Wizards are not game breaking.
The game has been around since the 70's, and it's still thriving. I've played a few broken games and they died horrible deaths.
therefore, this game can not be broken by a class that has been around forever. ;)
Broken elements aren't as big of a deal when the game lacks a significant competitive aspect. And even then, it's not like broken games haven't thrived due to being great in other ways... Akuma's fireball definitely breaks SFII, it's just that the competitive community enters into a gentlemen's agreement not to play Akuma. There's still a lot of game to play if you're not chucking OP fireballs in Street Fighter and there's still a lot of game to play in Pathfinder if you're not Paragon Surging yourself through every situation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
2. Gentleman's Agreement - Once we realize how limited the number of players with the system mastery to play an all power wizard is, we have to take into account Gentleman's Agreements. Sure I could sit down at my friends game and play a Wizard that obviates everything he prepared, but you know what'd that make me? A jerk. Most players who have the requisite system mastery realize this and thus opt not to show up to a game with a character who can say "A God am I" and be completely correct.
Seriously this. My wizards usually end the adventuring day with 75-85% of their spells, not because I couldn't use them, but because at a certain point I say "go to town minions...I mean ally's." and I stop taking actions(or make the ever strategic move of delaying). Even on a pretty long day I usually have at least 50%, and often a fee of each of my higher level spell slots.
I take up the treantmonk "god wizard" mantle, and set up my minions for victory. If I can effectively win the battle with 1 or 2 spells and let everyone else have their fun:
1) Why be a jerk?
2) Why not let them have THEIR fun?
3) Why spend a resource?
4) Why agro the GM (psst, this is a big one)?
I know that's not fun for everyone, but I find it to be a blast. I don't have to take every vital action and blast everything out of existence, other people are playing too and they get their fun through hitting things, hopefully things that are blind, prone and in a pit.
2 games ago in PFS my level 9 wizard cast 6 spells in combat, I had approximately 15 rounds to take actions, and still had all my 5th level spells(highest slots) except for "overland flight".
But 2+ casters is even scarier. My wizard got in a few games with 2 witches...We one round combo'd like half the encounters using 2 to 3 spells.
|
| 18 people marked this as a favorite. |
I saw the thread title and who the OP was and could only shake my head.
This thread was a trap laid by an insidious denizen of the darkest reaches of the internet and you've wandered into it.
Shallowsoul doesn't care what you think. He just knows this topic will be contentious and will provide him with an opportunity to expand his collection of 100+ post threads that he hoards like some sort of strange digital packrat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what? How's an extra-dimensional Demiplane going to break my game? How are any spells going to break my game?Yeah no.
A Wizard who wants to smash open your game like an egg on the pan can do so very easily. A Barbarian or Fighter depends on the DM not shafting him with intelligent enemies.
A Wizard can make a timeless Demiplane and do whatever the damn well he pleases.
Simulacrum would do it pretty easily.
A Time-less Demiplane essentially gives Wizards an infinite amount of time to accomplish their goals.
Simulacrum when people ignore the line about how creatures should be reduced in the power of their abilities to those appropriate for their hit dice - which numerous Paizo guys have gone on record means most SLAs and powers should be redrafted?
Timeless demiplanes, because hiding in your hole while time passes for the rest of the universe totally makes your quests easier.
The frequency with which I see these two ideas thrown out is laughable. Come on, you can come up with better than that.
As far as 'smashing your game like an egg in a pan' - is your GM asleep at the wheel, or is he so whipped that he believes he cannot change anything in any adventure ever without somehow cheating you out of your ability to make the time he puts aside to run a game for you miserable?
In fifteen years I've yet to see a single one of these 'OMG SPELLCASTERS R TEH ROX" myths actually play out at a table - and that's going back to 3.0 when haste was legitimately broken as hell.
I do find that following the rules tends to limit caster power.I find following the rules plays exactly into spellcaster's hands.
The rules say you can make tons of simulacrum of yourself.
I want to play under the DM that gives you the resources to be even begin to do this, since all of the ones I've played under tend to be much tougher in terms of what resources the party is given to work with.
With the level of system mastery needed to truly break the game as a wizard, you could just as easily break the game with a barbarian or fighter.I'd imagine the wizard's ability to bend space and time and generally be god-like has a lot more potential than martials ability to whack things with a stick. Also a lot more easier, a single spell is a lot easier and requires less investment than a feat chain, and feats and combinations only add to the power of a wizard.
That said, there are games where wizards aren't nearly the gods, and fighter's aren't nearly the mortals.
Spells also have a far better chance of backfiring or generally not working as intended, especially higher level spells with less well defined abilities. They also cost resources, and as a DM, I would most definitely make players running casters pay attention to additional costs, spell components, or other limiters described within the spell for higher level spells that require things that cannot be assumed to be available everywhere on a whim.
It's very hard to kill a decently built high level wizard, but it's actually not all that hard as a DM or martial opponent to put some pretty big dents in his scheming. A high level wizard facing a high level fighter is frequently only one successful saving throw from the fighter away from losing control of the situation and being at the very least unable to accomplish their goals for that encounter.
I want to play under the DM that gives you the resources to be even begin to do this, since all of the ones I've played under tend to be much tougher in terms of what resources the party is given to work with.I do find that following the rules tends to limit caster power.I find following the rules plays exactly into spellcaster's hands.
The rules say you can make tons of simulacrum of yourself.
If you read back to Anzyr's post earlier in the thread, I think he also says something about a billion free instances of simulacrum.
Last time we played we lacked a pure caster. Party was a fighter, bard, ranger and paladin and we were playing Kingmaker. I stopped running the game at level 10 basically giving up. DPOM was through the roof.
Spellcasters optimised probably make the game that much worse. I have not played PF since, went back to 2nd ed as 4E is more of a D&D cousin like 13th Age or DCC. Ended up playing retroclones like Castles and Crusades and played 1st ed the other night.
Game has a lot of flaws, to complex, to broken etc after level 6 or so to really enjoy it. Kind of gets a free pass because it is better than 4E. I'll play PF, will not run it now and still buy the occasional book or extra copies of the core books my players want for themselves.
If you read back to Anzyr's post earlier in the thread, I think he also says something about a billion free instances of simulacrum.I want to play under the DM that gives you the resources to be even begin to do this, since all of the ones I've played under tend to be much tougher in terms of what resources the party is given to work with.I do find that following the rules tends to limit caster power.I find following the rules plays exactly into spellcaster's hands.
The rules say you can make tons of simulacrum of yourself.
I'm pretty sure that assumes that the DM gives you resources and rewards in the first place to start the process; if you're not getting the starting resources from the DM, I don't know where you're getting them, since the DM generally has full control over such things. Most actual DMs in actual campaigns tend not to give players free access to the time, money, or whatever other resources they need to pull these so-called "broken" stunts off. It's not hard to stop the problem before it even starts, and it's still quite possible stop something in progress.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Simulacrum when people ignore the line about how creatures should be reduced in the power of their abilities to those appropriate for their hit dice
This is nowhere in the spell description at all.
- which numerous Paizo guys have gone on record means most SLAs and powers should be redrafted?
Ehm, this is also incorrect. What they HAVE gone on record saying most recently is, basically "Yeah it's broken but DMs can fix it so it's 'kay." and also "We don't like to implement incremental changes/nerfs via errata" (with an unspoken corrollary "if they're spellcaster options" as the Crane Wing and Weapon Cord errata can well attest).
Timeless demiplanes, because hiding in your hole while time passes for the rest of the universe totally makes your quests easier.
This is another case where the spell is just extremely poorly written. It could either mean "No time passes while you are on the plane" or "No time passes FOR INHABITANTS of the plane".
The first interpretation can basically mean UNLIMITED POWAH (pop into pane, rest, pop out...back to full strength, 6 seconds have passed).
But you don't even need to go that far to find things spellcasters muck with.
Let's start with something simple, minor, that everyone can agree on how it works.
Invisibility.
Now, yes, it burns a resource, but think about Invisibility for a moment.
What does it do?
It replaces a skill. Granted, it works better on those who are already stealthy, but you are essentially making someone with 0 ranks in Stealth stomping around in full plate as good at Stealth as a Dex based Rogue of up to 10th level (10 ranks, 3 class skill, 7 Dex).
That is stupid. INSANELY STUPID spell design. A spell should not be able to DO that.
And that's one of the most innocuous examples of a broken spell I can think of.
It won't likely disrupt your game, no. You likely will never notice a direct problem with it, which is what makes the game still function despite being fundamentally flawed.
But it contributes to a deep problem ingrained in the system: Spells can do anything that you can accomplish by other means, AND MORE.
And THAT is why spellcasters are "broken".
Not because of big flashy exploits like the Snowcone Wish Factory.
But because of subtle slaps in the face to classes as a whole.
A spellcaster of sufficient level can cover any non-combat role with a spell. Less so some social aspects, perhaps, but even then they still don't LACK the mundane means, they simply have alternatives.
When an entire class (the Rogue) can be obsoleted with pocket change (like Scrolls of Invisibility, Knock, Aram Zey's Focus, etc.) by a certain level, something is very, very, VERY wrong.
If you read back to Anzyr's post earlier in the thread, I think he also says something about a billion free instances of simulacrum.I want to play under the DM that gives you the resources to be even begin to do this, since all of the ones I've played under tend to be much tougher in terms of what resources the party is given to work with.I do find that following the rules tends to limit caster power.I find following the rules plays exactly into spellcaster's hands.
The rules say you can make tons of simulacrum of yourself.
Very rules legal and therefore part of the Wizard's power. The mere fact that it you can make a gentleman's agreement/not play at that level/houserules it away/don't find billions of simulacrums fun doesn't mean such options should be removed as considerations of a Wizards power.
Also "resources" does absolutely nothing to stop a caster. Even a Wizard.
Spells also have a far better chance of backfiring or generally not working as intended, especially higher level spells with less well defined abilities.They really dont. In fact this is pretty much one of the defining features of 3.x and later versions of the game. Magic is reliable, it is generally very clear how it works and it works that way every time. There are a very small number of spells where there is a degree of disagreement about how they work (Simulacrum) and then a smaller number which might backfire (Planar binding) but for the most part spells just work.
The things which are supposed to limit spell efectiveness end up nor really doing so. SR is very easy to play around with conjuration spells or to ignore at higher level with caster level boosts. Save bonuses generally dont keep up with spell DC's because casters only have to boost one stat while saves are based on three.
You really dont need to mess around with blood money, simulacrum, planar binding or creating your own planes to dominate the game. A standard set of mixed battlefield control, enchantment, summons and utility will allow you a huge impact on the game and it gets more significant the higher level you get to.
There's a great deal of reliability within the spells themselves and the direct effects, but any good DM is going to be able to find ripple effects to take advantage of to make high level casters cautious of throwing around high level magic on a whim. It's very easy for the DM to allow those casters to have a high impact, but little control over what that impact actually is beyond the spell itself. The more you try to change the world, the more people that are going to be impacted, and the more chance you have of others' reactions that alter the ultimate effect.
In the end, magic can be a very powerful tactical weapon, but it takes a lot of system mastery to really pull off large scale strategic success using just magic, and even that usually can be controlled by the DM limiting access to the necessary resources to pull off the magic. In the end, it's not hard for a good DM to keep the high level fighter just as useful as the high level wizard if he utilizes the NPCs and the world smartly from the first adventure to the last. There's a reason that Elminster usually doesn't do anything directly; same with Gandalf, Saruman, Sauron, and Raistlin. They can control magic, but they can't really control the world as a whole, no matter how much they might wish they could. Even the rings in the Lord of the Rings didn't allow direct control of the world, just massive influence over a handful of the world's hopefully more influential individuals.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Invisibility.Now, yes, it burns a resource, but think about Invisibility for a moment.
What does it do?
It replaces a skill. Granted, it works better on those who are already stealthy, but you are essentially making someone with 0 ranks in Stealth stomping around in full plate as good at Stealth as a Dex based Rogue of up to 10th level (10 ranks, 3 class skill, 7 Dex).
That is stupid. INSANELY STUPID spell design. A spell should not be able to DO that.
And that's one of the most innocuous examples of a broken spell I can think of.
The spell lasts at most an hour; the skill is always usable. The spell costs either a spell slot or buying/making a scroll every single use; the skill costs nothing beyond the initial skill point. To say that the spell replaces the skill is a bit of an overstatement; it is a useful, but temporary, and often expensive, supplement, nothing more. Same with most spells; they cost more than and only work for a short time compared to the related skill. Resources matter a lot, and just because a wizard has the potential for doing everything, they still are not going be able to do everything at once without having a very generous DM that gives them both time and resources to do so.
When do you ever need to sneak for more than an hour continuously? Or even 10 minutes most times. If you aren't done by then, you've already failed, likely because somebody FINALLY made an opposed Perception check against you.
And "expensive" is a bit of an overstatement.
It's a 2nd level spell. With the basic caster level it costs 125 gold. 75 with Scribe Scroll (which Wizards get free).
Do you know how "expensive" that is at 10th level (when the Rogue FINALLY might start pulling ahead without Skill Focus and other magic items).
That's far, far, FAR less than 1% of your wealth. Infinitesimally less than a tenth of a percent of your wealth, even.
And that's, if you'll recall, the LEAST broken example I can come up with for the systemic rot the spells are for this game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The spell lasts at most an hour; the skill is always usable. The spell costs either a spell slot or buying/making a scroll every single use; the skill costs nothing beyond the initial skill point. To say that the spell replaces the skill is a bit of an overstatement; it is a useful, but temporary, and often expensive, supplement, nothing more. Same with most spells; they cost more than and only work for a short time compared to the related skill. Resources matter a lot, and just because a wizard has the potential for doing everything, they still are not going be able to do everything at once without having a very generous DM that gives them both time and resources to do so.
Invisibility.Now, yes, it burns a resource, but think about Invisibility for a moment.
What does it do?
It replaces a skill. Granted, it works better on those who are already stealthy, but you are essentially making someone with 0 ranks in Stealth stomping around in full plate as good at Stealth as a Dex based Rogue of up to 10th level (10 ranks, 3 class skill, 7 Dex).
That is stupid. INSANELY STUPID spell design. A spell should not be able to DO that.
And that's one of the most innocuous examples of a broken spell I can think of.
Here's the thing sunshadow. That's a 2nd level spell slot. That means you can prepare quite a few of them. Also its big brother is even better and is only 4th level so you can prepare that as well. The problem with evaluating things with "skills are always usable" is that you don't need to always use skills. When your sneaking past the guards, Invisibility is better then stealth and if that's the only stealth check that is called for the fact that you can do stealth well another 1582 times that day is completely irrelevant. What matters is succeeding at stealth in that 1 instance. Not in the 1582 instances that don't matter.
I'm shocked at how underestimated Wizards total resources are... seriously, when is the last time you saw a 10+ Wizard actually run out of spells? The correct answer is never.
Edit: ninja'd by Rynjin.
Also "resources" does absolutely nothing to stop a caster. Even a Wizard.
Maybe not once a caster is allowed to get going in the first place, but getting the initial resources is very much in the DM's control, and any good DM is going to put enough strings on the resources the caster does get to limit the potential for the caster to run wild.
This is generally why I tend to treat the forum's expectations for all characters at high levels as being more dream than reality. No DM wanting to run a long term campaign is going to just give his players anything without exacting an appropriate cost in return, so if the wizard has been allowed to have the necessary time and resources to pull your stunt off, it's probably because he needs it to deal with an even bigger problem, assuming it's not weak DMing, in which case, the chances of the campaign lasting much beyond that point are already small enough that the wizard going crazy and ruining the campaign really doesn't change anything. In neither case has the wizard drastically changed the campaign; either the DM had control the entire time and decided that the wizard needed those things, or no one had control, and the campaign was already doomed to collapse. At on time can the player of the wizard claim to control anything beyond his own character's actions nor can that player simply sit down at the table and unilaterally declare they suddenly have all the resources they want with no drawbacks or limitations.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm shocked at how underestimated Wizards total resources are... seriously, when is the last time you saw a 10+ Wizard actually run out of spells? The correct answer is never.
Out of all spells? Rarely. Out of immediately useful spells? Not all that uncommon.
Your argument assumes that the wizard knows that the guard encounter is likely, is able to prepare enough invisibility spells to get the entire party past (since generally getting only part of the party past is not much of a solution), while not hindering his ability to deal with whatever may lie beyond, and that nothing happens on the way to the guards that changes the course of events. Believe me, it's a lot easier for a DM to determine what instances will and will not be relevant at any given point in time than any player, especially since that player is relying not just on the information the DM has chosen to give, but the focus of the other players not straying. Total resources don't ultimately determine effectiveness; the ability to bring those resources to bear does, and in that, all casters are just as dependent on both the DM and the rest of the party to set up favorable scenarios as non-casters. The task is easier for the rest of the party with a caster around, but it's still comes down to "gentleman agreements" that the party comes up with regarding party tactics and strategy.
A character's true potential is never held entirely in the hand of the immediately controlling player, and that's just as true for a high level caster with a great deal of total resources as it is for the high level fighter or rogue that has less total resources that are more easily understood and brought to bear. Those "gentleman agreements" that you write off lightly are just as important as the rules in the book because they dictate how well the party works together, and how likely all of the additional resources the caster has can actually be used.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm currently playing a 7th level Bard in Curse of the Crimson Throne, and a 5th level Arcanist in Skull & Shackles. Both characters are what I'd consider reasonably well-built without going all-out with the optimization.
The bard is a musekin aasimar using the Dawnflower Dervish (Dervish of Dawn) archetype and fights with a scimitar. A charisma of 16 means she gets a decent amount of spells but doesn't have the DC to reliably land offensive spells.
The bard focuses primarily on melee combat, using her spell slots primarily for buffs and minor utility. I find that this character has many abilities and options for progressing the storyline (such as generally excellent face and knowledge skills), but no real options for actually sidelining or disrupting it. I find this liberating, since I feel I can play my character to her full potential without worrying about destroying the plot or making my GM do lots of extra work.
The Arcanist is a gillman, played fairly straight as a "GOD" wizard. He focuses primarily on CC spells (Color Spray, Glitterdust, Create Pit etc) targeting what he surmises is the weak save of the opponent. He's the only caster in a party of fighter, (THF) rogue, mindblade, and archer ranger, so I'm shouldering the burden of healing and blasting as well as my preferred focus on crowd control and debuffing. Since the rest of the party mainly specialize in "wrecking fools" I'm also the party face - in short, I'm stretched pretty thin.
The GM has repeatedly had to make adjustments to the AP simply because I am around, and now feels very comfortable with dramatically upscaling the average challenge rating.
Mind you, I certainly haven't tried to ruin the AP. That said, there have been moments where the storyline simply didn't make sense to a caster.
The Arcanist was put in the hot box twice for laziness and general insubordination. The first time he promptly used cantrips to turn it into a bathtub, the second time he simply Dimension Door'ed out and spent the rest of the day sleeping in the hold. Though he was never keelhauled, I feel reasonably confident that I'd survive that as well.
When landing on the island of Bonewrack Isle the party realized the Arcanist could simply refill the barrels using Create Water - there was no real reason to explore the island. We decided to do so anyway since it was a nice break from shipboard life, but to be honest this was primarily a "let's go with what the GM has prepared" moment.
Similarly, the drought at Rickety Squibb's ended fairly fast when the Arcanist was able to provide 40 000 gallons of wholesome, drinkable water overnight.
After the first Sahuagin attack (which caught us off-guard and led to losing four sailors) the ship was warded with Alarm spells - two later attacks were promptly put down.
The GM had to scramble to make the Dominator event make sense, since the original event assumes that the ship is travelling upriver to replenish the water stores... This assumption seems particularly strained on a ship that specifically mentions having a friendly cleric (Sandara) on board right from the start. As you can probably imagine, running out of water isn't really a problem for our ship.
We arrived at the Rock earlier than the AP assumed and so didn't have the necessary Infamy to make the deal with the lady of the Rock. A Charm Person solved that particular snafu fairly easily. Using the alliance as cover, the Rock was infiltrated and captured (peacefully) before the spell duration ended.
Currently we're fighting off the pirate assault on the Rock where the GM decided that both the enemy ~8th level arcane caster and the ~30 pirates that would normally fight off-stage would make a reasonable encounter for us. Whether he's right or not depends entirely on how he plays the caster, since the minions are basically already dead.
Keep in mind that this is a not particularly optimized primary spellcaster who's holding back on level 1-5.
With all that said, I think the main problem with primary spellcasters is the potential of the class if played to its strengths. Unless you're reading things like Treeantmonk's Wizard Guide (which was a great help when making my arcanist) or you have an exceptional talent for optimizing, odds are your caster is not going to be all that he can be.
Rynjin raises a very valid point with Invisibility - a level 2 spell that can and will sidestep entire encounters. For more examples of similar power, consider Charm Person, Glibness, Teleport, or even the lowly Create Water.
|
Here's the thing sunshadow. That's a 2nd level spell slot. That means you can prepare quite a few of them. Also its big brother is even better and is only 4th level so you can prepare that as well.The spell lasts at most an hour; the skill is always usable. The spell costs either a spell slot or buying/making a scroll every single use; the skill costs nothing beyond the initial skill point. To say that the spell replaces the skill is a bit of an overstatement; it is a useful, but temporary, and often expensive, supplement, nothing more.
Invisibility.Now, yes, it burns a resource, but think about Invisibility for a moment.
What does it do?
It replaces a skill. Granted, it works better on those who are already stealthy, but you are essentially making someone with 0 ranks in Stealth stomping around in full plate as good at Stealth as a Dex based Rogue of up to 10th level (10 ranks, 3 class skill, 7 Dex).
That is stupid. INSANELY STUPID spell design. A spell should not be able to DO that.
And that's one of the most innocuous examples of a broken spell I can think of.
But did your wizard actually bother to prepare enough? On forums, yeah, of course he did, because his entire list of prepared spells is always custom tailored to the exact challenge that is presented (and nothing else, making him an extreme one-trick pony). Actual gameplay rarely works out like that.
As for the "if you haven't finished within the spell's duration, then you've already failed!" nonsense, that's entirely dependent on what the actual mission is.
|
|
With the level of system mastery needed to truly break the game as a wizard, you could just as easily break the game with a barbarian or fighter.I'd imagine the wizard's ability to bend space and time and generally be god-like has a lot more potential than martials ability to whack things with a stick. Also a lot more easier, a single spell is a lot easier and requires less investment than a feat chain, and feats and combinations only add to the power of a wizard.
That said, there are games where wizards aren't nearly the gods, and fighter's aren't nearly the mortals.
Dead is dead.
If I can kill everything the game throws at me, I win. It does not matter if I use a sword or a spell.
What you are talking about is the wizard being thematically superior. I'll concede that, but it has no affect on game balance.
But did your wizard actually bother to prepare enough? On forums, yeah, of course he did, because his entire list of prepared spells is always custom tailored to the exact challenge that is presented (and nothing else, making him an extreme one-trick pony). Actual gameplay rarely works out like that.
I have never, ever, ever played or DMed for a 3+ level wizard who did not have invisibility either memorised or in scroll form at all times.
Not to say a wizard will always be prepared of course, but I think you're somewhat missing the point. Even with a single scroll sitting in his inventory, or one spell slo, from 3rd level a wizard can invalidate a 10th level rogue's core feature once that day.
This is the fundamental problem.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many wizards actually heavily invest in Stealth? Few, I'd wager. And even those that do are unlikely invest in it AS heavily as a stealth-based rogue.
I've played a stealth based rogue or two...it's actually one of my favorites. And when I've done so, my unaided stealth bonus is higher than the party wizard can achieve with invisibility up.
If he actually uses that INT 20+, he casts the spell on me, and I handle the party's stealth needs.
Or he can cast it on himself, proving that his INT should actually be in the single digits, leaving him as the wizard with no spells.
How stealthy is your Rogue when he needs to take his party with him? Because a Wizard can make his friends sneaky as well. And Wizards tend to have some decent Dex too.
Invisibility is a pretty standard spell, haven't seen any Wizard who doesn't have at least one casting of it prepared every day. A 2nd level spell shouldn't be able to give characters the same bonus one gets from investing 20 skill ranks.
Sure, you could use it on the Rogue, but honestly... Better cast it on something else and convince the other player to choose a class that is not easily replaced by half a dozen others.
In a word? No.
Are there extremely over-used and aggravating spells (particularly non-Core spells)? Yes. About as many of those as over-used and aggravating feats. If you choose to include them, you have to be ready for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How stealthy is your Rogue when he needs to take his party with him? Because a Wizard can make his friends sneaky as well. And Wizards tend to have some decent Dex too.
Invisibility is a pretty standard spell, haven't seen any Wizard who doesn't have at least one casting of it prepared every day. A 2nd level spell shouldn't be able to give characters the same bonus one gets from investing 20 skill ranks.
Sure, you could use it on the Rogue, but honestly... Better cast it on something else and convince the other player to choose a class that is not easily replaced by half a dozen others.
Not really. Invisibility just doesn't cut it for the enemies perception check. You only get +20 + 1/5ft square. The maximum roll spread is +19 before perception.
Rogues can/should have skill focus(stealth), skill mastery, and be dex based. The roll spread is then just +10. Between max ranks, skillmastery, distance penalties, and your main stat, you should be able to sneak around everyone. The invisibility on you let's you do whatever you want to even the most perceptive foes.
Magic is great, and very useful. And depending on it to the exclusion of everything else is moronic and suicidal.
Same could be said about anything... But the more powerful something is, the less likely it's to fail. And Magic is very powerful while Rogues... aren't.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love how casters are broken because of non-core-rules spells like blood money, misreading simulacrum, ignoring the consequences of planar binding, and adding timeless quality to demiplanes when you can't.
Anyone going to post real reasons? Like how LoTR would have been a 5 minute movie if Gandolf used invisibility on him and Frodo and then teleported to mount doom.
|
|
How stealthy is your Rogue when he needs to take his party with him? Because a Wizard can make his friends sneaky as well. And Wizards tend to have some decent Dex too.
Invisibility is a pretty standard spell, haven't seen any Wizard who doesn't have at least one casting of it prepared every day. A 2nd level spell shouldn't be able to give characters the same bonus one gets from investing 20 skill ranks.
Sure, you could use it on the Rogue, but honestly... Better cast it on something else and convince the other player to choose a class that is not easily replaced by half a dozen others.
Not really. Invisibility just doesn't cut it for the enemies perception check. You only get +20 + 1/5ft square. The maximum roll spread is +19 before perception.
Rogues can/should have skill focus(stealth), skill mastery, and be dex based. The roll spread is then just +10. Between max ranks, skillmastery, distance penalties, and your main stat, you should be able to sneak around everyone. The invisibility on you let's you do whatever you want to even the most perceptive foes.
Yup. For one of my rogues, my group decided that one character, who didn't have the greatest perception bonus, didn't believe in my character. He thought the others were playing a long running practical joke on him.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you're comically missing the point.
Yes, casting it on sneaky man to make him MORE sneaky is still a BETTER use of the spell, this is undeniable.
But the fact alone that it is an OPTION to make someone with no ranks in Stealth even COMPARABLE to sneaky man is ludicrous.
This isn't even getting into the spells that actually DO 100% invalidate a skill (Spider Climb: Communal, anyone?).
I think this CAN be an issue if the gm lets players walk all over them. One way to keep spell asters from roflstomping encounters is to force them to play by their own rules.
Okay, you want to cast WISH? Fine, where are your spell components? No, I know you have the money, but you need to USE that money to buy them. No, I know you didn't buy components last time you were in town.
Blood Money. Arguement now invalid...
Blood Money
Haste
Create Pit
Summoning
Planar Binding
Demiplanes
Emergency force Shield
Color Spray
GreaseIn a hurry and off the top of my head these are some very powerful spells that make GMs hate life.
You just listed a bunch of spells, none of which have the ability to ruin my game.
Pretty much the only way to keep a super 9/9 spellcaster from ruining your game is gentlemen's agreement or enemy spellcasters.Again, how? You people just keep making these vague claims about how spellcasters wreck games like it's self-evident or something. And "Gentlemen's Agreement?" Um, the entire concept of a role-playing game is a Gentlemen's agreement. Every session ever played has a bevy of implicit agreements that make playing the game even possible. You say without a gentlemen's agreement a spellcaster is going to ruin my game? No. Without a gentlemen's agreement here's what happens:
GM: You're on the way to your dungeon when a great wyrm red dragon swoops out of the sky and breathes on you. Then, a Gate opens and 10 balors swarm out to attack you. You're all dead.
Players: WTF??? We're all level 1!!!
GM: So? Nothing in the rules says that can't happen.
[Suddenly GM finds that no one wants to play his game and is all lonely]
While I don't see wizards as gods at my tables (probably more of a system mastery issue on the part of my players though) one thing I've consistently seen is something Rynjin said upthread - namely that a prepared wizard of sufficient level and wealth can do everything everyone else can.
Now yes, they have limited resources to do it with but the fact remains that a wizard can stealth, scout, deal damage, cause "save-or-suck" and utilize battlefield control. More importantly that wizard has the possibility of doing ALL of those things over the course of the day, rather than just one of them. Built well, said wizard can even be good at one or two of them.
I've built a transmuter who, at level 11, lags only 3 behind a DPR fighter in the party in BAB. With all his buffs versus all the fighter's he can almost equal the fighter when he casts a 5th level spell (Monstrous Physique). But the thing is - on a full attack my transmuter can make SIX attacks, each of which deals the damage dice +10. Yes, it's only for minutes at a time, but that's A LOT of damage!
Now that same transmuter on the other hand can also stealth, scout and control the battlefield; not as insanely as other wizards but that's my fault for not optimizing him. Again, only for minutes at a time, but that's the reality of the 15 minute workday.
The only place I've seen wizards fall down in effectiveness is when they either didn't prep right for the adventure ahead -
Fighter: hey wizard, you gonna make any scrolls or wands while we're here in town?
Wizard: with my power I am like a GOD; what need have I for sticks and paper?
- last words of Wizario the Old
... or they were surprised -
*poof!* A balor appears!
Rogue and Monk attack; fighter hopes his armor does it's job; wizard closes his eyes and prays.
Given a moment to survey the fight or a couple rounds to amp up, wizards have something to contribute to every role, in every fight, every time. Are they the destroyers of games? No, but then who is?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what? How's an extra-dimensional Demiplane going to break my game? How are any spells going to break my game?Yeah no.
A Wizard who wants to smash open your game like an egg on the pan can do so very easily. A Barbarian or Fighter depends on the DM not shafting him with intelligent enemies.
A Wizard can make a timeless Demiplane and do whatever the damn well he pleases.
Simulacrum would do it pretty easily.
A Time-less Demiplane essentially gives Wizards an infinite amount of time to accomplish their goals.
Simulacrum when people ignore the line about how creatures should be reduced in the power of their abilities to those appropriate for their hit dice - which numerous Paizo guys have gone on record means most SLAs and powers should be redrafted?
Timeless demiplanes, because hiding in your hole while time passes for the rest of the universe totally makes your quests easier.
The frequency with which I see these two ideas thrown out is laughable. Come on, you can come up with better than that.
As far as 'smashing your game like an egg in a pan' - is your GM asleep at the wheel, or is he so whipped that he believes he cannot change anything in any adventure ever without somehow cheating you out of your ability to make the time he puts aside to run a game for you miserable?
In fifteen years I've yet to see a single one of these 'OMG SPELLCASTERS R TEH ROX" myths actually play out at a table - and that's going back to 3.0 when haste was legitimately broken as hell.
1) As per RAW, SLAs are not tied to HD. They are abilities you have BY VIRTUE OF BEING THAT CREATURE. A 6 HD aboleth can still dominate and project images. Why? Because he is an aboleth. If he was casting as a cleric (like say a Trumpet Archon) then he would lost thoses...
2) A timeless demiplane allows you to use your Sno-Cone Wish Factory to produce an infinete number of Cthulhus (he is less than 40 HD so he can actually be copies by people of less than level 20), then open a gate spell into the enemy territories and just send a wall of Cthulhus at them... Good luck surviving....
3) How about you try and prove that spellcasters DON'T dominate games short of GM fiating and saying "No because I said so" or the wizard intentionally holding himself back
4) Except the only real answer to a caster is another caster... which creates issues because not the martials in the party end up feeling more like Cohorts than anything...
|
|
Blood Money. Arguement now invalid...I think this CAN be an issue if the gm lets players walk all over them. One way to keep spell asters from roflstomping encounters is to force them to play by their own rules.
Okay, you want to cast WISH? Fine, where are your spell components? No, I know you have the money, but you need to USE that money to buy them. No, I know you didn't buy components last time you were in town.
I love how casters are broken because of non-core-rules spells like blood money, misreading simulacrum, ignoring the consequences of planar binding, and adding timeless quality to demiplanes when you can't.
Anyone going to post real reasons? Like how LoTR would have been a 5 minute movie if Gandolf used invisibility on him and Frodo and then teleported to mount doom.
Here's the thing sunshadow. That's a 2nd level spell slot. That means you can prepare quite a few of them. Also its big brother is even better and is only 4th level so you can prepare that as well.But did your wizard actually bother to prepare enough? On forums, yeah, of course he did, because his entire list of prepared spells is always custom tailored to the exact challenge that is presented (and nothing else, making him an extreme one-trick pony). Actual gameplay rarely works out like that.
As for the "if you haven't finished within the spell's duration, then you've already failed!" nonsense, that's entirely dependent on what the actual mission is.
I was under the impression that quite a few wizards left a few spell slots open and spent fifteen minutes to fill it with the 'appropriate spell' after some sort of scouting... or a minute in pathfinder if you invest a feat.
I love how casters are broken because of non-core-rules spells like blood money, misreading simulacrum, ignoring the consequences of planar binding, and adding timeless quality to demiplanes when you can't.
So you are using core only? Ok.
What are we misreading on simulacrum? Simulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature that appears to be the same as the original, but it has only half of the real creature's levels or HD (and the appropriate hit points, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD) up to twice your caster level. That's not confusing. The problem/feature is that its open-ended.
What do you mean ignoring the consequences of planar binding? You summon something. If your smart, you put them to a task that fits their goals and alignment. You lay down enough self buffs/enemy debuffs that they can't say no. It should be done in the form of a win-win.
Time: By default, time passes at the normal rate in your demiplane. By selecting this feature, you may make your plane have the erratic time, flowing time (half or double normal time), or timeless trait (see Time, GameMastery Guide 185).
Granted, that's a level 9 spell, but you can use it modify a pre-existing demiplane you've made with one of the lesser versions.
Anyone going to post real reasons? Like how LoTR would have been a 5 minute movie if Gandolf used invisibility on him and Frodo and then teleported to mount doom.
Wait... I have an idea. It only takes a diplomacy check.
Also "resources" does absolutely nothing to stop a caster. Even a Wizard.Maybe not once a caster is allowed to get going in the first place, but getting the initial resources is very much in the DM's control, and any good DM is going to put enough strings on the resources the caster does get to limit the potential for the caster to run wild.
This is generally why I tend to treat the forum's expectations for all characters at high levels as being more dream than reality. No DM wanting to run a long term campaign is going to just give his players anything without exacting an appropriate cost in return, so if the wizard has been allowed to have the necessary time and resources to pull your stunt off, it's probably because he needs it to deal with an even bigger problem, assuming it's not weak DMing, in which case, the chances of the campaign lasting much beyond that point are already small enough that the wizard going crazy and ruining the campaign really doesn't change anything. In neither case has the wizard drastically changed the campaign; either the DM had control the entire time and decided that the wizard needed those things, or no one had control, and the campaign was already doomed to collapse. At on time can the player of the wizard claim to control anything beyond his own character's actions nor can that player simply sit down at the table and unilaterally declare they suddenly have all the resources they want with no drawbacks or limitations.
By that same logic, what guarentees that the martial will have his Potion of Fly+Boots of Haste+ his focused weapon with just the right enchantments+ Armor with the right enchantments + Belt of correct stat distrobution... ect....
If you allow martials to have their toys, casters should to...
|
|
3) How about you try and prove that spellcasters DON'T dominate games short of GM fiating and saying "No because I said so" or the wizard intentionally holding himself back
That is the equivalent of my asking you to prove you can't fly. Jumping off a building and falling to your death is not proof. I just means you chose not to.
What I can do is prove a 500 DPR martial character destroys published content.
I love how casters are broken because of non-core-rules spells like blood money, misreading simulacrum, ignoring the consequences of planar binding, and adding timeless quality to demiplanes when you can't.
Anyone going to post real reasons? Like how LoTR would have been a 5 minute movie if Gandolf used invisibility on him and Frodo and then teleported to mount doom.
Actually the Snowcone Wish factory is 100% RAW.... there is no mis-reading or anything.
There are no consequences to Planar Binding by RAW if you succeed the cha check or if you just straight dominate them.
You can add the Timeless Quality. Try looking up the greater version...
You really don't play casters do you Marthkus?
[Suddenly GM finds that no one wants to play his game and is all lonely]
Do you have a point?
3) How about you try and prove that spellcasters DON'T dominate games short of GM fiating and saying "No because I said so" or the wizard intentionally holding himself backThat is the equivalent of my asking you to prove you can't fly. Jumping off a building and falling to your death is not proof. I just means you chose not to.
What I can do is prove a 500 DPR martial character destroys published content.
That's cool... try and beat a Balor played intelligently... i.e., drops Greater Dispel Magic to get rid of your flight, then proceeds to tear to shreds as you cry because you cannot fly... or a dragon who plays intelligently and swoops in and flyby attacks with his breath weapon, I doubt you are catching up to that guy....
[Suddenly GM finds that no one wants to play his game and is all lonely]Do you have a point?
I imagine it's the gentleman's agreement that you will have roughly CR appropriate encounters.
|
|
That's cool... try and beat a Balor played intelligently... i.e., drops Greater Dispel Magic to get rid of your flight, then proceeds to tear to shreds as you cry because you cannot fly... or a dragon who plays intelligently and swoops in and flyby attacks with his breath weapon, I doubt you are catching up to that guy....3) How about you try and prove that spellcasters DON'T dominate games short of GM fiating and saying "No because I said so" or the wizard intentionally holding himself backThat is the equivalent of my asking you to prove you can't fly. Jumping off a building and falling to your death is not proof. I just means you chose not to.
What I can do is prove a 500 DPR martial character destroys published content.
You would lose.
Look up the Beastmass threads.
An optimized martial is never going to give his opponent the opportunity to act.
[Suddenly GM finds that no one wants to play his game and is all lonely]Do you have a point?
If a Gm tries to pull something like "Suddenly a Ancient red dragon comes in and hits you all with his breath weapon.. your all dead... now re-roll" to stroke his ego, he is not going to be a GM for much longer... GMs have a a difficult time trying to control a wizard who is not holding back without either:
1) GM fiating that spells don't operate as per RAW
2) Pretty much tellign the wizard he cannot play (i.e. never letting the spell casters to prepare spells). That though will most likely cause a TPK because a lot of challanges assume a competent caster (i.e. anything that flies...)
3) Sending in a caster of your own... which may end up killing the mundanes. That and it begins to make your martial people feel like Krillin with the wizards flying around like Goku vs Freeza...
I imagine it's the gentleman's agreement that you will have roughly CR appropriate encounters.[Suddenly GM finds that no one wants to play his game and is all lonely]Do you have a point?
But we've established in this thread that gentleman's agreements are bad because it means that if you need to have them that some aspect of the game is unbalanced or overpowered. So therefore, I guess, this means the GM is the most overpowered thing in the game, ever!