|
A "true" high level game would involve politics and alliances on a world wide or even inter-planar level to forge an alliance against said lich.
Instead it is like a level 10 plot and to make it work everything that is different between level 10 and level 20 is simply disallowed.
This attitude, which is fairly widespread on this forum, disturbs me. It's basically saying "You're having fun wrong!" Not everyone gets off on politics and alliances and turning the game into a UN simulator. Some people want to just kick in the door to the dungeon and then proceed to kick some ass. And frankly, if all post-10th level gameplay should involve that, then why bother increasing the power of 11+ level characters?
If you ever find yourself saying "Any 'true' ___ game involves ____" and actually meaning it, then congratulations, you're become that condescending guy. And nobody should ever want to be that guy.
One of the great things about this hobby is that, by it's very nature, a large variety of playstyles is not only allowed, but encouraged. I'll never be comfortable with someone saying that a certain playstyle is wrong. It may not be for you, and it may not be for me, but if there is someone out there who enjoys it, who are we to tell him that he's having BADWRONGFUN?
We were promised a high level game. Instead we got a game where we can't effectively use ANY of the iconic abilities common to high level play. We ARE having fun so far, but it doesn't FEEL like it's high level as a result of all the restrictions (of which there will no doubt be more).
How would you feel in this situation?
This sounds eerily familiar to two "epic" games I've been in.
The first one, the DM arbitrarily made every commoner epic, and engineered organizations specifically to counter our abilities, even though nobody knew us from adam (I mean Beholder Police? gimme a break.)
The second one wasn't epic per se, but we were each given DM fiat powers, like I got the arm of my god which let me do crazy things and also let me never die. My buddy got this homebrewed circle magic which effectively gave him the power to (given a few minutes) destroy planets or summon lots and lots of creatures at once, or things like mass-chain-repeat-maximized-empowered-disintegrate. The funny thing is, the DM gave all his badguys nigh infinite saving throws and truckloads of immunities, then nerfed their damage... resulting in a game of us only being able to buff or do HP damage, while the enemy nickel and dimed us. It was pretty lame.
For some reason, this makes me think of the time the 16th level party I was running was facing a bunch of iron golems. Most of them were spellcasters of some kind, and while they were hurting pretty bad by the end, they managed to drop most of them, with only one iron golem left, who they blocked off in one direction with a wall of stone/iron/force/something hard. The iron golem used a back exit, ran around upstairs, and proceeded to charge them from another stairway that hadn't been blocked off.
The 16th level arcane archer resolved the problem with grease. Spell resistance doesn't apply, so it works on golems. Applied it to the stairs, golem made a poor save, slipped and fell down the stairs, where finishing it off was made much easier.
The moral of this story is, is often high level characters don't make it to high level and survive bad fights because they have win button spells (of which there are actually no such things--because the theorycrafting that "proves" they are win button spells fail to take into account a vast and wide array of very reasonable circumstances that will not make them work the way they are supposed to). High level PCs make it to high level and survive because they can be creative with whatever resources they have at their disposal. (I also liked the time the Eldritch Knight turned the high priest of the god of dark magic into a sheep with baleful polymorph).
ANYWAY -- part of high level combat is you're going to encounter obstacles where everything isn't going to work ideally. I think maybe the GM went a little overboard but not much, and certainly not with the design of the lich's tower.
The one thing I would allow in the described situation is allow the spellcasters to rewrite their spell lists to choose spells that apply to a broader area of situations. And RD, were I you, I'd ask your GM if you can do just that, because if half your spells truly are going to be useless through the whole scenario, I think it is fair to let you rejigger your list.
Everybody's got a tv a radio, or internet nowadays. That's the mass market part I was talking about. Magic is not mass-market in Pathfinder.
Oh really? Everybody you say?
Or do you just mean 'Most people in the Western World' - which is actually the world's significant minority.
So yeah it sticks.
On the other hand Joe The Commoner has McJagger the Bard who tells the tales in the local Inn, and McJagger is probably telling tales of... oh thats right, exploits of level 20 god-men.
I would be turned off by the scenario described in the original post.
I'm not crazy about introducing house rules after character creation, and I'm not crazy about plots that the GM seems to be clearly made up as he's going along.
Oh really? Everybody you say?
Or do you just mean 'Most people in the Western World' - which is actually the world's significant minority.
So yeah it sticks.
On the other hand Joe The Commoner has McJagger the Bard who tells the tales in the local Inn, and McJagger is probably telling tales of... oh thats right, exploits of level 20 god-men.
Oh, right. Forgot about the third world countries. Sure, the average african worker knows all about Paris Hilton. Right.
As for bards, again, yes. One song relating a deed, maybe a story or two. Most of it would be pure fiction with the correct fact dropped here and there. You really think Joe the commonner could anwser the lich's questions after that?
If you want to run your game as if every commoner should have access to reliable information about 20th level characters, do it your way. But please, don't try to push this background choice as if it was an integral part of the leveling system.
But please, don't try to push this background choice as if it was an integral part of the leveling system.
Ahhh see now whos being Shifty?
At least I don't try misrepresent people positions to try close an argument.
But please, don't try to push this background choice as if it was an integral part of the leveling system.Ahhh see now whos being Shifty?
At least I don't try misrepresent people positions to try close an argument.
Sorry man if I misinterpred you. My bad. I really got the feeling it's what you were trying to do.
The moral of this story is, is often high level characters don't make it to high level and survive bad fights because they have win button spells (of which there are actually no such things--because the theorycrafting that "proves" they are win button spells fail to take into account a vast and wide array of very reasonable circumstances that will not make them work the way they are supposed to). High level PCs make it to high level and survive because they can be creative with whatever resources they have at their disposal.
I think that's part of the issue here. One of the tables I'm at (as you're probably well aware) is playing at an obscenely high level ... but they started out at level 6, and worked their way up over 5+ years (real world time; in the game it's only been something like a year).
I really don't like doing "one shot" uber-high-level stuff because it is very different than organically growing a character, and it invariably feels phony to me. If someone has to play through every level from 1-20 they're going to end up with a very different character than someone who is just creating a level 20 character whole cloth ... and the higher the level the worse it is - it's easier to "three level dip this" and "two level dip that" when you don't have to actually suffer the pain of doing it.
