I think the main problem is that the game designers were convinced that feats shouldn't be equal to or greater than class features.
|
I really hope this is sarcasmAbsolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.A friend of mine when we debate about this, has a interesting sentence that, I think, define it perfectly.
He takes the PAthfinder Core Book. He opens it by the spells section, and show the number of pages that are spells, and compare it to the number of pages that are rules. And he says this: "this first half of the book is for everybody. Character creation, skills, feats, rules about combat, leveling... everybody has access to those. This other half of the book (*points to the spells*), is for spellcasters only. It's impossible to have balance between casters and non casters, when half of the game is exclusively for casters"
I think it's a good definition.
Why? ALL my martial have UMD for a damn good reason. I can have my own fly option pretty early with scrolls of fly instead of using double the gold on potions (Because you REALL should have your own after level 5...and it's a must have by 7). I can use a lot of the personal buffs on myself (fighters with all those polymorph spells are quite awesome I assure you...also shield and lead blades rock the low levels). I can have most of the must have utility spells on hand for pretty cheap. Yes you have to burn feats and a trait to do this so your early levels you won't do as much damage as you don't have power attack. Oh no, you only brought down the critter to -6 HP instead of -15 with your min damage...oh darn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Absolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.
I still don't understand this nonsensical argument.
"Martial classes can get an inferior form of spellcasting if they invest lots of skill points into a Cha based skill (a stat most martials have no other use for) and spend loads of their WBL they also have to spend on a magic weapon (something casters have no need for) and magic armor (something a lot of casters CAN'T use) to keep up among other magic items pretty much required by the devs."
|
|
Please feel free to eat into your wealth by level, us casters will be over here casting Wish for free, chilling on our private demiplane, with our horde of servant simulacrums that we get without dipping into our bottom line. (Oh we can also UMD all that stuff to.)Absolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.A friend of mine when we debate about this, has a interesting sentence that, I think, define it perfectly.
He takes the PAthfinder Core Book. He opens it by the spells section, and show the number of pages that are spells, and compare it to the number of pages that are rules. And he says this: "this first half of the book is for everybody. Character creation, skills, feats, rules about combat, leveling... everybody has access to those. This other half of the book (*points to the spells*), is for spellcasters only. It's impossible to have balance between casters and non casters, when half of the game is exclusively for casters"
I think it's a good definition.
You DO realize that WBL is not including consumables USED right?!? The GM is to account for anything that gets used in adjusting the treasure given out. In PFS, this could be an issue, but you have PP purchases that can cover the cost of this quite easily until pretty much the end of your PFS career. In an AP run as written with no modification, this can also be an issue I suppose...but a GM who can't adjust for somebody using consumables is one who can't adjust for craft item feats so these games tend to become doomed as soon as anyone realized what craft item feats does. So yeah, your penny pinching wizard is not suppose to actually be ahead in core assumption...and so from that PoV, UMD is a perfectly valid way to close the gap.
|
|
Absolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.
I still don't understand this nonsensical argument.
"Martial classes can get an inferior form of spellcasting if they invest lots of skill points into a Cha based skill (a stat most martials have no other use for) and spend loads of their WBL they also have to spend on a magic weapon (something casters have no need for) and magic armor (something a lot of casters CAN'T use) to keep up among other magic items pretty much required by the devs."
By a lot, you mean 1 point per level and two feats and 1 trait. With that set up, you can have a charisma of 5 and still be pretty decent at getting magic items off. And by LOADS of WBL, you mean the roughly 25% of it at any given point are SUPPOSE TO BE COMSUMABLES. Casters need rods (which aren't cheap), clerics most certainly do use weapons and armor, Druids DO use armor and their armor is fraking expensive. So basically with UMD and some scroll, instead of getting that extra +1 to your weapon and being completely beholden to your casters as you have spent every single GP you have on non consumable items, you can take care of yourself...which is closing the gap. Is it completely equal? No, but SHOULD IT BE? Does a wizard have it as easy as the barbarian at level 1? Do we even WANT that and go with the 4E design paradigm? I say HELL no to that. There is already a way for me to make fighters that doesn't completely suck monkey balls to casters at higher levels. It's the UMD skill and consumables. I play a LOT in high level games and there is a damn good reason why all my martials have massive UMD.
My GMs look at WBL and wipe their ass with it.
We'll go a whole game finding 100g per quest and then suddenly that one bluff check I made at lvl one has turned me into a deity worshiped by millions with infinite money.
*Aside: What would you do with a solar system of lizard people worshiping you a the sewer God in a Sci-fi setting using pathfinder rules (just flavored text to be sci-fi)? Let's say you are LG too.
|
|
My GMs look at WBL and wipe their ass with it.
We'll go a whole game finding 100g per quest and then suddenly that one bluff check I made at lvl one has turned me into a deity worshiped by millions with infinite money.
*Aside: What would you do with a solar system of lizard people worshiping you a the sewer God in a Sci-fi setting using pathfinder rules (just flavored text to be sci-fi)? Let's say you are LG too.
And this matters to a general discussion HOW?!? Just because you GM is ignoring WBL means SQUAT. The core assumption is that you DO follow WBL. If your local game does not...well the advice for your YOUR GAME will be different, but that does not mean we apply that to EVERYONE ELSE. Sheesh, I could have sworn this board was FINALLY broken of this stupid egotistical notion that my game = EVERYONE ELSE. It's not. Your not that important as to override everyone else.
And this matters to a general discussion HOW?!? Just because you GM is ignoring WBL means SQUAT. The core assumption is that you DO follow WBL. If your local game does not...well the advice for your YOUR GAME will be different, but that does not mean we apply that to EVERYONE ELSE. Sheesh, I could have sworn this board was FINALLY broken of this stupid egotistical notion that my game = EVERYONE ELSE. It's not. Your not that important as to override everyone else.My GMs look at WBL and wipe their ass with it.
We'll go a whole game finding 100g per quest and then suddenly that one bluff check I made at lvl one has turned me into a deity worshiped by millions with infinite money.
*Aside: What would you do with a solar system of lizard people worshiping you a the sewer God in a Sci-fi setting using pathfinder rules (just flavored text to be sci-fi)? Let's say you are LG too.
Please show me where in the wealth by level section it says that used consumables should not be counted against wealth by level. (Please note I am asking about Pathfinder, not Pathfinder Society.)
WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
My experience from my last couple of APs is that the martial characters slaughter the enemies while the casters buff them and hold back their good spells in case of future emergencies. Then the martials heal up with wands. Then the caster dies due to a failed fortitude save / low hit poitns.
On a semi-related note, APs ignore WBL. They provide approximate WBL in loot, but they don't replace your consumed consumables.
|
|
Please show me where in the wealth by level section it says that used consumables should not be counted against wealth by level. (Please note I am asking about Pathfinder, not Pathfinder Society.)And this matters to a general discussion HOW?!? Just because you GM is ignoring WBL means SQUAT. The core assumption is that you DO follow WBL. If your local game does not...well the advice for your YOUR GAME will be different, but that does not mean we apply that to EVERYONE ELSE. Sheesh, I could have sworn this board was FINALLY broken of this stupid egotistical notion that my game = EVERYONE ELSE. It's not. Your not that important as to override everyone else.My GMs look at WBL and wipe their ass with it.
We'll go a whole game finding 100g per quest and then suddenly that one bluff check I made at lvl one has turned me into a deity worshiped by millions with infinite money.
*Aside: What would you do with a solar system of lizard people worshiping you a the sewer God in a Sci-fi setting using pathfinder rules (just flavored text to be sci-fi)? Let's say you are LG too.
Actually PFS and AP run as written are the two cases where your consumables are NOT replaced (it's just that PFS has PP to cover it and AP run in home games can and should honestly be modified for player actions). Otherwise the general assumption is you follow WBL. Any consumables you use is replaced because the WBL is how much you should have at any given level...NOT HOW MUCH YOU HAVE EARNED. Yes it is a guideline...but it is a guideline that the game kinda assumes you use. If you do not use said guidelines and the game breaks...who's fault is that? Yours or the game? Because I am leaning towards you...I know, silly to think that a person has to take responsibility for their own choices and not blame the guidelines that they chose not to follow.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why? ALL my martial have UMD for a damn good reason. I can have my own fly option pretty early with scrolls of fly instead of using double the gold on potions (Because you REALL should have your own after level 5...and it's a must have by 7). I can use a lot of the personal buffs on myself (fighters with all those polymorph spells are quite awesome I assure you...also shield and lead blades rock the low levels). I can have most of the must have utility spells on hand for pretty cheap. Yes you have to burn feats and a trait to do this so your early levels you won't do as much damage as you don't have power attack. Oh no, you only brought down the critter to -6 HP instead of -15 with your min damage...oh darn.I really hope this is sarcasmAbsolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.A friend of mine when we debate about this, has a interesting sentence that, I think, define it perfectly.
He takes the PAthfinder Core Book. He opens it by the spells section, and show the number of pages that are spells, and compare it to the number of pages that are rules. And he says this: "this first half of the book is for everybody. Character creation, skills, feats, rules about combat, leveling... everybody has access to those. This other half of the book (*points to the spells*), is for spellcasters only. It's impossible to have balance between casters and non casters, when half of the game is exclusively for casters"
I think it's a good definition.
so I complain about My Beowulf-inspired character not being on par with your Harry Potter-inspired character and your solution is "make Beowulf buy a Wand"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And NOT following WBL kinda dis-balances...well EVERYTHING...so once again SO WHAT?!? Your really just digging a grave here for yourself.WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
It's a roleplaying game. PCs should get wealth based on their actions not how many level 1 hobos they slaughtered to power level.
|
|
It's a roleplaying game. PCs should get wealth based on their actions not how many level 1 hobos they slaughtered to power level.And NOT following WBL kinda dis-balances...well EVERYTHING...so once again SO WHAT?!? Your really just digging a grave here for yourself.WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
Key word...GAME. Games have balance. In this case, we are talking about WBL guidelines being one of those balance. You refuse to follow it and says the game is broken...so is it the game or YOU NOT FOLLOWING THE FRAKING GUIDELINE?!? I'm gonna say it's YOU.
|
|
so I complain about My Beowulf-inspired character not being on par with your Harry Potter-inspired character and your solution is "make Beowulf buy a Wand"
And that is completely irrespective of the discussion at hand...which is to balance martials and casters more. I pointed out that there already is a way to do this in the system when run with the guidelines in tact. The fact that you do not like the option does not mean there isn't an option. The fact that Marthkus does not want to follow said guideline is also irrelevant as those guidelines are assumed to be followed. This is a discussion about martials and casters in general...NOT YOUR FRAKING HOME GAME.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was wondering if anyone had any ideas about making martial characters that can work as well as full casters. I know the devs said that there is no difference and anyone who disagrees with that is someone with an agenda. My agenda has nothing to do with that, I just want a balanced game. (There are whole other posts about how much fighters suck more than casters and martials, so can we keep those posts to this post please).
I'm not sure where this attitude comes from. I've played PFS up to level 12 and no martial PC has ever "sucked", as a matter of fact they carried every table. And I've had several tables of martials have success and tables of spellcasters fail. Has nothing to do with the class, it has a lot to do with the player.
Sure, I'd like to see some spells nerfed so they play better in combat, but that's easily fixed with some house rules.
Martials are fine. Fighters could maybe use a little utility help, monks need to be completely redesigned, rogues need their talents to not suck, but besides that everything is fine. Having said that, they're still very playable.
|
|
Actually PFS and AP run as written are the two cases where your consumables are NOT replaced (it's just that PFS has PP to cover it and AP run in home games can and should honestly be modified for player actions). Otherwise the general assumption is you follow WBL. Any consumables you use is replaced because the WBL is how much you should have at any given level...NOT HOW MUCH YOU HAVE EARNED. Yes it is a guideline...but it is a guideline that the game kinda assumes you use. If you do not use said guidelines and the game breaks...who's fault is that? Yours or the game? Because I am leaning towards you...I know, silly to think that a person has to take responsibility for their own choices and not blame the guidelines that they chose not to follow.Please show me where in the wealth by level section it says that used consumables should not be counted against wealth by level. (Please note I am asking about Pathfinder, not Pathfinder Society.)
And this matters to a general discussion HOW?!? Just because you GM is ignoring WBL means SQUAT. The core assumption is that you DO follow WBL.
This is a terrible argument
Reallly, does somebody here argue witht their DM when his character do not have the exact money the chart says?
Does somebody here would use all his consumables careless cause the DM HAVE/MUST give them more money so they do not fall behind the WBL? Otherwise the M is a bad DM? really?
So...now we assume that the Player is either a jerk or STUPID (because you use your consumables when you NEED THEM NOT JUST BECAUSE)?!? That's the counter argument. Tell me mechanically why this does not work IF the game runs under the core assumption of WBL...because where this does NOT WORK is when your outside of that and that isn't the system's fault at that point, but YOURS. Lets get that fraking clear RIGHT NOW. The whole it does not work because I said so does not matter...not one bit.
I still would like you to quote me the "Consumables don't count against your WBL even though you spend your WBL on them" clause in the rules.
Also, I don't know about where you come from, but to me 25% of my total resources pumped into making myself a 4th rate version of what other classes get for free is a large investment.
Is it completely equal? No, but SHOULD IT BE?
Yes. That is what balance IS. Or it should be as close to equal as possible.
Does a wizard have it as easy as the barbarian at level 1?
OBJECTION!!!
Relevance?
Do we even WANT that and go with the 4E design paradigm? I say HELL no to that.
Have my canned response to this garbage.
Key word...GAME. Games have balance.
Make up your mind, please.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Key word...GAME. Games have balance. In this case, we are talking about WBL guidelines being one of those balance. You refuse to follow it and says the game is broken...so is it the game or YOU NOT FOLLOWING THE FRAKING GUIDELINE?!? I'm gonna say it's YOU.It's a roleplaying game. PCs should get wealth based on their actions not how many level 1 hobos they slaughtered to power level.And NOT following WBL kinda dis-balances...well EVERYTHING...so once again SO WHAT?!? Your really just digging a grave here for yourself.WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
If I wanted all these meta restrictions I would play WOW or 4th ed.
|
|
Key word...GAME. Games have balance.Make up your mind, please.
Balance does not mean EQUAL balance...but sigh, what ever I give up. You all seem to be utterly unwilling to accept core assumptions even remotely and just using your own personal games as experience. Fine if we are gonna just use personal experience from here on out, I have played casters and martials with and with out UMD at high levels. I LIKE high levels and play and GM a lot at those. Martials with UMD and wealth dedicated to consumables have ALWAYS done better then those without. The gap between the martials with UMD vs a caster is MUCH smaller then a martial without UMD vs a caster. Since personal experience is all that matters, I win...right? /s
I have a method that has worked and worked well...if you all wanna ignore that and continue to B&M that there is no option...have at it.
|
|
If I wanted all these meta restrictions I would play WOW or 4th ed.Key word...GAME. Games have balance. In this case, we are talking about WBL guidelines being one of those balance. You refuse to follow it and says the game is broken...so is it the game or YOU NOT FOLLOWING THE FRAKING GUIDELINE?!? I'm gonna say it's YOU.It's a roleplaying game. PCs should get wealth based on their actions not how many level 1 hobos they slaughtered to power level.And NOT following WBL kinda dis-balances...well EVERYTHING...so once again SO WHAT?!? Your really just digging a grave here for yourself.WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
If you don't want even the basics...then why are you playing a GAME at all?!? Go play story time is that is what you want. See I can do strawman arguments too...
|
The only reason casters ever seem better than martial characters is because GMs, and PFS mods, forget to add the elemental that already hampers caster's performance. A limited number of spells per day. If you create situations of urgency where the casters can not simply sleep to get their spells back, and force them to march on, then you will have your balance.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
In Pathfinder games I've played, I have not experienced martials being "terrible," nor have I experienced casters being "overpowered." I am not sure what it is about my and my friends' play styles that makes this so, but as I've not experienced it, it's hard to comment on the OP's request.
Yes, I've heard these rumors on the Internet for a long time that wizards are gods and fighters can't do anything, but never have seen it happen. Nope, never. So I assume that those rumors on the Internet are as valuable as most rumors on the Internet: about the same value as a handful of dust.
Heck, we were in an all arcane casters game, and several times a few players begged for a fighter NPC to help protect us squishy casters, especially as we ran out of resources. This is obviously a very unusual set up, and not to show how a typical game or class should feel in terms of balance, but if an arcane caster is so powerful, then an all-caster party seems like it would be the most powerful thing ever that no one would ever feel like they'd need help from another class. So something seems to be missing there.
My general experience is that the abilities between the two are simply different. I'm not going to go into deep analysis because it's all been discussed before, but basically, martials (and spell-less utility classes) are consistently useful (but save for some moments of glory, seldom AWESOME), and casters have intermittent bursts of total AWESOME, but less consistent contributions toward the general progress of the party.
Based on years of playing the game, in my experience and opinion, neither a martial or a caster will "win the game" but together, working in tandem at a team, they become something always amazing.
If you like to be consistently useful and don't mind having few crowning moments of glory, play a martial.
If you like to have certain vulnerabilities and finite resources as a trade off for the occasional ability to warp the very foundations of reality to your will, play a caster.
My suggestion is if you are dissatisfied playing the class you are, try something else for awhile.
While certainly ALL the classes in my experience could deal with a little tweaking one way or another, if you're generally feeling like a class or certain kind of class is "terrible," it may actually less be that it is objectively badly designed, and more that it simply is not a good match for you and does not compliment your personal strengths. The challenge to playing these games often is in finding the character, no matter whether it's a monk or a synthesist summoner, that does.
Now of course, you can respond to this thread and tell me why I am "wrong" -- that there is of course a horrible disparity. Maybe there is in your games. I've yet to see good, in-game, real-life examples of repeated experiences in a game of a martial being "terrible" and a caster being "overpowered" that wasn't to do with poor tactics on the part of the player or GM, or simply one player being better at tactics than another. However, if you've had those experiences, I'm sorry I cannot help you. But for the record, telling me I'm wrong will not in fact create that disparity in our home games just because you say it's so. Just in case that's not clear.
Limited Spells per day? Ya that works well... for about 3 levels. Urgent situations are a non-issue for the 5th Level Specialist Wizard with a 20 INT who is packing a healthy 3 Third level spells, 4 2nd Level spells, and a comfy 6 1st Level spells. Are you having 13 encounters a day? Keep in mind continues to become less and less of an issue. Once your Cleric/Oracle hits 5th/6th Level Nap Stack lets you cut down rest to 2 hours. (Once a week but still) Furthermore if every adventure you present to the Wizard is "time sensitive" then the Wizard will probably go find non-time sensitive adventuring to do... (And really... why does the Wizard care if the Princess is in another Castle?)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In Pathfinder games I've played, I have not experienced martials being "terrible," nor have I experienced casters being "overpowered." I am not sure what it is about my and my friends' play styles that makes this so, but as I've not experienced it, it's hard to comment on the OP's request.
Yes, I've heard these rumors on the Internet for a long time that wizards are gods and fighters can't do anything, but never have seen it happen. Nope, never. So I assume that those rumors on the Internet are as valuable as most rumors on the Internet: about the same value as a handful of dust.
Heck, we were in an all arcane casters game, and several times a few players begged for a fighter NPC to help protect us squishy casters, especially as we ran out of resources. This is obviously a very unusual set up, and not to show how a typical game or class should feel in terms of balance, but if an arcane caster is so powerful, then an all-caster party seems like it would be the most powerful thing ever that no one would ever feel like they'd need help from another class. So something seems to be missing there.
My general experience is that the abilities between the two are simply different. I'm not going to go into deep analysis because it's all been discussed before, but basically, martials (and spell-less utility classes) are consistently useful (but save for some moments of glory, seldom AWESOME), and casters have intermittent bursts of total AWESOME, but less consistent contributions toward the general progress of the party.
Based on years of playing the game, in my experience and opinion, neither a martial or a caster will "win the game" but together, working in tandem at a team, they become something always amazing.
If you like to be consistently useful and don't mind having few crowning moments of glory, play a martial.
If you like to have certain vulnerabilities and finite resources as a trade off for the occasional ability to warp the very foundations of reality to your will, play a caster.
My...
It is highly unlikely you will ever see it, despite it very much existing. I'll borrow my explanation from another thread here:
1. System Mastery - Most people don't have the system mastery to play an all powerful wizard. I mean ya its cool to have infinite Simulacrums without impacting your wealth by level, but be honest how many people that play do you think know how to do that?
2. Gentleman's Agreement - Once we realize how limited the number of players with the system mastery to play an all power wizard is, we have to take into account Gentleman's Agreements. Sure I could sit down at my friends game and play a Wizard that obviates everything he prepared, but you know what'd that make me? A jerk. Most players who have the requisite system mastery realize this and thus opt not to show up to a game with a character who can say "A God am I" and be completely correct.
3. Level of Game - Let me preface this by being perfectly clear about something... low level wizards are still very strong. But most players do not play games at the highest of levels where the Wizard reaches the zenith of his arbitrary power. If Wizards at the tables you play are only making it to 12th level or so... your missing 8 levels of quadratic power.
4. Houserules - When people talk about the all powerful Wizard, their talking about the kind of Wizard that you can play with the rules that are in the books. That being said, please note that just because a GM can say "Sorry Anzyr, even though the rules let you make infinite Simulacrums of yourself, in my game you can't." does not make Wizard any weaker. The very fact that you need to houserule that (or preferably get a Gentlemen's Agreement) indicates that the class is so strong that you need to change the rules to accommodate it.
5. Fun - I had originally intended to place this higher on the list, but its subjective so I ended up throwing it here. The last reason you don't see all-powerful wizards is because quite frankly its not much fun to play one. Half the fun of the game is knowing that the outcome of a fight depends on the falling of a few dice and well... all powerful wizards don't play dice. Playing the game with the certainty that you will always win gets pretty boring as anyone who has played a game on "god mode" can tell you.
Please note that just because you are unlikely to see an overpowered Wizard due to the above reasons in no way makes the Wizard less powerful. You can use your smartphone as just a phone, but that doesn't mean you can't one day decide to use all the features.
Limited Spells per day? Ya that works well... for about 3 levels. Urgent situations are a non-issue for the 5th Level Specialist Wizard with a 20 INT who is packing a healthy 3 Third level spells, 4 2nd Level spells, and a comfy 6 1st Level spells. Are you having 13 encounters a day? Keep in mind continues to become less and less of an issue. Once your Cleric/Oracle hits 5th/6th Level Nap Stack lets you cut down rest to 2 hours. (Once a week but still) Furthermore if every adventure you present to the Wizard is "time sensitive" then the Wizard will probably go find non-time sensitive adventuring to do... (And really... why does the Wizard care if the Princess is in another Castle?)How much of those spells are from selfprotection and utility? are all those spells encounter ending so the caster overshadow he martial 4-6 encounter per day?
I'd say Colorspray is pretty encounter ending, a well place application of Haste usually does to. Summon Monster III has solid options and a smart wizard can start prepping and making explosive runes in his off time. Shrink Item is another good to way to prepare free damage in your off time (make a bonfire and shrink it, apply to the threatening area). These latter two options go a long way to highlighting something few people really get about casters. You are not just dealing with their spells per day, you are dealing with their spells per day, plus their spells prepped in advance, plus their durable minions (Animate Dead/Simulacrum), etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
so I complain about My Beowulf-inspired character not being on par with your Harry Potter-inspired character and your solution is "make Beowulf buy a Wand"And that is completely irrespective of the discussion at hand...which is to balance martials and casters more. I pointed out that there already is a way to do this in the system when run with the guidelines in tact. The fact that you do not like the option does not mean there isn't an option. The fact that Marthkus does not want to follow said guideline is also irrelevant as those guidelines are assumed to be followed. This is a discussion about martials and casters in general...NOT YOUR FRAKING HOME GAME.
Magic is superior to martial prowess. "Then use magic" doesn't solve that disparity at all.
That's akin to someone saying "monks are underpowered" and some other answering "no they aren't. I have a monk 1/druid 14 which rocks with wildshape, pet and spells"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The classes are fine the way they are. If you want all the classes to be the same then play 4E. Yes magic is powerful, but so is being power crited by a fighter. Remember spell slots run out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The classes are fine the way they are. If you want all the classes to be the same then play 4E. Yes magic is powerful, but so is being power crited by a fighter. Remember spell slots run out.
See my above post about this "balance = homogenous" nonsense.
Spell Slots really do not (again around level 5) and that's before you factor in the effects the Wizard has gained from spell slots from yesterday, and the day before that, and the week before that... and so on. Honestly at high levels, needing to use your spells slots is less of a necessity and more of "Eh what else am I gonna do with it?" thing.
The classes are fine the way they are. If you want all the classes to be the same then play 4E. Yes magic is powerful, but so is being power crited by a fighter. Remember spell slots run out.See my above post about this "balance = homogenous" nonsense.
You say that, but this thread is full of people wanting to gut the caster until he is as mechanically boring as a fighter vs reworking feats because "that's a lot of work"
The classes are fine the way they are.
I keep hearing that since 3.0. In every version of the edition (3.5, pathfinder), they nerf some of tge broken spells (3.0 haste, old polymorph, etc) and the same people who said the previous version was ok, start to say the new version is ok. It's obvious then that they were wrong when they said 3.0 haste was fine, or that 3.5 polymorph was fine
|
|
Limited Spells per day? Ya that works well... for about 3 levels. Urgent situations are a non-issue for the 5th Level Specialist Wizard with a 20 INT who is packing a healthy 3 Third level spells, 4 2nd Level spells, and a comfy 6 1st Level spells. Are you having 13 encounters a day? Keep in mind continues to become less and less of an issue. Once your Cleric/Oracle hits 5th/6th Level Nap Stack lets you cut down rest to 2 hours. (Once a week but still) Furthermore if every adventure you present to the Wizard is "time sensitive" then the Wizard will probably go find non-time sensitive adventuring to do... (And really... why does the Wizard care if the Princess is in another Castle?)
I did not say time Sensitive I said urgent. In my campaigns you are actually going out for a reason, not just some motley crew of adventures doing what ever you'd like, there is actually a purpose and a story.
Maybe the wizard cares because the princess is his mother. And he's not just a wizard his name is Hank and he actually has real emotions and not just a series of mechanics on a piece of paper.
Even at 5th lvl with 3 whole 3rd level spells! WoW! You not going to be able to outshine every other character on every other level. And it is not like magical items are Wizard exclusive.
Another aspect of magic most people do not account for- Material Components. Start weighing down that Wizard with all the BS he's really supposed to be carrying. Sure eventually you can get bags to help carry it, now take that move and AoO getting it out of your bag.
Start enforcing rules that already exist and Martials do not seem that bad.
Based on years of playing the game, in my experience and opinion, neither a martial or a caster will "win the game" but together, working in tandem at a team, they become something always amazing
Well, a team that mix squishy casters and tough melees is going to be better than one with only squishies. That doesn't need *martials* are needed, though. A party of summoner syntgesist, archer inquisitor, archeologist bard, wizard and cleri is much better than a party of monk, archer fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric.
The only reason casters ever seem better than martial characters is because GMs, and PFS mods, forget to add the elemental that already hampers caster's performance. A limited number of spells per day. If you create situations of urgency where the casters can not simply sleep to get their spells back, and force them to march on, then you will have your balance.
Most parties agree to sleep if the casters are about out of spells, and right without buffs generally hurts the melee types more, not the casters. That is why they don't argue when the caster says "I am out of spells".
If the combat is easy enough that buffs are not need that just means the casters sit out for a fight or two, which is not really balancing the casters, but really just making the player using the caster watch combat.
Another aspect of magic most people do not account for- Material Components. Start weighing down that Wizard with all the BS he's really supposed to be carrying. Sure eventually you can get bags to help carry it, now take that move and AoO getting it out of your bag.
Start enforcing rules that already exist and Martials do not seem that bad.
I do enforce rules. However, you should check the rules for the piece of gear called "pouch of components"
Nimon:
I'm very curious... what exactly is the difference between time sensitive and urgent? Does the wizard get to rest more in time sensitive cases, if so this is even less of an issue...
Furthermore, you appear to be only considering the Wizards 3rd level spells. Color Spray is level 1 and if the Wizard desired he could prep 6 of them. You also don't take into account spells that the Wizard cast before hand like Explosive Runes and Shrink Item.
You seem confused as to how much as Wizard has to carry. A spell component pouch has all the materials a wizard needs and weighs a whopping... 2 lbs. Even if your the paranoid sort (like me) Carrying a Back-up pouch for your back-up pouch, for your back-up pouch. Your still only edging on 8 lbs. Do you really not have at least 18lbs of carrying capacity? Furthermore, Wizards don't take AoO's for using their material component pouches...
Maybe if you learned the rules you would realize martials are that bad?
Until level 15 or higher the I did not ever see this issue, but even then a lot of that was due to the abilities of the monsters/npc's, not the abilities of the casters that were being used.
As an example, if I have a player hit with reverse gravity or maze, and they are not ready for it they may be out of the entire fight. A caster might can still cast if hit with reverse gravity, and if mazed he has a better chance of having some planar traveling spell. Now of course plane shift or a similar spell is not what I call an "every day" spell so I am not saying it will be ready(prepared/known). I am only saying his chances of getting out of the maze are better.
Well, a team that mix squishy casters and tough melees is going to be better than one with only squishies. That doesn't need *martials* are needed, though. A party of summoner syntgesist, archer inquisitor, archeologist bard, wizard and cleri is much better than a party of monk, archer fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric.Personally I would take a party of 2-3 Oracle/Cleric/Druid and 2-3 Wizard/Sorcerer over one containing any form of Monk, Rogue or Fighter any day.
I would take on a partial caster as well, at least they are able to operate in multiple parts of the game at once far easier than the pure martial characters.
right now, at 18th level, the wizard I'm DMing has two bloody skeleto storm giants riding fast zombie wyrms (copper and black). They can add an eidolon, a simulacrum of said dragons, and some planar-binded cornugons riding the simulacrums. So yes, they got the melee part pretty well covered even without martials :)
Absolutely NOT true. ANYONE can use the second half of the book with UMD. There is already a way to make martials less terrible...it's the UMD skill and scrolls.
So the solution is to make him into a third-rate caster? Why not just give everyone spells, then? (or spell-equivalents, which was 4E's solution, and too many people - especially people who preferred casters - didn't like that).
This proposal, which others also have made, reads to me as: "Too bad you rolled a martial, sucks to be you. But since you did, you can take your piddling skill points and put them into UMD (which is, yes, one of the two best skills in the game) and be my backup/scroll caddy."
That's not why people play martials; if they wanted to cast spells, they'd play a caster (which I do more often than I play a martial), or a half-caster.
That said, since I'm dipping into this thread: I do agree with Marthkus (my "hated nemesis" in another thread)* that any "fix" to martials shouldn't be a "nerf" to casters. At least not a nerf just so martials can be relatively better. There are spells that need fixing, for their own sake, and other tweeks maybe need to be made, for their own sake (broken is broken, regardless of class or the affect on other classes - things that are broken in the game as a whole can and should be fixed). Fixes for Fighters or Rogues or Monks or Cavaliers should be fixes for those classes, not nerfings of other classes so that they'll all be in the dogpile together. Same with other martials (Barbs & Rangers are less hurting, but may also need help).
Also: yes, UMD is a great skill and I recommend it to everyone. However, it is not a "fix to fighters" as a class, or fix to any other class, as a class, or fix to people who want to play a non-caster. As a "fix of a class" recommendation, it's just a recommendation to roll a caster or turn every class into a caster.
*Casts extraction from thread and poofs away to another thread*
Now of course plane shift or a similar spell is not what I call an "every day" spell so I am not saying it will be ready(prepared/known). I am only saying his chances of getting out of the maze are better.Really!
I consider Plane Shift to be one of the most powerful offensive spells in the game and pretty much always take it with anyone capable of casting it. As an Oracle I would be torn over taking it as my first Level 5 spell known (Breath of Life might be the other if the group whinged at me).
Of course in a home game you might not want to cast it on anything that wears lots of its loot but loads of things don't. Just browse the Bestiary and look at some of the Will saves on those critters. Even the mighty Tarrasque only managed a 14.
Oh, its a Conjuration to so affected by Spell Focus if you have gone down the summoning route of feats.
Really, Plane Shift is just amazing.
I understand, but plane shifting is not something I can see being useful on a daily basis so I would only prep it as needed. I understand this is all a matter of preference though, even though Plane Shift has offensive capability.
PS:I try to avoid to many SoL's and any touch spells I can. This one is both.
I was speaking of it as wizard/sorc spell. As a cleric I would not be so worried about entering melee. :)
I agree that nerfing Magic is not a fix.
But I understand how attractive it is. After certain levels I feel like Pathfinder is very super-powered for relatively low key campaigns. Last session me and three other lvl 5 players faced off a CR9 Daemon. A thing from another plane of existence that breathes disease and death. That should have been an epic battle, a desperate struggle against something clearly outmatching us. But my lvl 5 Magus' opening gambit was to deal 10d6 to it in one shot and cripple it for a minute. Then I made my second attack.
But to be fair, in a game I'm GMing the players have trouble against things that are a CR lower than their APL so mileage may vary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
WBL is a guideline not a rule.
Following WBL can be dis-balancing for classes like the rogue who should/need more money than the rest of the party.
Your post makes the WBL Fairy sad.
The WBL Fairy knows who has been naughty (people who convert their loot into permanent gear, so she gives them only coal in their next encounters) and who has been nice (people who convert their loot into consumables, and consume them. The WBL fairy puts extra presents in their next encounters).
The WBL Fairy is 4 realz!