The big realism question


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 300 of 550 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
PIXIE DUST wrote:

And this is a shining example of martials not getting nice things...

Something as small as fall damage. Because "to does not make sense" to survive a fall from terminal velocity, people want to put more things in to make it more dangerous. Why??? All u do is force the martial to be even more of a leech off the caster "hey.... can you cast feather fall on us?"

What does which class your character is have anything to do with the realism or non-realism of falling damage?

Because Casters are more able to avoid taking the damage because...magic.

Feather Fall is the lowest level option, and can be done from level 1 (although the concentration checks from falling make it not completely reliable). If casters can trivially survive unharmed the majority of the time from level 1 onwards, martials should probably be able to probably shrug it off at level 15,


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A Ring of Feather Falling only costs 2200gp. At level 15, I would expect everybody to keep one in their pocket just-in-case. With a fall of that height, you'd have plenty of time to put it on during the fall unless you're incapacitated already and if less than 1% of your WBL is too much for you, switch it to a 50gp potion.

Still, if you want the martials to have an easier time of it, no problem, just do it. Give them Air Step or Wind Walk if you like. Sounds fun to me, but not everyone wants that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."


Pathfinder is a fantasy role-playing game with abundant magic. Magic is a big part of the system's draw, because it sparks the imagination and bends the rules of reality as we know them. A fighter with the fortitude to shrug off a direct blow from a rune giant's adamantine warhammer, or a fall from orbit onto a pile of jagged rocks, or being swallowed by a kaiju, or getting shot in the face with a cannon IS magical. NOT realistic. It doesn't matter whether the game system SAYS it's magical or non-magical; it's all magical. It's fantasy, and that's okay.

If the meta-knowledge that a spellcaster touched that piece of equipment bothers you so much that you're unwilling to use it, an alternative could be arranged. The magical item does not have to come from a spell-caster at all; it could come from a magical creature, fey, outsider, mythic being, or have come into being over the course of long-time exposure to the energies of the cosmos.

If even that is "too magical" for you, just re-flavor that ring of feather falling to be a fancy re-usable parachute, or a system of gas jets that slow your descent and recharge via kinetic energy generated by your movement, or an ACME Portable Decelerator, or even a preternatural aura of dumb luck.

I am 100% okay with the idea of giving martial characters nice toys to play with (even as class features, instead of dipping in to WBL!), but I disagree with the idea that magic as a whole has to be neutered to get there. For the record, yes, I'm saying that magic should be available to all and that ideas of "realism" shouldn't be used to stymie martials' contributions to the game. Everyone should be able to have fun. It might take some house-rules, but that's okay and it doesn't need a complete rewrite and a hypothetical PF 2.0 to accomplish.


I don't want magic to be neutered, and I honestly have no idea how you got that idea, but the very concept that you need to have a magical item, be it made from handwavium or a wizard's table, to do something that Ted the Wizard of Middling-to-Low Intelligence is able to accomplish with what is a glorified cantrip, to be asinine.

If this is the same guy that can take multiple shots from a 25-foot monstrosity wielding a club roughly the size and weight of a large van, if not more, then why is it outside the realm of possibility that something like falling off of a cliff side and brushing it off can happen?

This is one of the major problems that make up the inequality debate. Ted can do this at level 1, while Sir Gregory the Mighty, champion of a thousand battles, and hero of the Kingdom of Wherever, level 20 Fighter, can never, ever do this without having a magic spell or item to allow it.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Cuuniyevo wrote:

A Ring of Feather Falling only costs 2200gp. At level 15, I would expect everybody to keep one in their pocket just-in-case. With a fall of that height, you'd have plenty of time to put it on during the fall unless you're incapacitated already and if less than 1% of your WBL is too much for you, switch it to a 50gp potion.

Still, if you want the martials to have an easier time of it, no problem, just do it. Give them Air Step or Wind Walk if you like. Sounds fun to me, but not everyone wants that.

isn't terminal velocity 200 ft? pretty sure (besides immediate actions) that you fall 500 feet and then get to take your turn.


Bandw2 wrote:
Cuuniyevo wrote:

A Ring of Feather Falling only costs 2200gp. At level 15, I would expect everybody to keep one in their pocket just-in-case. With a fall of that height, you'd have plenty of time to put it on during the fall unless you're incapacitated already and if less than 1% of your WBL is too much for you, switch it to a 50gp potion.

Still, if you want the martials to have an easier time of it, no problem, just do it. Give them Air Step or Wind Walk if you like. Sounds fun to me, but not everyone wants that.

isn't terminal velocity 200 ft? pretty sure (besides immediate actions) that you fall 500 feet and then get to take your turn.

Rules quote.

Falling wrote:

Creatures that fall take 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet fallen, to a maximum of 20d6. Creatures that take lethal damage from a fall land in a prone position.

If a character deliberately jumps instead of merely slipping or falling, the damage is the same but the first 1d6 is nonlethal damage. A DC 15 Acrobatics check allows the character to avoid any damage from the first 10 feet fallen and converts any damage from the second 10 feet to nonlethal damage. Thus, a character who slips from a ledge 30 feet up takes 3d6 damage. If the same character deliberately jumps, he takes 1d6 points of nonlethal damage and 2d6 points of lethal damage. And if the character leaps down with a successful Acrobatics check, he takes only 1d6 points of nonlethal damage and 1d6 points of lethal damage from the plunge.

Falls onto yielding surfaces (soft ground, mud) also convert the first 1d6 of damage to nonlethal damage. This reduction is cumulative with reduced damage due to deliberate jumps and the Acrobatics skill.

A character cannot cast a spell while falling, unless the fall is greater than 500 feet or the spell is an immediate action, such as feather fall. Casting a spell while falling requires a concentration check with a DC equal to 20 + the spell's level. Casting teleport or a similar spell while falling does not end your momentum, it just changes your location, meaning that you still take falling damage, even if you arrive atop a solid surface.

It technically doesn't say that you fall 500ft and then get your turn, but if you can't cast for the first 500ft then the implication is that your turn only comes up after that far a distance.

Which makes sense - A fall from 200ft should take around 3.5 seconds and a fall from 500ft should take around 6 seconds. A turn cycle occurring every 500ft matches that fairly well.

In any case, I don't think that Freddy the fighter is going to have time to yank off his ring of protection and slip on a ring of feather fall any more than Will the wizard is going to have time to slap a Fly spell on themselves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It would be cool if there was a "Legendary Warrior" class that was basically a fighter than gains magical artifacts as a class feature...like Perseus.
I'd also like to see an "Indomitable Warrior" class that was like a Nega-Psychic or Anti-magic warrior...even to the point of generating lesser/greater globes of invulnerability as an Extraordinary ability.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:
In any case, I don't think that Freddy the fighter is going to have time to yank off his ring of protection and slip on a ring of feather fall any more than Will the wizard is going to have time to slap a Fly spell on themselves.

... ughm... feather fall is an immediate action.

also, overland flight is hours long.


Bandw2 wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
In any case, I don't think that Freddy the fighter is going to have time to yank off his ring of protection and slip on a ring of feather fall any more than Will the wizard is going to have time to slap a Fly spell on themselves.

... ughm... feather fall is an immediate action.

also, overland flight is hours long.

Oh, I wasn't saying that wizards couldn't easily save themselves.

My point was that the rules don't say that a fighter can't swap rings in the time span of a 200ft fall, but if the wizard doesn't have enough time to cast a standard action spell then the fighter almost certainly won't have enough time to pull a ring/potion out and stick it on or chug a potion (which is a full round worth of actions).


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
In any case, I don't think that Freddy the fighter is going to have time to yank off his ring of protection and slip on a ring of feather fall any more than Will the wizard is going to have time to slap a Fly spell on themselves.

... ughm... feather fall is an immediate action.

also, overland flight is hours long.

Oh, I wasn't saying that wizards couldn't easily save themselves.

My point was that the rules don't say that a fighter can't swap rings in the time span of a 200ft fall, but if the wizard doesn't have enough time to cast a standard action spell then the fighter almost certainly won't have enough time to pull a ring/potion out and stick it on or chug a potion (which is a full round worth of actions).

ahhh, okay.


On the time taken to fall, granted, I should have looked up the rule rather than go off of memory. If I remember correctly though, the example scenario was a fighter willingly jumping off because it was easier than climbing down the path, so the ring or potion still works fine if you use them before you jump.

@Nocte ex Mortis:
I did say that I was open to the idea of having such powers be granted by class abilities instead of having to dip into WBL, so it seems we're either arguing semantics or just misunderstanding one another at this point. My argument in the last post was simply that regardless of how the fighter gets the ability, it's still "magic". Whether it's an item, a (Su) or an (Ex), it's still not something that happens in real life. So yes, I think you need to have some magical justification for doing something magical. It doesn't need to be a spell and it doesn't need to be a magic item by the rules but it still counts as magic in my mind. Some people have a problem with this and think it sounds too much like a comic book, anime or "wuxia" movie, but I do not.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
I would deem that perposely taking a swim in lava is doing a self CdG and I'd apply the full [120] pts of damage. The same with jumpping off a 200' cliff 'because its the fasting down'.

What if someone jumped off a 10 ft cliff? Why is a 200 ft cliff different? Because you the DM deem it to be suicidal? What if the character is 10th level? With 16 CON, Toughness and your favoured class bonus and 18 levels in fighter you will be able to brush off 200 damage. Will you arbitrarily increase the damage?

What if someone jumped down onto a ledge but misses? Are you going to say they were deliberately trying to kill themselves? That's what a self induced coup de grace is, after all.

Also you've now conceded 12th level fighters are superheroes. So why restrict them to what people in the real world can do in every way EXCEPT for falling off cliffs?

Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."

Pathfinder classes are "balanced" around having access to magical items. If you can't accept that, then feel free to either implement one of the optional rules or a houserule or play a different game. But it is a central conceit of the base Pathfinder game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
Pathfinder classes are "balanced" around having access to magical items. If you can't accept that, then feel free to either implement one of the optional rules or a houserule or play a different game. But it is a central conceit of the base Pathfinder game.

I'd say it does a pretty poor job of it when some classes are totally dependent on having gear items T, U, W, X, Y and Z in order to keep up with the monsters, while other classes only need items Y and Z :P


And at least 1 class* is still competent without any items at all. And others that only need a feat for it.

*the sorcerer, others at least need eschew materials to be item independent


kyrt-ryder wrote:
I'd say it does a pretty poor job of it when some classes are totally dependent on having gear items T, U, W, X, Y and Z in order to keep up with the monsters, while other classes only need items Y and Z :P

Hence the quotation marks around the word balanced. Magic items have been used to "balance" classes since AD&D (if not before). It's why 3rd edition had that infernal WBL chart and why different items cost different prices. As awful as it is, it was still an attempt at balancing the classes.

Shadow Lodge

John Lynch 106 wrote:

Will you arbitrarily increase the damage?

Yes

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
...Stuff..

The long answer. If I wanted to play superheros I'd play a superhero genre based game.

Now this is the way "I" see things and I couldn't give a f#%! whether you think its wrong thinking. When you accidentally fall your adrenaline is rushing and your mind is going "gotta grab onto something! gotta stop!", so you get the 'luck factor' to help save you if possible. The 'Luck Factor' is rolling the damage dice. If you just jump off a cliff because you "know" it cant kill you and its the fastest way down, I remove the 'luck factor' and just apply the maximum damage. Same thing with walking into lava as opposed to falling into it.

Also I have always though that capping the dice at 20d6/200' was lame. It wasn't so bad in the earlier editions of the game since 20d6 was alot of damage back then, a 20 lv fighter with an 18 con would have a 168 hp MAXIMUM. 20d6 would kill most character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:

Will you arbitrarily increase the damage?

Yes

Cool. When you play houseruled Pathfinder, you're not playing superheroes. When people play something more closely resembling what's written in the book, they are playing superheroes.

What was your point? That GMs can implement houserules to change how Pathfinder plays? I'm all for sensible adjudications. But this isn't a way of interpreting the rules or speaking where the rules remain silent. This is outright houseruling. Which is fine. But not really relevant to discussing how people play the game when they don't use your personal houserules?

Shadow Lodge

John Lynch 106 wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:

Will you arbitrarily increase the damage?

Yes

Cool. When you play houseruled Pathfinder, you're not playing superheroes. When people play something more closely resembling what's written in the book, they are playing superheroes.

What was your point? That GMs can implement houserules to change how Pathfinder plays? I'm all for sensible adjudications. But this isn't a way of interpreting the rules or speaking where the rules remain silent. This is outright houseruling. Which is fine. But not really relevant to discussing how people play the game when they don't use your personal houserules?

Just about every post in this thread is personal houserules. The OP was asking why was realism part of the game 'because Fantasy' but of course it got way off base. At this point I have no idea how it got to be about game style, my 'side' with more realism type style and their 'side' superheroes/anime-esque/action movie type style.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
Just about every post in this thread is personal houserules. The OP was asking why was realism part of the game 'because Fantasy' but of course it got way off base.

There is no houseruling when using 20d6 as the maximum damage that can be dealt with damage. The fact people, when using the rules in the game, can fall off a cliff and then stand up and continue walking, is not a houserule and is not realistic. Even when implementing your "maximum damage, no rolling required" houserule.


Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."

This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?

He's not. But the fighter needs all the boosters too. The standard "Big Six", including weapons, which the mage doesn't really need.

But he also needs to have items handle all his utility stuff, unlike the casters. Added to that is that there're all kinds of things at the higher levels that casters can do that can't be duplicated with items.


thejeff wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?

He's not. But the fighter needs all the boosters too. The standard "Big Six", including weapons, which the mage doesn't really need.

But he also needs to have items handle all his utility stuff, unlike the casters. Added to that is that there're all kinds of things at the higher levels that casters can do that can't be duplicated with items.

Fine. Bring up those things, but saying drinking a feather fall potion is invalid because it makes them a fake caster borders on the silly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?

The arcane caster only needs his spellbook (a class feature) and/or a spell component pouch (which he could ignore with a feat) to be strong. The divine caster needs a holy symbol in addition to the component bag. (another 10go or so) Sure, he is not as strong as he would be with all his gear but he can stand his ground using only his class abilities.

A typical Fighter who has only his class abilities and a single 5gp non-magical item is close to useless.


RDM42 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?

The problem is more that the Fighter must have support in the form of either magic items or a pocket caster in order to do their job. Replace the Fighter with an Inquisitor, or a Warpriest, or a Druid, or a Cleric, or a Magus, or etc etc and there stops being a problem with "leeching".

The dislike for "Leeching" can be explained by this. Essentially, there is a fundamental difference between the two scenarios of a)class X gets augmented by teamwork and b)class X is dependent on teamwork. In the first, if the support doesn't want to immediately help the class then that is ok. They can drop BFC or debuff or take some action related to an encounter specific gimmick, or whatever else they want. The class would like the support, but they can get by without it. In the other, if the support wants to do anything other than prop up the frontliner, the class is left ineffectual for as long as the support is off doing other things. It restricts what actions the support can take because another character nigh demands that they assist them, and it also restricts what actions the class can take since they can only participate in many encounters when the support feels like allowing them to. Plus it puts the support PCs in the nasty situation where if they go down, the party TPKs because nobody can actually handle the encounter without all the PCs being up while crucial buffs get passed around. If the PCs are decent by themselves but still more than the sum of their parts together, then if half of them get taken out through bad luck the others have a good chance of pulling through.

As for the dislike for item dependancy...lets put it this way. A level 20 wizard with a few hundred GP worth of items is still a deadly threat for anything near their CR. A level 20 fighter...not so much. When a class is highly gear dependant, they essentially have to beg the GM and any crafters in the group to allow or provide the gear they NEED to have to be effective for their level. Classes that aren't gear dependant can get by with almost nothing. This creates problems when a GM doesn't want to do things like closely follow WBL or allow free crafting and purchasing of magic items. If the GM decides to go ahead and disallow things that gear dependent classes rely on, they end up making class imbalance worse, because the classes that really need magic items are usually also the worst classes. Plus the players with those classes aren't enjoying it when the wizard and druid have to blow 2 of their 20 spells per day getting things they would prefer receiving from items while they can barely function without things to patch up their weaknesses. Not to mention the fact that a lot of people don't like it when their characters are only successful because they look like a christmas tree under detect magic. This is another case of augmenting=good, dependance=bad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Further more,it creates the really annoying problem of FORCING OTHER PLAYERS to work around you.

Like, with older editions, many people hated being the cleric because ONLY the cleric could heal and the game was much more brutal so healing was needed more. So you wer pigeon holed into being a healer, regardless of your backstory or character concept.

Or some more examples, maybe i want to make a scout sorcerer (fetchling Shadow sorcerer). As such, i would be picking spells based on my build amd idea, but if lets say we had an entitlist fighter, he would get mad if I didn't provide fly and Haste, even rhthough i am not a buff bot. Or a Summoner. Or how about a enchanter? Yes it is a team game but I should not have to be forced into playing roles outside my character just because another player wants To play a fighter...


Strip any spell with a gold cost from the wizard or sorcerers repertoire, and spell which causes ability drain that someone else might have to get rid of or would require a magic item, any spells whatsoever beyond the new spells granted per level, let's see ...


RDM42 wrote:
Strip any spell with a gold cost from the wizard or sorcerers repertoire, and spell which causes ability drain that someone else might have to get rid of or would require a magic item, any spells whatsoever beyond the new spells granted per level, let's see ...

They would still do a hell of a lot better than the Fighter against anything which doesn't play along with the Fighter's combat style of "run up to it and start smacking".

Something like a druid is barely bothered. Most of the things they get from items can be replicated with their spells. They just can't get through as many encounters because they are burning through spell slots to replace their missing wealth(as opposed to fighters, who can't get through any encounters if those encounters include some of the myriad ways of shutting down the ground based charge into full attack routine so many martials rely on).


I also forgot, can't allow anyone else in the party to block any creature from engaging the caster in melee.


Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
RDM42 wrote:
Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.

?? but several are hours long


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
the game just describes a level 9 fighter as a level 9 fighter not a level 9 superheroic fighter.

For the record, the 1st edition AD&D Players Handbook, under level titles for the fighter, has "Hero" at 4th level and "Superhero" at 8th level. That's verbatim. So, yeah, the game does indeed describe a fighter as a superhero -- at one level lower than the one you cite.


RDM42 wrote:
Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.

That is...a little insane. Not even hours/level ones?

If I was trying to solo like this, I would probably play something like a Cleric or a Druid. Druids can have wildshape up for hours. They can be a dinosaur 24/7 from level 6 onwards with a single trait (Beast of the Society). Are you seriously going to say that they have to spend an action in combat because...???

Can I insist that the fighter don his fullplate/mithril breastplate in combat as well? Seems just as reasonable, right?


Snowblind wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.

That is...a little insane. Not even hours/level ones?

If I was trying to solo like this, I would probably play something like a Cleric or a Druid. Druids can have wildshape up for hours. They can be a dinosaur 24/7 from level 6 onwards with a single trait (Beast of the Society). Are you seriously going to say that they have to spend an action in combat because...???

Can I insist that the fighter don his fullplate/mithril breastplate in combat as well? Seems just as reasonable, right?

No. You've already said he can't have that mithril breastplate, because it would be acquired by wealth, so ...


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
RDM42 wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.

That is...a little insane. Not even hours/level ones?

If I was trying to solo like this, I would probably play something like a Cleric or a Druid. Druids can have wildshape up for hours. They can be a dinosaur 24/7 from level 6 onwards with a single trait (Beast of the Society). Are you seriously going to say that they have to spend an action in combat because...???

Can I insist that the fighter don his fullplate/mithril breastplate in combat as well? Seems just as reasonable, right?

No. You've already said he can't have that mithril breastplate, because it would be acquired by wealth, so ...

you misunderstand, we're saying paying for an item is not an excuse for not needing to balance the classes...


A character's wealth is part of the character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
Again, your solution is "Have a magical item," which ultimately translates to "You need to be this much of a spellcaster to survive/be effective."
This attitude, along with the "leech off the casters" one truly baffles me. It's a team, not a collection of individuals. And wealthy by level is a prat of the entire character. Mages use it to enhance certain abilities, fighters use it for enhancement and to obviate weaknesses. Does the Mage get denied his intellect boosters, meta magic items, ability to transcribe spells, et al, does the cleric get denied their pearls of power? Why is the fighter presumed to have to be naked for these comparisons?

See, I don't see this as much. The leeching is mostly on what is being given back. Let me see if I can give an example to better describe my view.

The fighter can do damage like a champ, but in most other cases isn't that useful. His more utility-minded friends dump some of their power to help him out, and the fighter, in return, keeps on doing damage and not much else. This is the team carrying the fighter, although I'm not going to say they won't feel like he's useful to have around when they force-multiply him to carve through something that's vulnerable to getting full-attacked until it dies.

Paladins and Inquisitors can also do a boatload of damage like a champ, but they are also bringing their own powers to help out their teammates beyond that. The paladin's numerous immunities, wonderful saves, and brilliantly efficient self-healing means that the paladin takes an enormous amount of strain off the other members of the party to keep him up and running, and more than that, the Paladin can heal other party members and bolster their saves just by being around. You might be dropping Fly and Haste on the Paladin and the Fighter equally, but on the other hand the fighter's way to reward for you for this teamwork is to attack things, while the paladin rewards you by attacking things, healing you while removing a status condition that's really putting the hurt on you, or possibly even bringing you back from the dead.

Teamwork, in my mind, is when everyone's relying on something from another member of the team while also giving back of roughly equal value. The Paladin casting a spell to take half of the fragile caster's damage upon himself for the duration of combat (so the paladin is tanking for the team even if something gets or shoots past him, which happens a LOT in real Pathfinder battles) while the caster uses crowd control to prevent the enemy from evading or overwhelming the paladin is teamwork. The Bard and the Inquisitor buffing each other up and going into battle, the Bard dropping debuffs on the enemy to soften them up while the Inquisitor slices through them, using the Bard's help to activate his Solo Tactics for greater power, is teamwork.

I don't view the cleric preparing a ton of "delay X" and "remove Y" spells purely to bail the swashbuckler out of trouble when he can't use Charmed Life and starts failing saves left and right as very good teamwork. That's one character losing their chance to do something cool to bail another character out repeatedly. The Cleric is saving the Swashbuckler's life repeatedly, but the Swashbuckler isn't helping the Cleric nearly so much. He's doing good damage to the enemy, which is something the cleric could also do if he had the space to prepare his battle-priest spell array instead of his "get the guy with weak saves out of trouble" array.

As far as the wealth by level thing goes, I don't particularly like that this system also favors magic-users, since they're rarely as reliant on strong weapons and armor as nonmagical warrior classes are, and a magic weapon plus a backup magic weapon plus magic armor is an expense that's added on top of the stat boosters both classes need in roughly equal measure. A fighter has to spend money to stay effective at his main job, shore up his inherent weaknesses, and gain a measure of utility he otherwise lacks. A caster already has utility, so they're mostly just focusing on staying effective and shoring up weaknesses. Anything else is just a convenient bonus because having a spell list takes a ton of pressure off them for carrying utility items.

Since higher-level martial classes are supposed to be legendary heroes, would it really be so out of line if things like the Black Blade mechanic were given to some of them as class features? Fighters are supposed to be some of the best warriors, so why is it that an Arcanist can get an entirely unique legendary sword that automatically scales and enchants with level on top of some other abilities and not them? I think that'd be a lot of fun, personally. A druid has his animal companion, an arcane class has their familiar, clerics have their power to call for divine aid, and the warriors find their personal legendary weapon at some point in their career. Plenty of people start naming their weapons once they find one with a +3 or better total enhancement bonus anyway, but when it comes right down to it any meathead with the proficiency to do so can use that character's weapon of choice. Black Blades don't play by the same rules; that's not "a really good sword," it's that character's sword, their companion and a source of plot hooks unique to that character. Link from Legend of Zelda is an almost entirely nonmagical character with a lot of magical items, but his defining thing as a heroic warrior is that he's got the Master Sword, a weapon of enormous power that only he can wield at full strength. Its significance dwarfs that of any other magic item he acquires on his quest, no matter how useful they are, and a significant portion of Link's quest is often shaped in relation to the Master Sword.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
RDM42 wrote:
A character's wealth is part of the character.

yes and it doesn't balance the classes since WBL is equal, you can remove it and compare the actual classes more easily. this is how to analyze actual issues in a system, you remove the parts that are the same because it heightens the differences where there are differences.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
The 'Luck Factor' is rolling the damage dice. If you just jump off a cliff because you "know" it cant kill you and its the fastest way down, I remove the 'luck factor' and just apply the maximum damage.

The luck factor in falls is actually about how you land and possibly about how your body is oriented to the fall [a fall parallel to gravitational forces is significantly faster than a fall perpendicular to them, because of air resistance]

The 20d6 cap is there for a reason. A google search will reveal half a dozen or more normal people who have survived falls out of airplanes without anything other than the clothes on their backs and sometimes their airplane seat.

A ridiculously lucky level one commoner with at least 14 constitution who stabilizes quickly enough can survive a 20d6 fall, on the minuscule chance the fall rolls one for damage 20 times.

Intentionally.


Except that doesn't work. Because different things are being done with the wealth, and the problems that crop up are ones that won't actually exist in the game. By the time mages can easily cast fly without worrying about losing the spell slot, the fighter likely has access to fly anyway, etcetera. It's creating false problems.


RDM42 wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Also can't presume a single buff or summon is up at start of combat, you have t apply them all in combat.

That is...a little insane. Not even hours/level ones?

If I was trying to solo like this, I would probably play something like a Cleric or a Druid. Druids can have wildshape up for hours. They can be a dinosaur 24/7 from level 6 onwards with a single trait (Beast of the Society). Are you seriously going to say that they have to spend an action in combat because...???

Can I insist that the fighter don his fullplate/mithril breastplate in combat as well? Seems just as reasonable, right?

No. You've already said he can't have that mithril breastplate, because it would be acquired by wealth, so ...

True. No mithril Breastplate.

So he has to don his regular breastplate/fullplate in combat, right? Or go along with a pitiful AC. That's "fair" I guess, although what hours/level buffs has to do with discrepency in wealth dependency is beyond me. Hours/level buffs are the ones casters use even with plenty of wealth lying around. You don't see many casters spending big bucks for wings of flying, or +3 haramakis when they have mage armor and overland flight. Hours/level buffs will be up 99% of the time regardless of wealth, just like fighters will have their main armor donned 99% of the time regardless of wealth (the exception would mostly be nighttime ambushes, and in that case the casters don't get their buffs without spending rounds, and fighters get a chainshirt at best unless they blew a feat on endurance).


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
RDM42 wrote:
Except that doesn't work. Because different things are being done with the wealth, and the problems that crop up are ones that won't actually exist in the game. By the time mages can easily cast fly without worrying about losing the spell slot, the fighter likely has access to fly anyway, etcetera. It's creating false problems.

that's my point, it shows how the class is unable to stand on it;s own without WBL, this shows that there is a flaw in the system. a wizard can get the same item to fly and never have to spend spell slots on flying as well. it's simply not an equal exchange.


Snowblind wrote:


You don't see many casters spending big bucks for wings of flying, or +3 haramakis when they have mage armor and overland flight.

They also don't have to choose between those wings of flying and +5 to all saves.


thejeff wrote:
Snowblind wrote:


You don't see many casters spending big bucks for wings of flying, or +3 haramakis when they have mage armor and overland flight.
They also don't have to choose between those wings of flying and +5 to all saves.

Winged boots. Next.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
This is one of the major problems that make up the inequality debate. Ted can do this at level 1, while Sir Gregory the Mighty, champion of a thousand battles, and hero of the Kingdom of Wherever, level 20 Fighter, can never, ever do this without having a magic spell or item to allow it.

The system, including classes, is built on the assumption that characters will acquire magic items. If you see this as a problem, UnChained! just gave you a whole book full of ways to adjust the game, depending on what you codify as an end goal.


RDM42 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Snowblind wrote:


You don't see many casters spending big bucks for wings of flying, or +3 haramakis when they have mage armor and overland flight.
They also don't have to choose between those wings of flying and +5 to all saves.
Winged boots. Next.

Ok, now you fail your Save or Die by 5. Shame about that. The caster on the other hand is fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
This is one of the major problems that make up the inequality debate. Ted can do this at level 1, while Sir Gregory the Mighty, champion of a thousand battles, and hero of the Kingdom of Wherever, level 20 Fighter, can never, ever do this without having a magic spell or item to allow it.
The system, including classes, is built on the assumption that characters will acquire magic items. If you see this as a problem, UnChained! just gave you a whole book full of ways to adjust the game, depending on what you codify as an end goal.

it still puts the wizard miles ahead of the fighter in terms of utility and use for the party.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:
This is one of the major problems that make up the inequality debate. Ted can do this at level 1, while Sir Gregory the Mighty, champion of a thousand battles, and hero of the Kingdom of Wherever, level 20 Fighter, can never, ever do this without having a magic spell or item to allow it.
The system, including classes, is built on the assumption that characters will acquire magic items. If you see this as a problem, UnChained! just gave you a whole book full of ways to adjust the game, depending on what you codify as an end goal.
it still puts the wizard miles ahead of the fighter in terms of utility and use for the party.

And part of that use is making everyone else, including the fighters, fight better. Instead of repeating the same canard that everyone else is, why not simply state what you want.. You either want to take away something from wizards or boost something on fighters.


RDM42 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Snowblind wrote:


You don't see many casters spending big bucks for wings of flying, or +3 haramakis when they have mage armor and overland flight.
They also don't have to choose between those wings of flying and +5 to all saves.
Winged boots. Next.

"three times per day for up to 5 minutes per flight"

Not quite Overland Flight.

251 to 300 of 550 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The big realism question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.