That and the fact that it completely ruins my suspension of disbelief when lies change the universe retroactively.
Erm... I don't think your lies come true, otherwise I could claim that the critter over there was an extremely friendly species of giant scaly bunny who fed only on nightmares and gave you good dreams.
Unfortunately it still is a CR 15 black dragon...
|
In fairness, if we were to go down the list of very strong to clearly overpowered options, it would end up enormous - because we'd have a thread full of opinions.
Things that I would like to see go would not be the same as Jiggy, who's would not be the same as Walter's, who's would not be the same as Matt's, ect. (all of whom people who's opinions I respect, if not always agree with)
When having discussions like these, we would probably do well to stick to articles that clearly and continually disrupt game play, rather than options which are just very strong.
Just a thought.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think bannign things already legal is a slap int he face for the people using them.
A player will build a character around a feature, it gets banned and now they can rebuild that one part. But all those pieces they picked to work with it or now wasted.
Now the staffs job is to prevent these unfair items from entertaining the game to prevent this. But if they misjudge it and let peopel take these items that same staff that made the first mistake in allowing it will punish them for it.
Banning will just make more problems.
|
|
The plus 2 stats are pretty good, the dark vision and spell like abilities are awesome.
Now I would argue the broken thing about the aasimar is the favored class bonus giving the revelation 1/2, along with the other advantages. Honestly a 1/3 would nerf that heavily for pfs and make it more on par with that hp or skill point.
|
The plus 2 stats are pretty good, the dark vision and spell like abilities are awesome.
Now I would argue the broken thing about the aasimar is the favored class bonus giving the revelation 1/2, along with the other advantages. Honestly a 1/3 would nerf that heavily for pfs and make it more on par with that hp or skill point.
I can agree to this, my Super Channeler Life Oracle, 10th level, took channel energy at 1 and put 10 favored class bonuses into it and now channels like a 15th level cleric. Its nice but, I agree it seems a bit broken.
|
Note: As something to ban, I would love to hit deeper darkness with the hammer hard, along with the ability see in darkness.
Those are, in combination, both past broken, and very, as a player, unenjoyable.
That combination is one of the reasons there are scenarios out there with bad reviews and noticeable death tallies.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
Personally, I think whenever something (a feat, piece of gear, racial option, etc) is a "must have" for a wide spectrum of character builds, we should question it's inclusion in an organized play environment. That's the sort of discussion I want to hear more of.
Bye bye power attack.
Bye bye great axe/composite longbow.Bye bye handy haversack.
Bye bye CLW wand.
[/tongue-in-cheek]
|
|
I think he means Tiefling PCs with the ability to see in Deeper Darkness.
98% of scenarios get owned by them.
Nope. I mean when the BBEG has deeper darkness as an at will SLA, and has see in darkness as a racial ability.
That, in my experience, comes out to "no fun" for the players, and can be a little wearying as a DM.
Then again, in my neighborhood, I am more likely to see all Human parties to start with, with very rare parties made up entirely of races with darkvison, and rarely with anyone who has spent the two feats needed to raise their normal darkvision to full see in darkness.
|
|
Personally, while I think that Pageant of the Peacock is a very strong article that doesn't make much sense at all (I mean really, how does it even work?), I do not find it game breaking. I can see why skill based characters would find it frustrating, but the fact of the matter is that no one is going to destroy the game with skill checks.
Personally, while I think that Pageant of the Peacock is a very strong article that doesn't make much sense at all (I mean really, how does it even work?), I do not find it game breaking. I can see why skill based characters would find it frustrating, but the fact of the matter is that no one is going to destroy the game with skill checks.
TBF flip this around.
If a rogue was able to destroy an entire encounter with one hit then how does the fighter or any other player feel? Thats considered "game breaking" because they beat the fight and didnt even need teammates.
This is just as game breaking, it might not be "FIGHT"-breaking, but its still a case of one person can overpoweredly beat encounters (they just happen to be skill encounters, not fights). Now thats fair enough if they have worked for it, put skill points in etc and thats their schtick, but if they just get to skip the queue, that kinda sucks.
|
|
Personally, while I think that Pageant of the Peacock is a very strong article that doesn't make much sense at all (I mean really, how does it even work?), I do not find it game breaking. I can see why skill based characters would find it frustrating, but the fact of the matter is that no one is going to destroy the game with skill checks.TBF flip this around.
If a rogue was able to destroy an entire encounter with one hit then how does the fighter or any other player feel? Thats considered "game breaking" because they beat the fight and didnt even need teammates.
This is just as game breaking, it might not be "FIGHT"-breaking, but its still a case of one person can overpoweredly beat encounters (they just happen to be skill encounters, not fights). Now thats fair enough if they have worked for it, put skill points in etc and thats their schtick, but if they just get to skip the queue, that kinda sucks.
I personally have never seen a skill challenge, the successful completion of which, broke the game/story/plot ect. All manner of folks play all manner of differently though, so YMMV.
On the point of skipping the queue, I have no argument. That is what makes it a very strong article to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How does it work? "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls---"
That would make fine sense if you were simply BSing that you knew something.
Pageant of the Peacock allows you to actually know, however, which is the part I have trouble grasping.
How does it work? "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls---"
LOL
If anything I'd give penalties for that!
(Internal monologue) "Hmm I'll bulls*** this knowledge check"
(Loud Booming Voice) "Eh, ahem, yes oh companions I know this fire elemental well, it is weak to (consults GM) eh, fire apparently?"
:D
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Daylight spell, oil of daylight, scroll of daylight, dayfinder, batform for sonar, dispel magic...
Ok, I got plan A for deeper darkness who has plan B?
All of which do not help when you're 1-0 and run into one of the 1-5s that has deeper darkness in it, or even just darkness. I have one particular adventure in mind, in which running as written seems to kill at least 1 pc most of the time for us.
Anyway, I disagree with banning options that are currently on the table. There are exceptions, but none of those presented are particularly egregious. Even pre-nerf Lessons of Chaldira wasn't that bad in my eyes, as I found no way it could lower the fun at the table. After playing a Wizard all the way through Eyes, and seeing the light of high level casters, nothing else really seems that bad TBH. You can rage lance pounce, use extremely powerful Animal Companions/Eidolons, spam your hexes, or pass every skill check with a 50 and I wont be fazed. I might ask you how you did it during the break, because I appreciate powerful builds, but at the end of the night all that matters is whether you and your table mates had fun.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
...
Personally, I think whenever something (a feat, piece of gear, racial option, etc) is a "must have" for a wide spectrum of character builds, we should question it's inclusion in an organized play environment. That's the sort of discussion I want to hear more of.Bye bye power attack.
Bye bye great axe/composite longbow.
Bye bye handy haversack.
Bye bye CLW wand.
[/tongue-in-cheek]
Oh you!
I actually agree to an extent. Since power attack is so required, it should probably just be lumped in to melee classes to some extent, and the feat removed. It seems silly to provide an "option" that's more of a requirement than anything. It removes the uniqueness of our characters when they all have the same feats.
Of course, that's a discussion for a different section of the Paizo boards.
Fun fact: only one of my characters has a handy haversack.
|
|
...
Personally, I think whenever something (a feat, piece of gear, racial option, etc) is a "must have" for a wide spectrum of character builds, we should question it's inclusion in an organized play environment. That's the sort of discussion I want to hear more of.Bye bye power attack.
Bye bye great axe/composite longbow.
Bye bye handy haversack.
Bye bye CLW wand.
[/tongue-in-cheek]Oh you!
I actually agree to an extent. Since power attack is so required, it should probably just be lumped in to melee classes to some extent, and the feat removed. It seems silly to provide an "option" that's more of a requirement than anything. It removes the uniqueness of our characters when they all have the same feats.
Of course, that's a discussion for a different section of the Paizo boards.
Fun fact: only one of my characters has a handy haversack.
I think your solution there would cause more problems than help.
Who gets Power Attack? Barbarians? Fighters? Rangers (with 2h fight style)? Melee clerics or Paladins? Other melee caster types?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
"Of course, that's a discussion for a different section of the Paizo boards."
EDIT: Honestly, I was thinking more along the lines of making it a combat option that characters could use, just include it along with fighting defensively in Chapter 8.
"If you have a Strength of 13+, you can choose to fight with your weapons in such way that is reckless and telegraphed, but packs more power.
[Existing rules for how Power Attack currently works]"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the end of the night all that matters is whether you and your table mates had fun.
And it will seriously impact my fun if a Pageant of the Peacock makes a wizards knowledge skills irrelevant (whether I'm playing the bard and feel guilty or playing the wizard and feeling overshadowed)
Or I play a character who doesn't do anything during a session because the uber fast and powerful twink destroys the BBEG before I even get to act.
I don't have a solution, but saying that power creep isn't an issue is just wrong. It seriously impacts my enjoyment and I know that I'm not alone in that.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
How does it work? "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls---"That would make fine sense if you were simply BSing that you knew something.
Pageant of the Peacock allows you to actually know, however, which is the part I have trouble grasping.
I think the intent of Pageant of the Peacock is to be the ability that lets you be Frank Abagnale (Catch Me If You Can).
|
|
I think the intent of Pageant of the Peacock is to be the ability that lets you be Frank Abagnale (Catch Me If You Can).
In other words, Pageant of the Peacock lets you... do things that are already covered by the Bluff skill.
That's kind of the problem with this masterpiece, and it's a problem that many rogue talents have. They invent "new" uses for existing skills, uses which are actually already covered by the skills themselves.
So, if Pageant lets you make Knowledge, Linguistics, etc. checks, it's pretty cool. If it just lets you deceive others, it's terrible, because Bluff does that. And then we run into GMs who adhere to the fallacy of "because Pageant exists, you have to have it to do what it covers."
In other words, welcome to what Rogue players have to deal with.
-Matt
|
|
Except Pageant makes you right, instead of full of it.
A bard with Pageant gets 17 ranks in skills for the price of one almost all the time.
With Versatile Performance he gets:
Perform (Act)
Bluff
Disguise
Appraise
Craft (All)
Knowledge (Arcana)
Knowledge (Dungeoneering)
Knowledge (Engineering)
Knowledge (Geography)
Knowledge (History)
Knowledge (Local)
Knowledge (Nature)
Knowledge (Nobility)
Knowledge (Planes)
Knowledge (Religion)
Linguistics
Spellcraft
|
|
Our group has already banned Pageant of the Peacock (being able to lie doesn't equate to uncovering more true information, no matter how you slice it) and is considering a new house rule that no matter how well they roll on a knowledge check, bards get ONE question and ONE question only. This illustrates the difference between a random factoid from a chance encounter (bard) and the expertise that only comes from serious, intensive study (wizard).
Calybos1, are you in the wrong forum by chance?
Alternately, is your group a home game that happens to follow OP rules? Otherwise, I think you're violating some pretty core rules for PFS, at least in the no house rules department.
If you guys have an understanding that no one takes that Masterpiece, Cool. But the AR clearly says that someone's allowed to take it.
|
Venture-Agent, Florida–Altamonte Springs
|
How does it work? "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls---"That would make fine sense if you were simply BSing that you knew something.
Pageant of the Peacock allows you to actually know, however, which is the part I have trouble grasping.
Sometimes Cliff Claven is correct (Cheers reference)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
the end of the night all that matters is whether you and your table mates had fun.And it will seriously impact my fun if a Pageant of the Peacock makes a wizards knowledge skills irrelevant (whether I'm playing the bard and feel guilty or playing the wizard and feeling overshadowed)
Or I play a character who doesn't do anything during a session because the uber fast and powerful twink destroys the BBEG before I even get to act.
I don't have a solution, but saying that power creep isn't an issue is just wrong. It seriously impacts my enjoyment and I know that I'm not alone in that.
In my experience it doesn't entirely matter if someone else got a 50+ in a knowledge with pageant. I still got a 34+, plenty to ID most things. That doesn't bother me terribly.
That's a problem that is far more prevalent with the player and less with the build. I have a character than has the ability to end an encounter instantly with a decent success rate. Does that mean I always do so? No, especially because early in his career he got tricked into thinking that someone was the evil boss, when in reality there happened to be a far more problematic being in charge.
If the power gamer at your table realizes that others want to contribute to combat, then they could hold back for the first few rounds of combat. If they do not while being aware that others want to participate, that is a problem with the player and not the build. If you wanted to ban every option that can effectively end an encounter in one round, then you would need to ban a lot of spells, especially higher level ones, and most ranged classes. So that's half the wizard/sorc spell list, two metamagic feats, 1/4 of the divine spell list, the gunslinger, the ranger, the paladin archer, the bow fighter, the zen archer, and most pouncing builds. These are all capable of doing what you say without much thought put into it. Oh also Furious Finish and Spirited Charge builds. This is just off the top of my head a list of things that can end encounters basically instantly.
It's a slippery slope, I don't agree with banning things for one rounding the BBEG. It's a simple task. Power creep does not matter when people can play cooperatively and allow everyone to shine. So options are so incredibly egregious or ubiquitous that it may be wise to ban them, but in general I'm against banning things already allowed, and none of these presented are particularly so. Honestly I don't think most people at my FLGS know Pageant exists. The same can be said for many other options presented, and I don't think double barrels are even very good. The gold cost+the increased misfire rate makes them very potentially costly.
I suppose I'm on the odd end of the spectrum when it comes to this issue though. One of the prominent figures at my store is a powergamer who doesn't know the rules, so I've grown accustomed to much worse things than the things posted here.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East
|
If the power gamer at your table realizes that others want to contribute to combat, then they could hold back for the first few rounds of combat. If they do not while being aware that others want to participate, that is a problem with the player and not the build. If you wanted to ban every option that can effectively end an encounter in one round, then you would need to ban a lot of spells, especially higher level ones, and most ranged classes. So that's half the wizard/sorc spell list, two metamagic feats, 1/4 of the divine spell list, the gunslinger, the ranger, the paladin archer, the bow fighter, the zen archer, and most pouncing builds. These are all capable of doing what you say without much thought put into it. Oh also Furious Finish and Spirited Charge builds. This is just off the...
This is the other reason that my gunslingers almost always use their first round of combat casting abundant ammunition.
|
|
It's not quite nerfed yet, as the AR still allow for the Faiths of Purity version. The Inner Sea Gods version was where it was reprinted with a change.This has to be an oversight, since the most current reprint is always the correct text I thought when two sources contradict.
That is my guess as well.
|
The trait Wayang Spell Hunter and Magical Lineage should be changed from un-typed to a trait bonus so they don’t stack. I’ve seen too many overpowered spell casters being cheesy and taking both of these traits and stacking them.
That would be tough. Neither provide a bonus of any kind. They each lower the effective spell level by 1.
The same pairing can be done with the two traits that lower Armor Check Penalties by 1.
|
|
Is it that widespread of a problem, though? I can't recall anyone that's used that combination before, or if they did it sure didn't leave an impression on me as "overpowered". I think when an option becomes so over-used by a wide variety of characters then it needs reconsidering. Those two traits in conjunction only benefit a small portion of spellcasters, and even then they only affect one spell.
|
|
Is it that widespread of a problem, though? I can't recall anyone that's used that combination before, or if they did it sure didn't leave an impression on me as "overpowered". I think when an option becomes so over-used by a wide variety of characters then it needs reconsidering. Those two traits in conjunction only benefit a small portion of spellcasters, and even then they only affect one spell.
Thanks to those traits together, I saw a level 7 admixture wizard dipped into crossblooded sorcerer spamming empowered acidballs with preferred spell, using a selective rod. Was pretty cheesy. He's not the only person I've heard of with that build, either.
|
Eh, as far as I'm aware, it's most commonly done on fireball or shocking grasp so you can do cheap intensified and empowered metamagics.
I considered doing that with snowball, but decided that snowball is too dumb and that would not be much fun.
I don't think it's a huge problem. And if it is, you should talk to that player.
That being said, Snowball by itself is kind of sketchy. Thankfully its in a pretty obscure book.
|
|
Is it that widespread of a problem, though? I can't recall anyone that's used that combination before, or if they did it sure didn't leave an impression on me as "overpowered". I think when an option becomes so over-used by a wide variety of characters then it needs reconsidering. Those two traits in conjunction only benefit a small portion of spellcasters, and even then they only affect one spell.
Yes it's an issue within the past couple months I have seen it on 3 PFS characters.
There was a cross blooded Burning Arc sorcerer lay out a 125 Hit point burning Arcs at 9th level multiple times per day, basically destroying every encounter in a scenario. Her initiative = Biggest dad guy dead every time.
I have also seen this on 2 Fireballing cross-blooded sorcerer specialist laying out 100 hit point fireballs at 9th level in the past couple months also.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Hrothdane and roysier: Notice how the problematic blasters all seem to share that crossblooded dip? The problem is not cheap metamagic, the problem is that the Orc bloodline is legal, which is the only reason the Crossblooded dip is able to double up on damage-boosting bloodlines. The Crossblooded Orc/Draconic dip takes your fireballs from 1d6/level to (1d6+2)/level.
For perspective, average damage on a d6 is 3.5.
Empower Spell (a +2 spell level metamagic) boosts you by +50%. That's an average of +1.75 damage per caster level.
Any single damage-boosting bloodline arcana gives you +1 damage per die, so roughly half of Empower Spell. Seems solid.
But the Crossblooded pairing that the Orc bloodline makes possible gives you +2 damage per die. That is more bonus damage than Empower Spell gives you.
Oh, and according to a FAQ, bonuses to dice also get counted in Empower Spell, so there's another +1 damage per die from combining the Orc/Draconic thing with Empower Spell, that wouldn't be there with just Empower Spell.
So at 7th level, here's some fireball averages:
Ordinary wizard: 24.5 damage, or 36.75 Empowered.
Draconic bloodline: 31.5 damage, or 47.25 Empowered.
Draconic/Orc mix: 38.5 damage, or 57.75 Empowered.
All those traits enable is the Empowering (or whatever other metamagic). But as you can see, the reason Empowered fireballs wreck encounters is not because they're Empowered, but because they were already boosted MORE than Empower is capable of, and THEN Empowered.