|
People seem to have a low bar for banning things.
I have never seen this trait in play. Thus it's obviously time to ban it.
Let's also ban Halflings because they always get a plus 1 to hit, saves, AC, and all social skills. Thus they are overpowered in every part of the game. Halflings obviously need to go!
|
|
Here's a modest proposal: ban all traits in PFS. Monsters and NPCs don't get them. Why should PCs? They're totally unbalanced and they give the PCs an unfair advantage. Don't bother sniping out single traits like LoC. Just blanket ban them all instead.
I wouldn't be too terribly upset if they did do this as a matter of fact. I never really liked traits in the first place. I think my next home game I am either going to outright ban them or allow only the ones that grant you an extra class skill.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Though the general idea is for traits to equal half a feat, that's not something that's useful to cling too rigidly to. As one or two people have already mentioned, not all feats are created equal.
I mean, the single most common type of trait is "you get +1 to [skill] and it's always a class skill". That's a +4 bonus to a skill. That is more than the Skill Focus feat. Even once you have 10 ranks and Skill Focus goes up to +6, those traits are still giving you 2/3 of a feat, which is still more than half.
So for most of a PFS character's career, the most standard type of trait is worth more than a feat, and after that it's still more than half.
Conclusion? Just because a trait's power doesn't equal half of the most comparable feat doesn't mean the trait is overpowered. You've got to look at the trait itself and judge it on its own merits. Feats aren't consistent measuring sticks for traits.
I think it's fair to say the classes aren't really balanced against each other either. But that's fine, because it's not a direct competition like Starcraft.
Oh hey, martial-caster disparity!
|
It's clearly more powerful than most, maybe all other traits, and it's more powerful than all the improved save feats, still doesn't shatter the game.
I'd argue that the Torag "can't be caught flat-footed" is more dangerous on a lot of things (you can always emergency force sphere, for instance)
Then there is the counter argument. Are things that keep people from dying bad?
It's more powerful than all other traits, and it's more powerful than all the feats that do a similar thing. Therefore it is overpowered.
That being said, it's not going to ruin anyone's play experience, and it's only an insurance policy against rolling bad.
I don't enjoy killing PCs, I also don't enjoy PCs killing all the monsters in the first round, this trait helps prevent the first one, and doesn't contribute to the second one. I don't think it needs to be banned.
I do agree it's clearly powerful enough to warrant a ban, if we're banning because "it does what feats do, better than the feats that do it".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More math. I wanted to be able to compare the trait in question to other traits that boost saving throws. I have already shown that it is equivalent to a +5 bonus on one saving throw. I now want to compare this to a +B bonus on every saving throw.
Suppose you get a +5 bonus to one saving throw, whereas your friend gets a +B bonus to every saving throw she rolls. Moreover, assume that without these bonuses you would each need a natural 11 on the die for a successful save. (I chose "11" because that is the natural roll where the trait in question is most powerful.) Lastly, assume you each need to succeed on K saves in a session without a failed save.
Now, the probability that you pass all K saves is
P(PASS) = (3/4)(1/2)^(K-1).
The probability that your friend passes all K of her saves is
P(PASS) = [(10+B)/20]^K.
We will equate these, and solve for B:
B = 20(3/4)^(1/K)(1/2)^(1-1/K)-10.
Here is a table of some values of B as a function of the number of required saves:
K : B
--------
1 : 5.00
2 : 2.25
3 : 1.45
4 : 1.07
5 : 0.84
6 : 0.70
7 : 0.60
The trait in question is equivalent to a flat +1 bonus to all saves if you must make 4 saves in the same day.
I think my sentiment echoes many of those who have already posted: it is a somewhat more powerful trait than some of the similar available traits, but it does not seem "Golarian-shattering" to me. Locally, I do not know of anyone who has taken this trait.
|
|
I do agree it's clearly powerful enough to warrant a ban, if we're banning because "it does what feats do, better than the feats that do it".
If that were the criterion, then all traits that provide a +1 trait bonus to a skill and make the skill a class skill for you would also need to be banned, as Jiggy has wonderfully illustrated above.
(I realize that I am quoting you out of context; I just would hate to see that be the sole criterion for banning a particular trait.)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 19 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the dim receses of time, the gods did gather, and they saw before them the world of mortals, long before the elves built cities or the men knew language. And the gods decided that mortals would need some help, and they held a contest to see which among them could bestow the greatest gift.
"I will give them laws," said Asmodeus, "so that they might know order."
"We shall give them the seasons," said Gozreh, "So that they might come to know the passing of time, and see beauty in change."
"I will give them fire," considered Sarenrae, "so that they might have warmth in the winter, and collegiality around the hearth."
And so it went, with each god placing a gift among the mortals. Some, like Gwlaunder's gift of pestilence, were more woe than weal, but even in those, mortals could learn from adversity and advance. Some, like Nethys' gift of arcane languages, would take the mortal races some time to discover, but even they were welcome.
From the humblest -- Naderi's fish-hook -- to the most subtle -- Silvanah's invention of riddle -- the gifts of the gods grew myriad and wondrous.
Finally, after all other gods, Chaldira Zuzaristan stepped forward, out from the shadow of Desna.
"And how is this, lady of the kinderfolk?" asked Moloch, a mocking tone at the corners of his words. "What might you bestow upon the world, that mortals might know and remember you?"
"Or even notice you? Take a care that you're not stepped upon!" spoke one of Gorum's militant godlings, barely containing a snicker.
She smiled, having no feel for the indignities the other gods bore her, and breathed upon the world below. "I give mortals the knowledge that we are with them, that we watch over the world and offer our guidance, our power, our protection. I give good fortune, a second chance, to all those who know of me and give homage. I make this restriction, not because I am more vain than you, nor hungrier for worship. But I do this because the minds of mortals will sometimes see the gift and forget the giver. Through this endowment, I remind mortals that all things are gifts from the gods. And so, I give them the touchstone for all faiths."
"Cunning," spoke Asmodeus, with something approaching admiration.
"Wise," agreed Pharasma.
"Beautiful," sang Shelyn.
Desna said nothing, but a sheen of deepest indigo rippled through her wings, shimmering with delight.
|
|
More math. I wanted to be able to compare the trait in question to other traits that boost saving throws. I have already shown that it is equivalent to a +5 bonus on one saving throw. I now want to compare this to a +B bonus on every saving throw.
The Math:
The trait in question is equivalent to a flat +1 bonus to all saves if you must make 4 saves in the same day.I think my sentiment echoes many of those who have already posted: it is a somewhat more powerful trait than some of the similar available traits, but it does not seem "Golarian-shattering" to me. Locally, I do not know of anyone who has taken this trait.
This is one mathematical analysis, but I don't believe it takes into account the value of the reroll that occurs exactly when you fail, and the +5 substitution doesn't work perfectly in this case. If you would have made the saves without either a +1 bonus or a reroll, both traits are irrelevant and you are already happy. I'll do the math of daily reroll vs +1 to all saves making 4 saves a day.
Each time you try to make a saving throw, if you have a +1 bonus, there is exactly a 1/20 chance that you made the save from the bonus alone (unless you only failed on a Nat 1 without that trait bonus, I guess, in which case it gave no benefit, but let's ignore that for now). That means if you have to roll 4 saving throws on a particular day, then, regardless of the DC and what you need to roll, there is precisely an 81.45% chance (19/20 ^ 4) that your +1 to all saves was useless that day because you either failed with or without the bonus or succeeded with or without the bonus on all 4. So there was an 18.55% chance that it helped. It may have helped more than once (as I calculate later, that chance is roughly 1%).
Now the power of a reroll is quite dependent on what you need to roll, as you 100% correctly mathed out in your earlier post. However, the fact that it only happens after you fails makes it stronger. If we do go with the "Need an 11", then the probability that Lessons of Chaldira saves you from failing a saving throw that day is actually 46.875% (15/16 chance that you fail one of them before reroll, followed by 50% chance that the reroll succeeds). Compare that to 18.55% for +1 to all saving throw types (which is already stronger than a trait) and LoC is way ahead. Now, the +1 to all saves might save you more than once. However, 17.1475% of the 18.55% is made up of times that it saved you exactly once (in other words, the chance of being saved more than once by +1 in a day with 4 saves is barely over 1%). For reference, a +2 to all saves has a 34.39% chance of saving you from failing a save if you make 4 in a day and a +3 to all saves has a 47.8% chance of saving you from failing a save if you make 4 in a day, so the +3 to all saves is unambiguously better.
Now, while you are correct that blind rerolls have their greatest utility when you need to roll an 11, tied with a pre-declared +5 bonus, it's actually the case that LoC rerolls have a different power curve when you rate them for probability in saving you from a failed save.
For example, let's say you have a 75% chance of making those saves. +1 to all saves trait still has an 18.55% chance of saving you from a failure. LoC has a chance equal to 68.36% (the chance that you fail one of your saves) * 3/4 (the chance the reroll saves you) = 51.27%. This is actually higher than for 50/50! Even at the extreme of having a very high bonus and low DC, the single reroll is better than a +1 to all saves (increasing yourself from having a 90% chance to save to a 95% chance to save cuts your chance of failing by 50%, but the reroll has a 90% chance to work, so essentially the reroll is better unless you roll 2+ natural 2s out of 4 rolls, which is very unlikely--reroll gives a 30.95% chance of saving you each day). And of course, when you need a Natural 1 to fail, no amount of bonus will help you on that 1, but reroll will (there's still nearly a 20% chance to fail one of 4 saves even if you only fail on a 1).
The only time the bonus is better is if it's a save you will almost surely fail. If you need a natural 20 to save, then the reroll is nearly a 5% chance to save you, which is way worse than 18.55%. As soon as your chance of succeeding on the saving throw is at least 4/20 (that is, you need to roll a 17 on the dice or higher to save), the reroll becomes better on a 4 save day and never goes back as your chance increases.
Now granted, I picked 4 because you picked 4, and you may need to make more than 4 saves in a day, which advantages the +1 to all saves. However, I think that nicely cancels the fact that you can save the reroll for the worst saves and let yourself be shaken or something compared to being paralyzed and coup de graced or killed by a death effect. Hopefully you don't make more than 4 utterly crucial saves each day in a typical adventure.
|
Also, after having experienced more tier 8-9, and 10-11 love, I'll take any advantage at the table I can get. Concept characters that fail mechanically have gotten people killed at tables I've been at and observed.Are you telling me I have to worship a halfling god?? NOOOOOO!!!!!!!! I'll never turn to the darkside!
No, I just don't fault someone for taking this trait. Note that I myself don't have anyone with this trait. I guess I'm a bad player. :)
|
There's some gnome luck thing that allows it that I've seen. And it was fine.
The gnome racial ability works only if you roll a 1 on the die, and only once per day. My samurai that has it has never used it in 8 levels. He prefers to fail his will saves on a 2. Not nearly as good as having a free re-roll at your fingertips for any circumstance.
The problem with this rationale is that you don't know what else you might have to save against. Having played MMORPG's for years, one of the primary complaints people had with one-off powers was never knowing when to use them for fear of needing them later. Developers acknowledged that these big use super long recharge powers are much less effective on average because of that psychology.
In turn a lot of non situational abilities in MMOs have a meta that just says to burn them ASAP so you get to use them at all, and even some situational ones too! Funny enough I do see rerolls not used even when being swallowed and eaten alive is at risk... because the person thought that they'd find another time to use them. "Don't worry bro, I can totally take this disintegrate!" Sometimes that doesn't end so well. Optional rerolls and are weird like that.
In other news, dual cursed oracle is pretty darned OP.
|
|
This is one mathematical analysis, but I don't believe it takes into account the value of the reroll that occurs exactly when you fail, and the +5 substitution doesn't work perfectly in this case.
Actually, it does, as I showed in my previous analysis. A priori when faced with a single saving throw, a reroll on that save is precisely equivalent to a +5 bonus on that one save. What I am getting at here is if you were given the choice, again a priori, between a +5 bonus on your next save or the chance to reroll on your next save, then the two options are equivalent.
If you would have made the saves without either a +1 bonus or a reroll, both traits are irrelevant and you are already happy. I'll do the math of daily reroll vs +1 to all saves making 4 saves a day.
Each time you try to make a saving throw, if you have a +1 bonus, there is exactly a 1/20 chance that you made the save from the bonus alone (unless you only failed on a Nat 1 without that trait bonus, I guess, in which case it gave no benefit, but let's ignore that for now). That means if you have to roll 4 saving throws on a particular day, then, regardless of the DC and what you need to roll, there is precisely an 81.45% chance (19/20 ^ 4) that your +1 to all saves was useless that day because you either failed with or without the bonus or succeeded with or without the bonus on all 4. So there was an 18.55% chance that it helped. It may have helped more than once (as I calculate later, that chance is roughly 1%).
Now the power of a reroll is quite dependent on what you need to roll, as you 100% correctly mathed out [The Fox: this expression, I find to be terribly grating, BTW] in your earlier post. However, the fact that it only happens after you fails makes it stronger. If we do go with the "Need an 11", then the probability that Lessons of Chaldira saves you from failing a saving throw that day is actually 46.875% (15/16 chance that you fail one of them before reroll, followed by 50% chance that the reroll succeeds). Compare that to 18.55% for +1 to all saving throw types (which is already stronger than a trait) and LoC is way ahead. Now, the +1 to all saves might save you more than once. However, 17.1475% of the 18.55% is made up of times that it saved you exactly once (in other words, the chance of being saved more than once by +1 in a day with 4 saves is barely over 1%). For reference, a +2 to all saves has a 34.39% chance of saving you from failing a save if you make 4 in a day and a +3 to all saves has a 47.8% chance of saving you from failing a save if you make 4 in a day, so the +3 to all saves is unambiguously better.
Yes, this is a good analysis of the problem. For the benefit of those who are following along, here is the math:
Let A be the event "a flat +1 bonus on 4 rolls requiring an 11 or higher provides no benefit." Then,
P(A) = (19/20)^4 = 0.8145.
Let B be the event that "LoC on 4 rolls requiring an 11 or higher provides no benefit." Then,
P(B) = P(all 4 rolls succeed naturally) + P(at least one fails)P(reroll fails)
P(B) = (1/16) + (15/16)(1/2) = 17/32 = 0.53125.
Now, while you are correct that blind rerolls have their greatest utility when you need to roll an 11, tied with a pre-declared +5 bonus, it's actually the case that LoC rerolls have a different power curve when you rate them for probability in saving you from a failed save.
For example, let's say you have a 75% chance of making those saves. +1 to all saves trait still has an 18.55% chance of saving you from a failure. LoC has a chance equal to 68.36% (the chance that you fail one of your saves) * 3/4 (the chance the reroll saves you) = 51.27%. This is actually higher than for 50/50! Even at the extreme of having a very high bonus and low DC, the single reroll is better than a +1 to all saves (increasing yourself from having a 90% chance to save to a 95% chance to save cuts your chance of failing by 50%, but the reroll has a 90% chance to work, so essentially the reroll is better unless you roll 2+ natural 2s out of 4 rolls, which is very unlikely--reroll gives a 30.95% chance of saving you each day). And of course, when you need a Natural 1 to fail, no amount of bonus will help you on that 1, but reroll will (there's still nearly a 20% chance to fail one of 4 saves even if you only fail on a 1).
The only time the bonus is better is if it's a save you will almost surely fail. If you need a natural 20 to save, then the reroll is nearly a 5% chance to save you, which is way worse than 18.55%. As soon as your chance of succeeding on the saving throw is at least 4/20 (that is, you need to roll a 17 on the dice or higher to save), the reroll becomes better on a 4 save day and never goes back as your chance increases.
I am capable of working out the math on this, but I'm feeling lazy. Would you mind?
Now granted, I picked 4 because you picked 4, and you may need to make more than 4 saves in a day, which advantages the +1 to all saves. However, I think that nicely cancels the fact that you can save the reroll for the worst saves and let yourself be shaken or something compared to being paralyzed and coup de graced or killed by a death effect. Hopefully you don't make more than 4 utterly crucial saves each day in a typical adventure.
This whole post is a great analysis. You may have convinced me. I will need to think about how I feel about it.
|
|
I stated this earlier: I have a folio reroll and hardly ever use it because I'm not going to use it unless I'm facing a save or die. The folio reroll applies to any d20 roll I make, not just saves. I can count on 1 finger the times I've used it outside of a day job roll.
Incidentally, I have worked out on all of my characters when to use my folio reroll with respect to Day Jobs. For example, with my bard, I know that if I roll a natural 8 or lower on the Day Job, I increase my expected earnings by rerolling; and if I roll a natural 9 or higher, I do not. I have not analyzed rerolling saving throws with her because I don't really want to play a game of pure mechanics; I would prefer to use a reroll when the action (read "psychology") of the table requires it, instead of when it is optimal. In other words, I would prefer to use the reroll "when if feels right."
I do believe that the probabilities that Mark and I have been working out in this thread do blow up in the face of psychology. But it is hard to quantify that effect from individual to individual.
|
|
Actually, it does, as I showed in my previous analysis. A priori when faced with a single saving throw, a reroll on that save is precisely equivalent to a +5 bonus on that one save. What I am getting at here is if you were given the choice, again a priori, between a +5 bonus on your next save or the chance to reroll on your next save, then the two options are equivalent.
Agreed. But LoC isn't a priori. It kicks in when you fail. Also, it has a different probability distribution with the same expected value, which is part of why my math came to a different conclusion.
I am capable of working out the math on this, but I'm feeling lazy. Would you mind?
99.84% chance that you fail at least once * 4/20 chance the reroll saves you = 19.968% chance to be saved by a reroll, which is higher than 18.55%. After that, the probability of reroll saving you increases linearly and probability of failing decreases slowly at first and then more quickly. The peak is at 75% chance to save (so you need a 6 on the dice), but even as the chance falls beyond that, it never goes below 18.55% again, so the reroll is still superior all the way out to 90% (and because you never succeed on a 1, once you hit 95% the reroll is strictly superior). So the only time that a reroll is worse against 4 daily saves than +1 to all saves is if the saves require you to roll a natural 18, 19, or 20 to succeed.
|
|
I stated this earlier: I have a folio reroll and hardly ever use it because I'm not going to use it unless I'm facing a save or die. The folio reroll applies to any d20 roll I make, not just saves. I can count on 1 finger the times I've used it outside of a day job roll.Incidentally, I have worked out on all of my characters when to use my folio reroll with respect to Day Jobs. For example, with my bard, I know that if I roll a natural 8 or lower on the Day Job, I increase my expected earnings by rerolling; and if I roll a natural 9 or higher, I do not. I have not analyzed rerolling saving throws with her because I don't really want to play a game of pure mechanics; I would prefer to use a reroll when the action (read "psychology") of the table requires it, instead of when it is optimal. In other words, I would prefer to use the reroll "when if feels right."
I do believe that the probabilities that Mark and I have been working out in this thread do blow up in the face of psychology. But it is hard to quantify that effect from individual to individual.
Oh Day Jobs. I remember I worked out when you should take 10 on day jobs and found that you should only do it when you would reach an exact multiple of 5 or when you would get 26 (because 50 is so much better than 20). There's another point where it's about equal too. Of course, I've been usually having a VL shirt reroll left over with a +5 GM bonus, so now if I have it, I reroll anything that isn't in the top tier of gold I could receive on the first roll. My investigator just nearly got 150 gold from a day job in his first game ever, First Steps 1 last night (he still did get 100)!
|
|
Impressive analysis Mark - a 1/day reroll is roughly equivalent to +3 to all saves. Honestly, that about matches my experience, having played since 2000-2001 characters with the old Luck Domain power. As long as you use it of course.
+3 to all saves is probably better because it has a competitive chance with rerolls to save you from one failed save, plus it has a not-unreasonable chance to save you from multiple saves (Only 36.8475% of the 47.8% are from one save, so there's a not-insubstantial chance of being saved multiple times, roughly 10% of all days). Then again, at the point where I have to point this out to show that a stacking +3 to all saves is better than a trait, I think the trait has already shown itself to be ridiculously strong.
|
|
I stated this earlier: I have a folio reroll and hardly ever use it because I'm not going to use it unless I'm facing a save or die. The folio reroll applies to any d20 roll I make, not just saves. I can count on 1 finger the times I've used it outside of a day job roll.
And I can count on one hand the number of times I have used it on a day job roll. Avoiding that plane shift to the Negative Energy Plane was a good use. So was using it to punch through SR and knock out the staggered enemy with a sound burst.
just make it a halfling only trait.
halfling deity , halfling flavor. keep it in the family burrow.
Won't keep it from being overpowered if it is though.
|
|
I don't think you can use the Inspiration ability on your Day Job roll, otherwise I'd be using my Inexplicable Luck human feat on it. The guide says temporary bonuses can't be used for Day Job checks, with the exception of Crafter's Fortune. Only permanent bonuses add to Day...Oh Day Jobs. I remember I worked out when you should take 10 on day jobs and found that you should only do it when you would reach an exact multiple of 5 or when you would get 26 (because 50 is so much better than 20). There's another point where it's about equal too. Of course, I've been usually having a VL shirt reroll left over with a +5 GM bonus, so now if I have it, I reroll anything that isn't in the top tier of gold I could receive on the first roll. My investigator just nearly got 150 gold from a day job in his first game ever, First Steps 1 last night (he still did get 100)!I stated this earlier: I have a folio reroll and hardly ever use it because I'm not going to use it unless I'm facing a save or die. The folio reroll applies to any d20 roll I make, not just saves. I can count on 1 finger the times I've used it outside of a day job roll.Incidentally, I have worked out on all of my characters when to use my folio reroll with respect to Day Jobs. For example, with my bard, I know that if I roll a natural 8 or lower on the Day Job, I increase my expected earnings by rerolling; and if I roll a natural 9 or higher, I do not. I have not analyzed rerolling saving throws with her because I don't really want to play a game of pure mechanics; I would prefer to use a reroll when the action (read "psychology") of the table requires it, instead of when it is optimal. In other words, I would prefer to use the reroll "when if feels right."
I do believe that the probabilities that Mark and I have been working out in this thread do blow up in the face of psychology. But it is hard to quantify that effect from individual to individual.
Inspiration isn't a temporary bonus or even a bonus at all. It simply adds 1d6 to the result of a check; it doesn't have a duration. Of course, the Guide wasn't written with investigators in mind, so if they do want to disallow this, it wouldn't be hard to alter the guide to do so. However, it makes sense that an investigator would be able to use Inspiration on Day Jobs since other skill monkey classes can currently use their skill edge abilities on them (for instance bards can use Versatile Performance on Day Jobs). Then again, this is a point for a different thread, and it may become irrelevant anyway depending on the updated investigator.
|
|
Is the trait overpowered?
Unambiguously, yes. Lessons of Chaldira provides a post-failed save free-reroll. It takes a two feat chain (Iron Will/Improved Iron Will, etc.) to get close to this for one of Fortitude, Reflex, or Will. Traits are supposed to be approximately half the power of feats: this one saves you at least two.
I don't see this trait being abused. Is this really a problem?
Whether it is being exploited or not in the wild is irrelevant; what matters is that the trait is overpowered. It is, and should be dealt with for the sake of consistent balance. You don't need to see an exploit to judge balance; you can judge balance without proof.
When we say "you brought a knife to a gunfight!", we don't ask for proof by watching the proverbial gunfighter shoot someone dead before declaring it imbalanced.
When a security researcher finds a hole in a company's software, the company doesn't say, "but it's not being exploited so it doesn't count!". Or, at least companies that intend to stay around with their business reputation intact don't. That has been proven many times in recent history....
Who cares if a particular trait is overpowered! It's not like it is breaking the game?
PFS' house rules allow or ban paizo content on thematic grounds (eg, pathfinders are non-evil) and on balance issues (eg, the recent ruling on weapon cords). Reviewing the list of banned items, lots of items are banned on much more marginal grounds than a trait being worth 2 feats.
Reaching for a quick example, the cauldron of overwhelming allies is banned from The Snows of Summer. I expect it is, because it can nearly double the efficacy of some summoning spells and is arguably better than the Superior Summoning feat chain. Summoning spells are already on shaky balance grounds according to some.
Would the cauldron break the game? No; but I bet the Mike et al. judged it would be a notable imbalance. And did they wait until it was exploited in the wild? No; they made the judgement call and here we have it. This thread is not asking Mike et al. to consider something he doesn't already do as a matter of course. Just to look at Lessons of Chaldira on its own terms.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Whether it is being exploited or not in the wild is irrelevant; what matters is that the trait is overpowered. It is, and should be dealt with for the sake of consistent balance. You don't need to see an exploit to judge balance; you can judge balance without proof.
You can judge balance without seeing an exploit, but it takes exploitation to make the imbalance actually matter. Look:
When we say "you brought a knife to a gunfight!", we don't ask for proof by watching the proverbial gunfighter shoot someone dead before declaring it imbalanced.
When a security researcher finds a hole in a company's software, the company doesn't say, "but it's not being exploited so it doesn't count!".
You say exploitation is irrelevant, but your examples are centered specifically around guarding against exploitation. One person bringing a knife and another person bringing a gun doesn't matter unless the gunman intends to do the other harm; if they're meeting for dinner, there's not an issue. A security breach in software only matters if someone intends to exploit it, which is why my laptop is not even password-protected; no one gives a crap what's on it.
You shot yourself in the foot. You claim that it should be banned "for the sake of consistent balance", but then explain that what you really mean is it should be banned because you fully expect people to abuse it — but that's not happening.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
"It is clearly overpowered, so why not ban / nerf it proactively? To prevent it being an issue in the future?" -- this might be what Nik is trying to say.
Fortunately, being able to re-roll a save isn't open-ended enough to end up combo-ing with new material down the line and becoming an issue, so no ban is needed. :)
Contrast with, say, the alchemist's Infusion discovery, which could end up breaking something down the line if the wrong new formula gets printed. That's open-ended, with its power dependent on other elements in the game. A save re-roll is a fixed thing; if it's not a problem now, it won't be later either.
1. Your analysis ignores one crucial requirement: You have to worship Chaldira. Since you can't plug that restriction into an equation, any comparison is fundamentally invalid.
Obviously worshipping Chaldira is overpowered! I say we ban worshipping any sort of halflings!
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
"It is clearly overpowered, so why not ban / nerf it proactively? To prevent it being an issue in the future?" -- this might be what Nik is trying to say.Fortunately, being able to re-roll a save isn't open-ended enough to end up combo-ing with new material down the line and becoming an issue, so no ban is needed. :)
Contrast with, say, the alchemist's Infusion discovery, which could end up breaking something down the line if the wrong new formula gets printed. That's open-ended, with its power dependent on other elements in the game. A save re-roll is a fixed thing; if it's not a problem now, it won't be later either.
Thanks for the explanation.
I just wanted to present what I see his argument as, since the meat of his it appeared to have been lost in the format with which was delivered with.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Obviously worshipping Chaldira is overpowered! I say we ban worshipping any sort of halflings!
I would suspect N N 959 is complaining that worship of one god prevents the player from also becoming, say, a Dawnflower Dervish or being able to obtain the cool improved familiar from a late 3rd-season scenario. It's restrictive, rather than humiliating or distasteful.
|
|
You say exploitation is irrelevant, but your examples are centered specifically around guarding against exploitation.
"It is clearly overpowered, so why not ban / nerf it proactively? To prevent it being an issue in the future?" -- this might be what Nik is trying to say.
Thank you Walter, I was being long winded :) You don't need to SEE the exploit widely to know that it CAN be exploited, and protect against it. Does someone need to break into your house before you think you need a lock on your door?
EDIT: The question here seems to come down to whether or not balance is worth preserving, and where you draw the line. Well, where Mike draws the line; we all clearly have different opinions on the subject.
Obviously worshipping Chaldira is overpowered! I say we ban worshipping any sort of halflings!I would suspect N N 959 is complaining that worship of one god prevents the player from also becoming, say, a Dawnflower Dervish or being able to obtain the cool improved familiar from a late 3rd-season scenario. It's restrictive, rather than humiliating or distasteful.
Why am I being quoted? Obviously I don't actually think Halfling gods are actually powered.
Mechanically, a restriction won't make something balanced unless the restriction is related to the trait itself, and that's not the case with this trait. It actually can lead to a sort of awkwardness with investment cost. Mechanically the feats that let you reroll are also relatively weak, though useful, and this trait is far more tame than other things in game. Level one wizard can knock out everyone in the room with frikkin' rainbows. We have a lot of threads on that balance.
The fact is that the Trait is probably not unbalanced. A once/day reroll is NOT superpowered.
The problem is it is being compared to three feats that basically do the same thing...for one save each.
And the fact is, the Improved Save feats are incredibly underwhelming. They should actually be extensions of the scaling base feats, not feats on their own. It's pretty arguable that the base feats are better then the Improved feats!
So...I suggest rewriting the three base feats, so that the benefits of the Improved feats accrues to them at 10th...maybe even at 2-3 times a day. That will make those feats actually attractive.
==Aelryinth
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
You say exploitation is irrelevant, but your examples are centered specifically around guarding against exploitation."It is clearly overpowered, so why not ban / nerf it proactively? To prevent it being an issue in the future?" -- this might be what Nik is trying to say.Thank you Walter, I was being long winded :) You don't need to SEE the exploit widely to know that it CAN be exploited, and protect against it. Does someone need to break into your house before you think you need a lock on your door?
EDIT: The question here seems to come down to whether or not balance is worth preserving, and where you draw the line. Well, where Mike draws the line; we all clearly have different opinions on the subject.
But in this case, I can't even imagine a potential future exploit. As I said to Walter, it's not open-ended like some things in the game; it's not going to combo with something later on down the line. It is what it is, and it will never be more. So, what exploit is it that you're so sure is going to end up happening if we don't prevent it?