|
I haven't read this whole bleeding thread (just the first handful of posts), but I'll just drop by to say this:
- DM attitude makes a big difference. I know there are "NG" DMs who want the players to win and sometimes flinch if things aren't going that way; "NE" DMs who view the game as a competition between them and players and are therefore 'out to get them' to the best of their ability; "CN" DMs who enjoy "shenanigans" and wind up making the enemies cleverer/more obnoxious than they're supposed to be; "LN" DMs who go by the book to the best of their ability and are ethical but harsh; "LE" DMs who seek to cruelly punish tactics they disapprove of for whatever reason even if it isn't smart tactics for the monsters; "NN" DMs who just want to wrap up the Scenario before the host store closes; "CG" DMs who want the players to win and assist in that by trying to reward creativity, and using discretion in choosing targets while at the same time not pulling punches; and plenty others (though those are the ones I'm most aware of).
- I don't want to see bean-counting/optimization become the order of the day like what happened to World of Warcraft. On the contrary, I want to see people who do that punished by putting them through a myriad of wildly disparate situations (combat, diplomacy, puzzles, survival, mysteries, situations that reward equipment/skills/magic normally regarded as trivial/extraneous, true roleplaying of an inhabitant of Golarion, etc.) that their precious optimized builds will regularly disappoint or fail to help them in, which in my experience Pathfinder Society has been pretty good about doing.
- Did somebody say "puzzles"? MORE PUZZLES, GODSDAMMIT! I loved Grandmaster Torch's "open the boxes" scene in Silent Tide.
|
I vote against this. I can tune my PCs down to the hardness level easier than I can beef up already Maxed out combat machines. And if everything hinges on surviving the combat, pretty soon all we have is Combat Machines.
If you think what we have now requires maxed out combat machines, either you have no idea what maxed out combat machines actually are...or your exposure to play skill level must be awfully low. A combat machine, played well can solo even season 4 stuff...even the hard ones. My not so speced fighters at level 8 could 3 round the final fight of fortress of nails...by himself. Two if I roll well on the damage dice...and this is assuming I miss my secondary attack and don't have haste up (or other buffs). Otherwise...yeah it's a one round fight. Or I could just use the archer and force the issue and make it a one round fight.
|
|
They do tend to think about things more through the lens of Cons, I think, which isn't wrong, but could give a different picture than the whole.
I think that this is probably the root of the problem. PFS had done a great job of being relevant beyond big cons, but the campaign really is still intended for cons and thus the scenarios get written for cons with as many characters as possible crammed at each table and the cracks appear so to speak when we look to more community oriented games.
|
|
I beleave I have been quoted out of context. I was casting my vote against the following (which appears to have been trimmed from the my comment above):
"I don't know about that. A fair number of us would much rather fall victim to TPKs than have to constantly deal with undertuned fights. "I was voting against TPKs to replace undertoned fights. I was being sure that I am not lumped into the group "A fair number of us..." because I do not want to "...fall victim to TPKs...", I would rather "...constantly deal with undertuned fights."
And I stated I can "tune my PCs down to the hardness level easier than I can beef up"... I was not trying to compare damage output ("who has the bigger stick?" ** spoiler omitted **
SO... which would you rather do? Cake walk the combats every second adventure, or TPK ever second adventure?
And I did not really care about that aspect of your comment. What I cared about was your thought on the need for maxed out combat machines. The system allows for some ridiculous things currently and the scenarios written as of now are nowhere near you needing those builds. My fighter isn't even all that maxed out. A well optimized archer will do more damage then me by a long shot...and he doesn't even have to walk up to the poor schmuck...much less a maxed out one. What I was picking on was your exaggeration (unless your play base is actually so bad that they can take characters like your alchemist and honestly manages to struggle in season 4...in which case, it's not a matter of system mechanics, it's a matter of human play element that PFS has NO control over).
As for what I would prefer, I pick neither unless your a gimp or an optimizer. If your a gimp, you should TPK. If your an optimizer, you should cakewalk. The game should be made for EVERYONE else. And yes, that means I expect cakewalks unless I am playing up.
|
|
If you think what we have now requires maxed out combat machines, either you have no idea what maxed out combat machines actually are...or your exposure to play skill level must be awfully low. A combat machine, played well can solo even season 4 stuff...even the hard ones. My not so speced fighters at level 8 could 3 round the final fight of fortress of nails...by himself. Two if I roll well on the damage dice...and this is assuming I miss my secondary attack and don't have haste up (or other buffs). Otherwise...yeah it's a one round fight. Or I could just use the archer and force the issue and make it a one round fight.
I vote against this. I can tune my PCs down to the hardness level easier than I can beef up already Maxed out combat machines. And if everything hinges on surviving the combat, pretty soon all we have is Combat Machines.I beleave I have been quoted out of context. I was casting my vote against the following (which appears to have been trimmed from the my comment above):
"I don't know about that. A fair number of us would much rather fall victim to TPKs than have to constantly deal with undertuned fights. "I was voting against TPKs to replace undertoned fights. I was being sure that I am not lumped into the group "A fair number of us..." because I do not want to "...fall victim to TPKs...", I would rather "...constantly deal with undertuned fights."
And I stated I can "tune my PCs down to the hardness level easier than I can beef up"... I was not trying to compare damage output ("who has the bigger stick?" ** spoiler omitted **...
|
|
Rogue Eidolon
Thanks for you clear questions Rogue... I enjoy showing off my 'toons!
you may check the stats on my Alchemist, as I am posting him here. Yes, he is an Elf, and has a Dump Stat (CHA), though I have played that up as a RP part of him from his first adventure. He's used Vermin Repleant from day one, and he smells "funny".
As he uses a Dex mutigen he often adventured in his early games with a 20Dex, and when I could he would use a Reduce Person Extract, so often he would have a 22 dex and get the +1 to hit for small. At 1st level, this would make him +8 to hit with bombs I think... maybe I'm missing something....(+3 dex, +2 Mutigen, +1Dex bump from size, +1 size, +1 Throw anything)... but later I added in Point Blank Shot and Spalsh Weapon Mastery (so I could bump misses slightly). Even with this, I did sometimes roll 1's and splash friends (or myself). Got kind of a reputation for it in fact. ;) 1st level splash damage would be 6, or 3 with a Reflex save of 16. I seemed to splash one bomb every other game or so...
But now that he has Breath of Life infusions, with Poisoners gloves so he can give them out to two other people (who can then give someone a BoL with a touch attack), he's one of my most popular PCs. People like to play with him... 'cause he's fun.
|
I think, perhaps, one of the issues in "detuning" encounters (especially the final BBEG encounters) is that most of the scenarios I have seen have very few targets.
Making a single enemy a challenge to a group of 6 is really quite tough, due to the economies of actions. Thus, perhaps, the APL+4 encounters. This is really still the case when there are two bad guys.
The "downsizing" I have seen has not been all that effective, in my eyes. I think this is where the devs should be looking at. Let's take for example, an Alchemist BBEG. In one scenario, this Alchemist is downgraded by making him sickened, which for many characters would be quite effective. However, the two things that make Alchemist NPCs so effective are the effectively unlimited use of bombs, and the touch AC attacks.
To balance such a thing perhaps they could limit the number of bombs left for the alchemist (he could have already had an encounter on that day), to perhaps 2-3 instead of 5-6. Perhaps his mutagen has already been used, as well as some of his elixirs.
The same kind of balancing could be done with all spellcasters... reducing the number of spells available.
For more martial bad guys, if the encounters have mooks with the BBEG, you could reduce the number of mooks (of course, the mooks would have be significant enough on their own). Barbarians could have fewer rounds of rage left, or the like.
I think the perception of deadliness in season 4 comes in part due to the assumption of 6 players (which means that the encounters are properly tuned), but a poor job of detuning.
|
|
Rogue Eidolon
** spoiler omitted **
Since touch AC on enemies doesn't rise at higher levels, it becomes easier and easier to hit as you level up, but at first it's not always so easy. Touch ACs of around 12 are common even at low levels, and that means a nearly 50/50 chance of missing if the enemy is in melee. Granted, you can just go extract-heavy like my alch did at low levels and just tank at level 1, then grab infusion at 2 and buff the heck out of everyone else.
Anyways, is it Feast of Sigils or Eyes of the Ten that gives you the extra +2 for the 30 Int at level 10? Or am I missing something less esoteric that allows such a high score?
am I going crazy or did a post get deleted in this thread?
earlier nosig was accusing Napalm of calling him a gimp or an optimizer and swore off further participation in this thread. but now that post doesn't exist? was that someone else or did it in fact go bye bye?
|
|
** spoiler omitted **Rogue Eidolon
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
edit: perhaps we should take the Alchemist discussion to a different thread and stop derailing this one.
Don't worry, I GMed that game as I said, didn't play it. None of my characters got singed. I think you've readily explained the incongruity I saw by pointing out that you often significantly lower the damage output in exchange to nearly negate the chance of harming allies, so I think I'm set now other than my curiosity over the source of those last 2 Int if they aren't from one of the two chronicles I've said. It'd be silly to make a new thread for just that, so I'd say just post once more here anyway or PM me to answer that if you feel like it, and otherwise, back to our regularly scheduled complaining about Season 4 difficulty :D
Cheers!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do think PFS has gotten harder in the time I've played, and not for the better. I enjoy playing characters that are fun but not super optimized, and these days I don't feel comfortable playing at a table where I'm the only frontline fighter or there's no healer. I don't get to play very frequently, Pathfinder isn't a 'hobby' as much as a thing that I do every now and then when there's nothing else going on. I know very well that many people I play with are the same way, but I'd venture most of us who play that way don't post on this forum, since the very nature of a forum kind of self selects for people who play frequently. Turning it into a murderfest is a great way to take those of us who get a level 5 character in a year of play to simply walk away from the game.
Obviously we spend less money and are less of Paizo's target audience, but I think flexibility should be key. The number of encounters I've played in the current season that required a party that was dead centre of the range we should have been plus someone playing way down so that we could overcome some ridiculous defences of the BBEG that we otherwise weren't optimized for has been kind of crazy.
Also: Dear Authors: Please stop giving everything Darkness, it turns encounters into a slogfest and every module I've played where something casts darkness involves getting out of a gaming store an hour late.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Also: Dear Authors: Please stop giving everything Darkness, it turns encounters into a slogfest and every module I've played where something casts darkness involves getting out of a gaming store an hour late.
Not to say anything against the rest of your post, but I wanted to reply to this particular part.
|
|
James, your post is perfect. There's this stream of thought of how PFS "should" be ignoring that some people have fun in different ways. Playing up is always rewarded pretty heavily, but for someone not optimizing the hell out of their character playing at level shouldn't be an insurmountable challenge.
This is a roleplaying game, not chess for powergamers.
|
|
Also: Dear Authors: Please stop giving everything Darkness, it turns encounters into a slogfest and every module I've played where something casts darkness involves getting out of a gaming store an hour late.Not to say anything against the rest of your post, but I wanted to reply to this particular part.
** spoiler omitted **
Because I don't play a spellcaster, and I can't control what other people play? It's not a home game, it's Society. People don't optimize themselves to work within a party of specific people. We frequently do have ways to overcome it, but darkness drops the speed at which an encounter is ended like crazy and in the end doesn't actually really seem to do anything to aid the enemies that much since, like you mentioned, it's overcome-able. I play a Dwarf mainly, so non-deeper darkness is okay with me. There's a lot of localized stuff that works fine once I get in close, but the last two modules in a row I've played have just left the ranged non-spellcaster just sitting their surfing the internet on his/her phone. Darkness is something that works really well as a mechanic but requires a certain amount of party cohesion to make fun for everyone. This isn't just me complaining, all twelve people from the last two modules I've played expressed the exact same thought.
Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
Because I don't play a spellcaster, and I can't control what other people play? It's not a home game, it's Society. People don't optimize themselves to work within a party of specific people. We frequently do have ways to overcome it, but darkness drops the speed at which an encounter is ended like crazy and in the end doesn't actually really seem to do anything to aid the enemies that much since, like you mentioned, it's overcome-able. I play a Dwarf mainly, so non-deeper darkness is okay with me. There's a lot of localized stuff that works fine once I get in close, but the last two modules in a row I've played have just left the ranged non-spellcaster just sitting their surfing the internet on his/her phone. Darkness is something that works really well as a mechanic but requires a certain amount of party cohesion to make fun for everyone. This isn't just me complaining, all twelve people from the last two modules I've played expressed the exact same thought.Also: Dear Authors: Please stop giving everything Darkness, it turns encounters into a slogfest and every module I've played where something casts darkness involves getting out of a gaming store an hour late.Not to say anything against the rest of your post, but I wanted to reply to this particular part.
** spoiler omitted **
An everburning torch counters standard darkness and only costs 110 GP. Anybody can carry it.
Deeper darkness, on the other hand...
|
|
An everburning torch counters standard darkness and only costs 110 GP. Anybody can carry it.
Deeper darkness, on the other hand...
And again, for anyone playing an archer they're pretty much just going to sit the fight out unless they happen to have a line of allies making it possible for them to shoot through the darkness. I've got a melee character with darkvision so it doesn't bother me tremendously, but nonetheless it's a mechanic that seems to slow everything down and leave some people out of the fight, which given the nature of Society I don't think is super fair.
Edit: I'm not sure this is really a derail, it's more prevalent in recent modules and is contributing to the 'hard mode' thing that the thread is about.
|
|
Jiggy
Darkness (or other challenges) and why do you / don't you overcome it next time.
Situation a:
You encounter darkness. You have a player who takes out an oil of daylight. 5 other players at the table might take note. 2 of the 5 might buy such a potion themselves.
Next time this isn't an issue.
Situation b:
You encounter darkness. Not a single player has a way to overcome it. It becomes a slug fest and people go home disappointed.
Now you can have b1: One or more of the disappointed people afterwards look up the internet / the rulebook and come up with a solution next time.
or you have b2: they still don't know how to overcome this.
You do learn a lot if you have good players around or go to conventions or surf these boards - especially the advice and rules threads. But people who don't do any of the above either need someone at the table doing it for them - or they need a lot of time to work it out from the rulebook.
I think the fallacy here too often is that b2 is ignored. Off course - if you are here posting you likely read and you likely know the problem. If you know the answer it's easy. But it isn't easy to know the answer.
Edit: and I would add the same goes for other 'simple' obstacles like hardness, DR etc. Each of them has a solution. Players who play A LOT will learn them at some stage.
But this again is an example of why the pregen are regarded as failure - despite solid builds. Are they able to overcome Darkness?
Kyra aquires a potion of Daylight at level 7, Valeros has an everburning torch at level 4. Ezren and Merisiell just would be stumped.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
An everburning torch counters standard darkness and only costs 110 GP.
Incorrect. It will fail to increase the light level in an area of darkness.
@stonecunning:
Why doesn't the archer have a potion of darkvision or an oil of daylight after having sat out of one darkness fight already? Then he doesn't depend on anyone.
A potion of darkvision is 300gp and completely trumps darkness for the drinker. It is available once you have 5 Fame.
An oil of daylight is 750gp and completely trumps darkness for the entire party. It is available once you have 9 Fame, or by spending 2PP.
That same oil of daylight, in combination with either a second light source or a potion of darkvision (depending on how the GM interprets a certain rule in daylight's text), defeats deeper darkness for the entire party.
So what is happening in your local area, stonecunning? Something's up.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think the fallacy here too often is that b2 is ignored.
Fair point. I think if an entire party fails to have a solution for something, the GM has a certain level of responsibility to make sure that the players become aware of standard solutions before they leave that day. And personally, I enjoy pointing out these options to other players, just as I enjoyed having them pointed out to me when I was starting out. To me, that's a big part of the social appeal of the game. :)
But as it relates to this thread, players being unaware of standard solutions to common obstacles is not an indication of the campaign becoming too hard.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
Jiggy,
Darkness is a second level spell. Continual Flame is either a second or third level spell, depending on the caster. Continual Flame states: Light spells counter and dispel darkness spells of an equal or lower level
Thod,
I think that another situation which needs to be considered is the use of table consumables. The player who used up that oil of daylight is now out 750 gold. Unfortunately, under the current rules, the table can't all pitch in their fair share and buy him a new one - the player just has to eat that. 750 gold is not an insubstantial amount at lower levels, and deeper darkness does come up at lower levels. In one particular 1-5 that I am thinking of, deper darkness *needs* to be countered, and the scenario gives out far less than 750 gold.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy,
Darkness is a second level spell. Continual Flame is either a second or third level spell, depending on the caster. Continual Flame states: Light spells counter and dispel darkness spells of an equal or lower level
Countering and dispelling are things you can only do at the time you cast a spell, not by bringing two diametrically opposed spells near each other when they're already active. If Valeros is affected by bane and Kyra is affected by bless, getting them to hug does not dispel those two spells, despite identical wording in both spells about countering and dispelling each other.
Additionally, darkness explicitly states that magical light sources do not increase the light level in the area unless they're of a higher spell level than darkness. (This does mean that a cleric-cast continual flame will trump ordinary darkness, but items like the everburning torch are unfortunately wizard-made.)
|
I remember a scenario where we were lost in Deeper Darkness and the bad guy just ignored it completely (legal RAW).
Problem I see (pun not intended) is that either :
- The group has the means to defeat the DD
- The group does not have this means
It is pretty obvious to me that depending on which situation your group is in, the encounter will happen very differently and the CR of the encounter/creature cannot really take this into account.
Why do writers so often put darkness in their scenarios when it is such an all-or-nothing situation ?
- If you can see, you win (usually)
- If you cannot see, you are screwed.
I think it is better to have encounters which stay challenging (rather than deadly) no matter what.
I like a challenge!
|
|
Now here is an interesting one:
Last time I ran into darkness (deeper darkness) I had summoned some Lantern Archons just before. They have an interesting description - they are creatures of light that you can only extinguish by killing them.
It was a summon III spell. So what happens (apart of table variation).
I think we tend to be pretty good with standard situations / solutions but from time to time you still encounter situations that let's you think and it can take quite a while of rule book reading to work it out. Showing that 'standard situations' just means we have seen them often enough without the need to look it up.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@The black raven: You raise an interesting point about all-or-nothing obstacles.
I think there are two types of challenges in Pathfinder: numbers challenges, and problem/solution challenges.
Numbers challenges are things like skill checks with high DCs, monsters with high damage output or high AC/HP, etc. Things you overcome by having bigger numbers yourself, or by lowering their numbers via debuffs.
Then there are problem/solution challenges:
Problem: Enemy is flying. Solution: Ranged weapon/potion of fly
Problem: Enemy has DR. Solution: Alternate weapon/spell damage/etc
Problem: Darkness. Solution: Darkvision/daylight
Problem: Immunity to elements/magic/etc. Solution: Physical-damage spells, buffing a martial ally, etc.
Problem: Enemy is incorporeal. Solution: Magic weapon and high damage, cleric, ghost salt blanched arrows, etc
On the one hand, having just the right solution for a problem/solution challenge is (at least for me) very fun and satisfying. On the other hand, darkness is in the awkward position of requiring the most specific solutions.
If the enemy is flying, you can have a bow, ranged spells, means of flight, or even just ready to attack when they come in range (if it's a melee flyer).
If the enemy has DR, you can have an appropriate backup weapon, you can use spells instead, you can just power through with high damage, you can grapple/pin/tie up/CdG, whatever.
If the enemy is immune/resistant to an energy type, you can use a different element, use non-elemental damage, buff a martial guy, and so forth.
If the enemy is using darkness/deeper darkness, your only options are darkvision and/or daylight. Instead of having a best solution, some good solutions, and some moderate workarounds; you've just got one solution and that's that.
...Not really going anywhere with all this rambling, just adding it to the discussion. ;)