I will admit, Slumber is a powerful ability. It is part of the 5 point combo that pretty much wins (Evil Eye into Cackle Into Misfortune into Cackle into Quickened Ill Omen into Slumber into cackle to pretty much auto Suck whatever you want).
What my main problem is the people claiming that Slumber, by itself is game-warping and rediculously overpowered. Without the aid of Evil Eye, Cackle, and Misfortune, it is a decently strong ability. The unholy trifecta of Cackle, Evil Eye, and Misfortune push the S.o.S. ability (or any sort of S.o.S. ability/spell for that matter) into the realm of sheer power.
I think I see where we're misunderstanding each other. I'm not necessarily saying that slumber is "game warping," although I have personally experienced a few very disappointing episodes that it caused. I don't know how we could ever define what "game warping" means, which is why I don't like to have that conversation. What I'm saying is that it is overpowered, and I feel that is more or less unambiguously provable through side by side comparisons to similar abilities that are available to other characters. Do you see the distinction I'm making?
It's funny because there really just seem to be two irreconcilable viewpoints about this kind of matter. I am interested purely in the "math" if you will, divorced of its actual applications, and you are interested only in the applications divorced of the "math." It's interesting...
That is understandable :). I like too look at things as they are truly applied since, as I have learned from more than a few first hand experiences, the "mathmatically strongest" sometimes tend to not prove thus in actual play (my poor poor monk... I will forever remember you)
On a side note to everyone else... I am a she, not a he xD.
I like too look at things as they are truly applied since, as I have learned from more than a few first hand experiences, the "mathmatically strongest" sometimes tend to not prove thus in actual play
This bears consideration, I will admit. I guess from where I'm sitting, the job of cleaning up Pathfinder is a Herculean endeavor. So my point is, why don't we at least start by getting rid of the mathematically, provably OP stuff first, since that's a heck of a lot less involved than getting rid of the random stuff that turns out to have untoward applications in play. As for that stuff, we'll get there...
I like too look at things as they are truly applied since, as I have learned from more than a few first hand experiences, the "mathmatically strongest" sometimes tend to not prove thus in actual playThis bears consideration, I will admit. I guess from where I'm sitting, the job of cleaning up Pathfinder is a Herculean endeavor. So my point is, why don't we at least start by getting rid of the mathematically, provably OP stuff first, since that's a heck of a lot less involved than getting rid of the random stuff that turns out to have untoward applications in play. As for that stuff, we'll get there...
The problem I have seen with the math is that I have very rarely seen Slumber being dropped without the other three hexes being dropped first. The only time I have seen Slumber being dropped by itself is when the witch knows that they pretty much can't fail (pretty much against something with a non-existant will save... like giants).
So I am forced to look at is as not Slumber but *insert generic ability with a DC equivalent to highest spell level*. At which point I don't see much of an issue with it because it does not have very many ways to boost the DC like a spell does, and as a player of BFC casters and Blasties (I do love me some fire...er...acidworks?), I know that the "base DC" is just not good enough. Even with something like reflex saves (which overwhelmingly are teh "weak save" on monsters), you boost up your DC to sheer rediculousness. Because 65% chance is unacceptable. So with that in mind, I don't see where I can be any more abusable than say Phantasimal Killer or Weird on a Sorcerer built SPEFICIALLY for illusions. In fact, it looks more decent because it does not have the stupid high retarded saving throw that the spell would have until MUCH later.
Am I allowed to use a lesser rod of quicken to cast ill omen followed by the Slumber Hex? How does that combo work?
And that is: Slumber is the most powerful single thing in the game, considering its power relative to its ease of acquisition and use. If I have "moved the goalpost" at all, it is only this far: I am after discussion and consideration ready to admit that, at best, slumber is, perhaps, tied with a very small handful of other truly ridiculous things in the game such as haste, magic missile and dominate person.
That's a strong claim. There is a magus archetype called Hexcrafter that gets a hex at 4th level. Do you assert that they should always choose slumber hex? If so, do you assert that Hexcrafter is the strongest magus archetype?
That's a strong claim. There is a magus archetype called Hexcrafter that gets a hex at 4th level. Do you assert that they should always choose slumber hex? If so, do you assert that Hexcrafter is the strongest magus archetype?
And that is: Slumber is the most powerful single thing in the game, considering its power relative to its ease of acquisition and use. If I have "moved the goalpost" at all, it is only this far: I am after discussion and consideration ready to admit that, at best, slumber is, perhaps, tied with a very small handful of other truly ridiculous things in the game such as haste, magic missile and dominate person.
I've heard Hexcrafter is the strongest Magus Archetype. Unlimited hexes combined with Magus abilities is damn powerful and fun.
Yes. You should always take the Slumber Hex. Just like you should always take Misfortune, Flight, and Evil Eye.
Which one do you take at 4th level? Is it always slumber hex?
Let me see. Flight or Slumber usually. Depends on the group make up. Flight is real nice for getting combat advantages. Slumber if you need some crowd control.
That's the part that is so hard to discuss in threads like this. Looking at an isolated ability absent knowing the makeup of the group makes a discussion difficult.
I've seen the Slumber Hex hammer on encounters. It's real powerful against humanoid warrior types like giants, orcs, or the physical damage dealing types you face in a lot of adventures. It's useless against undead, dragons, and a lot of high will save creatures.
If a Witch is in a group with a lot of high damage characters like a Magus, archer, or paladin, using the Slumber Hex is a waste of time.
If you were asking me which is more powerful Slumber or Magus Spellstrike, I'd say Magus Spellstrike by a mile. I have a far more difficult time dealing with a 15-20 shocking grasp spell crit from a buffed up Magus who gets keen on his weapon usually by 2nd or 3rd level. Who cares if the witch uses Slumber if the Magus is killing everything in a round or two.
At higher level I have far more trouble with the Come and Get Me Barbarian than the witch Slumber Hex.
Slumbering something for a round or two is pointless if the creature is dead. Optimizing damage dealers is more common than the Slumber Hex. Slumber does sometimes short circuit what could be an interesting encounter. So do plenty of other abilities and builds. Slumber doesn't kill anything. The witch would have a hell of a time killing something once it's asleep compared to a well-built damage dealer killing something while it's alive and kicking.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Guess what. I can kill a 20th level solar cleric with epic PC wealth too. At 7th level. He just has to fail two saving throws for my phantasmal killer spell.Sorry Ashiel, but you are forgetting one reason why this almost definitely won't work and one reason why it couldn't possibly work. Both of which don't apply to slumber.
Once again, people are entirely missing the point by focusing on what a pair of first level characters can do to a CR 9 creature.
A very specific CR 9 creature, under ideal conditions, on the magic Tuesday of the Third Month of the 99th Year since the last red moon during a solar eclipse. :P
Slumber hex can allow witches to take on a wide variety of encounters above what should even be possible, with a better chance of success then any other single ability or spell. It takes no resources, no special build, and works in most circumstances. If the hex is not useful in the encounter, the witch is still one of the most powerful classes in the game, with a wide variety of other powerful options. If you want to powergame the hell out of it, it isn't hard to do.
There are a lot of encounters that can be easily foiled with little trouble if you have the perfect tool for the job. And the slumber hex does indeed cost something. It costs you a hex and a standard action, and it's pretty "meh" in any encounter that isn't against a single low-Will bruiser. Also, Witch is a full caster which makes it decent. Still, I can't bring myself to play a witch when there are better classes in core (pretty much all the other full casters).
Other options like sleep, color spray (even from a heavens oracle), glitter dust, grease, and even hold person (probably the closest in power to slumber hex), are all substantially more limited and restricted.
Actually, most of those have better ranges, offer more control, have better durations, and can be tried multiple times if they fail. Slumber is 1 shot and the end. Save or not, you don't get to try it for another 24 hours. Cackle cannot extend it. You need someone to be in melee - right now - and land a slumber to threaten a solid coup. Which is fine. It's okay for an ability to have a section that it shines.
Also, charm person works on the giant, and should it land you can give the giant orders with an opposed Charisma check. So you don't even have to be born under the 7th sign on a monday between 2:00pm and 2:01 PM, to defeat the giant. You can throw a save or suck. It lands at the same % chance (a little better in your case at 1st level) and should you land it the giant is no longer a threat to you. And he also becomes super-open to Diplomacy. And you can magically compel him to actions with an opposed Charisma check, which even if you've got a 10 Cha, you're still looking at a 50/50 check to get him to do something.
And here's the kicker. When it fails, you can try again.
They may be better then slumber hex in one way or another, but Slumber hex is far better overall.
Given the substantial number of posts I have seen on these boards (over 12 posts and probably over 20) of people saying slumber hex had a bad affect on their games, I'm baffled people are so resistant to change. I would just remind everyone that Pathfinder is generally considered BETTER then 3.5 because they added things like a save every round to glitterdust, and toned down other save or suck/die options. Why go back to the bad ole days?
Ironically I'm not resistant to change. The witch IS a change. I'm not resistant to the idea that she has something that she can use that under perfect conditions is really strong. Especially when it's crazy corner cases like this. This isn't the witch being able to reliably take apart high CR enemies. This is the witch being able to maybe under great risk of death, and with perfect conditional aid (having someone with a high-damage multiplier weapon in-melee with the giant who is not already dead), who gets lucky on a die roll that she only has 1 shot at, disable an enemy who has an incredibly large weakness relative to other creatures of its CR, and then hope that the dude doesn't make his Fort save vs death from the coup de grace.
Charm person is still stronger in this case as the witch could actually just do it and turn the giant into her ally. No major strings attached.
This isn't going backwards. This is just having a class feature that doesn't suck. A HD limit on slumber would be horrible. HD of enemies scales faster than CR, and the power is so limited in its usability in that it can only be attempted 1/enemy and eats your standard action and only lasts for 1 round that it's a gamble every time you want to use it. If all the stars fall into alignment at the moment of the solstice on the day of red clouds, let the witch have her fun and build better encounters than "I am a single oddly placed and suicidal giant attacking a settlement who has a witch with a specific hex that might affect me hidden away inside a group of conveniently placed armed guards who I haven't cleaved in twain".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
The way you're evaluating probabilities - it makes it sound as if you think the Witch will never get a chance to use its Hex - or maybe once in its career!
I think that if that had been the case then this thread wouldn't have got past about 10 posts.
You will always be able to argue that the chances of any given set of circumstances occurring is ridiculously low.
However you have to factor in all the other sets of circumstances that work plus the number of opportunities that there are for any of those situations to happen.
IMVHO - Slumber Hex opportunities, both in play and in world-setting, are quite common.
As for Charm Person, I don't think it's that strong. I don't do what my trusted friends tell me to do. I listen to them. I don't attack them. But if I think I know best I follow my own convictions. Charming a Hill Giant, assuming you can then talk to it, is probably just going to result in a pat on the back and an invitation to "dinner" afterwards.
Richard
|
The Slumber Hex duiplicates the effect of the sleep spell. Not the casting time. It still takes a standard action to use a hex. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/witch/hexes
Casting Time 1 roundA spell that takes 1 round to cast is a full-round action. It comes into effect just before the beginning of your turn in the round after you began casting the spell. You then act normally after the spell is completed.
I thought you were continuing your "The Sleep spell is better" argument, and that you were saying that casting Sleep was a standard action.
|
|
Give. Me. One. Thing. That. Is. Better. Than. Slumber.Druids.
Another one comparing oranges to apple slices.
Druids are better than Witches? Maybe.
Druid are better than a single Hex? Sure. A class is always better than a single ability of another class.
Cool. Sometimes it's hard to tell. Some of the people on here are making arguments like that with a straight face.That's a whole class. Yes, every class ability possessed by druids all added together is better than slumber. I'm asking for one feat/spell/class feature etc that is better.Sorry, it seems you misunderstood my post. It was a joke. Of course a class is better than a single feature. And honestly I'd rather a witch in the party than a druid.
Ah. Sorry, but similar arguments had already been used in this thread, so I did take it as a serious position.
|
|
That's a whole class. Yes, every class ability possessed by druids all added together is better than slumber. I'm asking for one feat/spell/class feature etc that is better.Give. Me. One. Thing. That. Is. Better. Than. Slumber.Druids.Bombs...
Whole feature against a single hex. You should compare it against the Hex feature.
Wild Shape...
Again the same error. Whole feature against a single hex. You should compare it against the Hex feature.
Smite Evil...
Smite Good (in an Evil Campaign)...
Maybe. More situational that slumber. there are more non-evil or non-good creatures that creatures immune to sleep. heavily dependant on how good you are at hitting things.
Animate Dead (again, best in an evil game)...
Another maybe. 3rd or 4th level spell against first level ability. A money cost against 0 cost.
Wish..Miracle...
9th level spells are better than 1st level abilities. Wow.
Simulacrum...
6th level spells are better than 1st level abilities. another Wow.
Blood Money...
Not really. blood money alone do nothing. Blood money+another spell? Maybe. It all depend on the other spell.
Evil Eye hex...
Showdown at high noon. You use Evil eye, I use Slumber. I get a -2 or worse to 1 ability for several rounds, you sleep on the floor.
No, it is not better.
Leadership Feat...
Maybe, it all depend on the cohort. Still: 7th level ability vs 1st level ability..
Eidolon Class Feature...Synthesist Eidolon...
Again the same error. Whole class features against a single hex. You should compare it against the Hex feature.
Vanish Trick...
Not really.
Need I go on?
You need to find better examples.
BTW: Fergie Dominate person is a way better example.
|
|
I don't care about 1 round, it has four times the range. Good point about the bear, though; somehow I forgot bears had stupid high HD. Okay, so I'll stick with grease, instead. One elven sorcerer with grease and a longbow has a better shot against a bear than does a 1st level witch trying to deploy slumber hex.Sleep spell is 1 round to cast, besides bears are inmune to the spell.A sleep spell has better range and duration, and is therefore better in almost every way that matters.
The bear that prey on the sheep? Will ST +2, a witch in the bunting party will be very welcome (at least as much as a druid).
Grease range at fist level 25'.
Bear saves: Fort +8, Ref +5, Will +2
So targeting a +5 reflex save is better than targeting a +2 will save?
Acrobatic check DC 10 to move out of the 10'x10' area affected: the bear is large, so if it don't fall it can step out of the affected area without entering affected squares. It need to check?
Even if he need to check, with 13 dex he has a 60% chance of moving without problems and only a 15% chance of falling.
Don't seem so awesome.
|
|
I like too look at things as they are truly applied since, as I have learned from more than a few first hand experiences, the "mathmatically strongest" sometimes tend to not prove thus in actual playThis bears consideration, I will admit. I guess from where I'm sitting, the job of cleaning up Pathfinder is a Herculean endeavor. So my point is, why don't we at least start by getting rid of the mathematically, provably OP stuff first, since that's a heck of a lot less involved than getting rid of the random stuff that turns out to have untoward applications in play. As for that stuff, we'll get there...The problem I have seen with the math is that I have very rarely seen Slumber being dropped without the other three hexes being dropped first. The only time I have seen Slumber being dropped by itself is when the witch knows that they pretty much can't fail (pretty much against something with a non-existant will save... like giants).
Rogues, fighters and any other class without a good will save.
Then:- all animals - bad Will save
- most humanoids - One good save, usually Reflex.
- magical beasts - Good Fortitude and Reflex saves.
Not so bad a list.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...The way you're evaluating probabilities - it makes it sound as if you think the Witch will never get a chance to use its Hex - or maybe once in its career!
I think that if that had been the case then this thread wouldn't have got past about 10 posts.
You will always be able to argue that the chances of any given set of circumstances occurring is ridiculously low.
However you have to factor in all the other sets of circumstances that work plus the number of opportunities that there are for any of those situations to happen.
IMVHO - Slumber Hex opportunities, both in play and in world-setting, are quite common.
As for Charm Person, I don't think it's that strong. I don't do what my trusted friends tell me to do. I listen to them. I don't attack them. But if I think I know best I follow my own convictions. Charming a Hill Giant, assuming you can then talk to it, is probably just going to result in a pat on the back and an invitation to "dinner" afterwards.
Richard
It is all about how you read this part: "You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do."
Some see it as equal to dominate if you make the check, some don't. I am in the second group as to me "convince it to do" for me isn't the same as "force it to do", but there is a lot of table variation on how it work.
I like too look at things as they are truly applied since, as I have learned from more than a few first hand experiences, the "mathmatically strongest" sometimes tend to not prove thus in actual playThis bears consideration, I will admit. I guess from where I'm sitting, the job of cleaning up Pathfinder is a Herculean endeavor. So my point is, why don't we at least start by getting rid of the mathematically, provably OP stuff first, since that's a heck of a lot less involved than getting rid of the random stuff that turns out to have untoward applications in play. As for that stuff, we'll get there...The problem I have seen with the math is that I have very rarely seen Slumber being dropped without the other three hexes being dropped first. The only time I have seen Slumber being dropped by itself is when the witch knows that they pretty much can't fail (pretty much against something with a non-existant will save... like giants).
Rogues, fighters and any other class without a good will save.
Then:
- all animals - bad Will save
- most humanoids - One good save, usually Reflex.
- magical beasts - Good Fortitude and Reflex saves.Not so bad a list.
Actually... that IS a bad list... Magical Beasts and animals you stop fighting beyond the VERY early levels. When it comes to humanoids, it depends if they class levels (which most do... unless you are fighting CR 1s again).
So yeah... your list actually sucks compared to idk:
Outsiders
undead (immune)
COnstructs (immune)
Abberations
Any class with a high will save (Paladin, Monk, Anit-Paladin, Wizard, Sorcerer, Witch, Cleric, Oracle, Magus, Bard, Inquisitor, "Barbarians" (while raging), Druid)
And guess which types of creatures tend to be primary villians? I'll give you a hint, its not Yogi the bear and bambii...
|
|
Archery village defense options ...
I'm not sure how effective this is unless you can get the Giant in the open not in melee.
Otherwise the Hill Giant is AC 21 + 4 possible cover + 4 in melee = 29 = needing a natural 20 to hit.
As you point out, the giant could always throw some rocks back.
(I'm not sure at what point we moved from Frost Giant to Hill Giant, BTW :-), but anyway a Hill Giant has a will save of only +3)
Using Hexes is not a Fair Fight
Interesting idea :-)
Against raiding orcs, or goblins, hobgoblins, or other 1HD monsters, a sleep spell can take out up to 4 orcs (yes, the witch can keep casting slumber hex every round at a different orc, but action economy matters too). Color spray can also affect multiple creatures.
A Witch has to prepare her spells, and at 1st level she only gets two per day. I think it's unlikely in day-to-day living that she's going to choose two Sleep or Colour Sprays, in fact she might not even choose one. Furthermore, unlike a wizard, she can't leave slots open. And even if she *does* prepare sleep, that's only one or two casts and it's done.
Going up to 2nd level spells, I'd consider summoning a couple of celestial eagles with summon monster II. Summon swarm will be pretty devastating since such monsters aren't likely to have anything useful against swarms.
Summoned monsters only last 3 rounds and you have no control over a summoned swarm (and it occupies you completely if you want to keep it going).
Against a dire animal or dinosaur (or a big normal predator like a tiger) a druid might be as good an option as the slumber hex witch. Against a wolf pack, a calm animals spell from the druid may be better,
because it can affect multiple targets.
Again we have the issue of having the right spell in mind, and the fact you're not going to be able to do it that much. Calm Animals uses Will save just like slumber and only really buys you time while you position all your archers for that one bow shot before the spell breaks. On average you'll only affect 6 or 7 HD at 1st or 2nd level, so that *might* get you your tiger (6HD), not many dinosaurs and three wolves. So, I guess for the wolves, for the one spell cast - but I think I would still prefer the witch overall with its endless slumbers and wolves only having +1 Will.
Against skeletons or zombies or ghouls, which are immune to sleep, a cleric or paladin is better than a slumber hex witch. (Especially a cleric with the Turn Undead feat or a paladin with the undead scourge archetype.) Even a village militia would be a better option. How common undead are probably depends on where you are -- in Ustalav, pretty common, maybe not so much elsewhere.
Dragons, constructs, oozes and plants are immune to sleep just like undead, but these are likely pretty rare threats and the village is probably hosed no matter what against a major golem or adult dragon.
Can't argue with that :-)
So, no, I don't think Slumber Hex massively changes the village vs monsters situation as a whole.
I'm not convinced :-)
Well, no. A good stealth predator shouldn't be seen by anybody except the victim, most attacks, as I understand it. I think people in the villages that had lion and leopard problems just disappeared, mostly.
So the chance that the one person that manages to spot it on occasion -- or that it selected as prey -- is the witch with slumber hex is not high*
It might well be useful for people hunting the predator down, but that still doesn't really change the "terrorizes the village till a party gets together and hunts it down" situation.
I guess if your stealth predator was sufficiently sure of his skills that he didn't think he was going to be spotted then it wouldn't matter what the offensive capabilities of the village were, be it archers, slumber-hexing witches or crazy dictators with thermonuclear devices.
Richard
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You beat me to the breakdown on Charm, Diego! :)
(Also, Richard, we started talking about a Frost Giant, but somewhere in this thread, I'm pretty sure you mentioned a Hill Giant instead as a more reasonable CR and others agreed with it as a more reasonable point of discussion.)
Richard, your opening question was, "Does slumber affect the game world?" The answer, ultimately, is, "Only as much as other abilities."
Slumber is strong - very strong. That's never really been a contention on my part.
However the circumstances that it comes into play in the way that you describe are difficult to pull off. Generally, whether used by PC or NPC, the slumber hex will be utilized in substantially more secure ways.
In other words, slumber is very strong, but much like Diego keeps talking about, it's not very strong on its own at low levels. The whole question is about powerful combos - in this case, Slumber-plus-Coup-De-Gras - but on its own the Slumber Hex isn't that big a deal.
But let's look at your original example again.
If the witch is first level, the commoners (and/or fighters) are first level, and the giant is a CR 9, if the witch is somehow the leader of the town and at all cares for her people she's going to tell it, "We surrender, instead of killing us, let us serve you, please!" which most Frost Giants are going to respond with, "HAH-HAH, okay!" (presuming she's not bluffing or, if she is, she succeeds on her bluff v. its sense motive).
If she doesn't care about the villagers than, sure, she can command them to suicide-run against the giant so that some of them could be in place to attempt their insta-kill attack.
If she is not the leader, they would have had to prepare for this exact scenario before hand... which isn't terribly likely in most cases.
If the witch is in anything more powerful than a Hamlet, the giant wouldn't raid it anyway.
If the community is a Hamlet or Thorpe, the likelihood of a witch being there is extraordinarily low.
Given all the hexes that are extremely useful to a community, the likelihood of a witch having slumber is also low.
Given that NPCs don't flip through the book to choose their abilities (unlike PCs that do) and witches are effectively defined by having a patron that teaches them tricks, an NPCs ability to choose what to learn is startlingly limited; especially since they can't simply learn the stuff themselves.
Given that witches are defined as "more rare" than the Core classes, the odds of a witch being somewhere is low.
Given:
1) the low odds of success (due to requiring the witch to survive within 30 feet, and a person capable of dealing enough damage and consistently hitting surviving within 30 feet, and the giant failing its will save - any of which could fail)
2) the low odds of a witch with the correct hex [slumber] in the thorp or hamlet (due to the low population, the randomness and limited ability of PC classes within such areas, the high diversity of classes, and the comparatively low existence of witches within that hierarchy, the apparent inability of most NPC witches to choose their patron and Hexes)
3) the ability of numerous other classes, effects, or ideas to handle the situation just as well, if not better (charm person, massed crossbows, and so on)
... Slumber cannot be Game Changing from a giant's point of view - any giant, really, except for the most well educated of them. And even then, the likelihood is low enough that they probably won't care. I mean, there's a decent chance for me to get in a car accident and die, but I still take my car out.
Similarly, with the Balor. By the time the Balor is attacking another Balor, he's got bigger issues than level 1 mooks targeting a save that he's likely going to succeed at anyway. If lots of mooks are involved, the liklihood of any specific one, two, three, or four of them getting close the balor (due to the other mooks) is low, to say the least.
By the time most creatures deal with balors directly, they're going to be higher than first level.
It is only in the most extreme and dubious circumstances that a balor has anything to fear from what amounts to a gnat.
The Hex itself may have a 5% chance of success... but it has a 95% chance of failure. If you supply two or three witches that use slumber... you're clearly stacking the deck (and why does only one Balor have witches with slumber at this point?), and it is still a 95% chance for failure for each one of them.
That's... not good odds.
At higher levels, slumber is a decent option, but at higher levels you fight increasing number of immune creatures who usually (in my experience) also come with multiple minions to help waken them, meaning it's a hard sell that slumber alters the world that much.
It looks amazing on paper. It's not that "changing" in practice (from anyone's point of view), regardless of its relative power. Unusual, sure, but not game changing in the way that you're asking about.
Guess what. I can kill a 20th level solar cleric with epic PC wealth too. At 7th level. He just has to fail two saving throws for my phantasmal killer spell.
Just keep in mind that that Solar has Truesight, and 34 SR.
But again, I don't think this whole thing is about hitting something 10 CRs above your APL, because that is generally not something that comes up in the game much. This is about a witch being able to shut down many encounters with a CR = APL+4, with better odds of success then any other tactic, and no use of expendable resources. It doesn't require any special build, although you can min/max it.
There are a lot of encounters that can be easily foiled with little trouble if you have the perfect tool for the job. And the slumber hex does indeed cost something. It costs you a hex and a standard action, and it's pretty "meh" in any encounter that isn't against a single low-Will bruiser. Also, Witch is a full caster which makes it decent. Still, I can't bring myself to play a witch when there are better classes in core (pretty much all the other full casters).
The problem as I see it, is that hex is "the perfect tool" for too many jobs. The fact that SR doesn't apply makes it amazing against things with SR. Yes, it doesn't work against dragons, undead, elves and mindless creatures, and you are going to have a hard time against clerics and druids, but against EVERYONE else, you have very little to lose in trying slumber before using up precious memorized spells.
Yes it takes a standard action, but if that action ends the encounter, or takes out an opponent, who cares? You will get more standard actions next encounter, you won't get your spell slot back.EDIT: One more thing, since the witch gets most of the spells people say are better, such as charm, hold, and glitterdust, slumber allows you to use these spells when they are perfect tools, because you were conserving resources by using the slumber hex instead of spell slots, and ending encounters before they begin.
|
|
(Also, Richard, we started talking about a Frost Giant, but somewhere in this thread, I'm pretty sure you mentioned a Hill Giant instead as a more reasonable CR and others agreed with it as a more reasonable point of discussion.)
I guess Frost Giants attack chilly villages and Hill Giants more temperate ones.
I picked Frost Giant initially because I was looking to illustrate the point with an extreme case.
Slumber vs Village
Note that my thread is a question, not a statement. I'm canvasing opinion.
Looking at your analysis, however, I would like to offer some counter points.
The likelyhood of the Witch NPC vs monster situation taking place in the world is, I believe, very much driven by the likelyhood of its success, almost as if to say that it depends on the outcome of this discussion!
In other words, if we decided between us that it was a superior tactic then we can assume that it's use in the world would increase leading to greater instances of witches in settlements which, as has been pointed out, would then lead to the giants changing their tactics and so on.
The point is, if it is a superior tactic, the world changes.
If we conclude that it isn't, because of other equally good tactics or preferable hexes, then the world doesn't change.
In other words, likelyhood of use is driven from superiority as tactic. That's the driving factor here (IMO).
So, for me, it's your points (1) and (3) that drive the argument, not (2).
w.r.t (1)
Now when I first picked my example, I made the first level as an extreme case to prove a point. I think in this instance I would like to suggest 2nd level because that makes a massive difference to the likelyhood of the tactic working.
The giant has no idea that any of the villagers around him are witches, and slumber hex cannot be spotted. The witch has to get within 30' (which I think is quite a distance) and give the hex a go. If the giant fails, she can call out "get him!" and everyone gets one double move plus one coup-de-gras. I would have thought that giant, hill or frost, was in serious trouble.
w.r.t (3)
The debate continues. We none of us *know* of course, we just have our opinions, but I don't think I've heard anything to suggest there's a superior tactic at 1st or 2nd level.
Three other points have emerged in this thread to counter the example:
A) appeasement is preferable
B) stealth guarantees success
C) any lone marauder would be taking his life in his hands attacking a village anyway
(A) and (C) are matters of opinion and I'm not sure where I stand on this. (B) I guess is only available to some marauders.
Balor vs Balor
If you look at Return of the King, battle of Pelennor Fields (I think I said Gladden fields before, by mistake), you will see how I'm envisaging these sorts of huge battles take place. Well - sort of, because in this instance the big guys are only in one side, but imagine two evil armies fighting complete with Trolls, Oliphaunts and even Nazgul on Wyverns, what I see is low-level battles and high-level battles mixed together.
Now if each army had a Balor, I would have thought (intuitively) that they would go for each other, crushing the armies below them every now and then in much the same way that the head Nazgul causes chaos when it lands to kill Theoden. Prior to Slumber Hex, the Balors had nothing to fear from the footsoldiers. Not even a 1 in 400 chance of a critical getting through their DR.
Slumber Hex changes that.
Of course, getting all those stars properly aligned for a foot soldier to slumber a Balor successfully (so that the other Balor can coup-de-gras) is rare. But these battles take a long time; wars, in fact, can rage on for days, weeks, months even years. Because of this, the difference between no chance and a very small chance becomes significant. The Balors, therefore, have to change their behaviour.
But again, you know, this Balor vs Balor example is just there to illustrate a point. If a 1st level Witch can decide the combat between two fully functioning Balors, even under very unusual circumstances, something has gone a little strange. I can't think of anything else that could do this at 1st level.
IMVHO
Richard
|
Technically, any 1rst level guy whose boss will buy him the right vial of poison can drop a (non-poison-immune) high level monster. They might have to hit, but certain weapons and spells make it easier. The rule that seems to be causing the problems isn't the lack of a cap on the slumber hex, but the one that states a natural one always fails.
True Strike or Gun plus poison = death on a natural one. The true strike effect even predates Pathfinder.
So, either a few thousand gold invested in a decent poison and a gun, or some gold and a first level spell invested in hitting, can deliver a 5% chance of killing a boss. This is much more of an investment than slumber hex is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If an untrained Halfli- Hobbit commoner and a female human Warrior-classed character can take down the Witch King, greatest of all the Nazgul, it seems strange that it never happened before it did to the others.
Here's the problem: it doesn't matter if it's a strong tactic. It matters how likely the tactic is to come into play.
A really strong tactic in war is simply wait and starve an enemy to death or submission - it means a lack of loss of people for us and a loss of over-all ability for them.
Oddly, we don't use that tactic much anymore, because, as it turns out, in modern times, it's really difficult to get all the proper elements to line up such that we can do so.
The likelyhood of the Witch NPC vs monster situation taking place in the world is, I believe, very much driven by the likelyhood of its success, almost as if to say that it depends on the outcome of this discussion!
In other words, if we decided between us that it was a superior tactic then we can assume that it's use in the world would increase leading to greater instances of witches in settlements which, as has been pointed out, would then lead to the giants changing their tactics and so on.
The point is, if it is a superior tactic, the world changes.
If this were a barbarian, fighter, ranger, rogue (or ninja), or wizard ability, you'd have a strong case on your hands. These classes only require training. In these classes, you can point to a specific set of skills and say, "they were trained in these." and it can proliferate.
Druids might also be decent, I dunno, it's a little unclear to me.
Bards, Clerics, Paladins (and antipaladins), and Sorcerers require very specific circumstances and/or patrons to exist - you can't just make a person a natural singer, nor can you train them to have inherent spellcasting ability. You can train someone to be faithful and a true believer, but you can't force a god to give them power for it.
Even the alchemist, cavalier (and samurai), gunslinger, or magus would constitute "trained" classes - where skill is passed on through training.
But Oracles, Summoners, and Witches - much like Bards, Clerics, Paladins (and Antipaladins) and Sorcerers - and, most importantly, Witches, can't be created. Instead they are chosen by a higher power of some sort or another. (Druids are iffy - outside of specific settings, like Faerun, I can't see that they need a patron at all.)
Due to this, the validity of the tactic doesn't really matter. It is entirely due to the whims of greater powers.
In the case of a second level witch, you're presuming really, really brave or courageous commoners. Commoners aren't known for their bravery or courage. And double-move works if it works, the terrain is correct, they're within range, and so on, but, again, you have to make very specific assumptions about the "battle" (which, until the witch gets there is instead a slaughter)... and the giant has to fail his save, and has to be doing really dumb things.
So the only case in which a lone giant attacking is a likelihood - a hamlet - you have to have a lot of unlikely things that come together for it to work.
Add to that, the fact that giants don't have knowledge (arcana). They have no way of knowing about the slumber hex. So it wouldn't change their strategy.
The debate continues. We none of us *know* of course, we just have our opinions, but I don't think I've heard anything to suggest there's a superior tactic at 1st or 2nd level.
Three other points have emerged in this thread to counter the example:
A) appeasement is preferable
B) stealth guarantees success
C) any lone marauder would be taking his life in his hands attacking a village anyway(A) and (C) are matters of opinion and I'm not sure where I stand on this. (B) I guess is only available to some marauders.
Actually:
A) Appeasement of the giant is preferable where people don't want to foolishly throw their lives away getting close to a creature that can and will kill many, if not most, of them in their attempts to get that close. In the case of a Thorpe, it's very likely that the entire Thorpe will be killed setting up the death of the one giant. Not a good trade.B) Stealth (I'm presuming "on the raider's part") does not guarantee success, but it does improve chances, while reducing chances of problems; "stealth" is also relative - it doesn't necessarily mean using the stealth skill, and giants can do a walk-by-grabbing anyway.
C) If you believe C is a matter of opinion, then either you ignore the action economy or the lone marauder in question is really, really foolish. Villages just have way too many people for that to end well for them, and by that point, settlements have access to third level spells (sixth level characters), which means this encounter is going to end badly for the lone marauder in most cases anyway.
And, if you really, really want a lone marauder in a module, regardless of the size, you'd want to think of the mythic rules anyway, specifically, the agile mythic simple template. Here's the key: this is what you'd want, whether slumber was a thing or not.
As for their solitary organization, that's not the organization they use to raid anything other than a thorpe or hamlet (and hamlet is pushing it).
Let me put it this way.
Metropolises are far better than thorpes. Since create food and water is a spell that actually exists, and magic traps exist, before the slumber hex ever did, the most world-changing thing is a few create food/water traps - not all that hard to make, either, even at first level.
Or, you know, a reincarnation, restoration, and remove disease traps eliminate 90% of all problems ever.
Add one person who can craft rings that grants a constant prestidigitation, endure elements, and 3/day purify food and drink (the total cost of which only takes a few years to earn, presuming normal profession rules) and you've now got a society that has absolutely no physical needs whatsoever (and can, 3/day, not worry about problems if they want to eat something weird, though really this isn't necessary at all, I just put it in for fun).
Any of these are far, far more game-and-world changing than the Slumber Hex, existed before the Slumber Hex, do not require a specific class or build, and are really easy to come across.
But you were talking from the giant's point of view.
It is simple: it's not about the validity of the tactic. If that were all there were to it, then the Heaven's Oracle would dominate.
Instead, it's a whole host of factors which include the validity, but mostly include how commonly viable acquiring such an ability is.
In a world where lone marauders are the worst things, then it's likely a big deal... where available.
But if you keep the fluff of the class in mind, and the typical build of the world at large, it's not likely readily available.
And there are plenty of examples in fiction of that really rare (but effective) thing where, due to luck, situation, and skill, a creature defies all odds and somehow successfully destroys something more powerful than themselves.
That is all this is.
You've mentioned that it seems like the "lone marauder trope" is at stake. So is the "mysterious wandering wizard", without slumber, and the lone marauder doesn't work for a number of reasons.
You keep suggesting that it's only opinion, but the facts are simple: either the game rules function as they're supposed to and create an internally cohesive world, or they don't. Either the fluff and nature of the classes matter, or they don't.
IF (and only if) anyone can become a witch, witches have the ability to choose any hex they want at any time, AND solitary marauders are a constant (not occasional) threat, you'd see a minor proliferation of Slumber.
(In such a setting, you'd also likely see the end of all NPC classes because only the most moronic creatures wouldn't take PC classes, and you'd likely see Simulacra of Mythic Solars fill the universe - which in the end, isn't a bad thing, at all.)
IF, on the other hand, you treat the class as it talks about itself, then it's really unlikely that it changes anything for all the reasons people mention.
Slumber works well when you have lots of people work together to make it work.
Slumber by itself does nothing.
Slumber is sub-par to most commoners most of the time: they can slaughter cows easily enough without it, drive off predators without it, and so on, but they can't heal quickly on their own, eliminate diseases, or gain access to potions that can.
And if we want to talk about powerful tactics, I've already noted a better one: Coven. (Given that witches have hypnotism, and Hags like more power too, it makes sense that they can do this pretty easily.)
((Simply find a green or sea hag, and you're pretty guaranteed good to go.))
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guess what. I can kill a 20th level solar cleric with epic PC wealth too. At 7th level. He just has to fail two saving throws for my phantasmal killer spell.Just keep in mind that that Solar has Truesight, and 34 SR.
But again, I don't think this whole thing is about hitting something 10 CRs above your APL, because that is generally not something that comes up in the game much. This is about a witch being able to shut down many encounters with a CR = APL+4, with better odds of success then any other tactic, and no use of expendable resources. It doesn't require any special build, although you can min/max it.
There are a lot of encounters that can be easily foiled with little trouble if you have the perfect tool for the job. And the slumber hex does indeed cost something. It costs you a hex and a standard action, and it's pretty "meh" in any encounter that isn't against a single low-Will bruiser. Also, Witch is a full caster which makes it decent. Still, I can't bring myself to play a witch when there are better classes in core (pretty much all the other full casters).The problem as I see it, is that hex is "the perfect tool" for too many jobs. The fact that SR doesn't apply makes it amazing against things with SR. Yes, it doesn't work against dragons, undead, elves and mindless creatures, and you are going to have a hard time against clerics and druids, but against EVERYONE else, you have very little to lose in trying slumber before using up precious memorized spells.
Yes it takes a standard action, but if that action ends the encounter, or takes out an opponent, who cares? You will get more standard actions next encounter, you won't get your spell slot back.
It's no secret that encounters against single brute enemies are generally bad encounters. They are the #1 cause of complaints that the CR system doesn't work. Again, we're talking about a class feature that is expected to be useful through all levels (and thus doesn't have a HD limit) exploiting a weakness of a single enemy, in a situation that also requires you to have someone at ground-zero to deliver the death-blow in the small window of opportunity.
I never said the slumber hex isn't good. It's a good thing to attempt against an opponent that someone is already fighting. I just said it's not overpowered, nor is it uniquely game changing. It has some benefits, such as being a supernatural ability so you don't have to worry about SR. It has drawbacks like the 1/enemy, 30 ft. range (by 4th level, close-range spells have a longer range).
The only real thing people are complaining about is that it doesn't have a HD limit. That's really what this is coming down to. And I couldn't support it having a HD limit because it's a class feature and isn't supposed to become worthless as you advance in level. Enemy HD scales much faster than CR.
If this is such a game changer, why isn't it dominating all the other CR 9 creatures? This is little more than a niche opportunity that makes the hex shine exceptionally well. Kind of like how a lesser rod of dazing allows you to make a joke out of golems 3/day.
Do I think witches can make good use of Slumber? Oh heck yes. Do I think they should? Oh heck yes. Do I think that trying to make an argument that Slumber changes the way the game is played by cherry-picking a high CR opponent with an exceptional weakness to the ability and then frame the situation in a very ideal way to use the ability against this creature is a good way to begin making that point? Not in the slightest.
Try showing how it stacks up in a real encounter. Here, I'll give a few examples of good encounters, and you guys explain how slumber is going to break or drastically change the way they work.
CR 9 Encounters
A. 5 ogres + CR 6 Ogre Warlord (Ogre + 6 warrior levels)
B. 1 flesh golem + 8th level NPC wizard creator.
C. 4 basilisks (a colony is 3-6, according to their ecology)
D. 1 7th level NPC druid + animal companion + 3 tigers
E. 1 ogre mage + 2 ogres
F. 1 10th level NPC cleric w/ undead minions.
G. 1 5th level ghost sorcerer + 2 mummies
H. 4 mummies.
I. 2 dark stalkers + 6 CR 1 pit traps + 2 gelatinous cubes
J. 5 5th level adventurers (bard, barbarian, cleric + undead minions, sorcerer, wizard + familiar)
K. 4 army ant swarms (an angry hive)
L. 4 pixies + 1 CR 5 pixie leader (pixie / bard 2).
M. 1 young black dragon + 4 giant crocodiles (CR 2 crocodiles + giant simple template)
N. 1 advanced giant wraith (wraith + advanced & giant simple template) + 2 normal wraiths
O. 4 ettercaps + 8 spider swarms
P. 1 young blue dragon (using hit and run tactics via fly, burrow, and stealth)
Q. 5 5th level druids + animal companions
R. 2 invisible stalkers
S. 2 dark stalkers + 6 dark creepers + custom swinging pendulum blade trap (auto-reset, +10 to hit vs 15 ft. line, 5d6+5 damage, DC 15 Perception, DC 15 disable device)
T. The Fun House (T is for Traps): 1 dark stalker (w/ elixir of hiding and a shortbow) + 3 custom CR 1/2 trapdoor traps (DC 15 Perception, DC 15 Disable Device, auto-reset, DC 20 reflex negates, 8 ft. drop [0 damage], trapdoor closes requiring DC 15 disable device check and 1d4 rounds to open again [cannot be used untrained], trapdoor hardness 8 & 30 hp); 6 spider swarms (2 per trapdoor trap); 3 custom CR 1/3 wall traps (DC 15 Perception, DC 15 Disable Device, auto-reset, effect: once activated, each wall extends along a 10 ft. line into the room and remains there for one round before resetting for one round and repeating the process. When the wall extends it has a +0 to hit and deals 2d6 bludgeoning damage to creature in its path. While extended, the wall functions as a wall, blocking line of effect as normal); 4 custom CR 1/2 spike floor traps (Perception DC 15, Disable Device DC 15, +10 to hit vs 5 ft. radius, 3d4+3 damage, automatic reset); 2 custom CR 1 water trapdoor traps (Perception DC 15, Disable Device DC 15, 8 ft. deep [0] damage, manual reset, DC 15 reflex negates, effect: trapdoor pits are filled with water, trapdoor shuts after use and locks in place, requiring a DC 25 disable device check to open from the inside [cannot be used untrained], victims unable to breath underwater can drown, the trapdoor has hardness 8 and 30 hp).
U. A coven of 6 sea hags with Ability Focus (Evil Eye, Horrific Appearance).
V. 1 Green Hag adept 4 / druid 5 + animal companion + familiar.
W. 3 troll warriors (troll warrior 2) wearing plate mail and wielding longspears.
X. 3 Xill.
Z. 1 5th level vegepygmy cleric, 3 fast zombie assassin vines, 3 fast zombie yellow musk creeprs, 5 fast zombie spider swarms, 3 fast zombie bat swarms, 1 bloody burning skeleton spider swarm
(The other is so long, instead of an edit, I'm double-posting)
To be clear, Richard, I see where you're coming from. I really do.
But if a campaign allowed NPCs to choose things like PCs, the only setting you could have in that method would be one where mythic classed solar simulacra rule the cosmos at the whim of their solar masters.
(Heck, a thing Solars could do is to mass planar-bind efreets, use lots of Helms of Opposite Alignments on them, and then utilize their newly-gained alignment-based allies' wishes with their own to conquer the omniverse for the forces of good. Not really all that hard. Or even just make simulacra of random efreets. Or any such thing.)
The organization and tactics of most all game worlds and the creatures therein at large are not built by a single class that, fluff-wise and statement-of-intent wise, is rare.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like logically breaking it down but the reality is it doesn't matter how good a tactic it is as far as what the world looks like or how common or not it is because even if slumber isn't the most common tactic there are plenty of others that would lead to equally disruptive consequences if they were taken to their logical conclusions.
I tried to say this in a more narrative way before when I was posting as The All Seeing Eye but fantasy world exists by fiat period. Golarion has a certain charm as it basically functions a lot like Ravenloft in the sense that from one area to the next something "different" is going on. Oh the nation's affect each other and there are common world issues but Ustalav is Transylvania and everyone is worried about vampires and stuff while the Varisians are wondering when the next Runelord is going to pop up and the giant are gonna ruin s#*$. Versus the Shackles pirating it up versus Alkenstar and the Mana Wastes and so on...
Eberron took some of the basic assumptions of magic to its "logical" extreme but there are still plenty of fiat laden choices to explain why things remain in balance or not.
My earlier point which may be right in line with Tacticslion or one stope more extreme than his, which hopefully I am making clearer now is that you cannot balance a game world on the back of player options using Dungeons and Dragons or any of its children systems. Wish abuse, (magic in general) is too laden with the so many disruptive properties that assuming that those choices can simply be "chosen" in a mechanical sense the way players do would inherently disrupt any setting. That those choices would be evaluated in mechanical context and applied "logically" would disrupt any setting not specifically built with absolute balance.
Your concession to the notion is creating the setting and allowing the disruption to occur. Why would ANY wizard pick half the spells in the core book if the APG existed all along and was equally available? or UM or whatever? Even then why aren't they just picking the spells that obviously are better, every time?
Setting is purely GM fiat. Period. Some GMs crib, use notes or employ full settings written by other people but one of two things happens in every game ever run:
1. Players use the mechanics of the game in a way that interacts with the setting as intended.
2. Players use the mechanics of the game in a way that interacts with the setting as unintended.
Resolution to either choice is part of the contract between players and the GM. Good GMs and players have some sense of shared notion on how to resolve those interactions and create games from those notions of resolution.
The rest is window dressing and applying the rules to the setting doesn't work IMHO.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In addition to generally agreeing with PirateDevon, I'll note that 3.X (including PF) has lots of really great internally-consistent world-building tools that are part of the rule-set itself. Interestingly, applying fiat doesn't change this.
You can create an internally consistent world, but the PCs are, by definition, exceptional (even though the basic rules can be applied across the board).
Some fiat is more heavy-handed than others. This is fine.
Some fiat is more rule-bendy than others. This is fine.
There probably isn't a wrong fiat as long as people are having fun.
The fact that there is a clear difference between NPC classes and PC classes means that only morons would take NPC classes if anything else was an option. It is only in following the implied assumptions of world building and class choice that you get an internally consistent and cohesive world.
Slumber, as a world-building exercise, means only as much as any other world-breaking effect at any level. If Slumber is worrisome toward setting cohesiveness and internal consistency, then Solars are a GM's worst nightmare (second only to Pit Fiends - at least those guys have to wait a year).
Heck, someone pointed out just recently that efreeti can plane shift any time they want. And why wouldn't they, to get themselves some free wish-slaves? That is all kinds of unbalancing right there.
And yet. The world continues on. The problem doesn't exist in the RAW. Pushing RAW as RAW-exclusive can make very interesting things and can break everything, depending on how you do it.
The general reason? Whatever one you come up with that makes sense within the setting you're building.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand where the discussions are funneling down to and I do understand where you guys are coming from.
However I have difficulty, I must admit, abandoning the premise that the fantasy world should be a natural repercussion of the rules.
Paying attention to logic means we can have the sorts of discussions we've been having in this thread even during the game. As long as we, as players, and GMs, believe that the setting makes reasonable sense, then we can start interacting with it in terms of its own logic, rather than in terms of the rules.
I know there is a limit to this, but it's a limit I'm quite careful about pushing. And when I write material for other GMs to use, I worry quite a lot about setting-logic.
I'm also not terribly keen on the idea that PCs should have options available to them which the NPCs don't.
To my mind the game is the most fun when not only does the world feel real but also the PCs only have *some* measured / controlled advantage.
In D&D/Pathfinder PC advantage comes down to superior stats and access to PC classes in a world where only 5% of the remainder of the population is good enough to do the same. That's enough of an advantage for me - I don't really need the odds to be further tilted in my favour by being, for example, the only witch that can choose her patron.
I can accept the fact that every character in this fantasy world whose skin I inhabit is one of the superior ones. We none of us want to role-play farmers. However once I'm part of the PC-classed elite, I'm happy for all of us, PCs and NPCs, to be in the same boat.
If the world loses too much of its logic or I start to become too *special* within it then, within reason, which I know is woolly and subjective and all the rest of it, I start to disengage from it.
Finally I would like to say that whilst I think that these discussions we've been having are fascinating, lead to further appreciation and understanding, I do not believe that they can ever be conclusive.
I posted earlier about how nice it would be to be able to simulate the Pathfinder world using a supercomputer and see how things turn up after a century or so. Not only do we not have such a thing, I honestly do not believe that anyone on this earth could possibly predict how it would turn out. It's far too complicated.
We all have our opinions and it's great to share them and argue over them but I don't think anyone can ever imagine that they can actually work out the answer. What I hope is that we roughly speaking converge or something we think is likely - i.e. sufficiently logical that we can think about what advice we might give to, say, some village leaders when they hear giants have moved in the area. Go find yourself a witch? Build up your defenses? Send an emissary? Etc.
Richard
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
However I have difficulty, I must admit, abandoning the premise that the fantasy world should be a natural repercussion of the rules.
I... actually have been agreeing that it is.
The point is, that a fantasy world is a natural repercussion of the rules... plus fiat.
To declare otherwise is to ensure that there are no NPC classes, solars rule all, and so on.
I know there is a limit to this, but it's a limit I'm quite careful about pushing. And when I write material for other GMs to use, I worry quite a lot about setting-logic.
I'm also not terribly keen on the idea that PCs should have options available to them which the NPCs don't.
In fact, I've never tried to suggest otherwise. What I've suggested is that NPCs don't have the knowledge by virtue of flipping through a handbook. Instead, they need research, difficult work, and concentration... as do the PCs.
The difference is, unlike NPCs, the players have access to books or internet hyperlinks and so on. Because the players choose for the characters (a form of game-world fiat) the PCs can easily have an optimized system. From the PCs perspective, they're just as limited as the NPCs - there is no appreciable difference between them other than power.
But from the player and world-builder's perspective they are very different. That's what the names mean - player character v. non-player character. Thus, it's only by fiat who gets what class outside of the PCs.
Again, this doesn't water down internal consistency - it simply means that the group of player characters end up as optimized as the players make them, regardless of the tendencies of the world at large, not because the characters choose something (outside of strange but potentially interesting role playing), but because the players do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grease range at fist level 25'.
Bear saves: Fort +8, Ref +5, Will +2
So targeting a +5 reflex save is better than targeting a +2 will save?Acrobatic check DC 10 to move out of the 10'x10' area affected: the bear is large, so if it don't fall it can step out of the affected area without entering affected squares. It need to check?
Even if he need to check, with 13 dex he has a 60% chance of moving without problems and only a 15% chance of falling.
Don't seem so awesome.
It does if you're the 1st level fighter assigned to intercept the bear. Grease can be cast repeatedly, and does not require another character to be in CDG position when it lands. Just keep casting, circling, and shooting arrows. It doesn't have that wow factor, but it's much, much safer than subjecting your ally to a bear's attack, then hoping you win initiative and it fails its saving throw. One save versus a +5 is still better than one versus +2 AND winning initiative.
Also, you can ready an action and cast it when it moves, forcing it to make an Acrobatics check.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, this doesn't water down internal consistency - it simply means that the group of player characters end up as optimized as the players make them, regardless of the tendencies of the world at large, not because the characters choose something (outside of strange but potentially interesting role playing), but because the players do.
It's worth noting that at one time, Luke Skywalker was the only 1st level Jedi in a galaxy of several trillion people. Bilbo Baggins was one of a handful of halfling adventurers in every generation, most of them his relatives (on the Took side). Conan was a master linguist and a skilled tactician; most Cimmerians were not even literate. It should never be assumed that PCs are in any way typical.
Even when PCs and NPCs use the same rules, as with NPCs with adventuring classes, there exists a PC/NPC divide. NPCs are made to serve a purpose in the world; a PC is made to serve the purposes of one player.
I will replace my wall of text with a "yes, I basically mirror Tacticslion's latest point."
SO much easier to write!
You know, that happens to me all the time on these forums.
(Point in fact, I'm pretty sure that my latest post is just a re-wording of your own earlier.)
You guys are great, though. :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here one that could be added to the list of power stuff in the game. The Protean subdomain power:
Aura of Chaos (Su): At 8th level, you can surround yourself with a field wild energies. These energies manifest as a 30-foot aura of chaos for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. All enemies within this aura must declare one type of action at the start of their turn (attack, cast a spell, move, use an item, or activate a special ability) and make a Will save. Creatures that fail the Will save must take an action other than their declared action. If they succeed, they must take the declared action. Creatures cannot select actions that they cannot perform.
That can screw up a adventuring party and npcs pretty much imo. Unlike slumber hex it affects everyone within 30 feet. The cleric declares that he is going to heal a critically injured party member with a spell and fails his save he can't. Fighter wants to trip his target and fails his save well he has to do something else. By the time the power can be used for at least 8 rounds. Not too shabby.
This is about a witch being able to shut down many encounters with a CR = APL+4, with better odds of success then any other tactic, and no use of expendable resources. It doesn't require any special build, although you can min/max it.
Sure, they do. If the enemy saves, they can't try again. The usage of a hex per enemy is an expendable resource. You get 2 usages with accursed hex.
|
|
Heck, someone pointed out just recently that efreeti can plane shift any time they want. And why wouldn't they, to get themselves some free wish-slaves? That is all kinds of unbalancing right there.
You really want to restart the wish slave and the simulacrums don't lose spell like abilities when they lose HD arguments? there are lengtly threads about those.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grease range at fist level 25'.
Bear saves: Fort +8, Ref +5, Will +2
So targeting a +5 reflex save is better than targeting a +2 will save?Acrobatic check DC 10 to move out of the 10'x10' area affected: the bear is large, so if it don't fall it can step out of the affected area without entering affected squares. It need to check?
Even if he need to check, with 13 dex he has a 60% chance of moving without problems and only a 15% chance of falling.
Don't seem so awesome.
It does if you're the 1st level fighter assigned to intercept the bear. Grease can be cast repeatedly, and does not require another character to be in CDG position when it lands. Just keep casting, circling, and shooting arrows. It doesn't have that wow factor, but it's much, much safer than subjecting your ally to a bear's attack, then hoping you win initiative and it fails its saving throw. One save versus a +5 is still better than one versus +2 AND winning initiative.
Also, you can ready an action and cast it when it moves, forcing it to make an Acrobatics check.
2 times at first level, 3 if you are a wizard specialized in conjurations and 4 if you are a sorcerer, assuming you aren't using anything for defence.
If our bear don't fail its check he will move 30' instead of 40' as moving within the greased area cost double, so the caster is well within striking range.Grease is perceptible and animals are smart enough to avoid slippery areas. It is a tactic that can work well in a area delimited by narrow confines like a dungeon or a gully, but in woods or plains it has all the problems people see with slumber, its usefulness is very situational and it require some expendable cannon fodder between you and the bear.
BTW, your ally is giving cover to the bear. Good luck hitting it with a first level spellcaster using a bow (that was the initial example, elf spellcaster with a bow and grease). AC 16, +4 for the cover, maybe even +4 for the ally in melee. That is a AC of 20 or 24.
Killing a bear with a shortbow (NPC, so half value gear) on the average require 12 successful hits. With a AC of 16 and a +2 to hit at fist level we are speaking of something like 36 attacks.
If that spellcaster want to live he need plenty of burly warriors with longspears.
Exactly like the one with slumber.
Did you guys seriously just spend half a dozen pages argueing about a completely hypotethical and will never appear in an actual campaign situation where a 1st level witch takes on a lone monster way above her CR and wins with a lucky roll?
Why are you doing this instead of using actual situations that has happened in actual games? Im really confused by this. Nothing was achieved by argueing purely fantasy situations.
Or does someone want to talk about how forks are OP because a boy with a fork could thereotically kill a god if the stars were to align?
It's not just that it was a hypothetical - it's that it seemed (or seems) to the OP that said hypothetical could influence the way NPCs interact with one another and the world at large instead of the game itself.
The idea is to curtail players using fridge logic to go, "But wouldn't they just...?"
As has been pointed out, however, if you follow the fluff of the classes themselves, that fridge logic doesn't bear out.
You really want to restart the wish slave and the simulacrums don't lose spell like abilities when they lose HD arguments? there are lengtly threads about those.
Heck, someone pointed out just recently that efreeti can plane shift any time they want. And why wouldn't they, to get themselves some free wish-slaves? That is all kinds of unbalancing right there.
Nope, and it wasn't an argument. If you'd like, though, you can contribute to those in the two other threads similar discussions are happening on and see how I expound on those and probably hate every word I post. :)
The point was, "If you're permissive with NPCs in your world-building, you'll quickly get unbalanced worlds."
|
|
Again, this doesn't water down internal consistency - it simply means that the group of player characters end up as optimized as the players make them, regardless of the tendencies of the world at large, not because the characters choose something (outside of strange but potentially interesting role playing), but because the players do.
It's worth noting that at one time, Luke Skywalker was the only 1st level Jedi in a galaxy of several trillion people. Bilbo Baggins was one of a handful of halfling adventurers in every generation, most of them his relatives (on the Took side). Conan was a master linguist and a skilled tactician; most Cimmerians were not even literate. It should never be assumed that PCs are in any way typical.
Even when PCs and NPCs use the same rules, as with NPCs with adventuring classes, there exists a PC/NPC divide. NPCs are made to serve a purpose in the world; a PC is made to serve the purposes of one player.
Everyone has its limit at how much Mary Sue the PC are.
Everyone has its limit at how much Mary Sue the PC are.Again, this doesn't water down internal consistency - it simply means that the group of player characters end up as optimized as the players make them, regardless of the tendencies of the world at large, not because the characters choose something (outside of strange but potentially interesting role playing), but because the players do.
It's worth noting that at one time, Luke Skywalker was the only 1st level Jedi in a galaxy of several trillion people. Bilbo Baggins was one of a handful of halfling adventurers in every generation, most of them his relatives (on the Took side). Conan was a master linguist and a skilled tactician; most Cimmerians were not even literate. It should never be assumed that PCs are in any way typical.
Even when PCs and NPCs use the same rules, as with NPCs with adventuring classes, there exists a PC/NPC divide. NPCs are made to serve a purpose in the world; a PC is made to serve the purposes of one player.
... where's the "Mary Sue" in all this? My apologies, but I don't understand the reference as it's being used here.
(I think I'm familiar with the most normal uses of the term.)|
|
Here one that could be added to the list of power stuff in the game. The Protean subdomain power:
Aura of Chaos (Su): At 8th level, you can surround yourself with a field wild energies. These energies manifest as a 30-foot aura of chaos for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. All enemies within this aura must declare one type of action at the start of their turn (attack, cast a spell, move, use an item, or activate a special ability) and make a Will save. Creatures that fail the Will save must take an action other than their declared action. If they succeed, they must take the declared action. Creatures cannot select actions that they cannot perform.
That can screw up a adventuring party and npcs pretty much imo. Unlike slumber hex it affects everyone within 30 feet. The cleric declares that he is going to heal a critically injured party member with a spell and fails his save he can't. Fighter wants to trip his target and fails his save well he has to do something else. By the time the power can be used for at least 8 rounds. Not too shabby.
Read it carefully: it inhibit the character from using a category of actions, it don't stop him from acting.
The cleric? Channel instead of cure spell.A witch? Spells plus special abilities. That power will never completely stop her.
The only people that would be completely screwed are pure melee characters.
Here one that could be added to the list of power stuff in the game. The Protean subdomain power:
Aura of Chaos (Su): At 8th level, you can surround yourself with a field wild energies. These energies manifest as a 30-foot aura of chaos for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. All enemies within this aura must declare one type of action at the start of their turn (attack, cast a spell, move, use an item, or activate a special ability) and make a Will save. Creatures that fail the Will save must take an action other than their declared action. If they succeed, they must take the declared action. Creatures cannot select actions that they cannot perform.
That can screw up a adventuring party and npcs pretty much imo. Unlike slumber hex it affects everyone within 30 feet. The cleric declares that he is going to heal a critically injured party member with a spell and fails his save he can't. Fighter wants to trip his target and fails his save well he has to do something else. By the time the power can be used for at least 8 rounds. Not too shabby.
Read it carefully: it inhibit the character from using a category of actions, it don't stop him from acting.
The cleric? Channel instead of cure spell.
A witch? Spells plus special abilities. That power will never completely stop her.
The only people that would be completely screwed are pure melee characters.
That's actually a really good point, Diego, and it seems to me (at first blush) that it tends to be more powerful when used against NPCs than against PCs (though various cases obviously apply).
As a further example, here, if the probably-non-evil probably positive-energy channeling PC cleric wants to heal an ally with a spell and can't oh well, they can use channel.
On the other hand the probably-non-good, probably-negative-energy-channeling NPC cleric wants to heal an ally with a spell... he's out of luck.
Also healing isn't really the best example with clerics - if it's with a druid, for example, it could really mess with the flow of battle, especially if that lack of healing meant the ally died.
It's a fascinating point you've brought up about it. It's certainly dynamic changing when you're dealing with it.
I suppose instead, let me amend and say that it will more heavily affect classes that don't have multiple ways on-hand to do the same or similar things than it will those who do (like a non-evil positive-channeling cleric with an attempt to heal).
EDIT: also a really important tidbit that I think the initial post missed (or if not, than I'm misunderstanding what you're writing; sorry memorax): the aura itself only affects the enemy of the cleric who's using it, not the cleric's allies. That gives a tremendous tactical advantage to the allies, as they are capable of reacting each round to changes while their foes have a much more limited range.
|
|
However I have difficulty, I must admit, abandoning the premise that the fantasy world should be a natural repercussion of the rules.I... actually have been agreeing that it is.
The point is, that a fantasy world is a natural repercussion of the rules... plus fiat.
To declare otherwise is to ensure that there are no NPC classes, solars rule all, and so on.
I don't think we (piratedevon included, and others) are far apart in our views, however we're not entirely in agreement :-)
I'm happy with the plus fiat, as long as we try to minimise this as much as is reasonably possible. I prefer to look for explanations that fit everybody's world rather than let the GM and players paper over the cracks.
If possible.
NPC classes derived originally from the old D&D concept of 0th level characters.
About 95% of NPCs were 0th level. That meant that, not only were they low powered but, importantly, they had no potential for increasing in level.
In fact, back in those days, I believe I'm right in saying that you could be level drained down to 0 and then exist at 0th level - unable to gain levels by yourself until magically brought up to 1st level again.
3rd edition changed this by making this 95% contingent of the game world a bit more interesting with NPC classes, however I personally haven't lost the concept that they cannot actually progress in any other class.
It's a bit like the people in our own world who, for whatever reason, never get a college or university education, or the equivalent for non intelligence based disciplines.
As for the idea that Solars would rule the world, or whatever you might wish to conclude, like I said before we can advance our theories but we really don't know.
I'm reminded of an obscure Doctor Who quote where the Doctor replies to another BBEG talking about taking over the universe:
"How childish. Who could possibly want to take over the Universe?"
"Exactly!" agreed the Doctor. "That's what I keep on trying to tell people. It's a troublesome place, difficult to administer, and as a piece of real estate it's virtually worthless because by definition there'd be no one to sell it to."
In fact, I've never tried to suggest otherwise. What I've suggested is that NPCs don't have the knowledge by virtue of flipping through a handbook. Instead, they need research, difficult work, and concentration... as do the PCs.
The difference is, unlike NPCs, the players have access to books or internet hyperlinks and so on. Because the players choose for the characters (a form of game-world fiat) the PCs can easily have an optimized system. From the PCs perspective, they're just as limited as the NPCs - there is no appreciable difference between them other than power.
Now I disagree with you here as well.
I spend quite a bit of time optimising my PCs, but considerably more time optimising my real life :-)
Whether a C is a PC or NPC, we can assume that figuring out the best career path for themselves occupies far more time that we, as Players, allocate to it within the rest of our lives. In fact you could argue, and I have frequently heard the argument made the other way, that NPCs are unfairly much better versed in the rules governing their own world than PCs can ever be.
I will reiterate that it is hard to predict, and all we can possibly do is reach some sort of consensus.
In a way, it's the one thing that saves the Pathfinder world from becoming nonsensical and in need of lots and lots of fiat. It doesn't take very much imagination to find explanations about why people (in their various monstrous guises) don't follow the optimal path. That doesn't mean we throw logic to the four winds, it just means we have to act as philosphers - discussing the issues without ever reaching firm conclusions.
When I got started on my career back in the late 80s as a programmer, programming was seen as a great to earn a living (a bit, like, the Slumber Hex could be seen as advantageous in a fantasy world). Lots of people became programmers, and an awful lot of them were not very good at it. Not everybody did, for I dare say many different reasons. The rise of programming as a career back then certainly did change the world, but not absolutely. It "affected" it rather than revolutionised it - and then we got a lot of rubbish software written and programming lost its charm and the world changed again.
I see Slumber Hex in a similar way. It's not going to flip the world on its head, but it's going to make a difference.
Richard
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How come abilities like Slumber bother people more than the insane damage physical damage dealers deal?
It is strange to see people worry about an ability that puts things to sleep while shrugging about a class that deals extreme damage that opposing creatures can't match like a Come and Get Me Barbarian or a Magus. Do you guys really not see these classes end encounters in single rounds by killing the opponent?
Or do many play as though you have DM knowledge of the classes capabilities and buff opponents accordingly? How do you counteract an optimized Magus and Barbarian hammering an enemy that should not know how to counter their abilities?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whether a C is a PC or NPC, we can assume that figuring out the best career path for themselves occupies far more time that we, as Players, allocate to it within the rest of our lives. In fact you could argue, and I have frequently heard the argument made the other way, that NPCs are unfairly much better versed in the rules governing their own world than PCs can ever be.
I will reiterate that it is hard to predict, and all we can possibly do is reach some sort of consensus.
That's... a hard claim to make. They'll be substantially more versed in the common minutae and the day-to-day rhythms, the normal language and social interaction with people and animals, and so on, in myriads of ways we can't hope to fathom... but they'll never know as much as player without cracking open a book and learning that a sorcerer who has <insert XP number here> gains <insert level here> and access to <insert spell level here> per day.
Don't get me wrong - you can approximate metagame knowledge as in-game knowledge. I'm versed in how you do it and have made the argument that, to some extent, it must be done. But you can't get exact numbers in many cases, and even when you do, it'll look a lot more like our subtle variations to those in-world or else come off like an Order of the Stick style meta-world filled with meta-knowledge.
And here's where I think you're going wrong.
Witches are chosen by their patron, not the other way around.
You chose your career because you liked it and excelled at it and were able to be trained in it due to natural talent.
Witches don't do that.
Their career is chosen for them because they have the natural talent and some Higher Power blesses them.
In the same way you can't (to the best of my knowledge) change your actual innate height, skin color, eye color, or internal organ arrangement, NPCs (and PCs) can't control what their natural talents are - and they can't control whether or not a Power gives them patronage.
In the Western countries, we have many things that we take for granted - equal rights and access to education being one of them.
But instead of your easy access, imagine that you lived in some third world country. Then someone came along, thought you looked pretty bright, took you out of that third world country, and educated you.
What of your equally bright (or even brighter) friends? Why was it you and not them?
It has nothing to do with them lacking the ability to make a good witch. They lack the patron who will invest in them in the first place.
The difference is, in Pathfinder Worlds, there are Active Mystical Forces that Cannot Be Explained, whereas in Real World we use Repeatable Techniques and Personal Training.
In the real world, once you've made your fortune, you could go back and be a patron yourself - your training is repeatable.
In Pathfinder, you'd have to be some sort of mythic source to become a Patron. Not very likely.
That's where the disconnect between your view and others lies.
If we were talking about: barbarians, fighters, rangers, rogues (or ninjas), wizards, alchemists, cavaliers (and samurai), gunslingers, or magi I would say that your experience as a programmer was a valid comparison. Those are all trained skill-sets that utilize repeatable skills and abilities that are modified in effect by natural talent and ability. Just like programming.
But we're not. We're talking about a supernatural force hand-picking a bright young girl or boy for a mysterious purpose, fostering that kid's unique and special training that can't be repeated except by fiat of that mysterious force that doesn't respond to pleas to make it happen again, and that can't be seen, felt, or demonstrably affected in any way.
Players get to choose their class abilities.
PCs do not.
You did not set your intelligence score. If you were a PC, however, your player would be able to. You see it (much like anyone in the world sees it) as you taking your natural strengths and learning to utilize them to your maximum advantage.
If you had a Player, it would be called Optimizing... at least you think it would be called Optimizing because that's what you believe you've done.
That said, unless you're one of those self-made multi-billionaires or someone who's found an exploit in the System and utilized it to its full potential to gain some unrivaled political or social advantage you're not as optimized as you might be, regardless of your ability scores.
Of course, you didn't do that because those opportunities were not afforded to you - it was impossible.
Similarly, one does not just choose to become a witch... or if one can, there is no reason for NPC classes to exist because it's not a matter of education, it's a matter of choosing a supernatural entity and demanding they give you power and they do.
And solars wouldn't rule the world(s) because they want to. They would rule the world(s) because there are active, nearly-as-powerful malevolent forces at work.
Also, the quips and quotes are not really helpful to your point - it would be useful for all good souls if Solars took over everything. It would be their duty to sacrifice themselves by taking over the everything if they had it in their ability to do so and that's what was required. And, checking the Solar entry, they're more than ready to do something like that.
Thus, it runs counter to your idea that "if it's a useful tactic it'll be done".
Slumber is not as potentially damaging as the preponderance of things that already exist. If the gameworld runs as it looks like it does there must be reasons. Ergo, the fiat.
EDIT:
3rd edition changed this by making this 95% contingent of the game world a bit more interesting with NPC classes, however I personally haven't lost the concept that they cannot actually progress in any other class.
This right here is a contradiction in your stated methodology of world design. Why can they not progress in other classes? What prevents them? What form of arbitration - that isn't part of the game world rules - are you using to determine this?
That's where your problem runs. You're focusing on fiat that reinforces your "everything is bad" interpretation instead of fiat that reinforces the "this will work out" interpretation. Switch fiats. Neither requires that much effort and mostly works with RAW. It'll go easier on you. :)
|
|
Here one that could be added to the list of power stuff in the game. The Protean subdomain power:
Aura of Chaos (Su): At 8th level, you can surround yourself with a field wild energies. These energies manifest as a 30-foot aura of chaos for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. All enemies within this aura must declare one type of action at the start of their turn (attack, cast a spell, move, use an item, or activate a special ability) and make a Will save. Creatures that fail the Will save must take an action other than their declared action. If they succeed, they must take the declared action. Creatures cannot select actions that they cannot perform.
That can screw up a adventuring party and npcs pretty much imo. Unlike slumber hex it affects everyone within 30 feet. The cleric declares that he is going to heal a critically injured party member with a spell and fails his save he can't. Fighter wants to trip his target and fails his save well he has to do something else. By the time the power can be used for at least 8 rounds. Not too shabby.
Read it carefully: it inhibit the character from using a category of actions, it don't stop him from acting.
The cleric? Channel instead of cure spell.
A witch? Spells plus special abilities. That power will never completely stop her.
The only people that would be completely screwed are pure melee characters.That's actually a really good point, Diego, and it seems to me (at first blush) that it tends to be more powerful when used against NPCs than against PCs (though various cases obviously apply).
As a further example, here, if the probably-non-evil probably positive-energy channeling PC cleric wants to heal an ally with a spell and can't oh well, they can use channel.
On the other hand the probably-non-good, probably-negative-energy-channeling NPC cleric wants to heal an ally with a spell... he's out of luck.
Also healing isn't really the best example...
How much it can affect the players characters depend on what kind of unspoken contract there is between the GM and players.
If all play "fair" they will declare a kind of action that they want to make and abide the result of the dice roll.If they like to stretch the rules it is very easy to avoid the effect of this power: "Selected action: use item" (or some other action you don't want to perform), followed by "I voluntarily fail my saving throw. Full attack."
If only one of the two sides or only some of the players use this kind of tactic it can be even more ugly.
Then there is the problem of several action that combine two or more of the action listed.
"I want to cast Scorching ray." Spell or attack? Both? If you are barred from using the attack action, you can use the free attacks from rays, touch or ranged touch spells, SLA and special abilities?
Spell combat is stopped by being unable to use spells, attacks and special abilities?
Channeling to harm undead: special ability and attack?
Even power attack: nothing or special ability?
This ability seem an interesting power, but it require a lot of prior understanding between the GM and players to avoid discussions at the table.
It can be terrible in organized play.