|
Do you feel like it is a normal situation for wizards to not know if they are going to be fighting men or monsters that day? That's a heck of a no man's land.Yeah, in my experience I can fairly say that they don't know.
Then again, Adventure paths are very very different from how I used to run my homebrews; those were run as "conventional" RPGs and tended to have vastly fewer monsters for some reason.
You are a 5th level wizard, and you just got your 1st 3rd level spells. You have either 3 or 4 3rd level spells a day (1 normal, one if you have anything under a 24 int, 1 from specialty school and maybe one from your bonded item )
Do you devote one of them to a spell that is no effective against non-humanoids and even then is single target with saves every round? Maybe, maybe not. But if you do, are you memorizing it more than once?
Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Hold Person can be a nice potential homerun but Slow is the game changer at that level.
Yes it's relatively short range but multiple targets staggered is a major boost to the party. You can either engage and trust that no full attacks will harm your guys, you can kite with ranged weapons, or if they outclass you the caster and team can run like crazy.
Spiked Pit is also pretty damned close to a SoD at that level. Failed reflex save (many melee types have horrible reflex saves) means that someone takes 2d6 damage +2d6 spikes (no biggie) and is effectively stuck at the bottom of a 20 ft pit for 6 rounds.
If ranged opposition can't skewer a PC with arrows or flaming oil, etc during the next few rounds I'd be kinda surprised.
|
|
Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Hold Person can be a nice potential homerun but Slow is the game changer at that level.
Yes it's relatively short range but multiple targets staggered is a major boost to the party. You can either engage and trust that no full attacks will harm your guys, you can kite with ranged weapons, or if they outclass you the caster and team can run like crazy.
Spiked Pit is also pretty damned close to a SoD at that level. Failed reflex save (many melee types have horrible reflex saves) means that someone takes 2d6 damage +2d6 spikes (no biggie) and is effectively stuck at the bottom of a 20 ft pit for 6 rounds.
If ranged opposition can't skewer a PC with arrows or flaming oil, etc during the next few rounds I'd be kinda surprised.
The pit spells were the first major slip for Paizo, along with Persistent spell.
Those are the ones I kind of shake my head at, and what worry me about the ultimate magic coming out.
There may now be getting to be too many cooks in the kitchen.
Do you feel like it is a normal situation for wizards to not know if they are going to be fighting men or monsters that day? That's a heck of a no man's land.Yeah, in my experience I can fairly say that they don't know.
Then again, Adventure paths are very very different from how I used to run my homebrews; those were run as "conventional" RPGs and tended to have vastly fewer monsters for some reason.
I've always known. I've never played a game where I didn't know.
Ok, sure, on occasion there were times when a human might employ a monster, like a summoner wizard or maybe a druid left a trail of bread crumbs for a hydra or something, but that is a more rare and silly plot. You don't go into ruins said to be haunted by demons and find men in demon masks unless it is scooby do, and you don't take on bandits and find owl bears.
How do you always know what you are going to go up against and how often? That seems really weird to me. Not trying to criticize, it just seems very strange.
Do you feel like it is a normal situation for wizards to not know if they are going to be fighting men or monsters that day? That's a heck of a no man's land.Yeah, in my experience I can fairly say that they don't know.
Then again, Adventure paths are very very different from how I used to run my homebrews; those were run as "conventional" RPGs and tended to have vastly fewer monsters for some reason.
I've always known. I've never played a game where I didn't know.
Ok, sure, on occasion there were times when a human might employ a monster, like a summoner wizard or maybe a druid left a trail of bread crumbs for a hydra or something, but that is a more rare and silly plot. You don't go into ruins said to be haunted by demons and find men in demon masks unless it is scooby do, and you don't take on bandits and find owl bears.
I have never known in a home game, and in AP's you might know the monster type, but not always the exact monster. Many times you don't. I know in CoT I built my guy to fight devils, and a few undead were thrown in.
How do you always know what you are going to go up against and how often? That seems really weird to me. Not trying to criticize, it just seems very strange.Not to me. That's how it has always been, in ever game, with every GM. I've never played in a random parade of horrors game which seems to be what the RAW is all about, I guess. We always investigate and find out whats there, or we know we are attacking human bandits, or defending people from orcs, or breaking into a cybernetics company, or investigating a crypt of undead, or stopping a mutant with a certain power, or something, it is about something. We are never just walking through a highly populated random encounter zone. You go to an area or you take a job, you investigate it, you get it done. Maybe there is a surprise, but its rare, that's why it is a surprise. It isn't just a random field of strangeness making it impossible to predict.
This conversation started about Hold Person, and why it is good or not. The argument for it being fair is that you don't know if you will be fighting people or monsters. My counter point is that you almost always know if you are fighting people or monsters because of where you are and what you are trying to do.
Most BBEG's have a variety of enforcers. A necromancer might have a few humans for spotting intruders, a few undead of course just because he is a necromancer, and you don't have to worry about weather and other things humans may have to worry about. He may also hire a few monsters such as giants as mercenaries. He may also have created a construct or two. Maybe there is a dangerous monster in between the BBEG's lair and where the PC's start, and the bad guys avoid the monster due to a treaty of sorts, or they found another path that the PC's may not know about. There are all sorts of reasons PC's can encounter various monster types.
Sure, and that is all well put together and interesting, but it isn't all...Most BBEG's have a variety of enforcers. A necromancer might have a few humans for spotting intruders, a few undead of course just because he is a necromancer, and you don't have to worry about weather and other things humans may have to worry about. He may also hire a few monsters such as giants as mercenaries. He may also have created a construct or two. Maybe there is a dangerous monster in between the BBEG's lair and where the PC's start, and the bad guys avoid the monster due to a treaty of sorts, or they found another path that the PC's may not know about. There are all sorts of reasons PC's can encounter various monster types.
How do you always know what you are going to go up against and how often? That seems really weird to me. Not trying to criticize, it just seems very strange.Not to me. That's how it has always been, in ever game, with every GM. I've never played in a random parade of horrors game which seems to be what the RAW is all about, I guess. We always investigate and find out whats there, or we know we are attacking human bandits, or defending people from orcs, or breaking into a cybernetics company, or investigating a crypt of undead, or stopping a mutant with a certain power, or something, it is about something. We are never just walking through a highly populated random encounter zone. You go to an area or you take a job, you investigate it, you get it done. Maybe there is a surprise, but its rare, that's why it is a surprise. It isn't just a random field of strangeness making it impossible to predict.
This conversation started about Hold Person, and why it is good or not. The argument for it being fair is that you don't know if you will be fighting people or monsters. My counter point is that you almost always know if you are fighting people or monsters because of where you are and what you are trying to do.
That is only because the DM's that you play under or have played under won't do it. I have never known a bad guy to only have 1 or 2 monsters types between him and the PC's. I wrote my last post in about 2 minutes. I am sure there are DM's more creative then myself who can have other valid reason to use more than one monster type to throw the caster off his game. He might find out about the humans and the undead, but he would not be prepared for the contructs or mercenaries most likely since they would be deeper into the lair, and most likely not seen.
PS: I am not saying past DM's have been doing it wrong, but I have noticed that your game experience seems to differ from many of the other posters with regards to information being available. If you feel that a PC "should" know what he is fighting then I can understand, but information is power, and I mix up my encounters just to keep players off balance.
I just wish I could stop myself from using grappling monsters. :)
Ideas?
The best way to weaken spell casters is to understand the spell casting system completely and to have a full understanding of each spell your players could cast.
Players have a good way of reading there spells in a way that makes them seem far more useful then they actually are.
I understand that it is your wish to change the rules but it you will have more success just understanding the rules better.
If you wish to deviate from the norm its best to have an in game reason for the deviation.
You could say that all arcane spell casters are cursed.
Or that It is considered a taboo profession.
When a child shows signs of arcane talent they are crippled.
If you give an in game reason your players will resent you less because they will not feel as if you change the rules just to make it hard for them to play the type of character they want.
How do you always know what you are going to go up against and how often? That seems really weird to me. Not trying to criticize, it just seems very strange.Not to me. That's how it has always been, in ever game, with every GM. I've never played in a random parade of horrors game which seems to be what the RAW is all about, I guess. We always investigate and find out whats there, or we know we are attacking human bandits, or defending people from orcs, or breaking into a cybernetics company, or investigating a crypt of undead, or stopping a mutant with a certain power, or something, it is about something. We are never just walking through a highly populated random encounter zone. You go to an area or you take a job, you investigate it, you get it done. Maybe there is a surprise, but its rare, that's why it is a surprise. It isn't just a random field of strangeness making it impossible to predict.
This conversation started about Hold Person, and why it is good or not. The argument for it being fair is that you don't know if you will be fighting people or monsters. My counter point is that you almost always know if you are fighting people or monsters because of where you are and what you are trying to do.
I think this is one of the reasons you see such a disparity between casters and non-casters. If the casters are able to always have the right spell at the right time, their power level increases dramatically. I think if you played in a different type of game, you would find many of the problems with casters being too powerful to drop to more manageable levels.
|
|
Oh, wow, for a second I thought you believed the whole magic system was balanced. I see the cracks in the wall.Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Hold Person can be a nice potential homerun but Slow is the game changer at that level.
Yes it's relatively short range but multiple targets staggered is a major boost to the party. You can either engage and trust that no full attacks will harm your guys, you can kite with ranged weapons, or if they outclass you the caster and team can run like crazy.
Spiked Pit is also pretty damned close to a SoD at that level. Failed reflex save (many melee types have horrible reflex saves) means that someone takes 2d6 damage +2d6 spikes (no biggie) and is effectively stuck at the bottom of a 20 ft pit for 6 rounds.
If ranged opposition can't skewer a PC with arrows or flaming oil, etc during the next few rounds I'd be kinda surprised.
The pit spells were the first major slip for Paizo, along with Persistent spell.
Those are the ones I kind of shake my head at, and what worry me about the ultimate magic coming out.
There may now be getting to be too many cooks in the kitchen.
The system is balanced for the most part. Pit spells were a mistake because they don't have the balancing limitations of other spells.
They aren't single target, they don't have multiple saves, they aren't set up so that many classes have immunity, etc...
Persistent spell is poorly thought out, and way too cheap. I get the intent, but it should be a +3 or +4 level spell.
In generally, people underestimate the options available to counter SoS spells, and they forget that SoS spell mean that if the enemy makes the save you have done absolutely nothing for a round, while consuming a resource that you can't restore for the day.
They also forget that arcane casters are the most vulnerable of all classes to the very spells they think are so powerful. And if you can do it, so can the people you are fighting. Meaning your "super" class is also the one that is most vulnerable, particularly if you remember most of the buff spells are minute or round per level.
3.5 started to fall apart when game designers got in a hurry to add "new and improved" spells and didn't take the time to play test and consider how the spells impact the game. For the most part the APG was good, there were some exceptions.
Another spell open to abuse is Simulacrum, but that is more easily controlled by a DM.
|
|
Point of fact, Hold Person is now much more likely to be effective thanks to all giants now being humanoids, therefore subject to Hold Person. Hook Mountain Massacre what?
I'll do that one tomorrow in the other thread. It is a great spell for that particular section, but it is still single target, and 2nd level when you are I think 7th at that point.
I don't think anyone is arguing spells aren't good, or that if you have the right spells at the right time that you aren't dominant.
The argument is that it is hard to have those spells when you need them.
|
|
Do you feel like it is a normal situation for wizards to not know if they are going to be fighting men or monsters that day? That's a heck of a no man's land.Yeah, in my experience I can fairly say that they don't know.
Then again, Adventure paths are very very different from how I used to run my homebrews; those were run as "conventional" RPGs and tended to have vastly fewer monsters for some reason.
I've always known. I've never played a game where I didn't know.
Ok, sure, on occasion there were times when a human might employ a monster, like a summoner wizard or maybe a druid left a trail of bread crumbs for a hydra or something, but that is a more rare and silly plot. You don't go into ruins said to be haunted by demons and find men in demon masks unless it is scooby do, and you don't take on bandits and find owl bears.
Really?
In my experience, the world of illusion is like a box of chocolates, you never know what your going to get.
I expect my DM to have it all make sense and not just throw a dart at the board, but we never know exactly what we will be fighting on the way to the BBEG. A lot of times we don't even know much about the BBEG themselves until we get there.
I added some spoiler tags.
Last week called and said it wants its conversation back (;
ROTFLMFAO, i about spit my breakfast out dude...
I generally prefer to Haste my allies. They genreally won't try to save against the spell. :)Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Group Buffs are definitely valuable, group debuffs are also very valuable.
Haste has won plenty of fights but slow has also won plenty of fights.
Basically I view it as this if the total of opponents staggered > total number of allies hasted then slow is a better choice as the initial cast.
Made a slight adjustment on that. It really depends on how likely your opponents are to save. If half your opponents make the saving throw, that kicks the equation severely.I generally prefer to Haste my allies. They genreally won't try to save against the spell. :)Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Group Buffs are definitely valuable, group debuffs are also very valuable.
Haste has won plenty of fights but slow has also won plenty of fights.
Basically I view it as this if the total of opponents (that fail thier saves) staggered > total number of allies hasted then slow is a better choice as the initial cast.
True, Slow is great and hammering mook spam. It's inferior vs foes with good saves.
If I can get the BBEG in an AoE debuff that is primarily focused on debuffing his minions I'll do that (2 birds one stone) but debuffing the BBEG is a bonus. If I've absolutely got to debuff the BBEG it's time to pull out a no save debuff like enervation.
|
Who is taking Hold Person at 5th level instead of Slow?
Hold Person can be a nice potential homerun but Slow is the game changer at that level.
Yes it's relatively short range but multiple targets staggered is a major boost to the party. You can either engage and trust that no full attacks will harm your guys, you can kite with ranged weapons, or if they outclass you the caster and team can run like crazy.
Spiked Pit is also pretty damned close to a SoD at that level. Failed reflex save (many melee types have horrible reflex saves) means that someone takes 2d6 damage +2d6 spikes (no biggie) and is effectively stuck at the bottom of a 20 ft pit for 6 rounds.
If ranged opposition can't skewer a PC with arrows or flaming oil, etc during the next few rounds I'd be kinda surprised.
The pit spells were the first major slip for Paizo, along with Persistent spell.
Those are the ones I kind of shake my head at, and what worry me about the ultimate magic coming out.
There may now be getting to be too many cooks in the kitchen.
It took Paizo 10 years of 3.5 to "balance" PF. Of course the new stuff aren't gonna be balanced. I understand nerfing things to make sure they aren't broken, but man, other than ideas, APG was a major disappointment now that it's been out this long. I will never forget the patches Paizo did to make the summoner fit in. Seeing how the initial version with all the cool things it could do, and then the final version with all the thing it couldn't do, along with not removing pounce...
Also, it's impossible for Paizo to keep up quality and balance while maintaining a schedule for releasing books. I really think some of the APG classes could have been revised better, but they had to release the book. So the fix will be in the next book, where new classes are going to be, and the fix for them is in the next book. Very similar to 3.5.
It's a tough position to be in, and I'm glad they are trying. But it doesn't mean a good product in the end.
|
...
You need to read a thread where people compare them to fighters. There are dozens of them around. Searching the 3.5 boards also helps, assuming the threads survived the forum reboot. Some did, and some didn't.Read this
and this
and this
and more stuff on tiersGood reading, but unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "weakening" for the Wizard. Tiers are about versatility. Able to do more than swing a sword. That's balanced against the fact that nobody can compare to a Fighter with a weapon. So, the weakening for versatility has been handled by low offense, low AC, etc.
Wizards are extremely versatile, and not useless in combat for it. Fighters are not useless outside of combat, and extremely great in combat.
Not to mention... One of those threads suggested that Tiers could be calculated by putting a dragon atop an icy mountain as a goal. Who can get up the mountain, past the dragon, get the treasure, etc, etc... In my experience, the Tier 1 fighter would do it just as easily as the Wizard. Fighters can get the right magic items, the right equipment, the right skills, to do all those things. And if the Dragon does go to combat for both, the Fighter has the better chance of defeating and surviving the encounter.
I can surely agree that Wizards are more versatile. What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they're a better class
Yet he can't do any of this by himself unless a much higher level than his enemies...
Psst! Thread necromancy.
I always think its weird when thread necromancy occurs and people start responding to the 2 year old post... I don't know if that's the best part or the worst part.
Also, the best way to weaken wizards? Make them more fun. That's the most important part of anything you do for balance I think.