
Shadows_Of_Fall |

A little background before I jump into the main point: I've been in several mythic campaigns, all by different DMs, which reached anywhere from mythic 1 only to mythic 6 or 7. There've been hiccups with how strong mythic makes players or how strong the bosses need to be, but never anything major. In general no players min/maxed or anything of that nature. For example I always liked Sanctum, Eldritch Flight and Enduring Armor. No one ever took things like Mirror Dodge or looked to mythic up their strongest spells.
That said the group I'm in now is...shall we say...very min/max-y. Our DM currently has us at level 9 mythic 6, fighting custom colossal monsters that can kill us in 1 or 2 turns. Our last humanoid opponent was a dual wielding whip master who, in 1 or 2 turns, could pin and tie up opponents to take them out (he also threatened 10 or 15 feet). One member of the party is a tank with nearly 40 ac. Another is a Barbarian who (I don't remember how) goes Large and starts dishing about 100 damage on average. Both have mirror dodge as well.
The tank was dealing no damage but surviving and the Barbarian kept coming close to dying so both have raised issues with mythic unbalancing things. We're due to have a group discussion on whether or not we remove mythic. Personally I believe that anyone who wants to min/max and make the campaign rocket tag can do so without mythic, just not quite as easily. However I want to see what others think on balancing mythic and/or somehow fixing the campaigns balance before I sit down and present my thoughts. I'm the only other one at the table who has DMd and always tend toward the level 1-5 local, 6-10 regional etc scale rather than "level 6 fighting angels". That is to say I prefer to keep things somewhat lower key and try to avoid anything becoming min/max'd to begin with. So I'm not quite sure how to approach the issue (and yes, before anyone asks, our DM is looking for possible solutions or thoughts by players).

![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Well, I have one recommendation for the GM that might get things back on track: stop using bosses. I have a hypothesis that the concept of "a boss" is the single most destructive thing to gameplay in d20 and its spin-off games like Pathfinder. Basically, trying to get some sort of enemy that can effectively solo the party is simply a recipe for failure and that is because of action economy. So a boss has to be able to soak enough damage that it doesn't fall in a round or two while dealing enough damage to keep everybody on their toes. This is functionally impossible as power-level goes up; either they will go down like a house of cards or they will one shot one or more players a round. So my chief recommendation is the stop the use of solo-bosses; use a group of even CR enemies as the "climax" instead. This will prevent gang-up by the PCs and it will give the GM enough action economy to be a threat without one-shotting a player.

voideternal |
I agree that min-maxing can be done without mythic. That said, I think adding mythic rules amplifies the abilities of min-maxers to min-max. Defense-min-maxers will have higher AC and saves. Offense-min-maxers will have higher-to-hit, higher damage, and more attacks.
In that sense, yes. Removing mythic rules will tone down the min-maxing. But at the end of the day, min-maxing is a style of play, and no matter what rule system you use, min-maxers will min-max.
I'm understanding the problem as "Everything is too extreme. Offense-min-maxers do damage and die too fast. Defense-min-maxers do nothing but don't die." I see two possible solutions:
A) Change the playstyle of the players (and GM). Tell them to not min-max. If the table chooses this option, then you can go ahead and use mythic rules and it won't be a problem, as everyone will make more balanced characters anyway.
B) Remove mythic rules, and remove other rules that allow extreme min-maxing that breaks game balance. The players (and GM) can still min-max, but the resulting characters won't be so extreme. Defensive characters can still hit and damage the enemy. Offense characters can still take a hit or two and not die.

kestral287 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What, exactly, are you trying to balance?
Are you trying to achieve internal balance within a party?
Are you trying to 'balance' your party against the monsters you face?
Are you trying to somehow balance a mythic game against a normal game?
These are some very different things.
It sounds like you're going for the second, in which case you'd probably do better to explain your issues in detail rather than just saying "rocket tag".

Joynt Jezebel |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Well, in my very long experience with D and D and Pathfinder is that campaigns tend to end due to becoming hopelessly unwieldy or the PCs reach a power level they can't be threatened.
Smart people will already have guessed my conclusion, mythic tiers tend to bring about the second result earlier and more easily than otherwise.
Mythic stuff is best used by GMs who are experienced and really know what they are doing and are prepared to use the most important word in the GMs vocabulary, NO, to things the mythic rules allow PCs to do.
Otherwise mythic campaigns may be fun for a while, but will end in tiers.

Shadows_Of_Fall |

You're talking to a guy who does a combination of loot requests, letting PCs buy loot, random loot tables and hand picked loot to ensure balance. Mythic is awarded 1 tier per 2 levels going from 10 to 20 then another 5 as post-20 progress. I deny combinations and abilities even after they're chosen if I feel they affect balance. I give monster races and others class levels to achieve mixed dungeons and dangerous group encounters. I'm all for low scale and balanced. Heck that's one of the things I love about 5e.
As far as my DMs goals, I continue to suggest balancing the party while he continues to try to balance enemies and, to a lesser extent, mythic to a normal game to avoid min/maxing. I think that's just plain stupid but I try not to be rude. IMO the problem is campaign scale and player build choices. One of our...worse players made a complaint. He builds very simply and doesn't ever have a goal or anything. He just picks something anything and builds it. He's also afraid of losing his character so he often builds some for of any which is never even targeted because it never deals damage. He complained about combat being too extreme as far as AC and damage goes. DM in turn blamed mythic. He said mirror dodge negates challenge and that mythic is breaking too many things. I tried to point out multiple enemies negates mirror dodge and that using anything ND simple veto for several stronger abilities or rulings solves any other big issues. I argued that changing the approach to building encounters mixed with party changes to lower our AC and damage (it was basically sitting at 100+ damage and/or 50 damage and 40 AC at level 9) and move away from min/max'd builds, items and stats. I suggested we move away from stacking anything big time and that we should cut down on optimizing builds every time and going insane on certain fest chains or easily abused combos.
As it stands our DM doesn't seem to have an answer or any idea how to balance things (or maybe he's just not experienced enough with PF/mythic or just isn't that type of DM (every 3.X campaign ended with us at level 15 in level 20 gear killing demigods and changing world's and history)). One of the reasons I turned to you all for advice/suggestions. I'm not sure of the answer and I've never personally run into this problem in any of my campaigns or campaigns I've played in. Since no one ever tried to break or maximize or stack anything beyond a reasonable amount (I've never let it get there), I've never pushed mythic to the limits. Thus it's my understanding that, left to run wild, there's no way to properly balance mythic once it's allowed freely. My current DM is running up against this problem and seems to feel this way. Though he feels it's all mythic period and is leaning towards removing it whilst I think it just needs to be trimmed/guided/maintained to work.

Joynt Jezebel |

Well, Shadows of Fall, you certainly sound like you know how to run powerful campaigns and I would like to play in one of yours if distance didn't preclude it. Which means either you know how to run powerful campaigns or are good at bull####ing. :P
On the campaign you are in, it sounds like a mess, just the kind of thing I was talking about.
And on campaigns where the GM tells you not to power game. This is great- in theory.
In practice it is usually the opposite. Most players and GMs know they should not allow OT power gaming. Much rarer is the patience and ability to actually police OT power gaming.
I know from bitter experience the thing to do when a GM asks you not to power game is nod politely, express agreement and then ignore them totally. Like everyone else. The first few times I complied with such requests and wound up with a character so ineffective their presence or absence was irrelevant. Players are very bad at recognising when they are power gaming themselves, merely building a character to be good at what its intended to be good at.
Another thing I have experienced over and again is incompetant policing of power gaming. Doing this properly is actually difficult, requiring experience thought and resolution rarely all present. Where some things are banned while others allowed that are as bad or far worse. This is actually far more common than policing power gaming in a sensible fashion.
My favourite aphorism about RPGs is that the most important word in the GMs vocabulary is "no".

Shadows_Of_Fall |

I usually make the call after the ability is taken in practice. It's hard to see if it will be too OP before the fact, and the players certainly don't like the idea without seeing it for themselves. But most of my players have gotten used to it and I like to think I'm diplomatic about it, always trying to find a solution everyone is okay with. Not only that I *usually* include some degree of a downtime system so I allow, for example, the tower shield fighter to train against the Barbarian, allowing them to rebuild slightly for less armor and more damage on the fighters side and vice versa for the barbarian. In general it's not a problem if it's not a problem. You know? Unless someone is sticking out or fading into obscurity, unless someone is wrecking encounters or forcing me to start power gaming enemies, it's all good. And even then just tweaking a group of enemies works. One has high AC and another is a sniper Wizard to cover the Barbarian and Fighter. That way things aren't over the top but also reasonable against the...more "focused" characters.
Overall it all works out, in large part probably thanks to my campaign scale. 1-5 is local and encompasses guards and retired soldiers in towns. 6-10 covers the kingdom or region and includes head priests and commanders and such. 11-15 usually covers several kingdoms or regions or, in smaller scale, begins dealing more with outsiders and powerful cultists or what have you. It's the first time the scale gets big ? And thus the start of mythic). 16-20+ is the big guns. While 11-15 might travel to other planes or have semi-extraplanar dungeons, this comes into full swing here and the campaign often deals with high power plots across the world. Though not all of my campaigns hit that scale, nor do they need to. But I like to allow builds to come together.
Back to the issue that is the current campaign, I kinda had a feeling it would be a mess when I was told the setting and we were conducting full on raids at levels 1 and 2. Hell we attacked a camp and the NPCs ended up doing 70% of the work. By level 3 we were solving extra planar mysteries and directly engaged with head cultists. At level 6 or 7 a failed will save ended the universe. The only planes left are water, earth, wind, Astral and material. The only God left is Sarenrae and our enemy is a primordial dragon of pure time who created all of reality (the CR 20-25 time dragons were fun when the DM destroyed our kingdom and killed off or crippled half our characters then gave us at at penalties in exchange for curing our injuries with undead grafts). So...I've been lobbying for a lower scale for awhile.

Shadows_Of_Fall |

Shadows_Of_Fall wrote:At level 6 or 7 a failed will save ended the universe.Wonder what will happen at 20th.
Genuinely afraid to find out. At present the DM seems like he is planning to cut mythic entirely because one player (who is not enjoying the campaign and has no faith in the DM) would rather get rid of mythic if it meant even 1% more balance. He isn't totally alone, as I kind of agree with him. The scale is whack, the DM only cares about using 2 gods because he can't be bothered to learn about the others, half of reality is destroyed, every patron we had on our side is dead or doesn't care, our kingdom was functionally destroyed and, being the king of player I am, I had full goals and backstory for my MULTIPLE characters (we all got a character at level 1 and then another new one at mythic rank 1, 3, 6 and 9).
One of my characters was a Tiefling Warpriest of Cayden Cailean. Saved from a life of crime by her ex-fiance, the basically evil-yet-still-good zealots of Sarenrae killed him for his lack of faith. My warpriest took up his cause somewhat and runs taverns and inns helping out adventurers and using them as small information gathering centers. Her entire backstory and future goals etc were all destroyed. Same with my other characters. I mean I gave them detailed personalities and goals and flaws etc. Aaallllllll gone.
Really not a big fan of this turn of events and, at the same time, I see no out but to stick with things until they reach their own natural mangled end.

Zhangar |

It sounds like the issue is your GM, not mythic.
Mythic is much the regular game - most of it works well, but a small number of things are too good and you'll need to say "no" to them - or at least reduce them down in power.
A gentleman's agreement between the GM and the players is also helpful - for example, in my game mythic vital strike's been conspicuously absent on both sides of the table.
(Disclaimer: I'm currently running a mythic game where the party is L18 and tier 5, and I'm playing a magus in a mythic game where party is L9 and tier 3. There is a lot of stuff available through mythic that's just cool without being game-breaking.)

Shadows_Of_Fall |

If only. The more I post the more I realize why I never really missed his campaigns (only him) the 3 or 4 years we didn't live remotely close or keep in touch. There's no way to say that though. He can be a little bit of a control freak/hold a grudge over these types of things. Ah well. It also sucks that the other "usual DM" is...shall we say...certainly an odd character and isn't up for running a campaign for any of us save 1 member of our group. So any chance of being a player is looking grim as of late TT_TT.
Actually after talking to the group players they seem excited for the first of three campaigns I have planned (all in 5e as it's relatively new to us and I like the scale and it's easier for our newer players to learn (we started with 3 new players, 2 of them quit within the first 5 sessions and the last has fun but is a little lost)). Hello floating super dungeon in the sky (disclaimer: in love with floating islands/skyships of the alchemical and magical (or even better hybrid) variety).

kestral287 |
... Okay. So we have a bunch of things going on here.
Let's start from the base question: is Mythic impossible to balance?
Hell no it isn't.
Given enough GM skill and time you can build a challenging game for literally everything in Pathfinder. There are pieces that make things more difficult to balance. And yes, Mythic is one of those things. You're pretty much told that up front. Now then, let's go over some stuff!
1. The book tells us that every two mythic tiers = +1 APL. The book is wrong, wrong, wrong. I'm in a campaign with gestalt and mythic and customized races alike. We hit a particularly memorable encounter at level 2/mythic 1. So, by the book, we're APL 3.5 there (2 level, +1 gestalt, +.5 mythic).
We all went nova-- we could tell it was the last fight of this particular trip. There were fourteen enemies, one of which ran after counterspelling once. So thirteen-- eleven of them mooks, one level 4, one level 3. I'm assuming the mooks are level one with class levels (I know at least one was a Barbarian, so I'm making the assumption that the rest were Fighters or the like).
That's a CR3, a CR2, and eleven CR1/2s, then. That puts the encounter between CRs 7 and 8; closer to 8 than 7. So call it a CR+4. Epic encounter, what's supposed to be a 50/50 fight if we go at it at the start of the day with all of our resources-- instead it was fight number four.
It was certainly challenging, but Mythic did a lot to swing the difference-- we could routinely drop two mooks in a turn just off of a Champion's Strike or similar paired with a normal attack routine. Only the CR3 gave us real trouble-- and frankly without him the encounter wasn't a threat in the least (despite that on paper with him replaced with another mook it'd be a CR7).
Gestalt frankly contributed little to that fight because most of our gestalt combinations have to grow into their synergies; right now only one of the four meshes well. It was almost all mythic.
So that was tier one. Throw the book out on designing mythic encounters, it sucks. Use your own judgment.
2. You are going to have a hell of a time trying to challenge a mythic party with bosses.
This is true of most games (look at the bosses of APs that the community loves most; you won't find many solo bosses), but it's especially true for Mythic. You've pointed out one of the problems: Mirror Dodge makes it really hard to pin a target down to get hammered. Unless it has huge reach, some kind of range... or friends.
"The giant attacks your Barbarian"
"Mirror Dodge, I'll teleport... here, that's the safest spot in range"
"That's next to those three trolls, they attack"
Flexible Counterspell doesn't help either, making shutting down casters much easier if they're at an action economy disadvantage.
This was mentioned up-thread: solo bosses are a terrible idea. Don't use terrible ideas, use good ones. Make the boss a bit less ridiculous and give him friends instead.
3. The party has more resources. Make the days run longer.
This ties back into the story I told early on. We hit three encounters that day and still had the resources to tackle a CR+4 encounter. By the end of it the party was exhausted and beaten down, and almost all out of whatever resources we banked on. But we pulled it out. We were challenged.
And we were challenged in no small part thanks to the long days. I found myself expending resources in that fight, but cycling through the resources I was burning off. Mythic power this round, a Sorcerer spell next round. My A list of spells-- Magus, though that'll reverse later on of course-- had been used a lot early in the day, so I was trying to save what was left. If that hadn't been a concern, that CR+4 would have gone much more smoothly
Keep in mind that as a low-end estimate, you should assume a mythic 1 Wizard has five more uses of his highest level spells available-- this will either be auto-Quickened or can be spells he doesn't even actually know. That's a noticeable increase in resources. Make them spend 'em.
4. Optimizers are a tool. Use them well.
The one thing that can't be easily balanced by a GM is an imbalanced party. If one or more players are being overshadowed, that's not something that's easy for a GM to fix. Oh, there are things they can do-- the Rogue can get lots of opportunities to Sneak Attack, the Fighter can have a couple cool Fighter-specific loots drop. But if the optimizer knows what he's doing it isn't easy.
The GM can brute-force it-- and this is something that made me twitch when I read it up-thread, the concept of saying no after the fact.
To me that stems from a failure of the group on two points. First and foremost, the players aren't open with the GM. In that same game above, my GM has a pretty good handle on my character from level one to twenty. Back around the time of that fight, I was asking him about a certain level 8 spell from 3.5 that I wanted. He's seen my 1-20 plan and has a decent grip on what I intend for spells, items, and mythic stuff. And he has no problem vetoing things when I ask him about stuff like that.
But even when he's seeing me pull ahead of the group (the rest of whom don't really optimize), he'll discuss it with me instead of just telling me that my character can't use X spell anymore. Telling someone no after the fact is discouraging to them as a player; why should I try to have my fun if the GM is just going to take it away?
The second and greater failure though, is that your optimizers aren't playing for the group. I've mentioned this elsewhere on the boards, but one of the party members is an Alchemist/Kineticist. He was convinced, for a time, that he was going to lag behind in the mid-to-late games and be low on damage.
I blinked, ran some numbers for him, and pointed out that with a discovery, some stuff he was already looking at, and two feats, he could be delivering some really impressive damage at the end game.
If your PCs are at different power levels, your job as a GM becomes much harder. Use the mechanically strong players to bring up the weak ones and life becomes easy.
5. Blowing up reality has nothing to do with Mythic.
That's a campaign thing, not a mythic thing. One could blow up reality in a normal PF game, in a Mythic PF game, in an E6 PF game, in a 5e game... whatever. Your game might be screwed sideways, but that has nothing to do with the rules.

Shadows_Of_Fall |

I feel you're slightly missing a couple of points. Blowing up the world has A LOT to do with the issues at play. Namely the sense of campaign and power scale. I included it to give an idea of what sort of power we're up against. The other day we fought 3 enemies. This is at level 6. One had 150 hp, one had 200 and one had 300. One could snipe any area around him (even around corners) with a nearly one or two shot kill fireball. One could land 3 attacks and average over a hundred damage. One was basically the living god of vital strike with AC so high only one party member could hit consistently. I'm trying to point out that the DM has no sense of scale. Does campaign scale=balance? No, of course not. Is a DM prone to destroying most of reality before level 10 probably prone to going overboard on power, in conjunction with the scale of the campaign, yeah. Do you get what I mean?
As far as "no" after the fact, I'm sorry I didn't go into specifics. In fact I could have sworn I mentioned that I address these issues with players. I don't just go "no, get rid of it". I say something more along the lines of "hey, in that last session you were XYZ while the party was ABC." I work for a solution instead of flat denying with a blanket NO. No can mean a lot of things, ranging from "it's broken in practice/with your build" to "you're pulling ahead of the party in terms of *insert whatever*". Which happens given that I've only been DMing for a few years (been playing for 10+ tho). I can't always see what might be an issue or address it before it becomes one.
In our current campaign I try to build characters that synergize and contribute to the group. Our Barbarian is there to kill and the Fighter is there to never die. Those are literally their characters. The Wizard is more of a group player but the DM helped him pick spells which leads to him occasionally setting up nearly insta-kill combos/builds.
I truly think the issue lies more with the players here. Or rather than removing mythic won't fix anything.
He also only runs 1 scenario/fight per session. As in there are NO dungeons. Every "segment" is one fight. Or, at most, 3 smaller fights and one BIG fight, all over the course of an in-game week.

kestral287 |
Blowing up the world has a lot to do with your issues but nothing to do with Mythic. As I said, I can nuke the world as the GM of a PF E6 campaign if I really feel the desire. My point is that your issues are stemming from two sources, and it's important not to conflate them.
I'm seeing a lot of issues with your GM that are making things problematic and inflating Mythic. With only one encounter per day you have no reason not to nova every fight, and Mythic gives you some very potent resources to play with-- when you don't need to conserve them you can do a lot of damage in a heartbeat. The conservative estimate for using 1 mythic power at level 9 is a 50% upgrade in power (your standard martial is going from two attacks to three via a Champion's Strike or similar. Casters are either gaining another spell per round--100% increase-- or no gains in spell power but gains in options-- conservative estimate would say 0% increase, which is obviously untrue but I prefer to round down. Average to 50%).
One can get much nastier than a 50% increase in capability by tier 6, mind. The Archmage's Channeled Power is one mythic power to give a spell a 50% damage upgrade, doubled duration, +2 or +4 on DC, and the ability to ignore SR.
Handing every character on the books a 50% power increase as a basic expectation of play and then using poorly designed encounters is going to lead to a lot of very silly things.
Your fellow players aren't helping either. The Fighter has apparently failed Tanking School and went to Turtle Land if he's not contributing, for example. If they're power gamers they're bad at it.
So, your original question of "can mythic be balanced?" Of course. Your group is apparently terrible at it though.
Can your particular campaign be balanced? Probably, in theory. But getting rid of mythic isn't going to help.
On a side note: I'm sad that you called Enduring Armor a poor option. Throw it on a character who gets an alternative to the armor bonus and it gets hilarious. In that gestalt/mythic game my character is the party tank and wears no armor. It's just tough scales, a magic force field, and awesome dodging skills.

PathlessBeth |
Sure they can! The Balance skill from 3.5 is subsumed in pathfinder's Acrobatics skill. Mythic characters can invest mythic path abilities and mythic feats into boosting their dexterity and acrobatics modifiers, allowing them to Balance far better than nonmythic characters!
:)
More seriously, yes, a mythic campaign can be balanced. I've done it. kestral287 said most of what I wanted to say, though, so I'll just second kestral's posts.

Shadows_Of_Fall |

I wasn't calling it a poor power I listed it amongst several other powers I took, generally not the "broken as all get out" powers I took.
As far as the scale, I can't tell if you're just being difficult or not understanding the correlation I'm implying. His sense of scale is off the charts. Period. In campaign scale AND in power. Yes, scale matters. If we're fighting demigods at level 9 then he is CLEARLY overpowering us. Do you understand what I'm getting at? Campaign scale, overdone. Enemies, overdone with 8 attacks with 2 to 3 being a kill on hit. Loot and mythic, overdone. It's all tied together/related. Yes you could destroy half the universe in e6 but it hardly fits the scale of power if this is something the players are actively involved in.
Obviously it's possible regardless of "power scale", I was simply using his sense of campaign scale to impart a sense of how far he takes plot, encounters (usually single encounter against a boss or two) and power.
Is that clearer?

kestral287 |
Yes. I understand exactly what you're saying. The guy blew up reality and likes to throw ridiculous things at you.
And that has absolutely nothing to do with Mythic rules.
Rules do not create a campaign. A campaign can create rules-- look at the nifty items and spells we can get in an AP, along with the occasional. But Mythic Adventures does not lead to a campaign and certainly doesn't have anything to drop a reality bomb.
Whether they're tied together in his head means relatively little in the grand scheme of things. Do you think that, if your group discussion results in pulling Mythic, reality will re-write itself?
You know your GM better than I do... but somehow I doubt that it will change him. You'll still be facing ridiculous single creatures as the GM conflates 'large numbers' with 'challenge'; how those numbers are in detail isn't as important as how they are in comparison to your also newly-adjusted numbers. It could be that he's just that blind about the impact of his creatures or what Mythic actually means that it does magically fix things. I doubt it, but it's possible.
Instead you're going to have the same problem.
So, my step-by-step approach to solving things within your group, based on the dynamics as you've presented them:
1. Stop tying Mythic and the campaign together in your head. And ideally your party mates. Really ideally the GM too, but if wishes were fishes...
2. Convince the GM to try the kind of encounter system that Pathfinder was actually built for. Tell him you think it'd be fun to deal with an army or two, rather than a colossus. Tell him you want to go on a dungeon crawl or six.
3. If need be, demonstrate what you're talking about. I'd actually go in with a short dungeon suited to your party, or at the least a couple encounters put together.
4. Help the Fighter graduate from Turtle School. If he's investing significant resources into his AC, help him find a way to actually make the AC contribute meaningfully or convert it to something more useful.
5. If the GM refuses to change things, either accept that playing under him is your best current shot at finding a game, start hunting for another group (or PFS, if that's your speed), or just stick to GMing for a while.

Shadows_Of_Fall |

I feel you're still missing the point. No it has nothing to do with mythic. You are correct. I am not saying it does. I am using it to say he likes to go overly big. Blow up the world, throw a demigod at us, massive AC and massive damage big boom explosion exciting. And that, beyond any doubt, can translate into combat and challenge.
All I've been saying with that is that it's an example of how he often leans toward over the top in all fields. Nothing to do with mythic rules, no. Just an example of his...let's say style. Over the top. Now since this is going in circles where you keep stating it has nothing to do with mythic (restating that implies you've missed my point if you feel the need to say it again)...
I expect I'll live with things as they are until it ends whenever that may be. The DM just helped respec the fighter into a tank who can AoO and control over 40 feet or something. And by respec I mean gave the fighter a new character the DM himself made. I facepalm'd so hard there's brain on my walls.
I've suggested moving towards more encounters per day, more dungeons or dungeon-like settings (something several of us ha email wanted) and that, mythic or no, encounters>bosses (something I like to try to do as well). He seems to have decided today though that removing mythic is the best bet. If he can't balance it and it helps, whatever I guess. His call. At worst it's still PF with a couple friends and coworkers so there's still fun in that.