Fergie, just get out of the notion of movement requiring sacrificing an attack.
NOT moving now earns you a BONUS.
So, if you need to stay in place, you get a bonus to hit!
Pounce then simply becomes a somewhat longer ranger normal attack, because you can use it with a charge.
Pounce is extremely strong now not only because you can move and get a full attack, but you can move TWICE AS FAR AS A STANDARD ACTION, and get a full attack!
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I, unfortunately, picked a specific example that I was wrong about to try and make a point. The relevant part is the point I was trying to make:Sometimes GMs allow spells to do things they aren't designed to do.
Magic does what the spell says, no more, no less. Fireball doesn't give rules on setting things on fire, so it doesn't set things on fire.
Other spells HAVE rules about burning effects, so they DO set things on fire...
The only problem is that, again, you picked an incorrect example.
Here's the text of the fireball spell, straight from the PRD, with emphasis added.
A fireball spell generates a searing explosion of flame that detonates with a low roar and deals 1d6 points of fire damage per caster level (maximum 10d6) to every creature within the area. Unattended objects also take this damage. The explosion creates almost no pressure.You point your finger and determine the range (distance and height) at which the fireball is to burst. A glowing, pea-sized bead streaks from the pointing digit and, unless it impacts upon a material body or solid barrier prior to attaining the prescribed range, blossoms into the fireball at that point. An early impact results in an early detonation. If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.
and damages objects in the area. It can melt metals with low melting points, such as lead, gold, copper, silver, and bronze. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier shatters or breaks through it, the fireball may continue beyond the barrier if the area permits; otherwise it stops at the barrier just as any other spell effect does.
So the fireball does, according to the rules, set things on fire. The problem is often not that people don't understand the rules, but that the rules are simply not as complete as people would like,.... or simply that people are selectively (mis)remembering the rules.
that's a lot of emphasis
Of course, Vlad is himself a witch and has Spellbreaker.
But we're not talking about Vlad here, but take rather Kragar and Mario.
Well, combustibles means stuff that lights on fire easily, usually things like oil, tinder, sawdust, gasoline, alchemist's fire, etc.
Non-combustible stuff that can burn and be damaged by flame takes fire damage, but doesn't necessarily keep burning. It might be outright turned into ash or slag instead.
Pretty sure it's done that way for ease of game play, not physics.
==Aelryinth
Well, combustibles means stuff that lights on fire easily, usually things like oil, tinder, sawdust, gasoline, alchemist's fire, etc.
Non-combustible stuff that can burn and be damaged by flame takes fire damage, but doesn't necessarily keep burning. It might be outright turned into ash or slag instead.
That's your reading of the rules, and it's certainly plausible, but I wonder where, for example, a bolt of cloth would fall on the combustible/non-combustible line. I suspect that we could get a half-dozen different lines drawn --- which gets back to "the rules are not as complete as people would like." But when a GM says your clothes catch on fire because you were exposed to a fireball, that's not "allow[ing] spells to do things they weren't designed to do."
air's combustible
I had a whole long scenario written up in answer to the OP, but it kind of got bogged down in detail and went off track. I do like the intent of the question and wanted to answer at least part of it.
The way I've always imagined high-level fighters is as being inhumanly tough -- charging forward in battered armor, taking hits from monstrous beasties and stubbornly getting up again, shrugging off fireballs, and forcing their way through magic defenses with sheer grit and force of will alone. Nothing flashy, just the ultimate in determination, dogged resilience, and unwillingness to back down.
Fighters, to me, are from the John McClane/Rocky/Indiana Jones school of fighting rather than some sort of supercompetent Jason Bourne/James Bond archetype.
Unfortunately, PF's fighter doesn't represent my ideal all that well, but I've never had a problem imagining a very high-level fighter that wasn't "too wuxia".
Fergie, just get out of the notion of movement requiring sacrificing an attack.
==Aelryinth
Move and full attack is no good.
Most martial characters and many creatures like dragons can generally kill whatever they full attack in one round. A high movement speed is fairly easy to get. If the Fighter can kill anything within 50' and the dragon can kill anything within 200' the whole game gets switched to LONG range, or you die. That isn't fun.
EDIT: And if the dragon gets pounce, he moves 400' and attacks 6 times!
air's combustible
But it typically burns very quickly and doesn't have much fuel, so you're not likely to notice.
If you do notice, you're probably in trouble and would rather be somewhere else.
Since all women in comic books ever do is swoon over men or get tied up/fly an invisible jet, no one will make the comic book connection.
Someone hasn't read Wonder Woman in the past ten years.
Since all women in comic books ever do is swoon over men or get tied up/fly an invisible jet, no one will make the comic book connection.Someone hasn't read Wonder Woman in the past ten years.
I stopped reading it when it stopped being 75% bondage.
Nah, I was never that into comic books, (although loved ElfQuest and collected the original Transformers 1-20 marvel comics). I did have a job coloring comics for a while around 1996 and that was really cool. In addition to the pay being great, it was some of the most creative stuff I've ever gotten to do. The problem is that once you spend a few hundred hours coloring, all you can really see is how a comic is colored. I can't even read black and white comics, and most coloring is pretty weak. It drove me to check out some Top Cow stuff, but paying $5 for 20 pages, then waiting a month for the next issue just didn't keep me hooked on the medium. I really like the art however, and still flip through my Heavy Metal's now and again.
Also, I REALLY like Order of the Stick. That is one of the greatest stories ever told!
It's easy to have fun with an unbalanced class. Heck, I had quite a bit of fun in one game where my PC died early on, and for the rest of the session I was playing a commoner NPC who'd been dragged along with the party. Mechanically awful and horribly unbalanced, but I still enjoyed playing a farmer who was in over his head and just hoping to make it out alive.Sure, I wouldn't deny that.
I'm just saying that a fun experience as a commoner doesn't prove that commoners and adepts are at equal power, and certainly doesn't give anyone the right to mock those who discuss the difference.
Was the point I was driving at. Just because you're having fun doesn't mean the system is balanced. Honestly, in my experience having fun with any tabletop RPG is far more about who you're sitting at the table with than the system you're using.
Heck, I recall one completely ridiculous non-Pathfinder game I GMed where the party consisted of Vegeta, Rainbow Dash, and an Old-West bank-robber. Needless to say, the game was utterly unbalanced, and I had a hard time finding any way to make interesting challenges for such a weird party. But since all the players at the table were friends who got along well, we all had fun reveling the sheer absurdity of the situation.
Most martial characters and many creatures like dragons can generally kill whatever they full attack in one round.
Because high level spells and SLAs don't do that?
Most martial characters and many creatures like dragons can generally kill whatever they full attack in one round.Because high level spells and SLAs don't do that?
As I asked before, are we trying to balance martial characters with the CR system, or are we trying to balance martials against existing full caster characters?
You can't do both.
Out of curiosity, where are paper walls mentioned in the climb skill? I would think an intelligent GM could say something like, "They can't really hold your weight". It's like trying to climb up a sunflower stalk. Plus, isn't a perfectly smooth surface literally impossible to climb, barring "wuxia"? :P
Design Manager
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most martial characters and many creatures like dragons can generally kill whatever they full attack in one round.Because high level spells and SLAs don't do that?As I asked before, are we trying to balance martial characters with the CR system, or are we trying to balance martials against existing full caster characters?
You can't do both.
Considering the fact that every single class is potentially an enemy NPC, you have to do both if either is really expected to do it's job. Remember, in the CR system 5 18th level Summoners is an appropriate encounter for a party of 2 18th level Rogues, 2 18th level Fighters, and 1 18th level Monk.
If the classes aren't at least roughly of the same basic power in their own way, then the CR system can't work because every class is part of the CR system. In the CR system, a 20th level Fighter with 1/2 WBL is the same CR as a 20th level Wizard who has used crafting feats to get himself up to the same WBL as a PC and pre-cast a bunch of summoning spells when his wards warned him the party was getting close. So the party busts in the door to discover a Wizard surrounded by devils and elementals (summoned with spells or scrolls crafted as part of his WBL so they don't count against his CR), but it's okay, because he's exactly the same CR as a Fighter standing there by himself.
....
CR balance vs. class balance is a nonsense argument, because all classes are encompassed by and part of the CR system.
I don't think it's honestly needed to the degree others are saying, but if I was to improve the fighter I would give them the damage resistance instead of the barbarian and beef up all of their saves, give them free diehard anything else that just makes them tough as nails and resistant. GiVe them easier access to the condition imposing crits.
Out of curiosity, where are paper walls mentioned in the climb skill? I would think an intelligent GM could say something like, "They can't really hold your weight". It's like trying to climb up a sunflower stalk. Plus, isn't a perfectly smooth surface literally impossible to climb, barring "wuxia"? :P
I knew people who want "realism" secretely hate fun
|
Design Manager
|
Though in fairness, this isn't how it tends to be used - There are plenty of BBEG casters in published works and they're not designed this way.
Nor should a GM do so - the point of designing adventures is to make interesting challenges for the players, not to see how badly you can tromp them with a theoretically CR appropriate encounter.
Actually, a lot of them are. Realm of the Fellnight Queen, off the top of my head, has a sorceress with presummoned elementals. Svevenka from Rise of the Runelords uses antilife shell to keep adventurers at bay while she throws summoned creatures at them. Gamgin, also from Rise of the Runelords, has it specifically spelled out in his tactics that he summons 2d4 bone devils before engaging in combat. Having run basically all of Paizo's modules and APs, I know I can find many more instances of casters presummoning before a fight to jack up the difficulty without changing the CR, so I very much disagree with your statement that it isn't intended or commonly used that way in published adventures.
It's okay though, because in the greater math of the CR system, a summoned ice devil is really only worth like 1/3 of a Dodge feat since Dodge is always on and thus obviously more powerful.
Too anime?
to be clear nichijou translates to "my simple life" or some such.
Though in fairness, this isn't how it tends to be used - There are plenty of BBEG casters in published works and they're not designed this way.Most martial characters and many creatures like dragons can generally kill whatever they full attack in one round.Because high level spells and SLAs don't do that?As I asked before, are we trying to balance martial characters with the CR system, or are we trying to balance martials against existing full caster characters?
You can't do both.Considering the fact that every single class is potentially an enemy NPC, you have to do both if either is really expected to do it's job. Remember, in the CR system 5 18th level Summoners is an appropriate encounter for a party of 2 18th level Rogues, 2 18th level Fighters, and 1 18th level Monk.
If the classes aren't at least roughly of the same basic power in their own way, then the CR system can't work because every class is part of the CR system. In the CR system, a 20th level Fighter with 1/2 WBL is the same CR as a 20th level Wizard who has used crafting feats to get himself up to the same WBL as a PC and pre-cast a bunch of summoning spells when his wards warned him the party was getting close. So the party busts in the door to discover a Wizard surrounded by devils and elementals (summoned with spells or scrolls crafted as part of his WBL so they don't count against his CR), but it's okay, because he's exactly the same CR as a Fighter standing there by himself.
....
CR balance vs. class balance is a nonsense argument, because all classes are encompassed by and part of the CR system.
Actually, I think you have the wrong end of the stick here. One of the problems is BBEG non-casters are barely speedbumps. Reverse the challenge here -- a party of four 17th level casters (cleric, druid, summoner, and wizard) need to take down an 18th level fighter and his CL 20 posse.
* Wizard scries and learns everything about the fighter
* Buffed to the gills by the cleric, the party teleports in and easily obtains initiative due to the buffs.
* Wizard locks the fighter down with a save-or-suck, while the druid and summoner summon a wall of face-eating meat to eliminate the henchmen.
* BBEG turns into a greasy smear on the wall.
* Cleric plays air guitar while wizard shakes one last Gitanes Maïs out of a crumpled pack. Summoner and druid engage in an orgy of multispecies high-fives.
(That more or less happened to our group less than three months ago, when we were doing playtesting of a submission someone was planning to a publisher.) If the job of the GM is to make interesting challenges for the players, it would help if BBEG fighters more easily made the not-especially-demanding threshold of "interesting."
That's your reading of the rules, and it's certainly plausible, but I wonder where, for example, a bolt of cloth would fall on the combustible/non-combustible line. I suspect that we could get a half-dozen different lines drawn --- which gets back to "the rules are not as complete as people would like." But when a GM says your clothes catch on fire because you were exposed to a fireball, that's not "allow[ing] spells to do things they weren't designed to do."Well, combustibles means stuff that lights on fire easily, usually things like oil, tinder, sawdust, gasoline, alchemist's fire, etc.
Non-combustible stuff that can burn and be damaged by flame takes fire damage, but doesn't necessarily keep burning. It might be outright turned into ash or slag instead.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
If you want to burn someone, use Spontaneous Immolation, not Fireball.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
Shrug. Why, then, does the spell say that it set things on fire? If you're arguing that "the spell does what it says it does," then, as per spell description, it sets thing on fire.
I like the idea that full attacking is your best attack, but I also wish the martials could move and lose only 10%-20% of their damage.
I would like to bake it in every full bab class a class feature that gives some way to move and still deal most of their attacks. They would get these abilities at 11-12 level which is around when they get the third iterative.
The barbarian gets pounce, which is a full attack but demands a straight line with no difficult terrain or obstacle in the way. It's also a full round action so it can't be combined with anything else.
The fighter can full atack as a standard action but loses his last iterative attack. Not a powerful as pounce but more versatile, you could move and full attack, drink a potion and full attack, draw a weapon and full attack, etc. The slayer, cavalier and samurai could also have this ability or something similar.
The swashbuckler loses his highest iterative but can attack at any point of hus movement, either full attacking an enemy or hitting several enemies sround the battlefield. It's the least powerful option but ideally the class would be able to make up for it with other stuff, like parry and counterattack. The monk could have something similar too.
The ranger could get an ability based on the 3.5 scout, adding extra damage or some damage riders when he moves. Same with the paladin and bloodrager, just changing the flavor and abilities of the damage riders.
Shrug. Why, then, does the spell say that it set things on fire? If you're arguing that "the spell does what it says it does," then, as per spell description, it sets thing on fire.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
One might set things on fire, but that doesn't mean they keep burning unless they are easily combustible. You can set green wood on fire, but it generally won't keep burning. Being able to be set on fire and to keep burning are two different things.
Immolation means you play the torch on fire, even if you're made of steel.
==Aelryinth
Taking away its best attack is why the Mobile Fighter archetype is so Meh.
==Aelryinth
Shrug. Why, then, does the spell say that it set things on fire? If you're arguing that "the spell does what it says it does," then, as per spell description, it sets thing on fire.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
This is why I'm opposed to calling it "fire" damage rather than "Heat" damage.
Fire just sounds better, honestly. But calling it Heat damage seems more accurate to RAI.
Shrug. Why, then, does the spell say that it set things on fire? If you're arguing that "the spell does what it says it does," then, as per spell description, it sets thing on fire.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
This is why I'm opposed to calling it "fire" damage rather than "Heat" damage.
Fire just sounds better, honestly. But calling it Heat damage seems more accurate to RAI.
but the spell literally says combustible items catch fire in the area of effect...
Maybe it's too simplistic of me, or my lack of neckbeardly 'animu and mango iz teh poopz weeaboos r teh sux0rz' attitude, but I am perfectly fine with allowing martial to start living life like they are in a stereotypical 'Natural 20' thread. The scope of their successes should increase with level to reflect their growing renown and legend.
Above and beyond the Davey Crockett, Paul Bunyan, and Pecos Bill tall tale territory, it should have a sense, certainly, of superhuman nature without spandex ź it should also have a measure of 'just so' to it because they are larger than life heroes, unconcerned with limitations for the everyday people.
Martial should not equal mundane. Especially not in fantasy.
Even having said that, there's a bit of devil's advocacy that comes to mind in regards to verisimilitude, but that only goes as far as people are obstinate about constraining their suspension of disbelief to wigglefingers or pidgeonholing with their own derision because they want their particular flavor of nerd-vengeance fantasy to play out a certain way.
This is why I'm opposed to calling it "fire" damage rather than "Heat" damage.Shrug. Why, then, does the spell say that it set things on fire? If you're arguing that "the spell does what it says it does," then, as per spell description, it sets thing on fire.
There are spells specifically designed to set things on fire, Fireball is not amongst them.
What's wrong with a ball of that explicitly sets things on doing "" damage? I'm not seeing the basis for the opposition, I guess.
To me, that's like complaining that a wooden shield is made of wood.
So, has this thread yielded any fruit thus far?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, has this thread yielded any fruit thus far?
We decided that a Ranger should be better at tracking than a Diviner Wizard and that a Gunslinger should be a quicker draw than a Diviner Wizard. That's... pretty much it.
So, has this thread yielded any fruit thus far?
some apples, some oranges... is a watermelon a fruit?
I think any character above 10th level should act in a surprise round, you don't ever see high level people surprised about anything.
So, has this thread yielded any fruit thus far?
My sarcastic colleagues aside, I'd say it has. I think everyone agrees in principle that martials are unnecessarily hampered by the move-or-full-attack paradigm. There also seems to be general agreement that martials should have better defenses against magic, although the exact form that takes varies considerably.
A lot of people have suggested an enhanced role for followers that doesn't require the Leadership feat (if a 17th level fighter wants to gather an army, let him), and a much enhanced role for skills.
And Arachnofiend is right -- martials should be better at their specialties than a wizard is.
ETA: of course, if you've got other suggestions, it's nowhere near closing time.
I think any character above 10th level should act in a surprise round, you don't ever see high level people surprised about anything.
RIP High level rogues trying to assassinate their peers in level.
---How about super luck? Take 20 a few times a day. Auto-succeed a save, auto-crit, win initiative, succeed at an important skill. It's something even mundane people can do.
I made a Rogue fix a while back where as their 10th level ability they treated any roll of a 1 on 20-sided die as a 20, doubling their chances of critical success and taking the possibility of critical failure completely out of the picture.
I made a Rogue fix a while back where as their 10th level ability they treated any roll of a 1 on 20-sided die as a 20, doubling their chances of critical success and taking the possibility of critical failure completely out of the picture.
How about a Rogue Thief that steals luck instead and can use stolen luck for rerolls and forces a misfortune effect on the target? Why am I asking? No reason.
How about super luck? Take 20 a few times a day. Auto-succeed a save, auto-crit, win initiative, succeed at an important skill. It's something even mundane people can do.
Lacks flash and awesomeness, though. I'm not sure anyone would go "you know, I really want to play a fighter, because I can roll a 20 when I'm doing something otherwise very mundane."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Out of curiosity, where are paper walls mentioned in the climb skill? I would think an intelligent GM could say something like, "They can't really hold your weight". It's like trying to climb up a sunflower stalk. Plus, isn't a perfectly smooth surface literally impossible to climb, barring "wuxia"? :PI knew people who want "realism" secretely hate fun
What's inherently fun about climbing a piece of paper? Please, enlighten me on how my sense of fun is wrong.
I think any character above 10th level should act in a surprise round, you don't ever see high level people surprised about anything.RIP High level rogues trying to assassinate their peers in level.
---
How about super luck? Take 20 a few times a day. Auto-succeed a save, auto-crit, win initiative, succeed at an important skill. It's something even mundane people can do.
rogues and slayer's obviously, would be the exception, getting a bonus round in ambushes if they are the instigator.