Is it just me, or does Ultimate Combat inspire a lot of creep?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 553 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Anybody play this game anymore? Or do you just discuss how unplayable it is?

If everything goes well, I should be running Carrion Crown a couple weeks into the semester.

Honestly, I'm kinda wishing my players all pick up gun based classes and archetypes so it turns int a Spaghetti Western.

A few desperadoes roll into Rovengo, and hi-jinks ensue!


Hudax wrote:
This is why Monopoly was so popular, even in the midst of the Great Depression. Say you had to roll different classes at the beginning of Monopoly. You decide to roll "street person" while the guy next to you rolls "tycoon." How much fun do you think that game would be? Fortunately, that's not the way it is, and that's why people still play it.

People like Monopoly because it brings people together to socialize.

I refuse to believe anyone likes the actual game of Monopoly. It's perhaps one of the worst board games ever [/European Board Game Supremacy]


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Anybody play this game anymore? Or do you just discuss how unplayable it is?

I'm not calling this game unplayable.

"This system has flaws" does not equate to "This system is worthless trash and nobody should play it!" That's just the edition wars motto.

My hope is that people can discuss flaws like rational adults and find solutions to them. The reality is that people have such an ingrained loyalty for the game that even mentioning a flaw is tantamount to heresy.

I gurantee that every person here who snubs "balance" has created either houserules or social agreements that inevitably form to create that most awful "balance" themselves.

Kais86 wrote:
In my opinion, balance is overrated, you should be rewarded for choosing the best path to get to your goals, and Pathfinder does this beautifully. Admittedly some classes don't quite meet the goals as horrifyingly efficiently as other, but they still get there, even if it takes them a little longer.

My gripe is this - the best path is almost always "cast spells." That clashes both with my desires for the mechanics of a fantasy roleplaying game and with the aesthetics I see in fantasy as a whole.

Quote:
4e is fundamentally more balanced than Pathfinder is, but that balance brought about homogenization, everything looks the same, and that makes it boring. While in Pathfinder, you would be hard-pressed to find two classes that felt the same in combat.

Though the classes in 4e may read similar, I can assure you they play very, very differently. You will never see a wizard in 4e play like a fighter in 4e.

Likewise, if all you look at are spells just by briefly reading them, clerics and wizards will look very samey. It isn't until you examine them at depth that you spot the differences.

Quote:
The biggest culprit of this is the insanely flexible (and aptly-named) fighter, who can fake being several other classes, and unlike the wizard, can do that until the cows come home. Technically he can keep doing it after that, but he's going to get bored eventually.... we don't exactly have warforged here, though some GMs would still allow them, after making them fit a bit better in all aspects.

I am waiting for the "just kidding."


Kais86 wrote:


The biggest culprit of this is the insanely flexible (and aptly-named) fighter, who can fake being several other classes, and unlike the wizard, can do that until the cows come home. Technically he can keep doing it after that, but he's going to get bored eventually.... we don't exactly have warforged here, though some GMs would still allow them, after making them fit a bit better in all aspects.

I had to do a double take here.

Fighters are overpowered? First I've heard of that, and honestly, I'm glad someone thinks so.

Grand Lodge

You will be waiting a very long time for that "just kidding", I'm not going to try to explain why I said that about fighters, you are still convinced that casters are the end-all be-all, when they can be turned off by the local environment, much less any actions from opposing forces, while the noncasters keep trucking on.

On paper casters are superior to everyone else, but paper is a flimsy thing that goes see-through when you spill grease on it, in actuality if the non-casters fight smart the casters will lose 9 times out of 10. Often times the best solution is to wait for the caster to run out of time, spells only last so long, and once they are gone, the caster is screwed. That patience thing, it is on the side of the normals.

I also like the massive level of hypocrisy in this, the thread is asking about power creep in ultimate combat, a book primarily about non-casters, and you are going on about how casters can't be beaten. Such a delicious dichotomy.


Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Kais86 wrote:


The biggest culprit of this is the insanely flexible (and aptly-named) fighter, who can fake being several other classes, and unlike the wizard, can do that until the cows come home. Technically he can keep doing it after that, but he's going to get bored eventually.... we don't exactly have warforged here, though some GMs would still allow them, after making them fit a bit better in all aspects.

I had to do a double take here.

Fighters are overpowered? First I've heard of that, and honestly, I'm glad someone thinks so.

The 20th level wizard who divine's the 20th level fighter as his greatest threat and wishes that that fighter's family was never born has a little something to say about that.

Also, that same wizard could just move to another plane or even create a demiplane where he outlives that fighter because time does not travel or at least travels incredibly slow.

The fighter has an army to fight the wizard?
The army members have families, hopefully.
Why would that army want to try to kill someone when the right earthquake or portal to a plane of hell opens up near the villages or towns that army calls home?

A time altering, plane hopping,wish making wizard is far more powerful than the fighter with the same ammount of gold.

Grand Lodge

Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Kais86 wrote:


The biggest culprit of this is the insanely flexible (and aptly-named) fighter, who can fake being several other classes, and unlike the wizard, can do that until the cows come home. Technically he can keep doing it after that, but he's going to get bored eventually.... we don't exactly have warforged here, though some GMs would still allow them, after making them fit a bit better in all aspects.

I had to do a double take here.

Fighters are overpowered? First I've heard of that, and honestly, I'm glad someone thinks so.

...Reading comprehension plox!? I was stating that the fighter could duplicate other classes. I'm not anyone is more powerful than anyone else, the proper use of tactics is the true decider of victory. Killing someone in their sleep is perfectly viable, by the time the wizard is high enough level to get someplace normally considered "safe", the fighter has enough money to get there as well, and all he has to do is be sneaky. Fight dirty or go home.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

Expecting Core to be equal to Core + Splat is ridiculous, especially in a game with variables that can't be measured in number.

X+Y is always greater than X assuming Y is positive.

It isn't X + Y.

The sum is the build. Lets say there are 20 variables in a build. You can pull these variables from any source you like, but they will total 20.

If you take a little from X and a little from Y, if X and Y are equal it will still come up to 20 variables.


Kais86 wrote:

You will be waiting a very long time for that "just kidding", I'm not going to try to explain why I said that about fighters, you are still convinced that casters are the end-all be-all, when they can be turned off by the local environment, much less any actions from opposing forces, while the noncasters keep trucking on.

On paper casters are superior to everyone else, but paper is a flimsy thing that goes see-through when you spill grease on it, in actuality if the non-casters fight smart the casters will lose 9 times out of 10. Often times the best solution is to wait for the caster to run out of time, spells only last so long, and once they are gone, the caster is screwed. That patience thing, it is on the side of the normals.

I also like the massive level of hypocrisy in this, the thread is asking about power creep in ultimate combat, a book primarily about non-casters, and you are going on about how casters can't be beaten. Such a delicious dichotomy.

What kind of "local environment" just turns casters off but leaves fighters alone?

As for casters to just "run out of spells," do you not realize that casters, if they do run out of spells (which is hard because 3e in comparison to older editions gave them tons and tons of spell slots), can just cast Rope Trick or Teleport or any number of easy spells that let them rest with easy?

I think you've been reading too much Giacomo. That's bad for the brain.

Also, I don't think it's really hypocrisy. People are stating that there's power creep "because Core is ultimately balanced." Core is not balanced. Not in the slightest.


I think the only power creep might be whip: it has been replaced by Scorpian whip likely. Aftr all, who wants a whip that can't hurt people wearing armor (or have NA)?

I bet most will just buy scorpian whips now (same proficiency slot).


Starbuck_II wrote:

I think the only power creep might be whip: it has been replaced by Scorpian whip likely. Aftr all, who wants a whip that can't hurt people wearing armor (or have NA)?

I bet most will just buy scorpian whips now (same proficiency slot).

Ultimate Combat adds a feat chain that makes the whip better than the scorpion whip.

Grand Lodge

ProfessorCirno wrote:
Kais86 wrote:

You will be waiting a very long time for that "just kidding", I'm not going to try to explain why I said that about fighters, you are still convinced that casters are the end-all be-all, when they can be turned off by the local environment, much less any actions from opposing forces, while the noncasters keep trucking on.

On paper casters are superior to everyone else, but paper is a flimsy thing that goes see-through when you spill grease on it, in actuality if the non-casters fight smart the casters will lose 9 times out of 10. Often times the best solution is to wait for the caster to run out of time, spells only last so long, and once they are gone, the caster is screwed. That patience thing, it is on the side of the normals.

I also like the massive level of hypocrisy in this, the thread is asking about power creep in ultimate combat, a book primarily about non-casters, and you are going on about how casters can't be beaten. Such a delicious dichotomy.

What kind of "local environment" just turns casters off but leaves fighters alone?

As for casters to just "run out of spells," do you not realize that casters, if they do run out of spells (which is hard because 3e in comparison to older editions gave them tons and tons of spell slots), can just cast Rope Trick or Teleport or any number of easy spells that let them rest with easy?

I think you've been reading too much Giacomo. That's bad for the brain.

Also, I don't think it's really hypocrisy. People are stating that there's power creep "because Core is ultimately balanced." Core is not balanced. Not in the slightest.

Magic Wastes anyone? That's an entire section of the world casters are useless in. Proper use of terrain also favors the non-casters, say you are in a forest, you can't make an earthquake, a tree might fall on you, you also can't make that earthquake in a cave, because that will definitely kill you.

Rope trick doesn't really help them that much, "oh no, he's still well within my reach, because I wasn't stupid enough to come with only a melee weapon or better yet I'm a ranged combatant." This is Pathfinder and in Pathfinder ranged combat isn't just viable, it's actually really really powerful. Teleportation doesn't help when his first attack was to expend an item that put dimensional anchor on you, which is a bloody cheap item all things told (1400 gp, basically chump change when you are high enough level to fight someone with teleport, 9th, which gives you 46k gold), then it's just you and him.

Use your brain for something other than "hurr, spells are the best" and you might get somewhere. Create a scenario and figure out what the non-caster can do to win, even with the most optimal pvp build, the non-caster stands a fair chance of coming out on top.


Kais86 wrote:
Magic Wastes anyone? That's an entire section of the world casters are useless in. Proper use of terrain also favors the non-casters, say you are in a forest, you can't make an earthquake, a tree might fall on you, you also can't make that earthquake in a cave, because that will definitely kill you.

That doesn't prove anything other then "The DM can arbitrarily kill whoever he wants."

( Incidentally if the DM has to arbitrarily kill the wizard because that's the only way to stop him, you're making my point for me )

Quote:
Rope trick doesn't really help them that much, "oh no, he's still well within my reach, because I wasn't stupid enough to come with only a melee weapon or better yet I'm a ranged combatant." This is Pathfinder and in Pathfinder ranged combat isn't just viable, it's actually really really powerful. Teleportation doesn't help when his first attack was to expend an item that put dimensional anchor on you, which is a bloody cheap item all things told (1400 gp, basically chump change when you are high enough level to fight someone with teleport, 9th, which gives you 46k gold), then it's just you and him.

Ahhh yes, Giacomo. How I remember you.

So the fighter gets the jump on the wizard because...because. And then uses an item that casts Dimensional Anchor (which item is this? Or is the fighter pumping skill points into UMD for this?), and rope trick doesn't work because...because? You babble something about ranged weapons which makes me think you don't know what rope trick is.

None of that invalidates what I said, either. The wizard can rest on command. And if you're claiming this is some sort of PVP style arrangement (I thought it wasn't? YOu were claiming everyone is balanced with each other to work together, earlier), then how does the fighter just "wait for the wizard to run out of spells?"

Quote:
Use your brain for something other than "hurr, spells are the best" and you might get somewhere. Create a scenario and figure out what the non-caster can do to win, even with the most optimal pvp build, the non-caster stands a fair chance of coming out on top.

No. I don't think I will. This is an exercise in futility. This isn't even on topic in the slightest.

If you want to make another thread with a situation that a fighter is hands down better then a wizard with all things being assumed equal (that means if the fighter is at full health and rested then so is the wizard), so that no one side has a non-fiat advantage over the other, I may entertain you.

Grand Lodge

Actually, I did read rope trick, the wizard can't dismiss it, it's still there then entire time, hiding in that is basically inviting the guy with a better climb sill to come up and pull you inside out, while you are still on the rope. While the window itself is invisible, the guy on the inside only has a 50% miss chance (something you can reroll if you took the rigth feats, so you can still shoot him, through the window, while you are moving up to him. Held actions are also a noncasters best friend, make them roll concentration checks at DC30+. The other option is to wait until the spell wears out, he's already rested today so he can't do it again, and that spell will wear out before he can rest again.

The item is custom item, RAW states you can have this stuff made, and with the master craftsman feat even the fighter can make them for 30% of the item cost.

Your refusal to take part in the exercise I suggested basically states that nothing short of beating your precious spellcaster to death in a game will show you the error of your ways. That's not that hard frankly. One day a GM will kill your spellcaster in a straight fight and all you will do is whine that X (x being whatever he used) is overpowered. My money's on a paladin or anti-paladin, they have the easiest time of all with casters.

Command doesn't work the way you think it does, it also only lasts 1 round.


Kais86 wrote:
methods of beating casters

Magic must defeat magic!

/Uncle from Jacki Chan Adventures.

But on a serious note: You're right. With the correct amount of creativity and items someone who can't even cantrip can smash in a Wizard's head. This however requires an intense amount of lateral thinking that not many people want to deal with. Especially since a Wizard's ability to neutralize entire encounters with a single spell, which they get for free.


Kais86 wrote:
While the window itself is invisible, the guy inside it (look through the window) isn't, so you can still shoot him, through the window, while you are moving up to him.

Actually, he is. The spell description goes on to state that "even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it."

Also, you can just pull the rope up so people can't come in.

Grand Lodge

Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Kais86 wrote:
methods of beating casters

Magic must defeat magic!

/Uncle from Jacki Chan Adventures.

But on a serious note: You're right. With the correct amount of creativity and items someone who can't even cantrip can smash in a Wizard's head. This however requires an intense amount of lateral thinking that not many people want to deal with. Especially since a Wizard's ability to neutralize entire encounters with a single spell, which they get for free.

The only way they can neutralize entire encounters is if the DM doesn't plan for their magic, in which case he deserves to hand them free xp. A proper encounter takes into consideration the capabilities of the party and has a method of not being cripple by any one given thing. That said, magic isn't free, the wizard payed for those spells, if anyone bothered to enforce the rules on reagents, and writing spells in books.

Ettin wrote:
Kais86 wrote:
While the window itself is invisible, the guy inside it (look through the window) isn't, so you can still shoot him, through the window, while you are moving up to him.

Actually, he is. The spell description goes on to state that "even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it."

Also, you can just pull the rope up so people can't come in.

Anyone without flight by 9th level is a corpse anyway.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ettin wrote:

Also, you can just pull the rope up so people can't come in.

No you can't. Read the Pathfinder version of the spell, it was changed from 3.5e.


Gorbacz wrote:
No you can't. Read the Pathfinder version of the spell, it was changed from 3.5e.

So it is! That is what I get for not doublechecking my search terms when I google it up to check my memory.


Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Kais86 wrote:


The biggest culprit of this is the insanely flexible (and aptly-named) fighter, who can fake being several other classes, and unlike the wizard, can do that until the cows come home. Technically he can keep doing it after that, but he's going to get bored eventually.... we don't exactly have warforged here, though some GMs would still allow them, after making them fit a bit better in all aspects.

I had to do a double take here.

Fighters are overpowered? First I've heard of that, and honestly, I'm glad someone thinks so.

Fighters were better in PF than a barbarian till the APG was released. And they may still be better than the monk, but the new stuff in UC may have changed that. Paladin and rangers have their moments, but in general they are specialized in a specific set of enemies. I haven't seen the cavalier and other combat classes so I couldn't tell you. However no fighter can copy a caster class's role.

The Exchange

The entire premise of power creep is a moot point, in my opinion, when countered by a good GM. It really doesn't matter how awesome my mini-gun wielding 1/2 Dragon Chuck Norris wannabe is if the GM is worth his salt. Besides, if the GM and players don't want it, they don't have to allow it or use it. It is as simple as that.


Kais86 wrote:


The only way they can neutralize entire encounters is if the DM doesn't plan for their magic, in which case he deserves to hand them free xp. A proper encounter takes into consideration the capabilities of the party and has a method of not being cripple by any one given thing. That said, magic isn't free, the wizard payed for those spells, if anyone bothered to enforce the rules on reagents, and writing spells in books.

Wizards get a number of spells in their spell book for free, and the material components pouch is specifically called out as being purposefully nebulous so as to decrease the amount of logistical work needed for both the Players and GM.

Now if you're talking about expensive material components, or additional spells, then that's a different kettle of fish.

Grand Lodge

Jeranimus Rex wrote:

Wizards get a number of spells in their spell book for free, and the material components pouch is specifically called out as being purposefully nebulous so as to decrease the amount of logistical work needed for both the Players and GM.

Now if you're talking about expensive material components, or additional spells, then that's a different kettle of fish.

Most of the good spells, the really powerful ones, have expensive material components, ones that are defined. Those are the ones that the noncasters have to do lateral thinking on.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kais86 wrote:
Magic Wastes anyone? That's an entire section of the world casters are useless in. Proper use of terrain also favors the non-casters, say you are in a forest, you can't make an earthquake, a tree might fall on you, you also can't make that earthquake in a cave, because that will definitely kill you.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Anti-magic zones render everyone incapable of contributing to a fight, because martial classes rely on magical equipment to stay on the RNG. That spellcasters have many abilities which are only situationally useful doesn't make them worse than fighters, which only have one ability which is also situationally useful.

On top of this, you're still casting this in a PVP context, where spellcasters are fighting nonspellcasters. The chief weakness of fighters isn't that they aren't good at murdering people, but instead that they're just not capable of doing anything but murdering people in a level-appropriate way. This isn't a fighters versus wizards issue, but instead an issue of why fighters are worse than everyone. After APG, every class (save possibly rogues) can contribute to combat in a level-appropriate fashion while also having at least a few skill-based schticks for solving problems which aren't "There's a guy over there, he needs to die now."

Let's go back to breadth of ability, reliability, and vulnerability to mishap.

Fighters have an extremely narrow breadth of ability. Every significant combat schtick is feat-hungry, and feats generally offer little in the way of new abilities to solve problems. As a practical matter, fighters will have one form of combat they are good at, another form of combat they are poor at, and possibly one mediocre skill-based schtick if you chose your skills carefully. (Unfortunately, their general stat spread is poorly matched to the few problem-solving class skills.)

Fighters are generally reliable at executing their main schtick of murdering people. Melee fighters will generally have competitive survivability to enter melee, and ranged fighters will generally be able to use their ranged attacks on most foes in most situations. Melee fighters see a drop-off in reliability because mobility starts to become an issue, but this is something party members or magic items can supplement somewhat. Their skill-based schtick, if any, is unlikely to be terribly effective or reliable, because it will probably be based on a tertiary stat, if not a dump stat.

Fighters have middling vulnerability to mishap. They absolutely need magical equipment to stay on the RNG, but can still function poorly without it. They don't have any particular resource to consume other than HP. They aren't particularly vulnerable to melee combatants, but do not have very good saves. The largest vulnerability they have to mishap is the narrowness of their single combat schtick; a melee combatant will have a lot of trouble against a flier at low levels, a ranged combatant may have issues with melee combatants at low levels, high winds, Wind Wall, or a foe which can obstruct the battlefield.

But this is fighters versus wizards again. It has relatively little to do with UC.


Zmar wrote:
Well, I don't need more power. I want to do something different. I want to play, but not to repeat exactly the same. That's what keeps me happy, not the fact that my well built old character is garbage if compared to my new character. I want to take an old AP and play it with new a character without breezing through. I want to take a core character and not feel underwhelming in a new AP. You think I'm alone?

This.

I left 4e because I got tired of having to pay constant attention to when books came out to know if they were currently playable, with 3 versions of some races and classes


Kais86 wrote:
Jeranimus Rex wrote:

Wizards get a number of spells in their spell book for free, and the material components pouch is specifically called out as being purposefully nebulous so as to decrease the amount of logistical work needed for both the Players and GM.

Now if you're talking about expensive material components, or additional spells, then that's a different kettle of fish.

Most of the good spells, the really powerful ones, have expensive material components, ones that are defined. Those are the ones that the noncasters have to do lateral thinking on.

Fly doesnt, neither does dominate person, or dispel magic (on those pretty flying boots the fighter has).

Or any other "make a will save" spell... You must have taken iron will and improved iron will, now you only have a 50% chance to die... Every round... (Cause im flying and your flying will be dispelled).

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Shadow_of_death wrote:

Fly doesnt, neither does dominate person, or dispel magic (on those pretty flying boots the fighter has).

Or any other "make a will save" spell... You must have taken iron will and improved iron will, now you only have a 50% chance to die... Every round... (Cause im flying and your flying will be dispelled).

D&D isn't a PVP game, and arguing about a PVP fight in some abstract non-context proves nothing.


Kais86 wrote:
Jeranimus Rex wrote:

Wizards get a number of spells in their spell book for free, and the material components pouch is specifically called out as being purposefully nebulous so as to decrease the amount of logistical work needed for both the Players and GM.

Now if you're talking about expensive material components, or additional spells, then that's a different kettle of fish.

Most of the good spells, the really powerful ones, have expensive material components, ones that are defined. Those are the ones that the noncasters have to do lateral thinking on.

This, along with nearly everything else you've said, is incorrect.

A low % of spells require expensive material components.

You do not possess a secret wizard killing strategy.

You are not so great a player that you can overcome the class imbalance.

D20's do not magically sprout in your footsteps.

Casters are not required to be brainless idiots. Creativity, lateral thinking, and outside the box solutions are not the sole purview of classes who NEED such solutions to manage to be blindingly adequate. Think tactically with a fighter and you'll be good. Put half the thought into a wizard and you'll be a god.


A Man In Black wrote:
Shadow_of_death wrote:

Fly doesnt, neither does dominate person, or dispel magic (on those pretty flying boots the fighter has).

Or any other "make a will save" spell... You must have taken iron will and improved iron will, now you only have a 50% chance to die... Every round... (Cause im flying and your flying will be dispelled).

D&D isn't a PVP game, and arguing about a PVP fight in some abstract non-context proves nothing.

It's a easier to compare PCs to enemies with class levels and no racial hit dice because it doesn't require digging out the bestiary. I mean, sure, sometimes the big bad will be a dragon or something, but often it'll be a guy with class levels.


A Man In Black wrote:

D&D isn't a PVP game

Except when the GM throw dudes with class levels at you.

Granted, I like fighting monsters more.

Grand Lodge

Shadow_of_death wrote:
Kais86 wrote:
Jeranimus Rex wrote:

Wizards get a number of spells in their spell book for free, and the material components pouch is specifically called out as being purposefully nebulous so as to decrease the amount of logistical work needed for both the Players and GM.

Now if you're talking about expensive material components, or additional spells, then that's a different kettle of fish.

Most of the good spells, the really powerful ones, have expensive material components, ones that are defined. Those are the ones that the noncasters have to do lateral thinking on.

Fly doesnt, neither does dominate person, or dispel magic (on those pretty flying boots the fighter has).

Or any other "make a will save" spell... You must have taken iron will and improved iron will, now you only have a 50% chance to die... Every round... (Cause im flying and your flying will be dispelled).

Ranged weapons, line of site, held actions, these are your friends as a noncaster. Use them wisely and you can win. Why is it that everyone assumes that noncaster don't have range? You are like the 3rd or 4th person to state "lol, I fly out of your reach" when "my reach" is over 500 feet. Fly all you like, I don't care, I'm going to shoot you. Wind Wall, I stay out of line of sight until it comes down, then I shoot you some more.

@Man in Black: Long story short: no it doesn't. Take a monster, compare it to a properly built fighter equal to it's CR, and then apologize. Fighters don't need magic to win, it just helps a lot in the process. Since I've played several fighters, who have all had very useful skills to the party (only one who took survival, engineering, or stealth...oddly enough), I know first hand that you don't need a billion skill points to be useful out of combat.

@Bignorsewolf:Wrong, if you try to cast dominate person, and the fighter doesn't use his held action to interrupt it, you deserve to win, because he was an idiot. Then you get to make a ridiculously difficult concentration check. Maybe two depending on if the fighter is using manyshot and how the GM runs it. There isn't anything beyond simple thought on how to get around these things.

Wizards are not automatically better than everyone, they need the player to be better at playing their class than anyone else in the group, and at that point it's not the class at all, it's the player.


Quote:
@Bignorsewolf:Wrong, if you try to cast dominate person, and the fighter doesn't use his held action to interrupt it, you deserve to win, because he was an idiot.

Right. Because the way to win the fight is.. to stand there and hold an action till the cows come home.

The wizard walks around the corner where you can't see him and casts invisibility. You can't change your action to compensate because you're holding to shoot him when casts.

Quote:
Then you get to make a ridiculously difficult concentration check.

Injured while casting 10 + damage dealt + spell level

How much damage do you think you're going to do with that bow, IF you hit?

Quote:
Maybe two depending on if the fighter is using manyshot and how the GM runs it. There isn't anything beyond simple thought on how to get around these things.

As long as the wizard doesn't think too, sure.

Grand Lodge

Typically archers do around 1d8+15 or so. Also, you step out of line of sight, then the fighter just leaves. A fighter can simply throw powder if he figures out the wizard has gone invisible, he's also likely to have blind fighting, at which point you were better off casting Displacement. Plus, he's probably going to hit.

Furthermore, an archer fighter is just going to hit the wizard with a grappling/trip arrow. The fighter can also delay until the wizard's turn, if the wizard appears to be moving around a corner, the fighter moves to keep the wizard in LoS, then takes his shot. Another good option is to have an item that casts silence. Like an arrow or whatever.


Kais86 wrote:
stuff

Yes, it's true non-martial characters can do things to ruin a wizards day.

But like the very crafty fighter, the wizard has tricks up its sleeve and thus it all comes down to rolling initiative.


Kais86 wrote:
Typically archers do around 1d8+15 or so.

+3 strength +2 specialization, +4 weapon , +3 weapon training, +1 gloves .. you're talking pretty high levels there already. Like level 15? A dc 30 concentration check isn't THAT hard at those levels.

Quote:
Also, you step out of line of sight, then the fighter just leaves.

And gets chased down by pouncing celestial dire lions that move faster than he does.

Quote:
A fighter can simply throw powder if he figures out the wizard has gone invisible

At the cost of a round and a half(Move to wizard, draw powder from handy haversack throw powder)

Quote:
he's also likely to have blind fighting, at which point you were better off casting Displacement. Plus, he's probably going to hit.

The fighter needs to find the squares to throw the powder first.

Quote:
Furthermore, an archer fighter is just going to hit the wizard with a grappling/trip arrow.

Which the flying wizard responds to by casting flight while prone and zooming off. You can't interrupt the spell because you've shot this round.

Quote:
The fighter can also delay until the wizard's turn, if the wizard appears to be moving around a corner, the fighter moves to keep the wizard in LoS

Are you going to ready or delay? You can't mix and match the best of both initiative actions. If you ready you have to declare what action you're readying and the trigger. If you're delaying you do not get to interrupt the wizard or keep him in LOS. The wizard takes his entire turn and THEN you go.

Quote:
then takes his shot. Another good option is to have an item that casts silence. Like an arrow or whatever.

Wizard moves out of the area and continues as normal.

Grand Lodge

Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Kais86 wrote:
stuff

Yes, it's true non-martial characters can do things to ruin a wizards day.

But like the very crafty fighter, the wizard has tricks up its sleeve and thus it all comes down to rolling initiative.

Noncasters are far more likely to win that roll more often than not, the exceptions are what I call half-casters, Paladins, Rangers, Inquisitors (especially Inquisitors, they are full of go-first), Magi, and the like. These guys actually have the easiest time with other casters, though the non-spell-using ninja definitely wins the day. Especially once they take crippling strike at 10th.

@Bignorsewolf: that lion will be dead before it gets there. Nothing quite like provoking attacks of opportunity from an archer. You also aren't taking into consideration deadly aim, point blank shot, greater weapon spec, or anything else a fighter is likely to use to give him an edge in damage to make sure you don't cast that spell, like a flaming, frost, shock, etc. weapon. You also didn't take into consideration the effects of being grappled or tripped by an arrow. Each of these things makes it progressively more difficult to beat the fighter, to the point where they are about on even footing, even if they are both being played intelligently.

Side note: how do you move out of the area of an arrow stuck in you? Considering it was one of two arrows that hit simultaneously, there are several others sticking out of you now, which one(s) have silence on them, and which ones don't?


Quote:
@Bignorsewolf: that tiger will be dead before it gets there.

Exactly how many actions is your fighter getting to the wizards here? You're slaying the summoned critter, and the wizard is... doing his nails while you do that? You only get one attack of opportunity for movement, even if the critter moves through multiple threatened squares.

Quote:
You also aren't taking into consideration deadly aim, point blank shot, greater weapon spec, or anything else a fighter is likely to use to give him an edge in damage to make sure you don't cast that spell

If an archer has a ready action on you you move behind something.

Quote:
weapon. You also didn't take into consideration the effects of being grappled or tripped by an arrow.

You're right. I'm not taking into account the actions of your super-fighter who had 6 rounds of plinking at the wizard before the "Go" was signaled, and who can apparently ignore the rules to trip the wizard and then prevent his dimension dooring away.

Could you please explain how you plan on accomplish that WITHOUT confusing the delaying and readying rules? Its very hard to believe your claims to superior system mastery when you confuse the two.

Quote:
Each of these things makes it progressively more difficult to beat the fighter, to the point where they are about on even footing, even if they are both being played intelligently.

They did this out, ad nauseum, on the Order of the stick forums. level 20 fighter vs a level TEN wizard. The wizard usually won. The only fighter that i remember winning used a boatload of magic items and UMD.

Nothing you're saying indicates that you would fare any better. You're resorting to

Sovereign Court

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I did!

And then I got deployed.

:(

Wars are taking our gamers away! Down with wars!

Good luck out there!


The nature of having more choices will mean that there is more powerful combos. There is no way to release additional material with out there being power creep unless you nerf the new stuff so much that it doesn't matter at all.

It's the nature of the game, I don't know how so many people thought this would be different when Pathfinder came out and they were revelling in the glory of it being different from WOTC's 3.5 stuff.

It's the same thing. People like options. Options mean more synergy. More synergy means more power.

This can't and won't change.

Sean Mahoney

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I go away for awhile, and this thread meets the expectations I had when I posted it. :P

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:

I did!

And then I got deployed.

:(

Wars are taking our gamers away! Down with wars!

You made a mistake there, it should be "down with lawless occupation of 3rd world countries in the name of imperialist superpowers!"

;)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I was keeping it as apolitical as I could.

Although getting politics involved in this thread would be the quickest way to the OTF I can think of...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:

Expecting Core to be equal to Core + Splat is ridiculous, especially in a game with variables that can't be measured in number.

X+Y is always greater than X assuming Y is positive.

Nope. If Y is 0, then X + Y = X.

If you are using Integer Notation, and Y is a fraction of 1, then X + Y = X.

Anyway, you shouldn't be using algebra to describe splat book additions.

You should be using set notation.

In Set Notation, X equals the maximum power level of PF. X is described by the formula Max[Core] when Core was released. That is, X is defined by the most powerful option from Core book. You are assuming that adding the APG makes X = Max[Core] + Max[APG]. It doesn't. X becomes Max[Max[Core],Max[APG]]. If Max[Core] = 9, and Max[APG] = 8.75, then X doesn't equal 17.75, which is your assumption. X instead = 9, since 9 is the maximum of the set of sets.

Now, if you want to get into Combinatory Sets, where you're taking combinations of both sets (which is even more accurate), then X = Max[Core + APG]. Max[Core] might be 9, and Max[APG] might be 8.75, but Max[Core + APG] might be 10, or 127. Then you add in UC and UM, and X = Max[Core + APG + UC + UM]. If Max[Core] is 9, and Max[Core + APG + UC + UM] is within 2 standard deviations of 9, then there's no power creep.

What happened at the end with WoTC was that Max[Core] was 5, and Max[Core + Complete Series + Eberron + Races Books + Forgotten Realms + Book of 9 Swords + Magic of Incarnum] was about 25. That gave us huge power creep.

My own feeling right now is that currently Max[Core] for PF is about 10. And Max[Core + APG + UM + UC] is about 10.75, maybe 11.

101 to 150 of 553 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Is it just me, or does Ultimate Combat inspire a lot of creep? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.