How bad would these build rules be?


Advice

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Normal content (No Crafting, dazing spell, leadership, or sacred geometry) Otherwise all normal content legal.

9th level casters 10 pt buy
6th level casters 15 pt buy
4th level casters 20 pt buy
No casting 25 pt buy.

How bad or good is that for the structure of the game? Does this help simulate the extra dice some classes got long ago in 1st ed?

I feel that classes really probably should have been printed with a base point buy attached.

How does everyone else feel about this?

Silver Crusade

Off the top of my head, I'd say too wide of a range. Keep it with 10 points.

15
19
22
25

Maybe...


Brad McDowell wrote:

Off the top of my head, I'd say too wide of a range. Keep it with 10 points.

15
19
22
25

Maybe...

I mean the point was to make the range huge and to prevent casters from buying 18s while allowing full martial classes to effortlessly afford 18s.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So, if someone takes their first level in fighter then go wizard/eldritch knight they get a 25 pt buy? Or are you banning multiclassing too?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

What is to stop them from taking their first level in a non-casting class, then full caster after that?

How will you handle multiclassing?

Have you considered just going E6?

Dark Archive

The battle clerics and battle oracles might be a bit miffed. I think blackbloodtroll's suggestion of E6 is a better option.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It would probably stop the melee spellcaster builds (cleric, oracle, druid) while doing nothing to stop a control caster. No save/effect on save still wins.

On the flip-side, Summoner, Druid, and Hunter get to take their super pet and ignore all the restrictions while their awesome horse/tiger/dinosaur murders everything. So, Pokemon wins.


avr wrote:
So, if someone takes their first level in fighter then go wizard/eldritch knight they get a 25 pt buy? Or are you banning multiclassing too?

If you multiclass your stats decrease to fit your new lowest point buy.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Undone wrote:
avr wrote:
So, if someone takes their first level in fighter then go wizard/eldritch knight they get a 25 pt buy? Or are you banning multiclassing too?
If you multiclass your stats decrease to fit your new lowest point buy.

So, 1 level of Wizard, and 19 levels of Fighter, brings you down to 10 points?


Yes.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You basically force casters to optimize.

You should either ban casters, or just go E6.

How would handle Prestige Classes?

Dark Archive

Since it seems your fear is full casters overpowering martials, run E6 as others have suggested, everyone gets the same stats, full martials get a suddenly very much more powerful second attack whilst casters still get their goodies that make them fun to play but are limited from godlike power by the level cap, everyone wins and half your players don't feel victimised.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I third E6. You don't fix caster martial disparity by crippling casters. You just don't.

First off, unless you're starting at 10th level or so, it's just unfair to the casters, who have to Magikarp their way to the awesomeness they eventually become.

People will argue that tired old argument that colorspray or other save-or-suck is available at low levels, and I will counter with another tired old argument that it involves getting close which is very dangerous for a squishy character, has zero effect if they save, and is a limited resource compared to smacking with a weapon.

Unless you have hyper system mastery and specialize for it, low-level casters are outshined by martials. I've seen brand new players with little idea what they're doing slap a greatsword and power attack in the hands of a martial and dominate the battlefield for many levels until casters finally come of their own.

Second off, as stated earlier, pet classes laugh at your restrictions.

Third off, 4th level casters are unfairly lowered in power by this. They don't even get spells until 4th level, so why are they screwed for levels 1-3? Even then they get a sprinkling of spells...most of which they don't use. I'm playing a 4th level antipaladin right now and I have yet to cast my lousy once a day spell. I have NEVER seen a paladin, ranger, or bloodrager start dropping spells mid-fight until like ninth level, and even then it's pretty rare.

Fourth, some casters are SAD, but some aren't. The cleric, for example, is pretty MAD, considering he needs wisdom, charisma, constitution, and decent dex. Meanwhile some 6th casters, like the alchemist, are pretty much SAD.

I'll say it again, you don't fix caster-martial disparity by nerfing casters. E6 is a decent solution if you must, but if you don't want to do that, just adjust your encounters to actually threaten the casters more. There's an entire thread on ignoring the martials/avoiding them and attacking the casters filled with tips on how to do this.


Changing the point-buy values won't do a thing. Seriously. An extra +1 or +2 won't help non-casters compete with casters, even with the casters having slightly lower stats.


Prestige classes would not effect your point buy. The base lowest PB base class you utilize determines point buy.


Some of the results I would expect.

For casters:

  • MAD casters (Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer) will really suffer because they'll be forced to focus on casting at the expense of everything else
  • Oracles with all the "get Charisma to everything" cheese will be awesome.
  • Int based casters will do the best at all levels because they'll gets skills and casting in one stat. They'll have really bad saves though.

For everyone else

  • 6th levelcasters will have to focus, but 15 point buy is an acceptable number for most classes.
  • 4th level casters will be fine.
  • For "noncasters," I'd expect them to be great at low levels but taper off as per usual.

There's just a certain point where raw ability scores fall behind to investment in a skill or area by other characters, and when an extra +1 or +2 to saving throws stops making a difference compared to buffs and magic items. Add me to the list of people suggesting that you run E6 for a more balanced game.

A couple of questions:
- Would Qinggong monks get different point buys?
- Would characters who trade out archetypes to get or give up Spells or SLAs get different point buys?
- How would this system work with systems like Tome of Battle, or Incarnum?


Suthainn wrote:
Since it seems your fear is full casters overpowering martials, run E6 as others have suggested, everyone gets the same stats, full martials get a suddenly very much more powerful second attack whilst casters still get their goodies that make them fun to play but are limited from godlike power by the level cap, everyone wins and half your players don't feel victimised.

This is not the case. I feel that if you're forced to use the elite array for point buy casters are balanced. Magic itself (banning permanent spells like permanency, animate dead, simulacrum, exct) isn't hard to GM. What's hard to GM is garenteed access to a large amount of high level magic with DC's somewhere in the stratosphere.

The Pokemon builds are strong lower but at higher level the to hit tapers off vs the natural armor of better creatures.

I had thought about the battle cleric going away and am fine with that. The battle cleric is effectively a superior paladin/inquisitor/warpriest.

To put it in perspective for those saying "A +1 or 2 won't make a difference."

STR: 7
DEX: 10
CON: 11
INT: 18
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

That's your base wizard stats for an 18.

You lose HP/Level, Fort saves, Initiative, Reflex saves, AC, diplomacy, value of planar binding spells, exct. The base stat loss is real and it's by no means small. For reference a barbarian on 25.

STR: 18
DEX: 12
CON: 16
INT: 10
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

There is a significant difference in raw point buy.

Quote:
There's just a certain point where raw ability scores fall behind to investment in a skill or area by other characters, and when an extra +1 or +2 to saving throws stops making a difference compared to buffs and magic items.

My hope is to make it later not to make it not happen.


Undone wrote:
Suthainn wrote:
Since it seems your fear is full casters overpowering martials, run E6 as others have suggested, everyone gets the same stats, full martials get a suddenly very much more powerful second attack whilst casters still get their goodies that make them fun to play but are limited from godlike power by the level cap, everyone wins and half your players don't feel victimised.

This is not the case. I feel that if you're forced to use the elite array for point buy casters are balanced. Magic itself (banning permanent spells like permanency, animate dead, simulacrum, exct) isn't hard to GM. What's hard to GM is garenteed access to a large amount of high level magic with DC's somewhere in the stratosphere.

The Pokemon builds are strong lower but at higher level the to hit tapers off vs the natural armor of better creatures.

I had thought about the battle cleric going away and am fine with that. The battle cleric is effectively a superior paladin/inquisitor/warpriest.

To put it in perspective for those saying "A +1 or 2 won't make a difference."

STR: 7
DEX: 10
CON: 11
INT: 18
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

That's your base wizard stats for an 18.

You lose HP/Level, Fort saves, Initiative, Reflex saves, AC, diplomacy, value of planar binding spells, exct. The base stat loss is real and it's by no means small. For reference a barbarian on 25.

STR: 18
DEX: 12
CON: 16
INT: 10
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

There is a significant difference in raw point buy.

No on buys an 18 with that low of a point buy. Well, they shouldn't. You buy a 16 (or even a 14) and rely on your racial +2 bonus. I never buy an 18 unless the point buy is above 20, though.

Buying a 14:

STR: 9
DEX: 14
CON: 14
INT: 16 (14+2)
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

That's a competent caster. They might have to avoid spells with DCs unless it's in a specifi school, but it's competent.


Buying a 16:

STR: 7
DEX: 13
CON: 14
INT: 18 (16+2)
WIS: 10
CHA: 7
Customize with Elf, Human, Tiefling or whatever other race seasoning fits you best.


Undone wrote:


To put it in perspective for those saying "A +1 or 2 won't make a difference."

STR: 7
DEX: 10
CON: 11
INT: 18
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

That's your base wizard stats for an 18.

If you want to buy an 18, sure. I haven't done that in a very long time, there's very few builds it pays off for (oradin/synthesist maybe?)

What about:
Max stat dumping:

STR: 7
DEX: 14
CON: 12
INT: 16
WIS: 11
CHA: 7

or

no 7s:

STR: 8
DEX: 12
CON: 12
INT: 16
WIS: 10
CHA: 8

Powerful? Not more than any other wizard. Playable? Yes. Same Initiative and cripples your sample barbarian unless he rolls at least a 13 for Daze/14 for Color Spray/Sleep/Charm Person? Yes. And that's without even the racial stat bonus.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Undone wrote:


To put it in perspective for those saying "A +1 or 2 won't make a difference."

STR: 7
DEX: 10
CON: 11
INT: 18
WIS: 10
CHA: 7

That's your base wizard stats for an 18.

If you want to buy an 18, sure. I haven't done that in a very long time, there's very few builds it pays off for (oradin/synthesist maybe?)

What about:
** spoiler omitted **

or

** spoiler omitted **

Powerful? Not more than any other wizard. Playable? Yes. Same Initiative and cripples your sample barbarian unless he rolls at least a 13 for Daze/14 for Color Spray/Sleep/Charm Person? Yes. And that's without even the racial stat bonus.

Until he has superstitious, or the paladin has divine grace, or ever against the monk. The point is to penalize the early game of casters so they take longer to get to the "They need a 15+ to save" level destruction AND to prevent people from getting +2/+3/+4 spells of lower level spells because they reach +10 on the base mod. This change significantly impacts the spells available to the caster.

And needing a 13 is a LOT better than needing a 15. If it's a dwarf barb with glory of old that's a 9 needed to save which is more than enough to shrug it off compared to the 11 which is even odds.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Powerful? Not more than any other wizard. Playable? Yes. Same Initiative and cripples your sample barbarian unless he rolls at least a 13 for Daze/14 for Color Spray/Sleep/Charm Person? Yes. And that's without even the racial stat bonus.

Until he has superstitious, or the paladin has divine grace, or ever against the monk. The point is to penalize the early game of casters so they take longer to get to the "They need a 15+ to save" level destruction AND to prevent people from getting +2/+3/+4 spells of lower level spells because they reach +10 on the base mod. This change significantly impacts the spells available to the caster.

And needing a 13 is a LOT better than needing a 15. If it's a dwarf barb with glory of old that's a 9 needed to save which is more than enough to shrug it off compared to the 11 which is even odds.

Yeah, so they summon something (who might have SLAs/Spells with higher saving throws :P ) or buff their party instead of directly attacking the threat. *shrug*

Look, the idea where you shift classes' point buys to reflect their power is one that has been done, and it does kind of work. It certainly works at the earlier levels, where it expands/creates/highlights the disparity between martial and spell-caster characters. I just think it's taking a sledgehammer to make the square peg fit in a round hole. Your giving classes that always have plenty of big numbers and not enough options bigger numbers and the same number of options.

Honestly, increasing Wealth by Level per character would be a better way to boost a class that is perceived to be weak. It lets them buy the magic items deemed necessary for their class, while still letting them buy more situational boosters or consumables.

Also, the idea that Fighter 19/Wizard 1 should have the exact same stats as Wizard 20 is absurd if you actually want to achieve better in-party character balance.


Undone wrote:


Until he has superstitious, or the paladin has divine grace, or ever against the monk. The point is to penalize the early game of casters so they take longer to get to the "They need a 15+ to save" level destruction AND to prevent people from getting +2/+3/+4 spells of lower level spells because they reach +10 on the base mod. This change significantly impacts the spells available to the caster.

And needing a 13 is a LOT better than needing a 15. If it's a dwarf barb with glory of old that's a 9 needed to save which is more than enough to shrug it off compared to the 11 which is even odds.

Superstitious, without the human favored class bonus, increases at +1 every four levels. This means that the wizard's highest level spell, which increases by +1 every two levels, increases faster than the barbarian's superstitious bonus.

The paladin is in a similar situation, with a flat +Cha at level 2 that will only increase with levels/headband of Cha/tome of leadership. You can get it pretty high, yes, but just getting +2 requires 5 of your 20 build points. +3 requires 10 build points. Charisma does have other uses for them, but you can't throw out "Paladins are super great with saves" without saying what they give up for it. And they have no reason to pump Wis, so you're likely comparing good save + Cha versus +1/two levels + Casting Stat. Which is the same level of growth.

And are you kidding me with the monk? All they have is a good save and a reason for Wis to be a tertiary stat, they're not a cleric or druid who actually uses that Wis for something. The comparison is the same as the Paladin, except the monk's Wisdom isn't above 14 (or other massive failures in to-hit, damage, etc.).

Yes, some of this changes with archetypes. So do wizards. And there's feats like Spell Focus too.

Also, a 60% chance to be utterly useless for a round is terrible. And that's Daze. The rest go Coup De Grace, Coup De Grace, and you think they're your friend. Sure, it's better than a 70% chance, but that's like comparing getting punched in the face to getting punched in the gut. And if you require a certain race to make this not look unbalanced, that's a massive failing. What if I don't want to be a dwarf? What if I want a Str bonus?

The problem is not the point buy. A wizard tanking everything else can buy an 18 with a -3 point buy. Maybe pick a race to get to 20, human is an easy choice. Even with a 102 point buy, the best you can get a save at level 1 with no racial choices is +6. With a Dwarf I think you can get to +12 Will? Either way, the standard is going to be much, much lower, leaving them vulnerable to any of a variety of Save or Die/Save or Sucks. The problem is that there exist spells that ignore any defenses you have except for a single roll of the die. As you get to higher levels they get more of them, in an infinite variety of murder and death and mayhem. Why people don't notice at first level is because that Barbarian who will fail their Will save will also probably straight murder anything they're able to reach with their (hopefully) giant sword in a single round.

So I guess I'm thirding? fourthing? E6. By the time you hit level 10 martials are hitting for what, 2d6+30 or so? A level 10 wizard with 10 Con and average HP has 37 HP, so you better be a pouncing barbarian or the wizard has a 50% chance of getting a spell off. If they're a cleric or druid they have 48 HP, they definitely get the spell off. And that's with no Con bonus. Not including channel, wildshape, false life, the list goes on. E6 does a great job of keeping things at the level where you can't shrug off an attack of opportunity and just walk past a fighter and wizards don't get the enervation/greater invisibility/black tentacles (they can through blah blah blah but it's not a given, I'm sure someone can link to E6 for the curious). And those are just the combat ones.


I hate E6 and consider it a system for people who don't tolerate the current magic system. I dislike it conceptually and entirely and have no intent to participate in any game where the rules are used.

My goal is not to cripple a wizards casting. People don't seem to understand that. My goal is to trim the free power a wizard gets from +10 stats. For reference 10 stat points is worth around 20,000 gold. Of course the wizard will still be powerful. The point of this chance IS NOT and let me repeat IS NOT to cripple casters or make them not powerful. It's to remove free power they get. If I had wanted to cripple casters I'd have given them 5 points base.

With my changes all casters have bad saves early. Something that probably should have been a base line feature. They're squishier early. They can't also be diplomancers. They don't get to use things like academea graduate without severe risk.

Additionally there is a significant difference between an 18 and a 20 after racials at level 1 namely a second bonus spell. There is a big difference between getting another bonus spell and not doing so.

Lower bonuses give you more reasonable save dc's 10% is highly underestimated by the people here. That's the same as removing TWO feats from the caster at level 1! Removing additional spell slots helps.

The point isn't to cripple casters. The point is to make it so casters don't have so much free power.

Quote:
The problem is not the point buy. A wizard tanking everything else can buy an 18 with a -3 point buy. Maybe pick a race to get to 20, human is an easy choice.

So at level 1 vs the swashbuckler (For them terrible saves) we'll use he has 4 HP vs the rogue who has at minimum +10 init so he'll win init charges, hit's the horrific AC of the wizard and does 1d6+3. Shockingly the wizard dies in round 1 of every combat with such a build.

There is a point where it's demonstrable that the full caster is a terrible choice. I DO NOT WANT it to be a terrible choice. I want it to be a strategic choice for the party instead of "If we have 6 clerics/druids we'll always win"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Rather than having a point buy spread may I suggest you instead just use a stat array for all players?

Personally I use 16/16/15/14/13/11 for my players. It is a very strong array, but prevents anyone from starting with a 20 in any stat. Effectively it means slightly lower save DCs for caster, with some increased hp for survivability. MAD character also become very possible with such generous arrays.


Undone wrote:
Quote:
The problem is not the point buy. A wizard tanking everything else can buy an 18 with a -3 point buy. Maybe pick a race to get to 20, human is an easy choice.

So at level 1 vs the swashbuckler (For them terrible saves) we'll use he has 4 HP vs the rogue who has at minimum +10 init so he'll win init charges, hit's the horrific AC of the wizard and does 1d6+3. Shockingly the wizard dies in round 1 of every combat with such a build.

Sure, a rogue (swashbuckler?) with much better stats (16 Str, 22 Dex, Improved Init) built for initiative can beat up a wizard with a negative point buy. But only at level 1, because he might fail at level 2 when the wizard gets more HP. And he still has a not insignificant chance of failing should he lose initiative (on a one for you they need a 14, 10-15%?). So... a ridiculous and absurd example of the lowest possible HP a wizard can have (I guess they could go Elf and get even worse) is beaten by a build made to go first. The builds posted with the suggested 10 point buy both had at least 12 Con for 7 HP (and only +4 casting stat instead of +5, an extra 5% on your save), giving your rogue/swashbuckler a 33% chance of actually taking out the wizard (at 0 HP he still gets a 5-foot step and color spray before going unconscious). Congratulations, you've proven that even going first and getting the first hit you still have a better than 50% chance of losing. That's... bad. Very bad.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

A "Leveling Equipment" System for martials may help.

In the end, Full Casters will win out late level, because, well, magic.

Changing the point buy isn't really going to change that.

Maybe a level cap of full caster levels?


Mythic might work as a leveling system, it comes with bonus stats, feats, and various other abilities that help you against magic. Probably tone down some of the "blah blah blah unless they're also mythic" powers. At least take out the requirement the other person be mythic.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

A "Leveling Equipment" System for martials may help.

In the end, Full Casters will win out late level, because, well, magic.

Changing the point buy isn't really going to change that.

Maybe a level cap of full caster levels?

I think if you gave those who can't 6th level spell or higher free weapon enhancements alone it could go a long way. Just give them free a +1 that scales up to +5 with their level. The gold that they save from not needing to pay for a weapon can help them to purchase other magical gear such as potions or wondrous items to make up for abilities that other classes get as spells. It wont fully negate the difference, but it can certainly help. You might also consider adding in a free scaling resistance bonus to all saves to replace the Cloak of Resistance. Giving everybody free increased saves also means spell casters spells have less chance of working on an enemy as well. Again with more wealth being capable of being spent on other magical gear to enable melee to do what they couldn't before.


Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

House-rule Suggestion:

Feat: 4th level casting
Prerequisites: Spellcasting class ability
Benefit: You can learn spells and gain spells slots up to 4th level.

Feat: 6th level casting
Prerequisites: Spellcasting class ability, 4th level casting
Benefit: You can learn spells and gain spells slots up to 6th level.

Feat: 9th level casting
Prerequisites: Spellcasting class ability, 6th level casting
Benefit: You can learn spells and gain spells slots up to 9th level.

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.


Undone wrote:


How bad or good is that for the structure of the game? Does this help simulate the extra dice some classes got long ago in 1st ed?

I feel that classes really probably should have been printed with a base point buy attached.

How does everyone else feel about this?

I don't like that approach. It furthers gaming the system. And the first consequence that comes to mind is to play a summoner. It already is one of the most powerful classes and by this gets even stronger because his 9th level casting which masks as 6th level casting is punished less than true 9th level casting.

That way you have more point buy than you deserve and still are two for the price of one.


Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory. Caster already didn't have many feats they needed. Now, instead of taking metamagic feats they will just buy more rods of metamagic (which makes things worse).

If you want to do something good ban metamagic rods and pearls of power/runestones of power. Caster become more careful when their spell slots become more limited. Also don't let the party "quit" anytime they want. Run the casters out of spell and force them to keep going if they Nova every encounter so that the martial characters have a chance to shine.

Umbranus wrote:
Undone wrote:


How bad or good is that for the structure of the game? Does this help simulate the extra dice some classes got long ago in 1st ed?

I feel that classes really probably should have been printed with a base point buy attached.

How does everyone else feel about this?

I don't like that approach. It furthers gaming the system. And the first consequence that comes to mind is to play a summoner. It already is one of the most powerful classes and by this gets even stronger because his 9th level casting which masks as 6th level casting is punished less than true 9th level casting.

That way you have more point buy than you deserve and still are two for the price of one.

Couple that with Synethesist and point buy is irrelevant. You tank your physical stats and pump Cha and then Wis/Int as much as you can afford and then wear your Eidolon Power Suit to replace your physical stats.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't think this will solve what it seems you see as a "caster problem". Stats are not the end-all strength of a character. A 10 buy wizard will still outclass a 25 buy fighter. They would just need to use more spells that are no saving throw related, controlling the battlefield as they do. These rules will just pigeonhole your non-optimizing players and discourage them from playing things they enjoy, because while the full casters can overcome this "crutch", it still isn't fun being forced to dump stats.


One thing I have noticed is that some people who think reducing point buy for casters is the holy grail is that they do not like/accept the powerful martial variants like barbarians or some good feats.
I agree that casters are too strong. But by not allowing strong martial choices the problem gets worse.

In one game where this idea is being used (reduced point buy) I hear comments like:

- The GM thinks the barbarian is too strong, I'd stay away from it.
- Antagonize it OP and not allowed.
- Monster feats are op for PCs

Perhaps casters are not the only problem.


Claxon wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory.

That was the whole point. To take away feats instead of point buy. It might not be the BEST solution but still, by far better than reduced point buy.


Gingerbreadman wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory.
That was the whole point. To take away feats instead of point buy. It might not be the BEST solution but still, by far better than reduced point buy.

Why? That effects martial far more.

As for summoner they get 10 pt buy. They have access to 9th level magic via GATE and other 9th level spells on the list. They are the only "Sixth level caster" who would get 10pt because they are not "sixth level casters" they are 9th level casters with lower listed spell levels. As to "LOL OP SYNTH!" the base rules would be more or less PFS if it's banned there it would start banned in this game.

Quote:


One thing I have noticed is that some people who think reducing point buy for casters is the holy grail is that they do not like/accept the powerful martial variants like barbarians or some good feats.
I agree that casters are too strong. But by not allowing strong martial choices the problem gets worse.

In one game where this idea is being used (reduced point buy) I hear comments like:

- The GM thinks the barbarian is too strong, I'd stay away from it.
- Antagonize it OP and not allowed.
- Monster feats are op for PCs

Perhaps casters are not the only problem.

Nope. There's basically no martial character I have issue with. I used to have issue with rage lance pounce but after they made lance x3 damage apply to first hit only. Martial characters simply can't solve some problems.

For the millionth time the goal of this is to do something people even ADMIT it will do.

Quote:


Sure, a rogue (swashbuckler?) with much better stats (16 Str, 22 Dex, Improved Init) built for initiative can beat up a wizard with a negative point buy. But only at level 1

The entire point is just to push back the caster dominance levels. NOT TO ELIMINATE IT.


Undone wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory.
That was the whole point. To take away feats instead of point buy. It might not be the BEST solution but still, by far better than reduced point buy.
Why? That effects martial far more.

How does forcing casters to take feat taxes to cast affect martials more? Did you read gingerbreadman's posting?

Quote:


As for summoner they get 10 pt buy. They have access to 9th level magic via GATE and other 9th level spells on the list. They are the only "Sixth level caster" who would get 10pt because they are not "sixth level casters" they are 9th level casters with lower listed spell levels. As to "LOL OP SYNTH!" the base rules would be more or less PFS if it's banned there it would start banned in this game.

If you ask for advice on some houserules you should list them as they are, not pick some tiny bits.

With summoners treated as 9th casters and synths banned the worst exceptions are gone but remain more than enough.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I love seeing threads that go like this:

"Is this a good idea?"

"No."(x10 or so)

"#$^& it, I'm doing it anyway."


Umbranus wrote:
Undone wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:

Instead of giving out reduced point buy I would either go E6 (as suggested) or do the following:

** spoiler omitted **

Less problems with multiclassing. You either buy the feats or not. And less free feats means significantly less power for casters, too.

Not really, you've only made the feats mandatory.
That was the whole point. To take away feats instead of point buy. It might not be the BEST solution but still, by far better than reduced point buy.
Why? That effects martial far more.

How does forcing casters to take feat taxes to cast affect martials more? Did you read gingerbreadman's posting?

Quote:


As for summoner they get 10 pt buy. They have access to 9th level magic via GATE and other 9th level spells on the list. They are the only "Sixth level caster" who would get 10pt because they are not "sixth level casters" they are 9th level casters with lower listed spell levels. As to "LOL OP SYNTH!" the base rules would be more or less PFS if it's banned there it would start banned in this game.

If you ask for advice on some houserules you should list them as they are, not pick some tiny bits.

With summoners treated as 9th casters and synths banned the worst exceptions are gone but remain more than enough.

It hurts inquisitors, warpriests, and magus characters who are actually feat strapped more than it hurts casters who need a whopping like 4-5 feats for the entirety of existence the rest are just nice stuff.

I also assumed standard rules would be interpreted as PFS generic where it is gone. I guess I should have pointed out the summoner. My bad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mergy wrote:
The battle clerics and battle oracles might be a bit miffed. I think blackbloodtroll's suggestion of E6 is a better option.

E6 is NEVER as better option. Iron Heroes is better if you want low magic.

But yes, OP, I like your ideas, but this will encourage dumping, which I despise. Claxons ideas of stat array is also good. How about giving four stat arrays?

9th level casters 16/13/12/11/10/10
6th level casters 16/14/13/12/11/10
4th level casters 16/14/14/13/11/10
No casting 16/15/14/13/12/11

Also, Limit traits, and give item drops to the martials.

Traits- 9th level casters: One non-combat RP trait.
6th level casters: One Combat, one non-combat
4th level casters: One combat, two non-combat
Non- Two of each.


An alternate choice would be something like

6th and 9th level casters use the elite array.
4th and not casters use 17, 16, 15, 13, 12, 10.

E6 is not the same and I don't want to play it. Stop suggesting it. I don't want low magic. I just want caster dominance to take longer and for casters to have real weaknesses. Which lower casting stats by definition do.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've not read all posts
The main problem with your idea is that your focus is on preventing full-casters from getting a 18 caster-stat while your solution is effecting more than just the casters who wants a 18 caster-stat. You put all MAD full-casters and a SAD full-casters on a 10 point-buy

In my experice low point-buy only results in more dumping and favouring of SAD classes.
The wizard will dump STR and CHA and still afford the 18 INT with a 10-point-buy.
While a cleric will have to split those 10 points between STR and WIS while keeping CON up and not dumping DEX or CHA below 10 (you could but then it's eating away on their ability to fill their role).

What happens here is that you don't prevent a wizard to get his 18 INT (and that's what you wanted). However, you are making it harder for them: while dumping STR and CHA to 7 they will only have 1 point left for DEX/CON (but that won't intervene with their role).
But at the same time, you restrict the cleric and other MAD casters much more.

Bottomline: I wouldn't use this system because it doesn't really solve the problem. And it comes with unintentional side effects.

If you want to limit casters you probably need to look in other areas of the game, like spell lists.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As a caster I can say that we suffer through the low levels waiting for the day we're high level, when we can be powerful.

Most campaigns stop the second we get there.

This is profoundly annoying, but we suffer through it... We have to put off our nifty powers until the game is pretty much over.

If a hard hitting meaty doesnt enjoy being a hard hitting meaty, then why are they choosing to be hard hitting meaties? They are the ones who shine in the low levels, and most of the time, most of the campaign is spent in the low levels.

How much more limelight do they need?


Rub-Eta wrote:

If you want to limit casters you probably need to look in other areas of the game, like spell lists.

It's like people aren't even reading my posts.

I am not looking to limit casters.

I am looking to reduce FREE POWER given to them along side their caster god like powers.

Liberty's Edge

Going with E6/E8 or even Dungeon World handles the problem better than penalizing characters for their class. Penalizing people for playing what they enjoy is just anti-fun.

So here's some questions:

Has the caster / martial divide actually hurt your games? If so, how? Was it certain spells in particular? Look at fixing those.

What wealth do you run at? Martials need wealth far more than casters do. Alternatively, if you want to punish characters for the classes they choose, do it here, lower the price of weapons, raise the price of scrolls / purchasing spells for spell books, pearls of power, etc.


Rub-Eta wrote:
Bottomline: I wouldn't use this system because it doesn't really solve the problem. And it comes with unintentional side effects.

This.


ShadowcatX wrote:
Has the caster / martial divide actually hurt your games?

Yes. Several times.

ShadowcatX wrote:
If so, how?

Free metamagic is a big offender (rods, spell perfection, Generalist wizards) summoning is obnoxiously powerful at low levels but can be dealt with if the summoner isn't tough, unfortunately with free con that's never the case. Save or sucks are rarely a problem. Monsters I use tend to have strong spell defenses.

ShadowcatX wrote:
Was it certain spells in particular?

Almost never. The only spells which have ever been a true problem (Like unable to be GM'ed game wrecking shenanigans are animate dead and simulacrum. The problem is more the amount of magic available at any one time. Fewer bonus spells would go a long way toward it. The problem is that by level 7 there are so many lower level bonus spells that you get free buffs. With an 18 or 19 at level 7 they only have 1 bonus for each level. At best he'll have 2 first level spells on a 21. If you had maxed it out you'd have a bonus HASTE! that's a pretty big difference to me.

ShadowcatX wrote:
Look at fixing those.

It's not a specific spell excluding permanent spells which we just ban. Color spray has won a few encounters but it's never been a problem. It's not specific spells it's the AMOUNT of them they get.

ShadowcatX wrote:


What wealth do you run at? Martials need wealth far more than casters do. Alternatively, if you want to punish characters for the classes they choose, do it here, lower the price of weapons, raise the price of scrolls / purchasing spells for spell books, pearls of power, etc.

I've run on nearly nothing to WBL x3. The core issue is that casters use wealth better than martial so no amount of altering Wealth is going to work. When I tried giving the party big bonus weapons they'd sell them and give a ton of the money to casters for magical power.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:

If you want to limit casters you probably need to look in other areas of the game, like spell lists.

It's like people aren't even reading my posts.

I am not looking to limit casters.

I am looking to reduce FREE POWER given to them along side their caster god like powers.

I agree with your goal Undone, but the method you are suggesting wont really fix the problem I think you are experiencing with casters and will instead just introduce new problems that don't make the situation better.

You're point buy fix would simply mean SAD casters will all start with 7 str and cha, 10 wis and dex, 11 con, and 18 int (+2 from their race), or switch int for whatever the appropriate casting stat is. Honestly all you've done is lower their hp and AC a bit. I guess when they get killed you can feel accomplished until they make an identical character to the one they had before.

May I suggest that besides just trying to curb casters, you actually give martials something to help them out.

I combine all the two weapon fighting feats into 1, the vital strike chain into 1, and give power attack with two other feats that require power attack as a pre-req at level 6 and 11. You only get to choose one of the three sets (to get the extra feats for free) but it means martial characters dont have to spend so many feats just to do something basic. I also give weapon finesse out for free. It general helps everyone all around. Oh, and get rid of Combat Expertise as a prereq for pretty much everything.

I've also banned spell perfection, dazing spell, and persistent spell. Remove rods completely along side Pearls of Power and Runestones of Power.

I think these steps could help a lot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If your concern is not allowing casters to start with very high stats. Just limit that. I think your concept is extremly harsh to certain classes that arent the main problem children and misses alot of the actual problems in the game.

Not all 'casters' are created equal, and this will hurt alot of non-problematic concepts and classes. Many 6th level classes are very mad, and the 9 level casters that are mad pretty much become impossible to play.

In my game I do a 25 point buy, but no stat can be higher then a 17 after racial modifiers and no stat can be lower then 10 before racial modifiers. This means the wizard doesnt get to start with a 20int, but the battle cleric can still have descent wis, strength and con, same with the magus, or the inquisitor, or the bard. Many of the best balanced classes are the 6level 3/4 bab multirole classes. I dont think your concept is fair to them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
I've run on nearly nothing to WBL x3. The core issue is that casters use wealth better than martial so no amount of altering Wealth is going to work. When I tried giving the party big bonus weapons they'd sell them and give a ton of the money to casters for magical power.

Sounds like your group actually likes magic... Is anyone at your table (other than yourself of course) interested in less of it or less power to it?

Sometimes you come to a point where you realize a group of players will never be interested in your bag of hammers no matter how wonderful the hammers are... some people just prefer blasty casty.


Wait... what? Haste is a spell that benefits martials FAR more than it does casters. Whats the big deal with that?

Also, I think you are way off on your opinion that casters use wealth better than martials and I believe you will find that a lot of people here disagree with that statement as well.

On a constructive side there is an old 3.5 book called the Book of Erotic Fantasy that had a fatigue casting system in it that I liked a lot. It could probably be tweaked a bit and seems to fit in with most fantasy trope. Reminds me a lot of Rastlin casting spells and getting tired. There is a lot of great pictures in it too... ;)

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How bad would these build rules be? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.