I'm not. I'm examining moustaches.
Ramathorn: "Who wants a mustache ride?"
Germans: "I do! I do!"
|
Scrolls, staves, wands, rings of wizardry, high casting stat, etc.
Plan for what's most likely to occur, prepare contingencies (often in the form of items) to deal with corner cases...
Mix and match your sub-classifications of spells...
Experience tends to go a long way toward telling you what to memorize and what not to...
EDIT: I'll grant you that the subset of "win spells (SoL, SoD)" and the subset of "no SR" don't mesh too often. This is where the caster that focuses in one subset or the other creates scrolls or staves for the other subset...
Scrolls need to be remade each level, or be under your level and require a full round to cast (and a handy haversack if you don't want to take an AoO getting it out).
Staves and such count against WBL and can be used by anyone with UMD.
Experience is both a great teacher and an effective trap for a smart BBEG.
I'm not of the opinion we're passing judgment on the edition, merely acknowledging whether casters are superior to other options.
I argue this is the case, others do not. What's your take?
That's not exactly right. Many of us do see that casters are more powerful in many circumstances. My position is that just because the caster may be more powerful does not automatically mean that the non-caster can't be a viable character. Casters aren't perfect and non-casters can be played and built well in standard games. They measure up just fine to what the expectations are for the system.
We are pretty much arguing against those who say that non-casters cannot function unless the GM gimps the enemy. That position is not supported in any way by the rules. It is supported only by campaign style.
That's not exactly right. Many of us do see that casters are more powerful in many circumstances. My position is that just because the caster may be more powerful does not automatically mean that the non-caster can't be a viable character. Casters aren't perfect and non-casters can be played and built well in standard games. They measure up just fine to what the expectations are for the system.We are pretty much arguing against those who say that non-casters cannot function unless the GM gimps the enemy. That position is not supported in any way by the rules. It is supported only by campaign style.
Exactly.
Scrolls, staves, wands, rings of wizardry, high casting stat, etc.
Plan for what's most likely to occur, prepare contingencies (often in the form of items) to deal with corner cases...
Mix and match your sub-classifications of spells...
Experience tends to go a long way toward telling you what to memorize and what not to...
EDIT: I'll grant you that the subset of "win spells (SoL, SoD)" and the subset of "no SR" don't mesh too often. This is where the caster that focuses in one subset or the other creates scrolls or staves for the other subset...
Scrolls need to be remade each level, or be under your level and require a full round to cast (and a handy haversack if you don't want to take an AoO getting it out).
Staves and such count against WBL and can be used by anyone with UMD.
Experience is both a great teacher and an effective trap for a smart BBEG.
Also, staves only have 10 charges and to recharge takes spells away from the caster.
Staves hold a maximum of 10 charges. Each spell cast from a staff consumes one or more charges. When a staff runs out of charges, it cannot be used until it is recharged. Each morning, when a spellcaster prepares spells or regains spell slots, he can also imbue one staff with a portion of his power so long as one or more of the spells cast by the staff is on his spell list and he is capable of casting at least one of the spells. Imbuing a staff with this power restores one charge to the staff, but the caster must forgo one prepared spell or spell slot of a level equal to the highest-level spell cast by the staff. For example, a 9th-level wizard with a staff of fire could imbue the staff with one charge per day by using up one of his 4th-level spells. A staff cannot gain more than one charge per day and a caster cannot imbue more than one staff per day.
I think it's part of the overall discussion with Codzilla. he seems to feel thT the game only has one way to be played and started some discussion earlier regarding monster hps. though that was on a level 5. I'm not sure how the pit fiend got involved but they are insidious that way.
Staves and such count against WBL and can be used by anyone with UMD.
Sure, but they're not really cost-effective unless you're in a position to recharge them, which probably means you're a caster. (And I'd argue, probably not even then for most of the Core staves. I find the APG staves much more reasonably priced.)
Also, keying off your casting stat and feats and what not.
I think it's part of the overall discussion with Codzilla. he seems to feel thT the game only has one way to be played and started some discussion earlier regarding monster hps. though that was on a level 5. I'm not sure how the pit fiend got involved but they are insidious that way.
He was trying to say that the pit fiend breaks the monster creation rules. He was wrong, but he tried.
I'm willing to see how any monster stacks up to the rules. If it's wrong, I may grab my handy dandy pencil and make some changes in my Bestiary.
|
|
Scrolls take a move action to draw, and then a standard action to cast each spell on the scroll, or do you not make scrolls with multiple spells?
They also are likely to be used each level. This isn't really an instance of "stockpile 50 scrolls of spell X" this is an instance of "craft a scroll of 5 instances of X, use when needed, burn them when you get close to leveling in place of other spells"
Staves and scrolls both count against WBL. Absolutely. They can also be used by anyone with UMD, sure. But the guys with UMD have to pay full price to replace them, can't guarantee their selection (ie, shops may not have staff X in stock, or do you play with the magicmart?), and in the case of staves have lessened utility. Or did your rogue really take Spell Focus?
Just how informed is this BBEG? More importantly, how does he know what my entire spell list is, how many scrolls of what I have in my extradimensional bag, and what every trick I keep up my sleeve is? Or were you just going to rely on DM fiat to ensure victory? Congratulations, the GM beat my character. Next time I'll be sure not to game with that GM.
Remember kids, they can't scout your abilities if you kill all the witnesses. (or keep things in reserve)
EDIT: ah, staves are now 10 charges, down from 50 in 3.5 good to know. Haven't gotten a chance to play a high level caster in PF.
It appears I am arguing a tangential position from the opposition to your argument, chiefly that casters are superior to non casters, but in most instances there are still uses for non casters. That being the case, I'll be bowing out of major discussion once I am able.
It is still a full round for the first spell, and if you put that many spells on one scroll, guess who is going to be sad when they run into a fire effect with it out.
BBEG is going to scout you in the same way you are going to scout BBEG. I agree that leaving no witnesses is one way to limit being scouted, but everything you can do, BBEG can do as well.
Broke the monster creation rules? o.O
I just don't understand this mentality...
|
Why do Clerics need the most high stats? Con is a given, and Wis, but what else?
Calling Clerics and to a lesser extent Bards one trick ponies is laughable, and I know about three dozen people that would be happy to forcefully educate you.
Would be delighted as they are my favorate clas as far as concept goes, just not in play currently.
In order to be viable, in a generic Cleric sense, Clerics need good either Str or Dex, good Con, High Wis and decent Cha. Int is very helpful as well as there are so many skills that a Cleric really needs to keep up with, (Diplomacy, Heal, Know Nobility/History, Know Religion, Sense Motive, and Spellcraft, plus any that they may get from Domains).
PF has made Clerics better at relying on Dex than Str, in my opinion, but playing a Cleric with less than 12 Str means you are always carrying at least a Medium load. And his is just to be effective at the basic things that the Class is meant to do.
And by One Trick Pony, I mean that they are basically forced to be the secondary support other players. Practically every Domain power is designed to only work on others party members rather thn the Cleric themselvf, unlike nearly every oher class, which may have that option, but is rewarded mostly for pulling their own weight. Even their Class Feature, Channel (positive) Energy is mainly for other players, basically both wasted and less effective than self healing Cure spells, and mostly pointless as their original intent against undead, (even when maxed out).
Now if you read back, I did mention it is possible, though difficult in ways to step outside of this and make other types of Clerics. But it is looked down upon in both the mechanical/rules sense and by other players, not to mention given rediculous names and accussed of being common and the norm like your name's sake.
I think it's part of the overall discussion with Codzilla. he seems to feel thT the game only has one way to be played and started some discussion earlier regarding monster hps. though that was on a level 5. I'm not sure how the pit fiend got involved but they are insidious that way.Sneaky pit fiends...
I understand a portion of his argument, I think: that because casters are the optimal choice it's the best course to pursue. I'm not sure of his "non casters can accomplish nothing" stance, but I do believe it is substantially more difficult for a noncaster to do anything other than damage an enemy, which is less preferable to a OHKO SoL/SoD spell...
I think the only part ofnhis argument that ismcorrect is that casters are strong. he's said several things that I find blatantly false. namely that martial characters cannot have tactics as if they are somehow stupid cannot adapt to situations and never have any tols.
he's pretty much said that a fighter who runs up and hits a monster fdor a lot of damage will just be ignored because the single hit despite probably hurting a lot didn't kill the monster outright.
I also faint see how within the rules monsters can always one shot pcs Or why this is even fun. iw get the impression weir play style ( which he seems to enjoy so more power to him there). has created a deliberate situation In which martial types are never useful.
I'd also like to reference se coments on terrain never being useful to martial types and always being a hinderance ass in my opinion being false.
@bob_lob law I got that part. but resly monsters are allowed to break the rules I always felt.
|
|
It is still a full round for the first spell, and if you put that many spells on one scroll, guess who is going to be sad when they run into a fire effect with it out.BBEG is going to scout you in the same way you are going to scout BBEG. I agree that leaving no witnesses is one way to limit being scouted, but everything you can do, BBEG can do as...
The guy who doesn't have fire resistance/immunity?
Who said I was doing any scouting? Time spent scouting is time better spent bringing his world down around his ears.
If I view you as a threat coming to fight me, I'm sizing you up as I try to destroy you.
Particularly if you ever have to retreat for any reason.
Now if you read back, I did mention it is possible, though difficult in ways to step outside of this and make other types of Clerics. But it is looked down upon in both the mechanical/rules sense and by other players, not to mention given rediculous names and accussed of being common and the norm like your name's sake.
... is your argument really that you can't make a good cleric because other people will make fun of you for it?
I mean, we're not in the fifth grade anymore, are we?
|
|
Now if you read back, I did mention it is possible, though difficult in ways to step outside of this and make other types of Clerics. But it is looked down upon in both the mechanical/rules sense and by other players, not to mention given rediculous names and accussed of being common and the norm like your name's sake.... is your argument really that you can't make a good cleric because other people will make fun of you for it?
I mean, we're not in the fifth grade anymore, are we?
Rubber and glue, sir. Rubber and glue!
|
|
Now if you read back, I did mention it is possible, though difficult in ways to step outside of this and make other types of Clerics. But it is looked down upon in both the mechanical/rules sense and by other players, not to mention given rediculous names and accussed of being common and the norm like your name's sake.... is your argument really that you can't make a good cleric because other people will make fun of you for it?
I mean, we're not in the fifth grade anymore, are we?
Make fun of, no. But focusing on say being a solo capable melee cleric means that Fighters and Rogues might have to go purchase a few potions of their own, or people think that you are "broken" because you happen to be a spellcaster, . . . in armor, . . . with 2 good saves. . . Oh my!!!
Rubber and glue, sir. Rubber and glue!
I yield before your well-timed riposte.
And by One Trick Pony, I mean that they are basically forced to be the secondary support other players. Practically every Domain power is designed to only work on others party members rather thn the Cleric themselvf, unlike nearly every oher class, which may have that option, but is rewarded mostly for pulling their own weight. Even their Class Feature, Channel (positive) Energy is mainly for other players, basically both wasted and less effective than self healing Cure spells, and mostly pointless as their original intent against undead, (even when maxed out).
I actually like this change. The game is supposed to be played with a group. The cleric should use his spells to further the cause of his god and potentially find converts. What better way than to use your powers to aid others? The cleric can definitely pull his own weight, and he can help others do more.
EDIT EDIT: in fact, this is another argument AGAINST playing a fighter: They don't have access to divination protection schemes, and as a result, actually become a liability to a party at high levels when divinations are utilized. Certainly a mage could drop defenses on the party fighter, but then we're expending still MORE resources on what is quickly beginning to approximate a sandbag. Particularly given certain defensive spells like nondetection are less reliable when cast upon the fighter...
If is really such a problem, what about a ring of mind blank?
Moreover, people keep saying high level casters have more than enough slots.. so, 1 more cast of mind blank should not be a problem.
|
|
Make fun of, no. But focusing on say being a solo capable melee cleric means that Fighters and Rogues might have to go purchase a few potions of their own, or people think that you are "broken" because you happen to be a spellcaster, . . . in armor, . . . with 2 good saves. . . Oh my!!!Let them believe I am broken for whatever reasons they wish to use. Fact is, my cleric is superior to their fighter and especially their rogue by virtue of simply being a cleric.
I am obviously missin your point in relation to what I am saying, so I am guessing you didn't get mine. It is along the lines of playing a Fighter that focuses on Diplomacy, social encounters, and high Int, Wis, and Cha, while expecting your party of a Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric to not expect you to pull your weight in an actual fight.
PF has made Clerics better at relying on Dex than Str, in my opinion, but playing a Cleric with less than 12 Str means you are always carrying at least a Medium load.
Or there's Ant Haul as a 1st level spell.
Personally I'd probably pick a higher STR on most clerics for the way I tend to play them, but if carrying capacity is your only reason for doing so, that particular problem is easily solved any number of ways.
.
For example, +30 to hit at level 20? Pfft. Try 12. Even then it's on the low end. The lying chart tells you +30 to hit is actually good. Even though a half assed character, or monster hits it 8 levels ago. And if you actually start optimizing, level SIX stuff comes close to +30 to hit. So no, it's not breaking CR when a level 12 creature does it. Real breaking occurs much sooner.
:D :D :D
Wasn't AC not relevant? Why should pit fiend have so much to hit if the PCs don't bother to pump AC? ;)
|
|
I actually like this change. The game is supposed to be played with a group. The cleric should use his spells to further the cause of his god and potentially find converts. What better way than to use your powers to aid others? The cleric can definitely pull his own weight, and he can help others do more.
I am not argueing that. What I am saying is that it is difficult to go outside of this focus with a Cleric, (as a party healer and curer/buffer). Particularly in the sense that "Wizard" does not mean "Caster", as seems to be implied as interchangable here. The further away from the generic Cleric concept one goes, the les they can pull their own weight (for what the class is expected to do), which is less true for other classes.
EDIT EDIT: in fact, this is another argument AGAINST playing a fighter: They don't have access to divination protection schemes, and as a result, actually become a liability to a party at high levels when divinations are utilized. Certainly a mage could drop defenses on the party fighter, but then we're expending still MORE resources on what is quickly beginning to approximate a sandbag. Particularly given certain defensive spells like nondetection are less reliable when cast upon the fighter...
One spell is not dropping all that much in resources. I highly doubt that this is a problem. It's a group effort. If the wizard casts a spell to help the fighter, then the fighter is there to deal enough damage to take out the bad guys or keep them away from the wizard so he can do his thing.
Which divination spells are you worried about?
Detect thoughts: save required
Scrying: save required
Greater Scrying: save required
Others either affect areas, don't have saves, or affect the caster. So the only three spells require saving throws which is something the fighter can address.
It's average stats. If you don't know how to average stats, you probably shouldn't be playing a game all about math.Can you explain how you got this figure to the audience.
Average HP for stock enemies at level 5 is 56. There's your examples.
This is not a game about math. It's a role playing game. Yes, you figured out the average hit points for level 5 creatures correctly. No, the game is not about math.
Agreed, Pit Fiend breaks their table/Chart. I'm not sure PF really considered their own rules when they wrote that Chart (it seems low balled).
Granted, the few rd/day of Bard reasoning already showed that (Jason was one who talked about that I think).
The Pit Fiend is just one example. They didn't think it through at all. They just wrote down random crap, which gives them all the credibility of the Monster Manual 2 (read: none). And that's the whole point. When their standards are not consistent with their own work, as written, and often without considering any of the tools available to enemies once they stop being dumb mobs and start being played intelligently which puts them even further over those delusional baselines.
For example, +30 to hit at level 20? Pfft. Try 12. Even then it's on the low end. The lying chart tells you +30 to hit is actually good. Even though a half assed character, or monster hits it 8 levels ago. And if you actually start optimizing, level SIX stuff comes close to +30 to hit. So no, it's not breaking CR when a level 12 creature does it. Real breaking occurs much sooner.
I wonder what you would do in a game that goes strictly by the RAW. No house rules. 15 point buy. Nothing outside of Pathfinder material. You'll find that your assumptions are way off base. Yes, casters will still me slightly more powerful. None of the numbers you provide would even come close though.
I'm still waiting for a demonstration on how all your assumptions are true all the time using only Pathfinder material. For someone who wants substance to the counter arguments, you fail miserably at doing it yourself. Hand waving away facts doesn't make you right.
.
For example, +30 to hit at level 20? Pfft. Try 12. Even then it's on the low end. The lying chart tells you +30 to hit is actually good. Even though a half assed character, or monster hits it 8 levels ago. And if you actually start optimizing, level SIX stuff comes close to +30 to hit. So no, it's not breaking CR when a level 12 creature does it. Real breaking occurs much sooner.
:D :D :D
Wasn't AC not relevant? Why should pit fiend have so much to hit if the PCs don't bother to pump AC? ;)
Who do you think you are bringing in logic and his own arguments into this discussion? Stop that.
Who do you think you are bringing in logic and his own arguments into this discussion? Stop that..
For example, +30 to hit at level 20? Pfft. Try 12. Even then it's on the low end. The lying chart tells you +30 to hit is actually good. Even though a half assed character, or monster hits it 8 levels ago. And if you actually start optimizing, level SIX stuff comes close to +30 to hit. So no, it's not breaking CR when a level 12 creature does it. Real breaking occurs much sooner.
:D :D :D
Wasn't AC not relevant? Why should pit fiend have so much to hit if the PCs don't bother to pump AC? ;)
It's the second time today. I'm still laughing for combat reflexes, wich is switching from thread to thread from "utterly useless" of the "tank feat of DOOM" basing on what people want to show.
|
|
Also, Glitterdust and Web still work just fine on undead, as does Slow when you get it. Color Spray won't, but since it's been a few levels Color Spray has already expired, and Stinking Cloud won't, but since it's only been 3 levels instead of 4 you have not picked 3rd level spells yet so it's a moot point.
Remember, all the nerfs to spells and the change in Concentration was specifically to force casters to rely on lower level spells.
3.x greatly increases HP, making it correspondingly harder to take the last HP away. Barring lots of non core sources, you flat out cannot do enough damage to matter. It is not possible for you to make a relevant martial character.
PF heavily nerfed martial characters in a number of ways, denying them relevance even if you bring in the same 3.5 material, unless you also start deleting wide swaths of the PF ruleset.
:D :D :D
You keep saying this, even if facts (math, standard action high damage attacks, SoL for meleers) prove you wrong.
Translation: If the DM runs anything other than a mono campaign, non adaptable classes are screwed. Well that's true, but the DM isn't doing anything wrong. You beat the BBEG, and that arc is over. And then you move onto something else. Not to mention even the so called mono campaigns aren't really... RHoD has you fight humanoid mooks for 3-4 levels as the majority of things you face and then suddenly stops almost entirely with the humanoid opponents. And even before that there are also dragons, undead, magical beasts, giants, and many other creature types.
Also, Glitterdust and Web still work just fine on undead, as does Slow when you get it. Color Spray won't, but since it's been a few levels Color Spray has already expired, and Stinking Cloud won't, but since it's only been 3 levels instead of 4 you have not picked 3rd level spells yet so it's a moot point.
I'm starting to question whether you actually play RPGs. Do you know how a campaign is designed? Do you know how a good story is written? You may want to work on those elements before telling me I'm wrong. May I suggest watching some movies, especially those with several sequels (they used to be called serials) and long running themes (Star Wars comes immediately to mind but Lord of the Rings and even Rocky can qualify). Look at long running TV series like Buffy, Angel, 24, Supernatural, Smallville, How I Met Your Mother, etc. Those all have long running themes and they still have times when you deviate a bit from the theme but come back.
A good campaign uses a variety of opponents. I will never deny that. However, if you are playing in a Planescape game you probably have more elementals, devils, and demons as opponents than you will have giants and magical beasts. If you are playing in a Dark Sun setting, you will probably have more giants and vermin than dragons. If you are in Savage Tide, you will have more humanoids than devils and demons. That doesn't mean you won't see any opponents that are a bit out of the theme. It means that you shouldn't see ones that don't fit on a regular basis.
In Age of Worms, I am not expecting to see certain creatures because they won't fit the theme of the campaign. If I see a cadre of angels coming down to assault the party, I will be severely disappointed. If there are too many aquatic creatures, I'm not going to be happy. Those things don't fit with the overall theme.