|
OK, so let's say it is a workaround build. Is that really a problem?
Oh yeah.... I had intended to make a point in there somewhere.... :)
What I intended to say was that workaround builds draw the attention of GMs to varying degrees. I think that is the source of the reaction (or sometimes over-reaction) the OP experiences.
|
What I intended to say was that workaround builds draw the attention of GMs to varying degrees. I think that is the source of the reaction (or sometimes over-reaction) the OP experiences.
Eloquently done.
"Some people are going to see workarounds as cheese, and when these are GMs, some of THOSE are gonna push back against it."
Only you never said the word cheese! :D
|
What I intended to say was that workaround builds draw the attention of GMs to varying degrees. I think that is the source of the reaction (or sometimes over-reaction) the OP experiences.Eloquently done.
"Some people are going to see workarounds as cheese, and when these are GMs, some of THOSE are gonna push back against it."
Only you never said the word cheese! :D
And I think this is the core of the issue where the OP feels singled out.
Instead of showing You-Tube videos of animals handling stairwells we should get back to the original issue.
Question 1: are there character classes that tend to get push back from a significant proportion of GMs due to widespread cheese
Question 2: what can be done if this is the case
Cheesy builds by others! should never be an argument of discrimination against one of my characters.
How to deal with cheese builds is better discussed in a different thread as this one deals with non-cheese builds of classes where cheese seems common or at least above random.
|
I think its worth noting that not all workarounds are going to introduce balance discrepancies. I think the small cavalier is such a case.
Workarounds are likelier to introduce balance discrepancies when the system has not been well developed and tested.
In all honesty, I am in awe of the amount of effort put by the developers, testers and all the people in charge of both PFRPG and PFS in making a well-rounded solid system where balance discrepancies are really really rare (at least in my experience).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And let's not forget that this is a workaround to let the cavalier use their standard class abilities.
Cavaliers give up a hell of a lot compared to a fighter, for instance - no weapon training, not as many feats, and so on. Their compensation comes in things like cavalier's charge.
I personally don't think that a cavalier is too powerful even when leveraging all their class abilities fully - I'd say that at that point they're about par, with the rest of the time performing at 60-80% of a fighter's efficiency, depending on build and circumstances. I've never found Small cavaliers to be overpowered - they're just able to act as a cavalier should more often that a Medium cavalier can.
|
|
And let's not forget that this is a workaround to let the cavalier use their standard class abilities.
Cavaliers give up a hell of a lot compared to a fighter, for instance - no weapon training, not as many feats, and so on. Their compensation comes in things like cavalier's charge.
I think some of the issue can be attributed doubling down on Mounted Combat feat chain, on top of being a cavalier. Feast or famine characters are just (imo) never a good idea.
If you're reliant on being served a feast, you've set yourself up for tons of fail even without considering whether a GM decides to be a jerk to you.
Glad to see everyone is back on board with a good discussion. :)
I understand the impression that small Cavaliers are a workaround, and that they have been abused at times. However, I look at small Cavaliers much as I look at any other class with options. The player chose to make decent sacrifices to damage so that they could have a more versatile character, mount-wise. It's not as though they're getting it for free. Being small definitely makes a melee class less threatening. I could see how some GMs might get their hackles up when thinking about the potential for breaking the class, but not everyone is doing it to break things.
I see the same problems with this as I've had with other GMs when they encounter something they don't want to have to work around, or feel threatened by.
Cavaliers get enough flak as it is. Taking the penalties for small size so that they are a bit more usable is not a huge issue in my eyes. Just because something can be exploited doesn't mean it should be stomped on. A hammer is an extremely useful tool, but if we apply the same mentality, all hammers should be banned as potentially dangerous.
And, allowing this sort of restriction on Cavaliers opens up the door for GMs to apply wind direction penalties to archers, humidity penalties on scroll use, rust penalties on metal armor, cracking penalties on leather armor, and so on. There's a reason these things are set aside.
And, just remember: If there's ever an issue where a character is ridiculously overpowered, it is likely that enemies will recognize this and focus fire on him. Even if they don't kill him, it should give the player pause. The GM always has a card to play.
|
I think some of the issue can be attributed doubling down on Mounted Combat feat chain, on top of being a cavalier. Feast or famine characters are just (imo) never a good idea.
If you're reliant on being served a feast, you've set yourself up for tons of fail even without considering whether a GM decides to be a jerk to you.
How is it any different than a fighter going through weapon focus with a weapon? They're making the /assumption/ that they are going to have a greatsword. They're screwed if it gets sundered and they have no backup.
The cavalier situation is the same, the way I see it.
|
|
Other classes don't get to use their class features 100% of the time. Cavaliers (even small cavaliers) aren't any different. The fighter doesn't get to use his Weapon Training all the time. The rogue doesn't get to use Sneak Attack all the time. Why do some people feel like animal companions are so different?
Note this is coming from a guy that has three different characters with animal companions (a druid, an inquisitor with the animal domain, and a human cavalier). I fully understand that there are going to be plenty of situations where I can't bring them along.
Do small cavaliers get to use their mounts more often? Definitely, but it's not a free pass. You're still not going to be allowed to ride your dog/cat/boar/whatever inside the noble's villa nor inside any inn/tavern.
|
|
If you're reliant on being served a feast, you've set yourself up for tons of fail even without considering whether a GM decides to be a jerk to you.How is it any different than a fighter going through weapon focus with a weapon? They're making the /assumption/ that they are going to have a greatsword. They're screwed if it gets sundered and they have no backup.
The cavalier situation is the same, the way I see it.
It's a matter of extreme. A cavalier with no feats usable while dismounted is essentially playing a warrior NPC class when dismounted.
A weapon specialist fighter loses much of his punch when he loses his weapon, but at least he doesn't lose everything. And unless he chose to specialize in something bizzare, there's always the slim but realistic chance that a new weapon of his type can be found/had by the time the BBEG shows up should his weapon be lost/stolen/sundered/etc.
If a GM is perfectly amenable to a small cavalier, but the mount ends up dying halfway thru the adventure.. no mod I've yet heard of affords the opportunity to acquire a new mount mid-adventure. the cavalier is gimped and it's completely the player's fault that he's gimped w/o a mount.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a matter of extreme. A cavalier with no feats usable while dismounted is essentially playing a warrior NPC class when dismounted.
How about the rogue who can't sneak attack because the module features elementals as opponents? How about the illusionist who can't use their illusion spells versus undead, plants and so forth.
It isn't just cavaliers who can be neutered by modules, it happens to every class. If PFS is going to make special allowances for cavaliers while ignoring the equally disruptive issues for other classes, it's only going to increase the resentment against the cavaliers.
First and foremost, the Pathfinder Society should present a level playing field for all classes. No class should receive special dispensation because a module is a poor fit for their abilities.
|
|
It's a matter of extreme. A cavalier with no feats usable while dismounted is essentially playing a warrior NPC class when dismounted.How about the rogue who can't sneak attack because the module features elementals as opponents? How about the illusionist who can't use their illusion spells versus undead, plants and so forth.
It isn't just cavaliers who can be neutered by modules, it happens to every class. If PFS is going to make special allowances for cavaliers while ignoring the equally disruptive issues for other classes, it's only going to increase the resentment against the cavaliers.
First and foremost, the Pathfinder Society should present a level playing field for all classes. No class should receive special dispensation because a module is a poor fit for their abilities.
Lol, I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me.
But to clarify my position.. if a player brings a PC that's overly specialized (such as a cavalier fully invested in mounted combat chain feats) it's not the GMs fault when he has his inevitable issues. A GM's failing to cater to your narrow specialization does not constitute antagonism.
(before I get accused of rekindling flames- if the orginal post was not exaggeration, there's been advice on how to handle over-reaching GMs already given)
|
|
IMO low-level arcane casters, especially wizards, are probably most difficult -- because you get to do sheer amounts of nothing repeatedly for about half your build since you simply don't have enough spellcasting volume to do what is the you wanted to play the character for in the first place. -- You have less opportunities to "be cool" in combat than virtually any other class; and obtaining spells for your book is an annoyance which rivals doing your taxes.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with workaround small Cavalier characters is that they are only built due to the fact that they get round the "mount in dungeon" issue not because they are an interesting character to play.
The train of thought goes something like this:
1) I want to play a Cavalier
2) I want to be useful in dungeons
3) I will play a Gnome or Halfling because they can be mounted in dungeons
Whereas IMHO the train of thought should be
1) I want to play a Gnome/Halfling Cavalier because it's cool.
The fact of the matter is that most people who see a Gnome or Halfling Cavalier will see the first type rather than the second type. Hence accusations of cheese.
This is however totally irrelevant. If I have someone turn up to play a PFS game I am running, it is my job to provide an enjoyable session regardless of what they are playing. I may privately consider someone who sits at my table to have a cheese monster of a character. However I will not let that colour the game or affect my decisions.
Conversely as a player it is my job to show the GM respect. I will not show him up by going over his head to a VC, VL or con organiser. That's just rude. Accept the call at the table even if you know it is wrong and move on. A petty argument about the rules looks bad to new players and is not conducive to a fun game for everyone. If you want to email the VC after the event and raise the issue. It's better if you don't use the GM's name if you do this just speak in general terms.
As a corollary to this I would have all the rules available as appropriate for the character I am playing. If I play a character who imposes status effects I will have those effects available in a cheat sheet for the GM and other players to use. It speeds up the game and avoids arguments.
IMO low-level arcane casters, especially wizards, are probably most difficult -- because you get to do sheer amounts of nothing repeatedly for about half your build since you simply don't have enough spellcasting volume to do what is the you wanted to play the character for in the first place. -- You have less opportunities to "be cool" in combat than virtually any other class; and obtaining spells for your book is an annoyance which rivals doing your taxes.
Talking of which, I'm doing that with a new wizard. I have a wand of MM for when I run out of spells. Are there any other good wands for low level wizards, bearing in mind save DCs will suck...
|
|
IMO low-level arcane casters, especially wizards, are probably most difficult -- because you get to do sheer amounts of nothing repeatedly for about half your build since you simply don't have enough spellcasting volume to do what is the you wanted to play the character for in the first place. -- You have less opportunities to "be cool" in combat than virtually any other class; and obtaining spells for your book is an annoyance which rivals doing your taxes.Talking of which, I'm doing that with a new wizard. I have a wand of MM for when I run out of spells. Are there any other good wands for low level wizards, bearing in mind save DCs will suck...
Mage armor.
Mage armor.
Solid choice, but a bit boring. Much better appreciated with monks in the party though.
|
|
IMO low-level arcane casters, especially wizards, are probably most difficult -- because you get to do sheer amounts of nothing repeatedly for about half your build since you simply don't have enough spellcasting volume to do what is the you wanted to play the character for in the first place. -- You have less opportunities to "be cool" in combat than virtually any other class; and obtaining spells for your book is an annoyance which rivals doing your taxes.Talking of which, I'm doing that with a new wizard. I have a wand of MM for when I run out of spells. Are there any other good wands for low level wizards, bearing in mind save DCs will suck...
Enlarge person, it will make your melee types happy. Gravity bow if you have a ranged weapon, it cranks up your damage.
|
|
My PFS character just runs on wands (a DEX-combattant which is a Rogue/Fighter/Wizard/Monk going for the Halfling Opportunist PrC, will likely add Vivisectionist and/or Urban Barbarian later on). He is currently stacking
- Mage Armor (almost depleted)
- Shield (far less depleted)
- Cure Light Wounds (for use by the team's healer, far less used now that I use the 2 above)
- Expeditious Retreat (even more useful than Shield)
- Protection from Evil (added AC and a neat counter to many powerful spells)
- Grease
- Reduce Person (great for Stealth)
- Vanish (and use the Move action to get close to the enemy caster for a nice stealthy AoO)