Why do Martials need better things?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1,251 to 1,265 of 1,265 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>

ChainsawSam wrote:


And Rogues (Thieves) were incredibly useful because they were the capable of doing things like disarming traps, opening locks, and listening.

Don't forget climb (scale walls?) and move silently.


thorin001 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
knightnday wrote:
Yes, there has been a martial/caster discussion going on since about three minutes after magic users were a class option.

You think it took that long?

It took a couple of levels at least.

You presume nobody looked at the spell lists, then looked at the Fighting Man class and said "So wait.. one guy gets to make the world suck his ****, and the other just hits stuff?"

[Granted back then being good at 'just hitting stuff' was a lot more restricted AND important than it is in 3.P]

I really did not see much of that in 1st edition. Magic Users only had that d4 hitpoints, and that very much evened things out. There was a need for the fighter to stand in the way of the squishy, so he had a real role. Also there were fewer spell slots available to the magic user. The disparity in usefulness was much smaller.

You also had far less spells around. The spell list for the Magic User had 19 spells at 1st level, four or five more if you include the (separate) Illusionist list. There just weren't as many things that magic could do at the start. And while the lists got larger, I don't remember many spells adding whole areas where magic previously wasn't useful until late in the edition when FR became the favourite child.


Just a Guess wrote:
ChainsawSam wrote:


And Rogues (Thieves) were incredibly useful because they were the capable of doing things like disarming traps, opening locks, and listening.
Don't forget climb (scale walls?) and move silently.

Yeah, all these things that are just skill points now used to be things that were (just about) Rogue exclusive.

Ranger and Bard could do them too, but they got much less points to screw around with or only had access to a reduced list.

So every time you climb a wall in Pathfinder, just remember that way back in the day some Grognards had to wait while a Rogue climbed up and lowered down a rope for everyone else.

Every time you listen at a door for monsters or make a perception check to hear an ambush, remember that back in the day a Rogue had to do that.

3rd edition D&D essentially broke up a monopoly. A monopoly on listen.


Bluenose wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
thorin001 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
knightnday wrote:
Yes, there has been a martial/caster discussion going on since about three minutes after magic users were a class option.

You think it took that long?

It took a couple of levels at least.

You presume nobody looked at the spell lists, then looked at the Fighting Man class and said "So wait.. one guy gets to make the world suck his ****, and the other just hits stuff?"

[Granted back then being good at 'just hitting stuff' was a lot more restricted AND important than it is in 3.P]

I really did not see much of that in 1st edition. Magic Users only had that d4 hitpoints, and that very much evened things out. There was a need for the fighter to stand in the way of the squishy, so he had a real role. Also there were fewer spell slots available to the magic user. The disparity in usefulness was much smaller.
You also had far less spells around. The spell list for the Magic User had 19 spells at 1st level, four or five more if you include the (separate) Illusionist list. There just weren't as many things that magic could do at the start. And while the lists got larger, I don't remember many spells adding whole areas where magic previously wasn't useful until late in the edition when FR became the favourite child.

That's another important part of the equation.

General systems bloat over the years have drastically increased the amount of spells.

These spells aren't all just 31 flavors of fireball. It's this ridiculous utility bloat.

Magic used to be powerful and it had some neat tricks, but the modern magic system has become both the cause of, and solution to, most of the problems in the game.

This situation we run into now where, "Oh, it's a problem. I'll just spend 30 minutes to fill an unprepared slot and then wave magic at it so it goes away," didn't even used to be possible in a lot of cases.


I prefer 5e casting. No AOOs. No SR. Concentration is not an action. Everyone has spont or arcanist casting. Built in meta magic to some spells (stronger in a higher slot). No caster level. Same DC for all spells.

But

DCs cap at 19, all save or sucks are multiple saves.

You can only concentrate on one spell that requires concentration. This prevents many spell combos

Fewer spell slots and no bonus spell slots.

5e curbed the power of casting while making it more fun to use.


ChainsawSam wrote:

That's another important part of the equation.

General systems bloat over the years have drastically increased the amount of spells.

These spells aren't all just 31 flavors of fireball. It's this ridiculous utility bloat.

Magic used to be powerful and it had some neat tricks, but the modern magic system has become both the cause of, and solution to, most of the problems in the game.

This situation we run into now where, "Oh, it's a problem. I'll just spend 30 minutes to fill an unprepared slot and then wave magic at it so it goes away," didn't even used to be possible in a lot of cases.

This is precisely the reason why doing away with the prepared casting classes does so much to bring the magic system back into balance.


Aelryinth wrote:
The real killer for casters was the full round casting time. If they got hit, they lost the spell.

This but combined with a number of other issues.

You got far fewer spell slots
Wizards got no bonus spells for having a high Int
You were not guaranteed the spells you wanted
Magic item creation was hard, didnt come online until later levels and for permanent items cost you a point of Con which you had almost no way to get back
Many of the most powerful spells aged you multiple years

Quote:
Plus, saves got BETTER with level, not worse. Trying to use save or dies against high level foes was a laugh. They'd save on a 2+. An 18th level mage going up against a Fighter better be using no-save spells and have a LOT of interference, because otherwise the Fighter was just going to plow through everything, and murder him in 2 rounds or so.

This was also a major difference. Saves were much better but also HP were lower across the board. You didnt get max HP at level 1 and you didnt get average, you rolled and lived with it. A level 18 Wizard is likely to have 11d4+7 HP, an average of 33. If he is very lucky he might have a Con of 15 or 16 and get +1-2 HP per HD so 11-22 more. He cannot get +3-4 (the bonus for 17 and 18) as that is limited to Fighters, Rangers, Paladins and Barbarians. A level 18 wizard with maximum health has 73hp.

Our fighter types, with double weapons specialisation, at level 18, are swinging 3 times per round for 1d10+3 per hit before we factor in strength modifiers or magic bonus. If he is an archer it is even worse, especially at point blank range (5-30'). With a +2 weapon and a mid 18(--) strength our average wizard is quite possibly dead in a single full attack which will deal something like 3d10+24 damage.


Interesting thought...

Make casters no longer be able to memorize spells more than once per day (GASP!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:
Okay, what do you think is more fair? 60% don't have a problem with the disparity? 40%?

Why bandy about totally unverifiable percentages in the first place?

But if we're going with gut math, I don't know anybody who plays Pathfinder or D&D and thinks that the martial/caster disparity isn't a thing, so I'll see your 40% and go all in. I don't play with a representative sample of all Pathfinder players everywhere, so I don't pretend that my own subjective 100% is accurate, but in my experience, the more experience a player has, the more likely they are to realise that their beloved martial character isn't at the Wizard's right hand, or even eating at the same table.

They're the help.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:

These may not be complete, but the unspoken rules seem to be as follows:

(1) Casters must never steal the spotlight. If you can end a combat with a spell combination, don't. Instead, cast most of your spells so that the martials look good -- even if it's not really necessary to have them along, you must always pretend it is. This means that you don't save up explosive runes traps, and you don't use armies of simulacra, and you don't send planar bound critters to do all the fighting -- because gentlemen just don't do those things.

(2) Follow the railroad. Artificial timelines and endless series of combat encounters are what make martials look good, and they're also the most easily avoided situations, once casters start really using their spells. So don't. Don't use divinations, don't bypass encounters, don't change the playing field. Ignore the temptation to solve problems through solutions other than combat.

(3) If casters forget the first two rules, the DM's job is to remind them. Arbitrarily add restrictions or drawbacks to spells, or threaten out-of-rules consequences for using them, or, in extreme cases, declare outright that every dungeon is in an antimagic field. Give the martials all kinds of narrative abilities through "role playing" that the rules don't actually give them, and minimize the same for the casters.

(4) Every episode needs a contrived underwater element to make Aquaman seem like a full member of the Justice League. It's the DM's job to contrive to make the martials look good, regardless of how much that damages suspension of disbelief.

(5) Ignore that the game is based on mechanical underpinnings. Play Magical Tea Party as much as possible. The DM should fudge dice rolls at will, or even ignore them outright. The DM should alter stats mid-encounter as needed, or alter monster tactics (usually choosing to make them do really dumb things like run up next to the fighter and stand there to get full-attacked). Above all, the DM should always ignore actual written rules in favor...

This. So many times over. Whenever a PC doesn't obey the Polite Code for Gentlemanly Magicians, the rest of the party becomes their sidekicks at best or their pawns at worst. It's not even malicious, full casters just naturally assert control over their surroundings.


RDM42 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Remove a wizard's spellbook from them before they've prepared their daily spells and they'll be more useless than a naked fighter. Both classes are SOL though.

actually unless they used all their spells from yesterday i'm pretty sure they keep them.

could be wrong though.

also we deviated from the core expectations specifically to show that they were gear dependent.

Regardless, the spell slots and ability to memorize spells is the class feature, not the filled slots. You want to presume an equipmentless fighter, you get to presume a wizard or sorcerer with empty spell slots.

Your passive aggression is turning into regular aggression, also that counter point has been debunked. Prepared spells are retained indefinitely until cast, wizards have a multitude of ways to work around losing access to their spellbooks, and cantrips and school abilities are things that exist.

Next argument, please.

Dark Archive

alexd1976 wrote:

Interesting thought...

Make casters no longer be able to memorize spells more than once per day (GASP!)

Casters can't memorize spells more than once per day anyway. Once a spell slot is expended, an 8 hour rest is required before more spells can be memorized, and it can't be within the same 24 hour period as the last time spells were memorized. If you memorize spells on Tuesday at 8am, and burn them all up by 9, you can't rest 8 hours and start over at 5. You have to wait till Wednesday.


Legio_MCMLXXXVII wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

Interesting thought...

Make casters no longer be able to memorize spells more than once per day (GASP!)

Casters can't memorize spells more than once per day anyway. Once a spell slot is expended, an 8 hour rest is required before more spells can be memorized, and it can't be within the same 24 hour period as the last time spells were memorized. If you memorize spells on Tuesday at 8am, and burn them all up by 9, you can't rest 8 hours and start over at 5. You have to wait till Wednesday.

But you can leave slots open to fill them by memorizing later.

Dark Archive

Yes, but that's not the same as preparing spells more than once per day. A given spell slot can only be prepared once. The time it gets done is really irrelevant to how many times you're preparing spells per day.


Legio_MCMLXXXVII wrote:
Yes, but that's not the same as preparing spells more than once per day. A given spell slot can only be prepared once. The time it gets done is really irrelevant to how many times you're preparing spells per day.

It is not, however, irrelevant to your ability to wreck house with utility spells, especially if you've got the Fast Study discovery.

1,251 to 1,265 of 1,265 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why do Martials need better things? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.