You cannot add Persistent to slumber hex, you can to colour spray forcing enemies to make 2 saves and take the lowest. This significantly increases the chance of success especially against enemies with poor will saves.1) It require to take a specific revelation (albeit a good one);
2) It don't change the ST, while the slumber hex ST increase with the witch level.1 feat and +2 spell levels or a metamagic rod
You can Heighten colour spray if you want to up the DC and further reduce the chance to resist.1 feat and +X spell levels
You can add Widen to colour spray making it a 30' cone which covers a large area and turning it into a massive close range group control spell. Slumber gets 2 targets maximum per action and that only with a feat?1 feat and +3 spell levels or a metamagic rod
So, if you throw more resources at it, color spray become more powerful. Good.
On the other hand the slumber hex power increase bi itself every 2 levels as its DC increase. Essentially it benefit from the highten metamagic feat for free.
The thing you are missig is that YOU CAN add these things to your Color Spray. YOU CAN do all these things, making color spray (especially in the hands of a Heaven's Oracle) a rediculous spell. And heck, Why not Meta-magic it a bit? Its a level 1 spell. Oh! And if you got Spell Perfection on Color Spray it gets even more retarded...
|
The point I'm trying to make here, though, is about looking at this from the Frost Giant's point of view.
The Giant will know that if he bumps into a 5th level + party he's toast. That's bad luck, but relatively speaking unlikely given world demographics. 1st level NPCs, however, are quite common.
Additionally, high level monsters in high level situations frequently rely on SR to protect them against the sorts of attacks you're talking about.
In fact SR, which originally evolved from Magic Resistance, was always the way in which creatures developed a sort of armour against anything magical that the PCs could throw at them. When MR turned to SR it became specific to spells and spell-like abilities, which was fine when that was all that the PCs could throw but now that PCs are getting to use offensive Su abilities as well I think that the original design has been broken.
Richard
A 1st level goblin barbarian with the Endurance feat maxes out Stealth. He waits until the frost giant goes to sleep. Then, he performs a CDG. Actually much more effective and plausible than any of the described scenarios involving a witch.
If you want to become a serial killer of monsters,
1) It's not that hard
2) I cut my teeth on a playstyle where that was considered normal. Big deal, you do it one time, now you're a higher level party and it's no longer "unbalanced."You can't go to sleep by yourself in the wilderness, no matter who you are. A pack of wolves could sneak up on you.
The giant would have to find a cave with a big boulder that you can block it with. Or climb a tree (or glacier), or meet up with his mates, or go home!
Richard
That's why he has the Endurance feat. He can follow the frost giant almost indefinitely, and when he goes to sleep, BLAMMO!
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
While, a 20th level mage can change the world [see razmir], a 1st level one cannot. A coinflip chance of death will not make a giant tremble in fear, nor will it make him change his tactics. Especially when you consider that the odds of a witch in every village are very low, the odds of a village having a fighter in it who uses a scythe are relatively low (maybe a warrior), the odds of every witch having slumber are very low, the odds of a fighter being in a village with a witch are low, the odds of a fighter being in a village with a slumber witch are low the odds of a frost giant attacking a village with a witch is very low, the odds of a frost giant attacking a village with a fighter and a witch are low, and the odds of a frost giant attacking a village with a slumber witch are very very low. Couple that with the odds of the fighter getting within 5 feet of the giant and the odds of the witch getting within 30 feet of the giant and the odds of the giant failing the save, and the odds are astronomically low.
Its like canceling your trip from Arizona to Hawaii because even though you booked a flight on the safest airline in the state and you have a parachute as your carry on gear, and an inflatable raft with it[somehow], you fear that the raft might burst AND the parachute cord might sever AND the plane might crash in the ocean. People don't do this because it isn't very likely, and so plane crashes don't lead to planes never flying passengers commercially.
...
The Giant will know that if he bumps into a 5th level + party he's toast. That's bad luck, but relatively speaking unlikely given world demographics. 1st level NPCs, however, are quite common.
...more...
A solo frost giant is CR 9 so it would be an "epic" encounter for a sixth level party (I was wrong about epic being APL+4 it is actually APL+3) While the party might kill the giant, the rules expect the encounter to be a likely TPK.
Going back to the fourth level party with two witches, the giant has very little chance of success. The DC for the will save is likely to be at least a 16, and could easily be a 20 or more (especially if you throw in an foxes cunning). So we are back to 50/50 again, or worse for the giant. Assuming twp slumber hexes, I think the giant has at best a 25% chance of staying awake. Given that the group has four rounds to coup de grace, and any martial type character should be able to do a min of 25 damage with a melee or ranged crit by then, the giant is just hoping for a 20. Given that all teh characters can ready in case that fails, the giant is S.O.L.
You can throw 2 frost giants against the party, and even if you rule that a giant would automatically know its friend is only sleeping, and can be awaken with a standard action - (giants know all about that stuff right?) The giants STILL have decent odds of failing to both stay awake and getting coup de graced before they can kill the party.
As a GM I really dislike the slumber hex. I regret allowing in the party and will never allow it again. It has changed my game and the party around the witch. It has changed the tactics I need to use to make a fight more interesting. It has even been used in none combat situations. Put the guy to sleep and we will ransack the store looking for what we need...screw talking to them. It turned my party into a bunch of stone cold killers.....Coup de Gracing everything they can.
The witch tweaked out the save so it is over 20 (he is 4th level now) and it is his primary focus.
As a GM I started pairing things up, so they could wake each other. I also started looking for a way to protect against it...but I have yet to find one sine the FAQ states that Protection from Evil does not prevent sleep effects.
The only good thing about it is it has pushed the alignment argument as the party as "murderer" just about everything.
So never again in my groups
I dont know how much time you have as a GM but if my players start taking evil actions they get investigated just like an NPC would. They have no idea who that shopkeeper was related to
Whatever comes after them may or may not be level appropriate either. The problem here is corruption of your players by power, not that hex. Once they realize actions have consequences it will cut down on them being mean to NPC's.
I'd take the level 10 party any day. The slumber hex + cdg combo relies a lot on luck, while a level 10 party has a far better chance of surviving on skill and preparation. The level 10 party would understand the chances of running into that demon, and would have the resources to be ready for it; even if they didn't win initiative, they would still have a decent chance of survival. The level 1 party would praying to win initiative or they would be dead immediately.A CR 16 encounter would be epic for 4 x 13th level characters. It should wipe the floor with 2 x 10th, even with bad tactics.
In the scenario I gave, incidentally, initiative wasn't an issue.
Richard
It would likely defeat the 2 level 10 PC's, but they stand a much better chance than the 1st level PC's. He can't kill both of them in one round with one action. They may even be able to escape. The 1st level characters are just hosed every time.
|
|
On this whole demographics thing and what might be the likely chances of finding a witch and a fighter in a village, since I've just got Towns of the Inner Sea if we look at the smallest town there, Trunau, we get this:
Population 780, NPCs with PC levels that are mentioned in the text:
druid 8
barbarian 5 / ranger 3
ranger 7
cleric 6
wizard 5 / fighter 1
barbarian 3 / expert 3
fighter 4 / oracle 1
paladin 4
cleric 4
rogue 2 / expert 2
alchemist 3
Assuming that everyone of 3rd level and over is mentioned in the text, I would think it was not unreasonable for an equal number of 1st and 2nd level characters to be there too.
Let's say 26 NPCs with PC levels in a town of 780, because it makes the maths nice and easy, so that then it's 1 in 30 per head of population, with half of that being 1st and 2nd level.
No witches in the list above, I note, but I would be surprised if there wasn't a witch among the 1st and 2nd level contingent.
If this is a representative example, then in a village of 150 we should expect 5 NPCs with PC levels. I would personally have thought there would be 2 fighter types, 1 divine caster, 1 rogue and 1 arcane caster, and an equal chance of the arcane caster being a sorcerer, wizard or witch.
That would give us a 1 in 3 chance of a small village having at least a 1st level witch, and no shortage of fighting power.
Richard
The more "murderhobo" the group is the worse it gets.
Friendly outcast Hill Giant who has an adventure hook for the party... BAM slumber hex "Yeah, lets kill it for instant level-up"
It's actually much worse in encounters that aren't meant to be combat because the NPCs involved don't tend to be built to make the will saves that the PCs can force on them. Games where PvP isn't outlawed are also going to see significant shifts as well.
It isn't just the fact that it has made a ton of older adventures unplayable without complete revision because of encounters that were never balanced for this kind of power, or that it is forcing me to use way more of "encounter type X" because I want the party to have an actual challenge. The slumber hex has more potential for shaping the game than any other 1st level ability.
For my home game, I'm probably going to disallow it in the future, but I will give things a few more levels to see how it pans out. I'm pretty sure that it just gets more powerful, as the gulf between DC and weak will save increases, and the loss of action economy for the enemies of the party really starts to break any encounter where the party isn't just facing a bunch of mooks whose advantage is action economy (full round lost by the slumber affected creature + move action to get up + action by friend waking him up)
As a GM you need to know your party, and number 2 you are supposed to ad-hoc your XP to account for situations like this.
I have run for "talk first" groups and the murder hobos. I don't even bother with friendly NPC's for group 2, well not as things that look like enemies anyway.
That's a play style issue, not an issue with the power itself.Oh, it's definitely a playstyle issue. I want to play in games where the characters don't have a ridiculously good chance of taking down things they shouldn't be messing with. Where killing something with a CR of 5 above your party level is am amazing accomplishment, not just... "yeah well we had a "X" type character so it was pretty easy"
This goes for the home games I run and the games I play in. With PFS being a bit of an exception. I'm not advocating that this is what everyone should do, but I do think that certain abilities do kind of alter the game in a way that makes it... boreing. We remove those abilities and continue to enjoy the game.
I prefer to eliminate a single ability choice from players rather than eliminating tons of classic encounters.
As shown the chance of them winning in an actual fight is almost 0. That makes it not a game changer like people are claiming it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I swear... people need to stop confusing very poor GMing skills with "OP" abilities. I mean, if the GM kept throwing walls of CR 1/3 Kobolds (to amount to upwards of CR 10) at a level 5 wizard they would fall over dead too.. If the GM keeps throwing zombies vs an Oracle of Life, the oracle would look OP as all hell. If the GM keeps throwing creatures with crap tastic reflex saves vs a blaster mage, the blaster would look straight retarded (have you SEEN what a optimized blaster can do?).
As a GM, it is HIS JOB to look at a party and to tweak things to account for party composition.
I think the details about 1st level characters vs one frost giant are obscuring the big picture.
Slumber hex allows a player (and coup de grace helpers) to insta-win encounters above the "Epic" APL+4 level with good odds and ABSOLUTELY NO USE OF RESOURCES.
What are the odds for the frost giant against a fourth level party with TWO witches? You could probably even throw in a second giant, and the party STILL has a good chance of winning. They shouldn't even have a chance of beating one, but they might be able to kill both, without using any resources.
Actually they dont have a good chance of winning. At least not in any scenario that is likely to occur in a game. Giants charge or move and kill the party. If the giants have cleave they might be able to move and kill 2 party members a piece. If not they only kill half the party in round one.
|
|
It would likely defeat the 2 level 10 PC's, but they stand a much better chance than the 1st level PC's. He can't kill both of them in one round with one action. They may even be able to escape. The 1st level characters are just hosed every time.
You think the scenario that I painted is so unrealistic that it's not worth considering. I don't agree, but since it's a matter of judgement I think we'll just have to agree to differ.
Richard
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would likely defeat the 2 level 10 PC's, but they stand a much better chance than the 1st level PC's. He can't kill both of them in one round with one action. They may even be able to escape. The 1st level characters are just hosed every time.You think the scenario that I painted is so unrealistic that it's not worth considering. I don't agree, but since it's a matter of judgement I think we'll just have to agree to differ.
Richard
It is HIGHLY unlikely... With a Perception of +10, they are bound to notice a level 1 party. So somehow, the party needs to sneak up to the giant, Use slumber on it when it is within 30 ft, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME having a person next to it with a High crit weapon. This is assuming he fails his save (which is unlikely in any scenerio short of a witch who optimized SPECIFICALLY for slumber with a VERY SPECIFIC selection of feat, trait, race, alternate racial ability, AND has a 20 in Int which in lower point buys, is not very feasible).
So yeah.. that is a stupid corner case that requires the stars to align JUST RIGHT, the time to be perfect, the sacrifice of a virgin being made, and Cthulhu to rise from his depths...
It would likely defeat the 2 level 10 PC's, but they stand a much better chance than the 1st level PC's. He can't kill both of them in one round with one action. They may even be able to escape. The 1st level characters are just hosed every time.You think the scenario that I painted is so unrealistic that it's not worth considering. I don't agree, but since it's a matter of judgement I think we'll just have to agree to differ.
Richard
I am saying the chances of them winning are so low that it is a non-issue. That horned devil drops fireball and it is likely game over for the 1st level party, even if they may the save.
I guess if the GM sets him up for failure by using bad tactics he could lose, but level is a metagame construct. If you come across a monster it should realistically treat you the same in combat no matter whether you are level 1 or 10.
The guy in robes with a familiar may be a wizard, sorc, or witch. Neither class is to be taken lightly so keeping himself at a reasonable distance until he can determine which action to take is the best thing to do.
Being highly intelligent, this would be obvious to them.
...
The Giant will know that if he bumps into a 5th level + party he's toast. That's bad luck, but relatively speaking unlikely given world demographics. 1st level NPCs, however, are quite common.
...more...A solo frost giant is CR 9 so it would be an "epic" encounter for a sixth level party (I was wrong about epic being APL+4 it is actually APL+3) While the party might kill the giant, the rules expect the encounter to be a likely TPK.
Going back to the fourth level party with two witches, the giant has very little chance of success. The DC for the will save is likely to be at least a 16, and could easily be a 20 or more (especially if you throw in an foxes cunning). So we are back to 50/50 again, or worse for the giant. Assuming twp slumber hexes, I think the giant has at best a 25% chance of staying awake. Given that the group has four rounds to coup de grace, and any martial type character should be able to do a min of 25 damage with a melee or ranged crit by then, the giant is just hoping for a 20. Given that all teh characters can ready in case that fails, the giant is S.O.L.
You can throw 2 frost giants against the party, and even if you rule that a giant would automatically know its friend is only sleeping, and can be awaken with a standard action - (giants know all about that stuff right?) The giants STILL have decent odds of failing to both stay awake and getting coup de graced before they can kill the party.
The only way this is true is if the GM sets the giants up to be taken down. If the fight starts at a distance rocks will be flying at the spellcasters because they are more threatening due to magic.
If the witches try to use the fighters to block a charge one giant can just overrun a fighter. The clears the path for the 2nd giant to power attack both witches on a cleave. It should only take one hit off a level 4 witch, so now they focus on the fighters.
The odds are not in the party's favor. If the witches are too far apart he just kills one witch. The other witch can only slumber one giant, but giant 2 can likely still kill both fighters without even going prone on a power attack.
Which ever giant is not slumbered kills the witch.
It would likely defeat the 2 level 10 PC's, but they stand a much better chance than the 1st level PC's. He can't kill both of them in one round with one action. They may even be able to escape. The 1st level characters are just hosed every time.You think the scenario that I painted is so unrealistic that it's not worth considering. I don't agree, but since it's a matter of judgement I think we'll just have to agree to differ.
Richard
It is HIGHLY unlikely... With a Perception of +10, they are bound to notice a level 1 party. So somehow, the party needs to sneak up to the giant, Use slumber on it when it is within 30 ft, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME having a person next to it with a High crit weapon. This is assuming he fails his save (which is unlikely in any scenerio short of a witch who optimized SPECIFICALLY for slumber with a VERY SPECIFIC selection of feat, trait, race, alternate racial ability, AND has a 20 in Int which in lower point buys, is not very feasible).
So yeah.. that is a stupid corner case that requires the stars to align JUST RIGHT, the time to be perfect, the sacrifice of a virgin being made, and Cthulhu to rise from his depths...
The horned devil is the CR 16 he was talking about, IIRC..
I could see as a module writer how it would have a greater effect since you can't assume any given party composition, but for the DM writing an adventure at home, it really isn't that big of a deal. You know the party, you know their capabilities, and you can easily work around these issues with a little planning. The problem when writing modules, though, is that no matter what you write, there will be a party combo that can break it. Trying to plan for the slumber hex simply shifts that broken combo to something else, it doesn't remove it.
Heck, against a pair of 1st level characters, if even one of two frost giants goes first or makes his save, he would probably just sunder the fighter's scythe.
About 3 years ago, I posted this thread:
Witch's Slumber Hex makes it all too Easy
Pretty much, most people thought that the power was balanced compared with other powers, a point I still disagree with, at least from the point of the way APs are designed. Specifically, Legacy of Fire proved a cakewalk due to the number of living, non-sleep immune opponents (almost all of them) and the number of single bad-guy encounters. My group's synegrgy was ridiculously good as well; anything that engaged at range would be pin-cushioned by the Zen Archer (who had a good enough Perception to see flying, invisible creatures), while anything that got close would be put to sleep and coup-degraced. Eventually, by the middle of the fourth module, the game fell apart due to the balance issues, a fact I still don't like. In short, if you are running some of the APs as is, a Witch is going to make some of the encounters feel trivial with this power. Oh, there's definitely some APs where they don't do so hot (Carrion Crown) but any DM who was one in their game should be aware of how their power affects the game.
AP's tend to use more single monster encounters so they will have more problems with Slumber Hex if run as written. At a home game the GM can use less single monsters, which are not a great idea, even before slumber was around. I tend to avoid for optimized parties because by the time a the primary and secondary DPR characters have gotten a full round off the combat is over.
|
|
The problem with a lot of the arguments I'm hearing is that they're all about monster vs PCs - "I, as GM, would always have my encounter go *this* way, so it's a non issue".
Ok, fine - I'm not arguing with you. What I'm trying to establish is how monsters and NPCs interrelate, in all the myriad ways that they can, realistically, given what they know of each other's abilities.
Let me try a couple more examples.
If you were to read in a module that George the Hill Giant went off hunting on his own every few days - just a day trip from his palisade, a few hours away and back, or that Bill and Ben, two Hill Giants, descended on a farming community of 150 people or so to steal a cow or two, would you think to yourself "that's ridiculous - it could never happen!"
Would you think to yourself, particularly given the presence of Witches and Slumber Hex, and with reference to the post on demographics above, if you agree with it, and also with reference to posts we had earlier in this thread arguing that having a Witch in a village with Slumber Hex was a particularly good idea, that these giants were taking too much of a risk?
I don't have any sort of personal axe to grind over this, by the way. This isn't about PCs and gameplay so much - though I know we've touched on it frequently in this thread. I just want to get an idea how people feel about painting a realistic picture of the world for the PCs to adventure in. I started this whole thread because I felt that Slumber Hex had changed things - but if people broadly speaking disagree that's fine - I'll have George wander off hunting on his own and Bill and Ben attack the village :-)
Richard
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you are saying you want the very powerful monsters to be able to do suboptimal(almost foolish) actions and still be able to come out on top?
If I played that module with George I would likely find out what happened to him, and if the giant played as if his intelligence was 4, then I would call it out as a GM using narrative power to make it happen. Just to be clear I am not saying a giant can never lose. I am saying the chances and times of it occuring are so small that instead of thing "we need to worry about fledgling witches, the other giants will think "George was an idiot".
In order for you idea to work you need to have slumber, the extra hex feat, and cackle. <-----I assumed that combo which is not likely for every witch to have, for my previous post. So even with a cookie cutter optimized build, which not every NPC will be, which further lessens any real problem the witch fails. Actually an NPC witch has lower stats than a PC so the giants have a much better chance or surviving.
So you need a cookie cutter witch, not just any witch.
You need really dumb monsters who somehow are not already dead, and the fighter to survive.
It also helps if they don't notice each other until both parties are very close or the fighter or witch will likely die.
That is a lot of odds stacking. If something needs that much help to work, then it is not game changing.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two big things being ignored in the original argument (I haven't read the whole thread) - Colour Spray and ignoring that it doesn't work on anything immune to mind-affecting.
You can't pretend these don't exist when making comparisons.
Even if you argue Colour Spray doesn't work beyond x level (which isn't true for a Heavens Oracle), the wizard gets more spells later that effectively replace it.
In this way, ultimately, a wizard overall is more effective than a witch with slumber and the rest of her devices.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That would give us a 1 in 3 chance of a small village having at least a 1st level witch, and no shortage of fighting power.
So that's a 1 in 3 chance of their being a witch, you need to combine that with the odds of the witch having slumber, which is possible but I wouldn't say likely, as a witch would get much more use out of hexes like cauldron and healing which you can make a living out of. Then you couple that with the odds of the fighter getting within 5ft of the giant AND the odds of the witch getting within 30ft of the giant AND the odds of the giant failing its save, it still comes out to low chances. I would say you are more likely to be killed by a donkey.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you are saying you want the very powerful monsters to be able to do suboptimal(almost foolish) actions and still be able to come out on top?
If I played that module with George I would likely find out what happened to him, and if the giant played as if his intelligence was 4, then I would call it out as a GM using narrative power to make it happen. Just to be clear I am not saying a giant can never lose. I am saying the chances and times of it occuring are so small that instead of thing "we need to worry about fledgling witches, the other giants will think "George was an idiot".
In order for you idea to work you need to have slumber, the extra hex feat, and cackle. <-----I assumed that combo which is not likely for every witch to have, for my previous post. So even with a cookie cutter optimized build, which not every NPC will be, which further lessens any real problem the witch fails. Actually an NPC witch has lower stats than a PC so the giants have a much better chance or surviving.
So you need a cookie cutter witch, not just any witch.
You need really dumb monsters who somehow are not already dead, and the fighter to survive.
It also helps if they don't notice each other until both parties are very close or the fighter or witch will likely die.That is a lot of odds stacking. If something needs that much help to work, then it is not game changing.
i agree with this
you need a cookie cutter human or elven witch with 20 Int, Slumber, and Extra Hex (Cackle), then you need the giant to fail the save against the Slumber Hex, the Fighter to move up with a scythe in hand. the Witch to cackle, and the Fighter to Coup De Grace the Giant with a Scythe and Deal a minimum of 23 damage to get that DC 33 Save. a Coup De Grace from a 15 STR fighter with a Scythe deals 32 damage on average, but i'm sure an 18 Str Fighter with power attack and a Scythe, is what they Truly means, for an Average of 56 damage, a minimum of 44 damage. no way the Giant is making a DC 54-DC78 Fortitude Save.
but this is a corner case stacked in favor of the witch and scythe wielding fighter. not just a witch and fighter, but a cookie cutter pair built around the concept of slumber and coup de grace
a highly specific corner case with a 20ish percent chance of success among a pair of extremely complimentary characters built around a highly specific tactic, should not be the standard an ability is judged by.
how many witches honestly encounter frost giants at 1st level without a good chance to run away if not seen as a threat?
how many giants are honestly that stupid? it takes pure narrative power to keep a giant that dimwitted alive, not all giants are dumb, and if that frost giant were really that handicapped, natural selection would have killed it off long ago.
yay, a frost giant earned a darwin award.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
His friends posthumously demoted him to being a hill giant.
Look at Antagonize (Intimidate) for another example. Mikaze did a great in-character demonstration of what Antagonize does to the game world.Can someone link to this please?
even in the pre-errata version of Antagonize that could make pacifists and wizards waste their turn attacking you in melee.
all i would have done, is attach the (mind affecting) tag to the ability. i would have still kept it (Ex), but while it does break the setting, i would have attached a level requirement to it (say 5ish)
that is all i would have done with the pre-erratad antagonize feat is attach the (mind affecting) keyword and a requirement of 5 ranks in both intimidate AND diplomacy.
that is merely because the feat doesn't have a minimum level prerequisite, the half orcs wasted one of their few feats, and because they clearly forgot to label it a supernatural mind affecting ability
i would have no problems with the original ability if it had the following
the (Mind Affecting) and (Compulsion) Keywords
a level requirement in the form of say 5 Ranks each in Diplomacy AND Intimidate.
Clarified whether or not it was a supernatural ability, i have no problem with it being an extraordinary ability, but if there was a magical influence behind those words that could be detected as magical, despite being a spammable feat based ability, it would help the setting more.
had no means of quickening below the standard action required to use it
my problem, which i think Mikaze shares, is not what one high level character can do with it, but what a low level orcish horde can do to a village with it
another issue a lot of people, not including myself have, is that anybody can take it, and that it isn't spellcaster only.
why can't High level Noncasters use insults to make Mahatma Gandi charge them to his death? but low level Casters get a 1st level spell that does the same thing
Why can't high level noncasters use diplomacy to tell a dragon to commit Suicide? but low casters get a 1st level spell that does the same thing
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
that is merely because the feat doesn't have a minimum level prerequisite, the half orcs wasted one of their few feats, and because they clearly forgot to label it a supernatural mind affecting ability
i would have no problems with the original ability if it had the following
the (Mind Affecting) and (Compulsion) Keywords
a level requirement in the form of say 5 Ranks each in Diplomacy AND Intimidate.
Clarified whether or not it was a supernatural ability, i have no problem with it being an extraordinary ability, but if there was a magical influence behind those words that could be detected as magical, despite being a spammable feat based ability, it would help the setting more.
had no means of quickening below the standard action required to use it
my problem, which i think Mikaze shares, is not what one high level character can do with it, but what a low level orcish horde can do to a village with it
another issue a lot of people, not including myself have, is that anybody can take it, and that it isn't spellcaster only.
why can't High level Noncasters use insults to make Mahatma Gandi charge them to his death? but low level Casters get a 1st level spell that does the same thing
Why can't high level noncasters use diplomacy to tell a dragon to commit Suicide? but low casters get a 1st level spell that does the same thing
There is more than on thread on this spell. It is not because noncasters can do these things. It is easy to pump skill modifiers, and there is no save. There is also no taking into account the character's personality. Even dominate and charm person which have limited per day uses allow for an escape clause if the act is against the victim's nature.
but, the escape clause can be countered with a charisma check and the DC for the intimidate check effectively replaces the save. yes, skill checks are hard to augment, but i would simply change the DC to 10+Sense Motive Bonus or 10+level+wis, whichever is higher
essentially, one gets better at resisting, by improving their sense motive skill, realizing the target is trying to goad them, and find a means to combat them
it would be extremely difficult to calculate a DC based on skill ranks, and depending on which attribute determined the Save DC, would negate entire builds that use it.
base it on Charisma, and the only people whom will touch it are paladins and martially inclined oracles.
the skill check opens it's use up to other classes too.
but, the escape clause can be countered with a charisma check and the DC for the intimidate check effectively replaces the save. yes, skill checks are hard to augment, but i would simply change the DC to 10+Sense Motive Bonus or 10+level+wis, whichever is higher
essentially, one gets better at resisting, by improving their sense motive skill, realizing the target is trying to goad them, and find a means to combat them
it would be extremely difficult to calculate a DC based on skill ranks, and depending on which attribute determined the Save DC, would negate entire builds that use it.
base it on Charisma, and the only people whom will touch it are paladins and martially inclined oracles.
the skill check opens it's use up to other classes too.
You can change it as a GM, but in its current form it is easy to abuse, and skill bonuses are not hard to get to the point they need to abuse this feat.
skill focus helps, circlet of charisma, there is another feat that boost intimidate also. there is also a feat that lets you add your str modifier to intimidate.
People on this board have pushed skill modifiers over 50 before level 20.
but, the escape clause can be countered with a charisma check and the DC for the intimidate check effectively replaces the save. yes, skill checks are hard to augment, but i would simply change the DC to 10+Sense Motive Bonus or 10+level+wis, whichever is higher
essentially, one gets better at resisting, by improving their sense motive skill, realizing the target is trying to goad them, and find a means to combat them
it would be extremely difficult to calculate a DC based on skill ranks, and depending on which attribute determined the Save DC, would negate entire builds that use it.
base it on Charisma, and the only people whom will touch it are paladins and martially inclined oracles.
the skill check opens it's use up to other classes too.
You can change it as a GM, but in its current form it is easy to abuse, and skill bonuses are not hard to get to the point they need to abuse this feat.
skill focus helps, circlet of charisma, there is another feat that boost intimidate also. there is also a feat that lets you add your str modifier to intimidate.
People on this board have pushed skill modifiers over 50 before level 20.
i would consider the dedication of precious feats, the loss of a potential trait, the dedication of a skill rank per level, and the dedication of attribute points to merely get that +50 skill modifier at level 20. to be something to be rewarded.
if it were easy to get a +50 intimidate at level 20, sure, but look at the feats you are pumping to make this ability work. if you are honestly a PC whom optimized this one trick to the point of automatic success, guess what? you deserve to be able to exploit this trick. you spent at least 2 or 3 out of 10 general feats, 20 skill points over 20 levels, and maybe a trait or race choice.
i beleive such dedication should be rewarded. just because the benefits of the level of dedication are potentially overpowered, doesn't mean you should penalize the dedication this character devoted to one skill. as a reward for hyperspecialization, they should be overpowered at their specialty. it's like complaining that an archery fighter does too much damage with a composite longbow because he invested so much training into mastering archery.
the best way to limit skill numbers, is to ban skill focus and rewrite the feats that stack second stats onto a skill to function as a replacement stat instead.
i would consider the dedication of precious feats, the loss of a potential trait, the dedication of a skill rank per level, and the dedication of attribute points to merely get that +50 skill modifier at level 20. to be something to be rewarded.
If you are already a cha based class that attribute is not extra work, and you don't need a 50 to make this an auto-success. I was just making a point, and no it is not easy.
you deserve to be able to exploit this trick. you spent at least 2 or 3 out of 10 general feats, 20 skill points over 20 levels, and maybe a trait or race choice.
That is a matter of opinion and taking 1 skill rank per level is hardly considered a sacrifice since the skills are useful even outside of the feat. It is not the feat is asking for you to take profession of performance skills.
Level 10 bard.
10 ranks
skill focus +6
class skill +3
circle of charisma +3
char score 22(16, 2 from levels, 4 from headband) +6 mod
total= +28(and it could be higher). so assuming an average of 10 that is a 38
No CR 10 monster I know of, off the top of my head, is resisting a 38 intimidate check and for an opposed check vs sense motive I doubt they have higher than a +24.
As you can see no hyper specialization required. I put one feat into it, and the circlet is useful for other skills the bard has so he should get it anyway. If it was a non-cha based class then pick up the feat that add strength to your intimidate score instead of skill focus.
it's like complaining that an archery fighter does too much damage with a composite longbow because he invested so much training into mastering archery.
The number of feats needed for archery is not even close to what I have above.
the best way to limit skill numbers, is to ban skill focus and rewrite the feats that stack second stats onto a skill to function as a replacement stat instead.
That is another houserule. We can always houserule it, but as is, the feat is not like, but I think you can see why.
so the bard bought a magic item and spent 2 of his 5 feats
1 on antagonize, 1 on skill focus
this is before you factor the magic item the bard is using to even get a 22 charisma
it is still a significant investment
there is also the investment of levels
the example chose to specialize as a bard, spent 2 out of 5 feats, and sacrificed 40% of the feats he or she had before factoring his or her race into the equation, played a race that could boost charisma, bought a pair of charisma boosting magic items
and you say that is not specialization
even if the bard started with an 18 or even 20 charisma, it comes at the expense of any damage potential he or she could use to harm the guy he or she antagonized.
For the witch and giant: If the witch readies an action to sleep when the giant charges, then the fighter is already in 5ft + CGD range.
On the other hand, a level 3 cleric can do the same thing. So what the hex does is move your party's chance-for-a-miracle level 2 levels earlier...
Rather than say slumber hex is a game change, why don't we just say that some of the older APs are out of date with regard to assumptions about party balance in more recent materials?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rather than say slumber hex is a game change, why don't we just say that some of the older APs are out of date with regard to assumptions about party balance in more recent materials?
It's not even about party balance, he's assuming some kind of weird scenario where there's a lot of low-level witches defending against the stone giant attack. Which doesn't occur in the module, and not surprisingly, because witches hadn't been invented yet.
"Alright you sons-of-witches, line up on the battlements here and, on my order, cast your Slumber hexes at those advancing Stone Giants! Thus causing several, but by no means all, of them to lose one round's actions by falling asleep, at which point they will be completely immune to this tactic for the rest of the day and proceed to pummel us with thrown boulders and/or trample us to death."
"Alright, you sons-of-witches" is my favorite thing to have read today. :)
so the bard bought a magic item and spent 2 of his 5 feats
1 on antagonize, 1 on skill focus
this is before you factor the magic item the bard is using to even get a 22 charisma
it is still a significant investment
there is also the investment of levels
the example chose to specialize as a bard, spent 2 out of 5 feats, and sacrificed 40% of the feats he or she had before factoring his or her race into the equation, played a race that could boost charisma, bought a pair of charisma boosting magic items
and you say that is not specialization
even if the bard started with an 18 or even 20 charisma, it comes at the expense of any damage potential he or she could use to harm the guy he or she antagonized.
Antagonize is the base feat. Skill focus is the extra feat. It is still not even close to archery though which was the example you used. A better comparison is power attack and furious focus which is the "helper feat" much like skill focus is.
I only started the bard at a 16, not an 18 so he can still get a 14 in strength. I intentionally did not use the race to boost charisma to show how good it was with only 2 feats and not maxing charisma. The bard would have gotten the headband of charisma anyway so it is like that was made just for intimidate. That is more for the spells. The other social spells just benefit from it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually they dont have a good chance of winning. At least not in any scenario that is likely to occur in a game. Giants charge or move and kill the party. If the giants have cleave they might be able to move and kill 2 party members a piece. If not they only kill half the party in round one.
Remember, cleave require the targets to be adjacent, not within reach of the giant. there is any reason for the characters to stay in adjacent squares?
Let's return to the question about the effect on the playing world, not the question about adventuring parties:
A Witch with the elite array will have a 15 intelligence, often 17 with the race modifier.
The rules for settlements say that we can find spellcasting services in a settlement as small as a thorp with fewer than 20 people in it. The witch is one of the best characters for that as one can cover a large selection of arcane and divine spells. The best hexes for a village witch would be charm, slumber and healing.
So there is a good chance to find a witch with a slumber hex with a DC of 12 or 13 even in a thorp, a village with a population of 200 and the highest spellcaster capable to cast 3rd level spells will, almost certainly, have a 1st or 2nd level witch.
That mean that the mid level "lone menace" big basher, be it a ogre, hill giant, girallon or a fighter set to terrorize and subdue the village has little credibility. It would be much more credible as a evil witch (or cleric or wizard etc) ally or even puppet.
Charm person, now that the giants are humanoids, can do much of what the slumber hex do, but the two together have a great synergy against lone wanderers and work even against targets that are immune to charm person.
So, yes, the hex has a noticeable effect on the game world as it give a better fighting chance for small settlements against single big creatures.
Essentially the "lone wanderer" menace has little credibility in Golarion or any world based on the standard premises of the game.
The only way this is true is if the GM sets the giants up to be taken down. If the fight starts at a distance rocks will be flying at the spellcasters because they are more threatening due to magic.
Some reason for the witch (male or female) to be recognizable from the other villagers using farm instruments as weapons? For the villagers to wait for the giant in a open square to be squashed by throw rocks?
Why you should set up the villagers to fail against the giant?
Sure, the villagers will be squashed if the did go out in a giant hunt, but a single giant would risk his life every time he try to terrorize and blackmail a village.
I can't speak to the balance.
As for the world implications thing... I kind of assumed the default assumption (assuming we're talking Golarion, e.g. Sandpoint and so on) is that non-core classes are really really rare, except for specific regions where they might be much more common (samurai = Tian Xia, gunslinger = Alkenstar, witch = Irrisen, etc.)
Not really, they are less common in the produced AP simply because several of the AP were produced before or during the developement of the APG.
AFAIK the first AP that was produced keeping in mind the APG classes was Carrion Crown, so currently 6 AP out of 13 have been produced in the "witch (and alchemist, oracle, summoner, etc.) era".
Even lees while keeping the magus or gunslinger in mind.
|
|
Rather than say slumber hex is a game change, why don't we just say that some of the older APs are out of date with regard to assumptions about party balance in more recent materials?It's not even about party balance, he's assuming some kind of weird scenario where there's a lot of low-level witches defending against the stone giant attack. Which doesn't occur in the module, and not surprisingly, because witches hadn't been invented yet.
"Alright you sons-of-witches, line up on the battlements here and, on my order, cast your Slumber hexes at those advancing Stone Giants! Thus causing several, but by no means all, of them to lose one round's actions by falling asleep, at which point they will be completely immune to this tactic for the rest of the day and proceed to pummel us with thrown boulders and/or trample us to death."
** spoiler omitted **
You are aware that if you have several witches they can switch target every round? Being the target for the slumber hex from witch A don't make you immune to the slumber hex from witch B or C.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with a lot of the arguments I'm hearing is that they're all about monster vs PCs - "I, as GM, would always have my encounter go *this* way, so it's a non issue".
Ok, fine - I'm not arguing with you. What I'm trying to establish is how monsters and NPCs interrelate, in all the myriad ways that they can, realistically, given what they know of each other's abilities.
Let me try a couple more examples.
If you were to read in a module that George the Hill Giant went off hunting on his own every few days - just a day trip from his palisade, a few hours away and back, or that Bill and Ben, two Hill Giants, descended on a farming community of 150 people or so to steal a cow or two, would you think to yourself "that's ridiculous - it could never happen!"
Would you think to yourself, particularly given the presence of Witches and Slumber Hex, and with reference to the post on demographics above, if you agree with it, and also with reference to posts we had earlier in this thread arguing that having a Witch in a village with Slumber Hex was a particularly good idea, that these giants were taking too much of a risk?
I don't have any sort of personal axe to grind over this, by the way. This isn't about PCs and gameplay so much - though I know we've touched on it frequently in this thread. I just want to get an idea how people feel about painting a realistic picture of the world for the PCs to adventure in. I started this whole thread because I felt that Slumber Hex had changed things - but if people broadly speaking disagree that's fine - I'll have George wander off hunting on his own and Bill and Ben attack the village :-)
Richard
I don't think that PCs classes are common enough amongst the NPCs for it to be that big of a concern to be honest. A very small percentage of NPCs are going to have PC classes to begin with. Most of them are probably going to be fellow adventurers roaming the world. The remainder are going to be split up between all of the PC classes. Once you get down to just the witches, you still have to account for a wide variety of builds, many of which won't even focus on hexes, or if they do, not on the slumber hex. It's a large world and access to the necessary training and environment to reach just level 1 would be uneven, with the more remote areas being less likely to produce arcane magic users of any kind, diminishing it even further.
For me, it's not realistic that a giant or lone wanderer would worry about it because I don't populate my entire world with PC class NPCs and most of them that do have PC classes are either are fellow adventurers, and thus just as mobile and a random an occurrence as the party, or geared to very specific tasks or part of some elite force. Village defense, even in giant territory, is not something that requires magic or even PC class NPCs, so the idea of a large group of witches dedicated exclusively to village defense in the middle of the wilds would not make sense. I could see a group of witches who work in tandem with local druids to keep the local giants from getting too out of hand, but not ones that would consider this particular tactic all that useful on a routine basis; it relies a lot on luck and proper circumstances, and would quickly lose the shock appeal as the only remaining giants would be ones mentally tough enough to not care or they would simply do a mass assault and destroy the problem for good. For others, who craft their world differently, making PC classes more common amongst NPCs, it might more notably more effect. For Golarion, it could go either way. My argument isn't that witches don't cause problems; the slumber hex in certain campaigns can cause lots of problems. Rather, my argument is that they cause as many problems as you let them; it's just as easy to figure out why it's not a problem as it is to assume that it's a problem and look for a solution. If in your mind, they are a unique challenge, then they are genuinely a unique challenge to you; someone trying to say otherwise is wrong. That does not mean that they are going to be a unique challenge to everyone.
If you write a module that has a wandering giant (or other lone creature), some people won't blink, some people will blink for other reasons, and some people will immediately fixate on the slumber hex. Trying to write it so that no one blinks is impossible; there's too many ways to approach world building, and too many details that could shape how realistic one perceives any given encounter to be. I would say write something that satisfies you first. If you're not satisfied with it, chances are no one else will be, regardless of whatever it is that you are dissatisfied with. If you are satisfied with it, there will still be people that don't personally like it because it doesn't fit their view of how things should be, but the module as a whole will still be recognized as being good at what it was designed to be, and people who approach it willing to accept it's limitations will still have a lot of fun with it. If you don't believe that the slumber hex is particularly compatible with the module, put a short one sentence warning to that effect at the beginning, and DMs can deal with it accordingly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a world-building standpoint, a slumber hex has no more effect than the succession of sleep, hold person, and hold monster spells, not to mention the clerical alignment smackdown spells. Is there some way in which slumber hex is worse than heightened glitterdust? Because a giant blind for 6+ rounds against the village militia is actually in some trouble.