|
Sub-optimal is fine. Sub-competent means you're taking more than you're giving.
Unfortunately, just what is "Sub-competent" is so subjective. I remember when I made the aforementioned PC, I asked the board the question of just what level of combat effectiveness is considered "minimum competence." I received zero answers.
The board is apparent very good at maximizing them numbas. They aren't so good at figuring out what "competence" means beyond a named bonus type.
So... In a conversation about "competence," the question remains... What does "competent" mean? How much attack bonus? How much damage? How much AC? How high of a save DC? How high of a skill modifier? Etc.
Before accusing another player of bring a character which "takes more than it gives," it might be smart to define what that competence line actually is.
-Matt
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... In a conversation about "competence," the question remains... What does "competent" mean? How much attack bonus? How much damage? How much AC? How high of a save DC? How high of a skill modifier? Etc.
Before accusing another player of bring a character which "takes more than it gives," it might be smart to define what that competence line actually is.
-Matt
I've been working on and off for a months answering that. Right now I've got a spreadsheet where I plug in CR+2 and CR+4 monsters and my PCs numbers to see how a given PC would do.
This was for a clas rather than a character, but for an example of what I'm talking about, you can peek at some analyses I ran for the Spiritualist during the Occult playtest (trigger warning: maths):
Melee combat
Offensive casting
Buffs, condition clearing, and utility
For me, 'competent'--at a minimum--means succeeding more often than not. In combat, that roughly translates to 50%+ to hit a CR+2 creature. Or for a creature to fail its Save against you 50%+ of the time.
If you've got some other shtick, it can be harder to measure, but you can still count up the bonuses you offer (amount, type, duration, action economy to get them up) or how often you'll make skill checks at a given tier (~DC15 for tier 1-2, DC10+CR to identify monsters, etc.).
Does that help?
EDIT:
My personal minimum for my damage-dealers is to output DPR equal to or greater than ⅓ the hp of a CR+2 enemy. That means if two other people are meeting that standard, we can drop it in one round if the odds go our way. I wouldn't call such a character optimized. YMMV.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a start. What would be nice is to have a set of reference points for these sorts of stats, so players can, with a quick glance, see where their PCs are falling behind. Such a table would be great in a guide to 8-9 and 10-11.
Also useful would be a second set of reference points, this one showing stats beyond which a PC starts to trivialize content.
The space between, perhaps it could be called the Fun Zone?
-Matt
|
Well I am talking to you and I am curious as to your position on that question.
Its complicated.
Some people take enjoyment in building the most powerful engine of destruction and setting it loose on the scenario. The point isn't just to win, its to win with the biggest fountain of enemy blood possible. While there's nothing inherently wrong with that, it can overshadow other players either on accident or deliberately.
Of course, sometimes those characters are necessary. Some combination of fewer players, harder scenarios, harder dm , unoptimized party members, and the dice gods taking their polyhedral displeasure upon you means that if you hadn't brought the monstrocity the party would have died.
My preferred solution to the problem is to overbuild the character and then keep yourself to a dull roar by play, which is easier than increasing your characters power level when you find yourself having a bad night.
The problem is that everyone thinks that they have the right level of optimization. its like driving. Anyone slower than you need to learn how to play, but anyone faster than you is a min maxed munchkin. This adjusts for all values of "you"
However you can't control how optimized other peoples characters are. If your character isn't up to a pfs scenario then yes, they're going to be blown away by people who are and thats not their fault.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Oh and the term "with peccadillos that other characters can role playing against. " is pretty disgusting.
Merriam-Webster:
peccadillo - a small mistake or fault that is not regarded as very bad or seriousI do not see why you find this disgusting, unless you believe that the term "peccadillo" automatically means some form of sexual deviance, which is does not.
My reference to video games is probably a bit dated since I primarily played those during the early 1980's. The video games I played all permitted only a limited number of choices to be "successful" at the game. I view the requirement for mechanical optimization in PFS in the same vein.
The problem is, that one persons peccadillo can be quite detrimental to other players, and the since this is a cooperative game, you are supposed to cooperate with other players.
They already have enough problems in their way, they don't require other players to be difficult.Obviously that does not mean that players should not have quirks and memorable features, just the "against " part is a problem.
|
something something social contract of organized play somethingTheres a very vague definition in that social contract. Even if you accept its validity you have to agree on the terms. "Though shalt not overoptimize" is problematic because everyone thinks they're optimizing in the goldilocks zone.
I'll agree that PFS very much has a social contract. It's even more important than in home games because the nature of PFS is that you get random people that you don't know or with whom you share gaming preferences.
A player in PFS doesn't have the right to be uncompromising with the rest of the table.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know either playing or DMing, I know that it won't be a very good night when certain very optimized characters are seated at the table. A few weeks ago, I seriously wanted to just sign chronicle sheets as soon as the character sheets hit the table. I knew we had a 7-11 mod with will saves no greater than +5 (low tier), and that there was a sorcerer that would have 2 DC30+ confusion spells per combat. I knew going in that absolutely nothing in the mod could remotely challenge that character, let alone the other 5 people sitting at the table watching him throw his confusion at initiative 30 or so to start every battle.
This was an extreme example do to the terrible saves in the module, but in all the times I've seen that character at the table as a player or GM, I've only seen 1 enemy make a save and that enemy only had a 10% chance and got lucky. It doesn't make for a very interesting tactical game.
Too optimized definitely can detract from the experience at the table as well.
|
Can I ask how he did that? I made a conjuration-spec wizard and have been taking every possible DC increase I can find and have no idea how an L7 sorcerer can have a DC over 30 on any spell. Is it that he JUST has confusion and that's his only thing?
He didn't say it was level 7, only that it was a 7-11 scenario. Here's a quick napkin math theoretical L8 kitsune sorceror
L8 Kitsune Sorcerer Fey Bloodline
24 CHA (18 + 2 Racial + 2 Level Ups + 2 Headband)
10 Base
4 Spell level
7 Charisma
2 Kitsune FCB x8
2 Spell Focus/Greater Spell Focus
2 Fey Bloodline
2 Focused Metamagic Rod
1 Kitsune Magic racial trait
DC 30 Confusion
I don't play DC boosting casters, so I'm sure there's a trick or two I'm missing. Add a level or two, and his DC breaks 31 from upgrading his headband.
eta: Kitsune Magic racial trait
|
|
Off the top of my head.
Kitsune Sorcerer with 20 starting charisma, at level 8...
+4 Item, +2 level = 26 cha for +8 stat bonus.
Confusion is a 4th level spell is 22.
Kisune Magic is 23
Spell Focus and greater spell focus is 25
Sorcerer Favored Class is 1/4 DC of enchantment spell = 27
Fey Bloodline gives +2 to compulsions = 29
Another point or 2 can be squeezed out of various boons.
|
|
A player in PFS doesn't have the right to be uncompromising with the rest of the table.
What kind of compromise can you make?
You (probably) don't see other peoples character sheets so its hard to judge how optimized people are
You don't see how much other players care about the optimization gap.
You don't see how good the other players could be/if they're holding back.
You don't know if someone is so unoptimized you're going to HAVE to carry the table.
You're kind of expecting people to be mind readers and thats a bad expectation to build a social contract on.
Once the characters at the table its a little too late. What may have been the right optimization at one table may not work for another
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
Kitsune Feyblood is exactly what it is. So the lists posted for how to get the DC are right on target with how this character was constructed.
And overkill was exactly my point. When one enemy has had a 10% chance to make a save, and the rest need natural 20's in every single encounter, it gets old. (It's worse when another character at the table can force rerolls, which have cancelled out the occasional natural 20.)
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I like deep RP games, and I like tactical challenge games. I don't think they always fit together in the same 4 hours.
In my experience, higher-tier games don't really have better or even very different RP than lower tier. Sometimes you get to play high-stakes negotiators/ambassadors, but that's about it.
However, the combats are quite different. The big draw of high tier (for me) is epic tactical challenges.
|
I would hope that my tablemates enjoyed having me around while I was moving up the levels with my unoptimized socially-focused PC.
Just when did this idea of "playing suboptimal PCs is a troll behavior" start propagating, anyways?
Also, I would suggest adding "embrace teamwork" and "think outside the box" as tips for 8-9 and 10-11 play.
-Matt
Well, IIRC, while your PCs might not be the biggest (or even much of a) damage dealer, you still provided some input during combat.
There is a serious difference between, "My socially-oriented PC has only ever done damage to themselves, but still contributes to combat." and "My Int 9 Wizard is unable to contribute meaningfully during any encounter, in any fashion."
And, seriously, playing badly built (and badly run!) PCs has been, in my experience, a social faux pas since 1979.
And those are good suggestions, by the way. And, to quote an old DC Comic: "Expect the Unexpected!"
Also, in my experience, a lot of issues can crop up that shouldn't have been issues, if the Players/PCs had just thought about the VC speech, and asked the VC questions. "So, we are teleporting into an area under an illusion? What would be good for that?"
Sub-optimal is fine. Sub-competent means you're taking more than you're giving.
Unfortunately, just what is "Sub-competent" is so subjective. I remember when I made the aforementioned PC, I asked the board the question of just what level of combat effectiveness is considered "minimum competence." I received zero answers.
The board is apparent very good at maximizing them numbas. They aren't so good at figuring out what "competence" means beyond a named bonus type.
So... In a conversation about "competence," the question remains... What does "competent" mean? How much attack bonus? How much damage? How much AC? How high of a save DC? How high of a skill modifier? Etc.
Before accusing another player of bring a character which "takes more than it gives," it might be smart to define what that competence line actually is.
-Matt
To be honest, it isn't necessarily a simple question but it also isn't necessarily a difficult question.
Can the PC contribute in a meaningful fashion for a variety of the likely situations that will arise.
If your PC tries to hit an opponent with a weapon, does it hit more than every once in a while? If not, then you are not competent at that.
Did your hits do enough damage to make a difference. If you are doing 2 damage and the others are doing 30, then no.
If you are buff caster, are you giving the buffs that people want/need? Yes, bless is a good spell. But if you are playing 7-11 and all you can do is give a 1st level buff, it is probably not enough. Note: There are still possibilities. If you have some way to give a whole bunch of stacking buffs before the fight starts, it can still be a significant total bonus.
Is your character ONLY a face? Yes he has a high diplomacy and bluff. That will work excellently in the talking situations. But if that is all he has, it is probably not enough.
You cast debuff spells. Lots of fun. Does the bad guy fail the save very often? Is the penalty enough to make a difference? If you are playing a 7-11 and only casting flare or bane, it is probably not enough.
If the bad guys are shooting at you from on top of a cliff, do you have something to do or do you just hide behind the others and wine about how the scenario is unfair?
I don't see a need (or possibility) for a hard and fast law set to define minimum competence. It isn't that hard to tell if you are a reasonable asset to the group or not.
I don't think very many people can honestly think about it and not be able to tell that they are contributing almost nothing to the group success (or worse, making it harder).
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
I don't see a need (or possibility) for a hard and fast law set to define minimum competence. It isn't that hard to tell if you are a reasonable asset to the group or not.I don't think very many people can honestly think about it and not be able to tell that they are contributing almost nothing to the group success (or worse, making it harder).
I would like to point out that this started because according to the original poster, people were building ineffective characters. Several people have stated that by the time you get there, it is often too late to fix the problem. Therefore you really do need to give some easy guidelines on what makes a competent character.
You don't need hard and fast rules, but general suggestions would be a good idea. If your character is a hammer, when are you on the high or low end of the spectrum for ability to do and take damage? If your character is an anvil what sort of DCs do you need (high and low end) in order to be effective? How about when it is your secondary role?
Knowledge skills and certain other skills would also have two values, total bonus to be able to do the skill and total bonus to still be able to contribute via Aid Another. Having a positive modifier for climb and swim is also important at higher level since you don't want to be a handicap to the group. Certain skills get to the point where they are good enough, while others are opposed rolls so there is no ceiling.
I would like to point out that this started because according to the original poster, people were building ineffective characters. Several people have stated that by the time you get there, it is often too late to fix the problem. Therefore you really do need to give some easy guidelines on what makes a competent character. ...
I don't see a need (or possibility) for a hard and fast law set to define minimum competence. It isn't that hard to tell if you are a reasonable asset to the group or not.I don't think very many people can honestly think about it and not be able to tell that they are contributing almost nothing to the group success (or worse, making it harder).
So far, I have never seen a single character that was "too late to fix" where the player seriously thought about whether or not the PC was a help to others in typical PFS situations.
I've seen many few where the player had not considered certain types of situations. All of those were pretty easily 'fixable' by just being willing to spend a bit of cash or prestige on items to use in those situations.
I've seen quite a few where the player was unwilling to purchase any of those possible items even after the lack had been made obvious.
I've also seen a couple that really were unfixable. But I would also say it was pretty clear the player never even considered whether his 'snowflake' was capable of contributing in something other than the ideal perfect situation.
...
You don't need hard and fast rules, but general suggestions would be a good idea. If your character is a hammer, when are you on the high or low end of the spectrum for ability to do and take damage? If your character is an anvil what sort of DCs do you need (high and low end) in order to be effective? How about when it is your secondary role?Knowledge skills and certain other skills would also have two values, total bonus to be able to do the skill and total bonus to still be able to contribute via Aid Another. Having a positive modifier for climb and swim is also important at higher level since you don't want to be a handicap to the group. Certain skills get to the point where they are good enough, while others are opposed rolls so there is no ceiling.
I agree on the value of the general suggestions. But I feel they have already been largely given and ignored by many people.
At your specialty, are you at least as competent as the closest pregen? (I think most would consider that the bare minimum for what you are trying to be good at. Some would even say that is the minimum for your secondary roles.)
When it is not the ideal situation or you specialty doesn't apply, what can you contribute? How will you deal with darkness, DR, range, SR, flying ops, underwater, drain, spells cast at you, damage, incorporeal, social situations, etc...
Do you need to have the perfect tool for every eventuality? No. But you should be able to handle some things that are not your perfect set-up.
Super Optimization is needed because people like deusvult try to play in the big leagues.
It's alright to be average or what not when everyone else is too, but people start bringing substandard (compared to the iconics no less!) and someone else is going to have to pick up the slack.
If I know the other players are bringing decent characters then I just need a good one myself with an ace in the hole for "just in case" -- if people are bringing level 7 characters that can't carry their own weight then I have to have more because we won't survive if I don't.
What character I go to play is hugely impacted at what I can (or can't) expect at a given table.
If you are playing princess dewcup I'm going to need to play larry the lich if we are going to see the other side of things.
And at levels 7+ you aren't "just a guy" any more. You aren't joe smoe from the trailer park. You are a professional, and you should be able to look, and act the part.
Most builds can be salvaged, doing so might be slightly painful, or less able in PFS where you have much more limited choice on what resources are available and when/how you can spend them due to the limited playstyle. But even then something can generally be done to help the player/character/group if people are willing to find a way.
That doesn't mean such should be the norm at the *high* end though.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
I think suggestions for some of the key areas were made above.
Try to have at least a 50% success rate at what you do as minimal competence. Assuming the boss will be tier + 2, here is some guidelines for 50% success rates on different tiers.
Hitting an ememy:
Tier 1-2: +7 to hit (vs AC 17)
Tier 3-4: +9 to hit (vs AC 19)
Tier 4-5: +10 to hit (vs AC 20)
Tier 5-6: +11 to hit (vs AC 21)
Tier 6-7: +13 to hit (vs AC 23)
Tier 7-8: +14 to hit (vs AC 24)
Tier 8-9: +15 to hit (vs AC 25)
Tier 10-11: +18 to hit (vs AC 28)
Getting a spell past DC:
Tier 1-2: DC 18 (vs +7 save)
Tier 3-4: DC 20 (vs +9 save)
Tier 4-5: DC 21 (vs +10 save)
Tier 5-6: DC 22 (vs +11 save)
Tier 6-7: DC 23 (vs +12 save)
Tier 7-8: DC 24(vs +13 save)
Tier 8-9: DC 25 (vs +14 save)
Tier 10-11: DC 27 (vs +16 save)
(Note, I barely see enemies that are actually at the high ends of these saves in PFS modules, but those are the numbers from monster creation for high saves.)
Dealing Damage (I'm going to go with a more conservative 1/5 DPR number, not Norsewolf's 1/3 DPR from earlier in the thread when making a minimal threshold):
Tier 1-2: 8 DPR
Tier 3-4: 14 DPR
Tier 4-5: 17 DPR
Tier 5-6: 20 DPR
Tier 6-7: 23 DPR
Tier 7-8: 26 DPR
Tier 8-9: 29 DPR
Tier 10-11: 35 DPR
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
So is the DPR your sustainable value or peak value?
Barbarians, Blood Ragers, Rangers, Paladins and several other classes have different modifiers with limited uses.
The To Hit values seem a bit high, especially at the early levels. +3 attribute, +1 BAB, +1 Masterwork, so where does the other +2 come from?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
Above were offensive benchmarks. On the defensive side:
AC (if you plan to tank by not getting hit):
Tier 1-2: AC 19 (vs AB+8)
Tier 3-4: AC 23 (vs AB+12)
Tier 4-5: AC 24 (vs AB+13)
Tier 5-6: AC 26 (vs AB+15)
Tier 6-7: AC 28 (vs AB+17)
Tier 7-8: AC 29 (vs AB+18)
Tier 8-9: AC 30 (vs AB+19)
Tier 10-11: AC 33 (vs AB+22)
HP (this is total of 1 high and 1 low hit):
Tier 1-2: 28
Tier 3-4: 43
Tier 4-5: 52
Tier 5-6: 61
Tier 6-7: 70
Tier 7-8: 78
Tier 8-9: 87
Tier 10-11: 105
Saves (50% success in resisting primary DC):
Tier 1-2: +3 (DC 14)
Tier 3-4: +5 (DC 16)
Tier 4-5: +6 (DC 17)
Tier 5-6: +7 (DC 18)
Tier 6-7: +7 (DC 18)
Tier 7-8: +8 (DC 19)
Tier 8-9: +9 (DC 20)
Tier 10-11: +10 (DC 21)
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
So is the DPR your sustainable value or peak value?
Barbarians, Blood Ragers, Rangers, Paladins and several other classes have different modifiers with limited uses.
The To Hit values seem a bit high, especially at the early levels. +3 attribute, +1 BAB, +1 Masterwork, so where does the other +2 come from?
Not making any judgments on how to get there. I find the level 1 HP to be even worse than the to hits. I'm just taking the stats directly off the monster statistics...and it gives some questionable results at the lowest levels. I think it's likely many characters are going to hit bosses less than 50% of the time. The key is to be aware of that limitation. I knew I was hitting at +1 AB at level 1 in melee, so I knew not to expect to mow down enemies at will.
On DPR, I'd definitely make sure you know your sustainable and your peak. I calculate my own assuming I'm completely unbuffed and not fighting my species enemies (my high level is a ranger, so using him as a my test case...and no, he isn't optimal, or even competent by a number of these measures). At the same time, know what you can burst at when the chips are down.
If you are basing your numbers off boss encounters, I would say use your peak numbers.
|
|
It isn't terribly hard to achieve to-hit that meets or exceeds that chart. It's also understood that certain characters will vary above and below those numbers (such as Magi with Arcane Accuracy, or Warpriests starting at a low base to-hit or AC but raising these numbers each round with Fervor).
At higher levels he plans to ditch his shield, retrain his Bastard Sword profiency and switch to a two-handed combat style. This will lower his AC but keep his damage competitive, which I judge to be important at higher tiers especially in Core. His weakness is lack of ranged ability which can be offset with consumables and later Weapon Training. He will purchase helpful scrolls such as Dimension Door to gift the party spellcaster to "get us in their faces," potions of useful spells, and oils of Daylight.
Finally, although very stupid and horrifically scarred Daen is reasonably wise and thus has an adequate Perception, useful since he'll often march in front. His bonus human skill rank goes to rounding off his capabilities, powering through ACP on Climb and Swim and learning useful languages (he's taken a correspondence course in Abyssal thus far).
Despite his "optimized" statistics Daen is a blast to roleplay, working for The Exchange after a mixup with his Sczarni membership application. He doesn't quite get the idea of the merger but dutifully takes notes on interesting items or business opportunities by scratching them into the back of his shield. He is a devout worshipper of Gorum and takes the time his allies spend casting buff spells or solving puzzles to deface other religious depictions with crudely-rendered pictograms of Gorum flexing.
|
|
Getting a spell past DC:
Tier 1-2: DC 18 (vs +7 save)
Tier 3-4: DC 20 (vs +9 save)
Tier 4-5: DC 21 (vs +10 save)
Tier 5-6: DC 22 (vs +11 save)
Tier 6-7: DC 23 (vs +12 save)
Tier 7-8: DC 24(vs +13 save)
Tier 8-9: DC 25 (vs +14 save)
Tier 10-11: DC 27 (vs +16 save)
So is this saying my lvl 3 wizard should have a DC of 20 with her lvl 2 spell? Really?
|
|
A player in PFS doesn't have the right to be uncompromising with the rest of the table.
What kind of compromise can you make?
You (probably) don't see other peoples character sheets so its hard to judge how optimized people are
You don't see how much other players care about the optimization gap.
You don't see how good the other players could be/if they're holding back.
You don't know if someone is so unoptimized you're going to HAVE to carry the table.
You're kind of expecting people to be mind readers and thats a bad expectation to build a social contract on.
Once the characters at the table its a little too late. What may have been the right optimization at one table may not work for another
PFS encourages character introductions for a reason. It's not zone out and check your iphone time, it's how people who never played before get to feel each other out for their styles.
If you're of the school of gaming where anything less than tearing through NPCs like wet tissue paper isn't fun, you should be realizing whether or not the other players share that view before the VC brief even begins.
As a related thought: There are conventions to restrain GMs. A player should also restrain himself. Just because something is legal or possible doesn't mean it's always appropriate.
One specific commment of yours I think bears repeating because I view it as so blatantly wrong:
... if someone is so unoptimized you're going to HAVE to carry the table.
That is virtually never going to be the case. PFS scenarios are balanced so that a complete party of unoptimized characters can succeed. The thought "I have to carry the party" is a poisonous assumption that is not appropriate outside of corner cases.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
Getting a spell past DC:
Tier 1-2: DC 18 (vs +7 save)
Tier 3-4: DC 20 (vs +9 save)
Tier 4-5: DC 21 (vs +10 save)
Tier 5-6: DC 22 (vs +11 save)
Tier 6-7: DC 23 (vs +12 save)
Tier 7-8: DC 24(vs +13 save)
Tier 8-9: DC 25 (vs +14 save)
Tier 10-11: DC 27 (vs +16 save)So is this saying my lvl 3 wizard should have a DC of 20 with her lvl 2 spell? Really?
If you want it to hit a CR6 boss with high saves against your spell with a 50% success rate, then yes. So, go in knowing that you probably won't have a 50% to take down the big boss in one spell (unless you are targeting their low saves).
To be fair, this is the main reason I wanted to put up the actual numbers for the 50% rule. It gives some exact numbers to discuss instead of "be good at it". I really am not a fan of 50% chance to hose the encounter in one spell...so I don't hold my characters to any of the standards above. (I consistently fall short of these numbers.)
|
|
So is this saying my lvl 3 wizard should have a DC of 20 with her lvl 2 spell? Really?
Cylyria, especially if we're not talking Core there are other circumstances that can contribute to meeting that statistic. An ally capable of rendering enemies Shaken and/or Sickened (perhaps even a familiar) will essentially increase your DC by 2. Focused Spell is a low-cost metamagic that can increase your DC by 2, or Bouncing or Persistent Spell can be added to your favorite offensive spells to ensure that they "land."
Taking a trait like Magical Lineage can help boost your planned game plan, or even Eastern Mysteries for a +2 DC once a day to land that important debuff on the boss.
Getting a spell past DC:
Tier 1-2: DC 18 (vs +7 save)
Tier 3-4: DC 20 (vs +9 save)
Tier 4-5: DC 21 (vs +10 save)
Tier 5-6: DC 22 (vs +11 save)
Tier 6-7: DC 23 (vs +12 save)
Tier 7-8: DC 24(vs +13 save)
Tier 8-9: DC 25 (vs +14 save)
Tier 10-11: DC 27 (vs +16 save)So is this saying my lvl 3 wizard should have a DC of 20 with her lvl 2 spell? Really?
Not sure, but I think that means if you are targeting their highest save (which is poor tactics).
|
I believe DC scaling for saves is a bit off. With the DCs, these might be aiming towards succeeding on the strong saves. Sometimes you can try to prepare yourself with stuff that can aim at two different saves if one type of save seems insufficient, or at optimum, have things in your repertoire that hits any possible save.
|
|
The numbers aren't hard to reach with a little pre-planning. A Gnomish Wizard with 16 INT can field DC 18 spells at level 1. He selects Spell Focus (Illusion) for his wizard bonus, and takes Eastern Mysteries to offset his low INT for when he really wants his spells to land.
Now if he Color Sprays a group of foes, his DC is 16 normally, or DC 18 1/day due to his trait. If he had better INT or, say, a more apropos class choice for Color Spraying as a Gnome (e.g. Heavens Oracle or Sorcerer) he'd easily be hitting his stride in terms of DCs, without particular trouble.
Even better, as a Wizard he can make Knowledge checks to know not to target the Good save, and cast a different spell (Grease to target Reflex, for example).
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16
|
I think part of knowing where you stand when comparing to these benchmarks is knowing your limitations. Tactics can overcome a lot. If you look at that save chart and can see you don't meet the standard for overcoming someone's high save, then target low saves instead (or other opponenents). However, if you are throwing DC31 confusion spells at tier 7, then you pretty much don't care who you throw it at.
My highest level character is a Ranger (now level 11). He fell short of the AB, DPR, AC, and especially hit point benchmarks at every tier on the list. do a number of tricks on the side that can help, but I know I can't just tank things like most fighters and barbarians anymore than I should be the face with my negative charisma modifier. (For some reason I end up tanking about 1/3 of the time, and being the face 1/3 of the time though, in spite of those not being my strengths. My real strength is versatility, as I end up filling in for many of the things the party I end up in can't otherwise do.)
|
|
PFS encourages character introductions for a reason. It's not zone out and check your iphone time, it's how people who never played before get to feel each other out for their styles.
I love character introductions and go out of my way to request them if it looks like they might be skipped. That being said it really depends on the player how much information we can gain from introduction time.
I've had 5-minute introductory sections that varied between enthusiastically comparing spell lists with the other spellcasters at the table and ensuring no one stepped on each other's specialties and we had every eventuality covered for our adventure the next morning; or people that stated "I'm a Half-Elf Fighter. I have a sword." and said nothing further. If prompted, they'd further reveal the type of sword. During the adventure, it would come to light that they lacked any wands, a bow, and had taken Skill Focus (Diplomacy) for ~+7 Diplomacy and would cut off the Bard with his +17 to say "I roll Diplomacy at the NPC."
Not everyone communicates well enough to adjust your gameplan accordingly. Heck, I usually carry backup weapons specifically to give to unprepared Fighters and I've been turned down in the past because it isn't their "preferred weapon" even as they delayed the entire combat due to a lack of ranged option.
Now, on the flip side an awesome fellow I play with a lot has a number of characters with unconventional appearances and abilities that he likes to keep a secret for roleplay purposes. But we know that he'll be prepared for each eventuality, and happy to Aid Another if his score is lower than an ally's at a task. He avoids optimizing to the extent of ever overpowering his compatriots' fun but is often the key factor that salvages the scenario. So the "lack of a gameplan" is no big deal when playing with him.
|
|
What happens if you want to play a Human Wizard, rather than a gnome wizard?
What happens if you want to join the Dark Archives or Silver Crusade rather than the Scarab Sages (where the former Osiriani faction trait Eastern Mysteries comes from)?
Sometimes optimizations do not need to start at Level 1. People play their own characters, but from what I am seeing is that there are people on the side of playing optimization builds, that in some aspect are in fear of getting into the wrong party and use the optimization to pick up some slack of the others, and those who see that this is simply just a game and play what they want to play, even if it is not the best for the situation.
I have been in parties that have trounced scenarios (My Bonekeep 3 table was one of them). I have also have been in parties that went downhill due to poor gameplay (37 charges of my own CLW wand on a single scenario because the Barbarian with 12 AC likes to provoke AoOs). Sometimes bad tactics makes games unenjoyable, but we learn from it, like our pathfinder characters. We can discuss what can help afterwards, guide players to help them out and still enjoy the game and characters they play.
There can be players who devote themselves to pushing the boundaries of hyperoptimization of characters (I am one of them, I am not going to lie), but try to be reasonable to those who do not see this game as a series of numbers and percentages.
