|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're still trying to claim that the game is balanced because you can have combats with 1+ enemies focusing specifically on the spellcaster, and using a bunch of annoying and/or obscure rules to make that spellcaster's life harder, just so that he doesn't ruin everything for everyone else? Because if you didn't stack all of those efforts and rules together (which, by the by, pretty much allow the rest of the party to freely cleave through the enemy as they're so focused in preventing the spellcaster(s) from doing their thing) they'd break encounters over their boney wizard knees.
Well if that isn't proof that spellcasters in PF are too strong, I don't know what is.
|
Also spend all your non-fighter bonus feats on Skill Foci so that you can be less incompetent, but still woefully incompetent, with skills.
Uhm, yeah, you could do it the stupid way.
Or... you could pick up Use Magic Device as a class skill with a trait and apply Skill Focus to that. Or take the Master Craftsman feat and start cranking out magic items and constructs!
Or do the Improvisation feat chain I mentioned earlier. Surprise the crap out of your party when your paladin steps forward, cracks his knuckles, and rolls Disable Device on that trap. The fighter will be with you in a second to aid another on that, right after he gets done identifying these potions, healing these caltrop wounds, putting on his disguise, and appraising all our gems.
The tools are there. If you choose not to use them (or are unwilling to sacrifice a few points of DPR for them), don't get upset when you spend the non-combat portions of the game twiddling your thumbs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
EsChew Materials laugh at the need for materials
|
|
You're still trying to claim that the game is balanced because you can have combats with 1+ enemies focusing specifically on the spellcaster, and using a bunch of annoying and/or obscure rules to make that spellcaster's life harder, just so that he doesn't ruin everything for everyone else? Because if you didn't stack all of those efforts and rules together (which, by the by, pretty much allow the rest of the party to freely cleave through the enemy as they're so focused in preventing the spellcaster(s) from doing their thing) they'd break encounters over their boney wizard knees.
Rules are rules, man. If you choose not to use some of them, you'd better be prepared to deal with the consequences. That's really what I'm saying.
It goes for more than just martial/caster disparity, too. I played in a game where the DM thought tracking ammunition was a waste of time. It only took a few battles with the party's ranger spamming half a dozen +5 adamantine arrows per round for him to realize his mistake.
Well if that isn't proof that spellcasters in PF are too strong, I don't know what is.
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. "The designers added rules to balance casters, but I choose not to use them, therefore casters are overpowered."
|
|
Fly, Blur, Invisibility, Stoneskin, Mirror Image, Displacement, Wind Wall
Those are all great ideas! Start rolling concentration checks against the three archers with readied actions who fire on your well-known wizard (he's at least 7th level, right?) each round.
Oh, you wanted to cast all those before the fight began? Sure, you can pull off 7 rounds of preparation before some, but certainly not all battles. Just remember that if you get 7 rounds to buff up before the battle, so does the lich, dragon, or demon lord who knows you're coming. Or did you forget they have scry as well?
We could trade hypothetical situations all night, but my point is: Your DM has all the tools he needs to balance casters, he just has to learn and use them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Misguided Stuff
1. They do have to make them, but surprise surprise... they do.
2. Spell Component Pouches should not actually be targetable. I personally keep mine inside a robe pocket, the action to manipulate the components is part of the spell anyway so why not? If the GM is targeting a competent Wizard's spell component pouch they are cheating.
3. Right, cause Henchman have any hope of hitting the Wizard. Really?
4. I require languages to get additional options. Guess how many languages Wizards start with? And then guess how many skill points they get per level? This might come up once in a while at low levels, but you don't need animals to detect traps. Just use Perception. At low level the WIS based casters are the best at it anyway.
5. Because again, the Henchman are so likely to succeed with Dispel Magic. Or because the GM has a Henchman that has conveniently prepared the Wizards main spells. Of course at that point your using an equal level caster and the threat is the equal level caster, which tells us that "Oh hey, magic is the powerful thing here."
6. At mid levels, you'll need to be able to penetrate a Wizards fortified defenses to get their spellbook. This is significantly more risky then just attacking the Wizard. At low levels, I have yet to see a situation where a thief could steal the Wizards spellbook where 1. It wouldn't be easier to just *kill* the Wizard, or 2. The Fighter's magical sword wasn't worth more and much easier to steal to boot.
7. You know there's an item for that right? It's only 6,000 GP and it makes your action a waste of time. But no please waste a Dismissal on the Eidolon.
8. Actually having it tattooed on you does. Read Tattoo, Holy Symbol. And if an Arcane Caster, False Focus. My Razmiran Priest has it on the front and back of his hand that is not equipped with Glove of Storing. And another spare on his chest. You know, in case.
9. This has come up. When it does, casters in my games tend to Switch to non-reflex based saves. Or just cast a spread effect that can get around the cover, which is really easy. Or cast the Reflex Save spell anyway, since seriously what's +2 going to in the face of a Persistent Dazing Ball Lightning? Nothing that's what.
If those are the "checks" keeping casters in place in your game, my casters are duly unimpressed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Readying an action to shoot an enemy caster isn't what big bad enemy bosses do. That's what henchmen are for!
Once again, counterspelling isn't something the dragon or lich is wasting their turn doing. It's what their henchmen, summoned demons, or mind-controlled enemies are doing.
Wizard: "Guys, before we face this evil mastermind, can I ask you a question?"
Barbarian: "Sure, what's up?"
Wizard: "Why is it that every time we fight a powerful foe, all his henchmen stand around staring at me instead of attacking?"
Barbarian: "I don't know why, but I really like how safe and easy it makes it to focus on the boss."
Once again, counterspelling isn't something the dragon or lich is wasting their turn doing. It's what their henchmen, summoned demons, or mind-controlled enemies are doing.
Right I meant to address this but forget to. In order to Counterspell, you need to be able to actually cast a spell. So Demons are very poor choice for it. I suspect you have been playing this wrong.
And in that case, the Wizard is STILL making combats much easier by simply standing around and maybe flashing his old man balls at the various archers who are contributing to the encounter's CR but aren't actually doing anything.
Yep, perfectly balanced.
And hey everyone still gets their long duration buffs. Win/win.
chaoseffect wrote:
1. Concentration check DCs are largely trivial after a couple levels outside of the ones for being grappled.Yes, but it still has to be made. Ever wonder why arcane casters don't like to wear even just padded armor? What's the big deal, it's just a 5% chance. What are the odds it'll ruin a spell at exactly the wrong moment?
chaoseffect wrote:
2. If you have a spell component pouch you have all non-costly material components so there is very little that needs tracked.Ha, nice! Now your wizard is waving around a fragile, non-magical item that can be sundered, stolen, disarmed, or burned. Thanks for showing everyone on the battlefield your own personal Death Star exhaust port, Mr. Wizard. While you're at it, why don't you show everyone your arcane bond weapon, too. Hope nobody thinks to sunder it.
chaoseffect wrote:
3. Not taking your full attack in order to get a single attack that maybe stops a spell that you don't necessarily know is coming isn't really a very good tactic and at most is going to work once in an encounter barring terrain advantage on your end.Whoa, whoa, whoa. Readying an action to shoot an enemy caster isn't what big bad enemy bosses do. That's what henchmen are for!
chaoseffect wrote:
4. I don't know about telling a wolf to sunder a weapon, but you don't tell a wolf "to look for traps" you tell it to "run that way" and the trapfinding takes care of itself. I can see your point here, but I have never seen anyone actually try to give complex commands to summoned animals.Nope, can't even do that. Read summon monster again. Without specific verbal commands in a language they understand (or some ability to speak with animals), all a summoned creature will do is "attack your opponents to the best of its ability."
chaoseffect wrote:
5. Counterspelling is 100% always a horrible idea unless you can immediate action counter like an Arcanist; you are wasting your turn (where you could be casting the battle winning spell that you are trying to stop!) to maybe do something. If you mean use Dispel/Greater Dispel to pop buffs, then but of course.Once again, counterspelling isn't something the dragon or lich is wasting their turn doing. It's what their henchmen, summoned demons, or mind-controlled enemies are doing.
chaoseffect wrote:
6. Spell books are dirt cheap. Counting pages is pretty much a a pointless endeavor as there is little difference between having one tome and two in your bag/extradimensional space/demiplane.Spellbooks are dirt cheap, yeah, and 3 pounds each, right Mr. Seven Strength Wizard? And flammable. And not usually waterproof. And pickpocket-able.
chaoseffect wrote:
7. I'm assuming by unique weakness you mean Protection from.../Magic Circle; it comes up from time to time.Yeah, that and how long it takes to summon the eidolon. And dismissal. And banishment. Does that sound like specific knowledge that not all enemies would know? Maybe. Then again, all your player characters just instinctively know that they need silver to take on werewolves. Oh, that's common knowledge but preparing to deal with an infamous summoner's eidolon is OOC meta-gaming? Nice try, Mr. Summoner Player. Turns out when you're a famous adventurer, the bad guys do their homework. They know to attack you at night when it takes 10 rounds (or a wasted 2nd level spell slot) to summon your eidolon. Oh, and when you try to cast Summon Eidolon, see #3 and #5 above.
chaoseffect wrote:
8. Never enforced that as all it would do is mean that everyone would spend the handful of gold to get a holy symbol tattoo and negate the problem. Enforcing it just forced you into a particular flavor that everyone might not like.Whoa now, having something tattooed on you doesn't count as having it available to use for spells. That's like saying a wizard can substitute a wicked tattoo of his arcane focus staff on his butt cheek in place of his actual arcane focus staff. Would you let a player get away with that? Geez, I'm starting to see why you guys think casters are overpowered...
chaoseffect wrote:
9. I tend to forget about cover bonuses to reflex, but I feel it very rarely comes up, at least in games I've ran/played in. I really should try to remember it though.Seriously, these were just rules I plucked out of my recent memory. There's tons of stuff in the rules to help keep casters on their toes. But, as the tone of your arguments reinforces, they're often really situational, annoying, and easily forgotten. But hey, if martial/caster disparity is really that big a deal, maybe it's time to start enforcing them.
Also spend all your non-fighter bonus feats on Skill Foci so that you can be less incompetent, but still woefully incompetent, with skills.Uhm, yeah, you could do it the stupid way.
Or... you could pick up Use Magic Device as a class skill with a trait and apply Skill Focus to that. Or take the Master Craftsman feat and start cranking out magic items and constructs!
Or do the Improvisation feat chain I mentioned earlier. Surprise the crap out of your party when your paladin steps forward, cracks his knuckles, and rolls Disable Device on that trap. The fighter will be with you in a second to aid another on that, right after he gets done identifying these potions, healing these caltrop wounds, putting on his disguise, and appraising all our gems.
The tools are there. If you choose not to use them (or are unwilling to sacrifice a few points of DPR for them), don't get upset when you spend the non-combat portions of the game twiddling your thumbs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, if they are gonna be.running around ssundering stuff, why not sunder the Fighter's sword...
Oh wait thats right... that would be rude to take away his entire Class...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, if they are gonna be.running around ssundering stuff, why not sunder the Fighter's sword...
Oh wait thats right... that would be rude to take away his entire Class...
And unlike a Spell Component Pouch, you will almost always be able to target it...
Unless you are a caster lol.
Blackblade type archetypes are cool.
2. Spell Component Pouches should not actually be targetable. I personally keep mine inside a robe pocket, the action to manipulate the components is part of the spell anyway so why not? If the GM is targeting a competent Wizard's spell component pouch they are cheating.
Would you allow a wizard to keep them in a locked strongbox at the bottom of his backpack? After all, "interacting with the spell components" is part of the spell, right? Or is there room for a GM to say "Actually, no. You haven't kept that pouch readily accessible. Spend a move action to retrieve those now"? If you accept there's room then it's simply a matter of drawing the line. I've always expected a pouch to be on a belt pouch or around the neck or somewhere really easily accessible (and open so they're just dipping into the pouch). Inside a pocket might seem like a minor step of inconvenience, but it's enough to warrant an action in my view.
8. Actually having it tattooed on you does. Read Tattoo, Holy Symbol.Don't mind if I do
In some religions, you are allowed to tattoo or brand your deity's holy symbol onto your skin (typically the palm, back of the hand, or forearm) in a special ceremony.
So which religions are those? I could definitely see priests of Shelyn allowing it. Not necessarily anyone else though. I also just checked, this isn't in the CRB. The only reference I can find to it is in Ultimate Equipment, a splatbook filld with all sorts of broken items. Fortunately I say no to that splatbook and move on without issue in my games. It is true, if you allow every single option available in every single splatbook then you're game will be broken. It won't matter whose more broken because the game will simply be unusable.
Also, if they are gonna be.running around ssundering stuff, why not sunder the Fighter's sword...
You mean his magical sword? What's easier to sunder? A small pouch or a magical weapon?
Oh wait thats right... that would be rude to take away his entire Class...
Having so many levels of intelligence, surely they'd keep backups, right? Of course, it will open up attacks of opportunity as you reach into your backpack. Fortunately a 5-ft step will help, unless of course the enemy has step up or worse, step up and strike. A free attack at full BAB at the cost of using your lowest iterative attack? Sounds like a good deal to me. Don't even need combat expertise or improved sunder, just provoke the AoO from the strength 7 wizard.
A lot of good arguments are being thrown around, but there seems to be some really poor ones as well where people are simply trying to win the internets.
I've never seen a wizard actually spend a feat on eschew material components. They always seem to have more important things to spend their feats on somehow.
2. Spell Component Pouches should not actually be targetable. I personally keep mine inside a robe pocket, the action to manipulate the components is part of the spell anyway so why not? If the GM is targeting a competent Wizard's spell component pouch they are cheating.Would you allow a wizard to keep them in a locked strongbox at the bottom of his backpack? After all, "interacting with the spell components" is part of the spell, right? Or is there room for a GM to say "Actually, no. You haven't kept that pouch readily accessible. Spend a move action to retrieve those now"? If you accept there's room then it's simply a matter of drawing the line. I've always expected a pouch to be on a belt pouch or around the neck or somewhere really easily accessible (and open so they're just dipping into the pouch). Inside a pocket might seem like a minor step of inconvenience, but it's enough to warrant an action in my view.
You can houserule as such. But that's all it is. A houserule. Though I do agree that you need to be able access the Spell Component Pouch. But, a pocket allows access. And you are dipping into the pouch anyway. Care to explain what the difference between doing that and pocket that has the pouch is?
So which religions are those? I could definitely see priests of Shelyn allowing it. Not necessarily anyone else though. I also just checked, this isn't in the CRB. The only reference I can find to it is in Ultimate Equipment, a splatbook filld with all sorts of broken items. Fortunately I say no to that splatbook and move on without issue in my games. It is true, if you allow every single option available in every single splatbook then you're game will be broken. It won't matter whose more broken because the game will simply be unusable.
You know that here is a trait that lets you use a tattoo as a holy symbol and is available to everyone, so evidently all religions? Furthermore, Ultimate Equipment is literally part of the core line. Why would we not discuss something from Ultimate Equipment? Eschew Materials is a still a thing in Core. This is just a more efficient option with an additional cost.
Remember, the strongest items are all in the CRB.
You mean his magical sword? What's easier to sunder? A small pouch or a magical weapon?
The one that can actually be targeted. So the Sword.
Having so many levels of intelligence, surely they'd keep backups, right? Of course, it will open up attacks of opportunity as you reach into your backpack. Fortunately a 5-ft step will help, unless of course the enemy has step up or worse, step up and strike. A free attack at full BAB at the cost of using your lowest iterative attack? Sounds like a good deal to me. Don't even need combat expertise or improved sunder, just provoke the AoO from the strength 7 wizard.
A lot of good arguments are being thrown around, but there seems to be some really poor ones as well where people are simply trying to win the internets.
You may want to be careful about calling other's arguments poor when your relies on things that are not in the rules. And again, those back-ups are in more pockets. And honestly, even if the martial has somehow magically appeared next to the caster, Swift Action spells don't provoke AoOs. Meaning the Wizard can escape, or just end you there and then.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find this whole discussion on spell pouch semantics to be rather pointless. They cost 5g, they weigh 2 pounds. You can have a hundred of them littering up your Bag of Holding for less than the cost of a Cure Light Wounds wand. Even with 10 strength you could get away with wearing 3 or 4 at any particular time. Your pouch getting destroyed is pretty much a non-issue unless it is literally the first time it ever happened with that DM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whenever I hear people say that casters are way more powerful than martial characters, I always ask them if they use all the lesser known rules put into the game to help with that disparity.
Do you force concentration checks for environmental conditions like high wind? Do you track material components? Do your intelligent enemies make good use of the initiative system, readying/delaying their actions to hit casters when they try to cast? Did you remember that a caster has to be able to communicate with a summoned creature to give it complex instructions (no summoning a wolf and telling it to go down a corridor looking for traps or telling it to sunder an enemy's weapon). Do your enemy spellcasters actually counterspell, especially when they know Captain Caster and Company are about to barge into their dungeon? These are just the tip of the iceberg, too. Do you track of the number of pages in spellbooks, toss in a few enemies that are familiar with summoners/eidolons and how to exploit their unique vulnerabilities, and remember that your cleric's divine focus is probably an actual holy symbol that requires a free hand to use? What about how cover gives Reflex save bonuses against burst spells?
Headfirst and John Lynch,
Lets address these in order.
Do you force concentration checks for environmental conditions like high wind?
Yes, however as with things like climb checks and underwater breathing/movement, for most of these a caster has a long duration answer that is either kept up most of the time or prepared for due to use of divination well before they come up.
Do you track material components?
For anything not covered by a spell component pouch, ruthlessly. For anything covered by a component pouch, not really as most of my caster players have somewhere between 5-10 of these. There are only some many turns a person is willing to waste getting to an elusive and long duration buffed caster and then sundering one of multiple items.
Do your intelligent enemies make good use of the initiative system, readying/delaying their actions to hit casters when they try to cast?
Yep, but mostly again the caster due to high initiative, long duration buffs and divination is able to clear most "Henchmen" in one round if not simply avoiding them altogether. If the boss is doing this then the caster is happy that he has effectively CC'ed the most powerful opponent without using spell slots. In short it is a losing strategy at best a delaying tactic.
Did you remember that a caster has to be able to communicate with a summoned creature to give it complex instructions (no summoning a wolf and telling it to go down a corridor looking for traps or telling it to sunder an enemy's weapon).
Yep, which is why elementals are so popular or simply use of the mount spell.
Do your enemy spellcasters actually counterspell, especially when they know Captain Caster and Company are about to barge into their dungeon?
Not unless they are an Arcanist or a subordinate brought in to stiffen a martial boss. Counterspelling is usually a terrible choice unless you can do it as an immediate action.
Do you track of the number of pages in spellbooks,
Yep and track encumbrance. Not an issue blessed book is a thing as is multiple copies of spell books.
toss in a few enemies that are familiar with summoners/eidolons and how to exploit their unique vulnerabilities,
Yep, dismissal/banishment make eidolons sad in the face and magic circle makes non-summoner class summon focused characters sad. :-) But usually this is only a summon eidolon/dispel magic away from being useless. Can buy you a round though so I use it.
and remember that your cleric's divine focus is probably an actual holy symbol that requires a free hand to use?
Most of my cleric players either have a free hand or forge their holy symbols onto their shield. I know I know everyone is going to pounce all over that as a "houserule" and completely ignore every other part of this post, but I am being honest here.
What about how cover gives Reflex save bonuses against burst spells?
Yep.
In short as levels go up casters get answers to more problems, so the "limiting factors" that are in effect at level one become less and less significant, while martials unless they have spells as well, or are a card carrying barbarian, due to rage powers being basically a limited spell list, only get better at what they can already do.
In the end casters end up being able to do things like have an army at their beck and call or just make a retirement dimension which they rule. All of these hard coded class features while martials swing a sword harder and faster....
Or... you could pick up Use Magic Device as a class skill with a trait and apply Skill Focus to that.
Yes, the old "magic is balanced because fighters can learn to use a little tidbit of it, too." argument.
By that way of thinking we can remove all spells, SLA, su that grant an AC bonus (including bracers of armor) because casters can wear armor, too. They can even get feats to reduce the spell failure chance.
"Yep, dismissal/banishment make eidolons sad in the face and magic circle makes non-summoner class summon focused characters sad. :-) But usually this is only a summon eidolon/dispel magic away from being useless. Can buy you a round though so I use it."
A couple other things:
1. Not all Eidolon forms have poor Will saves, though quadruped, everyone's favorite because of Pounce, does.
2. Eidolon Anchoring Harness is a thing and only costs 6k. Dismissal and Banishment are instantaneous effects so even if the Eidolon fails, a single use of the harness would negate the effect. It's not constantly triggering after all. Even if you disagree with that assessment and think a SLA use would need to be burned each round, it still buys enough time to wreck face.
Most of my cleric players either have a free hand or forge their holy symbols onto their shield. I know I know everyone is going to pounce all over that as a "houserule" and completely ignore every other part of this post, but I am being honest here.
Not at all.
The channeling foci are stated to be/include holy symbols so having a weapon or shield be/include a holy symbol is totally RAW. You can even have a ring as a holy symbol if you don't mind wearing a wedding ring. And it has additional abilities over just being a holy symbol.A channel focus is a garment or other object that incorporates a holy or unholy symbol [...] Because a focus includes the holy symbol of a specific religion...
Here I just quoted the two times channeling foci are called out as including a holy symbol.
I'd have thought most clerics would get holy symbol tattoos?