Because a wizard can buy more spells and add them to his spellbook. This can be done as easily as adding any equipment to your gear list. Sorcerers do not have the same luxury.
Who decides which equipment is available?
As easy as a GM can say there is no sword he also can say there is no scroll in the shop.
This means of course even a wizard doesn't have always the right spell in his spellbook.So if a wizard is more powerful than any other class, it's the GM fault.
(you can replace wizard with any other class)
okay. so lets say the DM says no, no scroll shops, no enemy spellbooks to capture, etc.
The wizard still has 41+INT options in a given situation. The Fighter has one: smash with a weapon.
Either way, wizard is still ahead as far as versatility.
If your GM is going to do that to you, There is still Cleric, Druid, Oracle, Sorcerer, Witch...All classes without spellbooks, all of which give greater versatility than a Fighter, Rogue, Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger, Cavalier etc.
Plus, the various 6th level casting classes (Magus, Inquisitor, Bard, Summoner, Alchemist)which are also quite versatile... and they use spells.
Basically, any spellcasting class is going to be more versatile than a non spellcaster. Thats just the way of the D&D/Pathfinder world.
the 15 minute workday: The idea with various levels of truth behind it that high level adventurers can work for 15 minutes, blow through your encounters, and then leave to rest and restock their spells.
Alchemist The melee alchemist is a better sneak attacker than the rogue. The Bomb alchemist can nova for a few rounds per day and do some pretty sick damage and debuffs.
Barbarian: Will one shot foes up till about level 5
Bard: Is a jack of all trades, a master of buffing. People think they're silly and weak
Fighter: The ability to move or do your full and expected amount of damage can eat at them a bit.
Rogue: Sneak attack is more difficult to pull off than expected. Stealth rules make it difficult if not impossible to sneak up on non humans (see the thread why jack be nimble can't steal a chicken) Magic is better at skills than skills are (Disguise vs alter self, Climb vs Fly, stealth vs invisibility)
Ranger: Largely seems to do what its supposed to do. People complain less now that they're not locked into two weapon fighting.
Oracle: Has a few very powerful options, but generally a fun and versatile class.
Magus: There's only one real build for it: High dex, scimatar wielding dervish dance. It does a LOT of damage , and its confusing whack spell whack combo
Wizard: Save or die spells end combats boringly. There is NO reason to be a generalist.
Inquisitor: Very good all around character, can do nearly anything fairly well. Makes a better rogue than the rogue, especially with haunts taking the place of traps as things DM's love to kill people with.
Paladin: causes alignment arguments. Can open some serious cans of whoopass if your baddie is an evil dragon or outsider.
Sorcerer: Not quite as good as the wizard because of slow spell progression. Doesn't get as many spells as a specialist wizard even though they're supposed to have more. If not as versatile as a wizard because they know so few spells: often only 1 at their highest level.
Ninja: Is a good rogue fix: would completely replace the rogue if people didn't mind re-skinning it.
Samurai: Seems like a funny fighter to me.
Cavalier: Gettiing the horse into the adventure can be a pain.
Druid: Anything you can do i can to better... Good spells, good buffs, utility, very powerful wildshape forms. The melee fighters bane is the problem that when they move they can't full attack. The druid has access to animal forms with pounce.
They also come with an animal companion that, properly geared and buffed, will beat up a rogue and take their pick pocketing money.
Summoner: Problem 1: math is hard. Most summoners are built wrong. Problem 2: you can easily build an eidolon or synthesist that will roflcopter a fighter.
Witch: Make a save or die.
Monk: its two main assets are flurry of blows and a high movement rate. Flurry of blows requires that you hold still. its supposed to be an unarmed fighter but hits better with the temple sword.
Gunslinger: Does ungodly amounts of damage and can't miss: TOuch ac either stays mostly static or actually DROPS against tougher enemies.
Cleric
okay. In a campaign, fighters (in my experience, which you imply is gathered solely from reading online forums) do one thing: They deal damage. Wizards can do that to.
Do they? Can they do as much as consistently as the fighter?
They can also scout, they can infiltrate, they can provide battlefield control. Maybe they can't do it RIGHT NOW, but give them 8 hours of prep time, they can do just about anything.
And here we have theory crafting at it's finest. This is just the reverse of my fighter example, instead of feats, you're just using spells. How many spells per day are you giving your wizard? Remember that's spells per day not spells per 8 hours of rest. A Wizard can't get up after sleeping 8 hours, unload all their spells in 15 minutes, then sleep another 8 hours and restock. A spell slot can only be filed once per 24 hours.
What I was referencing (which you derided without fully understanding) is that in a one on one combat situation with two builds, both built independently by different people, the wizard will win nine times out of ten. This I have seen over and over again, but only in character optimization forums: my group has no need to run PvP scenarios to settle optimization debates/arguments.
This, combined with ANY experience with an actually optimized wizard in a real campaign, should disprove any theories that the game is balanced.
Oh no I understood it, I just don't agree. Balancing is not who can take who in a fight. The Paladin's code of conduct is part of balancing does that help him win or contribute to a loss in some PvP tourney? Nope, but it still helps balance the class. So does a Cleric's choice of god(ess). The number of skill points a Rogue gets is part of that balance, but doesn't really contribute much to a PvP contest.
A wizard can fulfill more roles than a fighter in a real campaign.
Again, not sure I agree. A Fighter can take stealth and Shadow Armor, now he's the Fighter role and the scout role at the same time, without an 8 hour rest. Take the Lore Warden archetype and it's even more plausible.
A wizard can defeat a fighter in single combat more often than not.
Ergo, Wizard is more powerful/versatile than the fighter.
I don't think anyone said it wasn't, but we're not talking about power or versatility, we're talking about balance.
Oh, and for the record, there is nothing wrong with asking a community for help or opinions, so lets stop being so short-sighted, shall we?
If you had asked for opinions, you might have a point. That is not what you asked for, though, so chuck the condescending attitude.
You wanted to know, "what are the things that make each class strong/weak?" Your stated goal was to correct the imbalances present in the class system. That's not opinion you were looking for, you need factual statement and record to even attempt your goal. That's why asking for information as you did was worthless: there are no factual statements or records regarding class imbalance. It is all a matter of opinion, and unless you already have your own opinions on the matter you have no business attempting to remedy a perceived problem that you have not experienced.
If you truly want to address class balance, play all the classes and come to your own conclusions first; because class imbalance is entirely opinion-based you are not qualified to "solve" the issue until you have identified it yourself.
@Jodokai
IF the wizard is more powerful/versatile than a fighter... which you say no one is arguing...
How is that balanced?
You can argue all you like, but I guarantee that most people will have had similar experiences in game: Spellcasters are more versatile characters, able to more adequately provide avenues and outlets for player creativity; they have the tools to get around and/or defeat any obstacle or opponent.
Anyone familiar with game design or "theory-crafting" will tell a similar tale: Spellcasters have numbers and mechanics on their side. Not only that, they have access to the only legal way to bend and break the rules of the game, namely, spellcasting.
I personally don't mind (anymore): in ancient myth and lore, spellcasters were particularly feared.
However, pretending to the contrary, or otherwise ignoring empirical data, does not make the classes balanced.
As much as I hate to say it, Class Tier is a good guideline for class power. The trick is that it seems to matter more and more as you get to higher level, that's when things really start to show through. Wizards end up knowing so many spells that they end up more concerned with figuring out which of their spells to prepare for just-in-case situations than anything else. The non-humanoid monsters get to the point where martial characters can be left in the dust.
I've been through two 1-20 campaigns (War of the Burning Sky, with Pathfinder addaptation in one) and in each the problem starts coming down to to spells versus martial. The wizard and the warmage exceled, the rogue and archer didn't in the one I ran. In the one I played in the Archer did well basically because the DM willed it so (guess who got the artifact weapon that changed shape and scaled in level?). Otherwise only my Jade Pheonix Mage and the most tenatious Crusader I have ever seen survived.
Monks may be good against casters at lower levels, fighters and barbarians may deal consistant damage, rogues may destroy when they get flanking setup, but once those better spells come out the wizard/sourcerer/whatever will be the MVP even if they aren't running a spec build. They start going over/around/through/below obstacles that leave martial characters and some partial casters stumped/dead.
HOWEVER, this mainly holds true in modules. If you are running homebrew or are flexible as to how you run your module this can/will change. You can make the fights require your casters to panic, your martial characters to shine. Most classes have certain advantages that really work, theory crafted or not. Wizards may be able to prepare for batman-esque contingincies, but sometimes even they get caught wth their pants down (even if it requires an unholy dragon wearing a mask of woven liches (an archer made that fight winable))
I suppose I should add that it is almost unfair to compare classes during the last 5 or so levels. It seems most campaigns either run out of steam or wrap up before this point, which means that the class disparity is much less noticable.
Early on the classes are much more balanced, with casters sometimes being at a disadvantage (the barbarian has following step and the rage power to pursue you when you flee?). My wizard favoring friend even admits this weakness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, Martial-Caster Disparity. Welcome back! It's been a while. Would you like a drink? What'll yah have?
*glugluglug*
So, how's Wizard doing? Cleric? That's nice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Class imbalances exist because we all need something to talk about after the Doritoes are gone.
In all seriousness...they do exist, though there's also a lot of getting worked up over them, probably more than there should be.
However, if it wasn't Pathfinder, it would be something else, some other system.
We just have to accept these things if we're going to work with one another, and accept that some of the anger has some sense behind it...and also be willing to step up and say, "Okay, let's move on and do something fun for a while, and come back to this later--because xyz is getting heated and we're not accomplishing anything except getting more and more upset over the same thing."
This is not being dismissive so much as it is saying: We need to come back to it later, when things have had a chance to chill, and decide if it's really a thing, how much of a thing...and how we can and should present it in a positive manner. Because all we're doing at this point is repeating, and becoming more upset, more angry.
The positive manner is important. Cycling, abrasive anger tends to throw up defenses and cause a deaf ear. "Oh, that's just so and so going off again." It's Peter and the Wolf.
Tossing, "I'm so smart I can do it better" and "everything is wrong forever" on top of that just throws up the walls even higher and thicker. Because it reads as arrogance more than criticism.
Worse, perceived arrogance makes enemies of others who might listen and who otherwise might offer support.
@Jodokai
IF the wizard is more powerful/versatile than a fighter... which you say no one is arguing...
How is that balanced?
I don't know how else to say it. You seem to feel that if A can beat B in a single 1vs1 fight then A must be the ROXXXOR. If campaigns were 1 class fighting another class in 1 vs 1 fights, you might have a point. If the GM give the Wizard the module prior to playing so the Wizard can prepare, you might have a point, but since none of those things typically happen, you are very off. The only way you'll actually see what I'm talking about, is play a wizard in an actual campaign that you don't know what's going to happen. See how "all powerful" you really feel. Then try it without a fighter or similar melee type defending you and see how well it goes. While you may not know it, the reason a Wizard is able to cast spells and feel powerful is because of the wall of steel in front of him.
You can argue all you like, but I guarantee that most people will have had similar experiences in game: Spellcasters are more versatile characters, able to more adequately provide avenues and outlets for player creativity; they have the tools to get around and/or defeat any obstacle or opponent.
And we're back to theory crafting. The Wizard has the potential to get around obstacles, if they're psychic enough to know they're coming.
Let's do a little experiment, make a Wizard that you would use in a campaign, pick your spells. Create your spell book and use standard Wealth by Level. I'll take encounters from published adventures and we can see first hand how much of what you say is simply unfounded theory that gets regurgitated from forum to forum.
@Jodokai
IF the wizard is more powerful/versatile than a fighter... which you say no one is arguing...
How is that balanced?
I don't know how else to say it. You seem to feel that if A can beat B in a single 1vs1 fight then A must be the ROXXXOR. If campaigns were 1 class fighting another class in 1 vs 1 fights, you might have a point. If the GM give the Wizard the module prior to playing so the Wizard can prepare, you might have a point, but since none of those things typically happen, you are very off. The only way you'll actually see what I'm talking about, is play a wizard in an actual campaign that you don't know what's going to happen. See how "all powerful" you really feel. Then try it without a fighter or similar melee type defending you and see how well it goes. While you may not know it, the reason a Wizard is able to cast spells and feel powerful is because of the wall of steel in front of him.
You can argue all you like, but I guarantee that most people will have had similar experiences in game: Spellcasters are more versatile characters, able to more adequately provide avenues and outlets for player creativity; they have the tools to get around and/or defeat any obstacle or opponent.And we're back to theory crafting. The Wizard has the potential to get around obstacles, if they're psychic enough to know they're coming.
Let's do a little experiment, make a Wizard that you would use in a campaign, pick your spells. Create your spell book and use standard Wealth by Level. I'll take encounters from published adventures and we can see first hand how much of what you say is simply unfounded theory that gets regurgitated from forum to forum.
And you completely ignore my point where I say most people will have had a similar experience to mine in actual game: wizards have more tools to get around obstacles and opponents. The fact that wizards can beat martial types in single combat is merely to show that fighters are not the best at single combat: that spells provide more options than "smash"... And that fighter cannot compete with these options.
I am sorry my experiences mirror those of better players and game designers than myself... It explains why you see the same opinions and theories "regurgitated" on forums though. Maybe there is something to that.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo makes an effort. Most of the 3.5 books were not even spellchecked, let alone playtested. Is Pathfinder balanced? No. But it is a shining golden god to anyone who has endured years of 3.5 printing things like Complete Warrior's Samurai A.K.A. "play a 3.5 Fighter except you don't get to pick your feats and you get less of them."
|
|
character strength depends on the circmumstance
zombies all around you spread out and coming at you
better to have 3 bazooka rounds--the wizard?
or a pistol with a clip that never runs out--the warrior who doesnt have a limit on how many attacks a day?
at lower levels ac can bust encounters. In some scenarios monsters can't hit the warriors ac except with a 20. at higher levels that changes.
sometimes it is the warrior that is more powerful--sometimes the wizard. sometimes they both might be dead if someone without roguish abilities is around.
think of it this way--which is better for fighting? a grenade launcher, a pistol, an assault rifle or a shotgun?
they all have their use---for example room to room fighting in a house and a grenade launcher dont go well together. especially if that grenade launcher only has a limited number of rounds. Yeah you can lob the grenades without entering--but what if you have to enter.
|
|
depends on how many high level encounters there are. As many have said before, if you let the party rest after the wizard blows all of their spells--yeah wizard is powerful. but if wizard blows all their spells by noon and the party continues on??
it is the difference between a GL with 4 grenades and a pistol that never runs out of ammo
if you always stop combat til the GL gets its 4 grenades back--it gets real powerful.
in real combat, that guy with 4 grenades may not be participating in every combat--but instead saving them up til there is a target that is worthy.
Oh, and for the record, there is nothing wrong with asking a community for help or opinions, so lets stop being so short-sighted, shall we?If you had asked for opinions, you might have a point. That is not what you asked for, though, so chuck the condescending attitude.
You wanted to know, "what are the things that make each class strong/weak?" Your stated goal was to correct the imbalances present in the class system. That's not opinion you were looking for, you need factual statement and record to even attempt your goal. That's why asking for information as you did was worthless: there are no factual statements or records regarding class imbalance. It is all a matter of opinion, and unless you already have your own opinions on the matter you have no business attempting to remedy a perceived problem that you have not experienced.
If you truly want to address class balance, play all the classes and come to your own conclusions first; because class imbalance is entirely opinion-based you are not qualified to "solve" the issue until you have identified it yourself.
I'm not really in the mood to argue semantics, so lets just go ahead and drop the whole 'asking for advice vs. asking for facts' issue. In the same instance, I could argue that your 'assumptions' about what I was really asking for to begin with could have been just as off, but I imagine your whole claim about 'already knowing what I was REALLY asking for' was just a little slip up on your part (no biggie, it happens).
If I wanted facts, I'd ask about history, mathematics, or maybe even the laws of physics. However, in this thread, I wanted advice (or if you will, a consensus) on what other players felt were lacking in certain classes. I have my own opinions of course, but it would seem to make more sense to ask for multiple perspectives from players who have vastly more experience with certain classes than I do. After all, I already know the issues I have with classes, but there is always that chance that I am 'overlooking' something, and thus I ask the forums to see if I can find other individuals who can perhaps lend me some extra insight.
And there you have it.
Though I must say, I never imagined that you actually had to be 'qualified' to do research into a problem that you didn't already know the answer to. I mean, that just sounds...illogical, doesn't it? ;)
Anyway, if you have any 'advice' of your own that you'd like to give in regards to the issues with certain classes, please feel free to share them. Otherwise, lets go ahead and drop this debate before it gets out of hand. I imagine that it is in both our interests to keep the threads clean. Thanks again buddy.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, Martial-Caster Disparity. Welcome back! It's been a while. Would you like a drink? What'll yah have?
*glugluglug*
So, how's Wizard doing? Cleric? That's nice.
The many tentacled being of pure black doom accepts the offering from the dark overlord of emancipation complimenting him on his choice of headgear in a language that would cause a mortal to fall into gibbering madness as his gray matter leaked from his ears. It inquires in a voice that is not a voice in that it reverberates the soul rather than the all too fragile ear canal as to the status of the servants mate and offspring.
at the earliest levels when AC breaks the game and the monsters need 20s to hit the fighters ac of 23 but only 15s to hit the mages ac of 17, who do you think those limits on hps affect more?
the fighter probably has 14-16 hps and the mage has probably 7-8.
unless you are fighting a single monster at a time, and if it is an intelligent monster can block it off from rest of party, I have yet to have a GM who didn't have monsters going after the rest of the party. we usually have to maneuver ourselves into a chokepoint to have the fighter protect us, because the gm has the smart monsters go after our squishys. so a lot of our squishys use one of their 3-4 daily spells for mage armor. leaving them 3 spells for the day. if they dont use a mage armor later also--leaving them only 2 spells in a day.
two adventures
halfplate armor +8
large steel shield +2
defender of society +1
taldor duelist +1
shield focus feat +1
trust me--not much is going to hit that.
sleep should not exist just because a wizard or any caster has blown their spells--sometimes it should not be possible just to stop and come back when they have full spells again. in fact with clerics--you wake up at 8am--get your spells and by noon you blow them all--it specificaly says you dont get them again til 8 am the next day--even if you rest from noon til 8pm
in PFS there aren't a whole lot of non-dungeon encounters---just ask any cavaliers or mounted samurai
The many tentacled being of pure black doom accepts the offering from the dark overlord of emancipation complimenting him on his choice of headgear in a language that would cause a mortal to fall into gibbering madness as his gray matter leaked from his ears. It inquires in a voice that is not a voice in that it reverberates the soul rather than the all too fragile ear canal as to the status of the servants mate and offspring.Ah, Martial-Caster Disparity. Welcome back! It's been a while. Would you like a drink? What'll yah have?
*glugluglug*
So, how's Wizard doing? Cleric? That's nice.
GORUM BE BLASTED AM GOING TO BEAT YOU BACK INTO HOLE YOU CRAWL OUT OF.
WHY YOU AM NOT JUST STAY ASLEEP LIKE ALL OTHER TENTACLY EVIL MONSTERS ON THE WEEKEND.
character strength depends on the circmumstance
zombies all around you spread out and coming at you
better to have 3 bazooka rounds--the wizard?
or a pistol with a clip that never runs out--the warrior who doesnt have a limit on how many attacks a day?at lower levels ac can bust encounters. In some scenarios monsters can't hit the warriors ac except with a 20. at higher levels that changes.
sometimes it is the warrior that is more powerful--sometimes the wizard. sometimes they both might be dead if someone without roguish abilities is around.
Well, an efficient wizard would just D-Door out of said zombie situation. Or teleport to his safe house. Or summon a better fighter than the fighter to kill things for him, then drop a "bazooka round" as well.
The martial character though... he is stuck there, forced to fight his enemies like a man... which means he very well might die like a man.
The wizard lives to fight another day, when things are to his advantage: timing, spell selection, enemy distribution, etc.
The only thing the martial types are better at is overcoming obstacles when time is a sensitive issue: The wizard has to wait a day to re-select his spells for a given situation. Martial types can overcome it RIGHT NOW... perhaps. but it is risky and less efficient.
Once again... give a wizard time to prepare, and he's got the situation handled better than anyone: But that is entirely dependent on time and preparation.
|
|
character strength depends on the circmumstance
zombies all around you spread out and coming at you
better to have 3 bazooka rounds--the wizard?
or a pistol with a clip that never runs out--the warrior who doesnt have a limit on how many attacks a day?at lower levels ac can bust encounters. In some scenarios monsters can't hit the warriors ac except with a 20. at higher levels that changes.
sometimes it is the warrior that is more powerful--sometimes the wizard. sometimes they both might be dead if someone without roguish abilities is around.
Well, an efficient wizard would just D-Door out of said zombie situation. Or teleport to his safe house. Or summon a better fighter than the fighter to kill things for him, then drop a "bazooka round" as well.
The martial character though... he is stuck there, forced to fight his enemies like a man... which means he very well might die like a man.
The wizard lives to fight another day, when things are to his advantage: timing, spell selection, enemy distribution, etc.
The only thing the martial types are better at is overcoming obstacles when time is a sensitive issue: The wizard has to wait a day to re-select his spells for a given situation. Martial types can overcome it RIGHT NOW... perhaps. but it is risky and less efficient.
Once again... give a wizard time to prepare, and he's got the situation handled better than anyone: But that is entirely dependent on time and preparation.
you are pretty much saying the same thing I did.
ok I play mainly PFS--you have to have your spells written down when you show up before the brief. And usually you are sent right to adventure (via society teleport or something) with no time to change. So if the wizard has D-door or teleport set up--and doesnt use them--take those spells off of available ones he can cast. so instead of 2 spells available at that level he now has d-door or teleport taking up that slot. if it was not memmed it is not like he can ask the zombies to wait while he sits to memm it.
a wizard with time to prepare is indeed the most powerful. But I don't see that often where the wizard has the right spell prepared. They usually have one of each type of thing--to be more universal---meaning they are not optimized with spell specialization for that particular fight.
Heck give me any class and let me know exactly what I am facing and will need and I will do better (by having the right potions and scrolls and protection)
I do not play wizard but say a 7th level evoc specialist wizard
6-1st
5-2nd
3-3rd
3-4th
I choose mage armor, 2X shield, 3 magic missiles
flaming sphere, mirror image X2(because in PFS--there will be at least 4 fights), hideous laughter, scorching ray
3rd=fireball, hold person, lightning bolt
4th= black tentacles, ice storm, stone skin
with four fights in PFS--I have 6 defensive spells---1 mage armor will last the whole time probably---so the other 5 get divided up--say 1 shield each of first two, 2 mirror image on last two fights and stoneskin on very last fight. leaves me pretty protected.
I now have 3 magic missiles, flaming sphere, hideous laughter, scorchign ray, fireball, hold person, lighting bolt, black tentacles and ice storm for my four fights. 11 spells--not bad.
the 3 magic missiles do what four missiles at 1d6+1--so about 12 missiles at 1d6+1--or average of 54 points of damage.
fireball-say 10d6 with CL adds--so average of 35 points of damage--save for half--if you have evasion--save for none.
ice storm 5d6--no saves---so about 20 points of damage to everyone in 20 ft radius---nice. but not killer
black tentacles--yeah that is a nice one
as you can see---his spells are not going to be much more than 120 points in each fight---saying he gets 3 offensive spells a fight out of the four fights. and that only because the area of affect ones like ice storm and black tentacles will get multiples.
saves and SR cut down what looks like great damage--a lot.
now lets give him the d-door and the teleport--well teleport is fifth---so just the d-door. so he loses a level 4 spell--stoneskin?--so only mirror image up in last round--fair enough
is he powerful--yep. Is it as awestriking as everyone makes it sound?--not even close. cause he did not know what to face so had to choose several different spells.
now take the same wizard and let him know what he is facing--and only one combat so he can blow his wad?-----oh yeah---jaw dropping.
but at 7th level--how many melee are not going to be doing about 40 dpr? so in 3 rounds--they will keep up with the wizard.
wizards do shine in control---walls, pits, black tentacles---but once again---if they cast those--take away the fireballs, ice storms etc. They basically delay the enemy and separate them so the melee can kill them a few at a time--since the control centric wizard wont have the dpr spells to do it.
|
|
and yeah--I know there are people who can build better wizards. I can however build a better gunslinger or archer who will one shot the monsters coming in with no limit on how often I can do it. They will be doing a LOT more than 40 or even 80 dpr at level 7.
the limitation to a spell caster is the number of spells per day---once they reach that--they use a sling, bow, or acid splash or daze (all highly innefective at that level)
two adventures
halfplate armor +8
large steel shield +2
defender of society +1
taldor duelist +1
shield focus feat +1trust me--not much is going to hit that.
So, after dumpster diving a bunch of random non-core junk and spending more than standard wealth, he's good against straight melee bruisers for a level or two. On top of this, he's a lopsided character who has no significant abilities besides "Pretty please, hit me instead of people who can do things."
with dex 14--I do the exact same with chain mail armor for 150 gp instead of half plate. total cost chain mail 150 and heavy steel shield 20 gp. Don't tell me people dont have ac 23 at level 1---way over half the warriors I play with are at 23 ac at level 1.
after two adventures--or the equivalent in non PFS--wealth will be close to 1K gp
I have GMed---I can't hit the warriors in most games unless I roll 20s. so my smart monsters go after the squishys---why keep pounding on something you can never hit while getting killed? dumb mobs--like zombies or skeletons--yeah they just pound away at the proverbial wall til they die--boring for all. I would not waste a spell as a wizard at them--why--just let the melee wipe up stuff that can't hurt your party. Save the spells for when needed.
adult dragons have SR 25---say a 10th level wizard. Every spell he casts has a 75% chance of failing--and losing the spell when it fails. You are better off taking a gunslinger--who will hit the ac 8 touch ac with 8 shots.
SR is a killer against magic. and if you do get through the SR--then the dragon has saves of +16, +10 and +15. target the reflex save?--the weakest? ok your 14d6 damage whatever--that would normally do 61 points damage (but if saved against 30) doesnt really hurt the dragon like a gunslinger or archer would. and it gets two saves SR and save against a caster.
roll yourself up an archer--use cluster shot and figure out what you would do to that dragon (ac 29) you would probably have +16 to hit on your first couple of shots at least--so say out of 4 shots (rapid, many, two attacks) you hit twice clustered---you will do about 30 points of damage at the least also. now which one will be able to do that for 10 rounds?
I am not saying wizards are not powerful. but they are not as powerful as you are all making them out to be (ie unlimited spells, miraculously always having the perfect spell memmed) I don't even play a wizard. I dislike the fact of being basicaly "disarmed" after my spells are gone. and squishy sucks.
Speaking as a PFS wizard you can do a hell of a lot better than that, especially if you're the only wizard and would otherwise play a barbarian or something. Haste makes Fireball look like a steaming sack of poo.
Leaving slots open (especially with Fast Study) lets you customize spells even if Drendle Drang has you woken up in the middle of the night. Running out of spells is also pretty rare after level 5ish - you just don't get enough combat rounds to cast them all and even a first-level spell can turn the tide. (If Chalfone Dalsine fails his save against Grease and someone grabs his sword, he's a kitten.)
Also, you're again talking about only combat encounters. PFS does tilt towards those, but the tier system also considers non-combat encounters that are much more important in modules, APs and GM-written games.
Dragon calculations
The question is not "how do you kill a dragon?" Though I would have some things to say about that Wizard's tactics (direct damage? Seriously?) the point of the question is the other challenges.
1) Climb a freezing mountain range.
2) Pass through the trapped lair.
3) Acquire the jewels.
The Fighter has trouble dealing with any of those save "Acquire the jewels," and his only real option there is "beat the dragon to death and take them." You have to understand that the Tier system is not rating the ability of characters to beat things to death, but to deal with disparate challenges (including enemies). That Wizards and Clerics are very capable of dealing with a variety of challenges including enemies (not just by killing them, mind you) is why they are high tier. That a Fighter has trouble (or rather, has no abilities that help) with things that don't involve murder is why they are a lower tier. Continued comparisons of DPR between them are pretty much irrelevant to the point.
man in black--you keep mentioning clerics---you do realize they have the exact same 2 + int bonus to skills that a fighter does right? unlike an oracle who can just raise cha, a cleric has to raise cha and wis. so to dump?--con? dex? str? int?
if your fighter is dumping cha--the cleric is dumping int--so you wil have more skills. If neither dump, you have equal.
if the cleric puts his skills into heal and diplomacy---where do yours go? the cleric is also trying to raise knowledge planes, knowledge religion, etc----same as you--he has 2 skill points to do it.
you could have the exact same skills as the cleric.
wizard---2+int modifier--same thing
heck a gunslinger--which we have shown is just as powerful dpr wise gets 4+ int. and you are worried about wizards? the gunslinger will have twice the social skills.
in your example--the 2nd level cleric or wizard is using their spells to get past guards and crowd. If his spells are used against them--what does he use on the vampire? the cleric and wizard both with 2+int skills will do the same thing as the fighter---rely on skills and roleplay. charm or sleep those guards and before you get to the vampire they have probably broken charm or woke up and you have to fight them also. Once again--you overestimate the spell limit of casters. I am not going to use 3 spells or so on "innocents" before I even start fighting. doesnt leave me much left.
Dragon calculationsThe question is not "how do you kill a dragon?" Though I would have some things to say about that Wizard's tactics (direct damage? Seriously?) the point of the question is the other challenges.
1) Climb a freezing mountain range.
2) Pass through the trapped lair.
3) Acquire the jewels.The Fighter has trouble dealing with any of those save "Acquire the jewels," and his only real option there is "beat the dragon to death and take them." You have to understand that the Tier system is not rating the ability of characters to beat things to death, but to deal with disparate challenges (including enemies). That Wizards and Clerics are very capable of dealing with a variety of challenges including enemies (not just by killing them, mind you) is why they are high tier. That a Fighter has trouble (or rather, has no abilities that help) with things that don't involve murder is why they are a lower tier.
ok I have dealt with the freezing mountain range. Guess what---clerics in general suffer worse than fighters. Yes we can endure elements---but we can get the whole party with it-to protect the fighter also. and there are cold weather gear. But guess who makes their saves vs the high altitude because of their higher con and fort saves?????? now if a cleric is raising chr and wis and the fighter is raising con and str---the fighter makes it and the cleric doesnt--who is hurt worse? same with sorcerer. or should the sorcerer just fly up to the lair himself--and get caught mid flight by a dragon?
passing thru a trapped lair? advantage to who? fighter could have as high a perception as the cleric and avoid just as much.
fighting the dragon---? like I said SR
it would take the whole party to do it--any of it.
if the cleric does not use their limited spells to deal with enemies, how do they do it? they have the same 2+int skills that a fighter does--a fighter could take the same skills if they chose. but instead the fighter will have different ones that the cleric won't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point seems to continue evading you. That the Cleric can cast endure elements to defeat the challenge not only for themself, but for the party, is the reason for him being high tier. That a Fighter can benefit from it does not make him more versatile. The Fighter's only option is to try to walk through the mountains, offering nothing to the party in the process. If he fails a save he can't deal with the fatigue or ability damage, while the Cleric can remove them magically.
It isn't the perception checks that will help the Cleric bypass the traps. It is that he can summon a monster to disable or set off trap. He can cast Find Traps. He can remove conditions and damage caused by any that are accidentally tripped. The Cleric may not have all these spells prepared (though he should have many, knowing where he was headed). However, having any of them prepared is offering more than the Fighter in this scenario.
When we get to the dragon, you again jump to SR. SR is, frankly, rarely an issue. The cleric can summon monsters, protect the party with resist energy, use spells to try and avoid alerting and fighting the dragon entirely, or beat it to death with a weapon. The Fighter only has the last option. He is very good at it. Extraordinarily so. Nobody is better at beating things to death. However, the fact that that is the only available answer to challenges is the reason he has a low tier. Low Tier doesn't necessarily mean "bad," it just means "lacks versatility."
Speaking as a PFS wizard you can do a hell of a lot better than that, especially if you're the only wizard and would otherwise play a barbarian or something. Haste makes Fireball look like a steaming sack of poo.
Leaving slots open (especially with Fast Study) lets you customize spells even if Drendle Drang has you woken up in the middle of the night. Running out of spells is also pretty rare after level 5ish - you just don't get enough combat rounds to cast them all and even a first-level spell can turn the tide. (If Chalfone Dalsine fails his save against Grease and someone grabs his sword, he's a kitten.)
Also, you're again talking about only combat encounters. PFS does tilt towards those, but the tier system also considers non-combat encounters that are much more important in modules, APs and GM-written games.
told you--I don't play a wizard. but right there---if you cast haste---what are you relying on? your melee attacks? nope--you cast it ON the melee.
as a cleric my common spells are
1st bless X3, murderous command X2
2nd aid, hold person X2, silence
3rd bestow curse, prayer, summon monster
4th terrible remorse (will get one more wis next level at 8 to take me to 18 and bonus spell)
cleric of abadar with earth for 6 acid darts, and travel. domain spells longstrider, soften earth and stone, fly and dimension door.
If I have time--I will change them around--but usually those are ones I wind up going with due to no time to change. Yep they give me good flexibility. but without a fighter taking the pounding, I couldn't get my spells off. Oh--and I will freely take suggestions on better spell mix--but all my parties have been happy so far--I just ask what enemy is wearing to try to match my spells to their probable saving throws.
usually a bless for first 3 fights--or maybe save one for fourth fight along with the prayer. murderous command only if the melee look like they need help or (gaming the system) if I believe this is last fight of scenario. hold person--as it presents itself---if the scenario briefing makes it sound obvious no humanoids in last scenario--will use it earlier.
with 10 str being closest I have to a dump stat--my melee is pitiful--if I am out of spells or no appropriate spells for what we are fighting--acid darts or lite crossbow---both little damage but what the hey. OR I will go and aid another for a fighter and work as his flank partner.
I also have tanglefoot bags, thunderstones and alchemist fire to throw. even a net--but have not yet hit with that.
The point seems to continue evading you. That the Cleric can cast endure elements to defeat the challenge not only for themself, but for the party, is the reason for him being high tier. That a Fighter can benefit from it does not make him more versatile. The Fighter's only option is to try to walk through the mountains, offering nothing to the party in the process. If he fails a save he can't deal with the fatigue or ability damage, while the Cleric can remove them magically.
It isn't the perception checks that will help the Cleric bypass the traps. It is that he can summon a monster to disable or set off trap. He can cast Find Traps. He can remove conditions and damage caused by any that are accidentally tripped. The Cleric may not have all these spells prepared (though he should have many, knowing where he was headed). However, having any of them prepared is offering more than the Fighter in this scenario.
When we get to the dragon, you again jump to SR. SR is, frankly, rarely an issue. The cleric can summon monsters, protect the party with resist energy, use spells to try and avoid alerting and fighting the dragon entirely, or beat it to death with a weapon. The Fighter only has the last option. He is very good at it. Extraordinarily so. Nobody is better at beating things to death. However, the fact that that is the only available answer to challenges is the reason he has a low tier. Low Tier doesn't necessarily mean "bad," it just means "lacks versatility."
may I ask how he summons a monster to deal with the traps? My GMS would just look at me if I said I summoned a monster using the SM3 I have memmed and have him trip the trap. You cant automatically command the monster you summon. It will attack your enemies, but you cant tell it--take that path up there and turn right at the fork--unless you can talk to it. Heck most of my gms raise an eyebrow if I have the monster move to a flank position on its second move (after the post summon one). They prefer to move the monster.
yep--but my cleric protected your fighter from the cold---who protects me from the fort save for thin air? when we get there---you are in better shape.
Once again--out of 22 scenarios--I have had a chance to change spells--five times---less than 25% of the time. usualy it is---you arrive here---now go. that is why I have the set list above. even on the five I could change spells--the info given was vague enough, you didn't have much clue what you would be fighting. yes you could prepare endure cold if you wanted cause usually you knew area--but not monster.
The point seems to continue evading you. That the Cleric can cast endure elements to defeat the challenge not only for themself, but for the party, is the reason for him being high tier. That a Fighter can benefit from it does not make him more versatile. The Fighter's only option is to try to walk through the mountains, offering nothing to the party in the process. If he fails a save he can't deal with the fatigue or ability damage, while the Cleric can remove them magically.
It isn't the perception checks that will help the Cleric bypass the traps. It is that he can summon a monster to disable or set off trap. He can cast Find Traps. He can remove conditions and damage caused by any that are accidentally tripped. The Cleric may not have all these spells prepared (though he should have many, knowing where he was headed). However, having any of them prepared is offering more than the Fighter in this scenario.
When we get to the dragon, you again jump to SR. SR is, frankly, rarely an issue. The cleric can summon monsters, protect the party with resist energy, use spells to try and avoid alerting and fighting the dragon entirely, or beat it to death with a weapon. The Fighter only has the last option. He is very good at it. Extraordinarily so. Nobody is better at beating things to death. However, the fact that that is the only available answer to challenges is the reason he has a low tier. Low Tier doesn't necessarily mean "bad," it just means "lacks versatility."
the point apparently is avoiding you---I have conceded that given perfect knowledge and the opportunity to 100% prepare spells knowing exactly what they are going against, yes casters are awesome. I am pointing out to you that, that situation is rarely the case and casters very often find many of their spells of no use. My spell load---silence, 2 hold person==may never get used in many cases. bestow curse, hold person, murderous command---played dawn of the scarlet sun--if you know that end mob---everyone failed to land---and silence was handled by ability of BBEG also. Paladin and gunslinger were the heros in that one--lol pop in too close to a GS once--pow--you are dead.
my channels did come in handy. as did bless and prayer.
adult dragons have SR 25---say a 10th level wizard. Every spell he casts has a 75% chance of failing--and losing the spell when it fails. You are better off taking a gunslinger--who will hit the ac 8 touch ac with 8 shots....
I am not saying wizards are not powerful. but they are not as powerful as you are all making them out to be (ie unlimited spells, miraculously always having the perfect spell memmed) I don't even play a wizard. I dislike the fact of being basicaly "disarmed" after my spells are gone. and squishy sucks.
If the dragon has SR, why target the dragon? buff the gunslinger so he's even better, and you are still contributing. Dispel any spells the dragon casts. You probably knew you were going to fight a dragon (being a wizard and having access to divination spells and all) so why not prep for it?
No one ever said wizards have unlimited spells... but they DO get Scribe Scroll as a first level feat, and they can easily pick up Craft X feat, (such as wands) for free.
So though the wizard may run out of spells, he ought to have plenty of spell trigger/spell completion items to get him out of the jam.
No, the wizard won't have the perfect spell memorized all of the time. I never go out the door without a an "oh crap" spell. You know, like contingency, D-Door, Teleport, Overland Flight/Fly, etc. Thus, after escaping the situation (which again, you probably should have known about via Divination Spells and prepared for accordingly, but whatever), you can come back with the RIGHT spells.
Wizards always have a way to survive a situation by mid levels. If a wizard survives an encounter, you can bet he can defeat in the next day, the next week, whatever.
The only way to prevent a wizard from being fully able to overcome an obstacle, is a GM saying "you must complete this task today, not tomorrow".
Wizards aren't "disarmed when their spells are gone, as I outlined before they ought to have wands and scrolls with them.
Wizards are squishy in a mechanical stance, but they have powerful spells that make "squishiness" a non issue. Mirror Image. Improved Invisibility. Fly. You can't hit what you can't see, what is out of your reach, and what you will miss 1d4+1 times anyway.
They very fact that you say "I don't even play a wizard" for x,y, and z reasons, explains more than your arguments.
You should try playing an optimized wizard, and then explain why you don't want to play one. x,y, and z won't be an issue.
* omitted for space*
You can command summoned monsters to do whatever you want if you speak their language. Clerics have the same base Fortitude save as Fighters, and can remove the effects of altitude sickness from themselves and others with lesser restoration, an absurdly common spell and wand.
It is important to remember that the Cleric does not need to have all these spells to contribute. A single endure elements, lesser restoration, find traps, or summon monster will contribute more than the Fighter to overcoming the non-combat challenges in the presented scenario. That he could contribute even more if he got to plan ahead does not change that. There is no binary here, no requirement of 100% knowledge. Spells are a toolbox, and even if you don't have something perfect for the task, the more it grows the more likely it is that you will have something that will at least work.
I think the issue here is that, looking at your spell lists, you have gone for very, very combat focused characters. Perhaps this is a result of PFS, I honestly have no idea or experience with it. However, to continue the example of a toolbox, yours are filled with screwdrivers, and nothing but. This is fine if all you ever need to deal with is screws (normal combat), but you are out of luck when you have to saw some wood or pound a nail (non-combat, or monsters with SR, or whatever). It also means that you don't feel so bad for the guy who has screwdrivers instead of hands (lower Tier classes), because he is still perfectly capable at the one thing that is important to you. There is nothing wrong with this sort of focus, mind you, but it isn't what the Tier system measures. The Tiers are about ability to deal with a variety of challenges, both expected and unexpected. Not capacity to deal with combat, which is what seems to be of import to you and to PFS.
ahh and I take it you and everyone commenting on how powerful they are--DO play a wizard?
see they brought up cleric--and I DO play a cleric--and i can tell you they are wrong about our versatility. It is good---but not THAT great. You saw my spell list--that is what I work with for four encounters---a lot of buffing others---then I plug away with a lite crossbow or my 1d6+3 acid arrow. Support class---not a class to be the hero in "usually"
PFS_-no scribe scroll--no craft x. so if we are talking about buying magic items?----well the fighter could buy fly items, endure--etc
are we bringing in expendables? which come closer to giving the fighter caster powers than giving the caster fighter powers.
you are right on one point however---clerics and wizards greatest contribution to the party is 'buffing' the others. with no one to buff we are not so powerful. a hasted cleric is not as scary as a hasted barbarian or rogue or archer.
so D-door memmed---you take the oh crap teleport and the rest of your party dies. that was one spell of another type you could not have to help your party. it was not a freebie. and do that many times, people dont like to adventure with you. Galaxius the great, sole survivor of twenty adventuring parties.
once again---I do concede---having 100% knowledge of what you will be facing and exactly what spells you need make casters "tremendously" powerful. Too bad that rarely happens. actually good thing it rarely happens---or your point would be much more valid.
* omitted for space*You can command summoned monsters to do whatever you want if you speak their language. Clerics have the same base Fortitude save as Fighters, and can remove the effects of altitude sickness from themselves and others with lesser restoration, an absurdly common spell and wand.
It is important to remember that the Cleric does not need to have all these spells to contribute. A single endure elements, lesser restoration, find traps, or summon monster will contribute more than the Fighter to overcoming the non-combat challenges in the presented scenario. That he could contribute even more if he got to plan ahead does not change that. There is no binary here, no requirement of 100% knowledge. Spells are a toolbox, and even if you don't have something perfect for the task, the more it grows the more likely it is that you will have something that will at least work.
I think the issue here is that, looking at your spell lists, you have gone for very, very combat focused characters. Perhaps this is a result of PFS, I honestly have no idea or experience with it. However, to continue the example of a toolbox, yours are filled with screwdrivers, and nothing but. This is fine if all you ever need to deal with is screws (normal combat), but you are out of luck when you have to saw some wood or pound a nail (non-combat, or monsters with SR, or whatever). It also means that you don't feel so bad for the guy who has screwdrivers instead of hands (lower Tier classes), because he is still perfectly capable at the one thing that is important to you. There is nothing wrong with this sort of focus, mind you, but it isn't what the Tier system measures. The Tiers are about ability to deal with a variety of challenges, both expected and unexpected. Not capacity to deal with combat, which is what seems to be of import to you and to PFS.
so say we take your approach and I do a shotgun approach to spells---then when we do combat--four encounters guaranteed a scenario---I have nothing to contribute. my generalist approach is dwarfed by your fighting. replace my spells and add endure elements, lesser restoration and find traps. so take out a first and two second level spells-- find traps last for 1 min/level--so for 7 mins--I find traps--unless I take it multiple times. lesser restoration--I can restore-1 party member.
so take away a murderous command and a hold person and a silence. Now my contributions to damage are 1 murderous command, 1 hold person, 1 silence, 1 bestow curse, 1 terrible remorse, and 1 summon monster --over 4 fights. so on ONE of those four fights I could actually cast two offensive spells. On the other 3, I only have one offensive spell to cast. yep I can use one buff on the party each round---so each fight--one round buff, one offensive spell---then plink with 1d6+3 for one round--then lite crossbow. 3 rounds into each fight, I turn into a person firing a crossbow once per round.
even out of PFS---a total of 14 spells per day basically. my 2+ int skills are no better than a fighters. anything I can diplo--you could too. not like clerics are one of the 8+ int skill classes.
do you really think a 7 minute find trap up an entire mountainside to a dragons cave is that great? or you could use your entire allotment of 1st level spells and make it last for 42 minutes. If you know right where the traps are to know where to cast it--do you need it?