What character options are underwhelming or underpowered?


Advice

101 to 146 of 146 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gurps has the more realistic option with crossbows. The bow has a STR rating, and it does damage based on the STR rating of the bow, not the user. And there is no limit on how high that can go. The bigger the difference between the user's STR and the crossbow's STR, the longer it takes to crank and reload. The higher the STR bonus, the more expensive the bow.

But there is nothing but cost stopping you from getting a crossbow with STR 60 or something. It might take an hour to cock it, but that first shot is deadly.

Unfortunately, that doesn't really work with the level based d20 system. 1d10+30 isn't balanced against the rest of the game at low level, even if you can only do it once per combat and it's wasted on a miss.


Jodokai wrote:
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Locks you into 'returning' weapons.

Actually returning is underwhelming, using called instead.

Crossbows, holy crap crossbows. Let's let crossbows use touch AC and make the gunslingers use regular AC... just a thought

Inspired Blade Archetype. Lose the ability to get panache back when you down an enemy for your INT bonus to panache, which is usually 1 at lower levels, which never really works out. If you didn't have the archetype you'd have 1 less but you'd get it back twice as many ways. It does add a slight benefit at level 20, your rapier will crit on a 14 instead of a 15...whoopty doo

You kinda forget a free feat at 1st level. Which allows all races to start with fencing grace from lvl1.

Starting with:
Weapon focus
Dex to attack
Dex to damage
Free feat

At lvl1 is quite big

The lvl11 ability is also quite good, int to attack and/or auto critical threat

Liberty's Edge

Wheldrake wrote:
The question of "what character options are underwhelming or underpowered" seems to be based on a faulty paradigm, that's all. As if every character needs to be a contender in the DPR olympics in order to simply be "viable".. Which is pure rubbish.

It depends on what you're talking about. In the case of a crossbow, all it does it cause damage to things, so being really bad at causing damage is a major consideriation to the viability of crossbow builds. Meanwhile, we have someone else talking about the Inspired Blade archetype, not because of it doing less damage (it actually does more than a standard Swashbuckler) but because of its poor resource management. Similarly, I dislike many Bard archetypes because they trade out things like Bardic Knowledge and Versatile Performance, reducing the utility of the class without really adding much.

Sovereign Court

Tangaroa wrote:

Teamwork feats often fall into this category. Yes, highly specific builds that hand out teamwork feat are powerful, but still situational enough to at least qualify as "too complicated". The ones in the APG are particularly bad. You need the feet and you need to be adjacent. The UC feats are better - less of those have adjacency requirements.

Of course, as bad guy feats, feats for hyperspecialized unrealistic I-exist-only-to-kill-heros, they are... Still only OK.

I've found a few of them pretty powerful, actually. My girlfriend and I have stealth synergy on two PFS characters and when we combine our bonuses we have a +37 to stealth at 11th level. Rolling twice means we rarely have below a 45. Not much at 9th level that can get a 45 perception check.


So why not just take 10 for a 47?

Scarab Sages

Of course, teamwork feats on a hunter/sacred huntmaster inquisitor are downright terrifying. Outflank + Pack Flanking + Paired Opportunists.

Sovereign Court

Rynjin wrote:
So why not just take 10 for a 47?

Read the feat. You get to roll twice. I suppose one person could always take 10 and the other could roll? Not sure what that would do.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

The Human Diversion wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
So why not just take 10 for a 47?
Read the feat. You get to roll twice. I suppose one person could always take 10 and the other could roll? Not sure what that would do.

Actually not a bad idea. One rolls, one takes 10. You know you'll get at least 10, which will put your average roll around 13.


I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

Sovereign Court

Rynjin wrote:

I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

The only reason we're at +37 is because we both add our stealth bonuses together, thanks to the feat. Without the feat I'm at +22 and she's at +15 on stealth.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

The Human Diversion wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

The only reason we're at +37 is because we both add our stealth bonuses together, thanks to the feat. Without the feat I'm at +22 and she's at +15 on stealth.

That isn't how I parsed that sentence. I read it as "You take the highest roll, then each of you adds his or her own modifiers to that number." Has that been FAQ'ed?

ETA: ANd then you each arrive at [high roll]+your own modifiers. So you'd have different numbers.

An Army of 1000 warriors with 1 rank in Stealth and this feat... 1d20 + 1000 to Stealth?

Sovereign Court

Christopher Dudley wrote:
The Human Diversion wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

The only reason we're at +37 is because we both add our stealth bonuses together, thanks to the feat. Without the feat I'm at +22 and she's at +15 on stealth.

That isn't how I parsed that sentence. I read it as "You take the highest roll, then each of you adds his or her own modifiers to that number." Has that been FAQ'ed?

ETA: ANd then you each arrive at [high roll]+your own modifiers. So you'd have different numbers.

An Army of 1000 warriors with 1 rank in Stealth and this feat... 1d20 + 1000 to Stealth?

Here's the exact text from the feat (which I linked above):

"Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a Stealth check, you all take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth."

Seems pretty clear to me.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

The Human Diversion wrote:
Christopher Dudley wrote:
The Human Diversion wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

The only reason we're at +37 is because we both add our stealth bonuses together, thanks to the feat. Without the feat I'm at +22 and she's at +15 on stealth.

That isn't how I parsed that sentence. I read it as "You take the highest roll, then each of you adds his or her own modifiers to that number." Has that been FAQ'ed?

ETA: ANd then you each arrive at [high roll]+your own modifiers. So you'd have different numbers.

An Army of 1000 warriors with 1 rank in Stealth and this feat... 1d20 + 1000 to Stealth?

Here's the exact text from the feat (which I linked above):

"Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a Stealth check, you all take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth."

Seems pretty clear to me.

Just curious how other people read it. I read it as, for example, you roll a 9 and your gf rolls a 17. "You each take the highest roll" so you both start with 17. "and add all your modifiers to Stealth" tells me that you add all yours to 17, and she adds all hers to 17, and you end up with a 39 and she ends up with a 32.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Christopher Dudley wrote:
LeesusFreak wrote:
Crossbows. 'Nuff said.
The 8th level fighter in my party with Crossbow Mastery and Bracers of Falcon's Aim would disagree. Two crits and a hit on a mummy in Legacy of Fire did over 100 points of damage before the mummy got a turn. Which we retconned out because as he rolled the last damage die, I realized that he 5'stepped before firing to within 30' of the mummy which put him in the fear aura, but if he'd made his save I would have let it happen.

That is whoefully underpowered. Two crits and a hit for 100 is ~ 4th level raging barbarian damage. Even using the horribly underpriced bracers of falcons aim you've merely min maxed a crossbowman to be.. meh.

Sovereign Court

TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.

The language is ambiguous and it's been marked by 12 people for FAQ, both of which can be found here:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mz7z?Stealth-Synergy#1


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.

Yes, it would seem that you each add your own modifier after sharing the highest d20 roll.


Rogues
Sneak attack
Crossbows
Two weapon fighting
Full attack options
Vital strike
Whirlwind attack
New Cleave
Most direct damage spells
Counterspelling (just blast them with a damage spell works so much better)
Concentration checks in a grapple (its like a bonus to jump checks trying to reach the moon)
In combat healing

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
The Human Diversion wrote:

The language is ambiguous and it's been marked by 12 people for FAQ, both of which can be found here:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mz7z?Stealth-Synergy#1

I'm aware. I am one of the 12.


Rynjin wrote:

I'm saying you're both spending a Feat for low of 45 (8 on the die).

When you could just save both of yourselves a Feat, Take 10, and get 2 better, all the time, with no chance of rolling lower.

If not much can see a 45, even less will see a 47, so it's moot that you don't have the chance of rolling higher.

The average CR 10 creature, near as I can tell, can't hit a 47 on a 20 (the highest I found was a Movanic Deva at +26. 1 shy on a 20).

So the Feat is pretty much pointless.

CR 9: T-Rex, +37 to perception.

Sovereign Court

Rogue Eidolon wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.
Yes, it would seem that you each add your own modifier after sharing the highest d20 roll.

Why use the verbiage "add all your" then? "Your" in English can refer to an individual or all the people of a group. They could clear it up very easily with a FAQ ruling by stating something like, "you all take the highest roll and each add all your modifiers to Stealth."

We're talking about a teamwork feat here, so the wording has to cover all characters with the feat. Because they were referring to the plural at the beginning of the sentence, by rules of grammar unless clearly indicating otherwise they are still referring to plural at the end of the sentence.

I invite you all to go to the thread I linked above and ask for a FAQ.

Shadow Lodge

The Human Diversion wrote:
I invite you all to go to the thread I linked above and ask for a FAQ.

*falls over laughing*

Dude, he IS the FAQ.

(Okay, not exactly accurate, but being the spokesman for the PDT is close enough.)


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

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, thrown weapons are even worse than crossbows because of action rules.

I would also put Sacred Summons on the Underwhelming list assuming that you strictly follow the alignment subtype requirement. At first reading, I thought it would be wonderful. Checking into it more, even when combined with Summon Good Monster it really didn't give you that many summons you could do as a standard action. If Celestial/Fiendish gave the appropriate alignment subtype it would be great.

For the levels that PFS plays at, I don't think Arcane Trickster is worth it. The problem is you lose the FCB and the advancement in any arcane powers.

Sovereign Court

TOZ wrote:
The Human Diversion wrote:
I invite you all to go to the thread I linked above and ask for a FAQ.

*falls over laughing*

Dude, he IS the FAQ.

(Okay, not exactly accurate, but being the spokesman for the PDT is close enough.)

Ok, and why is that funny? There's no official ruling and more people FAQing it would maybe get an official answer.

Shadow Lodge

The Human Diversion wrote:
Ok, and why is that funny? There's no official ruling and more people FAQing it would maybe get an official answer.

Because you just asked the guy in charge of posting the official FAQs to go FAQ the question to get it officially answered.

And I already FAQed it, as I said upthread.


Imbicatus wrote:
Claxon wrote:

As long as you don't mind spending 5 levels of Bolt Ace crossbows are great. Actually, if you want to be good at Crossbows just play a straight Bolt Ace. Doesn't get much else to be excited about, but they're fraking amazing at crossbows.

With Bracers of Falcon's Aim and Crossbow Training (at level 5) you have a weapon that is 19-20x4. Plus dex damage. You take a bit longer to reach your stride than an archer, but honestly your damage will probably beat out the dedicated archer's because of your higher critical multplier and the fact that you're SAD (at least for your attacks). The only real difference at the end that I can think of is that you can't use Manyshot on crossbows.

The ability to target touch AC makes up for the loss of manyshot. You get fewer attacks, but they are more accurate.

But If you want more attacks, you can use TWF with crossbows to make up the difference, or use a double crossbow, or multiclass with sohei.

Yes, once you get to level 11 and can attack vs touch AC using no grit your damage will soar above what an archer could hope to do. Mostly because you'll never miss.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To be fair TOZ, not every poster realizes that Rogue Eidolon is Mark Seifter. There are probably some posters who don't know that hovering on a username will tell you who it's an alias of.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Oh I know. I still find it funny.

People still don't realize TOZ is my alias.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:

Oh I know. I still find it funny.

People still don't realize TOZ is my alias.

To be fair the NSA has lost track of some of them.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
To be fair the NSA has lost track of some of them.

Tch. What the hell are we paying them for anyway?


BigNorseWolf wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:

Oh I know. I still find it funny.

People still don't realize TOZ is my alias.

To be fair the NSA has lost track of some of them.

40 ish non-PFS character aliases, and all of one post by the one that's his actual name.

Shadow Lodge

Thing about that was, I was impatiently waiting for my VL status to get updated, and tried to post this one to actually have my name there. But it doesn't list my region, so it's pretty useless.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Human Diversion wrote:

Here's the exact text from the feat (which I linked above):

"Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a Stealth check, you all take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth."

Seems pretty clear to me.

The Human Diversion wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.

The language is ambiguous and it's been marked by 12 people for FAQ, both of which can be found here:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mz7z?Stealth-Synergy#1

If you feel it is 'pretty clear', why also do you consider it is 'ambiguous' and request the FAQ? I think deep down you know it is not supposed to be that ridiculously overpowered, but are rules-lawyering the admittedly poor wording saying its up to the devs to prove you wrong via a FAQ entry. This happens all the time on this forum. And its pretty obvious every time.

Can you think of any other feat anywhere that can give a 9th level character a +22 on ANYTHING? While there are plenty that will provide a 'double roll take highest'. So which do you think the RAI is here?


Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Thing about that was, I was impatiently waiting for my VL status to get updated, and tried to post this one to actually have my name there. But it doesn't list my region, so it's pretty useless.

I wasn't meaning it sound like a bad thing TOZ; I'm frequently impressed by the effort you put into using the right name for the right comment. (Although I've yet to figure out when you use TOZ vs. TriOmegaZero.)


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.
Yes, it would seem that you each add your own modifier after sharing the highest d20 roll.

Hey mark, remember when you said months ago you were going to do a blog post on how simulacrum actually worked?

those were the days

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
CWheezy wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.
Yes, it would seem that you each add your own modifier after sharing the highest d20 roll.

Hey mark, remember when you said months ago you were going to do a blog post on how simulacrum actually worked?

those were the days

Yup, I'm still going to. All things in their time. I'm happy that I got the FAQs to start coming once a week. To me that feels like a good start.


Mark Seifter wrote:


Yup, I'm still going to. All things in their time. I'm happy that I got the FAQs to start coming once a week. To me that feels like a good start.

I'm excited for your solution on what memories a simulacrum has. If I make a copy of Karzoug, do I just know all his plans forever?

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Christopher Dudley wrote:
LeesusFreak wrote:
Crossbows. 'Nuff said.
The 8th level fighter in my party with Crossbow Mastery and Bracers of Falcon's Aim would disagree. Two crits and a hit on a mummy in Legacy of Fire did over 100 points of damage before the mummy got a turn. Which we retconned out because as he rolled the last damage die, I realized that he 5'stepped before firing to within 30' of the mummy which put him in the fear aura, but if he'd made his save I would have let it happen.
That is whoefully underpowered. Two crits and a hit for 100 is ~ 4th level raging barbarian damage. Even using the horribly underpriced bracers of falcons aim you've merely min maxed a crossbowman to be.. meh.

I think we're using different definitions of "underpowered." I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through. You're using "underpowered" in this case to mean "I can think of something that does more damage." The crossbow fighter is keeping well ahead of the power curve.


My gripe of crossbows aren't that they are weaker than, say, a barbarian's axe. It's that, relative to bows, they are so weak, when in reality, a crossbow was considered a far more dangerous weapon.


Christopher Dudley wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Christopher Dudley wrote:
LeesusFreak wrote:
Crossbows. 'Nuff said.
The 8th level fighter in my party with Crossbow Mastery and Bracers of Falcon's Aim would disagree. Two crits and a hit on a mummy in Legacy of Fire did over 100 points of damage before the mummy got a turn. Which we retconned out because as he rolled the last damage die, I realized that he 5'stepped before firing to within 30' of the mummy which put him in the fear aura, but if he'd made his save I would have let it happen.
That is whoefully underpowered. Two crits and a hit for 100 is ~ 4th level raging barbarian damage. Even using the horribly underpriced bracers of falcons aim you've merely min maxed a crossbowman to be.. meh.
I think we're using different definitions of "underpowered." I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through. You're using "underpowered" in this case to mean "I can think of something that does more damage." The crossbow fighter is keeping well ahead of the power curve.

Wow, what's your power curve here? Is your party a rogue, a monk, a blaster wizard with no metamagic and the crossbow user?


Really, just about every ranged weapon in the game suffers from longbow envy. The longbow just has such a huge advantage that unless you're a gunslinger there's no reason other than flavor to ever use any other ranged weapon. I'd say that's a balance issue, whether it's calling the longbow overpowered or everything else underpowered.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CraziFuzzy wrote:
My gripe of crossbows aren't that they are weaker than, say, a barbarian's axe. It's that, relative to bows, they are so weak, when in reality, a crossbow was considered a far more dangerous weapon.

Eh, crossbows were "banned" by the pope for the same reason guns were revolutionary. It gave an unskilled peasant a way to kill the noble knight. Bows took years of training. While certainly you could carry extremely powerful crossbows, it gets to a point where you're less carrying a crossbow, and more a portable ballista.

That said, I see no reason for crossbows to not be more effective in Pathfinder. I'd rather them do something different than archers, though. Less "blot out the sun" and more powerful precision shooting.


Christopher Dudley wrote:


I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through.

Wait, and with that definition you called the first world summoner underpowered?

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Gingerbreadman wrote:
Christopher Dudley wrote:


I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through.
Wait, and with that definition you called the first world summoner underpowered?

Fair enough. I've never seen the first world summoner in action. Just reading it made it sound weak. You say it does fine, I believe you.

Scarab Sages

Christopher Dudley wrote:
Gingerbreadman wrote:
Christopher Dudley wrote:


I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through.
Wait, and with that definition you called the first world summoner underpowered?
Fair enough. I've never seen the first world summoner in action. Just reading it made it sound weak. You say it does fine, I believe you.

It's weak compared to a normal summoner (unless you are a half orc and summon unkillable pugwampis). That still makes is more powerful than most other classes.


Christopher Dudley wrote:


I think we're using different definitions of "underpowered." I'm thinking of "underpowered" as some build choice that's unable to keep up with the power level expected of the CR system and printed materials, in this case the AP that I'm running them through. You're using "underpowered" in this case to mean "I can think of something that does more damage."

.

Underpowered to me is a combination of what you've listed and its comparison to other comparable options, not that i can think of a better option (someone can always tweak a few more points out of something)

I do not believe that the crossbowman is going to keep up with the party for long, nor do I believe that pointing out a few good rounds of combat and lucky dice is a substitute for looking under the hood at the underlying mechanics.

By comparable i mean things that do the same job. A bow and a crossbow are comparable because they do the same job. A bow and a greatsword or a bow and a wand of cure light wounds are not because they don't.

Quote:
The crossbow fighter is keeping well ahead of the power curve.

It gets quadratic pretty soon.

101 to 146 of 146 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / What character options are underwhelming or underpowered? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.