|
3 with your school, and its intellect likely to go up to 19 with racial, and 20 at 4. Wizards at low levels don't have many spells, but grease and color spray are both lots of fun. Its at the higher levels when wizards have so many they can afford blowing them on whatever.
So at what level does this happen and what do they have.
This is a thread about assumptions. Testing assumptions is what the thread is about.
You left out the part where I said its a variable your trying to give a static number, and the part where I said the thread wasn't even about wizards being grappled. A faulty assumption by a developer would be "MAD is okay!" which... it isn't, unless you have a good fix for it. MAD sucks, its also not very intuitive imo.
|
|
You left out the part where I said its a variable your trying to give a static number, and the part where I said the thread wasn't even about wizards being grappled. A faulty assumption by a developer would be "MAD is okay!" which... it isn't, unless you have a good fix for it. MAD sucks, its also not very intuitive imo.
Your posted Wizard is more MAD than most monks I've seen.
Also, the game is made of variables. As one goes up, one goes down.
Which is the point.
Also, the game is made of variables. As one goes up, one goes down.
Which is the point.
I don't think you know what a variable is...
Edit: You also didn't talk about the MAD thing beyond telling me wizards are MAD.
|
|
Also, the game is made of variables. As one goes up, one goes down.
Which is the point.
I don't think you know what a variable is...
Edit: You also didn't talk about the MAD thing beyond telling me wizards are MAD.
And you clearly don't know what an assumption is.
You were doing so well when you produced numbers a second ago, but now that they don't show what you were arguing, it is like you are mad at me and the numbers.
This whole thread was about assumptions Developers make, and I think what has been demonstrated more clearly is that some players make a ton of assumptions without actually being able to show they are true.
Unlike the developers who actually playtested stuff.
20 point buy: Str 8, 14 dex, 15 con, 17 int, 11 wis, 7 cha. His wisdom is not tanked, and will is his strong save.
At the cost of being the ugliest and least charismatic human in Golarian? Urchins follow him around throwing things and laughing. He has the self-esteem of a wet dishrag. No adventuring party would allow him to join.
Cha =/= looks.
My low cha characters tend to be acerbic jerks everyone hates or soft-spoken/quiet and ignored by others.
And fortunately, D&D party-forming doesn't work like the modern job interview where your body language is more important than your GPA. If a D&D party has a wizard who wants to join, they would care more about his ability with magic than his personality, so long as he wasn't like... a murderous psychopath or something.
|
|
At the cost of being the ugliest and least charismatic human in Golarian? Urchins follow him around throwing things and laughing. He has the self-esteem of a wet dishrag. No adventuring party would allow him to join.
20 point buy: Str 8, 14 dex, 15 con, 17 int, 11 wis, 7 cha. His wisdom is not tanked, and will is his strong save.
More to the point, even with two dump stats, still squishy.
Cha =/= looks.
My low cha characters tend to be acerbic jerks everyone hates or soft-spoken/quiet and ignored by others.
My druid was one of those "raised by wolves" types. He has a good reason to have trouble talking to people and look unkempt. Doesn't mean he's not pretty. Not a huge fan of the charisma = looks gig.
7 charisma = power gamer = must be punished is another problem altogether I think. That said, there are 5 charisma dwarves out there who might be able to put them to shame.
Cha =/= looks.
My low cha characters tend to be acerbic jerks everyone hates or soft-spoken/quiet and ignored by others.
My druid was one of those "raised by wolves" types. He has a good reason to have trouble talking to people and look unkempt. Doesn't mean he's not pretty. Not a huge fan of the charisma = looks gig.
7 charisma = power gamer = must be punished is another problem altogether I think. That said, there are 5 charisma dwarves out there who might be able to put them to shame.
"Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance. "
"Raised by wolves" or loner types still have decent force of personality. In fact, pretty much any adventurer has to have decent force of personality.
I accept a 8 for (human) adventurers in CHA , but not a 7.
In any case... 20 point buy:
Str 7, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 19 (human +2), Wis 10, Cha 7
Is how I'd probably do it.
With favored class, has d6+4 hp per level, an average of 6.5 per level, 10 at first level. At level 5, would have 36 hp. Not good enough to tank for the party, but hardly squishy either. Level 5 Fighter with 14 con and using FC to make up for his anemic skill points would have 50 hp. If he used FC for hit points, 55.
Cha =/= looks.
My low cha characters tend to be acerbic jerks everyone hates or soft-spoken/quiet and ignored by others.
"Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance. "
Note "and appearance"
Acerbic jerks have force of personality. A lot of it.
And that's the problem. Too many players dump CHA and then make up a cool reason for having a low CHA, like being a loner. Low CHA is the antithesis of cool. They are unlikeable, and they don't like themselves either.
More to the point, even with two dump stats, still squishy.At the cost of being the ugliest and least charismatic human in Golarian? Urchins follow him around throwing things and laughing. He has the self-esteem of a wet dishrag. No adventuring party would allow him to join.
20 point buy: Str 8, 14 dex, 15 con, 17 int, 11 wis, 7 cha. His wisdom is not tanked, and will is his strong save.
The point was con as a second highest stat. Not that he wasn't squishy. He could easily put his racial into con, and then take toughness as his first feat. The dumps don't really matter because you can make up for the lost con with items and skill points and wizards aren't well known for hitting people in melee.
I accept a 8 for (human) adventurers in CHA , but not a 7.
Okay, that's your opinion. I accept people with 5 charisma for adventuring and don't punish them beyond mechanics. What you get out of being raised by wolves is going to vary between people. I don't tell everyone who's raised by wolves they come out the same way or they're wrong.
Edit: Are we still talking about faulty assumptions by developers?
I accept a 8 for (human) adventurers in CHA , but not a 7.
Perhaps you would prefer 3E's point buy system, then. Where you could not lower a stat below 8 before racial penalties, but also got more points to spend so you didn't need to min-max so much, nor did the system allow it to such an extent.
|
|
Cha =/= looks.
My low cha characters tend to be acerbic jerks everyone hates or soft-spoken/quiet and ignored by others.
My druid was one of those "raised by wolves" types. He has a good reason to have trouble talking to people and look unkempt. Doesn't mean he's not pretty. Not a huge fan of the charisma = looks gig.
7 charisma = power gamer = must be punished is another problem altogether I think. That said, there are 5 charisma dwarves out there who might be able to put them to shame.
7 means you have a significantly lower than average charisma. 8 means you have a lower than average Strength.
Having two stats below 10 means 1/3rd of your adventure is below average.
And even with that, you still only have 8 hit points, a 12 AC and barely mediocre saves.
Which is as it should be.
In any case... 20 point buy:
Str 7, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 19 (human +2), Wis 10, Cha 7
Is how I'd probably do it.
With favored class, has d6+4 hp per level, an average of 6.5 per level, 10 at first level. At level 5, would have 36 hp. Not good enough to tank for the party, but hardly squishy either. Level 5 Fighter with 14 con and using FC to make up for his anemic skill points would have 50 hp. If he used FC for hit points, 55.
If, even with a 20 pt buy, you have to dump two stats down to 7 to make your point- you have made the other guys point instead.
|
|
More to the point, even with two dump stats, still squishy.At the cost of being the ugliest and least charismatic human in Golarian? Urchins follow him around throwing things and laughing. He has the self-esteem of a wet dishrag. No adventuring party would allow him to join.
20 point buy: Str 8, 14 dex, 15 con, 17 int, 11 wis, 7 cha. His wisdom is not tanked, and will is his strong save.
The point was con as a second highest stat. Not that he wasn't squishy. He could easily put his racial into con, and then take toughness as his first feat. The dumps don't really matter because you can make up for the lost con with items and skill points and wizards aren't well known for hitting people in melee.
Uh...the whole point I made was that they were squishy. Showing they are squishy even when con is the 2nd highest stat only kinds of emphasizes my point.
So thanks I guess?
Having two stats below 10 means 1/3rd of your adventure is below average.
Wizards are well known for using strength and not having a ton of skill points? What does this have to do with faulty assumptions by developers? Why aren't we talking about things like MAD classes, full attacking, or the way they treat house rules as "fixes"?
7 means you have a significantly lower than average charisma.
And in fact, the lowest human charisma in all of Golarian*. Even a peasant, covered in pig dung and the worst case of acne in the lands, is more charismatic that you.
* unless your DM set up a NPC to have one lower.
|
|
If, even with a 20 pt buy, you have to dump two stats down to 7 to make your point- you have made the other guys point instead.In any case... 20 point buy:
Str 7, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 19 (human +2), Wis 10, Cha 7
Is how I'd probably do it.
With favored class, has d6+4 hp per level, an average of 6.5 per level, 10 at first level. At level 5, would have 36 hp. Not good enough to tank for the party, but hardly squishy either. Level 5 Fighter with 14 con and using FC to make up for his anemic skill points would have 50 hp. If he used FC for hit points, 55.
Well...they actually didn't even make the point.
The wizard has 9 hit points, a 12 AC 23 hours a day and all saves of +2.
Expectation for level is 15 hit points, 12 ac (got that), Low save of 1 high of 4.
On the upside he has available 1st level spell to cast other than Mage Armor. That will get him through a 4 encounter day.
The wizard doesn't need Str or Cha. Point buy allows you to put a 7 into your stats if you want, whether you like it or not.
I personally prefer 3E's point buy setup, as I mentioned before. But your houserules about point buy don't change that the wizard I posted is perfectly legit by PF's rules.
The wizard has 9 hit points, a 12 AC 23 hours a day and all saves of +2.
My first level wizard has 10 hp. 1d6+4, maxed. A Fighter with Con 14 would have 12 or 13 depending upon favored class choice. Also, 13 AC when mage armor is not up; Haramaki. Higher levels quickly improve as Mage Armor lasts longer and I can afford a mithral buckler.
|
|
Having two stats below 10 means 1/3rd of your adventure is below average.Wizards are well known for using strength and not having a ton of skill points? What does this have to do with faulty assumptions by developers? Why aren't we talking about things like MAD classes, full attacking, or the way they treat house rules as "fixes"?
It is the faulty assumptions you are making at this point, although if you would like to use numbers to test assumptions you think the devs make, that would be cool with me.
It is the faulty assumptions you are making at this point, although if you would like to use numbers to test assumptions you think the devs make, that would be cool with me.Having two stats below 10 means 1/3rd of your adventure is below average.Wizards are well known for using strength and not having a ton of skill points? What does this have to do with faulty assumptions by developers? Why aren't we talking about things like MAD classes, full attacking, or the way they treat house rules as "fixes"?
Ciretose, you purposefully insulted me. How do you think that adds to the conversation? Talking about how level 1 wizards are squishier than fighters accomplishes what?
|
|
Ciretose, you purposefully insulted me. How do you think that adds to the conversation? Talking about how level 1 wizards are squishier than fighters accomplishes what?It is the faulty assumptions you are making at this point, although if you would like to use numbers to test assumptions you think the devs make, that would be cool with me.Having two stats below 10 means 1/3rd of your adventure is below average.Wizards are well known for using strength and not having a ton of skill points? What does this have to do with faulty assumptions by developers? Why aren't we talking about things like MAD classes, full attacking, or the way they treat house rules as "fixes"?
This thread is, purportedly, about faulty assumptions developers make.
I have not seen people willing to take the time to show how the assumptions are actually faulty. Rather lots and lots of people saying that what they assume to be true is more valid than whatever assumptions they are piling on the developers.
I would love to talk about different levels, or specifics, but this is all you are giving me. I'm working with whatever numbers you give me, but getting numbers seems to be like pulling teeth.
|
|
The wizard doesn't need Str or Cha. Point buy allows you to put a 7 into your stats if you want, whether you like it or not.
I personally prefer 3E's point buy setup, as I mentioned before. But your houserules about point buy don't change that the wizard I posted is perfectly legit by PF's rules.
The wizard has 9 hit points, a 12 AC 23 hours a day and all saves of +2.My first level wizard has 10 hp. 1d6+4, maxed. A Fighter with Con 14 would have 12 or 13 depending upon favored class choice. Also, 13 AC when mage armor is not up; Haramaki. Higher levels quickly improve as Mage Armor lasts longer and I can afford a mithral buckler.
Can I see your first level wizard, or is it secret?
|
More to the point, even with two dump stats, still squishy.At the cost of being the ugliest and least charismatic human in Golarian? Urchins follow him around throwing things and laughing. He has the self-esteem of a wet dishrag. No adventuring party would allow him to join.
20 point buy: Str 8, 14 dex, 15 con, 17 int, 11 wis, 7 cha. His wisdom is not tanked, and will is his strong save.The point was con as a second highest stat. Not that he wasn't squishy. He could easily put his racial into con, and then take toughness as his first feat. The dumps don't really matter because you can make up for the lost con with items and skill points and wizards aren't well known for hitting people in melee.
I accept a 8 for (human) adventurers in CHA , but not a 7.Okay, that's your opinion. I accept people with 5 charisma for adventuring and don't punish them beyond mechanics. What you get out of being raised by wolves is going to vary between people. I don't tell everyone who's raised by wolves they come out the same way or they're wrong.
Edit: Are we still talking about faulty assumptions by developers?
I wouldn't tell anybody that had ACTUALLY raised by wolves (the word you're looking for is "feral") that they were wrong. They tend to go for your throat.
As far you your last edit goes... I wish we were still talking about developers faulty assumptions, but it looks more like a "duel-to-the-death" over how squishy wizards are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have not seen people willing to take the time to show how the assumptions are actually faulty. Rather lots and lots of people saying that what they assume to be true is more valid than whatever assumptions they are piling on the developers.
I would love to talk about different levels, or specifics, but this is all you are giving me. I'm working with whatever numbers you give me, but getting numbers seems to be like pulling teeth.
Not everyone wants to play by your forum rules. Shocking I know. Telling everyone they're wrong or don't matter if they don't do it your way, is just rude.
It gets worse that the demands are ridiculous. If people show numbers its "GOAL POST!" "SCHRODINGER!" and when we talk about wizards its a level one wizard. Not a higher level one with loads of tricks, a level one. It met all he criteria Ciretose gave, but somehow its still wrong. A wizard with okay constitution as a second stat who didn't dump dex and wisdom. That was the criteria. "Well that has bad charisma and strength, so it doesn't count." "your Wizard is as MAD as a monks!" So why should people bother playing by those rules? Beyond of course, Ciretose thinking Ciretose is right. If you want a big thread running on rules you set, make your own maybe?
As far you your last edit goes... I wish we were still talking about developers faulty assumptions, but it looks more like a "duel-to-the-death" over how squishy wizards are.
Yeah... Can we go back to faulty assumptions? Wizards weren't a part of that. Every time I try to list another faulty assumption it gets glossed over. "MAD sucks" turned into "Wizards are MAD!"
|
|
As far you your last edit goes... I wish we were still talking about developers faulty assumptions,
We are talking about faulty assumptions. I'm asking people to actually prove what they assume is true.
If the OP can say the Devs are making assumptions that are wrong, why is it wrong to ask for evidence?
|
|
Yeah... Can we go back to faulty assumptions? Wizards weren't a part of that. Every time I try to list another faulty assumption it gets glossed over. "MAD sucks" turned into "Wizards are MAD!"
I don't think wizards are MAD. But you posted a Wizard that was MAD. It had to take two dump stats.
I'm not sure why you are getting upset over what you posted.
Also, feel free to post a wizard, or any other class of any level you like.
Dump stats don't make you mad. Having room for them makes you less MAD.
What does this have to do with faulty developers? What does a wizards squishiness have to do with it?
|
|
Multi-ability Dependent. As it, you need to put points in multiple abilities to be successful.I'm tired of trying to decipher acronyms.
Someone please define MAD.
Thank you.
There are very few classes that I can think of that aren't MAD, but Fighters and Wizards are definitely the 2 with the best potential to be SANE (Seldom Able to Negotiate Effectively).
My first level wizard has 10 hp. 1d6+4, maxed. A Fighter with Con 14 would have 12 or 13 depending upon favored class choice. Also, 13 AC when mage armor is not up; Haramaki. Higher levels quickly improve as Mage Armor lasts longer and I can afford a mithral buckler.Can I see your first level wizard, or is it secret?
Why do I need to produce a full build to prove every single thing I post? It's not my fault you don't think of things like Haramaki or that mithral makes bucklers pain free. I gave a stat array to show a non-squishy wizard, that's all that really matters because we were talking about hp totals, and other than making +Con the next stat booster to buy after int (seems obvious to me; you bother to make it your 2nd best stat, it's got 2nd priority for enhancement), hp isn't really changing. You could take Toughness, but... I wouldn't bother unless it was a core game, too many other good feats.
Let's go with Teleport (Conjuror) for specialty, if it matters.
|
|
My first level wizard has 10 hp. 1d6+4, maxed. A Fighter with Con 14 would have 12 or 13 depending upon favored class choice. Also, 13 AC when mage armor is not up; Haramaki. Higher levels quickly improve as Mage Armor lasts longer and I can afford a mithral buckler.Can I see your first level wizard, or is it secret?Why do I need to produce a full build to prove every single thing I post? It's not my fault you don't think of things like Haramaki or that mithral makes bucklers pain free. I gave a stat array to show a non-squishy wizard, that's all that really matters because we were talking about hp totals, and other than making +Con the next stat booster to buy after int (seems obvious to me; you bother to make it your 2nd best stat, it's got 2nd priority for enhancement), hp isn't really changing. You could take Toughness, but... I wouldn't bother unless it was a core game, too many other good feats.
Let's go with Teleport (Conjuror) for specialty, if it matters.
You said you could do something, asking for evidence that you can do it is a problem?
Interesting. Particularly in an thread about assumptions...
|
|
Dump stats don't make you mad. Having room for them makes you less MAD.
What does this have to do with faulty developers? What does a wizards squishiness have to do with it?
You dumped two stats to get to a point where you were still well below expectations.
Either you need those stats or you don't. Do you need them or not?
What "expectations"? All was even trying to prove was that the wizard isn't much "squishier" than the actual tank classes.
If my wizard is below "expectations," how bad off is a level 1 human monk with Str 16 (human +2) Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 7, exactly?
With favored class to hp, he has 11 hp and an AC of 14. It's nearly identical, except the monk's actually expected to fight in melee combat and isn't getting to raise his AC with mage armor like the wizard can.
Also, even with your two 7's, you still only get one bonus spell if you take mage armor as one of then, and you still are below expectations for level.
Oh noes, only one bonus spell? What are we going to doa bout that! Without bonus spells the world is ended. Woe is us! Speaking of which, you might want to compare it to higher levels. 4th level wizard can afford a mithral light shield, silken armor, and other nifty things. He'll also bump that 19 to 20 and have 2 bonus spells at first, 1 bonus second, and every spell level after is at least 2 more spells. He also can cast mirror image to get D4+1 Mirror images as a standard action and that's really nifty, of course if he can get another form of concealment in that's even better. His AC is could easily be 14(17 with mage armor), with toughness he has an average of 8 hp per level(more than a fighter with 10 con!) Of course, its a losing race to be squishy without spells. Having prep time, or having a way out is pretty nice.
No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?
What I mean in my case, is that my magus has a secondary weapon... a str adjusted bow. She doesn't have any feat support with it, but at 7th level, she still did most of her damage in one PFS module with it, because of situation.
Can I ask what this situation was? That's sort of ridiculous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?
It's something to pedantically criticize someone about. Which is probably why he wants full builds for every single argument or statement.
|
|
What "expectations"? All was even trying to prove was that the wizard isn't much "squishier" than the actual tank classes.
If my wizard is below "expectations," how bad off is a level 1 human monk with Str 16 (human +2) Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 7, exactly?
With favored class to hp, he has 11 hp and an AC of 14. It's nearly identical, except the monk's actually expected to fight in melee combat and isn't getting to raise his AC with mage armor like the wizard can.
I actually set goalposts. Crazy I know. Bestiary expectations by level.
So your Wizard who dumped two stats compared to a monk who dumped one stat...how fair...
How about I take your concept and beat it without any dump stats.
16 Str (+2 human), 12 Dex, 12 Con, 10 Int, 16 Wis, 10 Cha
AC 14, 9 Hit Points. Toughness as human feat and favored class brings me to 13, Monk Feat Dodge brings me to 15. So -2 to hit points vs Bestiary, but +3 to AC over bestiary.
Saves are +3, +3 + 5, better than the bestiary. And a +3 to hit and damage (+2/+2 flurry)
With no dump stats.
If I dump Charisma like you did, I can get the con or Dex up higher. But I don't need to.
|
|
Also, even with your two 7's, you still only get one bonus spell if you take mage armor as one of then, and you still are below expectations for level.Oh noes, only one bonus spell? What are we going to doa bout that! Without bonus spells the world is ended. Woe is us! Speaking of which, you might want to compare it to higher levels. 4th level wizard can afford a mithral light shield, silken armor, and other nifty things. He'll also bump that 19 to 20 and have 2 bonus spells at first, 1 bonus second, and every spell level after is at least 2 more spells. He also can cast mirror image to get D4+1 Mirror images as a standard action and that's really nifty, of course if he can get another form of concealment in that's even better. His AC is could easily be 14(17 with mage armor), with toughness he has an average of 8 hp per level(more than a fighter with 10 con!) Of course, its a losing race to be squishy without spells. Having prep time, or having a way out is pretty nice.
No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?
Great. Let's see your 4th level wizard.
CR 4 Expectations are 40 HP, 17 AC, Good Save 7, bad save 3. Mage armor will be on 4 hours a day, or are you casting it multiple times?
No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?It's something to pedantically criticize someone about. Which is probably why he wants full builds for every single argument or statement.
Really I don't get it, posting full builds is more time consuming and varies between people. I've always thought asking for it was a defense in case something he says might be wrong, because he can just pick at every thing in a build and ignore the point or if you don't post a build he can just yell "BUILD!". Of course if by some miracle I reach all expectations, I don't expect an admittance but to be blown off by something like "Well not everyone is like that" which is sort of the problem with showing builds in the first place...
Of course, its likely like every other time I post, any of the important parts get snipped out for something that can be picked on. The paragraph about wizards wasn't the point, the part asking about what it has to do with faulty assumptions by developers was... Being pedantic was just a form of humor.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?It's something to pedantically criticize someone about. Which is probably why he wants full builds for every single argument or statement.
Do the two of you really not get that since you both are in a thread accusing the devs of making faulty assumptions, you are now being called out for not being willing to test if your own assumptions are faulty.
Do you really not understand that? I mean, honestly, that connection is not clear to you?
|
|
Really I don't get it, posting full builds is more time consuming and varies between people.No, really though, what does this have to do with faulty assumptions by devs?It's something to pedantically criticize someone about. Which is probably why he wants full builds for every single argument or statement.
Where as just telling the Devs they are making faulty assumptions based on...well...assumptions you personally are making about the game is incredibly useful and productive...
Also, hello, the fact that the builds vary between people is the entire point of why you post the build.
Also, hello, the fact that the builds vary between people is the entire point of why you post the build.
If they vary they don't prove a thing about static numbers. You could build a really good ubercharger in 3.5, didn't mean every fighter with a dip into barbar was a DPR machine. Your demanding static things, where their aren't.
I think talking about things and fixes is actually more progressive than trying to find Ciretose's stamp of approval. Talking about things like Developers being okay with MAD, or the way Full Attacking and feat chains are handled. Most of all, talking about fixes, which we left behind a few pages ago I think.