs (Glitterdust should have at least a DC 19 save at level 8, and it could go higher).
Translation - Your GM lets you get everything you want. All these build options for wizards involve them having GM's lenient enough to let them craft whenever, buy exactly the item they need, have time to learn whatever spell is necessary for the situation (through blank slots etc).
While that style of GM leniencey is fine if you're after that type of game, it isn't the norm.
I'm all for having PC's shop up at times, but only when it makes sense in the campaign for that to happen. I have to say, getting those DC's you talk about is much harder when you can't shop for it. In my campaigns there are usually three points where I let my players respec their gear. But between these levels, they make do with what they have.
And before people go telling me that the other types are equally messed with from loot drops, I'd advise you go through your average AP or module and check the types of gear that is regularly used by NPC's and monsters. It certainly isn't Mr Wizard getting most of the love there I can tell you. That is one of the bonuses for classes being gear dependent (as people describe it), there's plenty of it lying about.
I'll restate my claim from earlier, Wizards and their ilk become powerful when the GM nurtures them. Have a GM that nurtures all players equally and there isn't much disparity. Have a GM that treats all players the same and their isn't much disparity.
The apparent disparity amongst the classes comes from differnt play styles or mixed experience at the table.
cheers
So giving you the benefit of the doubt here, that means you barely meet the stated criteria... but have the lowest HP in the party, weighing in at 79 wet. You also have a save line of 10/9/6 or so, so even Fortitude based effects have at least a 50/50 shot of killing you. And that's just the at level stuff. When we fight stuff that's hard, it's several levels higher.
All I'm hearing is "You met my demands so I'm changing the goal posts now". Side concern: His ability that replaces bravery gives him a bonus against anything that stops him from moving. At level 11 it will be a +3.
There is still room to tweek that particular build honestly, and I would be willing to take at least 3 points off the AC to do so -- the average to hit at level 11 isn't high enough to hit over AC 35 on a regular basis without power attack, let alone with it. I would probably drop the desperate battler for Iron will. Level 11 is a funky point in the fighter's career though -- from about 7~11 is when the fighter has the hardest time balancing all the demands upon his feats and money. Before hand he can do fine, and starting about level 12 his wealth and feats start getting to the point of restablization. Past level 13 the fighter is again fine on saves, feats, and money.
I'll try to have some more sample fighters that meet the old criteria, and some of your new stuff when I get back from work today.
However I'm not building for the crazy standard that "a level x character should handle all fights of his CR+x by himself" -- I'm pretty sure if we were to try this in reverse, where you build a wizard and I build the encounters in the same situation we wouldn't get over a 50% survival rate for the wizard at CR, let alone past it.
Also I believe the game was made for a party as such I think that a party is the best way to handle most things. A wizard with a fighter such as the one I posted could afford the POE for the fighter without the fighter "being a burden" for needing it -- after all with that being the largest issue the fighter has the wizard should spend a first level spell (maybe up to third) to save more of his spells for later -- using the fighter as a force multiplier, and method of ignoring some encounters while still handling them. A case of "I can use two low level spells and the fighter can save me... meh 3~4 high level spells -- economy of actions tells me this is a good thing."
That wasn't a case of a good group and a bad group. That was a difference of the DM being dumb enough to allow one of the more stupidly (cheap pun intended) broken SC spells to be used.
lol :D
Now, come on, that's not very nice!
>_<
That wasn't a case of a good group and a bad group. That was a difference of the DM being dumb enough to allow one of the more stupidly (cheap pun intended) broken SC spells to be used.
IME, start to pull out stuff from SC is meant with the purpose of advocating not full retrocompatibility from PF part.
As if designers should have been addressed every not-so-smartly designed spell of 3.x splats. :D
Also: K Scent can pinpoint, it just doesn't negate the 50% miss chance -- basically it's a weaker version of blindsense.
Here's text from the PRD.
The creature detects another creature's presence but not its specific location. Noting the direction of the scent is a move action. If the creature moves within 5 feet (1 square) of the scent's source, the creature can pinpoint the area that the source occupies, even if it cannot be seen.
So basically, unless you end a turn in a square next to a creature with Scent, or they Ready an Action to attack things they Scent and can't see, they can't actually pinpoint you in any meaningful way (though if you stood in one place, they might find you in 3-4 turns.... so you don't do that).
In the example, the party/solo can walk right past the Trolls while invisible since we can assume that creatures who have no idea you are coming will not be Readying Actions to attack things they might Scent but can't see.
As for Enervation, I guess I can't explain to people how throwing down a 4th level spell for a -2 to stats is pointless when monster stats tend to be very high or very low AND you have access to better effects that do things like remove an enemy's ability to act and/or outright kill them or turn them to your side. Sigh.
Those are some silly arguments! (Forgive me, but they were made in the past by a poster with poor manners, so I'm biased against them.)
Everything sucks compared to dominating a high level caster and having him win battles for you. Your points are invalid because my caster can have displacement, and stoneskin, and fighters can never have such things cast on them. Everyone who doesn't min/max the snot out of their primary casting stat is a noob, and the GM is forbidden from adjusting things for min/maxing.
Blah Blah Blah.
There are many good points to be made about caster -melee imbalances, but when you base comparisons on a PC vs. PC arena battle, or start saying things like fighters suck because they can't automatically one-shot same CR level creatures, you really are not playing baseline pathfinder anymore. Can casters fight above their weightclass? Sure! Can a caster help a melee type fight above their weightclass? Sure! One of the baseline assumptions of the game is that players work together to overcome challenges. Casters have a responsibility to use their resources to boost the party as well as fight enemies. Fighting types are less able to "help" other party members, but that is only a weakness if played as one.
And one last thing, 1-4 negative levels without a save is pretty damn good. If you know of a better 4th level spell, by all means, let us know.
This is a strawman. K's point is that a team of all spellcasters is more effective than a mixed party and can not only handle problems in the same way with fewer resources but can handle them in entirely different ways that only work in all caster teams. Whereas an all martial team is going to their afterlives, and that's all. He is absolutely correct about this.
Who said anything about PC vs PC arena combat?
This is patently false. I have run and played in non-caster parties who did just fine against equal and greater challenge rating opponents. In Pathfinder it may be even easier especially with the Teamwork feats introduced in the APG.
You can give me any encounter from the Bestiary or Core Book (NPCs) and I can give you a party of non-casters that can handle it without building the party simply to defeat the encounter. I can use the following: barbarian, fighter, rogue, monk and go through any of the AP. I could do without using anything other than the Core Book. The APG would only make it easier and more interesting.
"K's point is that a team of all spellcasters is more effective than a mixed party and can not only handle problems in the same way with fewer resources but can handle them in entirely different ways that only work in all caster teams."
This I would agree with at the later levels of the game. Although the "fewer resources" thing is nebulous. I also question the, "ways that "ONLY" work in all-caster teams".
"Whereas an all martial team is going to their afterlives, and that's all."
So play casters or Death. I just don't buy that. Sure there would be real issues if no one can cast a spell, but you can keep a group of melee types going with wands and potions, or a healing type cohort or hireling.
My bringing up PvP was just an exaggeration based on past threads comparing one class to another (Monk Vs Insert Class Here). I find it kind of arbitrary because the yard-stick (the value of melee vs. the value of casting) is so subjective from one player/GM to another.
|
Buncha stuff that really wasn't half as good as K seems to think it was.
I had a big post and forgot to save it before previewing it. Probably for the best. Let me sum up:
- Dimension Door doesn't escape from a devil that Greater Teleports at will. It may allow you to take the fight to better ground, but don't expect an auto-win out of that.
- Casting Spells while invisible gives away your position, so that's not a good solution. It's hard to stay 120 away from a creature that teleports and can fly.
- Charming an Evil outsider as a party is a good way to get the rest of your party killed. Sure, the caster will be friendly to YOU. But if you've got four wizards trying to charm it, she'll still kill the three who are unsuccessful. And handily. Sure, it would be evil for her to ignore your pleas to the contrary, but she's Evil. So that kinda works.
- I wish you'd had a good solution to the Erinyes one, because I don't. But if you had a fighty-type, you could cast Fly and Haste on him, which would be AWESOME. And effective.
- Sending in Air elementals vs. Hill Giants is bad. A Hill Giant can easily one-shot an air elemental. I wouldn't feel confident in sending fewer than four small elementals per hill giant (eight in this case). That's too many spells for one encounter, in my opinion.
- A suggestion would be a much better tactic, though possibly outside the bounds of the spell. Ventriloquism and Unseen Servant would also have been good. Invisibly Flying and using all your spells to Summon Monsters, not so much.
- Invisibility doesn't defeat scent. They can still smell which direction you're in with a move action and take another move action to move towards you. If they pass within 5 feet of you, they know where you are. And they can track you. DM's being what they are, the trolls will likely show up at the worst possible time.
- Blink doesn't get through walls of arbitrary thickness, and although it does get through doors it does not defeat traps. And getting poisoned really sucks in Pathfinder.
- Gaseous Form would have been much better than Blink. It's party-friendly, makes you immune to poison, resistant to damage, arguably defeats scent (depending entirely on DM fiat for that, but it would make sense), and gets through locked doors. Much, much, much better than Blink for this purpose.
Story time!I've ran two Savage Tide campaigns.
In the first, none of the players really had an idea of what they are, or should be doing. You had a lot of low damage melee characters, Wizards who think Magic Missile is the best first level spell ever, stuff like that.
In the second, the party was considerably more skilled.
Still same encounters, same character creation rules. They even went for similar party mixes, even though they could have done whatever they wanted.
Know that part where you fight a T-Rex?
The first group was completely destroyed by it. They couldn't do enough damage to take it out, the Wizard was casting damage spells instead of the effective spells, they were screwed. One by one they became dinosaur food.
The second group took one look at it, arched a brow in mild amusement, and rolled initiative. Wizard cast Ray of Stupidity. One and done.
Why did he have that spell? Because it provides exactly the effect it had on a T-Rex on a wide variety of enemies. It just happened to be applied to that one.
Experienced groups, particularly experienced players playing casters are head and shoulders over those who lack said experience.
Group 1 was constantly struggling all the way up to the point they all died.
Group 2? They pulled their collective asses out of so many fires and once they got past the random death levels (1 and 2) blazed through most of the rest of the campaign with flying colors.
I remember that spell and have seen that card played before.
But Ray of Stupidity doesn't exist in Pathfinder. Also, I don't remember what type of ability debilitating effect it had, but if it's anything like Ray of Enfeeblement...
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
So if Ray of Stupidity were ported into the PF ruleset (assuming it is a penalty to Int) it would have little effect on the T-Rex. That tactic is no longer viable against creatures that are already pretty dumb.
That said, I'm sure your party of experienced players would have beaten the T-Rex pretty easily anyway.
Buncha stuff that really wasn't half as good as K seems to think it was.I had a big post and forgot to save it before previewing it. Probably for the best. Let me sum up:
- Dimension Door doesn't escape from a devil that Greater Teleports at will. It may allow you to take the fight to better ground, but don't expect an auto-win out of that.
But how are they going to find you? True Seeing has a range of 120 feet and D-door can take you 740 feet at that level. The Erinyes can't find you if you go invisible and out of range, so as long as your D-Door gets you out of sight you can cast Invisibility without the thing even knowing where you went.
That distance is far enough that even on a featureless plain they can't even hear you casting.
The win condition for this fight is "don't fight the Erinyes because it has the jump on you", or at least wait an hour until the summoned demons get sent home before you go back to fight so that you are the one getting a surprise round.
- Charming an Evil outsider as a party is a good way to get the rest of your party killed. Sure, the caster will be friendly to YOU. But if you've got four wizards trying to charm it, she'll still kill the three who are unsuccessful. And handily. Sure, it would be evil for her to ignore your pleas to the contrary, but she's Evil. So that kinda works.
Ok, a DM who wouldn't let you convince a charmed monster to stop attacking the party is a black swan. I'm sure they exist, but you'll be hard pressed to find one.
Go ask ten people who DM a game and get back to me. I'd be surprised if you find even one who would play that way (or would have any players if they played this way).
- Sending in Air elementals vs. Hill Giants is bad. A Hill Giant can easily one-shot an air elemental. I wouldn't feel confident in sending fewer than four small elementals per hill giant (eight in this case). That's too many spells for one encounter, in my opinion.
The Air Elementals are there to pick up the object. Who cares if a giant kills one as long one of the remaining picks it up and brings it to you? They do it as whirlwinds since they can pick up the greased object that way.
Remember, the win condition for that fight is to get the object.
That being said, I'll concede that Unseen Servant would be better and less resource-intensive. The only issue is that as a Wizard I probably will never have that spell.
- Invisibility doesn't defeat scent. They can still smell which direction you're in with a move action and take another move action to move towards you. If they pass within 5 feet of you, they know where you are. And they can track you. DM's being what they are, the trolls will likely show up at the worst possible time.
Draw a map for yourself. Put the trolls on it and you. Then make them burn a move action to find your direction.
That leaves them needing to burn their standard to actually move.... which leaves them with no actions left to attack you.
That's above and beyond the fact that you can just move beyond the distance they can get with a single move or a charge and fire spells at them or just avoid them entirely.
- Blink doesn't get through walls of arbitrary thickness, and although it does get through doors it does not defeat traps. And getting...
It does defeat traps. They never trigger because you aren't even touching the door or the wall since you are in the Ethereal Plane.
You can even just pop into the space in the wall next to the door and zag back to the other side of the door. There are no rules that say that you have to pass in a straight line.
|
|
I'm not disagreeing with those who say that a party of 4 wizards all working together would be a very tough party. Which again brings me to think that the latest rules give Wizards TOO many resources and make them TOO easy to use and recover. What has happened is that the rules have tried to enhance the melee classes when what would have been, in my opinion, smarter, to look at the issues of Wizard resources (i.e. spells). Only think I as a DM could think to do would be make sure that 'rest stops' were few and far between. Seems bad adventure writing when you need to start targeting a specific class to provide a challenging game.
S.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not disagreeing with those who say that a party of 4 wizards all working together would be a very tough party. Which again brings me to think that the latest rules give Wizards TOO many resources and make them TOO easy to use and recover. What has happened is that the rules have tried to enhance the melee classes when what would have been, in my opinion, smarter, to look at the issues of Wizard resources (i.e. spells). Only think I as a DM could think to do would be make sure that 'rest stops' were few and far between. Seems bad adventure writing when you need to start targeting a specific class to provide a challenging game.
S.
Less resting actually hurts fighting guys more because they can't heal and they burn through spellcaster buffs and healing faster.
It's a myth that fighting guys can fight all day. They fight for exactly as long as the healing holds up. A little ability damage or some negative levels and no Restorations and suddenly the fighting for the day is over.
Heck, once the spellcasters are out of good spells and the fighters start taking a lot more damage, even HP damage becomes a serious issue.
And one last thing, 1-4 negative levels without a save is pretty damn good. If you know of a better 4th level spell, by all means, let us know.
Final point before this thread gets all flamey.
Basically, lots of spells are better than Enervation.
Take Color Spray. It's only 1st level and stuns targets in range for 1 round. Even if the enemy saves half the time, you can cast it four times in a four round battle and expect to reduce enemy damage output by an average of 50%.
But I'll stay away from the 1-3rd spells that are better thsn Evervation.
How about Solid Fog. Even in it's neutered Pathfinder form it can split enemy forces for a round by preventing ranged attack AND keeping them in the Fog for a round, wasting several enemy's actions that round. Heck, just making it pop so that the enemy are just in it and you aren't means they take -2 to hit and don't get a 5' step (and you don't face those problems.) Spell Resistance also doesn't affect this, unlike Enervation that has a miss chance AND SR check.
How about Wall of Ice? Again, this is another spell that wastes enemy actions and give you rounds of not being attacked as you concentrate fire or buff, except it also damages enemies breaking through AND can be used as a bridge.
Really, the list goes on and on. Animate Dead for turning high-end enemies into meatshields? Black Tentacles for grappling death AND difficult terrain (also no SR and no save). Greater Invisibility for immunity to targeted spells and 50% miss chance on most attacks? Resilient Sphere for perfect party protection mid-combat or perfect chokepoint blocker?
Charm Monster? Any chance to take an enemy and turn it into combat fodder for ever a single extra combat is awesome. Hands down.
Yeh, when you are reducing enemy effectiveness by half or more with all the other 4th level spells, a average of 12.5 damage and a -2.5 to all rolls from a spell that has a miss chance and SR check is weak sauce.
It's a myth that fighting guys can fight all day. They fight for exactly as long as the healing holds up. A little ability damage or some negative levels and no Restorations and suddenly the fighting for the day is over.
Yes it is a myth. The fact of the matter is that adventuring stops for ANY class once it's resources have been depleted to the point that it is suicide to continue.
A wizard can fight until he is out of viable spells that will help him in a fight.
A fighter can fight until his hit points reach too low a threshold to continue.
That's a bit simplistic of an explanation, but it gets the point across. No class can theoretically "go all day."
The myth is perpetuated I think because healing is in many cases so readily available. To the point that it often outstrips the daily spell-casting resources of a given group.
Sorry, POE is protection from evil -- held the shift key by mistake.
Half Orc Freehand Fighter 10/ Duelist 1
Str 13 Dex 24 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 16 Cha 7
Racial: Sacred Tattoos
Traits: Dangerously Curious, Indominatable Faith, Heirloom Weapon
Feats: Additional Traits, Weapon Finesse, Dervish Dance, Weapon Focus(scimitar), Weapon Specialization(scimitar), Dodge, Power Attack, Iron Will, Improve Critical, Greater weapon focus, Mobility, Desperate Battler
Reduce person(permanency), celestial armor, cloak of resistance +3, Scimitar +2, Fetish +2, Belt of dex +2, wand of haste, Animiated heavy shield +2, Ring of Protection +2, Headband of wisdom +2
Stats:
HP: 102 Fort: +13 Ref: +14 Will: +13 CMD: 34 Initiative: +7
AC 41 (10 base + 9 armor + 7 Dex + 1 Int + 4 dodge +2 natural + 2 deflection +4 shield +1 size +1 haste)
Full attack: scimitar +24/+24/+19/+14 (1d4+20 17~20/x2)
Human Paladin 9/ holy Vindicator 2
Str 24 Dex 13 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 7 Cha 18
Weapon bond
Traits: Magical Knack, Heirloom weapon, Indominitable faith
Feats: Power attack, weapon focus(scimitar), Additional Traits, toughness, Alignment channel(evil), Dodge, Improved critical(scimitar)
Wand of fly (25 charges)
Wand of haste
Full plate +3
Heavy Shield +3
Scimitar +2
Cloak of resistance +3
Belt of strength+4
Ring of protection +2
Amulet of natural Armor +2
AC 40(43) Fort +15 Ref +11 Will +12 HP 112 CMD 38 Initative +1
AC: 41 = 10 base +12 armor +5 shield +6 sacred +2 deflection +2 natural +1 dex +1 haste +1 dodge
AC with smite evil: 43
Full attack: +25/+25/+20/+15 (1d6+18 15~20/x2)
Full attack with smite: +28/+28/+23/+18 (1d6+27 15~20/x2)
Full attack with weapon bond: +27/+27/+22/+17 (1d6+20 15~20/x2)
|
|
@ K - All those are fairly situationally dependent, but useful spells. A few points though.
Colour spray means you need to be close to use it. If they pass, you're in a world of hurt. And you have to make sure it's not affecting your friends either.
Fog spells can be useful, but oft times hinder your companions and sommoned creatures as much. Anything that blocks choke points or slows creatures may be useful, but often leads to enemies withdrawing and attacking after the effect has worn off. Also see my point about multiple attack fronts earlier.
Charm spells require DM interpretation of how creatures act. You also need to be able to speak teh creatures language for it to follow instructions. Maing it your friend does not mean it makes its old friends enemies. Why on earth will it attack tehm. This puts it in harms way, giving it extra saves, and you'd have to make opposed charisma checks to boot. Evil creatures act evil, including backstabbing your other friends because that's what evil guys do, Chaotic evil guys in particular may be just as dangerous to your friends when charmed as not. You'll be fine though.
Invisibilty and fly are the two hardest to deal with for sure, but even they are only useful when situations are right, and this isn't as often as these boards paint them out to be.
Cheers
I'd argue that those spells are not heavily situation dependent. I mean, Solid Fog is great in just about any battle.
Charm spells require DM interpretation of how creatures act. You also need to be able to speak teh creatures language for it to follow instructions. Maing it your friend does not mean it makes its old friends enemies. Why on earth will it attack tehm. This puts it in harms way, giving it extra saves, and you'd have to make opposed charisma checks to boot. Evil creatures act evil, including backstabbing your other friends because that's what evil guys do, Chaotic evil guys in particular may be just as dangerous to your friends when charmed as not. You'll be fine though.
Chaotic Evil as an alignment does not mean you backstab people for no reason. "Stupid Evil" is not an official alignment.
So yes, your DM might require a Charisma check to stop attacking your friends, but after that your people will stop attacking and calling for additional saves after that is just pure Gygaxian retribution.
I understand how quickly a single Charm effect can unravel a DM's plot, but this is the game everyone at the table agreed to play and boning players who try to use their abilities as intended is just asking for player rebellion. (Remember that once a DM rules this way he has to stick to it or else appear arbitrary; this means that players who get charmed by any one of the dozens of charming monsters will pull the same BS stunt of "oh, but she has to command me to not attack her minions!")
Then you toss her into the next battle with another Cha check, because betraying her old allies for her new friend is a rational reason to a Chaotic Evil creature.
PS. Erineyes have telepathy. She totally knows what you are saying.
PPS. What's with the AC discussion? I'm honestly confused because around half the monsters you face don't even attack AC with their best attack.
That being said, things still hit on a 20 so even a level 20 fighting guy will get killed by enough level 1 Orcs (admittedly, probably over a hundred).
|
Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell.
Anything that is construed as a threat to the creature (suicidal orders, attack superiors or superiors forces) would break the spell. She is just your friend, and not over the fact that she already has previous alliances. At best you get get her to help you fight mooks or creatures unrelated to those she is associated with. And only as long as it serves her interest and doesn't put her at risk (going back to her original nature) or if her actions get don't put her at risk of being destroyed by a higher authority.
I know I know, your games exist in a vacuum.In any case she just becomes your friend, not stupid.
Any DM that hands over the creature to the party with a Charm Monster is doing it wrong.
I think the spell you are looking is the much more economical 9th level Dominate Monster.
GG though.
I understand how quickly a single Charm effect can unravel a DM's plot, but this is the game everyone at the table agreed to play and boning players who try to use their abilities as intended is just asking for player rebellion. (Remember that once a DM rules this way he has to stick to it or else appear arbitrary; this means that players who get charmed by any one of the dozens of charming monsters will pull the same BS stunt of "oh, but she has to command me to not attack her minions!")
Actually no, the number one charmer in the game is the Vampire/Vampire Spawn and it has Dominate Person as an at will, not the crappy charm person. Even the Dryad/Rakshasa can back up their Charm Person SLAs with Suggestion
|
|
Actually K, I do keep it consistant for players and NPC's. Their responses come down to personality. Charm is the weakest spell you can throw out there for all the reasons Aux pointed out above me, and it requires you to speak their language. The question I always ask my players if they get charmed is "Would your character do that for a trusted friend based on background, alignment and situaion?". It's a catch 22 for them at times, because I can hold them to those decisions later in the campaign as well.
As a combat spell it's far less useful than you make it out to be. Remember, that spell does not turn the NPC over to you as a player at all. They still treat their old friends exactly the same way as old, you just happen to be one of them now as well. Even here there are limitations though. It will stop single opponents attacking you though, assuming they're not being attacked by your real friends in return. Note it does not make your allies its friends, only the caster. So yes, you may very well have to convince the victim of said spell not to keep attacking your friends. ("Lookout my brand new best friend, you are surrounded by the enemies of the drow. Have no fear, I will save you!")
Charm is good for getting info out of people who otherwise wouldn't give you the time of day. . Charming a Lawful character and asking for state secrets may net you no gain, since that is information they still wouldn't share with trusted allies.You'd need a damn good diplomacy roll to go with that, all the charm does is open the opportunity for the diplomacy to work. Chaotic folk though, they'd sing a like a canary.
Dominate on the other hand, that's a corker. However, it's a much higher level and so fairly appropriate I would say.
A point I made earlier, and will bring up again. Many caster tricks are only as powerful as the GM lets them become. Summon monster is another that gets abused by players because GMs allow them to. The summoned creature attacks the nearest opponent, not follow your every command, unless you know their language and they are smart enough to follow commands. PC's don't control summoned monsters, GM's do, unless your GM is giving you that leniency.
Notice how all of this is about what your GM let's you do with spells that specifically leaves the results in the GM's hands.
I also find it interesting that the folk arguing for "Mages rule all" are the ones who call the GM a dick when the GM actually uses those rules. Magic users have checks and balances in place the same as every other class, it's just that players who use magic using classes don't like it when those balancing factors are used.
Cheers
.
..
...
....
.....
Many caster tricks are only as powerful as the GM lets them become.
Do you mind!?
A fair few of us were quite happy blaming the rules set, thank you very much...
I mean, once you start letting someone arbitrate a campaign, where does it stop?
The madness!
::
ZE WIZARDS! FLEE! O_O
PPS. What's with the AC discussion? I'm honestly confused because around half the monsters you face don't even attack AC with their best attack.
That being said, things still hit on a 20 so even a level 20 fighting guy will get killed by enough level 1 Orcs (admittedly, probably over a hundred).
It was stated that a martial character can't compete after level 11, and to do so he would need an AC of 40(or better) and need to have a DPR of over 100 to be effective. In addition CoDzilla suggested after the first actual martial character I posted that met those criteria that they would need more HP and better save throws. He was of the opinion that it couldn't be done without 3.5 material.
Since this thread is about melee combat and wizards (actually a comparision of the two) it's vital to know if these sorts of standards can actually be matched -- if not then there is something fundimentally wrong and it needs to be addressed. However we now have three different builds with ACs over 40, HP over 100, saves in the double digits, and a DPR of greater than 100. Which means that you can have a martial character that can drop CR equivilent opponents in two rounds by itself, and still survive their attacks (in multiple forms).
I didn't bother reading this whole thread, but I just wanted to throw it out there that I for one is not that interested in having "balance" between the classes. And I like both melee and spellcasting classes.
So yes, your DM might require a Charisma check to stop attacking your friends, but after that your people will stop attacking and calling for additional saves after that is just pure Gygaxian retribution.
I understand how quickly a single Charm effect can unravel a DM's plot, but this is the game everyone at the table agreed to play and boning players who try to use their abilities as intended is just asking for player rebellion. (Remember that once a DM rules this way he has to stick to it or else appear arbitrary; this means that players who get charmed by any one of the dozens of charming monsters will pull the same BS stunt of "oh, but she has to command me to not attack her minions!")
Then you toss her into the next battle with another Cha check, because betraying her old allies for her new friend is a rational reason to a Chaotic Evil creature.
PS. Erineyes have telepathy. She totally knows what you are saying.
If anything, Charm is one of those spells that can move the plot forward in new directions. It won't unravel a DM's plot any more than anything else that would unravel it.
It has very limited in-combat utility, simply because it only changes the affected creature's perception of you. Its perception of everything else besides you does not change. The entire description of the spell (right down to the duration) implies that it's not really meant for combat and is far more useful out of it.
I wouldn't try it against an Erineyes. Your Cha is 7 (because it's a stat you don't care about) and theirs is 21. And the fact that it is a devil, which fluff-wise is never a good idea to have as a friend.
What I actually said was that you need an AC of at least 40 at that level to make AC work for you.
:D
What do you mean for "AC work?"
Ways like completely bypassing the encounter, instead of the melees wanting to fight and having to use more resources to make them not die?
If you're completely bypassing encounters, how are you getting XP? If the encounters are trivial, how are you getting XP?
It isn't. It's not a penalty, it's ability damage. Which means it does work this way. If it was a penalty, then it wouldn't have been useful either way.
As to why it existed, we spent good money on 3.5 books. It wasn't going to go to waste. Not to mention that at the time, Paizo was still in the writing APs but not designing games phase. You are aware Savage Tide was originally written for 3.5 right? In other words, PF didn't exist yet. Though it's obvious in hindsight that if PF were out, and we were using it then we'd have to do much the same things we are doing now. Namely still using 3.5 Power Attack and maneuver rules, and allowing our selection of 3.5 material. Otherwise, Fighters don't get nice things. Did I mention we like our melee characters viable?
You can't argue that Pathfinder wizards are more powerful when you aren't using pure Pathfinder wizards. Sure, in your game you allow other company's materials and that works for you. That doesn't mean that wizards are, by default, more powerful.
Also, I highly doubt you actually know how to build or play a fighter (or any other melee based character) since you are under the illusion that they are non-functional. They may not be able to do the same things as casters but that doesn't make them non-functional. It means you have to think differently to play one.
I remember that spell and have seen that card played before.
But Ray of Stupidity doesn't exist in Pathfinder. Also, I don't remember what type of ability debilitating effect it had, but if it's anything like Ray of Enfeeblement...
It isn't. It's not a penalty, it's ability damage. Which means it does work this way. If it was a penalty, then it wouldn't have been useful either way.
As to why it existed, we spent good money on 3.5 books. It wasn't going to go to waste. Not to mention that at the time, Paizo was still in the writing APs but not designing games phase. You are aware Savage Tide was originally written for 3.5 right? In other words, PF didn't exist yet. Though it's obvious in hindsight that if PF were out, and we were using it then we'd have to do much the same things we are doing now. Namely still using 3.5 Power Attack and maneuver rules, and allowing our selection of 3.5 material. Otherwise, Fighters don't get nice things. Did I mention we like our melee characters viable?
Int damage? Wow... that's just poor design.
So it existed in your games. I don't see how that matters to everyone elses.
I'm confused as to whether or not your story took place pre-pathfinder ruleset or post. Not that it matters. If it was pre-PF then I don't see how it has any relevance in this PF Wizard vs. Fighter debate (it only serves to illustrate "how it used to be"). If it is post PF ruleset, your story is essentially PF + 3rd party.
Making your point with "how it used to be" or "rules + 3rd party" doesn't work.
You've made other valid points. This isn't one of them.
What I actually said was that you need an AC of at least 40 at that level to make AC work for you.:D
What do you mean for "AC work?"
He means, that at X level, you have to have an AC value equal to Y or over (and doing so usually hinders your character elsewhere in a dramatic way) otherwise AC will fail to protect you, and enemies will near-auto-hit.
In essence, if a character can't get his AC up to the point that a monster's primary natural attacks (which is most of the attacks of combat oriented monsters....) miss on... I'm going to say under 15, then there was no real point to the AC endeavor, and the character should have gone for other kinds of defenses.
:D
AC 40 for level...?
Moreover, does this value consider temporary buffs or a smart use of covers and stuff?
|
At which point will you guys finally realize that arguing with Roy's sockpuppets doesn't have a point ?K is actually not Roy, just a different denner -hence the similar dismissive posting style.
I didn't mean K, he's got the decency to appear under one name anywhere he posts.
I was thinking about CoDzilla/GodWizard.