|
To me, the issue with them was that everyone had 12 or so. They encouraged dipping too much, IMO. Archetypes mostly avoid that issue.
I think they actually encourage them.
I can dip two levels into Monk of the Sacred Mountain and give my full-plated Fighter unarmed strike, Toughness, and a +1 natural armor bonus with no problems. I'm sure I could find another archetype to swap out flurry and thus only lose Wis to AC when wearing armor.
Archetypes are balanced against single-class characters, but some make very attractive dip classes due to front loading.
Some people might see that as a problem.
To me, the issue with them was that everyone had 12 or so. They encouraged dipping too much, IMO. Archetypes mostly avoid that issue.I think they actually encourage them.
I can dip two levels into Monk of the Sacred Mountain and give my full-plated Fighter unarmed strike, Toughness, and a +1 natural armor bonus with no problems. I'm sure I could find another archetype to swap out flurry and thus only lose Wis to AC when wearing armor.
Archetypes are balanced against single-class characters, but some make very attractive dip classes due to front loading.
Some people might see that as a problem.
Perhaps it's just me, but due to the strength of single class characters, 2 levels may as well be 5, and 3 is one gazillion levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ohhh ohhh me next!
My pet peeves;
My favorite class is the weakest and needs to be fixed!
The classes I dont like are all over powered and every one must agree that they need immediate nerfing!
Anyone who provides a system of any sort in which the players are not forced to use the treasure a DM hands out and only that treasure is the worst kind of power gamer....no no...you must use the 15 thousand large size Ogre hooks, or you are a terrible rolplayer and must burn in a fire!
Clearly if I provide the most ideal example of how in perfect conditions at the exact right level, with all the exact correct feats and everything preplanned, you must all agree with my proof that a class is broken....no no...never mind that every class has a killer combo that makes them stand out at certain levels.
I must constantly treat everyone like they are an idiot or their game is inferior if they dont agree that my house rules are better than the real ones...or better yet, I have been using this rule for so long that I am certain its how it actually works!
....ok so maybe they arent genrally accepted things, but darned if sometimes it doesnt feel like they are when reading posts.
- That it is a given that the PC's will be able to buy magic items like a trip to the mall.
- That no plus should be left on the table when building a character.
|
That level 20, or even level 10, should be a guideline for character building. Most gameplay I've seen happens from 1-7, where the game seems most interesting anyway. I think level 7 should be the board-accepted guideline for posting characters; 4th level spells are online (3rd for bard-types), everyone just got their 4th feat, Martials have 2 attacks, PFS still has 4 levels to go. Far too many people post "look at how much damage I can do at 20", or post level 20 builds to prove that a mystic Theurge is a viable class, or some such. It just wastes time and gets old.
Also, PFS has such discouragers for multi that archetypes don't really change all of that. For instance, martial clerics are taught not to gain that 1 level of fighter, despite a far better weapon selection (average +2 damage, basically weapon specialization), heavy armor proficiency, and a free extra combat feat. It's still not worth it. Milticlassing even disrupts martial-types and their buildup... My fighter would gain a lot from 1 (or 3) levels of inquisitor, but that puts off his weapon bumps and extra feat tricks and such, so it doesn't seem worth it. Favored class bonus just adds insult to the mix. I remember the devs talking about how 3.5 was a splashfest and they wanted to stop that (at a GenCon talk), they succeeded in spades.
Oh, and love the alchemist build, I withdraw my complaint there. I still think ninjas are "false glimmers of hope" for those who wish rogues were playable. For what it's worth I think traps are wasted anyway; seriously who would architect their home that way? Forget a password 1 day and take an axe to the face.
I think a "Fixed that for you" can be funny, if not used to do the nearest thing to strawmanning you can call strawmanning and still be mocked.
In other words: If you don't use it in a debate, to make your foe look stupid or to 'correct' him, it's okay in my book.
I've never seen it NOT come accross as "ha ha, you totally hold the opposite of your stated positions! see.. they're your words!"
- That you don't really need trapfinding because magical traps don't play a big role in the game, and they can be easily bypassed with magic, or even worse by having the big barbarian throw himself on them.
Well, in many games (mine for example) traps DON'T play a big role, and thus trapfinding is unneeded.
Why is that? You don't like the idea of the trap? I think they add a "whole nuva level" of challenge to the game. Not every adventure should be a Tomb of Horrors, but I think that module is a classic for this reason.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't agree traps add ANYTHING to the game. Either they get the party declaring "take 10" as they move, or serve as HP damage soaks. I hate when it takes 10 minutes real time before players will open doors; and seriously, some of these traps (especially those without bypass mechanisms) would be unrealistic to keep around a place people are about.
They also add an illusion of NEEDING any class; a party makeup should be flexible, so if nobody wants to play a rogue / urban ranger, they don't have to. I say illusion, because anyone can perception a non-magic trap, and by RAW a magic one does "ping" when detected for. So unless you house rule, a cantrip is being used to detect your trap setup.
|
|
Logical consistency. Most encounters don't happen in tombs where traps would make sense. Scythe traps on your front door would get tedious.
Plus the difficulty in making them meaningful. 'You get shot with an arrow.' 'Okay, pop a CLW, move on.' When they're just a tick off the sheet, it just doesn't make much sense.
Mostly they get used as hazards in combat, where trapfinding doesn't really come into play.
They are the best buffers because they can cast Inspire Courage, Good Hope (an amazing bard only spell), and Haste in one round. At level 7.
Please explain. Morale bonuses do not stack, and how are they casting good hope and haste in one standard action?
I don't agree traps add ANYTHING to the game. Either they get the party declaring "take 10" as they move, or serve as HP damage soaks. I hate when it takes 10 minutes real time before players will open doors; and seriously, some of these traps (especially those without bypass mechanisms) would be unrealistic to keep around a place people are about.
They also add an illusion of NEEDING any class; a party makeup should be flexible, so if nobody wants to play a rogue / urban ranger, they don't have to. I say illusion, because anyone can perception a non-magic trap, and by RAW a magic one does "ping" when detected for. So unless you house rule, a cantrip is being used to detect your trap setup.
Not an Indiana Jones fan I see. :-)
OK I agree that it would not make much sense to have death traps in your home. But there are lots of places where it makes sense to have them.
And not all traps need to do damage. Sometimes they teleport you to other areas, or summon something nasty, or even just set off an alarm. It's not about making all classes needed, it's about adding a different kind flava to the game.
And the challenge is not just in finding the trap, it is about bypassing the trap. And the absence of a bypass mechanism is to make the players think outside the box, encourage them to come up with a new kind of solution to a problem.
They are the best buffers because they can cast Inspire Courage, Good Hope (an amazing bard only spell), and Haste in one round. At level 7.Please explain. Morale bonuses do not stack, and how are they casting good hope and haste in one standard action?
Good thing that Inspire Courage gives a competence bonus, Good Hope gives a morale bonus, and Haste gives a dodge bonus :D. It was one of the major changes to a bard, swapping Inspire Courage's morale bonus to be a competence bonus.
Also, rod of quicken, lesser. Good Hope and Haste are 3rd level spells. They fall under the realm of lesser quicken rods.
I thought the talk about the evangelist cleric using a rod would tip people off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That parties should be able to win every encounter.
That the GM should never inflict anything unpleasant on PCs.
So..."let's get dangerous"?
Logical consistency. Most encounters don't happen in tombs where traps would make sense. Scythe traps on your front door would get tedious.
Plus the difficulty in making them meaningful. 'You get shot with an arrow.' 'Okay, pop a CLW, move on.' When they're just a tick off the sheet, it just doesn't make much sense.
Mostly they get used as hazards in combat, where trapfinding doesn't really come into play.
I will admit, that does sound pretty tedious. Is there some reason why the adventures and traps must lack variety?
OK not every adventure will be in a tomb, but some will be, no? And scythe traps and single arrows do sound boring, but that does not have to be the case does it?
The only reason most traps are hazards in combat is because the GM made it that way, no?
At first level, a 30' pit trap is a danger to everyone!
|
|
On that note Golarion needs it's own Tomb of Horrors.Gallowspire?
Well, here's what I think the someone trying to recreate the Tomb of Horrors: Golarion Edition needs to keep in mind:
The Tomb is medum sized. It's not a mega-dungeon. It's almost devoid of monsters (at least for a dungeon it's size)...the vast majority of encounters are with traps. So comparing it to something like Gallowspire isn't really appropriate.
The Tomb is NOT fair. Throw the concepts of avoiding save or die and "level appropriate" out the window.
Take 20 to find traps = A really goddamn boring dungeon that the characters spend three weeks walking through. For that matter, solving puzzles by rolling an INT check is also lame. Frankly, the Tomb challenges PLAYERS, not characters. In other words, you might just wanna ignore the enitre skill sub-system for a better Tomb experience.
Poison should kill you, not minorly inconvenience you. Take a cue from the pre-d20 versions of the game...if you fail the save, you die. If you make the save, you still take ability and/or hit point damage.
If you're doing a straight conversion, I'd recommend adding the demilich's odd immunities / weaknesses from the original module to the Tome of Horrors demilich. If you're looking for more of a "inspired by" vibe, then using "The Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps" should be mandatory.
All in all, it's really something that's better played under a system that is more appropriate to it (such as 0E, 1E, 2E, or one of the Basic D&D varieties) than something that you would have to rebuild around it (such as 3.X or PFRPG).
|
|
I will admit, that does sound pretty tedious. Is there some reason why the adventures and traps must lack variety?
OK not every adventure will be in a tomb, but some will be, no? And scythe traps and single arrows do sound boring, but that does not have to be the case does it?
The only reason most traps are hazards in combat is because the GM made it that way, no?
I could ask the module writers, I think they hang out here. :) I've been toying with the idea of adjusting traps to use more ability damage than HP damage, but that just changes it to 'pop a restoration and move on'.
The biggest problem is lack of buildup. Most traps get written as 'BAM you're hit it's over'. And ones that players can see coming take too long to resolve.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Peeves:
...oh, I could go on. But my favorite...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shoot me if I ever do that.
In the back of the head. At the theater.
Well, quicken rods, even lesser, are expensive (prohibitively so). My level 8 plan is summon-bardsong-radiate heroism with no rod... D3 lantern Archons > haste. They were silly for making ways to bypass full-round summons.
The lesser version is really cheap for what you get. Since you're doing it for the party, they should be splitting the costs with you, so it's even cheaper.
I could ask the module writers, I think they hang out here. :) I've been toying with the idea of adjusting traps to use more ability damage than HP damage, but that just changes it to 'pop a restoration and move on'.
The biggest problem is lack of buildup. Most traps get written as 'BAM you're hit it's over'. And ones that players can see coming take too long to resolve.
Ahh I see. We usually run homebrew campaigns with a supplement as a foundation. And modules (AP's) are used in a similar fashion.
So in my game I am running Forgotten Realms using the 3.0/3.5 material and converting everything to PF. The adventures have been either totally homebrew, or classic modules (A1 - A4, White Plume Mountain, Queen of the Demon Web Pits) painstakingly converted to challenge the Pathfinder PC's at whatever their present level happens to be.
Well, in many games (mine for example) traps DON'T play a big role, and thus trapfinding is unneeded.Why is that? You don't like the idea of the trap? I think they add a "whole nuva level" of challenge to the game. Not every adventure should be a Tomb of Horrors, but I think that module is a classic for this reason.
Playing devil's advocate here, recall that in Gygax's own campaign, the Tomb of Horrors was beaten not by a thief finding traps but rather by a fighter with a lot of disposable orc henchmen.
In other words, someone dealing with traps with exactly the kind of brute force methods that people point to when they say "Eh, you don't *really* need a trapfinder."
Rather than contesting the idea that a trapfinder isn't an absolute must, the Tomb of Horrors is the canonical demonstration of why you don't. (And, hell, how many rooms would a 1E thief have survived with their terrible ability to find magical traps? No, you probably should send in the orcs.)
Playing devil's advocate here, recall that in Gygax's own campaign, the Tomb of Horrors was beaten not by a thief finding traps but rather by a fighter with a lot of disposable orc henchmen.
In other words, someone dealing with traps with exactly the kind of brute force methods that people point to when they say "Eh, you don't *really* need a trapfinder."
Rather than contesting the idea that a trapfinder isn't an absolute must, the Tomb of Horrors is the canonical demonstration of why you don't. (And, hell, how many rooms would a 1E thief have survived with their terrible ability to find magical traps? No, you probably should send in the orcs.)
Really? Wow. That is certainly not how we played it.
OK I will shut up about traps now and just shed a single tear.
"I am right and am so right that I will not ever present or have to present evidence that my rightness is correct."
Or the "I use my super sword." "Well I use my super sword blocker!" "Well I use my super sword blocker counter!" "Well I use..."
Either both come in from a static position and have it out or don't do it. Post the builds up have it out and be done with it. Especially applies with prepared casters.
Playing devil's advocate here, recall that in Gygax's own campaign, the Tomb of Horrors was beaten not by a thief finding traps but rather by a fighter with a lot of disposable orc henchmen.
I am not disputing your facts, but please tell me where I can find this information?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Traps.
For example, the classic 10' pit trap won't do much, even to a low level party. but if it makes enough racket to attract the attention of the band of orcs down the corridor, who check it out while the meat shield is in the pit...
Traps in the home/lair should be non-fatal on average. The 10' pit above won't kill the orcs living there (most of the time) if they forget. The orc that falls in will likely need help out. But it will at most put a basic orc to 0 HP, staggered but not unconscious. Likewise, a kobold lair trap is going to likely be something like a net with bells on it. The trap isn't dangerous, the 4 kobolds with long spears who come check it out OTOH...
Now from a 'realistic' point of view, some traps are going to be the 'suck up a CLW and move on' type that TOZ hates. If you're exploring and abandoned orc warren for example, the pit trap isn't going to bring orcs running. An ancient crypt might be shooting arrows that were poison coated when they were installed, but the poison's long since faded.
If you expand your definition of 'trap' to 'environmental conditions that will get you killed' it becomes more useful.
Really what's the diference between a deadfall rigged to fall when a support is removed, and an old mine that if one of the supports is broke will trigger the roof to cave in? The only difference is one is designed to be hidden, the other is obvious to someone who knows what to look for. While synergy bonuses are a 3/x artifact, this is the perfect time to allow someone with profession (miner) or knowledge (engineering) to use those skills, or give a rogue who has one or the other that +2 curcumstance bonus.
Playing devil's advocate here, recall that in Gygax's own campaign, the Tomb of Horrors was beaten not by a thief finding traps but rather by a fighter with a lot of disposable orc henchmen.I am not disputing your facts, but please tell me where I can find this information?
I know I've seen a more in-depth account somewhere else, but two minutes with Google found me this which mentions Robilar and his infamous expendable orc henchmen. If you're willing to dig around on the internet I'm sure more details are out there.
I know I've seen a more in-depth account somewhere else, but two minutes with Google found me this which mentions Robilar and his infamous expendable orc henchmen. If you're willing to dig around on the internet I'm sure more details are out there.Playing devil's advocate here, recall that in Gygax's own campaign, the Tomb of Horrors was beaten not by a thief finding traps but rather by a fighter with a lot of disposable orc henchmen.I am not disputing your facts, but please tell me where I can find this information?
Thank you. Of course Google is the first thing I did when I read your post. I will continue looking for something more descriptive.
However even this brief description does not make it sound like the fighter and his orcs actually beat the Tomb of Horrors. It says a near-invincible fighter sacrificed his orcs to reach the end - only to flee at that point.
I don't think this really makes a point for brute force tactics being the best approach to handling traps.
|
|
Not an Indiana Jones fan I see. :-)
That's the trick. Indiana Jones traps weren't of the "BAM it's done" variety, but were tricky, suspenseful activities--huge rolling balls, cryptic riddles... more hazards than gotchas.
I recently dealt with a dungeon that was essentially a whole list of traps (and tricks... does anyone remember those?). Here were some of the things that happened:
- Maneuver a stone statue that wanted to kill you so that it unlocked a door for you
- Equate the pressure in the room with the room above by filling the room you're in with water and holding your breath long enough to swim through the room above--while sea kraits attacked
- Make your way through a stormy wind to the center of the room while the spike-covered ceiling descended
- Find a way across a number of skinny planks that couldn't necessarily support your weight across a pit of acid (we have no flight)
Sometimes, traps make sense--we once were hit by a horrendous, nauseating gas while trying to open a sarcophagus that was supposed to remain closed. The whole trick is in knowing when to use them.
Pathfinder community meme I hate the most:
"There are no bad rules in Pathfinder! Only bad GMs and bad roleplayers!"
If you're looking for more of a "inspired by" vibe, then using "The Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps" should be mandatory.
I had never heard of this before, so I googled it and found a preview of the PDF. Wow, this looks great! I will be buying this asap. Thank you for pointing it out! (Expect hate mail from my players..)
I had never heard of this before, so I googled it and found a preview of the PDF. Wow, this looks great! I will be buying this asap. Thank you for pointing it out! (Expect hate mail from my players..)If you're looking for more of a "inspired by" vibe, then using "The Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps" should be mandatory.
Sorry I (wrongly) assumed everyone knew about Grimtooth's.
|
|
Sorry I (wrongly) assumed everyone knew about Grimtooth's.I had never heard of this before, so I googled it and found a preview of the PDF. Wow, this looks great! I will be buying this asap. Thank you for pointing it out! (Expect hate mail from my players..)If you're looking for more of a "inspired by" vibe, then using "The Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps" should be mandatory.
Unfortunately, Grimtooth is truly old-school enough by now that it's quite possible not to know about them.
But yes, Grimtooth is truly inspired.