Good luck getting to 20 if everyone specs for bow damage.
Bows aren't amazing unless you take the feats for it and spend money on it.
It takes 4 feats to be effective with a bow, more if you want to be great with them. All you need: point blank, precise, and rapid shot with deadly aim. Take an adaptive weapon (+1000 gold to price) and everything beyond that is gravy to the ability to full attack every single turn.
Its pretty easy to be effective with 2 handers and bows by level 20.
Easier if you're a fighter right? 4 feats are hard to come by in barbar or paladin world.
Good luck getting to 20 if everyone specs for bow damage.
Bows aren't amazing unless you take the feats for it and spend money on it.
It takes 4 feats to be effective with a bow, more if you want to be great with them. All you need: point blank, precise, and rapid shot with deadly aim. Take an adaptive weapon (+1000 gold to price) and everything beyond that is gravy to the ability to full attack every single turn.
Its pretty easy to be effective with 2 handers and bows by level 20.
While it's easy to be more effective with these weapons, the barbarian is getting more out of the 2 handers simply because he gets every attack. That's where accelerate is helping other classes. Plus, being able to move and full attack removes the need to be good at using bows to do massive damage. It allows for more feat options if you want them.
Not really, you're gonna need those 4, and power attack to effective at melee as a barbarian or paladin... 5 feats. Raging vitality will be nice as a barbarian and after that (you still have 3 left over) all you're going to take is extra rage power over and over.
Or everyone just moves and full attacks with a buff spell.
So what I'm getting from you is that lvl 20 is always rocket tag and added full attacks to everyone who didn't build right is not going to do much to change that.
I've learned to leave options for ranged and melee and generally to focus ranged over the years because you get more oomph out of it. Level 20 is always rocket tag in my opinion yes.
Don't get me wrong, giving full attacks to the martials that weren't wise enough to grab a ranged option will certainly make a game changer for them and will be nice, but for the vast majority of gameplay I see, everyone grabs a bow to make sure they can make things explode if they can't get that full attack on melee.
Well that's kind of aweful. My fighter Brian the Fair and Strong master of the great sword has to pick up a bow to be effective at high levels...
Or everyone just moves and full attacks with a buff spell.So what I'm getting from you is that lvl 20 is always rocket tag and added full attacks to everyone who didn't build right is not going to do much to change that.
I've learned to leave options for ranged and melee and generally to focus ranged over the years because you get more oomph out of it. Level 20 is always rocket tag in my opinion yes.
Don't get me wrong, giving full attacks to the martials that weren't wise enough to grab a ranged option will certainly make a game changer for them and will be nice, but for the vast majority of gameplay I see, everyone grabs a bow to make sure they can make things explode if they can't get that full attack on melee.
So if ranged combat is stronger than melee how does that change when all your cool on attack effects can be applied to all melee attacks? If I have a rogue with TWF he could potentially get a lot of sneak attacks. I like the idea of giving a fighter, barbarian or whatever martial more options than I can full attack over here with my bow or I could walk up and smack that guy once with my morningstar.
Something interesting I just realized in how this relates to combat maneuvers. If I had a fighter and I wanted to grapple the enemy spellcaster I could double move before grappling. Also now sunder could be used in the first round of combat to destroy all a BBEG's gear.
Now Melee is by and far stronger and ranged is practically worthless. Why? You need strength for damage, you need strength for to hit, your power attack goes for more, and you have better crit ranges.
Ranged forces you to split between dex and strength for to hit and damage. Now you stack one score and press the I win button.
Melee better be better than range. I'm right next to the HURT me monster when using it.
No range is too good. This balances it.
Rocket Tag, a well built damage dealer will kill it before it even gets a turn to attack back. Damage scales faster than health and if you can now move and full attack they're gonna be dead before they fight back.Melee better be better than range. I'm right next to the HURT me monster when using it.
No range is too good. This balances it.
Now we're back to why only the barbar should be allowed to do this?
If it is such a problem then barbars shouldn't have pounce.
Rocket Tag, a well built damage dealer will kill it before it even gets a turn to attack back. Damage scales faster than health and if you can now move and full attack they're gonna be dead before they fight back.Melee better be better than range. I'm right next to the HURT me monster when using it.
No range is too good. This balances it.
Now we're back to why only the barbar should be allowed to do this?
If it is such a problem then barbars shouldn't have pounce.
Rocket tag only pops up in higher level games, if at all depending on the group your with and the DM. By the same logic archers shouldn't be able to full attack and spell casters should lose a chunk of their spell list. Nerfing is usually a bad option because unless its an egregious problem, then you just alienate your crowd. Bring the people who need it up is always good publicity though.
Now we're back to why only the barbar should be allowed to do this?If it is such a problem then barbars shouldn't have pounce.
Hold on for a moment. The purpose of this thread isn't to say barbarians aren't balanced or pounce isn't balanced. The point is to bring other martials to the barbarian's level and in general make melee more attractive of a choice in combat. I think accelerate can do that.
Rocket tag only pops up in higher level games, if at all depending on the group your with and the DM. By the same logic archers shouldn't be able to full attack and spell casters should lose a chunk of their spell list. Nerfing is usually a bad option because unless its an egregious problem, then you just alienate your crowd. Bring the people who need it up is always good publicity though.Rocket Tag, a well built damage dealer will kill it before it even gets a turn to attack back. Damage scales faster than health and if you can now move and full attack they're gonna be dead before they fight back.Melee better be better than range. I'm right next to the HURT me monster when using it.
No range is too good. This balances it.
Now we're back to why only the barbar should be allowed to do this?
If it is such a problem then barbars shouldn't have pounce.
Right.
So why should barbars be the only ones who move and full attack?
You criticized giving everyone that ability as making games into rocket tag. Yet barbars should be the only full BAB martial to have it because?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So why should barbars be the only ones who move and full attack?
You criticized giving everyone that ability as making games into rocket tag. Yet barbars should be the only full BAB martial to have it because?
Well, if I remember correctly pounce in Pathfinder is actually intended for natural attacks which have no iterative. Barbarians get it from beast totem line which gives them natural attacks for raging and then the great beast totem powers up their claws to help keep up with martial weapons. Natural weapons are lame unless you have a bunch of them and amulet of mighty fist to boost them. If you nerf it to just natural attacks the beast totem line is far weaker except for builds based entirely around natural attacks. Barbarians get it because they're ferocious and animalist, bestial even. Theres also those things Thomas posted.
On the flipside, martials do need something to help them keep up at higher levels. Vital strike is too feat intensive and is still very weak, and only helps people with large weapon dice. Like a hippo, which players are not. Barbarians shouldn't be the only ones with pounce, but I don't think relying on a specific buff is the way to go so much as to give them an additional combat option to help them do damage when they move. Preferably one that doesn't feat tax them, because feat taxes are lame and really kill the joy of taking feats.
This is incorrect. Pounce can be used with all melee attacks.
Well, if I remember correctly pounce in Pathfinder is actually intended for natural attacks which have no iterative.
I know, its RAI not RAW. Doesn't make me agree with either one.
So why should barbars be the only ones who move and full attack?
You criticized giving everyone that ability as making games into rocket tag. Yet barbars should be the only full BAB martial to have it because?Well, if I remember correctly pounce in Pathfinder is actually intended for natural attacks which have no iterative. Barbarians get it from beast totem line which gives them natural attacks for raging and then the great beast totem powers up their claws to help keep up with martial weapons. Natural weapons are lame unless you have a bunch of them and amulet of mighty fist to boost them. If you nerf it to just natural attacks the beast totem line is far weaker except for builds based entirely around natural attacks. Barbarians get it because they're ferocious and animalist, bestial even. Theres also those things Thomas posted.
On the flipside, martials do need something to help them keep up at higher levels. Vital strike is too feat intensive and is still very weak, and only helps people with large weapon dice. Like a hippo, which players are not. Barbarians shouldn't be the only ones with pounce, but I don't think relying on a specific buff is the way to go so much as to give them an additional combat option to help them do damage when they move. Preferably one that doesn't feat tax them, because feat taxes are lame and really kill the joy of taking feats.
And now we're back to what this thread is talking about. Using WoP to help everyone out equally.
So from what I gather you say this is a bit too much? But since a better alternative doesn't exist we can lean on the side of too much of a boost and just make encounters a bit harder with more creatures to compensate right?
Inter party balance is more important than party vs encounter balance. Encounter can always be changed. Party members can always make you feel inadequate.
On the flipside, martials do need something to help them keep up at higher levels. Vital strike is too feat intensive and is still very weak, and only helps people with large weapon dice. Like a hippo, which players are not. Barbarians shouldn't be the only ones with pounce, but I don't think relying on a specific buff is the way to go so much as to give them an additional combat option to help them do damage when they move. Preferably one that doesn't feat tax them, because feat taxes are lame and really kill the joy of taking feats.So why should barbars be the only ones who move and full attack?
You criticized giving everyone that ability as making games into rocket tag. Yet barbars should be the only full BAB martial to have it because?
In any campaign I run I would not want my PC's to be reliant on a buff that lasts 1 round/level. It's not going to work out for them. That said, using accelerate could considerably add to a party's damage in late levels. No one wants to see the party barbarian go all in and crush the BBEG alone. That would make the rogue who can make a few attacks a round feel useless because he just can't keep up with the barbarian. I see this more of a small dip for the wizard in the party so the party can deal with dangerous encounters as they get higher in level. It's impossible to say the buff balances melee classes because it's just a buff which they need help to get but it would help parties do damage rather than feel less and less useful as they increased in level.
Actually what I'm saying is that Barbarians are the most effective melees because they are such lack luster ranged attackers. That's why they get to be special in the melee department is because they're going to suck compared to any other Ranged full BAB.
Melee is only the real viable option for them.
Ok so this WoP makes barbars a little weaker in comparison because they no longer dominate melee and don't have as great access to range combat.
Is that a problem?
I'd think it would be pretty cool to see a barbarian dual wielding throwing axes moving and making a full attack due to accelerate. I think a ranged barbarian could work with this.
I know, its RAI not RAW. Doesn't make me agree with either one.How'd you get it as RAI? It comes up on the forums all the time and I've never so much as seen a Dev hint at the idea that its supposed to be only for natural attacks.
RAW it works with iteratives thankfully. Heres where I get my RAI I mention from. RAW triumphs all of course.
Inter party balance is more important than party vs encounter balance. Encounter can always be changed. Party members can always make you feel inadequate.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design. Everyone should be capable and self sustained and then we can consider how to add to each other. Otherwise you get "I'm sorry, we can't game. We need someone to play a WOP caster or it just won't work...". Sort of like when people say you need a rogue or cleric. They should be fun to play and useful, but not necessary.
I don't think this'll be a huge nerf because accelerate only allows you to full attack while moving a barbarian with haste and pounce can full attack with an extra attack at full BAB. Everyone else has to give up the extra attack to move. He's still got an edge there and I'm good with that.
FYI Accelerate can give the extra attack too, but you can't do that and use an extra move action on the same turn. (Its not clear if you meant that)
Ok so barbar retains a slight edge, but an extra attack is less of a problem than that extra attack + 3 more over everyone else.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design.
'Team Game' :: designed around players relying on each other...
Honestly that is one of the ballsiest things I have seen anyone say on these forums. Bravo!
That's what that was for lol.I don't think this'll be a huge nerf because accelerate only allows you to full attack while moving a barbarian with haste and pounce can full attack with an extra attack at full BAB. Everyone else has to give up the extra attack to move. He's still got an edge there and I'm good with that.FYI Accelerate can give the extra attack too, but you can't do that and use an extra move action on the same turn. (Its not clear if you meant that)
Ok so barbar retains a slight edge, but an extra attack is less of a problem than that extra attack + 3 more over everyone else.
Was just making sure.
Well I guess I'm seeing the fighter is a little weak but when compared to the barbarian he seems extremely weak. Why play a fighter when a barbarian seems to do everything better with rage powers? Part of that I'm thinking stems from pounce. Out of all martial classes I think not having pounce effects the fighter the most because he lacks other super cool things.
I guess it's a problem with the fighter that you don't really get scaling class features.
And this is exactly what the other thread was supposed to be all about, that is until it got thrown WAY off-course with all the WoP nonsense. ;)
all the WoP nonsense. ;)
*eye twitch*
This thread is about how WoP changes the game. Most of the rage power vs feat debate comes from the access to pounce rage powers give. In this thread that is not an issue since we are using that "WoP nonsense"Which how is it nonsense???!?!?!?!? OP is a GM wondering how this will effect his games and martials in them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still maintain channel energy bypasses the barbarians superstition for healing seeing as how it only calls out a save for damage dealing, not healing :P
That sounds like fun.
Barbarian: STOP HEALING MEH!
Word casters get resurrection and true res and standard actions and free. (not that the cleric is taking WoP, but I thought I would mention it)
Also the barbar still saves against SLAs if they mimic a spell. I guess you could argue that channel energy, lay on hands and the like would 'technically work' but you can just as easily say that those SLAs ara more or less spells and require a save.
You asked about WoP in general. The cleric is more relevant than the barbarian.
The WoP cleric cannot ever remove negative levels. Coming back from the dead by any method other than breath of life (which WoP doesn't offer either) or Ultimate Mercy with a material component leaves permanent negative levels. Temporary negative levels from sources other than spells become permanent if you fail the save at day's end. Permanent negative levels with no means to remove them are crippling.
And SLAs and spells are not the same thing. If they were there would be no need for superstition or the dwarven Hardy racial trait or any number of other similar abilities to call out both spells and SLAs. And the very same superstition ability that calls out SLAs separately from spells as being subject to increased saves only calls out spells as not being subject to the option to forgo saves. You're now not only trying to defend the sanctity of the fighter with optional rules, but house rules.
Purify (Life)
School conjuration (healing); Level alchemist 4, bard 4, cleric 4, druid 4, inquisitor 4, paladin 4, ranger 4
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
Target Restrictions personal, selected
When a wordspell with this effect word is cast, the wordcaster chooses one type of affliction: curses, diseases, or poisons. The target of a wordspell with this effect word receives a new saving throw to immediately end all such afflictions of the chosen type currently affecting the target. The DC of this save is equal to the original DC of the affliction. The target must roll a saving throw for each affliction individually. If the affliction does not allow a saving throw, this effect word cannot remove that affliction.
Alternatively, a wordspell with this effect word can be used to remove 1d4 temporary negative levels possessed by the target, or 1 permanent negative level
Please learn to read I have already posted this word spell in this thread.
Furthermore accelerate is can only be cast by ARCANE CASTERS and can be gained with 1-2 feats.
Words of Power only change magic for the one who uses them, but a cleric WoP caster is irrelevant to this thread.
The WoP cleric cannot ever remove negative levels. Coming back from the dead by any method other than breath of life (which WoP doesn't offer either) or Ultimate Mercy with a material component leaves permanent negative levels. Temporary negative levels from sources other than spells become permanent if you fail the save at day's end. Permanent negative levels with no means to remove them are crippling.
This is not exactly true.
PURIFY (LIFE)
School conjuration (healing); Level alchemist 4, bard 4, cleric 4, druid 4, inquisitor 4, paladin 4, ranger 4
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
Target Restrictions personal, selected
When a wordspell with this effect word is cast, the wordcaster chooses one type of affliction: curses, diseases, or poisons. The target of a wordspell with this effect word receives a new saving throw to immediately end all such afflictions of the chosen type currently affecting the target. The DC of this save is equal to the original DC of the affliction. The target must roll a saving throw for each affliction individually. If the affliction does not allow a saving throw, this effect word cannot remove that affliction.
Alternatively, a wordspell with this effect word can be used to remove 1d4 temporary negative levels possessed by the target, or 1 permanent negative level.
also,
REVIVE (LIFE)
School conjuration (healing); Level cleric 5, druid 5, witch 5
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
Target Restrictions selected
This effect word restores life to a living creature that has died within up to 1 hour per caster level. The soul of the target receives a clear image of the caster, and can choose not to return, causing the wordspell to fail. If the soul is willing, the target does not receive a saving throw.
The target is restored to life with 1 hit point, unless another effect word adds to this total. In addition, the target loses 50% of any prepared spells or spell slots it had before it died (determined randomly). Coming back from the dead in this way is an ordeal, and the target gains three permanent negative levels from the experience (if the target does not have at least 4 Hit Dice, a wordspell with this effect word has no effect).
While this effect word undoes any mortal wounds the target might possess, its body must otherwise be whole for the effect word to function. Any missing parts are still missing when the creature is restored. Normal poisons and diseases are cured as well, but magical afflictions remain. Undead creatures are unaffected by a wordspell with this effect word, as are the dead bodies of creatures that were undead. Constructs and outsiders cannot be restored to life by this effect word. Targets that died as a result of old age cannot be restored to life by this effect word.
LIFE TOUCH (LIFE)
School conjuration (healing); Level cleric 8, witch 8
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
Target Restrictions selected
This effect word functions as revive, but it can be used on a creature that has been dead for up to 1 day per caster level. The creature is restored with half its original hit points, and its body does not need to be whole (just a piece of the creature is required). Any parts of the creature that were missing before its death are not restored by this effect word. The creature gains only one permanent negative level from being restored by this effect word, and this negative level fades after 24 hours (although it can be removed early as normal). The creature retains all of the prepared spells and slots it had when it died.
A wordcaster can remove negative levels plus it does get an equivalent to breath of life.
EDIT: woops Marthkus beat me to it.
I still maintain channel energy bypasses the barbarians superstition for healing seeing as how it only calls out a save for damage dealing, not healing :PThat sounds like fun.
Barbarian: STOP HEALING MEH!
Woah don't think you can ignore this gem you threw at us.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design.
I still maintain channel energy bypasses the barbarians superstition for healing seeing as how it only calls out a save for damage dealing, not healing :PThat sounds like fun.
Barbarian: STOP HEALING MEH!
Woah don't think you can ignore this gem you threw at us.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design.
Oy don't pick fights. I do think it would be weird for a barbarian to ignore channel energy but if I was ruling an all or nothing approach on spells, sla's and supernatural for superstitious I'd need to include it. lol CLERIC STAHP!
Oy don't pick fights. I do think it would be weird for a barbarian to ignore channel energy but if I was ruling an all or nothing approach on spells, sla's and supernatural for superstitious I'd need to include it. lol CLERIC STAHP!Its not that he's ignoring it. There is no save against healing. None. It wouldn't matter if it was a paladin who actively TRIED to save against the healing. There is only a save for when it deals damage. I posted the quote with the area included for the save bolded earlier.
Ok I can't say he would try to save against something without a saving throw. The barbarian is healed and he has to deal with the cleric using supernatural abilities.
Oy don't pick fights. I do think it would be weird for a barbarian to ignore channel energy but if I was ruling an all or nothing approach on spells, sla's and supernatural for superstitious I'd need to include it. lol CLERIC STAHP!Its not that he's ignoring it. There is no save against healing. None. It wouldn't matter if it was a paladin who actively TRIED to save against the healing. There is only a save for when it deals damage. I posted the quote with the area included for the save bolded earlier.
Well that's the good thing of about these forums. Many eyes looking over the rules catch things.
Bravo well done.
So we now have to face the barbar getting better saves than every other martial except the paladin.
I'm sorry how does a ranger compete with a barbar? It seems more than just fighters are put to shame.
I still maintain channel energy bypasses the barbarians superstition for healing seeing as how it only calls out a save for damage dealing, not healing :PThat sounds like fun.
Barbarian: STOP HEALING MEH!
Woah don't think you can ignore this gem you threw at us.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design.
It was a joke. Doesn't change my opinion that its bad game design to force someone into a role or to rely on each other(in fact it had nothing to do with it...) In combat healing is usually a bad thing anyway.
I'm sorry how does a ranger compete with a barbar? It seems more than just fighters are put to shame.
Rangers have 2 good saves, more skill points, and an animal companion. They've also got a selection of spells and can at certain levels ignore feat prereqs with bonus feats. Situational, he is likely to outdo other martials with his favored enemy bonus. Was there something in particular you wanted to compare?
It was a joke. Doesn't change my opinion that its bad game design to force someone into a role or to rely on each other(in fact it had nothing to do with it...) In combat healing is usually a bad thing anyway.Woah don't think you can ignore this gem you threw at us.
Actually, forcing players to rely on each other is awful design.
What? D&D has always been a team game where players need each other to succeed.
Do you have a problem with roles? Because without roles you just have multiple individuals playing together or you have multiple people with the same set of abilities that can compliment each other.
I'm sorry but table top role playing requires variation to be interesting. If you have variable powers the only way to avoid roles is to allow each set of options the ability to handle every situation. This creates groups of individuals who happen to be part of a team or classes that are essentially the same.
So you want no party roles, balance, and variation between characters?
You can't do that. That's not poor design...
Or do you just not want to play a game with teamwork in it?
So you want no party roles, balance, and variation between characters?
You can't do that. That's not poor design...Or do you just not want to play a game with teamwork in it?
I said forcing someone into a role is awful. How you define roll could vary greatly too. I didn't say remove them from the game, or to remove all the flavor and individual mechanics. That's a very different thing.
Teamwork can exist in a game you can play solo. The two can coexist.
I'm sorry how does a ranger compete with a barbar? It seems more than just fighters are put to shame.Rangers have 2 good saves, more skill points, and an animal companion. They've also got a selection of spells and can at certain levels ignore feat prereqs with bonus feats. Situational, he is likely to outdo other martials with his favored enemy bonus. Was there something in particular you wanted to compare?
FE is never likely to be more than a plus 4 and rare at that. And a barbar can always rage against any opponent. No, ranger is far behind in DPR without FE and still falls short with it.
A 1/2 level animal companion falls off in usefulness fast. Even a druids animal companion only remains relevant because of druid spells. Even then the main purpose of an animal companion is to help carry through low levels, no the high or mid levels we are talking about.
His saves will never be better than a barbars. He likely has higher dex, so that is his only advantage on a reflex save. Both will and fort are hands down worse. Superstitious closes most of the gap in reflex save and his rage + superstitious raise both fort and will far above the ranger.
We have already said feats are worse than rage powers or do you disagree?
Spells are nice, but limited and considering how much better rage powers are over feats they may even cover most of the usefulness spells provide.
So the ranger gets +2 points and maybe if he prepared the right spell some limited usefulness that rage powers probably cover.
Seems to me he's hands down worse (unless the ranger is the skillmonkey of the party, but you don't like roles right?)