Min-maxing wasn't good enough


Gamer Life General Discussion

251 to 300 of 429 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The spellbook thing reminds of one time I was playing Shadowrun 4e.

So, all of us make our characters. It's going great. I and a friend make elf siblings, my guy as the face, her elf as a sneaking, sniping, and generally shooting the hell out of things expert. We have a dwarf technomancer/rigger obsessed with the free flow of information. We've got an orc mage who specializes in paranormal detective work and illusion magic. It's going great.

We get a fifth player that none of us really know. He decides to play razorboi. Seems simple enough. Then we learn that his character sheet is five pages long. Why? Because it's filled with "this is what my character does in this situation."

He has a list of all his gear and how all of it is hardwired, not wirelessly connected, slaved to a master internal Commlink, which it in of itself is kept disabled unless physically activated with a hidden manual switch.

He has three comlinks, two of them to throw people off. The third internal one is set to automatically encrypt and record all sensor data and store it on an anonymous off-site location. [b]All/b] files are protected with data bombs that can only be accessed by specific biometrics within the correct milliseconds and auto-deletes everything after two weeks.

All software code is in several different languages.

The list goes on and on. The final straw was when we finally meet the Mister Johnson - keep in mind he actually sits there and tells us how he covers his own paranoia - and he refuses to eat or drink anything. Then, when the Mr Johnson leaves after rebuffing him for his rudeness, he gets out a small pre-prepared cloth to wipe off all our fingerprints.

See, the guy was used to a DM that so very aggressively punished them for any breach outside of absolute paranoia. We were used to, shall we say, more casual style games.

When I look at all these methods and "needs" for protecting spell books my mind reels. I've never played in a game that required this, nor can I imagine how annoying playing in such a way would be.


ProfessorCirno wrote:

The spellbook thing reminds of one time I was playing Shadowrun 4e.

So, all of us make our characters. It's going great. I and a friend make elf siblings, my guy as the face, her elf as a sneaking, sniping, and generally shooting the hell out of things expert. We have a dwarf technomancer/rigger obsessed with the free flow of information. We've got an orc mage who specializes in paranormal detective work and illusion magic. It's going great.

We get a fifth player that none of us really know. He decides to play razorboi. Seems simple enough. Then we learn that his character sheet is five pages long. Why? Because it's filled with "this is what my character does in this situation."

He has a list of all his gear and how all of it is hardwired, not wirelessly connected, slaved to a master internal Commlink, which it in of itself is kept disabled unless physically activated with a hidden manual switch.

He has three comlinks, two of them to throw people off. The third internal one is set to automatically encrypt and record all sensor data and store it on an anonymous off-site location. All/b] files are protected with data bombs that can only be accessed by specific biometrics within the correct milliseconds and auto-deletes everything after two weeks.

All software code is in several different languages.

The list goes on and on. The final straw was when we finally meet the Mister Johnson - keep in mind he actually sits there and tells us how he covers his own paranoia - and he refuses to eat or drink anything. Then, when the Mr Johnson leaves after rebuffing him for his rudeness, he gets out a small pre-prepared cloth to wipe off all our fingerprints.

See, the guy was used to a DM that so very aggressively punished them for any breach outside of absolute paranoia. We were used to, shall we say, more casual style games.

When I look at all these methods and "needs" for protecting spell books my mind reels. I've never played in a game that required this, nor...

Sounds like normal Shadowrun to me. :)

It could be worse. You might have been playing Paranoia. :D

Liberty's Edge

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
I thought you were arguing for the other side?

I'm secure enough in the evidence and rationale for my position that i'm not frightened by evidence.

The fact is that 99% of the time PC's get these books by prying them out of the wizards cold dead fingers. Bothering an adventuring party for cash seems like hunting bears with a spear for a living. Trying to get the wizards spellbook while he's alive seems to be like trying to shave bears for a living.

I respect you for that. Good show.

Shadow Lodge

I just find arguing for one side all the time boring, so I tend to pick whatever side strikes my fancy when I come upon an argument.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ProfessorCirno wrote:
When I look at all these methods and "needs" for protecting spell books my mind reels. I've never played in a game that required this...

Which may be part of why you think the Wizard is a god class.

It isn't too much to ask you have a spare spellbook. But it is a cost of doing buisness.

Frankly a spellbook is paper in a land of fire breathing dragons. The fact that is survives regularly is a lot of DM handwaving.

I think all of us have said that specifically targeting for no good reason is foul-play. However we are also saying that not protecting your spellbook in a reasonable manner makes it fair game.

All wizards I play with have at least a suboptimal spare spellbook somewhere not on them should something happen to the spellbook they have. All get handy haversacks or simlar to keep the travel book in so it is safe...all of this is withing reasonable expectation.

Wizards are very, very powerful...if everything goes their way. But they have to spend 9 hours a day in preparation while carrying around a book that without which most of their power goes away.

They are the all win/all fail class. They get the most advantage of any class to handwaving.


TarkXT wrote:
It could be worse. You might have been playing Paranoia. :D

Sounds like that guy was a Communist mutant and should have been purged. If he wasn't doing anything wrong he wouldn't have had anything to hide.


Quote:
Frankly a spellbook is paper in a land of fire breathing dragons. The fact that is survives regularly is a lot of DM handwaving.

I think its more like leather in a land of fire breathing dragons. Keep in mind that tree pulp paper is a fairly recent invention, before that high quality books would be made out of vellum (high quality dead animal skin skin) or parchment (also dead animal skin)

Quote:
All wizards I play with have at least a suboptimal spare spellbook somewhere not on them should something happen to the spellbook they have.

Our groups tend to be a little low on downtime, so that hasn't really come up for any of my wizards. One however did build his own house, and kept his spellbook in a familiar pocket in his hat along with his bat familiar. (he had bats in his belfry in more ways than one)

Quote:
All get handy haversacks or simlar to keep the travel book in so it is safe...all of this is withing reasonable expectation.

There are groups that don't pick up a hewards at some point?

Wizards are very, very powerful...if everything goes their way. But they have to spend 9 hours a day in preparation while carrying around a book that without which most of their power goes away.

Quote:
They are the all win/all fail class. They get the most advantage of any class to handwaving.

Its no so much handwaving as the rules. When you get burnt to crisp, yes, your stuff is fine, because the rules say so. this is mostly because you're easier to fix than your stuff is. Its not a rules oddity so much as a design feature of not wanting to track the durability left on a player's underwear.


Eacaraxe wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
It could be worse. You might have been playing Paranoia. :D
Sounds like that guy was a Communist mutant and should have been purged. If he wasn't doing anything wrong he wouldn't have had anything to hide.

Oh absolutely. Oh and on a totally unrelated topic friend troubleshooter would you mind holding this smoking unloaded laser pistol for me and strike a daring pose while I take a picture?


pauljathome wrote:

It also depends on the NPC in question.

I was running a campaign awhile back where the BBEG was
1) Insanely intelligent (god like)
2) Insanely paranoid
3) Had lots and lots of time and resources.

I made it very clear up front to the players that they had absolutely zero chance of coming up with a plan to surprise him in his lair. As the GM I'd wait until they'd spent all their time planning and THEN decide why it failed. I'd stick to the rules in telling them HOW it failed but given that "the rules" included Wish spells and the like I was pretty confident that I'd be able to foil any plan.

There was no way that I was willing to spend the time and effort to try and come up with all of those defenses in advance. And, if I had, I'd almost certainly fail since it would be 1 of me vs 5 intelligent and creative players who would almost certainly find something that I'd missed.

The situation wasn't impossible, of course. The PCs were slowly getting access to a form of power that the BBEG didn't know anything about and so, eventually, the PCs would be able to use that new form of power to come up with a plan.

Wow....

That... Doesn't sound like ANY fun at all!! The moment the DM tells me that any plan we come up with will fail... that would cause me to throw up my hands say 'Frontal charge then... what the heck.'

Dire Mongoose wrote:


At this point, I've played it so much that if, for whatever reason, I could write down my precautions and not tell the DM what they are, I'd have 99.99% confidence my access to a spellbook wouldn't be a problem. And that's kind of stupid. It's not about how smart or brave or interesting or influential or lucky my character is, it's about how much I, as a player, have seen -- and because there's so much riding on a spellbook, there's no chance I'm going to say: Well, my last three wizards have lost 50k gold worth of spellbook to water damage, but wizard #4 isn't going to take any precautions because he doesn't know better!

And that's why it's inevitably metagamey and stupid and a distraction from everything that's fun or interesting about the game.

NORMALLY I've been on the OTHER side of the argument... but I feel the need to jump in here ;)

I don't think it's TOO metagamey for characters to know what characters SHOULD know... I get frustrated when I get tied up not remember what golarion month comes in what order... but my CHARACTER has lived there his whole life...

On that note... if he learned his magic from a teacher or acadamae... I'm sure 'protect you book' was an entire semester class of BEATING it into the wizards head...

Eacaraxe wrote:


Pertinent to this line of conversation is the fact wizards' reliance on spellbooks in most fantasy worlds would be fairly common knowledge. Even if you imagined some campaign world in which wizards were some kind of rare, monolithic figures ruling in a LE magocracy and knowledge of magic among the common people was harshly suppressed, the highest you're talking is a DC 11 Knowledge (arcana) check. Where there's a wizard, there's a spellbook nearby. That's pretty much the end of the story.

1) How are these common people telling the difference between wizards, bards, and sorcerers?

2) Knowledge arcana is trained only... so I'm not sure how many of the 'common folk' have skill points in that ;)

Ok, Question for those in favor of taking hard earned and mandatory to the class stuff...

Do you do the same thing to OTHER players? When these rogues sneak into the inn and swipe the book... do they also steal the cleric's holy symbol, the Paladin's holy sword, the fighters +3 flaming/ghost touch weapon, and the Bard's instrument?

If THAT's the game your going for, then I'm all for it. Spread the love, and screw everyone over... Breeds drama and revenge... Could be FUN!!!

If it's JUST the wizard who is vulnerable...THAT I don't think sounds fun at all. Why would BBEG send out assassins who omnipotently spy on the party for months... and only screw ONE of the characters over?

They should be good enough to get them ALL.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
phantom1592 wrote:
1) How are these common people telling the difference between wizards, bards, and sorcerers?

One sings, one wears revealing clothing soemtimes composed entirely of belts, and the other smells funny and knows big words like suffulufficus.


TarkXT wrote:
[Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back

I know! Next, the fighter could get both arms chopped off. Then the party can go on a lengthy adventure to get them regenerated. What's that, you say? He can't do much and mostly sits those sessions out? Maybe somebody should have thought ahead and picked kicking or biting as a secondary weapon training.


Dire Mongoose wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
[Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back
I know! Next, the fighter could get both arms chopped off. Then the party can go on a lengthy adventure to get them regenerated. What's that, you say? He can't do much and mostly sits those sessions out? Maybe somebody should have thought ahead and picked kicking or biting as a secondary weapon training.

Oh hello there little blower of things out of proportion are you suggesting that the wizards spell book is somehow attached to his shoulder blades? My that must be painful when it gets sundered.


phantom1592 wrote:


I don't think it's TOO metagamey for characters to know what characters SHOULD know... I get frustrated when I get tied up not remember what golarion month comes in what order... but my CHARACTER has lived there his whole life...

On that note... if he learned his magic from a teacher or acadamae... I'm sure 'protect you book' was an entire semester class of BEATING it into the wizards head...

But...

My point remains that: even if you can justify knowing it, newbie players don't have this knowledge, and veteran players have it in spades.

So let's take a class that's probably the most daunting in the game to an inexperienced player and double punish them for their inexperience, while not legitimately making things any harder for the guy who actually knows how to play a wizard.

The first guy doesn't make wizard look like the best class in the game. The second guy does, and spellbook destruction has nothing for him.

I mean, if I suggested it be a normal component of a campaign that if you're playing a fighter and it's your first fighter, sometimes your weapon is just randomly destroyed, but if it's your second or later fighter this never happens, people would think I was insane. But that's, effectively, what people are defending here.

You cannot seriously threaten a non-very-low-level veteran wizard player's spellbook without overwhelming force which could just easily kill the party (lame) or extreme DM fiat, e.g., yeah you had these dozen defenses but this random thief just happened to bypass them all because, plot! (also lame). That's why the whole thing seems silly to me. There's a strong correlation (not causation) between it and bad/cheesy/cliche'd GMing.


TarkXT wrote:


Oh hello there little blower of things out of proportion are you suggesting that the wizards spell book is somehow attached to his shoulder blades? My that must be painful when it gets sundered.

I'm saying that playing a gimp character that cannot meaningfully contribute to the team in what is essentially a team game isn't fun for anyone, including the other players, for long.

As I'm fond of saying, if Pathfinder were football, some people would want to be the quarterback, others running backs, others wide recievers, others linemen, and maybe some odd guy even wants to be the kicker, but nobody wants to play the waterboy if they have a choice.


Dire Mongoose wrote:
but nobody wants to play the waterboy if they have a choice.

My waterboy just teleported to he bookstore dropped the money that the quarterback blew on the lowest level of football he carried, teleported back annihilated the entire team in a blaze of fury while his summoned minions made the scoring touchdown because some b+&%@@&! said gatorade was better than water. He then went home with the cheer leading squad. But still woke up early in the morning for his chess meet.

Meaningful contribution is an arbitrary term that fails to ever get truly defined. A creative and intelligent player can make meaningful contributions by merely being creative and intelligent. Evena new player entirely unproficient in the system can still surprise players with out of nowhere ideas.

But I digress. Let's just strike at the heart of the matter shall we?

Many classes have mechanisms built into it that would cause the loss of class features. In fact most do. And in nearly every case (paladins and occasionally druids being the exception) you don't hear people b!!&# and moan about one or more of these players losing their class abilities because they didn't respect the restrictions of their class. In this case the restriction is tied to a physical object. That's it, that's all. Funny enough I do agree that arbitrary stealin is essentially wrong and no different then making paladins fall for no reason. The difference however is that it's harder for a paladin to get his abilities back then the wizard. All a wizard has to do is shell out the cash for another book, it might not be his book buts it's better than nothing. A paladin will ahve to get an atonement, and that can either be easier or harder depending on the circumstances.

In the meantime none of these classes, while limited, are not dead people or unplayable, merely difficult. And whose to say it's not fun every once in a while? Maybe not for you who prefers to keep the image of the untouchable god wizard all the time every time. But maybe it'll lead into better stories, more fun, maybe some *gasp* actual character development will take place.

I think some people have been burned too hard or just give up too easily to actually consider that these things might actually enhance the storytelling aspects of the game rather than hinder it. It's partly GM's fault of course some like to use it as an arbitrary plot device or punishment mechanism with no real build up towards it. The way I envision it adventuring's a tough life, people don't come out of it unscathed, many retire gloriously but many still hold scars like old war veterans. I find these people interesting, the oens who struggled, the ones who fought, the ones who threw down the epic evil despite the hardships, not left the table because of them. I don't know maybe I'm the only one in the world who doesn't flip the table when permanent damage happens to my character.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
I think its more like leather in a land of fire breathing dragons. Keep in mind that tree pulp paper is a fairly recent invention, before that high quality books would be made out of vellum (high quality dead animal skin skin) or parchment (also dead animal skin)

Assuming a prototypical western European fantasy game, that is. PC's in an Asian-themed campaign will have ready access to paper (it was invented in the 1st Century CE in China, after all), and PC's in an Arabic or North African-themed game will have access to papyrus in scroll or codex form. A more ancient-themed, sub-Saharan Africa-themed, or Native American-themed game could have the wizards packing around rolled skins or clay tablets for their "spellbooks", or taking spell mastery out the wazoo (learning spells via oral tradition).

Assuming the GM doesn't outright prohibit the wizard class in total, requiring arcane casters to be witches or sorcerers.

Quote:

1) How are these common people telling the difference between wizards, bards, and sorcerers?

2) Knowledge arcana is trained only... so I'm not sure how many of the 'common folk' have skill points in that ;)

1. Bards are the guys that sing and dance, and tend to be rather flamboyant. Telling the difference between a wizard and sorcerer, and arguably even a magus, will be much harder. That kind of thing makes for great RP and plot hooks from time to time.

Spoiler:
In a game I ran once, the PC's had ended up in some bumpkin town. Some idiot NPC broke into the sorcerer's inn room to steal his spellbook; when he didn't find it, rumor quickly spread said sorcerer was some Deific Ultra-Wizard who didn't even need a spellbook. Of course the sorcerer PC was eating it up, enjoying the finest the town had to offer in food, drink, and nubile farm girls.

When the local wizard heard the rumors, he thought someone was moving in on his action and challenged the sorcerer to a mage duel. The PC heard the rumors about that wizard being super-powerful and figured he was toast but was going to face his death honorably, meaning he was going to rig the duel by convincing the townsfolk to have a "banquet" the night before in honor of the combatants and using it as an opportunity to poison the wizard. The wizard had the same idea, being in reality just as much a keystone cop as the sorcerer and playing off the bumpkins' ignorance of magic to boost his reputation.

So, when it came time for the duel both of them had been up all night barfing their brains out, stacked with nonlethal and Con damage, and hadn't been able to prepare spells for the day. The entire town and people from nearby villages and farms showed up to watch the Epicest of Epic Ever Mage Duels Between Monolithic Heroes. The mage duel ended up being a complete wash, the townsfolk figured out both of them were frauds and ran both of them out of town. That wizard ended up being a recurring character, continual foil for the PC's and in the end a hero antagonist.

2. Knowledge checks of up to DC 10 can be made untrained, which is actually why I specified the 11 DC in my example of the totalitarian magocracy: you'd have to already be "in the loop" legally or not to know, but word's still going to slip out from time to time. Anywhere else it's guaranteed to be under 10, which is still "common knowledge"...probably in the DC 5 range for most campaign settings, and just a DC 0 gimme in high-magic, high-fantasy settings.


ciretose wrote:
Which may be part of why you think the Wizard is a god class.

No, I think wizard is a god class because they have unparalleled narrative power.

This is something you don't understand. I didn't think my elf or the other elf or the technomancer or any of the characters in SR4 are "god classes" despite the DM occasionally grabbing us in the weak point and throwing us at the wall.

I don't think the paladins is a god class despite it being possible to just strip away their class powers on a whim of you are a terrible DM.

Wizards being "god" have nothing to do with "Well you don't steal their spellbook" and everything to do with "Once they get level 3 spells, they have access to Fly."


TarkXT wrote:
Many classes have mechanisms built into it that would cause the loss of class features. In fact most do.

Except, other then things like druids and paladins which you explicitly bring up, none of them are built on DM fiat.

Melee classes are weak against flying monsters or teleporters. Sneaky characters are weak against monsters that can detect them regardless. These aren't specific cases though; they're weaknesses that are intended to come out naturally that aren't connected to any playing style.

Wizards are weak in situations in which their spellbook has been specifically targeted by the DM to make them lose all their powers.

Do you not see the difference?

Grand Lodge

Or if they somehow end up in the Mana Wastes.


ProfessorCirno wrote:


Except, other then things like druids and paladins which you explicitly bring up, none of them are built on DM fiat.

It's funny how people forget that a lot more classes have a similar restriction. I'll give people a moment to read the rest of the classes again. I can wait.

I'm not here to debate the relative strength/weakness of wizards or whether or not it's DM fiat for a rival wizard to be stealing the party wizard's book. Part of that I feel stems from a lot of uncreative thinking on the part of the GM or at least unwillingness to account for the wizards hazard skipping powers. Which I point out is amusing to me since it's always the druid that's managed to do that moreso than the wizard in my games (I really ought to stop making dungeons made of stone...).

Liberty's Edge

TarkXT wrote:
Dire Mongoose wrote:
but nobody wants to play the waterboy if they have a choice.
My waterboy just teleported to he bookstore dropped the money that the quarterback blew on the lowest level of football he carried, teleported back annihilated the entire team in a blaze of fury while his summoned minions made the scoring touchdown because some b!~#!+!% said gatorade was better than water.

It's got elecrolytes.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ProfessorCirno wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Which may be part of why you think the Wizard is a god class.

No, I think wizard is a god class because they have unparalleled narrative power.

This is something you don't understand. I didn't think my elf or the other elf or the technomancer or any of the characters in SR4 are "god classes" despite the DM occasionally grabbing us in the weak point and throwing us at the wall.

I don't think the paladins is a god class despite it being possible to just strip away their class powers on a whim of you are a terrible DM.

Wizards being "god" have nothing to do with "Well you don't steal their spellbook" and everything to do with "Once they get level 3 spells, they have access to Fly."

As so why wouldn't any reasonable NPC want to limit them? Why isn't it a cost of the class to have to manufacture at least two spellbooks? Why is it so expensive, by rule, to simply write a spell into a book?

The Wizard has the theoretical ability to cast any spell at any time. But the practical application of this ability comes from him maintaining 8 hours of rest with an hour of meditation while maintaining a spellbook that contains the spell that they need at that time.

Fly is apparently much more awesome in your game. We find that after you cast fly (standard action) you can move 60 feet parallel to the ground or 30 feet up that round with it's move action.

Unfortunately for wizards, this generally means they are still at risk from things called "arrows", which are also accessible to 5th level characters.

The argument you seem to be making is "If you ignore all the inherent weaknesses of the class, they are invincible!"

To which I reply "From the ankles up, Achilles was unstoppable!"

Liberty's Edge

TarkXT wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:


Except, other then things like druids and paladins which you explicitly bring up, none of them are built on DM fiat.

It's funny how people forget that a lot more classes have a similar restriction. I'll give people a moment to read the rest of the classes again. I can wait.

I'm not here to debate the relative strength/weakness of wizards or whether or not it's DM fiat for a rival wizard to be stealing the party wizard's book. Part of that I feel stems from a lot of uncreative thinking on the part of the GM or at least unwillingness to account for the wizards hazard skipping powers. Which I point out is amusing to me since it's always the druid that's managed to do that moreso than the wizard in my games (I really ought to stop making dungeons made of stone...).

Creative players and druids in particular do make GM planning challenging. But then again, creative players make GM planning fun.

Liberty's Edge

ProfessorCirno wrote:


Wizards are weak in situations in which their spellbook has been specifically targeted by the DM to make them lose all their powers.

Do you not see the difference?

No, Wizards who don't have the common sense to have a back up spellbook are limited to the spells they have memorized, their special abilities (school/feats/bonded weapons/etc...) until such time as they acquire a new spellbook.

A wizard who loses his main spellbook is in the same position as a fighter who loses his main weapon. They have lost something they invested a great deal of time and money in, and will be less effective using a back up until they can get the original restored.


ciretose wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Which may be part of why you think the Wizard is a god class.

No, I think wizard is a god class because they have unparalleled narrative power.

This is something you don't understand. I didn't think my elf or the other elf or the technomancer or any of the characters in SR4 are "god classes" despite the DM occasionally grabbing us in the weak point and throwing us at the wall.

I don't think the paladins is a god class despite it being possible to just strip away their class powers on a whim of you are a terrible DM.

Wizards being "god" have nothing to do with "Well you don't steal their spellbook" and everything to do with "Once they get level 3 spells, they have access to Fly."

As so why wouldn't any reasonable NPC want to limit them? Why isn't it a cost of the class to have to manufacture at least two spellbooks? Why is it so expensive, by rule, to simply write a spell into a book?

The Wizard has the theoretical ability to cast any spell at any time. But the practical application of this ability comes from him maintaining 8 hours of rest with an hour of meditation while maintaining a spellbook that contains the spell that they need at that time.

Fly is apparently much more awesome in your game. We find that after you cast fly (standard action) you can move 60 feet parallel to the ground or 30 feet up that round with it's move action.

Unfortunately for wizards, this generally means they are still at risk from things called "arrows", which are also accessible to 5th level characters.

The argument you seem to be making is "If you ignore all the inherent weaknesses of the class, they are invincible!"

To which I reply "From the ankles up, Achilles was unstoppable!"

You seem to keep throwing things into "But in this battle..."

I thought the big thing for Paizo was that it wasn't all about combat?

Fly is incredibly awesome in fights, but the thing is, it's even MORE awesome outside of fights. If your game is just nonstop fighting then fly is merely "really awesome because it completely evades monsters who are focused on melee." Outside of combat fly becomes "Literally ignore every terrain based obstacle or plot point that would ever come up outside of caves."

See, I'm not even talking about wizards theoretically being able to cast any spell whenever they want. That makes them god-ier, sure, but that's not what makes them "god" in the first place. It's about the power of spells in of themselves.

Liberty's Edge

ProfessorCirno wrote:


You seem to keep throwing things into "But in this battle..."

I thought the big thing for Paizo was that it wasn't all about combat?

Fly is incredibly awesome in fights, but the thing is, it's even MORE awesome outside of combat.

Did you hurt your back trying to move the goalposts right there?

I'll stick with you. Fly is awesome and incredibly useful. Having it at 5th level is a huge boon to the wizard class.

It's also a potion.


ciretose wrote:
Did you hurt your back trying to move the goalposts right there?

I'd check with your doctor about seeing things that aren't there if I were you.

Quote:

It's also a potion.

"I can momentarily give myself a wizard spell" does nothing to disprove that the wizard has far too much narrative power in comparison to other classes. It only proves it more so, because the only way to try and match the wizard is to use wizard powers.

Liberty's Edge

ProfessorCirno wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Did you hurt your back trying to move the goalposts right there?

I'd check with your doctor about seeing things that aren't there if I were you.

Quote:

It's also a potion.

"I can momentarily give myself a wizard spell" does nothing to disprove that the wizard has far too much narrative power in comparison to other classes. It only proves it more so, because the only way to try and match the wizard is to use wizard powers.

Yeah.

And it's a good thing all that narrative power is kept in a fragile non-armor wearing shell that needs 9 hours of prep per day, one hour of which in an area of "peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them."

Not to mention all that goes into maintaining that spellbook to assure it has the spells you need when you need them...if you happen to prepare the right spells the right number of times that day, of course.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Writing-a-New-Spell-into-a-Spellboo

So again, at 5th level you can fly. If you cast your highest available spell. For 5 minutes.

Sweet lord, we are all doomed! The unarmored guy with low AC and Hit Points is flying for 5 minutes if he consumes a significant portion of his resources!

RUN!!!


Hey LilithsThrall.

LilithsThrall wrote:
there are three seperate topics in the forum right now which show that it's possible to optimize beyond min-maxing

Actually, there are a great many more topics than just the three I've seen you participating in regarding what you're terming "optimizing beyond min-maxing" ... folks basically discussing / debating / arguing over the finer points of playing Pathfinder RPG.

LilithsThrall wrote:
In all three cases, rather than min-maxing, the character maxes and then demands that the GM sweep the min under the rug where it will never be seen.

Meh. I'm not sure that's the conclusion I'd draw from reading the three threads of concern, but everyone's different. I'm sure what I take away from reading a thread will be a great deal different from what someone else might.

LilithsThrall wrote:
Am I simply old school?

Dunno'. I'm so old school I'm not sure what folks mean anymore when they say "old school."

From what I can discern from your posts, you seem to be strongly focused on role-play and game immersion in your flavor of Pathfinder RPG, but you also feel ... again strongly ... that there are portions of the game mechanics you see others take advantage of, and you're resentful of DMs / GMs who allow anyone to do so.

LilithsThrall wrote:
Does all the passion with which these things are argued influence the game designers?

I think they factor in the passion their customers express on the forums when discussing game design and mechanics.

But it's just a factor in a larger picture. Paizo is (after all) a business concern. Regardless of how much the rest of us love our Pathfinder RPG, for them it's their paycheck.

I suspect folks arguing about "Charisma" vs "Appearance" / "How to Protect Your Spellbook 101" / "The Mechanics of Pole Arms Usage in Constricted Spaces" is noticed and nodded at.

After all, these discussions have been going on for some 30 years. It's just in the age of the intarwebz and forums, there's a sense of immediacy and importance to the arguments that belies their true importance.

LilithsThrall wrote:
Does it indicate the future direction of the game?

I'm not worried about the direction of MY game.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document wrote:

The Most Important Rule

The rules in this book are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters have a number of “house rules” that they use in their games. The Game Master and players should always discuss any rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt.

Regards,

-- Andy


ciretose wrote:


I'll stick with you. Fly is awesome and incredibly useful. Having it at 5th level is a huge boon to the wizard class.

Meh its about 2/3 of a mile, moving at 7mph.

Lets just get that in perspective. Basically (assuming you gain little to no height, you can move at the pace of a jogger for around 5 minutes.

Once.

And thats assuming you were happy to go one way.

Hardly overcoming any melee muppet in the game, they just follow you down the block and beat you up when you land.

You can cross a river, or get up the side of a smaller mountain.

And that all assumes you are in little to no armour.

Am I missing the big deal?


Shifty wrote:
I guess we are lucky you trained with Shaolin Monks up in the Hills whilst you were on assignment from your Navy SEALS gig and crosstraining with Spetznaz. I didn't realise I was in the presence of a hardened Bullshidoshi.

Shifty, that was rich.

I snickered so loud I nearly started laughing.

-- Andy


TarkXT wrote:
Cartigan wrote:


And getting a witch familiar back is way better than replacing a spellbook. You at least get automatic spells and it only takes a day.

Wizard: Oh hello local arcane book keeper it appears some ruffians have gone and ran off with my spell book perhaps I might offer coin for a temporary replacement?

Shopkeep: Why yes good sir I'm afraid I don't have the vast stores of arcane knowledge your book undoubtedly had allow me to show you my marvelous collection of books transcribed with specific use.

Wizard: Ah I think some of these will be sufficient. I would like a Book of Harms and is that a Journeyman's Book of Thul Raven?

Shopkeep: Good eye sir! It is without it's protections but I've no doubt the spells within can help you find the ruffians.

Wizard: Indeed! So that will be 2000gp?

Shopkeep: How generous! You do me too much honor!

Wizard: It is no bother to one such as myself. Thank you kind shop keep!

Took the wizard less than an hour and earned a discount card at the bookstore. :)

You come upon a link with a tag attached. The tag says "Click me."


Shifty wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
And getting a witch familiar back is way better than replacing a spellbook. You at least get automatic spells and it only takes a day.

Although thats not QUITE true now is it.

"If a familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced 1 day later through a special ritual that costs 500 gp per witch level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete. A new familiar begins knowing all of the 0-level spells plus two spells of every level the witch is able to cast."

So please, lets not get carried away.

Please tell me what part of that I got wrong. Start with the bolded sections.


TarkXT wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:
1) How are these common people telling the difference between wizards, bards, and sorcerers?
One sings, one wears revealing clothing soemtimes composed entirely of belts, and the other smells funny and knows big words like suffulufficus.

Yes, you've identified the Bard. But what about the other 2?


ciretose wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:


Wizards are weak in situations in which their spellbook has been specifically targeted by the DM to make them lose all their powers.

Do you not see the difference?

No, Wizards who don't have the common sense to have a back up spellbook are limited to the spells they have memorized, their special abilities (school/feats/bonded weapons/etc...) until such time as they acquire a new spellbook.

A wizard who loses his main spellbook is in the same position as a fighter who loses his main weapon.

Except the Wizard only gets to make a new spellbook if he memorized one of each spell he had in his book and never uses them. A Fighter can just pick up a club and hit people because hitting people is what the Fighter does.


Cartigan wrote:
ciretose wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:


Wizards are weak in situations in which their spellbook has been specifically targeted by the DM to make them lose all their powers.

Do you not see the difference?

No, Wizards who don't have the common sense to have a back up spellbook are limited to the spells they have memorized, their special abilities (school/feats/bonded weapons/etc...) until such time as they acquire a new spellbook.

A wizard who loses his main spellbook is in the same position as a fighter who loses his main weapon.

Except the Wizard only gets to make a new spellbook if he memorized one of each spell he had in his book and never uses them. A Fighter can just pick up a club and hit people because hitting people is what the Fighter does.

A Wizard can make a backup spellbook with every spell that's in his main spellbook before his main spellbook is destroyed/stolen. That's beesides the spells he has mastered. He also doesn't immediately lose all the spells he has for the day the moment his spellbook gets destroyed/stolen. In addition, his feats (such as spell focus) continue to work.

A fighter does a measly 1d6x2 with a club and will generally lose the benefit of his feats (such as weapon specialization).


Cartigan wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:
1) How are these common people telling the difference between wizards, bards, and sorcerers?
One sings, one wears revealing clothing soemtimes composed entirely of belts, and the other smells funny and knows big words like suffulufficus.
Yes, you've identified the Bard. But what about the other 2?

As he said, the Wizard will generally speak in big words and be covered in strange odors/stains (bat dung, incense, etc.) He'll also have a spell component pouch.


LilithsThrall wrote:


A Wizard can make a backup spellbook with every spell that's in his main spellbook before his main spellbook is destroyed/stolen.

Irrelevant to the scenario.

Quote:
That's beesides the spells he has mastered. He also doesn't immediately lose all the spells he has for the day the moment his spellbook gets destroyed/stolen.

But if he casts them, he can write them into a new spellbook.

Quote:
In addition, his feats (such as spell focus) continue to work.

What the hell do those have to do with anything?

Quote:
A fighter does a measly 1d6x2 with a club and will generally lose the benefit of his feats (such as weapon specialization).

So he loses what, an average of 6 damage and 4 to hit? (and that's at like level 12)


LilithsThrall wrote:


As he said, the Wizard will generally speak in big words and be covered in strange odors/stains (bat dung, incense, etc.)

Congratulations, you identified the Bard. What about the other 2?

Quote:
He'll also have a spell component pouch.

So will every caster except the Sorcerer. And not being a Sorcerer is no guarantee they will have one.


Cartigan wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:


As he said, the Wizard will generally speak in big words and be covered in strange odors/stains (bat dung, incense, etc.)

Congratulations, you identified the Bard. What about the other 2?

Quote:
He'll also have a spell component pouch.
So will every caster except the Sorcerer. And not being a Sorcerer is no guarantee they will have one.

Also, who said anything about bards singing and dancing? Since we got Archtypes like detective and Archaelogist... there doesn't need to be an instrument in sight...

Telling the difference between a sorcerer and a wizard should be near impossible. Especially since any wizard can pick up 'eschew materials' as easily anyone else...

Now these well planned rogues have to decide if it's worth the risk of sneaking in and HOPING there's a book around...

I notice nobody has responded to my other questions...

Does anyone sunder Holy Swords, Steal Holy Symbols or otherwise screw over the OTHER classes?

I KNOW there are a lot of DMs who do what they can to make a Paladin fall... but what about the other stuff? Does Mega-evil ONLY target the mage with his ninja-assassins?


phantom1592 wrote:


Does anyone sunder Holy Swords, Steal Holy Symbols or otherwise screw over the OTHER classes?

YES


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Want to see metagaming at its finest? Ok. You have a big bad evil guy who has his minion (or maybe even himself) who is pretty damn good at sneaking and being unnoticed, so he creeps into the party's camp, home, whatever. He scoots right up to the wizard and somehow manages to lift the wizard's arm up (since he's probably sleeping with his spellbook), steal the spellbook from the wizard's possession, then creep back out of the camp while leaving the vast collection of magical sundries. All in an attempt to harm or make it more difficult for the party.

So then a player goes: "I don't get it. They were skilled enough to sneak into the camp, steal McWizard's spellbook from out of his sleeping bag while we were all sleeping in close proximity to one another, and then left. Why didn't he just kill one of us?"

Yes, why DIDN'T the badguy just kill one of them? I mean, it's apparently so effortless for them to have done so. If you can just waltz into the party's camp and start stealing their gear while they sleep, then there's not a thing in the world preventing them from just coup de gracing them in their sleep.

Say it's an 8th level expert. He walks into the camp, using his sweet stealth skill. Maybe he was even using a potion of invisibility so he's so much harder to hear creeping up (I know it's stupid but it's true), so the party has no idea he's around. At this point he decides that he wants to steal the party's stuff. So he whips out a light pick and coups the dude for 4d4+8 points of damage while he sleeps. Ok, that's an average of 18 damage and a DC 28 save or die.

So now you have a dead party member and he steals their stuff. No one to come looking for it now!

Maybe he then repeats this with each party member. You get a dead party and a very rich minion of the BBEG after he sells all their pretty +X shinies of magical wonder.


Ashiel wrote:

Want to see metagaming at its finest? Ok. You have a big bad evil guy who has his minion (or maybe even himself) who is pretty damn good at sneaking and being unnoticed, so he creeps into the party's camp, home, whatever. He scoots right up to the wizard and somehow manages to lift the wizard's arm up (since he's probably sleeping with his spellbook), steal the spellbook from the wizard's possession, then creep back out of the camp while leaving the vast collection of magical sundries. All in an attempt to harm or make it more difficult for the party.

So then a player goes: "I don't get it. They were skilled enough to sneak into the camp, steal McWizard's spellbook from out of his sleeping bag while we were all sleeping in close proximity to one another, and then left. Why didn't he just kill one of us?"

Yes, why DIDN'T the badguy just kill one of them? I mean, it's apparently so effortless for them to have done so. If you can just waltz into the party's camp and start stealing their gear while they sleep, then there's not a thing in the world preventing them from just coup de gracing them in their sleep.

Say it's an 8th level expert. He walks into the camp, using his sweet stealth skill. Maybe he was even using a potion of invisibility so he's so much harder to hear creeping up (I know it's stupid but it's true), so the party has no idea he's around. At this point he decides that he wants to steal the party's stuff. So he whips out a light pick and coups the dude for 4d4+8 points of damage while he sleeps. Ok, that's an average of 18 damage and a DC 28 save or die.

So now you have a dead party member and he steals their stuff. No one to come looking for it now!

Maybe he then repeats this with each party member. You get a dead party and a very rich minion of the BBEG after he sells all their pretty +X shinies of magical wonder.

DO NOT QUESTION MY MOTIVATIONS PEASANT! PERHAPS HE SHOULD SEARCH FOR HIS SPELL BOOK IN THE CAMPFIRE! BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


ciretose wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Erato wrote:
Ion Raven wrote:
I don't see why the wizard doesn't just keep his spellbook in the fighter's bag. No one ever steals rifles through the fighter's stuff. Also spellbooks are heavy, so it's a load off the wizard's back. The wizard should keep a journal written in another language as a decoy though.
Because an enemy who has observed the party for months would know where it was and steal it from inside the fighter's pack. Granted, why said enemy shouldn't also steal the fighter's stuff is beyond me, but obviously some DMs play that way.
A sword is a lot easier to replace than a spellbook, and does not hurt nearly as much, but it probably requires the same effort that taking the book does.

a) Not really, look at the cost of enhanced weapons vs the cost of basic spellbooks

b) Which is why Wizards need to invest in protection and/or back up spellbooks.

Would you argue fighters shouldn't have to carry back up weapons?

Fighters do need backup weapons, but a fighter does not lose as much effectiveness using a backup weapon as a wizard using a backup spellbook.

The backup spellbook normally does not have all the spells that the original book does so it is a decent powerdown for the wizard.

That weapon might cost more than the spellbook, actually I am sure it will, but it is harder to replace. You can only transcribe one spell per day into the book so even if you have 70 percent of your spells in the backup book it might take a while to even get back to where you were, and you are still missing spell you have had if the book had never been taken.

Another factor is whether or not the stolen object is done so the GM can send you on a quest or if it is perma-gone.


ciretose wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Did you hurt your back trying to move the goalposts right there?

I'd check with your doctor about seeing things that aren't there if I were you.

Quote:

It's also a potion.

"I can momentarily give myself a wizard spell" does nothing to disprove that the wizard has far too much narrative power in comparison to other classes. It only proves it more so, because the only way to try and match the wizard is to use wizard powers.

Yeah.

And it's a good thing all that narrative power is kept in a fragile non-armor wearing shell that needs 9 hours of prep per day, one hour of which in an area of "peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them."

Not to mention all that goes into maintaining that spellbook to assure it has the spells you need when you need them...if you happen to prepare the right spells the right number of times that day, of course.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Writing-a-New-Spell-into-a-Spellboo

So again, at 5th level you can fly. If you cast your highest available spell. For 5 minutes.

Sweet lord, we are all doomed! The unarmored guy with low AC and Hit Points is flying for 5 minutes if he consumes a significant portion of his resources!

RUN!!!

I am not going to check to see if concentration applies to studying, but if a GM said it did I would just buy a tent. As for light. It is a cantrip. At higher levels just cast rope trick or one of those other shelter type spells.

Potions are expensive bro, and are not an equal substitute for being able to cast a spell just because you want to.

With the said I don't think fly is a game breaker, but a GM should be prepared for flying(most likely overland flight) if he knows his party likes it.


Ashiel wrote:


So now you have a dead party member and he steals their stuff. No one to come looking for it now!

Yep. That's one of the major things that confuses me about this 'stealing' scenario...

A lot of people seem to argue that 1) the bad guys are INCREDIBLY smart and observant... WAY to smart to NOT send assassins in to swipe the book...

and 2) that the quest to get the book back is great plot fodder...

but.... How is it the rogues don't KNOW that taking a wizards book will result in a vengence crazed 'god-character' coming after them?? Probably with his whole party??

NEVER take a living mages book... If you got him standing in front of you... kill him dead!!!

Despite how crappy a game THAT would be.... ;)


LilithsThrall wrote:


A Wizard can make a backup spellbook with every spell that's in his main spellbook before his main spellbook is destroyed/stolen. That's beesides the spells he has mastered. He also doesn't immediately lose all the spells he has for the day the moment his spellbook gets destroyed/stolen. In addition, his feats (such as spell focus) continue to work.

A fighter does a measly 1d6x2 with a club and will generally lose the benefit of his feats (such as weapon specialization).

Keeping your backup on pace with the original is not that easy since your free spells at level up go into the original book, and don't take up any time. Most of the time the original is ahead of the backup because if a wizard has a choice to transcribe a spell he already has or putting a new spell into a book he will choose the new spell.

The fighter backup weapon won't be as good as the original, but it will be good enough to make him a threat to most opponent. He won't lose as much as the wizard.

As for spells lost for the day, that is not high on the wizard's list unless he thinks he can get the spellbook back that same day. He will be thinking about tomorrow and the next day.


Ashiel wrote:

Want to see metagaming at its finest? Ok. You have a big bad evil guy who has his minion (or maybe even himself) who is pretty damn good at sneaking and being unnoticed, so he creeps into the party's camp, home, whatever. He scoots right up to the wizard and somehow manages to lift the wizard's arm up (since he's probably sleeping with his spellbook), steal the spellbook from the wizard's possession, then creep back out of the camp while leaving the vast collection of magical sundries. All in an attempt to harm or make it more difficult for the party.

So then a player goes: "I don't get it. They were skilled enough to sneak into the camp, steal McWizard's spellbook from out of his sleeping bag while we were all sleeping in close proximity to one another, and then left. Why didn't he just kill one of us?"

Yes, why DIDN'T the badguy just kill one of them? I mean, it's apparently so effortless for them to have done so. If you can just waltz into the party's camp and start stealing their gear while they sleep, then there's not a thing in the world preventing them from just coup de gracing them in their sleep.

Say it's an 8th level expert. He walks into the camp, using his sweet stealth skill. Maybe he was even using a potion of invisibility so he's so much harder to hear creeping up (I know it's stupid but it's true), so the party has no idea he's around. At this point he decides that he wants to steal the party's stuff. So he whips out a light pick and coups the dude for 4d4+8 points of damage while he sleeps. Ok, that's an average of 18 damage and a DC 28 save or die.

So now you have a dead party member and he steals their stuff. No one to come looking for it now!

Maybe he then repeats this with each party member. You get a dead party and a very rich minion of the BBEG after he sells all their pretty +X shinies of magical wonder.

+10


That's why these sorts of arguments are stupid. Anyone who can reliably steal the wizard's spellbook can take anything else they want and kill the party in the process. Finding the spellbook in other situations is just as stupid, since you can't see what's inside a bag. What's the Perception DC to get X-Ray vision, exactly?

Likewise, the assassination in the night is a real threat, but most foes just aren't going to know where you are at every moment. Scrying can be a method of doing so, but honestly scrying isn't something you can keep up constantly, and if your enemies are using scry & die tactics on you, then you should probably at least be able to afford a simple alarm spell on your camp every night.

However, arguing that an enemy would just sneak into their camp and steal their spellbook is stupid; since if they can already do that the party is dead anyway.


Ashiel wrote:
Want to see metagaming at its finest? Ok. You have a big bad evil guy who has his minion [...] Yes, why DIDN'T the badguy just kill one of them?

Could be lots of reasons. Could be an LE BBEG who wants to kill the party himself, or just have a fairly aberrant code of conduct (kneecapping is permissible, but assassination is dishonorable). Or, a CE BBEG who wants to convert the party to evil by forcing them to resort to increasingly desperate and ethically-gray acts to defeat him (the Joker option). Or the BBEG could be romantically or sexually attracted to and obsessed with the wizard, trying to get him/her to come to them and "do what they know they want to do anyway" to get the book back (this is a fantastic one to get the players' skin crawling). Or a BBEG that just wants to maximize suffering.

Or it could be a rival party looking to undercut the competition. A BBEG that's not a bad guy at all and just uses ethically grey-to-black actions to achieve their ends, out to keep the party from throwing themselves in the way of whatever greater threat the "BBEG" is after. Or a more neutral-leaning opposed to just plain evil BBEG that wants a party out of the way with a minimum of violence. You have to look at this through an antagonist's viewpoint; the midnight assassin is merely the pragmatic solution, and not every villain need be such, or even out to kill the party. Especially in an urban setting, where murder is messy and attracts a ton more unwanted attention than vandalism or theft (and avoiding unwanted attention is an overwhelming motivation for rogues of all spectra).

It doesn't even have to be "a thief sneaks into the camp in the middle of the night". Perhaps a bard gets the wizard drunk, seduces him/her, and lifts the book on their way out of the inn room after pillow talking the PC to sleep or slipping them a drug. A pickpocket could use sleight of hand to smear paste laced with bookworm eggs inside the wizard's backpack, or a shrunken, scored (to shatter when the shrink wears off) vial of sovereign glue or universal solvent (either one is perfectly capable of destroying a spellbook). There are a lot more subtle, inventive ways to get rid of a spellbook that doesn't reek of GM interference or deus ex machina.

251 to 300 of 429 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Min-maxing wasn't good enough All Messageboards