Haste kind of sucks.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

JoeJ wrote:
Anonymous Visitor 163 576 wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
Anonymous Visitor 163 576 wrote:

For an easy fix, you could have it fatigue the target when the spell wears off.

Thematic, not a ton of math, and makes you wonder if it's the best move on round one.

How long should the fatigue last? One round per caster level perhaps?
You're kinder than I am, i say until you get some rest. Or until someone casts lesser restoration, i suppose.

Or just rule that when Haste ends (wears off, dispelled, whatever) the target is too fatigued to move or take any actions at all for 1 round.

...Why? To any of this.


Xexyz wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
So you use that slot for a spell that breaks the game by itself.
Kinda curious which 3rd level arcane spell "breaks the game by itself" so my sorcerer knows to pick it up next time he levels.

fly


CWheezy wrote:
Xexyz wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
So you use that slot for a spell that breaks the game by itself.
Kinda curious which 3rd level arcane spell "breaks the game by itself" so my sorcerer knows to pick it up next time he levels.
fly

Extended Invisibility, Persistent charm person.

Anyone got a spell for pick-pocketing?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Xexyz wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
So you use that slot for a spell that breaks the game by itself.
Kinda curious which 3rd level arcane spell "breaks the game by itself" so my sorcerer knows to pick it up next time he levels.

You don't know that even cantrips break the game?

:P


Diego Rossi wrote:
Xexyz wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
So you use that slot for a spell that breaks the game by itself.
Kinda curious which 3rd level arcane spell "breaks the game by itself" so my sorcerer knows to pick it up next time he levels.

You don't know that even cantrips break the game?

:P

Yup, create water wreaks havoc on survival stories. And anywhere else where being able to summon forth thousands of gallons of water a day could be problematic.


Anonymous Visitor 163 576 wrote:

For an easy fix, you could have it fatigue the target when the spell wears off.

Thematic, not a ton of math, and makes you wonder if it's the best move on round one.

For an easy fix you could have any spell fatigue the caster for one round per spell level.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Zhayne wrote:
Spook205 wrote:


2e used to balance its good spells by giving them non-mechanical, or non-obvious drawbacks. Haste was great. Improved your speed, made you made of win but...

Each casting of it on you ate a year of your life.

Which was no drawback or balancing mechanism at all, since you were most likely to die LONG before all that became an issue, or you were an Elf. Lose a year, big whoop.

I take it you didn't play earlier editions. Besides the fact that frequently casting haste on a human would bring him into middle age physical penalties really quickly, and the fact that you had to make a system shock check every time or just fall over dead...if you role played at all it should be pretty clear why aging a year would not be considered particularly cool to an awful lot of characters.

Elves could and did abuse haste a bit more, but with their con penalty, the system shock checks were no joke. Haste back in the day was like shooting atropine into your leg and going into "I'll die fighting" mode...pretty much reserved for only the most desperate of situations. That said, it was also an insanely powerful panic button for the wizard, as it just straight up gave the party (except for the wizard, more or less) the equivalent to two rounds worth of actions to everybody else's one.

Silver Crusade

the secret fire wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
Spook205 wrote:


2e used to balance its good spells by giving them non-mechanical, or non-obvious drawbacks. Haste was great. Improved your speed, made you made of win but...

Each casting of it on you ate a year of your life.

Which was no drawback or balancing mechanism at all, since you were most likely to die LONG before all that became an issue, or you were an Elf. Lose a year, big whoop.

I take it you didn't play earlier editions. Besides the fact that frequently casting haste on a human would bring him into middle age physical penalties really quickly, and the fact that you had to make a system shock check every time or just fall over dead...if you role played at all it should be pretty clear why aging a year would not be considered particularly cool to an awful lot of characters.

Elves could and did abuse haste a bit more, but with their con penalty, the system shock checks were no joke. Haste back in the day was like shooting atropine into your leg and going into "I'll die fighting" mode...pretty much reserved for only the most desperate of situations. That said, it was also an insanely powerful panic button for the wizard, as it just straight up gave the party (except for the wizard, more or less) the equivalent to two rounds worth of actions to everybody else's one.

Right. The spell had drawbacks and benefits. It was a weighed cost equation every time you used it.

I'm not saying that 3e didn't make things more fun by making them simpler (they got rid of a lot of the 'this spell is like eating uranium to power yourself up' effects) and a lot of emergent stuff (like using grease to oil someone/somewhere up to light them on fire), I'm just saying that 2e and earlier had magic that felt more like 'magic' and less like 'lets make super-combos!'

And like I said earlier, I think its due to WoTC's influence that 3e moved more to the 'netdeck' optimization ethos. Although the internet's wider availability has a lot to do with that too.

I don't have a huge problem with haste. I just dislike 'always need' spells. Admittedly, I've not found haste to be a huge issue because 1.) My maps are usually large, 2.) I have many enemies, 3.) By a certain level PCs and NPCs are piles of buffs anyway.

What I miss though is spells that felt like magic instead of Magic: The Gathering.


I don't mind the effect that Haste has on characters/creatures - buffs are awesome. What I do mind is the overall effect it has on the game itself. A party designed to use Haste on a regular basis will pretty much ROFLStomp encounter after encounter. Of course, the monsters can do the same - Just add a kobold with a scroll of haste to every encounter. And there's the rub... The one time the party decides not to use Haste, they get ROFLStomped by the encounter. Welcome to rocket tags and regular TPKs.

From there, the entire game degenerates into Haste or die. It makes telling any kind of story nearly impossible - all the protagonists are dead. So, yea, it sucks.

I usually nerf it by limiting the number of creatures affected (1 creature per 3 caster levels) and that seems to negate the game-killing effect of it. Still useful, but not a "must have".


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm having a hard time figuring out how an extra attack a round creates a scenario where you ROFLstomp any encounter.

If that's all it takes, the encounter wasn't hard to begin with.


Rynjin wrote:
I'm having a hard time figuring out how an extra attack a round creates a scenario where you ROFLstomp any encounter.

Well, it also doubles movement, and provides basically a +1 attack/defense buff. Haste doesn't allow parties to automatically ROFLstomp encounters - that is obviously an exaggeration - but it raises the martials' effective ECL by a couple. It a martial-heavy party this can be quite unbalancing, especially in the 5th - 8th level range, where an awful lot of the game is typically played.


I have no problem with the idea of haste, no matter what certain posters think. I believe it would be better, however, if there was a meaningful decision on what 3rd-level spell was the best buff for a given encounter. It's almost always haste, unless there is literally only one martial character in the party, in which case the best buff will depend on that character's build.

Asking the other players "should I cast haste or heroism?" shouldn't be met with concerned looks that cast aspersions on your intellect.

A 6th-level sorcerer that didn't pick haste as his 3rd-level spell shouldn't have that decision attributed to not casting spells based on Intelligence.

We want options, is what I'm saying.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:
But it is _VERY POWERFUL_. As a force-multiplier it's difficult for me to think of a better spell.

Blessing of Fervor comes to mind. And, yes, Haste does more together, but Blessing of Fervor gives you a choice per round between very, very useful buffs.

I'm currently playing a buff oriented Bard with the Pathfinder Savant prestige class mixed in and I took the prestige class mainly for my character to be able to cast this spell (Although it has many other benefits, too). It really is a game changer, just as much as Haste is.

Silver Crusade

Thelemic_Noun wrote:

I have no problem with the idea of haste, no matter what certain posters think. I believe it would be better, however, if there was a meaningful decision on what 3rd-level spell was the best buff for a given encounter. It's almost always haste, unless there is literally only one martial character in the party, in which case the best buff will depend on that character's build.

Asking the other players "should I cast haste or heroism?" shouldn't be met with concerned looks that cast aspersions on your intellect.

A 6th-level sorcerer that didn't pick haste as his 3rd-level spell shouldn't have that decision attributed to not casting spells based on Intelligence.

We want options, is what I'm saying.

Aside from my rose colored 2e glasses, this is my main point.

People see haste and say 'Why wouldn't I take haste?' Thats a problem.

Conversely, I had the pleasure of sitting with a summoner player as he picked out spells. He literally was in a 'but I want this one too...' dilemma. That's the ideal for spells.

Haste's problem is that it does a hell of a lot for a level 3 buff. It lasts a reasonably long time in combat, it increases your AC (and your CMD), it gives another attack action, it piles 30 feet onto your base speed, and if you have it up before a fight, your init gets helped.

That's a pretty beefy set of stuff for one spell. That's why I asked, would you still take haste as a 4th level spell, a 5th?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Thelemic_Noun wrote:
But nobody seems to be complaining about haste, despite how much it distorts the game.

I don't see that as a bad thing. It's a great spell. As strange is this phrase sounds out of context, I completely agree with Mythic Evil Lincoln. It's a spell fun for everyone that encourages teamwork without making fights feel trivial. Even the GM benfeits as it's a great spell for a Big Bad to cast on his minions. It's everything a spell should be.


Cyrad wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
But nobody seems to be complaining about haste, despite how much it distorts the game.
I don't see that as a bad thing. It's a great spell. As strange is this phrase sounds out of context, I completely agree with Mythic Evil Lincoln. It's a spell fun for everyone that encourages teamwork without making fights feel trivial. Even the GM benfeits as it's a great spell for a Big Bad to cast on his minions. It's everything a spell should be.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU IN THE SLIGHTEST!!!!!!

My point is, it's extremely boring that only one spell does that this well, so everyone uses it with almost no thought.

Since there isn't a better 3rd-level buff (and precious few higher-level buffs on the arcane end of things), there's no strategic decision making. The divination wizard wins initiative, says "I cast haste," and the martials charge and murderhobo the opposition in build-appropriate fashion.

While this is more engaging than "I cast Extended Dazing wall of fire, everyone else go home now" in that other players get to actually participate, it will eventually get boring for *everyone* doing the same thing over and over.

When I see haste highlighted in bright blue in every single guide, I get the same feeling I got in World of Warcraft where all the high-level players wore the same Best-in-Slot items and all looked exactly the same to the point of looking like a cult.

I shouldn't get the same feeling from a spell that I got at the tail end of Wrath of the Lich King where all the warlocks in Dark Coven gear made it look like Dalaran had been taken over by a sect of Klansmen with a thing for indigo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And as for blessing of fervor, that's really just a buffed version of haste.

If anything, perhaps the design intent was to take some of the pressure off the arcane caster by allowing clerics to provide the extra attack per round function, in much the same way that it's preferable for the cleric to handle dispel magic duty since the arcane caster has better things to do with their 3rd-level slots.


There is one huge drawback to Haste that everyone seems to be forgetting; the party must stay in Fireball formation until Haste is cast. And enemy casters tend to be good at initiative too.

Silver Crusade

In certain situations I let my party get away with pre-casting haste, just so the summoner doesn't need to 'waste' his initial turn with the requisite buff and can get into the 'fun stuff.'

When you feel like its your job to cast that spell, and you need that spell, thats when something starts feeling a bit off.


Rynjin wrote:

I'm having a hard time figuring out how an extra attack a round creates a scenario where you ROFLstomp any encounter.

If that's all it takes, the encounter wasn't hard to begin with.

Holy s$+!. I agree with Rynjin on something.


thorin001 wrote:
There is one huge drawback to Haste that everyone seems to be forgetting; the party must stay in Fireball formation until Haste is cast. And enemy casters tend to be good at initiative too.

This has actually been an issue for one of my groups.

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
FuelDrop wrote:

Now I have to test this theory.

Cheese Dip.

...

SCIENCE!

Your cheese dip is weaksauce. You intentionally nerf yourself by insisting on using Sour Cream when Crema Mexicana is more powerful and more authentic to the flavor you're going for. Also, you would get better mileage out of fresh jalapenos rather than pickled jalapenos. On top of that, splashing in some chipotles or even a Serrano for extra heat would give you diversity. Finally, let's talk about your crunch. Why stop at Radishes? Add Carrots and Celery. And Doritos are a terrible choice - go for Tostitos, or see if your local grocery store fries their own chips.

;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Spook205 wrote:

In certain situations I let my party get away with pre-casting haste, just so the summoner doesn't need to 'waste' his initial turn with the requisite buff and can get into the 'fun stuff.'

When you feel like its your job to cast that spell, and you need that spell, thats when something starts feeling a bit off.

While I'm sympathetic to the idea that haste may be a dominant strategy, I'm not entirely convinced that it's bad that a character feels it's his "job" to cast it. Welcome to the burden of effective teamwork, summoner, and stop your whining.

Plus, that summoner probably already has an eidolon out there giving him an extra action anyway. And even if he doesn't and has to use his summon monster ability for his combat effectiveness, he'll get plenty of game time actions to make up for losing one to casting haste. I play a summoner in a Skull and Shackles game and I'm quite familiar with the trade-offs. My sympathy for any summoner complaining about wasting an action by hasting his fellows is very limited. It does my group a lot of good to have the ranger, inquisitor, rogue, and eidolon hasted up as soon as I can manage it.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
There is one huge drawback to Haste that everyone seems to be forgetting; the party must stay in Fireball formation until Haste is cast. And enemy casters tend to be good at initiative too.
This has actually been an issue for one of my groups.

More commonly in my group, we're too spread out to use haste efficiently right away. We end up having to get into position for it. But then, we're playing Skull and Shackles with one PC usually at the helm and another managing the siege weapon in the bow.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
the secret fire wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
Spook205 wrote:


2e used to balance its good spells by giving them non-mechanical, or non-obvious drawbacks. Haste was great. Improved your speed, made you made of win but...

Each casting of it on you ate a year of your life.

Which was no drawback or balancing mechanism at all, since you were most likely to die LONG before all that became an issue, or you were an Elf. Lose a year, big whoop.
I take it you didn't play earlier editions.

I played all of 'em, from the original Red Box where elf was a class.


johnnythexxxiv wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Xexyz wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
So you use that slot for a spell that breaks the game by itself.
Kinda curious which 3rd level arcane spell "breaks the game by itself" so my sorcerer knows to pick it up next time he levels.

You don't know that even cantrips break the game?

:P

Yup, create water wreaks havoc on survival stories. And anywhere else where being able to summon forth thousands of gallons of water a day could be problematic.

Altho it is true that the board for Outdoor Survival was used heavily in early D&D, this is a Fantasy RPG, and playing a survival game is best left to other venues. Not to mention being boring as hell.


Zhayne wrote:
the secret fire wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
Spook205 wrote:


2e used to balance its good spells by giving them non-mechanical, or non-obvious drawbacks. Haste was great. Improved your speed, made you made of win but...

Each casting of it on you ate a year of your life.

Which was no drawback or balancing mechanism at all, since you were most likely to die LONG before all that became an issue, or you were an Elf. Lose a year, big whoop.
I take it you didn't play earlier editions.
I played all of 'em, from the original Red Box where elf was a class.

Darn Kid! Get off my lawn!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Thelemic_Noun wrote:


My point is, it's extremely boring that only one spell does that this well, so everyone uses it with almost no thought.

I don't see it as a problem, because for one thing there ARE other things to think about. Haste isn't the only option either. As a wizard with limited slots, I have to choose between Haste and OTHER good spells such as Summon Monster 3. Maybe I'm a blaster optimised sorcerer, so Haste might not be the number one spell for me to learn.

It's a bit of an exaggeration to claim that it's the one and only spell that's guaranteed to be the first or cast in a combat. When you get to higher level play and you don't have rounds to buff, you might want to cast more important spells first.

Not every combat starts in a simple open box with 3 rounds of buff time. Circumstances can throw many theorycraft assumptions out the window.


Just because something is not powerful every single time doesn't mean its power isn't an issue.

Choosing between summoning a monster and buffing the party is a tactical decision that requires thought.

Once you've settled on buff as the option, choosing which offensive buff is essentially a no-brainer, because there is no offensive party buff on their spell list that provides such a direct numerical boost.

And at higher levels, Quickened haste takes care of a lot of the action economy problems for the caster.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Thelemic_Noun wrote:

Just because something is not powerful every single time doesn't mean its power isn't an issue.

Choosing between summoning a monster and buffing the party is a tactical decision that requires thought.

Once you've settled on buff as the option, choosing which offensive buff is essentially a no-brainer, because there is no offensive party buff on their spell list that provides such a direct numerical boost.

And at higher levels, Quickened haste takes care of a lot of the action economy problems for the caster.

At the levels where you can afford to quicken third level spells, you're playing an entirely different game, so that's moot.

Saying it's an issue doesn't make it an issue. Is your problem that players tend to standardize on tactics? That's what players will DO. They will find something that works and use it again and again in any situation where it will work. That's not an issue, that's play style. And again you're on a messageboard full of optimisers, munchkins, and would-bes looking for the one good gambit. If it wasn't Haste, and it isn't Haste always, it'll be something else.

I have a PFS Summoner that I've played to 12th level. Haste was the first 2nd level spell he learned along with Summon Monster 2 (which got traded out as he leveled up), that doesn't mean I cast Haste on every single battle he's been in since. There is a danger in generalizing personal experience.


Rynjin wrote:
I'm having a hard time figuring out how an extra attack a round creates a scenario where you ROFLstomp any encounter.

I think the post was exaggerated. Though I don't think haste is a solution to all combat-based encounters, I've seen plenty of battles where haste made the difference between the enemy getting killed by the extra attack granted by haste as opposed to the enemy surviving long enough to get another turn.

I don't see other buffs (Bull's Strength, Heroism) make that kind of difference very often. Sometimes they do, but not as often as haste.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Saying it's an issue doesn't make it an issue.

But all the other people saying it's an issue isn't even a hint of a clue that it might actually be an issue?

LazarX wrote:
Is your problem that players tend to standardize on tactics? That's what players will DO. They will find something that works and use it again and again in any situation where it will work. That's not an issue, that's play style. And again you're on a messageboard full of optimisers, munchkins, and would-bes looking for the one good gambit. If it wasn't Haste, and it isn't Haste always, it'll be something else.

So discussion is pointless, because there will always be a thing that is better than most other things a vast majority of the time, to the point where not using it is an indicator of lack of familiarity with the game or a deliberate choice to be suboptimal.

I can't really think of a standard campaign style where attack rolls aren't the most common actions characters take. And haste helps anybody making an attack, especially a full attack.

Haste is a massive boost to the most common action in the most common style of game.

I'm not saying get rid of it. I'm saying it shouldn't be so strong as to have no consistent serious competitors. If it is going to stay as strong as it is, there should be other options that make the choice less clear-cut.


Thelemic_Noun wrote:


So discussion is pointless, because there will always be a thing that is better than most other things a vast majority of the time

This doesn't have to be true. Also, haste is broken good in basically every game it exists in. I think the Pathfinder one is actually less powerful on average compared to haste in other games.


I am unconvinced that Haste is broken good. The only evidence I see for that is that DSP did not make a psionic equivalent that was as good, and they were making an entirely re-balanced casting system.

In the scope of arcane vancian casting, I don't see how addressing this one spell would be an improvement or how it is even overpowered.


Marroar Gellantara wrote:

I am unconvinced that Haste is broken good. The only evidence I see for that is that DSP did not make a psionic equivalent that was as good, and they were making an entirely re-balanced casting system.

In the scope of arcane vancian casting, I don't see how addressing this one spell would be an improvement or how it is even overpowered.

Well the main issue with nerfing haste is that it does not nerf wizards. I wrote up a google doc of Reasonable spell nerfs. It is possible to get them all such that wizards become more reasonable.


Check the DPR Olympics threads.


When I was playing a bard low those many moons ago, my go to spell was Good Hope, following up with Haste if the battle actually needed two 3rd level spell castings. +2 to everything, including saves, seemed to be a better choice unless we really needed the double movement.

Too bad it is Bard only.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dilvias wrote:

When I was playing a bard low those many moons ago, my go to spell was Good Hope, following up with Haste if the battle actually needed two 3rd level spell castings. +2 to everything, including saves, seemed to be a better choice unless we really needed the double movement.

Too bad it is Bard only.

Wizards and Sorcerers don't need more toys.


I think you're conflating "There aren't many good 3rd level buff spells" with "Haste is too good because if you wanna buff why wouldn't you use it".

Heroism is amazing as well, but it lasts 10 minutes a level. No need to cast it in combat.

Other than that, everything is highly situational, like Fly.

Haste and Heroism are good all-purpose spells, that's why they're taken. Not every buff spell needs to be like Spiked Scales.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed the 5th edition PDF derail. Guys, this is edging into edition warring territory and is dripping with insults. Let's drop it.


My players have long realized that by house rule, I foolishly allowed haste/slows to stack...even with the hastes needing a system shock roll for each haste spell and multiple years aged [as my players are pretty much elf/dwarf meaning the age penalties did not faze them...system shock and a dwarf's con meant an easy roll.

I favor a style of if you do it...I do it too!

So after they stacked 3 slows on a choke point of enemy knights and I ended up with ground round by my turn...they were hit by 2 stacked slows and a double hasted group of 6 berserkers later down the road so to speak...

It worked to cut back on the abuse of haste/slow spells...They keep it for endgame scenarios, or if it's a use it or die...and I have a moderately well behaved group of gamers.


Spook205 wrote:

In certain situations I let my party get away with pre-casting haste, just so the summoner doesn't need to 'waste' his initial turn with the requisite buff and can get into the 'fun stuff.'

When you feel like its your job to cast that spell, and you need that spell, thats when something starts feeling a bit off.

It's your job like inspiring courage is the bard's job, or laying down black tentacles is the wizard's job. If you're going to be a buffer then it is generally assumed that you are going to be spending at least some of your turns buffing party members.

I don't know why a summoner of all things is complaining, he gets two turns per round with his eidolon.

51 to 100 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Haste kind of sucks. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.