I have now played about as much Pathfinder at lvl 10 and up as I have DnD 3.X. So far, I am seeing the same problems...
1) Full attack actions of CR 10, 11, and 12 creatures can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.
2) NPC casters of this level can throw around a few save or die effects, giving average NPCs a 50/50 shot of DYING outright.
3) Traps of CR 10, 11, and 12 can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.
I love the possibility of PC death as an ever-present concern. Personally, I love to crunch numbers and optimize my characters. At the same time, I respect the other dedicated gamers and role-players at my table who don't try to squeeze and stack every possible bonus. Every time our party gets somewhere between level 9-11, we hit a wall of PC deaths that crash the campaign or slow the action down to an unbearable, almost silly pace. People dying once in a while is cool, and there are ways to deal with it, but someone dying every session is just not fun because continuity is part of the pleasure of this role-playing game.
I am writing this because I believe it to be a system problem, not a player or DM problem. I mentioned that some players in this scenario are not 'optimized,' but they aren't stupid! They give themselves good prime stats and understand that Dex/Con/Wis are all crucial survival stats. Tactically, they aren't perfect, but they know how to concentrate fire, pursue flanks, and avoid attacks of opportunity. Our DM limits the CR of our encounters to our level+1, though most of our encounters are on-level or lower. He also doesn't run monsters 'smarter' or more devious than they should be.
So, the purpose of this post? First, to find out if other groups have similar experiences. Second, to evaluate some possible solutions (mine and yours).
I think the 'HP death point' of PCs needs to be tied to something that increases every level (unlike your Con score).
I also think that the 'full attack action' is an awkward, unbalancing mechanic (I'm not the first one to say it). It is a multiplicative effect rather than an additive one, and that's what makes it SO dangerous.
Finally, save or die effects are cool, but they need to be moderated. For example, maybe they knock you down for that fight on a failed save, but you get additional saves to avoid DEATH.
We tend to find the opposite. We seem to have fewer deaths as level increase. At low levels a lucky crit can end things but at higher levels most people have specialized. Melee classes have a crap ton of hp and/or sky high AC. Casters usually have tricks to get them out of trouble if something nasty gets too close. Everyone focuses on their saving throws.
We still get the occasional high level death but it tends to occur when we make a large tactical mistake or bite off way more than we can chew.
Now admittedly most of my group are pretty good optimizers and we tend to work well together. We had lots of problems with save or die spells in 3.5 (the obituary for AoW is very long), but we don't find it as much of a problem in Pathfinder. Thankfully the massive damage = death rule is gone since its only a matter of time before you roll a 1.
I appreciate the response, but you yourself said that your players are optimizers. I'm an optimizer too, but I don't want to HAVE to play with all tactician-optimizers at higher levels.
How would you reckon your group would fare if folks were a wee bit less savvy with character building and tactics?
The issue I have found in 3.5 and Pathfinder is that at high levels the attack bonus of adversaries starts to make your armor class look ridiculous. As such, characters end up being hit with every single attack and find themselves simply battered to death over the course of a couple of battles (or even a couple of rounds in one battle).
Now, we generally retire our campaigns when a character gets into the 9-12 level range ... a hold-over that comes from 1E and 2E where such levels were considered pretty 'epic' and about time for retirement / kingdom management / etc ... but it is nice to have high level adventures once in a while.
Just try though to get a rogue with an AC that can stand up to an attack at that level.
A level 9 character should, according to http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/character-advancement have about 46,000gp of wealth ...
The rule is that a character 'should not' spend more than 25% of this wealth on armor/protective items http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html That's a good measure of approximately the type of protective items a character will have if going from level 1 to 9 and 'finding' said items adventuring ... so ... let's spend 11,500gp on armor/protection:
Leather Armor +3 (9,000gp + armor cost which is negligible)
Ring of Protection +1 (2,000gp)
That leaves us with 500gp to spend, but no protective options to spend it on.
With no DEX bonus, we're looking at an ac of 16.
Let's say the thief started with a relatively good DEX in a 'standard' game (15 pt buy) of 16. So +3 ... but at level 4 and level 8 he increased to 18, so +4
Our level 9 rogue now has an AC of 20. Awesome. In 1E or 2E we'd be throwing parties about a rogue with an AC of 0 (it went in reverse back then).
NOW ... let's look at a monster a level 9 rogue would fight ...
For a standard "easy" encounter, the level 9 rogue would face a CR 8 creature ...
To make it fun, and because Pathfinder is a spin-off of a game directly referencing dragons, we'll use the very young red dragon: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/chromatic- red/red-dragon-very-young
The dragon has a bite with an Attack Bonus of +14
So ... my AC is 20 ... my opponent has an Attack Bonus of +14 ... he needs to roll a 6 or above to hit me. I may as well just lie down and die.
Let's also take a fighter into account ... put him in full plate +3 with a ring of protection +1 and give him a decent 14 dex ...
AC: 25
That's a HEAVY armored fighter with a good Dex (we're looking at 15 pt builds here, so something else was dumped and it wasn't strength) ...
The dragon still hits 45% of the time (11 or higher).
THAT is the problem with higher levels.
At least that's been my experience.
My experience is actually the exact opposite of yours. I ran a campaign that went from 1 to 20, with a group that consisted mostly of few people who were around where your friends are (knew how to build effective characters, but didn't optimize too much, and were decent, but not great, tactically), none of whom died after level 6 or so, and one optimizer who tried to squeeze out every possible bonus. Interestingly, the optimizer was the one who died the most, generally once every 3-4 sessions (and for about a month when we were somewhere in the level 5-8 range, once per session). No, I didn't specifically target him, it just kinda happened.
Regarding your suggestions, the only one I have any thoughts on is the "HP death point. Perhaps the "HP death point" should be negative Con + some other number, like base Fortitude save, BAB, or level? That way player survivability once unconscious increases, but still allows for the possibility of the sudden death. I personally prefer base Fortitude save or BAB, as that makes it so the people who should best be able to withstand physical punishment (the fighter types) can take the most punishment before finally succumbing to their wounds and dying.
Let me allay your fears, then. I run a group that has only been playing this system for about 19 months now. We're in the midst of two campaigns right now (Runelords and Serpent's Skull), and while Runelords hasn't progressed to the levels of your concern, the players in SS are currently at 16th level. Thus far, I have had three character deaths in the course of that campaign (rogue twice, diviner once), and one of those deaths occurred at 9th level. They've been able to handle the higher level stuff quite well.
Of my four-member group of players, only one of them is actually an optimizer (min/max); the other three prefer to build characters according to concepts that do not always find them making optimal choices--not that their choices are bad by any stretch, only that optimizers would undoubtedly shake their head and say, "Why are you doing that exactly?" They've met every challenge and come out on top . . . well, they've retreated a couple times, but I hold them in high regard for such choices. I've not taken it easy on them by fudging rolls or the like either. Some of the combats they've been in were hair-raising experiences, and they've come close to dying on a couple different occasions. However, they've always managed things well and come out on top in the end.
Frankly, I see nothing overtly wrong with the system, except that I believe PCs become too powerful at times. Also, I find the traps in this system to be a joke, honestly. Perhaps a trap could kill characters if ever they would be set off, but from what I've noticed, our rogue can find and disarm them with very little effort.
Also, just so you know, I regularly put my crew up against encounters that are CR+2 or +3 to their level. I definitely don't think what you're talking about is a system problem necessarily. On the overall, I've found that the system works relatively well with my group.
I think really it depends on the DM. Ours pretty much knows what we can handle and alters encounters to match our power level. For a group of new newbies a DM would have to adjust in the other direction making monsters use less than ideal tactics and spellcasters use less nasty spells.
A good DM can handle both and even make adjustments on the fly if an encounter turns out to be too hard or two easy. The only time it gets really hard is when you have a bunch of non-optimizers mixed in with optimizers. Really tough to balance then.
mem0ri, that is scary math. I've never figured that all out before. I guess everyone had better be mighty careful around that dragon!
Sub-Creator, this is not exactly on-topic with the OP, but I agree about traps being a little...troublesome. My beef with them is cost. Have you ever read the rules to make a trap? My favorite example is a spiked pit trap (CR2). Normally, traps are 1000gp x CR, but the CRB states that simple traps can be as little as 250gp x CR. Let's go with the lowest possible cost, just to silence naysayers, so 500gp to dig a hole (albeit a big hole), stick some sharpened sticks at the bottom, and disguise the opening. 500 gp buys you over 8 months at a "good" inn in Golarion. 500 gp buys you 16,666 miles in a carriage. 500 gp buys you 4.5 consecutive YEARS of service by a trained hireling. I could see it taking a day or two of work to make one, but how many holes with sharpened sticks do you suppose your trained hireling could dig in 4.5 years? Anyway, I can just houserule it and move on, but since you bring it up...yeah, traps could be polished up a bit.
Sorry for the threadjack.
Does the paizo official stuff even get to high levels?
You mentioned that you never really face CR above APL+1, which if you have a standard size 4 person party shouldn't be a problem (CR+APL+1 is normally just a beefier than average speedbump, 'bosses' should be APL+4or5), so I agree there is definitely an issue.
People mentioned how AC doesn't scale with attack bonuses. Sure, it doesn't.
First, it loses relevance vs. primary attacks, but still is relevant vs. secondary. Then loses relevance vs. those. Then vs. lower iteratives. Then vs.archers at multiple range increments. Creatures who aren't melee powerhouses, but have 'special effect' attacks, will often be stymied by AC even when that AC doesn't hold up to real melee opposition. Touch Attacks often don't come with high BAB, and different characters can often have Touch AC comprise a high percentage of their normal AC.
Not to disagree with the facts about how the game changes at high level, but you just need to adapt to those changes - min/max'ing isn't necessary, and really is just evading the issue. I think the OP's co-players need to learn how to change how they play. Not optimizing, but battle tactics.
Yes, Full Attacks are lethal. So avoid them at all opportunity. The difference is that monsters at this level now have so many Natural Attacks, or 4 or 5 iteratives are in play, so Full Attack vs. Single Attack is much more contrast than at 1st level... At low levels, you could get away with bad tactics because there was less difference in forcing your opponent to move and only take 1 attack,coupled with the fact that low levels is where AC escalation is most viable AND cost effective (esp for heavy armor users).
Yes, AC ceases to be great, so use options like Concealment and MirrorImage instead/in addition.
If full attacks are lethal, you need to avoid full attacks hitting you.
If single attacks get lethal, you need to avoid getting hit at all.
('melee' types can usually suck up more hits, so can play a bit looser, squishies need to take their title seriously at high levels)
From what I've seen of semi-new players at PFS conventions, most players just aren't aware of playing defensively... chalk it up to video games or whatever. (when the situation allows a decisive action, offence is good, but playing defensively means arranging for those situations to happen, and not vainly putting yourself forward when the conditions aren't propuitous).
Anybody should realize that it all comes down to action economy, and initiative, at high levels.
With that in mind, it effectively is a game of 'efficiency' in some ways.
If your casters can put up fog effects that prevent allies from being targetted, i.e. prevent enemies from taking full efficient advantage of their opportunities, you can play to swing things in your advantage. If you have Familiars/Animal Companions, you NEED to be using them... THey don't need to be melee power-houses, or SLA powerhouses, just their action economy and positioning should be a signifigant tactical boost if you use them. That kind of game is what is fun about high level play for me... Mix/maxing not needed.
....Advice to GM: I think shifting to more Humanoid NPCs with Class Levels will help you as an intermediate step.
You should be able to deal with higher CRs, up to where your players SHOULD be playing at (APL+4or5)
Does the paizo official stuff even get to high levels?
APs usually top out from 15th to 17th level, which counts as 'high level' by my book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rule is that a character 'should not' spend more than 25% of this wealth on armor/protective items http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html That's a good measure of approximately the type of protective items a character will have if going from level 1 to 9 and 'finding' said items adventuring ... so ... let's spend 11,500gp on armor/protection:
That's just a guideline and mostly for GMs to build their NPCs that way.
A PC that concentrates on defense will have more of their money spend on defense and less on offense.Also your fighter example. Give him a Heavy Shield +2 or so, which is just 4k more and doesn't put you alot over your 25% really, and its another 4 AC. Have him fight defensively and/or use Combat Expertise, and that fighter can have an AC of easily in the mid-30s.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To the OP: I've played/run 4 AP's to completion at levels 13 to 16. Total higher level deaths (including animal companions) is 7, and 3 of those were Breath of Life'd away.
I have to take a slight exception to mem0ri's example:
so ... let's spend 11,500gp on armor/protection:
Leather Armor +3 (9,000gp) Biggest issue here
Ring of Protection +1 (2,000gp)
That leaves us with 500gp to spend, but no protective options to spend it on.With 18 Dex, so +4, AC 20
First, the only class that should *ever* wear magic leather armor is a druid (or maybe an eldritch knight for a short time). MW Studded Leather is much superior, and a mithril shirt (or even a chain shirt) is even better - the extra 1k gp is a bargain.
Second, going to +3 is wasteful at this point. The 5000 can be better spent elsewhere.
Third, there are non-defensive items that can increase your AC, such as a Belt of Dexterity (common item for a Rogue).
So just taking a mild bump:
Studded Leather +2 (5 AC) - 4175
Ring of Protection +1 (1 AC) - 2000
Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (1 AC) - 2000
+1 Buckler (2 AC, no penalty for a rogue to use, unless TWF) - 1155
- 2000 leftover for potions of blur or scrolls of haste (or mithril shirt armor)
18 Dex + 2 belt = 20 Dex (5 AC)
That's 24 AC, before spells from allies, other potential items, or things like the Dodge feat.
If a very young red dragon got a full attack on this rogue, he'd hit an average of 2.25 times (wings are only +9), for an average of just over 18 damage. To a rogue who probably has 62+ hp.
right, and that shows how fragile the standard wealth guidelines are.
some characters have more or less reliance on the given categories.
something that seems 'defensive'(DEX boosts AC, Reflex) is ALSO offensive for Finesse/Ranged characters, for the same price/item... Not even getting into how to classify the benefit of Init boosts, or what a Headband of INT counts as for a Wizard.
SLAs do need Concentration checks. you probably meant Su abilities, which don't.
ultimately, dying is less of a problem when characters can be raised, etc.
if you aren't playing with a cleric/oracle in the party, yeah the game can be alot tougher.
I'd say the monster rules are fundamentally broken. They don't follow the same curves as PCs. They're close enough at lower levels, but getting multiple attacks without attack penalties, inflating size with the corresponding CMD bonuses and reach, SLAs that they don't have to make concentration checks for, and all the other different rules that bestiary monsters play by, make them break all sorts of stuff that would be just fine if the players were put against humanoid NPCs with few or no racial hit dice.
I think the reason the monsters have all these goodies, is because in most cases action economy greatly favors the PCs. So monsters need something to keep up.
Remember a single monster is balanced to be facing 4 PCs. If you have more monsters, you use less dangerous monsters, or accept that the encounter gets more dangerous.
The problem, ultimately, is that monsters have natural attacks at full BAB instead of iteratives. If that dragon were Falchion Fred at the same CR he'd probably be hitting less than half the time on his second iterative. Dragon hits on a 6 with all his attacks and has more of them.
Assuming you're talking about a very young red dragon as mentioned up yonder, it hits the AC 20 rogue on an 11 with two of his attacks(the wings).
I have now played about as much Pathfinder at lvl 10 and up as I have DnD 3.X. So far, I am seeing the same problems...
1) Full attack actions of CR 10, 11, and 12 creatures can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.
2) NPC casters of this level can throw around a few save or die effects, giving average NPCs a 50/50 shot of DYING outright.
3) Traps of CR 10, 11, and 12 can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.
I have never seen a full attack be that good unless crits were involved, and that is just the luck of the dice. Even if every attack hits the player should still be alive. Now if someone dumps constitution, and rolls poorly that is different.
Before running any real numbers though let's look at a level 10 fighter with 16 con
Average hp from rolled dice is about 60. Add in 3 from a 16 con and you get 30 more. We are now at 90. Add in the favored class bonus and you get 100 hp.
According to the monster creation chart a CR 10 monster should be able to deal about 45 points of damage if all of its attacks hit.
Let us take a few sample CR 10's for comparison, to be fair I will do use monster that are intended to kill you in melee.
1. Bebelith Melee bite +19 (2d6+9 plus rot) and 2 claws +19 (2d4+9/19–20)=44 points
2. Fire Giant greatsword +21/+16/+11 (3d6+15) or 2 slams +20 (1d8+10)
about 75 with the greatsword, and 30 with the slams
3. Young Red dragon: Melee bite +17 (2d6+10), 2 claws +17 (1d8+7), 2 wings +12 (1d6+3), tail slap +12 (1d8+10)
I see about 67.
Remember these are worst case scenarios if all the attacks hit, and most likely they won't especially once the party is buffed or the monster is debuffed.
So I now have to ask how are these monsters getting PC's in positions for full attacks, and how are they hitting so often?
---------------------------------------------------------
2. How are NPC casters getting stats that high? The high stat for an NPC caster is 15. His level bumps at 4 and 8 push that to 17.
More than likely he won't be able to afford more than a +2 ability enhancer so he now has an 18. Well maybe the race comes into play giving him a 20 which is a +5 modifier from stats.
That means the spell DC is about a 20. If you take the spell focus feats you can push it to 22. You can probably get it higher if you really focus on it, but most NPC's are not as optimized as PC so the spells are more likely to be in the 20 to 22 range.
Correction:21 to 23 assuming the highest level spell is used. SoD's are not very efficient though. If the caster fails he has wasted an action, and if the PC's have decent to good saves then they will fail.
Lets take a level 10 fighter again and use it's will save(the poor one).
The base save is a +3, Assuming we are using 20 pb he should be able to get a +14 in wisdom for another +2. A headband of wisdom +2 pushes that to a +3 meaning he is now at a +3 for wisdom. Before we go to far that nets him a +6. A cloak of resistance +3 is affordable. Now he is at a +9. Iron will pushes him to a +11. He is probably at about a 50% chance to not make the save.
If he is really trying to be careful he get improved iron will so he can roll twice meaning he is at about a 25% chance. That is just from memory. I am sure if I scour the books I can boost it even more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traps often are said to be not dangerous enough.
Energy Drain Trap CR 10
Type magic; Perception DC 34; Disable Device DC 34
Effects
Trigger visual (true seeing); Reset none
Effect spell effect (energy drain, Atk +10 ranged touch, 2d4 temporary negative levels, DC 23 Fortitude negates after 24 hours)
Chamber of Blades Trap CR 10
Type mechanical; Perception DC 25; Disable Device DC 20
Effects
Trigger location; Duration 1d4 rounds; Reset repair
Effect Atk +20 melee (3d8+3); multiple targets (all targets in a 20-ft.-square chamber)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither of these is killing anyone from full health.With all that aside, and before I go further into the post, the game changes as you level up, but the system does give you the means to adapt to it to an extent. That extent also depends on the GM and the group. I personally prefer to not go past level 15 because it gets real hard to not kill players at that point, unless they are really good. I have met players that I could go to 20 with, but that is after 10ish years of gaming.
So, the purpose of this post? First, to find out if other groups have similar experiences. Second, to evaluate some possible solutions (mine and yours).I think the 'HP death point' of PCs needs to be tied to something that increases every level (unlike your Con score).
I also think that the 'full attack action' is an awkward, unbalancing mechanic (I'm not the first one to say it). It is a multiplicative effect rather than an additive one, and that's what makes it SO dangerous.
Finally, save or die effects are cool, but they need to be moderated. For example, maybe they knock you down for that fight on a failed save, but you get additional saves to avoid DEATH.
I often find it harder to kill PC's as they level up. Now if I use stock(straight from the bestiary with no modification) monsters, and the players know their stuff they run over monster even at APL+2 or higher. I often have to change out feats or make other adjustments. As for my comment of level 15, I am normally using home made NPC's at that point, and they act like a well oiled machines. Other than dragons, and certain new monsters the PC's don't have much to worry about.
As for SoD I think they should stay like they are. Some groups like them, and some groups don't. Personally as a GM I just limit their use by NPC's for several reasons.
1.Insta-deaths are not all that fun so I save them for boss fights that make it more memorable.
2.If they fail the NPC just wasted an action.
3.I like to drag fights out just a little.
I run a tough game so my players know to push their defense pretty high. People new to my group often suffer in the first game. Yes I warn them, but the previous GM was often nicer than I am.
PS:I am not a killer GM.
I appreciate the response, but you yourself said that your players are optimizers. I'm an optimizer too, but I don't want to HAVE to play with all tactician-optimizers at higher levels.
How would you reckon your group would fare if folks were a wee bit less savvy with character building and tactics?
I would scale things back as a GM until the players got better. I have eventually learned that sometimes you have to adjust the game to the group.
|
High level play is a mess for many reasons.
Consider:
A first level character's turn.
Move > Attack > Roll > Deal Damage
Or a first level character's full attack:
5 ft. Step > Attack > Resolve.
Now look at a typical 10th level character:
Swift > Move > Decide Among Dozens of Feats or Spells > Attack/Cast > Add Many Dice and Modifiers > Minus DR/Miss Chance/SR Resolve
Or a 10th level fighter's full attack:
5 ft. step > Swift Action > Attack > Add many dice and modifiers > Resolve Miss Chance > Minus DR > Attack > Add many dice and modifiers > Resolve Miss Chance > Minus DR > Resolve.
10th level play is not 10x more fun than 1st level play but always seems to take 10x as long. The sweet spot of Pathfinder is very much 1-6 or even 1-7.
The amount of rules to remember, the amount of time each turn takes does not lead to a more fun game. The unfortunate side-effect is that story suffers as well. It's harder to move through a plot when any time combat breaks out a larger, and larger chunk of game time is removed.
If I had my druthers I would redesign the game to:
A - Remove iterative attacks with the exception of TWF, Rapid Shot, or even a single hand weapon Rapid Strike feat.
B - Remove feats that should just be options for players anyway (this is any feat where a player takes a penalty to get a bonus: Power Attack, Combat Expertise, even Cleave). A feat should be all bonus or a new option that isn't available to anyone.
C - Nerf spells that step too heavily on the toes of skills, and simplify skills wherever possible by putting more tags (or descriptors on them).
D - Implement something like e10. Essentially after level 10 characters continue to gain Feats, but do not continue to improve BAB, HD, Skill Ranks, Saves etc (except via Feats which improve these things).
E - Implement Buff Caps. A PC may have a number of temporary magical buffs on their character equal to 1/2 their character level (minimum 1), or something to that effect. New buffs remove old buffs, so characters don't spend 1/2 an hour discussing what spell combo can make them indestructible juggernauts before scry and frying the newest villain.
I come down on the extreme other end of things. My group optimizes slightly... they are quite defensive-minded and as such you can reliably find very high AC's and saving throws on their characters. But they are far from exploiting common tactics like the God Wizard and other things and simply play a more common "massive damage on opponents" game, with some of the restant SoD spells thrown in the mix.
As such, I haven't seen any "one round and you're dead" full attacks on any of them for YEARS at the high campaign levels ( We've been playing D20 campaigns since third edition came out, one session each week ). SoD spells or unlucky saves against monster ability effects account for most deaths in those campaigns and even those were far in-between.
I've begun to combine three to four standard AP encounters into one single encounter again lately and it has begun to challenge them at least somewhat... but not to the point where they were in real danger of a TPK or even losing one character.
Keep in mind, please, that we are talking about 15-point buy characters here.
As such, I think high-level Pathfinder is much too forgiving on PC's. I don't mind them rocking at what they do, but given the damage output even this defensive-minded group has, I think monsters should begin to have double the HP starting at level 11, so that they can get off their attack routine and special abilities at least once per combat. Most monsters don't last more than two rounds.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Getting into the higher levels definitely demands more from the player than lower level games. Scenarios are written with the expectation that you will have a level of expertise by the time you get there.
Fortunately, in APs and non-PFS play GMs have a lot of latitude to tweak things, probably the easiest thing to do is just let your players level early or extend the number of encounters before the finale of the AP.
Seriously, most AP encounters are written with the thought that putting together a group of lower CR's still constitutes a challenge to a high-level group. Or that a single high CR will not get totally swamped by the action economy of one against four ( or more ). Both trains of thought are a total joke.
This Tuesday I combined four regular AP encounters vs. my 6-players party and they walked right through it, no losses, only a slight worry on their parts, when four wood golems used their AE together and two Spirit Nagas lobbed fireballs. The Cleric channeled half of that away in one go and the next round one spirit Naga, three of the four wood golems and one Blood Knight Fighter 12 were down for the count, leaving only a lvl 13 Witch Vampire, one heavily wounded Wood Golem and one Spirit Naga in the mix, which all were down two rounds later.
It was enough to put the group under pressure and that is what counts for me... not killing the party, but making them feel like they are in danger of losing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems to be quite a diversity of opinion out there with some solid reasoning all around. Responses appear to be divided into three categories...
1) "Yeah, it's an issue, high level mechanics don't work" (followed by some math and anecdotes to support the claim)
2) "Nope, it's not an issue." or "I have the opposite problem" (followed by some math and anecdotes to support the claim)
3) "Your doing it wrong!" (followed by tactical and character building suggestions to avoid PC death)
I will say that most (not all) of the "nope, it's not an issue" people did also admit that their characters were either optimized, very defensive-minded, and/or tactical about avoiding full attacks.
I think Dennis just summed it up pretty well when he said that higher level play does demand more from the players. Maybe my gaming compadres just aren't willing to be paranoid enough to survive above level 10, but that's OK because we had a blast getting there!
I believe it REALLY depends on your GM and your game.
If you are talking about PFS play then I am not in a posiiton to comment really as our group does not follow all of those guidelines, but we do stick to the books without any major mods.
We ignore the WBL guidelines. We play the game and let the chips fall where they may. In our Friday game we just made Lvl 9 and I can tell you it is a challenge as a player and a GM, but I don't feel it's the "end of ties" or anything like that.
Some of the changes to spells to allow re-saves (Hold Monster) and such have eliminated alot of the "Oops, the party is dead" moments. Don't underestimate how much difference channeling makes also. Healing is much more effective that I believe alot of people give credit.
At level 9 it feels like we are just starting to get interesting, I say that most because I play the Wizard =) Finally getting to measure up to all the melee and bow types.
I will tell you, the only charcter the GM really feels is overpowered is our bow fighter. He's pretty scary but I pointed out that's what the GM gets for allowing Strength bows =)
Spells like Breath of Life, or (if you use 3E material) Delay Death, Close Wounds, and Revivify help a lot towards keeping PCs alive at higher levels.
Better yet, you can get more ways to disrupt and negate attacks. Check out the Divine Interference feat. All it needs to work is a level 1 spell, and pearls of power do exist.
That said, I suppose that just proves your statement. You need to know what you're doing at higher levels to make it less inhospitable.
Hm, I guess my definition of "optimizers" is different from the OP's. Optimizers are synonymous for me with min-maxers and those are like the dudes who write the class guides ( Treatmonk and so on ).
Well, there are optimizers and then there are OPTIMIZERS;) I was talking about the type of player who takes pride in building characters that are mechanically ahead of the curve.
|
Rocket tag was the rule of the day in 3.5. PF hasn't change enough from that.
At higher levels, whoever goes first in a straight out fight (no worries about diplomacy, injuring the innocent, and the like), the side that wins initiative usually wins the encounter. And at the higher level, characters need to be better than average (possibly better than even above average).
I never played enough of AD&D to remember if that was the case as well, but I suspect the older D&Ds were like that as well.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
3) Traps of CR 10, 11, and 12 can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.
PCs being reliably killed by those traps are NOT average.
Just took a look at some sample traps of that CR, and we've got 3d8+3 damage at CR 10, 15d6 with a save for half at CR 11, and 60 with a save for half at CR 13.
At 10th level, a wizard with 14 CON (whether starting CON, boosts from items, whatever) will have 58 HP (more if he put FCB's into HP). The cleric with the same stats has 69 HP, and the fighter has 80. (Again, that's on the low end due to not assuming any FCB's.) So even the CR 13 (that's APL+3, which is supposed to be really difficult) maximized fireball trap won't kill the squishiest PC even if he fails his save.
Sorry, but I'm not even going to bother looking up attack routines and whatnot. If you're doing high-level adventuring with a negative CON mod, you deserve to die.
|
|
3) Traps of CR 10, 11, and 12 can RELIABLY kill average, undamaged PCs of similar level.PCs being reliably killed by those traps are NOT average.
Just took a look at some sample traps of that CR, and we've got 3d8+3 damage at CR 10, 15d6 with a save for half at CR 11, and 60 with a save for half at CR 13.
At 10th level, a wizard with 14 CON (whether starting CON, boosts from items, whatever) will have 58 HP (more if he put FCB's into HP). The cleric with the same stats has 69 HP, and the fighter has 80. (Again, that's on the low end due to not assuming any FCB's.) So even the CR 13 (that's APL+3, which is supposed to be really difficult) maximized fireball trap won't kill the squishiest PC even if he fails his save.
Sorry, but I'm not even going to bother looking up attack routines and whatnot. If you're doing high-level adventuring with a negative CON mod, you deserve to die.
My first objective in making any character is making sure I have 14 CON. If I have a -2 CON for racial adjustments, then it depends on the point buy if I make it 16 or leave it at 14.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I don't have a hard rule for CON, but if I'm no more sturdy per level than a random beggar, I'm going to be taking precautions to not die - which will likely include, by the time I hit 10th freaking level, magical means of making me tougher (i.e., a +2 or +4 CON belt). And unless my INT and WIS are both dumped, that's in-character reasoning, not metagaming.
I was thinking of spell traps using save or die. Probably should have specified.
Phantasmal Killer trap (a great rogue-killer spell) is CR 8. Charlie Bell, I do agree that traps are not hard to avoid. I mentioned them in the OP because of certain spells, but traps are definitely not the reason I wanted to have this discussion.
I believe it REALLY depends on your GM and your game.
If you are talking about PFS play then I am not in a posiiton to comment really as our group does not follow all of those guidelines, but we do stick to the books without any major mods.
We ignore the WBL guidelines. We play the game and let the chips fall where they may. In our Friday game we just made Lvl 9 and I can tell you it is a challenge as a player and a GM, but I don't feel it's the "end of ties" or anything like that.
Some of the changes to spells to allow re-saves (Hold Monster) and such have eliminated alot of the "Oops, the party is dead" moments. Don't underestimate how much difference channeling makes also. Healing is much more effective that I believe alot of people give credit.
At level 9 it feels like we are just starting to get interesting, I say that most because I play the Wizard =) Finally getting to measure up to all the melee and bow types.
I will tell you, the only charcter the GM really feels is overpowered is our bow fighter. He's pretty scary but I pointed out that's what the GM gets for allowing Strength bows =)
Hold Monster allowed rerolls in 3.5 also, but with that aside you are correct, it really depends on the group.
How much someone is willing to put into system mastery is also a factor. That goes for players and GM's.
You are assuming that the rogue can totally optimize the loot they get. Some DMs like random tables and if a +3 leather armor drops wouldn't the rogue just wear it.
Others may not have a magic mart or even drop alot of gold. So yeah if you play in a game with a magic Walmart or a DM that doesn't use random tables yeah you can pimp out AC.
One time our DM rolled a 20K magic weapon, at level 6. The fighter who took it basically had no loot for like 4 levels.
No we couldn't sell it because we never got to a town that was big enough to even pay half price for it.
In my game we can't buy ability score boosting items. We also start with much better base stats and have much higher wealth by level. Those tidbits, like how your GM chooses to apply wealth, is irrelevant when discussing system balance.
The game assumes a series of base assumptions and works within them. When you start to deviate from them I object to complaints about how the system is broken. You aren't playing wrong as long as you are having fun, but when you make large changes (like an inability to buy or sell items for 4 full levels) you have seriously departed from the way the basic system works.
This isn't to say that Pathfinder is flawless at high levels (or low levels). It isn't, there are some real problems. That said, it is entirely possible to play at high levels.
I was thinking of spell traps using save or die. Probably should have specified.
What save or die trap is a CR 10 that is likely to outright kill someone?
If you use a higher level spell then the perception and disable DC will might be lower so the trap should not be getting set off any way.The trap is also not likely to reset.
Examples:
Energy which I used in my first post here is CR 10 trap. It uses a high level spell, but the trap does not reset. Even with a DC of 34 for perception and disable the trap should be found.
level 10
10 ranks+3class skill+2 masterwork item+4 ability modifier=19
1/2 ranks in class +5. The total is now a 24. Taking 10 finds and disables this trap.
To the OP: Here's an AC class table for your people.
Note that at level 10 every character should have a +2 or 3 Resistance item, and if their saves are truly bad, save booster feats.
Using the table below, your rogue should be using an elven chain shirt (1000 gp, no penalty, +4 AC, +6 Dex) +2, A buckler/light shield +2, ring of prot +1 and an Amulet of Nat AC +1. With a Dex of 19, your Rogue should have an AC of 25. He could do better by buying potions of Barkskin, which should give him another +2 to +4. This is assuming no Dodge feat.
=================================
Here is an example of optimizing AC. It has nothing to do with cheating and everything to do with just spending gold in the most efficient manner.
Note: Celestial mail and celestial plate not included.
A sample reference for Armor Class costs
AC comes, at a fundamental level, in the following forms which are easy to gain: Dex Bonus; Armor Bonus; Natural Armor Bonus; Deflection Bonus; and potentially a Shield Bonus. Yes, there are Insight, Sacred, Profane, Competence, Dodge and all sorts of other bonuses, but the above bonuses are the ones that are easy to pay gold for and retain.
This is a simple basic guide to maximizing AC for gold.
Two builds are presented here – With Shield, and without Shield. Additionally, there is a third build here using Defender to accentuate your AC via an off-hand weapon, or on a shield.
First is going to be choice of armor.
The optimal types of armor are: Light Armor (all varieties add up to +8 Armor/Dex allowed); Breastplate (Medium armor, +6 AC/+3 Dex = +9); and Full Plate (+9 AC, +1 Dex = +10).
Note: Celestial Armor completely borks this table if you have the Dex to top it off, coming in at +13!!
First thing to point out is that Mithral is only a viable AC option if you have the Dex to max it out, OR you need your armor to be lighter for movement purposes.
Classes that are going to get exceedingly high Dex scores are actually better off with lighter armor that allows them to maximize use of their Dexterity at later levels. The exception to this is the Fighter; because Armor Training expands the maximum Dex bonus, Fighters typically aren’t going to need Mithral armor until very late levels, when their Dex scores exceed either 20 or 24 (Full Plate/Breastplate).
Maximizing AC is based on costs to gain an extra point of AC. These costs are:
+1 Armor bonus: 1000 gp, +3000 gp; +5000 Gp; +7000 gp; +9000 gp.
+1 Shield bonus: As +1 Armor
+1 Natural Armor: 2000 gp; +6000 gp; +10000 gp; +14000 gp; +18000 gp.
+1 Deflection bonus: As Amulet of Natural Armor
+1 Dexterity bonus: 4000 gp (Dex +2); +12000 gp (Dex +4); +20,000 gp (Dex+6)
Mithral Armor (Total bonus +2): Light, +1000 gp, Medium Armor +4000 gp, Heavy armor +9000 gp:
+1 Defender on Weapon used for defense: 8000 gp; +10,000 gp; +14,000 gp; +18,000 gp; +22,000 gp. (ending at +5 Defender)
Now, we simply take them and add them on in series.
If your starting Dex is 19 and you wear light armor; Immediately buy a chain shirt.
If your starting Dex is 17 and you can wear Medium Armor, buy a breastplate.
If your Starting Dex is 13 or lower, buy Full Plate.
Note that if you are a Fighter, you need to increase the minimum Dex for Mithral by your Armor Training bonus.
Base:
Chain Shirt, 19 Dex = +8 AC
Breastplate, 17 Dex = +9 AC
Full Plate, 13 Dex = +10 AC
Bonuses are listed in the order you add them, with Defender bonuses last as an optional (you should take them before similar items if possible). Basically, you want Deflection before anything; Dexterity next; and Nat Armor and Armor Enhancements equally. This is because the prior two affect your Touch AC (so does Defender) and the latter do not.
Add Cost AC Total GP Total
Mithral Light Armor 1000 (+2) (+1000)
+1 Armor Enhance 1000 +1 1000
+1 Ring of Prot 2000 +2 3000
+1 Natural Armor 2000 +3 5000
Mithral Medium Armor 4000 (+2) (+4000, Dex 20)
+2 Armor Enhance 3000 +4 8000
+2 Dex Gaunts 4000 +5 12000
Mithral Heavy Armor 9000 (+2) +9000, Dex 17+
+3 Armor Enhance 5000 +6 17000
+2 Ring/Prot 6000 +7 23000
+2 Natural Armor 6000 +8 29000
+4 Armor Enhance 7000 +9 36000
(+1 Defender) (+8000) (+1*)
+5 Armor Enhance 9000 +10 45000
+3 Ring/Prot 10000 +11 55000
+3 Natural Armor 10000 +12 65000
(+2 Defender) 10000 (+18000) (+2*)
+4 Dex booster 12000 +13 77000
+4 Ring of Prot 14000 +14 91000
+4 Natural Armor 14000 +15 105000
(+3 Defender) 14000 (+32000) (+3*)
+5 Ring of Prot 18000 +16 123000
+5 Natural Armor 18000 +17 141000
(+4 Defender) 18000 (+50000) (+4*)
+6 Dex Booster 20000 +18 161000
(+5 Defender) 22000 (+72000) (+5*)
Totals: Light Armor: Mithril Studded Leather +5, Dex 24 = AC 36, 162k
Medium Armor: Mithral Breastplate+5, Dex 20 = AC 36, 165k
Full Plate: M. Full Plate, Dex 16 = AC 37, 170k
Fighter Armor Training +4
Note: Needs +5 Dex (level/inherent) on all!
Mithral Chain Shirt, Dex 30. AC 40.
Mithral BP, Dex 28, AC 41
Mithral Full Plate, Dex 24, AC 42
Mithral is basically needed to max out Dex bonus for Dex builds. For fighters, Armor Training basically means their Dex will seldom be high enough to max out their armor.
Using an off-hand weapon as a Defender adds 72,000 gp to the defense cost, but the +5 AC is significant.
For Shield builds, the cost is negligible (+25000 gp for a +5) and the AC is significant (+6 or 7), resulting in a much quicker rise in AC.
ADD Add’l COST AC TOTAL TOTAL COST
+1 Armor Enhance 1000 +1 1000
+1 Shield Enhance 1000 +2 2000
+1 Ring of Prot 2000 +3 4000
+1 Natural Armor 2000 +4 6000
+2 Armor Enhance 3000 +5 9000
+2 Shield Enhance 3000 +6 12000
+2 Dex Gaunts 4000 +7 16000
+3 Armor Enhance 5000 +8 21000
+3 Shield Enhance 5000 +9 26000
+2 Ring/Prot 6000 +10 32000
+2 Natural Armor 6000 +11 38000
+4 Armor Enhance 7000 +12 45000
+4 Shield Enhance 7000 +13 52000
+5 Armor Enhance 9000 +14 61000
+5 Shield Enhance 9000 +15 70000
+3 Ring/Prot 10000 +16 80000
+3 Natural Armor 10000 +17 90000
+4 Dex booster 12000 +18 102000
+4 Ring of Prot 14000 +19 116000
+4 Natural Armor 14000 +20 130000
+5 Ring of Prot 18000 +21 148000
+5 Natural Armor 18000 +22 166000
+6 Dex Booster 20000 +23 186000
Assuming use of a Heavy Shield for +2 AC, at 12k layout you’re +3 AC ahead of the Shield-less build. At 50k you are +4 ahead. At 100k you are +5 ahead, at 150k you are +6 ahead, and you max out at +7 ahead.
Note that if you put Defender on your shield, and simply don’t attack with it, the numbers can look something like this:
Light Armor: AC 47, 52 with Defender
Medium Armor: AC 48, 53 with Defender
Heavy Armor: AC 49, 54 with Defender.
And all this is before Dodge, Shield Specialization, and incidental bonuses from spells, templates, defensive fighting, and whatnot. Note that to max Dex from Armor Training, any fighter is going to need Inherent bonuses to his Dex, unless he raises Dex instead of Str.
If he does both, then he probably wants a lighter grade of armor to max out the Dodge-based bonus of Dex, which is more effective against touch/ranged touch attacks.
==Aelryinth
I was thinking of spell traps using save or die. Probably should have specified.What save or die trap is a CR 10 that is likely to outright kill someone?
If you use a higher level spell then the perception and disable DC will might be lower so the trap should not be getting set off any way.
The trap is also not likely to reset.Examples:
Energy which I used in my first post here is CR 10 trap. It uses a high level spell, but the trap does not reset. Even with a DC of 34 for perception and disable the trap should be found.level 10
10 ranks+3class skill+2 masterwork item+4 ability modifier=19
1/2 ranks in class +5. The total is now a 24. Taking 10 finds and disables this trap.
Don't know many rogues with masterwork perception devices (are there any?), nor that have an 18 Wisdom for those Perception checks.
==Aelryinth
I was thinking of spell traps using save or die. Probably should have specified.What save or die trap is a CR 10 that is likely to outright kill someone?
If you use a higher level spell then the perception and disable DC will might be lower so the trap should not be getting set off any way.
The trap is also not likely to reset.Examples:
Energy which I used in my first post here is CR 10 trap. It uses a high level spell, but the trap does not reset. Even with a DC of 34 for perception and disable the trap should be found.level 10
10 ranks+3class skill+2 masterwork item+4 ability modifier=19
1/2 ranks in class +5. The total is now a 24. Taking 10 finds and disables this trap.Don't know many rogues with masterwork perception devices (are there any?), nor that have an 18 Wisdom for those Perception checks.
==Aelryinth
Good point with perception* so lets take those away and push it down to 16, and give the rogue Eyes of the Eagle. It is cheaper anyway. :)
*I was assuming a rogue optimised for finding traps, but even with that aside another party member can find the traps. That is what my druid did in CoT, and the rogue disabled them.
Also you can usually take 20 when checking for traps, which makes finding them trivial.
I was going to mention that, but I thought giving a rogue's possible modifiers was a better idea in case time restraints made taking 20 a bad idea.
Also you can usually take 20 when checking for traps, which makes finding them trivial.
Skill Mastery makes traps trivial as soon as level 10 rolls around, anyway.