|
I actually find its much more fun to drench the offending party in ground meat and unleash a pack of rabid weasels upon them. Leaves more of an impact y'know? :PVoila: you have no arcane casters. Everybody is playing martial classes.
If your goal is to run a group with 5 pure melee and a healbot, your suggestion would do it.
A simpler suggestion. Instead of spending countless hours rewriting rules to ensure nobody is wiling to play an arcane caster, just ban them from your games. It is simpler and has the same end result.
Same affect, but probably more amusing.
Also FYI, casters don't really need that much dexterity unless they're spellslinging (divination, summoning, area effects, healing, etc don't need it). If the baddies are up in the caster's face, the martials aren't doing their job. It is a team game after all. Or do most people play solo PF?
Not solo, but adventurer wizard. You know, the one that can take an arrow in the knee and survive. The one that can act before enemies, so he can place himself where he is unlikely to be a target. The wizard that can try to do the save for poison without hoping to succeed only on a "20". You know, a wizard that can actually survive through an adventure with a normal DM and do his job.
If a wizard wants AC/ray spells they get DEX
And Initiative : a caster who acts first is a boon to a party (haste BEFORE anyone in the party and any ennemy have acted is HUGE).
Voila: you have no arcane casters. Everybody is playing martial classes.
If your goal is to run a group with 5 pure melee and a healbot, your suggestion would do it.
A simpler suggestion. Instead of spending countless hours rewriting rules to ensure nobody is wiling to play an arcane caster, just ban them from your games. It is simpler and has the same end result.
Totally agree with you.
Ok, you could add something like "Casters may learn one spell of a secondary school of magic per each caster level." Better?
Why is everyone want to nerf the wizard to a point it is no longer playable ? A wizard who has 4 forbidden schools (but can cast spells with 2 slots) has already many weaknesses (so many in fact that it become dangerous to play one, or you aren't doing your duty in the party anymore).
Forsake 6 schools of magic totally ? Come on, it's just waaaaaay too much.
@Calybos : DC heroes uses a system like this, with 9 attributes, 3 physical, 3 mental and 3 social/magical. Each category is divided in Attack/dodge, Power and Resistance.
Many years ago I played the Batman RPG - a subset of DC heroes with the same rules. I found the attribute sytem fascinating. Well thought out.
You can sorta solve SAD MAD issues by giving the players stat arrays instead of pointbuy.
Give everyone 16,14,14,12,10,8 (or something) and other than the 16 goes to int you will likely find some variety in wizards played at your table.
That... doesn't even come close to solving the problem. Where do the ability score increases go? The casting stat. What +X stat item do you buy? The casting stat. Problems solved? None.
|
|
That... doesn't even come close to solving the problem. Where do the ability score increases go? The casting stat. What +X stat item do you buy? The casting stat. Problems solved? None.
Where do the fighters ability score increases go? What +X stat item does the fighter buy?
The same problem exists on both sides of the martial/caster line. The magic-mart problem is a separate issue that only goes away when the DM makes magic gear exclusively available as found loot.
@Artanthos : Exactly. Most wizards have a belt of DEX/CON anyway (the difference between wizards and fighters is that a fighter will want a belt of DEX/CON/STR, which will cost a little more than a belt of DEX/CON and a headband of INT).
|
|
@Artanthos : Exactly. Most wizards have a belt of DEX/CON anyway (the difference between wizards and fighters is that a fighter will want a belt of DEX/CON/STR, which will cost a little more than a belt of DEX/CON and a headband of INT).
My fighter has a belt of physical might, a headband for INT, and ioun stones boosting CON and CHA.
My Casters tend to take headbands that improve two, or all three, mental stats plus a CON belt.
The fighter buys STR and CON. If he's high enough level to have spare max dex in his armor, he gets DEX too. He needs all three.
The caster buys different stat-boosting items not because he NEEDS the stats, but because three +1 items are still cheaper than one +2 item.
inb4 another weak argument in the line of "but that just means it harder to itemize a caster!!!"
This is incorrect for several reasons. Fighters et al are MAD because they REQUIRE several attributes to stay alive.
If you want damage and attack, get STR. If you want armor, get some DEX. If you want health, get some CON. If you want to not be useless outside of combat, get some INT.
Yeah those are all nice but they are bought on the basis of what's left after having decent Strength first. When its the 10 point buy or everyone rolls iffy on 3d6 Gygax old school style, you can live with penalties for anything but Con and Strength if you really have to. Because as the Fighter your first job is still broadly assumed to be hitting things with your sword and as long as you do that you do your job.
And nobody can afford a Con penalty excepting maybe an archer build.
Here's how the wizard deals with that.
DEX? For what? Mage Armor, baby! Pump INT. Damage? Meh, damage is for suckers, but if I needed to, I could. Pump INT. Health? What ever for, I have Stoneskin. Pump INT. Utility? Yeah, here's a spellbook, pick a page. Pump INT. Oh look, that INT gives me skill points!
With INT, they do EVERYTHING.
Yes, the only reason to do it is nerfing. BECAUSE. THEY. ARE. TOO. GOOD.
And I, for one, do not agree with the "spells per day based off one, maximum spells of another, saves off the third" approach, because it screws over actual specialists, the "good" build that has built in strengths AND weaknesses. That's why I proposed the casting-stat-by-school approach.
Of course but that's because when your primary job is to cast a spell that has far more options.
You are being a bit hyperbolic there though.
Mage Armor isn't Dex, its a Chain Shirt, you take a slice of your abilities to replace a 100 gp item anyone can have. Sure its better for specific things but it doesn't improve either, and there's always a loose chance your GM will play the "you haven't cast it/ it ran out" when he runs a random encounter while traveling or some such. Its still great because mages don't get armor, even OP'd for its level, but it doesn't replace a stat that also gives saves, initiative, and stackable AC.
Stoneskin, at 250 a pop is a poorer option now. Literally. Its good but it makes it a judgement call on when to use it as opposed to effectively 24/7. And DR is beatable for the properly prepared, and even without that high damage will still eat you up.
Utility you mean scrolls and wands right? Otherwise did you prepare that useful spell today and if you did how much does it cut into your depth in a fight. Sure you can just rest or what not, but if your GM is letting you freely control time like that nobody should complain. Resting to prepare Identify (or whatever) is seriously the same as running back to town and paying the magic shop to do it, its a conscious choice that time is not a factor anymore. Now scrolls and wands of course change that but that's getting into gear where there's lots of options for everyone. Nevermind the skill monkey should have UMD. Yes there's questions of relative economies, but options are there.
This is all not to say casting isn't the most powerful skill in the game. It is. I personally strongly support a judicious nerf, which is why I proposed some. I just find trying to build in MAD a bad one. While more spells and such are nice, the real stat boosting reason is for save DCs. Ergo you will just change the "primary" stat for certain builds. Or maybe shuffle the strengths of various full casters for certain niches.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So archers don't need CON, but casters do?
And because casters need PRIMARY STAT and CON, it makes them MAD?
Whatever, I'm done bashing my head against this particular wall.
|
|
So archers don't need CON, but casters do?
And because casters need PRIMARY STAT and CON, it makes them MAD?
Whatever, I'm done bashing my head against this particular wall.
Your having difficulty today.
Everybody buys CON. Caster and Martial.
I emphasized it for you.
Most casters have the exact same stat concerns as fighters, with their casting stat replacing strength.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I used to feel like wizards needed Dex and Con. But then Paizo gave them +2 hp/level (d6 HD and favored class bonus) for no apparent reason, so they need a lot less Con now than they used to. And Paizo also started handing out auto-win-intiative class features (see Diviner et al.) that make Dex a lot less important, too. Because clearly wizards weren't SAD enough to begin with? In any event, in Pathfinder, a wizard can get by with a 10 Con and dumping Dex, allowing you to pump Int that much higher. Add in the +2 Int just for being a human or elf, and it gets pretty sick.
Universal comments are almost always wrong, Artanthos. I've seen plenty of low-Con characters in my games, from both sides of the GM screen. The ones that survive do so not because they redid their character sheets before the first game to up their Con, but because they played smartly and occasionally got lucky. The ones that died did so because they did something stupid or just got the bad rolls at the wrong time.
|
|
I used to feel like wizards needed Dex and Con. But then Paizo gave them +2 hp/level (d6 HD and favored class bonus) for no apparent reason, so they need a lot less Con now than they used to. And Paizo also started handing out auto-win-intiative class features (see Diviner et al.) that make Dex a lot less important, too. Because clearly wizards weren't SAD enough to begin with? In any event, in Pathfinder, a wizard can get by with a 10 Con and dumping Dex, allowing you to pump Int that much higher. Add in the +2 Int just for being a human or elf, and it gets pretty sick.
Only if your wizard never intends to make a fortitude or reflex save, never wants to win initiative, and is happy with fewer hit points (you can never have too many hit points, you WILL get hit eventually).
Pro tip: Diviner is only the 3rd best initiative in the game. The best is martial.
|
|
Universal comments are almost always wrong, Artanthos. I've seen plenty of low-Con characters in my games, from both sides of the GM screen. The ones that survive do so not because they redid their character sheets before the first game to up their Con, but because they played smartly and occasionally got lucky. The ones that died did so because they did something stupid or just got the bad rolls at the wrong time.
This is true, but applies to more than just casters.
Most players take either a 12 or 14 in CON, regardless of class.
Oh I'm sure most do. Let's just say most instead of everybody in the future =)
Only if your wizard never intends to make a fortitude or reflex same, never wants wants to win initiative, and is happy with fewer hit points (you can never have too many hit points, you WILL get hit eventually).
Yes, you're absolutely right ^^
Pro tip: Diviner is only the 3rd best initiative in the game. The best is martial.
I'm curious how you can beat 30+DEX mod in initiative with martials.
|
|
Only if your wizard never intends to make a fortitude or reflex same, never wants wants to win initiative, and is happy with fewer hit points (you can never have too many hit points, you WILL get hit eventually).
Yes, you're absolutely right ^^
Pro tip: Diviner is only the 3rd best initiative in the game. The best is martial.I'm curious how you can beat 30+DEX mod in initiative with martials.
At 1st level, a sohei can always act in a surprise round even if he does not notice his enemies, though he remains flat-footed until he acts. In addition, a sohei gains a bonus on initiative rolls equal to 1/2 his monk level. At 20th level, a sohei’s initiative roll is automatically a natural 20.
At 7th level, a kensai applies his Intelligence modifier as well as his Dexterity modifier on initiative rolls (minimum 0). A kensai may make attacks of opportunity when flat-footed, and may draw his favored weapon as a free action as part of taking an attack of opportunity.
At 13th level, a kensai may always act and may draw his weapon as a swift action during a surprise round, though he is considered flat-footed until he acts.
At 19th level, a kensai’s initiative roll is automatically a natural 20 and he is never surprised.
Sohei: 30 + feats + traits + dex mod.
Kensai: 20 + dex mod + int mod + feats + traits + familiar.
A sohei archer or dervish dance kensai will have DEX as their primary stat, unlike the diviner. Kensai will have an INT only slightly lower than his DEX. My level 9 kensai is looking at a +18 initiative bonus. I could have built for higher.
At the most extreme high end builds, the kensai has the best initiative. He can eventually get an INT bonus greater than the +10 level bonus received by either the Sohei or Diviner.
Only if your wizard never intends to make a fortitude or reflex save, never wants to win initiative, and is happy with fewer hit points (you can never have too many hit points, you WILL get hit eventually).
Or if you intend to make most saves thanks to the cheap cloak of resistance you make for yourself, win initiative against everyone and everything in the game except for two specific optional splatbook archetypes (and even against them, early on), and are happy having as many hp as you would have had with a much higher Con in 3.5E.
The ONLY thing that Paizo did to nerf his awesomeness was to remove the greater resistance series of spells... but that's a double-edged sword, insofar as it actually hurts the wizard's teammates just as much as it hurts him.
So archers don't need CON, but casters do?
And because casters need PRIMARY STAT and CON, it makes them MAD?
Whatever, I'm done bashing my head against this particular wall.
I guess the "maybe" was lost on you?
An archer using a martial class can fall back on primary Dex, armor, good HD, and strong Fort saves. All of which is not so for all casters. Its not optimal but with a little sensible tactics I call it still playable. I'd do it simply because I feel I should RP Int/Wis/Con penalties and so avoid them like the plague. Course I don't take any penalty I can avoid because I think they all suck.
The greater truth is still that everyone needs Con just about equally.
|
|
Or if you intend to make most saves thanks to the cheap cloak of resistance you make for yourself,
Last time I checked, cloak of resistance was one of the big six items that nearly all optimized builds automatically purchase.
win initiative against everyone and everything in the game except for two specific optional splatbook archetypes (and even against them, early on),
Having been demonstrated two options that match or beat the diviners initiative, the goal post is now moved.
and are happy having as many hp as you would have had with a much higher Con in 3.5E.
Ignoring the fact that Fortitude has always been a weak save for wizards. Or that no matter how many hit points you have, more are always desirable. Giving wizards an average of 1 extra HP per level in no way diminishes the value most players place on a 14 CON.
The ONLY thing that Paizo did to nerf his awesomeness was to remove the greater resistance series of spells... but that's a double-edged sword, insofar as it actually hurts the wizard's teammates just as much as it hurts him.
All the points you've raised as making casters overpowered are used by, or options for, other classes.
Time to hide this thread.
Ignoring the fact that Fortitude has always been a weak save for wizards. Or that no matter how many hit points you have, more are always desirable. Giving wizards an average of 1 extra HP per level in no way diminishes the value most players place on a 14 CON.
The 1 HP/level is frankly only much of an advantage over Sorcerers. Everything else off the top of my head has either better HD or better skills. And Cha skills are lots of fun so its very tempting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having been demonstrated two options that match or beat the diviners initiative, the goal post is now moved.
I don't mind disagreement, and I welcome the additional information you provided (that there were in fact two splatbook archetypes with even more insane auto-win initiative options). I don't see why you'd want or need to accuse me of the sheninanigans which you yourself were the one committing, though* -- that's just bad form.
If you'd like to stick to facts and opinions on the topic, I'd welcome further discussion. If for some reason you want to make this personal, I'd rather not.
*
The ONLY thing that Paizo did to nerf his awesomeness was to remove the greater resistance series of spells... but that's a double-edged sword, insofar as it actually hurts the wizard's teammates just as much as it hurts him.
Greater resistance was weak, because it didn't add with a cloak of resistance, that EVERY single character has past a certain level.
PLease... Wizard's spells have known many nerfs during the passage from 3.5 to pathfinder. Some are almost invisible, and other are false nerfs, but they have been nerfed anyway.
Just look at Protection vs [alignment], or Mind blank for example (to illustrate with spells from very different level of power, but still in comparison to greater resistance).
I har used con to fuel spells before. You take non- lethal dmg = to spell lvl + meta magic and can burn extra HP to bump your dmg dice and dcs. Non lethal dmg was healed double, so no big deal. Learning new spells, dcs, and gaining higher spell lvls was still based off of prime stat but you could bump your DC by your con mod.
|
|
UnconsciousYeah 3 HD and more will be immune to unconcious. At level 1 though? Unconscious blinded and stunned for 2d4 rounds (average 5 rounds of helpless). Stunned and blinded for 1d4 more rounds after that (average 2.5 rounds of unable to do anything). Then stunned for 1 more round (still unable to do anything.
A wizard could easily have a 16 on its save by level 1. Fighter? Give him a +2 save (1 trait 1 wisdom)? He has to roll a 14 or higher (65% failure chance) or be in capable of acting for an average of over 8 rounds and helpless (meaning he can be coup de grac'd) for 5 of them.
The flip side is the situation I found myself in last weekend. My level 1 wizard had a color spray memorized, but absolutely everything we fought was either undead, mindless or a construct. Three quarters of the encounters were also immune to grease for various reasons.
A wizard could easily have a 16 on its save by level 1. Fighter? Give him a +2 save (1 trait 1 wisdom)? He has to roll a 14 or higher (65% failure chance) or be in capable of acting for an average of over 8 rounds and helpless (meaning he can be coup de grac'd) for 5 of them.
I'm sorry but starting with a 20 in primary casting sounds easy to you maybe.
To me it sounds like on a 20 point buy I spent 17 of my points. Leaving me with a measly +1 for one more stat before I need to start dumping hard. I think a lot of people will not feel happy with the two 7s they then need to get two 14s for Dex and Con. I personally have negative attribute aversion disease to begin with.
Also for that same buy a Fighter willing to also severely dump and take 18 in Str can afford a 14 Dex/Con/Wis so can have a plus +2 there. For this exact situation a trait and Iron Will would not nessecarily be a bad idea. What's that you cast Grease instead? Still a +2 anyways, maybe Lightning Reflexes. And even if it works then what? Hope you get lucky with that light crossbow you can barely lift before they can get up and make a 10 DC to get out of Grease? Spell Focus? Well if you are willing to be an Illusionist I suppose thats a reasonable choice.
Of course not like actual play is dominated by fighting PC classes you are well situated to beat.
Its still only a 15' cone on a fragile platform. It doesn't matter how good you spell DC is when you face 2+ creatures more then two squares apart. Or are undead, or constructs, or any number of things. Or can make will saves well.
Or have just have better initiatives. Even if you survive the hit its not like Defensive Casting is a walk in the park anymore. Five ft step? Meet Step Up, Large Size, or Reach+Spiked-Gauntlet.
Now I'd still say Color Spray is probably the best 1st level spell for 1st level play. And certainly casting is a high high powered option overall.
BUT its not half as omnipotent as hyperbole would suggest.
Especially when you have to prepare it every day and low level, how many Color Sprays do you think you need today? 50% of your total spells, 25%?
In order:
1. Its not that its not possible but you are looking at a very literally minmaxed build. Its almost begging the GM to screw with you leaving such obvious gaps. (How's about all your potions and wands and no Haversack, 23 light load means even light weight are not trvial)
More importantly plenty of people aren't always going to want to play to the scrawny anti-social wizard sterotype, they'll want some different flavor. Furthermore its a build with very little flexiblity in concept, you HAVE to be all spell no considering EK class, no polymorphing into something more modestly melee capable, not having anything social as back up when Charm Person runs out on that NPC. Your options for doing something "less optimal but fun and still playable" are far less open.
Even to the most cold-blooded munchkin should have concerns with say locking themselves out of more Initiative and HP and shoring up their own saves. Or a CMD even that is that is that much poorer. That's why 18 (paying 16) or even 17 allows you a lot more stat points to play with, for a +1 and some spells.
Now sure in strict sense of what's "likely" you might well be the most optimal. But the problem with what's likely is you have to win everytime but only loose once so even lower probablities are of concern.
2. All the feats I mentioned are available at level one. Only Step Up has a pre-req of... BAB+1.
3. What other spells? Please be specific. With a focus on lower levels if you could.
Debuffs on the whole have the problem of not actually killing your enemies, considering a wizard alone thats a troublesome issue. Summoning needs 1 round of casting to do. Anything with a duration under 5 rounds poses something of a problem in application. You are a long way away from having a thousand and three tricks like later levels.
4. You are confusing when I stopped talking about the fighter. The fighter is not the best example relevant example, 3 goblins or kobolds are more like your classic low level play. Or any of the nigh infinite options out there you have to face potentially.
However on the proverbial fighter when exactly did I mention Power Attack?
I find the notion you simply assume that interesting. Honestly I'm not sure if its all that much benefit to a low level character, I've always worried more about hitting period. I think Power Attack can wait a few levels unless I feel I need Cleave ASAP. Even then of course if you notice... I presented Step Up or ReachSpike options for countering casters. I did not at any point require all of it together any more then when I mentioned it I was actually talking about a fighter.
In point of fact Step Up is if anything counterproductive for a Reach+Spiked-Gauntlet combo. Because with ReachSpike you want your enemy to be dumb enough to 5' step away from you. Step Up is for when you start with a Greatsword not a Glaive.
5. And loose your little wand drone, scout, second Perception check with Scent, improved ally, and be one disarm/sunder(or out of combat theft) away from penalties on all casting?
Its a choice, but not an obviously completely superior one nobody is ever going to not take.
Which is the thing these arguments tend to miss and the point I was trying to get across in the first place. Its easy to duel specific examples back and forth, but PF doesn't present any one option. The what's the "best" option game was irrelevant the moment Pun Pun was developed for 3.5. Even before that it wasn't a sea of Batman vs CoDzilla in actual play.
Yeah 3 HD and more will be immune to unconcious. At level 1 though? Unconscious blinded and stunned for 2d4 rounds (average 5 rounds of helpless). Stunned and blinded for 1d4 more rounds after that (average 2.5 rounds of unable to do anything). Then stunned for 1 more round (still unable to do anything.A wizard could easily have a 16 on its save by level 1. Fighter? Give him a +2 save (1 trait 1 wisdom)? He has to roll a 14 or higher (65% failure chance) or be in capable of acting for an average of over 8 rounds and helpless (meaning he can be coup de grac'd) for 5 of them.
Yeah, agreed, color spray is dangerous. About as dangerous as a barbarians's greatsword. With a DC16 you have a 80% chance to knock out an orc. With a +8 to hit the barbarian has a 80% chance to knock out an orc. So yes, those are powerful attacks. And well, the barbarian's greatsword works on skellies and spiders too.
And the big thing; in the 20% of cases where the orc saves, there is a reasonable risk of the wizard dying, a single crit can do that especially if the party doesn't have in-combat healing - that risk is neglible for the barbarian.
EDIT: I don't think a 20 starting Int is unreasonable on a 20 PB though. I'd probably go for 19 on an optimized char, just to have a little more leeway on the other stats for the very first levels, but 20 isn't very hard. On a 15 PB it REALLY requires some hefty sacrifice though, and mostly forces you to take Toughness unless you want to die to ranged attacks before you get to reliable Prot from Arrows and Wind Wall.
And no way you'll cast a color spray when your AC is 12 and your HP 7.