| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading a lot of posts on these boards i've noticed a large number of players who seen to be worried that there characters arn't doing emough DPR
And i can't help but wonder if you want to do lots of damage play a fighter class or a combat mage not a rouge or healer type
Or worry a little less about how much damage you do and more how your character can help the PARTY in combat and stop looking for glory kills
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or worry a little less about how much damage you do and more how your character can help the PARTY in combat and stop looking for glory kills
I'd be wary of this kind of thinking. There is no wrongbadfun in roleplaying. If someone has more fun chasing "glory kills" then so be it. For some folks that's more entertaining, for others, being the God Wizard that enables others to easily get the "glory kill" is where their own enjoyment lies. To each their own.
Also, there are reasons for wanting to know DPR other than chasing "glory kills." Some players just want to know what their own class is capable of, or how they should expect their class to stack up against other classes in a similar role.
If you can balance all three of those play styles you will be fine. Typically the table ends up seeing 4 different "jobs" for people to have. One of them is to handle DPR in combat, one of them is to handle random crap out of combat, one is to heal, and one is MAGIC at things. Typically, if your character can do one of those things well, and one of the other things well enough to where they can count on your character to handle that kind of situation (paladin maxing Diplomacy etc.) then you should be fine.
After reading a lot of posts on these boards i've noticed a large number of players who seen to be worried that there characters arn't doing emough DPR
And i can't help but wonder if you want to do lots of damage play a fighter class or a combat mage not a rouge or healer type
There are two reasons for this. First, many if not most of the people concerned about DPR are expecting to be playing a major combat role; DPR is an appropriate way to figure out if your TWF ranger can really hold his own as the party tank (hint: probably not). So, you're right, if you want to do lots of damage, there are some apparently viable "martial" builds that aren't really very good.
The second thing is that many campaigns -- and most of PFS, I'm given to understand -- are combat heavy, meaning that everyone is expected to be able to contribute to hit point attrition. A healing-specialized cleric isn't a very effective fighter, and in fact, isn't a very effective cleric given how the healing system works in PF; a healing-specialized druid is even worse.
I'm not saying that wanting to be a DPR machine is wrongbadfun i just think if that's what floats your boat build an apporate character to do that and not complain when your skill monkey can't keep up with the tank in the damage stakes
<Shrug.> Lots of people like to play off-tanks. They're more flexible and still can contribute in a straight-up slug fest.
I used the example of a ranger upthread. Rangers actually make good off-tank/skill monkey combinations, but if you want to be an off-tank, you should know that TWF rangers don't work, that archers do but only if there's a good front line in front of them, and so forth.
We have a player who likes to build DPR machines. As a group we don't care. He gets a huge kick out of doing massive damage, frequently doing far more damage than is required to put his opponent down. He revels in the damage roll more than the actual success of his attack. In other words, he is happier if he gets 35 damage even if 15 would have been more than enough to take his opponent out of combat.
It's cool.
I tend to build characters that do enough damage to get the job done and spend the rest of my resources on other things that give the character more options. We both get the job done, we both enjoy it, and everybody is happy.
If you can balance all three of those play styles you will be fine. Typically the table ends up seeing 4 different "jobs" for people to have. One of them is to handle DPR in combat, one of them is to handle random crap out of combat, one is to heal, and one is MAGIC at things. Typically, if your character can do one of those things well, and one of the other things well enough to where they can count on your character to handle that kind of situation (paladin maxing Diplomacy etc.) then you should be fine.
Pretty much. When people claim they are not doing enough DPR, it's usually because they want to be effective in combat, and to do that you have to be able to hit things - all other tactics are unreliable in their way, so if you don't hit things or...you don't hit things.
...build an apporate character...Define appropriate.
20 levels of a fullcasting class.
I'm not saying that wanting to be a DPR machine is wrongbadfun i just think if that's what floats your boat build an apporate character to do that and not complain when your skill monkey can't keep up with the tank in the damage stakes
The problem is that "Skill Monkey" is only a relevant role early in the game. By midlevel, spells have killed skills and taken their stuff (except Perception, which everyone can afford to have).
The real issue is that non-magical classes can only contribute DPR to a party (since skills become irrelevant), so DPR has to be a serious consideration when making a "skill monkey."
Your point of "why not just play a fighting type or a mage" is an excellent summation of the problem: there is no reason for "skill classes" to exist. Play a Bard, Inquisitor, Alchemist, or Ranger and you'll be much happier.
I'm not saying that wanting to be a DPR machine is wrongbadfun i just think if that's what floats your boat build an apporate character to do that and not complain when your skill monkey can't keep up with the tank in the damage stakesThe problem is that "Skill Monkey" is only a relevant role early in the game. By midlevel, spells have killed skills and taken their stuff (except Perception, which everyone can afford to have).
The real issue is that non-magical classes can only contribute DPR to a party (since skills become irrelevant), so DPR has to be a serious consideration when making a "skill monkey."
Your point of "why not just play a fighting type or a mage" is an excellent summation of the problem: there is no reason for "skill classes" to exist. Play a Bard, Inquisitor, Alchemist, or Ranger and you'll be much happier.
Nah perception is useless because spells can give blind-sight and true seeing.
Spells also do damage, making martial DPR useless.
Spells can tank with summons, making tanking usless.
Druid and clerics are inferior casters than wizards.
Therefore, any character aside from a wizard is useless.
You "win" an encounter by dealing more damage than the other guy. It's just a natural facet of the game. If you won by a series of diplomacy checks that made someone like you and be your friend then that would be the focus of many power gamer character builds.
There is something addicting about finding that perfect build to maximize damage potential. I find myself scouring spell lists for combos, archetypes for synergies and feats for exploits. It's a fun thought experiment.
I then make NPC's that do these things. Once in awhile I'll have a player that wants to mimic the build, but for the most part they tend to agree when something is OP and shouldn't be brought to the table anymore.
Best part of being a DM. I get to play everything :)
Nah perception is useless because spells can give blind-sight and true seeing.
Blindsight is never as long a range as regular vision, and true seeing doesn't stop mundane stealth. But yeah, even Perception isn't as important, ultimately.
Spells also do damage, making martial DPR useless.
Spells can tank with summons, making tanking usless.
Well, yeah, pretty much, but if you're not going to have spells, you better do DPR, since it's the only thing you do better than spellcasters (and only if they are unbuffed).
Druid and clerics are inferior casters than wizards.
This, I totally disagree with. Druids and Clerics are equally good spellcasters to wizards--possibly better, even, since they know their entire list without needing to worry about spellbooks.
I actually think the power level difference between a prepared caster and a spontaneous caster is pretty small to nonexistant, so every caster with 9th level spells is pretty much equal in my mind. Summoner is close behind that, since their list gets higher-than-6th spells on their 6 level list. Then all the 6 level casters, especially Bard. Then the 4 level casters. Then, in the "I better be good at DPR because I can't do anything else ghetto" are the classes without spells. Barbarian is better than the rest because of all the supernatural powers, but only slightly.
Well the strongest caster is always going to be a Half-Elf Oracle with Eldritch Heritage (Arcane), with Half-Elf Sorcerer and Conjurer/Divination Wizard standing above the rest. But ya no matter what your goal in Pathfinder is (unless your goal is not cast spells), the best way to do it is almost certainly going to be take 20 levels of a fullcasting class. Want to do skills? Bard/Witch/Wizard have your back. Damage? Metamagic stacking will get you there. Debuffs? Spells and metamagic. Horde of Celestial Superbeings? Summons and Planar Ally/Binding. Really magic is your one stop shop for doing anything that isn't "not using magic".
And there you have it. People who perfer to play with magic feel that every other option is mechanically inferior wrongbadfun.
And there you have it. People who perfer to play with magic feel that every other option is mechanically inferior wrongbadfun.
...generalist fallacy much?
And there you have it. People who perfer to play with magic feel that every other option is mechanically inferior wrongbadfun.
Actually, I dislike playing with magic and am constantly frustrated that I have to use it in 3rd edition D&D to be valuable to the party.
If I had a choice, I'd always pick a non-magical character--and ideally a non-magical bard like the 4e Warlord. In AD&D, I always played Fighters or Rangers. In 4e, I have only played Warlords. In Next, I loved the Fighter for the first few playtests (but was not a fan of expanding their unique expertise dice to rogues and since lost touch with the playtest). I've always liked Han better than Luke, and would rather be a Bounty Hunter than a Jedi or Sith Lord.
But my preferences don't work in 3rd, which is one reason I don't put Pathfinder/D&D 3rd in my top 10 favorite RPGs.
Yeah spell casters do kick butt until they run out of spells then there just a chew toy
And funky badger you need to follow your own advice
We have a player who likes to build DPR machines. As a group we don't care. He gets a huge kick out of doing massive damage, frequently doing far more damage than is required to put his opponent down. He revels in the damage roll more than the actual success of his attack. In other words, he is happier if he gets 35 damage even if 15 would have been more than enough to take his opponent out of combat.
It's cool.
I tend to build characters that do enough damage to get the job done and spend the rest of my resources on other things that give the character more options. We both get the job done, we both enjoy it, and everybody is happy.
I'll admit, I'm this guy. It's why I like Barbarians so much, and like to use Earthbreakers and other high crit MULTIPLIER weapons than one with a high RANGE.
I like being able to smack a dude a few times for 317 damage (265 of it static, no less), even though he only has like 100 HP left. Gives me a good feeling inside.
Yeah spell casters for kick butt until they run out of spells then there just a chew toy
And funky badger you need to follow your own advice
No, because in practical terms, your team doesn't keep going when you're out of spells.
Do the humans leave the dwarf in the dust when they travel overland? No, they slow down to the speed of the slowest guy.
Does a modern soldier rush into the enemy's camp with an empty gun clip? No, they stop and reload.
You don't push on when members of your party are empty unless you enjoy going into battle without a full team.
Well, that, plus HP run out faster than Spells by mid level.
And there you have it. People who perfer to play with magic feel that every other option is mechanically inferior wrongbadfun....generalist fallacy much?
More so than, "...in the 'I better be good at DPR because I can't do anything else ghetto' are the classes without spells."?
And there's a number of way to stockpile spells by converting them into permanent minions like Animate Dead, by converting them to long duration/permanent duration effects like Shrink item/Explosive Runes, by having a casting time that is hours/per levels and extending it around CL 16 (casting it 32 hours ago for great justice). Some spells just straight up hold more spells for you like Spellstaff. And this is before we even touch on wands/scrolls/SLA's off summoned monsters. Spellcasting just does anything that isn't "Does not cast spells" better. Its not a matter of badwrongfun, its just how the game mechanics work. There is no badwrongfun argument here, just a game mechanics one.
You don't always get a choice if the bad guys keep coming and won't give you enough time to rest and recover and you can't get away then there's a good chance that you will run out especially at low to mid levels
You don't always get a choice if the bad guys keep coming and won't give you enough time to rest and recover and you can't get away then there's a good chance that you will run out especially at low to mid levels
This is highly unlikely to be the case, and martial characters won't fare much better in those scenarios either (they, if not rely on, highly benefit from bufing and support from casters to get through fights, especially in the mid-high levels).
It's a grueling scenario for everybody involved.
Not to say it can't make for a good session, just that it's rare (mostly because it's much less frustrating and un-fun when used sparingly).
No, because in practical terms, your team doesn't keep going when you're out of spells.Yeah spell casters for kick butt until they run out of spells then there just a chew toy
And funky badger you need to follow your own advice
True... However, your party isn't guaranteed to have the 'fifteen minute work day'. When time permits, sure, why not. However, if you've got a GM that runs intelligent enemies, they'll notice you doing the "I'M GOING NOVA!... Crap I'm out. Rest plz!", and send raids while you whittle away the remaining 12+ hours of the 24 hour day, and especially during the 8 while you're trying to regain spells.
Personally, I hate that mentality. It slows the game down something horrific. My last group did that constantly, and I (as the inquisitor) was sitting there going "Can we move on with the #$(%ing story yet?" every time our sorceress blasted through all of her spells in ONE combat. Maybe two if our barbarian managed to get to them before she did... Then what happens? We rest... Rinse, lather, repeat, and more than a few of us are sitting here bored out of our freaking minds.
I'm not saying it's badwrongfun, I just really, really don't like it myself.
That said, I like my characters to be generalists, with a bit more focus in one specific area. Weather it's combat, skills, or magicks, they get the primary things needed for them to fit what they do, then branch out... this probably comes from games way back in my formative gaming years where the parties were getting separated and had to deal wit a bunch of things on their own, a GM style which I still replicate to this day.
So, in effect for on topic... I'm one of the few people I know that aren't obsessed with uber-DPR. I just like enough DPR to actually be effective in combat.
I think your missing all the ways I posted that you can stockpile spells. Also at high levels (and by high I mean around Level 9) it is very difficult to stop the PCs from simply teleporting away when their resources are low. You can make quests time dependent, but having absolutely everything be time sensitive is going to get old very quick. Also, I have no idea how one could blast through 15 or so spells in one combat (at around 5th level you should have at least that many), it sounds like the result of less the effective battle strategies. Most fights last approximately 4 rounds in Pathfinder and a caster hardly needs to contribute one spell a round to ensure victory. The other problem is that casters are the ultimate generalists. If you want to do something, there is probably an app... er spell for that. Open Locked things? Knock. Stealth? Invisibility. Predict the future? Divination is an entire school. Make stuff? Masterwork Transformation/Fabricate. and so on...
Yep but if your mage is covering all these other roles in the party thats reducing the number of spells he has got for combat
And in all the games i play combat normally last for a good deal longer than 4 rounds unless it a random encounter
Just as a side does anyone else find combat is over so quick
True on stock piling spells, and quests being time dependent. However, if done correctly and in moderate amounts (and for particularly entertaining reasons), it doesn't get old for a while.
In any case, all I can go off are my own experiences with the few play groups I've had. And, no Tony, our combats are not over so quickly... When she's not playing a sorcerer anyways...
Personally, I'm very curious as to why encounters are getting torn through in four rounds. It sounds like there aren't enough enemies being tossed around... Then again, I'm more of a fan of the band of heroes taking on a lot of minions before getting to the final boss.
Honestly, you never see or read about characters in film/stories/games fighting a measly three or four mooks before fighting the big bad. Or at least I haven't anyways, and I devour books and movies daily. Four or five upgraded mooks or lieutenants sure, but only if they're almost as tough as the main characters. Usually it's a bunch of mooks, and a handful of lieutenants, then the dragon (Trope name for 2nd in command) and some of his more powered minions, then FINALLY they get to the big bad.
Maybe I like a more cinematic game, but eh, that's just my two copper.
I think your missing all the ways I posted that you can stockpile spells. Also at high levels (and by high I mean around Level 9) it is very difficult to stop the PCs from simply teleporting away when their resources are low.
The counter to this is having their foes teleport away when their resources are low.
You can make quests time dependent, but having absolutely everything be time sensitive is going to get old very quick.
The easiest way to make things time-sensitive is to provide consequences to the PC's actions. And consequences never get old.
Also, I have no idea how one could blast through 15 or so spells in one combat (at around 5th level you should have at least that many), it sounds like the result of less the effective battle strategies.
That's the thing with spells, though. As you get your higher-level spells, your lower-level ones are continually getting weaker. Sure, Magic Missile may do an additional d4 or two, but it's no Scorching Ray or Fireball, etc.
The other problem is that casters are the ultimate generalists. If you want to do something, there is probably an app... er spell for that. Open Locked things? Knock. Stealth? Invisibility. Predict the future? Divination is an entire school. Make stuff? Masterwork Transformation/Fabricate. and so on...
On paper this looks great. In play both the sorcerer and wizard have to work really, really hard to be everything at all times. It usually involves using up a lot of their time and wealth on scrolls, wands, etc. And even then, the downsides of those instruments means that a fair amount of the time, while the class has the potential to solve a given problem, this particular wizard will have not happened to have memorized the right spell, or that specific sorcerer will have chosen a different 3rd-level spell, etc. etc.
Just as a side does anyone else find combat is over so quick
To me, four rounds sounds like a long combat. Most fights I've seen are over in two rounds, or if not actually over, effectively over and we're just picking off strays that are no threat for the 3rd and maybe fourth round.
I've never seen a solo boss last more than 2 rounds, for example, though I've only rarely seen solo bosses.
Do I like this? No, not really. Is it part of the game? Yes. Do I like the game? Kind of.
I think part of it is how one designs the solo bosses. A lot of people design for offense and build glass cannons, or in extreme cases, glass particle accelerators. I find that bosses are more fun if you design them as cockroaches, for defense, and you let their mooks and minions take care of the offense bits. This forces the players to take out the m&m's first, which in time allows the boss to prep his world-shattering counter -- and also monologue to his heart's content.
That, of course, is also the issue with the DPR formulation; a DPR-optimized character tends to be an eggshell armed with a hammer. There are few things as pathetic as a greatsword-armed fighter who can't get off any attacks because he's trip-locked by a pair of m&m's.
I think part of it is how one designs the solo bosses. A lot of people design for offense and build glass cannons, or in extreme cases, glass particle accelerators. I find that bosses are more fun if you design them as cockroaches, for defense, and you let their mooks and minions take care of the offense bits. This forces the players to take out the m&m's first, which in time allows the boss to prep his world-shattering counter -- and also monologue to his heart's content.
I dunno about "cockroach" but I like bosses that tend to do a lot of hit and running (if solo), using poison.
The look on my Barbarian player's face when a heavily modified version of Vorkstag (Carrion Crown) dropped him from 14 Con to 6.
Priceless.
That, of course, is also the issue with the DPR formulation; a DPR-optimized character tends to be an eggshell armed with a hammer. There are few things as pathetic as a greatsword-armed fighter who can't get off any attacks because he's trip-locked by a pair of m&m's.
I'd think the 2H user would have better defenses considering 2H weapon damage optimizing consists of "Have high Str. Have Power Attack.".
My Barbarian has more HP (even higher effective HP, because DR 6/-) and the best saves of anyone in the group, and the CMB/CMD you'd expect from a Barbarian.
Low-ish AC (24 Non-Raging/26 Raging at level 12, by far the lowest of the party who'll be anywhere near the front lines), but hey. No build's perfect, and he can take the hits like nobody's bidness at least.
I dunno about "cockroach" but I like bosses that tend to do a lot of hit and running (if solo), using poison.
Glorious monk master race and his immunity to poison!
Speaking of things DPR doesn't measure.
I dunno about "cockroach" but I like bosses that tend to do a lot of hit and running (if solo), using poison.
Glorious monk master race and his immunity to poison!
Speaking of things DPR doesn't measure.
This boss shows up at level 4 or 5.
=)
I dunno about "cockroach" but I like bosses that tend to do a lot of hit and running (if solo), using poison.
Glorious monk master race and his immunity to poison!
Speaking of things DPR doesn't measure.This boss shows up at level 4 or 5.
=)
Then the monk will astounded his foes with slowfall and high jump!
Actually High Jump WOULD have been decently useful there, since the guy's tactics (which I didn't significantly change) had him Spider Climbing everywhere.
Actually High Jump WOULD have been decently useful there, since the guy's tactics (which I didn't significantly change) had him Spider Climbing everywhere.
HAHA! Glorious Monk master race! With his ability to jump slightly higher.
Of course, trading it out for Scorching Ray still would've been better. =)
You realize that counts as defeating them and you'll get experience for them (possibly twice) now right?
What if your player characters just never go back to the Dread Chasm of Harhyus and instead decide to explore the Keeper's Sunken Grove? What "consequences" are there for this?
No, but spells like Snowball, Grease, and yes even Magic Missile will continue to grow in strength with caster level. Sure they might cap while some of your other spells get higher, but the ability to deny an enemy their turn thanks to Ear-Piercing Scream or Snowball, or dealing them enough damage with a magic missile, or making their movement hell is plenty useful in most fights.
Umm... You wouldn't have one spellcaster do *everything*. You'd have a party of spellcasters that does one thing very well and then generalizes in everything else. For example -
Big Stupid Fighter - Druid - it'll outdamage the fighter, pounce and still cast buffs before breakfast, with some very useful skills to round it out.
See? Party role filled with a caster that can do that role better.
You can build for high DPR all you want, if you are rolling ones and twos on your 'to hit' roll it won't help you much. That may be the true advantage of the spell caster: There are spells that don't require a 'to hit roll' and there are spells that require multiple enemies to make saves. If you can catch multiple enemies an the effect, you should at least get one of them. If not more.
I agree that a cleverly played spell caster is a very dangerous opponent but players need to remember that anything they can make character wise can also be made by the D.M
Then the monk will astounded his foes with slowfall and high jump!
I like it!
Trampoline Style
Your amazing acrobatics dumbfound your enemies.
Pre-requisites: Slow Fall and High Jump class features, Acrobatics 3 ranks.
Benefit: By bouncing up and down you may make an Acrobatics check against the 10 + targets hit dice + targets Wisdom modifier. If successful the target stops and stares in astonishment for their next action, and are treated as falt-footed.
Trampoline Bounce
You launch yourself at your foes like a missile.
Pre-requisites: Slow Fall and High Jump class features, Acrobatics 6 ranks, Improved Unarmed Strike, Trampoline Style.
Benefit: On a charge action you can make an Acrobatics check instead of your attack roll for an unarmed strike if you have the room to leap on your opponent. If successful, your attack deals damage as if you were one size larger than you are.
Trampoline Ricochet
You hurtle between foes like a bullet, delivering powerful strikes on any and all.
Pre-requisites: Slow Fall, High Jump, and Flurry of Blows class features, Acrobatics 9 ranks, Improved Unarmed Strike, Trampoline Style, Trampoline Bounce.
Benefit: You can make a flurry-of-blows attack with your unarmed strike, you can and must move five to ten feet between each target, inflicting unarmed damage as if you were a size larger, up to the limit of your number of attacks and total movement. You must make Acrobatics checks to avoid attacks of opportunity for each target you attack and to move through their square (you do not have to 'stop' in an empty square to make your attack). If you fail one of these checks, your attack halts at that point, though you may use the rest of your flurry of blows attacks normally.