paizo.com Recent Posts in Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?paizo.com Recent Posts in Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?2012-03-11T16:08:40Z2012-03-11T16:08:40ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?shallowsoulhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7412012-03-16T20:28:19Z2012-03-16T20:28:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ciretose wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.</p>
<p>Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well) who have abilities that are wildly out of proportion for to the rest of their statistics. There's a few in the 3.x MM as well, including many of the fey.</p>
<p>While some aspects of the game have begun to try and experiment with this "CR as a statistic" line of thinking, very little of the game has actually followed with that reasoning. In fact, more of the game would need to. CR = level isn't a bad idea. One of the better "Monster PCs" variants I've seen was to take CR = Level, assume most monsters are using the elite array and deducing their ability modifiers as such, resulting in much lower ability modifiers than normal, and just rolling with it.</p>
<p>But if you want consistency (and believe me, I do like consistency), you would need to change a lot of stuff. Cloudkill would need to auto-kill creatures of CR X or lower, sleep would ignore HD and instead target based on CR, so it might completely rail a bunch of kobolds, merely because they are CR 1/4, while being of little effectiveness against other stuff. Incidentally, this would also lead to effects where not being equipped with level-appropriate gear means that you are more vulnerable to spells and effects, while being equipped with more than level-appropriate gear means you are immune to sleep.</p>
<p>No longer would the HD of things like undead matter, but really just what their CR was. That might even make things nicer for necromancers, since we could cram way more uber undead into a CR cap than a HD cap.</p>
<p>CR is also very abstract. I mean, look at the Tarrasque. He's CR 25. Yet</blockquote>... </blockquote><p>The only way to truly defeat a tarrasque is to actually transport it to another plane or dimension because it says a way to kill it has yet to be found.ciretose wrote:Ashiel wrote:
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well)...shallowsoul2012-03-16T20:28:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?ciretosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7402012-03-16T20:21:53Z2012-03-16T20:21:53Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.</p>
<p>Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well) who have abilities that are wildly out of proportion for to the rest of their statistics. There's a few in the 3.x MM as well, including many of the fey.</p>
<p>While some aspects of the game have begun to try and experiment with this "CR as a statistic" line of thinking, very little of the game has actually followed with that reasoning. In fact, more of the game would need to. CR = level isn't a bad idea. One of the better "Monster PCs" variants I've seen was to take CR = Level, assume most monsters are using the elite array and deducing their ability modifiers as such, resulting in much lower ability modifiers than normal, and just rolling with it.</p>
<p>But if you want consistency (and believe me, I do like consistency), you would need to change a lot of stuff. Cloudkill would need to auto-kill creatures of CR X or lower, sleep would ignore HD and instead target based on CR, so it might completely rail a bunch of kobolds, merely because they are CR 1/4, while being of little effectiveness against other stuff. Incidentally, this would also lead to effects where not being equipped with level-appropriate gear means that you are more vulnerable to spells and effects, while being equipped with more than level-appropriate gear means you are immune to sleep.</p>
<p>No longer would the HD of things like undead matter, but really just what their CR was. That might even make things nicer for necromancers, since we could cram way more uber undead into a CR cap than a HD cap.</p>
<p>CR is also very abstract. I mean, look at the Tarrasque. He's CR 25. Yet he's actually less challenging to do battle with than a CR 16 Planetar. A 16th level party could curb stomp Big T (or at least ignore him) every day, easily. The Planetar is actually scarier in terms of actually being able to be a threat. The Tarrasque is just hard to make dead, and he jumps really good. That's about it.</p>
<p>But at this point, it's rather irrelevant, because I'm just musing about the ripples in the system and kinda babbling. I'll stop now.</blockquote><p>In the case of spells like Cloudkill I think HD works fine as it is intended as a substitute for equivalent removal of hit points. It is a nice balancer for caster monsters with less Hit Dice, much in the same way them having less hit points in general makes them vulnerable.
<p>The reason the Tarrasque is a CR 25 is if it wins initiative, someone in that Level 16 party is going to die, as they are either getting charged and grappled (or swallowed whole), or 6 spines that are +25 to hit that do an average of 26 damage each with a X3 crit from 120 feet. Yes you can run away from it more easily…if you win initiative. If you stick around…</p>
<p>For comparison, you are likely going to get a few rounds on the Planetar before anyone dies, and you have a number of things that will work fine on the Planetar if you are level appropriate when facing it that can take out the Planetar, not to mention that it only has 229 hit points…</p>
<p>A Tarrasque is much, much, more likely to equal death than a Planetar for a level 16 party, and it is much, much harder for a level 16 party to defeat by means other than avoidance than a Planetar. Which is why it’s CR is much higher. (why do I smell another derail coming...)</p>
<p>The bottom line is that you should not be able to summon something more powerful than you are, and control it. That is silly and game breaking. </p>
<p>The best measure of power is CR level, that is what it is for.</p>Ashiel wrote:Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well) who have...ciretose2012-03-16T20:21:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ashielhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7392012-03-16T17:54:21Z2012-03-16T17:54:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ragnarok Aeon wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Imagine if someone decided to drop the size of the HD of more powerful creatures and just gave them more to make HD more relevant to power level... (Of course there would need to be many more changes made, requiring too much effort to be worth the trouble)</p>
<p>Either way, to fix the problem of HD not equaling power level would be an extensive project rehashing a good portion of the game. You might as well just create a new system, it's just easier to pull out the GM card to call it. </blockquote><p>Quite true.
</p>
HD used to be a key factor in how strong a monster was. A lot of that fell off in 3.x though. Sign of times, perhaps.</p>Ragnarok Aeon wrote:Imagine if someone decided to drop the size of the HD of more powerful creatures and just gave them more to make HD more relevant to power level... (Of course there would need to be many more changes made, requiring too much effort to be worth the trouble)
Either way, to fix the problem of HD not equaling power level would be an extensive project rehashing a good portion of the game. You might as well just create a new system, it's just easier to pull out the GM card to...Ashiel2012-03-16T17:54:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ragnarok Aeonhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7382012-03-16T17:42:42Z2012-03-16T17:42:42Z<p>Imagine if someone decided to drop the size of the HD of more powerful creatures and just gave them more to make HD more relevant to power level... (Of course there would need to be many more changes made, requiring too much effort to be worth the trouble)</p>
<p>Either way, to fix the problem of HD not equaling power level would be an extensive project rehashing a good portion of the game. You might as well just create a new system, it's just easier to pull out the GM card to call it.</p>Imagine if someone decided to drop the size of the HD of more powerful creatures and just gave them more to make HD more relevant to power level... (Of course there would need to be many more changes made, requiring too much effort to be worth the trouble)
Either way, to fix the problem of HD not equaling power level would be an extensive project rehashing a good portion of the game. You might as well just create a new system, it's just easier to pull out the GM card to call it.Ragnarok Aeon2012-03-16T17:42:42ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ashielhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7372012-03-16T17:24:28Z2012-03-16T17:24:28Z<p>Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.</p>
<p>Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well) who have abilities that are wildly out of proportion for to the rest of their statistics. There's a few in the 3.x MM as well, including many of the fey.</p>
<p>While some aspects of the game have begun to try and experiment with this "CR as a statistic" line of thinking, very little of the game has actually followed with that reasoning. In fact, more of the game would need to. CR = level isn't a bad idea. One of the better "Monster PCs" variants I've seen was to take CR = Level, assume most monsters are using the elite array and deducing their ability modifiers as such, resulting in much lower ability modifiers than normal, and just rolling with it.</p>
<p>But if you want consistency (and believe me, I do like consistency), you would need to change a lot of stuff. Cloudkill would need to auto-kill creatures of CR X or lower, <i>sleep</i> would ignore HD and instead target based on CR, so it might completely rail a bunch of kobolds, merely because they are CR 1/4, while being of little effectiveness against other stuff. Incidentally, this would also lead to effects where not being equipped with level-appropriate gear means that you are more vulnerable to spells and effects, while being equipped with more than level-appropriate gear means you are immune to <i>sleep</i>.</p>
<p>No longer would the HD of things like undead matter, but really just what their CR was. That might even make things nicer for necromancers, since we could cram way more uber undead into a CR cap than a HD cap.</p>
<p>CR is also very abstract. I mean, look at the Tarrasque. He's CR 25. Yet he's actually less challenging to do battle with than a CR 16 Planetar. A 16th level party could curb stomp Big T (or at least ignore him) every day, easily. The Planetar is actually scarier in terms of actually being able to be a threat. The Tarrasque is just hard to make dead, and he jumps really good. That's about it.</p>
<p>But at this point, it's rather irrelevant, because I'm just musing about the ripples in the system and kinda babbling. I'll stop now.</p>Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying HD is a perfect measure, but that it is intended to be effectively "monster levels", and are roughly on par with NPC classes, with perhaps certain creatures like outsiders and dragons being note-able exceptions.
Powerful creatures with few HD were one of the things people have criticized when it came to the MM II and subsequent Monster Manuals in 3.x. There are a lot of "gotcha" monsters who are low HD (and often CR as well) who have abilities that are...Ashiel2012-03-16T17:24:28ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?ciretosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7362012-03-16T17:13:48Z2012-03-16T17:13:48Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">shallowsoul wrote:</div><blockquote> Certain abilities can make a creature more powerful while having less HD. </blockquote><p>Hense the potential for abuseshallowsoul wrote:Certain abilities can make a creature more powerful while having less HD.
Hense the potential for abuseciretose2012-03-16T17:13:48ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?shallowsoulhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7352012-03-16T16:20:27Z2012-03-16T16:20:27Z<p>Certain abilities can make a creature more powerful while having less HD.</p>Certain abilities can make a creature more powerful while having less HD.shallowsoul2012-03-16T16:20:27ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?wraithstrike (alias of concerro)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7342012-03-16T11:27:18Z2012-03-16T11:27:18Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote> I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient. </blockquote><p>I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold.
<p>1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can really get a hold of and see a clear difference in power. From a mechanical standpoint, CR is less assured, and is a number that is assigned to a creature based on estimated encounter difficulty and XP value. CR is literally nothing beyond determining the XP value of an enemy. CR is an entirely metagame concept, while HD is more tangible in terms of mechanics.
<br />
2nd) Assuming creatures are well designed, their HD should be an indicator of their effective power. While there are some exceptions, generally the level of power of a creature is tied to their HD (again it's the key factor in HP, BAB, Saves, Skills, save DCs, etc). While some creatures have bizarre abilities that are beyond the norm (the Tarrasque being unkillable) most creatures should fall in a certain power range based on HD.</p>
<p>Personally, I've always liked HD. Basing statistics off CR has always seemed backwards to me (like SR = CR + X). Good creature writing is key though. </blockquote><p>HD is also a metagame concept that is not really tied to power. You can have 2 HD 13 creatures with and they can be 2 CR's apart or more. That is a big power difference.
<p>If you go by the monster creation chart saves, attack rolls and so on are tied to CR. It also matches the monsters in the books pretty well.</p>Ashiel wrote:wraithstrike wrote: I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient.
I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold. 1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can...wraithstrike (alias of concerro)2012-03-16T11:27:18ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?ciretosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7332012-03-16T10:57:47Z2012-03-16T10:57:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote> I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient. </blockquote><p>I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold.
<p>1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can really get a hold of and see a clear difference in power. From a mechanical standpoint, CR is less assured, and is a number that is assigned to a creature based on estimated encounter difficulty and XP value. CR is literally nothing beyond determining the XP value of an enemy. CR is an entirely metagame concept, while HD is more tangible in terms of mechanics.
<br />
2nd) Assuming creatures are well designed, their HD should be an indicator of their effective power. While there are some exceptions, generally the level of power of a creature is tied to their HD (again it's the key factor in HP, BAB, Saves, Skills, save DCs, etc). While some creatures have bizarre abilities that are beyond the norm (the Tarrasque being unkillable) most creatures should fall in a certain power range based on HD.</p>
<p>Personally, I've always liked HD. Basing statistics off CR has always seemed backwards to me (like SR = CR + X). Good creature writing is key though. </blockquote><p>But HD strength varies widely and isn't reflective of power.
<p>Take the chart on 294 of the bestiary. You have a whole list of creatures that the HD is nowhere near the CR, sometimes almost half of the CR. And even within that chart they can vary substantially.</p>
<p>HD is never meant to be an indicator of power, just an indicator of hit points. </p>
<p>CR is the indicator of power, subjective as it is. So when a spell has a limiting factor that is suppose to be for power, which is what I believe it was intended for spells like Similacrum and Gate, that would be much more practical than HD.</p>
<p>Again, I think the Devs want open spells like the ones above for story purposes, but you can't lets some players have nice things without them trying to abuse them.</p>Ashiel wrote:wraithstrike wrote: I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient.
I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold. 1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can...ciretose2012-03-16T10:57:47ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ashielhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7322012-03-16T02:31:10Z2012-03-16T02:31:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote> I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient. </blockquote><p>I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold.
<p>1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can really get a hold of and see a clear difference in power. From a mechanical standpoint, CR is less assured, and is a number that is assigned to a creature based on estimated encounter difficulty and XP value. CR is literally nothing beyond determining the XP value of an enemy. CR is an entirely metagame concept, while HD is more tangible in terms of mechanics.
<br />
2nd) Assuming creatures are well designed, their HD should be an indicator of their effective power. While there are some exceptions, generally the level of power of a creature is tied to their HD (again it's the key factor in HP, BAB, Saves, Skills, save DCs, etc). While some creatures have bizarre abilities that are beyond the norm (the Tarrasque being unkillable) most creatures should fall in a certain power range based on HD.</p>
<p>Personally, I've always liked HD. Basing statistics off CR has always seemed backwards to me (like SR = CR + X). Good creature writing is key though.</p>wraithstrike wrote:I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient.
I think the reason designers go with HD rather than CR is twofold. 1st) HD is more tangible. Likewise, it determines the raw statistics and abilities of creatures. It is effectively levels that the creatures have. HD is something you can really get a hold...Ashiel2012-03-16T02:31:10ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?wraithstrike (alias of concerro)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7312012-03-16T00:39:32Z2012-03-16T00:39:32Z<p>I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient.</p>I always thought CR was a better number to use than HD, but the designer keep referring to HD. I was hoping that would end with 3.5, which outsiders were really efficient with HD, and other creatures were less efficient.wraithstrike (alias of concerro)2012-03-16T00:39:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?ciretosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7302012-03-16T00:34:39Z2012-03-16T00:34:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">wraithstrike wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Asked Wraithstrike a question..</blockquote>Sorry I missed it before. I do like that a lot better since I like to be able to sit down at anyone's table without having to worry about how any one GM might rule on an issue. </blockquote><p>I think it would make more sense to actually use the CR rather than the HD, since the intent seems to be to limit the power of what you can summor while not limiting what you can summon.
<p>It would be just as open, but less breakable.</p>
<p>I would suggest CR = Two less than actual for real, not buffed by a ton of weird synergistic loopholes, caster level.</p>
<p>And control isn't remote control, but that is a whole other derail...</p>wraithstrike wrote:Ashiel wrote:
Asked Wraithstrike a question..
Sorry I missed it before. I do like that a lot better since I like to be able to sit down at anyone's table without having to worry about how any one GM might rule on an issue. I think it would make more sense to actually use the CR rather than the HD, since the intent seems to be to limit the power of what you can summor while not limiting what you can summon. It would be just as open, but less breakable.
I would suggest CR...ciretose2012-03-16T00:34:39ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?wraithstrike (alias of concerro)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7292012-03-15T06:03:23Z2012-03-15T06:03:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Asked Wraithstrike a question..</blockquote><p>Sorry I missed it before. I do like that a lot better since I like to be able to sit down at anyone's table without having to worry about how any one GM might rule on an issue.Ashiel wrote:Asked Wraithstrike a question..
Sorry I missed it before. I do like that a lot better since I like to be able to sit down at anyone's table without having to worry about how any one GM might rule on an issue.wraithstrike (alias of concerro)2012-03-15T06:03:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7282012-03-14T02:48:59Z2012-03-14T02:48:59Z<p>No... I usually leave game discussions to weekends. We'll see then. Thankfully for him I tend to be about as lenient as a wife as I am a DM.</p>
<p>He's also hovered on the brink of DM burnout a few times, so I tread carefully (mostly).</p>
<p>That's actually a very nice spread of items for versatility. To be honest I hadn't thought of using intelligent magic items in such a fashion. Or really magic items at all. </p>
<p>Seems I need to be thinking more outside the box. Fell into the trap of seeing only combat items as items for combat characters, but in retrospect there's no reason why a fighter type couldn't benefit from a wider array of abilities. </p>
<p>Makes Master craftsman all the more tempting for a future fighter type...</p>
<p>oooooo...•lightbulb•</p>
<p>Paladin who makes his bound weapon intelligent? Enter dialogue, snark and vast RP potential... </p>
<p>I smell an NPC on my horizons....</p>No... I usually leave game discussions to weekends. We'll see then. Thankfully for him I tend to be about as lenient as a wife as I am a DM.
He's also hovered on the brink of DM burnout a few times, so I tread carefully (mostly).
That's actually a very nice spread of items for versatility. To be honest I hadn't thought of using intelligent magic items in such a fashion. Or really magic items at all.
Seems I need to be thinking more outside the box. Fell into the trap of seeing only combat...dkonen2012-03-14T02:48:59ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ashielhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7272012-03-14T02:42:07Z2012-03-14T02:42:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">dkonen wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> lots of pertinent stuff about fighters vs. casters</blockquote><p>It's something that we have to grapple with here at our table, and we only manage due to having a fairly cooperative group and adaptive DMs.
<p>Casters start off with a "level tax" until they meet the average, and fighters start off decent out of the box @ 1st.</p>
<p>I tend to think of Casters as ECL characters. They pay for levels of inefficiency and feeling underpowered for the big bonus at the end. </p>
<p>Typically we run rather long distance campaigns, so to give an added oomph to martials there's often "candy" in the way of templates, items and suchlike to balance it out. </p>
<p>I don't have an issue with this, and the only reason why I don't play more martial characters is that I like versatility. The candy our DM hands out if often interesting and very very tempting, but I also am th DM's wife, so playing a character that doesn't get candy avoids calls of favoritism.</p>
<p>Though I probably shouldn't worry about it since nearly every character I've had in his games has ended up horribly scarred by her adventuring days. </p>
<p>In fact, over just five years I can think of two out of the seven who hasn't ended up as a tragedy. The other five have been 1-killed herself after being turned away by everyone/thing they love 2-tortured, assaulted, and ultimately perpetually separated from their loved ones 3-divinely cursed and outcast 4-alone and wandering as a reviled monster 5-owned by an insane/evil archmage and locked in an enormous dungeon full of nasties. </p>
<p>Hm... </p>
<p>Now that I look at that maybe a "talk" is in order...</p>
<p>:P</p>
<p></blockquote><p>Haha, hopefully no one will be sleepin' on the couch tonight (unless it's snuggling up with a good movie). :P
<p>I've got a player who has a fighter who has done very well in our online group. He's a half-giant fighter, which means he has nice race/class synergy, but the biggest reason he has done so well is because he's been very keen on picking items that lend to his strategies. He's around 8th level, and has a couple +1 weapons. One of which is a <i>+1 net</i> for snagging people and he plans to make it a <i>+1 ghost touch</i> net one day. He carries a few different weapons. His magic items mostly revolve around little boosts a few times per day, rather than big static buffs.</p>
<p>For example, he has a belt that lets him use <i>enlarge person</i> a few times per day. So in most fights he can get big for a few rounds to run crowd control for the party. Currently one of the spellcasters in the group is working on a magic item that will let him activate <i>lead blade</i> a few times per day. Stuff like that. Eventually, he wants to get a few 1/day abilities on several pieces of his gear, and possibly get some of his gear made intelligent, so that it can help him when the chips are down (such as an armor that can cast <i>remove paralysis</i> or <i>cure critical wounds</i> when he's in danger).</p>
<p>He's been very smart with his money. He isn't super powerful at all times, but he has enough little low-level x/day or x/rounds abilities scattered about on his gear that he has a trick for different situations, which gives him more to do than just swing sticks (but he swings sticks very well!). At higher levels, he will definitely be getting something that gives him <i>freedom of movement</i> and <i>death ward</i>. In fact, we've talked about the possible benefits of getting an intelligent item that can cast <i>spell turning</i> eventually (item readies action to cast spell turning if targeted by a spell, for example). I believe he will do just fine even at higher levels.</p>dkonen wrote:Ashiel wrote: lots of pertinent stuff about fighters vs. casters
It's something that we have to grapple with here at our table, and we only manage due to having a fairly cooperative group and adaptive DMs. Casters start off with a "level tax" until they meet the average, and fighters start off decent out of the box @ 1st.
I tend to think of Casters as ECL characters. They pay for levels of inefficiency and feeling underpowered for the big bonus at the end.
Typically we run...Ashiel2012-03-14T02:42:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7262012-03-14T00:26:20Z2012-03-14T00:26:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> lots of pertinent stuff about fighters vs. casters</blockquote><p>It's something that we have to grapple with here at our table, and we only manage due to having a fairly cooperative group and adaptive DMs.
<p>Casters start off with a "level tax" until they meet the average, and fighters start off decent out of the box @ 1st.</p>
<p>I tend to think of Casters as ECL characters. They pay for levels of inefficiency and feeling underpowered for the big bonus at the end. </p>
<p>Typically we run rather long distance campaigns, so to give an added oomph to martials there's often "candy" in the way of templates, items and suchlike to balance it out. </p>
<p>I don't have an issue with this, and the only reason why I don't play more martial characters is that I like versatility. The candy our DM hands out if often interesting and very very tempting, but I also am th DM's wife, so playing a character that doesn't get candy avoids calls of favoritism.</p>
<p>Though I probably shouldn't worry about it since nearly every character I've had in his games has ended up horribly scarred by her adventuring days. </p>
<p>In fact, over just five years I can think of two out of the seven who hasn't ended up as a tragedy. The other five have been 1-killed herself after being turned away by everyone/thing they love 2-tortured, assaulted, and ultimately perpetually separated from their loved ones 3-divinely cursed and outcast 4-alone and wandering as a reviled monster 5-owned by an insane/evil archmage and locked in an enormous dungeon full of nasties. </p>
<p>Hm... </p>
<p>Now that I look at that maybe a "talk" is in order...</p>
<p>:P</p>Ashiel wrote:lots of pertinent stuff about fighters vs. casters
It's something that we have to grapple with here at our table, and we only manage due to having a fairly cooperative group and adaptive DMs. Casters start off with a "level tax" until they meet the average, and fighters start off decent out of the box @ 1st.
I tend to think of Casters as ECL characters. They pay for levels of inefficiency and feeling underpowered for the big bonus at the end.
Typically we run rather long...dkonen2012-03-14T00:26:20ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7252012-03-14T00:12:15Z2012-03-14T00:12:15Z<p>Quoting isn't. Making accusations can be. Technically, even telling someone they can't expect well..really anything is a bit..it's debatable. Ashiel can expect to be taken seriously, people can tell her that that's not the way it works. </p>
<p>If it degrades to "It does so and if you disagree you're a poopyhead"
<br />
or "Don't be a moron, it doesn't work that way" that's when it becomes an issue.</p>
<p>Saying "yes it does because of x,y,z,"</p>
<p>and returning with "no it doesn't because of x,y,z" is the generally accepted ways of debates. </p>
<p>And I disagree; I do indeed read the rules in favor of my players. Though I don't allow anything that would cause a problem at my table, mostly because we all get along. I could probably hand (most) of them a tarrasque with class levels and they would throttle it back to not overshadow other's fun. </p>
<p>yeah, they're that awesome.</p>
<p>Would I try any of this at a table with devs? Why not? I assume they're people who are as much interested in a good time as anyone else, and gradiose world spanning epic plotlines with character relevance are great!</p>
<p>In order to do that, I alter the rules. In fact almost all of our changes are alterations to allow for more customization and more heroic/antiheroic characters. Noone wants to play a grunt, or a sideline window dressing. We all want to be main characters. I try to reflect that. I don't think the devs would be upset at that. </p>
<p>RAI is also a nonrational argument, there is no proof. It should not be treated as if there is. I cannot prove or disprove (realistically) that the devs would enjoy what I run as a game at my table. I cannot prove that they meant the game to be x,y, or z. </p>
<p>I can •guess• but that's an opinion. Opinions can't be wrong or right. Interpretations can't be wrong or right. That's why it's RAI, not RAW. </p>
<p>RAW is right/wrong. It is empirical, physical evidence.</p>
<p>RAI is "I think they intended"</p>
<p>Disagree all you like, but please keep it pleasant and no calling people down, accusing, or placing blame. On either side. </p>
<p>Though at this point I is highly suspicious that this is being brought up merely to keep this topic on the front page and generate extra posts. </p>
<p>Since it was largely resolved already. </p>
<p>I do not like tenderized well aged equine. </p>
<p>I'm more of a roast beef with veg sort of person.</p>Quoting isn't. Making accusations can be. Technically, even telling someone they can't expect well..really anything is a bit..it's debatable. Ashiel can expect to be taken seriously, people can tell her that that's not the way it works.
If it degrades to "It does so and if you disagree you're a poopyhead"
or "Don't be a moron, it doesn't work that way" that's when it becomes an issue.
Saying "yes it does because of x,y,z,"
and returning with "no it doesn't because of x,y,z" is the...dkonen2012-03-14T00:12:15ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?Ashielhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7242012-03-14T00:02:31Z2012-03-14T00:02:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">shallowsoul wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">dkonen wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Thankyou, it's appreciated. </p>
<p>And honestly, it seems there are quite a lot of friendly people, just a lot of misunderstandings and opinions. </p>
<p>Ah well, you know what they say about opinions...</p>
<p>At least it gives me something to mull over and challenge my status quo. </p>
<p>A stagnant mind is a crime. </blockquote>Indeed. I'm trying to get a full-time job at a Bookstore not far from here. What a minor dream come true that would be. Being around books all day, and the smell of the coffee. I don't even drink coffee, but it smells wonderful. It'd be so great to be able to read a bit while on lunch breaks. Reading always seemed like such great mental exercise. :) </blockquote>Oh god!! I remember when I worked as a Barista and as a Department head in a bookstore when I was younger..... I drank so much coffee back then that I can't drink it now without getting the shakes. </blockquote><p>Haha! Wow, nurse bring the decaff! XD
</p>
I absolutely love the smell of coffee and cremes. I worked at a grocery store for about 2 years before leaving on friendly terms for personal issues. My absolute favorite isle to work on was the coffee and creme isle. Oh my gosh it smelled so good, all the time. It was like happiness as an aroma. Ah...</p>
<p>========================================================================
<br />
On the main topic (I actually like side topics too, as it gives a bit of a breather), IMHO it's actually not the fact spellcasters wield godlike power at godlike levels (that's to be expected really). The problem is that most non-casters rarely have mundane ways of doing things that are relevant at higher levels. I mean, at low levels, it's pretty cool. Lots of very mundane things can be done with a little ingenuity. Some stuff like dealing with invisible enemies might be solved by scattering a pouch of crushed white chalk around the room (or perhaps using it as an AoE grenade-like weapon), but there's little that supports that sort of thing.</p>
<p>Some things were nerfed in PF, like how rogues could sneak-attack with splash weapons on a direct hit. Stuff like acid or alchemist fires were more useful because rogues and some other classes that added bonus damage for certain hits had a nice energy-damage attack (scouts in 3.5 could move and chuck a flask for 1d6 + Xd6 damage and such).</p>
<p>Martial characters lost lots of combat effectiveness from 3.0 to 3.5, because they lost the ability to move + full-attack, which was a standard part of combat in 3.0 due to 3.0's version of <i>haste</i> allowed characters to move and full-attack, which literally eliminated the biggest complaint about 3.5's martial classes, and their having to find ways to patch their inability to move and be relevant at higher levels.</p>
<p>But it's a little bigger than that too. Most skills have a few set effects. A lot of those effects don't mean much past low levels, don't scale very well, or are pretty limited. For example, beyond tracking, Survival isn't exceptionally useful in most games past low levels. Acrobatics is pretty good, but again becomes less and less useful as the game progresses. There's also little advice or rules to be found in the game for using skills outside of their basic purposes (like giving advice for setting DCs for acrobatic stunts like running along or up a wall and jumping to something else, like a free-runner might do).</p>
<p>Even not noting skills, there's a disturbing lack of abilities that are relevant that aren't spellcasting abilities, both in and outside of combat. For a combat example, let's look at many of the critical feats, and stuff like Deadly Stroke. Most all of these come to late to be of much use. The vital strike line of feats requires too many feats for something to scale half-way reasonably, and so forth. For out of combat situations, there are few non-spells that help solve non-combat situations if it's not immediately covered under a skill.</p>
<p>Pathfinder has made some progress in this sort of thing (such as by allowing magic item properties to be determined with hard Appraise checks) but there's not much progress. Spellcasters still have tons of options, and non-casters still have difficulties adapting to situations both in-combat and during general adventuring purposes. Most make up for their lack of options with magic items, which actually does help. And a lot of people who play martials or more mundane characters (myself included) often really like playing with our magic toys, so this isn't necessarily a game breaker.</p>
<p>Because a roleplaying game is ultimately about imagination, problem solving, and story telling, the kid with the biggest toolbox usually will come out on top in terms of capability for success. However, the overall impression of balance has been strained severely since 3.0, because now mundane characters have difficulties doing what mundane characters usually do. Fighters and Barbarians now have to look for special patches like Mobile Fighter or Rage-Lance-Pounce to actually get returns on their actions like they were getting back at 1st level.</p>
<p>Post 3.0, it's not even about quadratic wizards vs linear fighters. It's that Fighters begin fairly high, and steadily diminish relative to their challenges and peers; while their peers rise to meet their challenges and just grow stronger and more versatile.</p>
<p>That being said, it's not terribly hard to patch it in the core rules by just being smart with what sort of items you buy/create/award. A martial character decked out in intelligent items that use buff-spells on them so as not to waste actions is often well worth the investment. A lot of people consider that sort of thing "cheese" however; which goes back to the saying that Fighters can't have nice things.</p>shallowsoul wrote:Ashiel wrote: dkonen wrote:Thankyou, it's appreciated.
And honestly, it seems there are quite a lot of friendly people, just a lot of misunderstandings and opinions.
Ah well, you know what they say about opinions...
At least it gives me something to mull over and challenge my status quo.
A stagnant mind is a crime.
Indeed. I'm trying to get a full-time job at a Bookstore not far from here. What a minor dream come true that would be. Being around books all day, and the...Ashiel2012-03-14T00:02:31ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?shallowsoulhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7232012-03-14T00:00:31Z2012-03-14T00:00:31Z<p>Homebrew material can never ever be wrong, it can be opinionated but it can never be wrong. You can argue about whether it's a good idea but you can never argue right or wrong. </p>
<p>If you are going to argue right and wrong then you have to stick with the rules because the rules are something that you have a basis to argue right over wrong, homebrew you don't.</p>Homebrew material can never ever be wrong, it can be opinionated but it can never be wrong. You can argue about whether it's a good idea but you can never argue right or wrong.
If you are going to argue right and wrong then you have to stick with the rules because the rules are something that you have a basis to argue right over wrong, homebrew you don't.shallowsoul2012-03-14T00:00:31ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?ciretosehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7222012-03-13T23:52:27Z2012-03-13T23:52:27Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">dkonen wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Well it looks like he's agreed to stop insulting and attacking you, so perhaps we'll see how that goes.
</p>
</blockquote><p>For the record, I don't think quoting someone is insulting them.
<p>On topic, you can't expect to be taken seriously when you complain about a caster/martial divide when you interpret the rules as liberally as possible to allow the player the most favorable reading in every interpretation because spells are by their nature more subjective.</p>
<p>To say the developers weren't trying to make spells of the same level as close to equal power as possible is ignoring the fact that it is exactly their stated intent.</p>
<p>You shouldn't read the rules for or against your players. You should ask yourself in each unclear ruling two questions. </p>
<p>1. Is this going to cause a problem at my table.</p>
<p>2. Would I try this crap at a table with the devs, were I ever lucky enough to play with them.</p>
<p>If you answer 1 yes, stop, don't.</p>
<p>If you can't answer two yes, admit you are house ruling and make up your own mind about it for your table, but stop posting about it on the rules thread and take it over to homebrew.</p>dkonen wrote:Well it looks like he's agreed to stop insulting and attacking you, so perhaps we'll see how that goes.
For the record, I don't think quoting someone is insulting them. On topic, you can't expect to be taken seriously when you complain about a caster/martial divide when you interpret the rules as liberally as possible to allow the player the most favorable reading in every interpretation because spells are by their nature more subjective.
To say the developers weren't trying to...ciretose2012-03-13T23:52:27ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7212012-03-13T23:39:56Z2012-03-13T23:39:56Z<p>I'm one of those weird people who only sweats after hours of hard manual labour (like chopping brush back from a quarter mile trail with a machete in july)...</p>
<p>as for paranoia...</p>
<p>How do •you• know the government isn't spying on my every word??</p>
<p>You're just trying to lull me into a false sense of security aren't you??</p>
<p>Or</p>
<p>•gasp• trying to take away my sacred java juice!</p>
<p>You can pry it from my cold dead hands!!!!</p>I'm one of those weird people who only sweats after hours of hard manual labour (like chopping brush back from a quarter mile trail with a machete in july)...
as for paranoia...
How do *you* know the government isn't spying on my every word??
You're just trying to lull me into a false sense of security aren't you??
Or
*gasp* trying to take away my sacred java juice!
You can pry it from my cold dead hands!!!!dkonen2012-03-13T23:39:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?shallowsoulhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7202012-03-13T23:33:37Z2012-03-13T23:33:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">dkonen wrote:</div><blockquote><p> But..but.. I thought the shakes meant you had reached a supersonic level of enlightenment! </p>
<p>•sips fifth cup•</p>
<p>oh sweet sweet elixir of life..... </blockquote><p>I start to sweat real bad and I get really paranoid.dkonen wrote:But..but.. I thought the shakes meant you had reached a supersonic level of enlightenment!
*sips fifth cup*
oh sweet sweet elixir of life.....
I start to sweat real bad and I get really paranoid.shallowsoul2012-03-13T23:33:37ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7192012-03-13T23:32:19Z2012-03-13T23:32:19Z<p>But..but.. I thought the shakes meant you had reached a supersonic level of enlightenment! </p>
<p>•sips fifth cup•</p>
<p>oh sweet sweet elixir of life.....</p>But..but.. I thought the shakes meant you had reached a supersonic level of enlightenment!
*sips fifth cup*
oh sweet sweet elixir of life.....dkonen2012-03-13T23:32:19ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?shallowsoulhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7182012-03-13T23:30:21Z2012-03-13T23:30:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ashiel wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">dkonen wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Thankyou, it's appreciated. </p>
<p>And honestly, it seems there are quite a lot of friendly people, just a lot of misunderstandings and opinions. </p>
<p>Ah well, you know what they say about opinions...</p>
<p>At least it gives me something to mull over and challenge my status quo. </p>
<p>A stagnant mind is a crime. </blockquote>Indeed. I'm trying to get a full-time job at a Bookstore not far from here. What a minor dream come true that would be. Being around books all day, and the smell of the coffee. I don't even drink coffee, but it smells wonderful. It'd be so great to be able to read a bit while on lunch breaks. Reading always seemed like such great mental exercise. :) </blockquote><p>Oh god!! I remember when I worked as a Barista and as a Department head in a bookstore when I was younger..... I drank so much coffee back then that I can't drink it now without getting the shakes.Ashiel wrote:dkonen wrote:Thankyou, it's appreciated.
And honestly, it seems there are quite a lot of friendly people, just a lot of misunderstandings and opinions.
Ah well, you know what they say about opinions...
At least it gives me something to mull over and challenge my status quo.
A stagnant mind is a crime.
Indeed. I'm trying to get a full-time job at a Bookstore not far from here. What a minor dream come true that would be. Being around books all day, and the smell of the coffee....shallowsoul2012-03-13T23:30:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster/non-caster problem. OK, but why?dkonenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nod0&page=15?Casternoncaster-problem-OK-but-why#7172012-03-13T23:22:28Z2012-03-13T23:22:28Z<p>Also great source for campaign ideas and villains. </p>
<p>I'm actually currently slated to do a term paper on the importance of literature (specifically fiction based) for my upper level english course. </p>
<p>It's a blinding passion of mine, so far I can gobble about 100pages an hour. Good thing I don't mind rereading material. </p>
<p>Ooo we're terribly offtopic. Though I think the matters have been largely resolved. </p>
<p>Caster/non caster is DM/Player issue at least so the majority seem to agree (with an addendum that yes, RAW, spells can get pretty nasty)</p>
<p>Yes?</p>Also great source for campaign ideas and villains.
I'm actually currently slated to do a term paper on the importance of literature (specifically fiction based) for my upper level english course.
It's a blinding passion of mine, so far I can gobble about 100pages an hour. Good thing I don't mind rereading material.
Ooo we're terribly offtopic. Though I think the matters have been largely resolved.
Caster/non caster is DM/Player issue at least so the majority seem to agree (with an...dkonen2012-03-13T23:22:28Z