Metamagic Rod, I'd assume.Ok, I'll bite.
I'm assuming an intensified, maximized, and empowered fireball cast by a Orc/Draconic crossblooded halforc with the APG favored class bonus for +1/2 pt fire damage?
and you're getting that out of a 3rd level slot how? to my knowledge, there is no incantatrix twin in PF, and no way to gouge out free metamagic beyond magical lineage, wayang, and spell perfection, and that only gets you maximized and intensified for free, max, making that a 5th level spell slot at least.
you can only use 1 metamagic rod per spell, and the dazing effect was also included in the list of effects.
you can only use 1 metamagic rod per spell, and the dazing effect was also included in the list of effects.Metamagic Rod, I'd assume.Ok, I'll bite.
I'm assuming an intensified, maximized, and empowered fireball cast by a Orc/Draconic crossblooded halforc with the APG favored class bonus for +1/2 pt fire damage?
and you're getting that out of a 3rd level slot how? to my knowledge, there is no incantatrix twin in PF, and no way to gouge out free metamagic beyond magical lineage, wayang, and spell perfection, and that only gets you maximized and intensified for free, max, making that a 5th level spell slot at least.Pretty sure he was also using Spell Perfection
As well as the two traits, each of which can only be applied to a spell of 3rd level or less, but reduce the total metamagic cost when metamagicing that spell by one level per trait. So that's one free metamagic feat, two free metamagic adjusted levels, and a metamagic rod slot.
Spell perfection nets you the maximize or dazing(both are +3 level)
Magical Lineage and Wayang together get you Empower(a +2 level metamagic)that leaves you with either Max or dazing, and Intensify. you can knock out the first with a rod a few times a day, but you still have a metamagic feat unaccounted for.
I want to reiterate a question I asked earlier just so I don't need to make a new thread about it; With the consideration of Pathfinder Unchained and the options from hardcovers, what classes are actually underpowered in this discussion?
Cavalier hasn't been a part of this discussion. Barbarian seems to be an exception and I haven't heard anyone complain about the 4/9 casters. Similarly I never hear bad things about the Slayer and the Gunslinger is often the center of the subject of whether or not it's overpowered or whether or not guns are overpowered. I've seen Monk vs Brawler arguments but not conclusive ones. It seems the list is limited to Fighter, Monk, Rogue, and Swashbuckler with Brawler and Cavalier as 'maybe's.
Cavalier isn't part of this discussion because Cavalier is so rarely played. I imagine it's just a hair above fighter, literally within spitting distance.
Barbarian and Paladin and Ranger are all way better off than the rest of the martials, but they still fall horribly short of full casters.
For the purpose of argument lets say that Inquisitor is the desired comparison rather than Wizards. Mostly because that range extends to the realm of brokeness rather than usefulness and for my purposes all my players suck at playing full casters to the extent discussed on the boards.
I like Cavalier. It's fun and you get to charge things for a ton of multiplied damage and you crit big, and you can get cool mounts...
and it's mostly a wasted effort. Unless you're one of those Emissary Cavaliers who jump off the 'horse' and fight alongside it like a Hunter, you're just a Fighter with a shtick that takes up 4 squares. Like I said, I enjoy charging headlong into everything we see and forcing my party to deal with it, but it's just another way to be a beatstick.
I like Cavalier. It's fun and you get to charge things for a ton of multiplied damage and you crit big, and you can get cool mounts...
and it's mostly a wasted effort. Unless you're one of those Emissary Cavaliers who jump off the 'horse' and fight alongside it like a Hunter, you're just a Fighter with a shtick that takes up 4 squares. Like I said, I enjoy charging headlong into everything we see and forcing my party to deal with it, but it's just another way to be a beatstick.
Daring Champion though. Oh hell yes.
Technically, it already did. It's called ToB/Psionics.Much as I love ToB and Psionics (and much prefer them to the core classes' design), I think completely redoing the magic system and all the classes doesn't exactly qualify as a "quick and simple" fix.
It qualifies as quick and simple, since you don't need to completely redo anything. You just google the pfsrd and done. All the work done for you.
hmm? i thought we ANIMATED the corpse, and they had no soul...
PF, it has a spark of the original soul, hence why you can make undead out of the unwilling with the unwilling's memories. And they will always be evil.
Also why you can't raise/resurrect them once animated. They're 'not dead' anymore.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, you can just remove alignment from the game... fixes tonnes of issues.
Also, you can just remove alignment from the game... fixes tonnes of issues.
been using loyalty since unchained, paladins are fun now ;-;
been using loyalty since unchained, paladins are fun now ;-;
I was fun being able to shout Smite Terrorist! at my enemies.
Also let them move and full attack. Casters can do huge amounts of damage or even bypass hp altogether as a standard action and still move 30 feet. Martials don't need to be penalized in the action economy.
Yessss! Let's all move and full attack, that will be fun!
More seriously, move and full attack makes martial characters overpowered for their APL/CR. It creates more problems then it fixes.
This has not been my experience. I've used Full Attack as a standard action since 3.5. It doesn't result in overpowered martials, just ones that don't have to pretend they're trees.
This has not been my experience. I've used Full Attack as a standard action since 3.5. It doesn't result in overpowered martials, just ones that don't have to pretend they're trees.Also let them move and full attack. Casters can do huge amounts of damage or even bypass hp altogether as a standard action and still move 30 feet. Martials don't need to be penalized in the action economy.
Yessss! Let's all move and full attack, that will be fun!
More seriously, move and full attack makes martial characters overpowered for their APL/CR. It creates more problems then it fixes.
Am I not the only one that has named martial characters after sacred celtic trees?
I've had Ash, Elder, and Yew (Yew was in text game, I imagine it would have been confusing verbally).
I dislike full-attack as a standard action because I want pounce to mean something.
But I don't want pounce to mean nearly as much as it does.Eventually I reached a compromise:
--At BAB +6, you get an extra move action every round in addition to your normal actions.
--A 'full round action' takes one standard and one move action. Spells with a casting time of 'one round' still consume a full round (Hence, if your BAB is +6 or higher, you can triple move. Or you can move and full attack. Or you can double move and single attack.
([ooc]This change makes Spring Attack near useless, so I rewrote it, and made it part of a scaling feat encompassing Revised Spring Attack, Mobility, and Dodge)
To me, invalidating one very niche ability in order to make the rest of the game better is an acceptable trade. I like a game where not every mobile warrior has to be a beast totem barbarian. There are several other totems.
If one assumes that the game is supposed to start out "Lord of the Rings" and eventually be "Naruto: Shippuden" (which if you're a 2/3 or full caster, it does), then the issue is less the system itself and more that there is a fundamental disconnect in the way the game currently values at-will and limited use abilities that causes characters with exclusively at-will or "always on" options (primarily feats) to never be able to ascend out of the Lord of the Rings phase.Give 20th level wizards the typical power of a 5th level caster in the current system.Yeah, I was hoping for something more along the lines of "Here's a couple quick house-rules..." and not quite so much "Here's how to destroy half of the CRB and 2/3 of all the Advanced Guides and 3/4 of all the Bestiaries..."If it was that easy, someone probably would have already done it.
Its a fundamental problem with the system. I wouldn't hold out for any "quick fix".
Not necessarily "Naruto" as it is "Mythology/Folklore". A 12+ level Martial should be able to hack down trees with a single swing of his axe, tunnel through mountains with nothing more than a pair of hammers, hurl boulders like a giant, hurl a dagger across a river and hit his target between the eyes, tame any animal through sheer force of will, or swat away/slash through spells with his blade. Not through magic or magic items, but just because he's that badass.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right now martials can move and do one attack or full attack while casters can cast and move as much as they want.
How about a rule that gives casters two option for casting: Use a standard action for 1/2 CL* casts or a full round action for full CL casts. That doesn't help with quadratic vs. linear but at least both have to "pay" for moving.
minimum 1*
This has not been my experience. I've used Full Attack as a standard action since 3.5. It doesn't result in overpowered martials, just ones that don't have to pretend they're trees.Also let them move and full attack. Casters can do huge amounts of damage or even bypass hp altogether as a standard action and still move 30 feet. Martials don't need to be penalized in the action economy.
Yessss! Let's all move and full attack, that will be fun!
More seriously, move and full attack makes martial characters overpowered for their APL/CR. It creates more problems then it fixes.
Am I not the only one that has named martial characters after sacred celtic trees?
I've had Ash, Elder, and Yew (Yew was in text game, I imagine it would have been confusing verbally).
Daniel Jackson: "Don't. Every joke. Every variation. Done to death."
I love how no NPCs ever question the person who cast an obviously evil spell, and the other party members just accept him doing it.Just end the 8 minute day. Problem solved.Wizard: What my Bloody Skeletons can keep going, why are you slacking off Fighters? Is your HP really such an important resource? We shouldn't have to stop just cause you are out of resources, I say we keep going.lord don't make this an alignment discussion
because there's nothing inherently evil about using undead minions, except maybe in that you desecrate a corpse.
Sorry, in PF animating undead involves recalling a spark of their soul, enslaving it, and then infusing it with negative energy in a torturous manner while binding it to servitude.
Yes, quite evil in PF.
==Aelryinth
Humor me here. Show me the text in a rulebook that states that this is a case because I've never been able to find it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Humor me here. Show me the text in a rulebook that states that this is a case because I've never been able to find it.Yes, quite evil in PF.
==Aelryinth
There isn't one. It's another one of those unwritten rules the design team is supposed to follow when creating new mechanics.
It's been extrapolated by the fact that every single undead creature in the game is evil, including the mindless ones. That means that even though a skeleton is mindless, when uncontrolled it will mindlessly do evil things. You don't have to commend a skeleton to kill things. You have to command it not to, or at least carefully clarify it's choices of targets.
The only exception to the "undead are always evil" rule is the Ghost, which is almost always evil. I think there's been one fairly unique non-evil undead in an adventure path.
James Jacobs has been quoted stating that all undead are inherently evil in Golarion.
It's part of the setting whether we like it or not. Luckily it's a pretty easy thing to house rule if you feel that mindless things can't have an alignment other than neutral.
Personally, I find either to be valid, depending on the tone you want to set for your campaign.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
Consider crafted items the same as purchased when determining Wealth By Level.
...This is a terrible idea.
The reason why is that when a wizard crafts themselves a new cloak you cut back incoming wealth for the whole party. This effectively means that when the wizard spends 500gp making a 1000gp cloak, you as the GM take out 125gp from the treasure that the wizard would receive, and 375 gp for the other 3 players. The wizard is still ahead, since 625<1000, but the fighter and rogue are down 125gp through no fault of their own. You literally hand some players a tool to give themselves an unequal share of the treasure. Even worse, in character the other characters lose nothing, since in universe what someone does in their spare time has no impact on the amount of pocket change the orcs down the road have. Unless you as the GM plan to order players and their PCs to distribute loot a fair way instead of splitting it how they want to, which can vary from group to group but almost always consists of "everyone gets a fair share", which goes against what you want to accomplish....
Bold added by Fergie.
You are getting it backwards. The current item creation feats are "the tools to give themselves an unequal share of the treasure". The rules encourage a wizard* to have about 125% - 175% WBL once you pass the mid levels. Considering wizard is probably the most powerful class in the game already, increasing that characters power with items is detrimental to the balance of the game.
(* or other caster, but wizards get the feats almost free, and have the whopping Int to pass any spellcraft checks)
It seems that a lot of people tend to assume that WBL has some mechanical significance. It doesn't. It is a GM tool and an assumption of the CR system. Players don't have to know about it, don't have to care about it, and most certainly don't have to try to abide by it. That's the GM's problem, if they even want to follow it themselves (not following it creates issues with the system math, but nonetheless it is still just a guideline).
I understand that WBL is a guideline, but a characters wealth = magic items = individual power in Pathfinder. Giving the casters more wealth/items/power is the opposite of balancing the game. When the GM looks at an individual characters WBL it is to determine his power level within the CR system. If a character is 50% ahead of where he should be, that character has too much stuff, and having spent a bonus feat or two on craft wondrous item and craft wand are an insignificant price to pay for all that additional power.
I personally would make all item crafting more difficult, make martials able to effectively craft weapons/armor, and remove the economic incentive from crafting. Crafting should be something you do to get the item you want, not have more then everyone else in the group.
You are getting it backwards. The current item creation feats are "the tools to give themselves an unequal share of the treasure". The rules encourage a wizard* to have about 125% - 175% WBL once you pass the mid levels. Considering wizard is probably the most powerful class in the game already, increasing that characters power with items is detrimental to the balance of the game.
But the proposed fix won't address that.
But the proposed fix won't address that."I personally would make all item crafting more difficult, make martials able to effectively craft weapons/armor, and remove the economic incentive from crafting. Crafting should be something you do to get the item you want, not have more then everyone else in the group."
I would propose crafting an item costs close to full price.
EDIT: Note that according the the current rules (See Spoiler below), when the wizard crafts the fighter a magic item, that item is treated as market price when calculating the fighters WBL. When the wizard makes himself the same item, it is 1/2 WBL.
I don't think it should matter who made what when calculating WBL.
It counts as the item's Cost, not the Price. This comes into play in two ways.
If you're equipping a higher-level PC, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise the character isn't getting any benefit for having the feat. Of course, the GM is free to set limits in equipping the character, such as "no more than 40% of your wealth can be used for armor" (instead of the "balanced approach" described on page 400 where the PC should spend no more than 25% on armor).
If you're looking at the party's overall wealth by level, you have to count crafted items at their Cost. Otherwise, if you counted crafted items at their Price, the crafting character would look like she had more wealth than appropriate for her level, and the GM would have to to bring this closer to the target gear value by reducing future treasure for that character, which means eventually that character has the same gear value as a non-crafting character--in effect neutralizing any advantage of having that feat at all.
i'm keeping this
Feel free to steal as much of my stuff as you like. Houstonderek noted that Paizo has already ripped off some of it for Unchained.
A lot of what I posted for the ranger and rogue, in Orfamay's challenge thread, is already there.
So has that site actually been updated with the current rules?
No, they're still the Beta -- close enough to get an idea of where they were headed, but not where the "final" October 2012 rules were.
i'm keeping thisFeel free to steal as much of my stuff as you like. Houstonderek noted that Paizo has already ripped off some of it for Unchained.
A lot of what I posted for the ranger and rogue, in Orfamay's challenge thread, is already there.
where's the actual rules on the WBL mojo? equipment? i told my player's about it and they seem interested, though one of them doesn't like the idea of randomly making magic items, i'm wondering if i had it all codified it would make him understand it more.
Humor me here. Show me the text in a rulebook that states that this is a case because I've never been able to find it.I love how no NPCs ever question the person who cast an obviously evil spell, and the other party members just accept him doing it.Just end the 8 minute day. Problem solved.Wizard: What my Bloody Skeletons can keep going, why are you slacking off Fighters? Is your HP really such an important resource? We shouldn't have to stop just cause you are out of resources, I say we keep going.lord don't make this an alignment discussion
because there's nothing inherently evil about using undead minions, except maybe in that you desecrate a corpse.
Sorry, in PF animating undead involves recalling a spark of their soul, enslaving it, and then infusing it with negative energy in a torturous manner while binding it to servitude.
Yes, quite evil in PF.
==Aelryinth
A creature who has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can't be raised by this spell.
Resurrection requires the undead to have been destroyed
You can resurrect someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed.
Therefore, something is preventing the soul from returning to the body because the person has been animated.
I just always took that to be because his allotted mortal coil was in use. nothing to do with souls.
where's the actual rules on the WBL mojo? equipment? i told my player's about it and they seem interested, though one of them doesn't like the idea of randomly making magic items, i'm wondering if i had it all codified it would make him understand it more.
Equipment. Scroll past the weapons section (all weapons have simple, martial, and exotic proficiency uses, btw). There are price structures and stuff for custom items (which have since been refined and hard-coded with an order-of-operations approach, but what's there should get you started). There's also a bunch of explanatory text that might help.
Explain it this way: instead of just hoping that you leave them loot they want, or trading unwanted stuff for money and so on and then buying the stuff they want, we save a lot of time by instead having them tell you what magic loot they find, within clearly-defined guidelines. It's an intentional shifting of creativity from the DM (who has enough to do already) to the players.
<<posted on the other thread, may have been in the wrong place, so cross-posting here as well.>>
I'd think a class ability that makes the target more resistant to magic would go a long way. Whether it is sheer perseverance, understanding/seeing the flow of magic and moving out of its way or any other sort of handwaving, the idea is the same: the martial becomes more resistant to magic baked into the class.
Further that with feats to amplify that ability and magical attacks become something to be watched for, but not a game ender.
Grant various classes ways to disrupt magical fields, reflect/deflect types of magical attacks, kick summoned beings back to where they came from and in general have ways to make spell casters more wary to engage them with the usual tactics.
A simple fix, if not total, for Fighters is to allow them some reshuffling of Fighter Bonus feats when they pick up a new Fighter Bonus feat. At my table, Human Fighters can do this every Level.
If it matters, when we instituted this rule some 4-5 years ago, we suddenly had players choosing more than a 'dip' Level of Fighter. Now that I'm shifting to PF, rather than a 3.5 with PF add ons, and running an Undead RotRL, I have two Fighters in a pool of 6-10 players. That's as many as I had after 3.5 came out!
Humor me here. Show me the text in a rulebook that states that this is a case because I've never been able to find it.A creature who has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can't be raised by this spell.Resurrection requires the undead to have been destroyed
You can resurrect someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed.Therefore, something is preventing the soul from returning to the body because the person has been animated.
Or magic in Pathfinder could be arbitrary. But that is a nice find/implication. Personally I do run Undead as being powered by souls, but that's always been more of a way to justify the otherwise very silly standpoint that Undead are always evil. I've never found a firm statement on the matter in a rulebook, and I ignore unwritten rules, specifically setting specific ones.
Anyway, this is getting a bit off topic, and seems like something for another thread.
In terms of fixing fighters: Doing it properly would probably require rebuilding the system from the ground up. i would start by changing the way feats (specifically feat chains), class skills, and CMB/CMD work.
|
Skills are an area where this problem shows up very blatantly (sneak v invisibility, climb v fly).
The easiest way to fix that without getting rid of them - would be to increase the cost of such things greatly, either in terms of character build or resource use.
Build example: If to fly a sorcerer needed to take Feather Fall and Levitate in order to qualify for Fly, they may not take it. At least not until higher levels. (A wizards would - but that's because knowing spells is practically an infinite resource for them.)
Resource example: Each round that a character was flying in the air, they had to use up another point from their 'magic pool' or what have you, it's limiting. Sure - they can fly right up The Cliffs of Insanity, but they'll have spent half of their 'magic pool' to do it, and then probably won't have the juice to fight the Spaniard and the giant, and then after tricking the mastermind make their way through the Fire Swamp.
a paladin should be able to pray himself and party members to another plane
i mean even 1/2 casters need a little love