|
With so many books, rules, weekly changes, etc... it is nearly impossible to be up to speed on everything this game has to offer. So what do you do as a GM when you have someone playing a character that seems "not quite legal" but there are so many "I got this from this book, and that from this add-on, and this from..." that it would take hours to look everything up? For example,
I was recently running a table where someone had some level 11 multi-classed halfling melee type, that did nearly 50 points of damage per attack and had an armor class or 40 with a touch AC of 35. The character also had several other types of other "special abilities". I don't know if this was legal or not but had I known the details of this character before beginning the adventure, I would have not allowed him to play that character. That character alone broke the scenario as he could essentially run it himself. It made the whole gaming session a complete joke.
So ultimately I am wondering if a GM can just say, "you can't play that character"?
|
See this thread. All of those things actually sound pretty on par for many level 11 characters (or maybe I'm just used to seeing a lot of power gamers).
|
|
There are people who will say that all you can do is let him play but that isn't true.
First you can and should audit the character. Just checking that the player has all of the sources the character uses might have solved the problem for you.
Second if you felt there was no point in running with the character at the table you did not have to run. As a GM you are supposed to have fun too. If you know this player is going to ruin your night you don't have to suffer just so he can do his thing. If you as a GM are not enjoying yourself you need to let the players know why not and if they won't make adjustments to let you enjoy running then stop running.
Now ultimately a martial able to do 50 damage per hit at level 11 is pretty vanilla TBH. A decent high level scenario should have had equally buff enemies.
Trouble is that the scenario "Boss" had 168 HP and our fighter was hitting him on a 3, and the boss had a +22 to hit but sadly that fighter had a 40 AC, so I needed to roll an 18 to hit. So with slightly above average damage rolls this character (who also had a +14 initiative) could kill the boss in one round.
Part of the problem is how "vanilla" the scenarios are written, and the other big problem is how much PFS creates an environment for overpowered, ultra-optimized characters. It makes it less about the game and more about who can manipulate the numbers and rules.
|
|
Marcellus, perhaps it would be helpful for your experience if you shifted your focus from running an 'effective' scenario to running an 'enjoyable' scenario?
We play the games we do because they are fun. This sometimes gets forgotten in the mix.
Problem with that is when the players start complaining that you aren't "staying true" to the scenario. (This player had run the scenario before. and complained when I upped the boss stats).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Problem with that is when the players start complaining that you aren't "staying true" to the scenario. (This player had run the scenario before. and complained when I upped the boss stats).
Unfortunately, he is right. Changing the bosses stats is not allowed.
You have several options (many of which can be combined)
1) talk to the player and ask him to pull back his power gaming
2) refuse to run for that player
3) learn to enjoy being rotfl stomped (it can sometimes be fun :-))
4) run scenarios with lots of roleplaying and/or puzzles
5) run only low level games (the power gaming is usually significantly less problematic at lower levels)
6) run only Core games (the power gaming is usually somewhat less problematic in Core)
If these don't work, you pretty much have to quit bring a PFS GM. Power gaming is here to stay (although Paizo has obviously recognized the problem and is currently I taking steps to address some of the issues).
|
|
Well I guess I'm old school and enjoy playing the game and making it fun for all the players, not just one. The entire table barely did anything, and many times couldn't do anything, because the one player stomped everything so quickly. The PFS rule number one is make sure the players have fun, so I gave them a chance to engage at least one creature in combat (which would have been impossible if I left it "as written") Anyway, the players thanked me for trying to make the scenario fun after "that player" left the table.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So ultimately I am wondering if a GM can just say, "you can't play that character"?
No. And you're pointing out exactly WHY you can't do that in a public game. Your sense of whats appropriate for an 11th level character is off. 50 points of damage? Its really par for the course at that level.
The judgement of whether a character can play in a pfs scenario is its pfs legality, not an arbitrary decision by someone that may or may not have the experience to tell when something is wonky.
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So instead we should let players "curb-stomp" the scenario and finish early with no challenge at all?
Yep. You can use the extra time to ask him to show his resources and politely inquire as to how exactly he got that build to do what it did.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, you can use the extra time to, you know, role play...
There is rarely time to get to all the roleplaying stuff.
50 damage per hit is pretty good for someone with 40 AC. If you don't have time before, you can also audit the character after the game.
|
|
But when will there be time for beer? ;)
There's always time for beer!
To the OP:
How big is your PFS community in your area? If this person is consistently causing a headache to you and the other players at your table (which it sounds like from your last post That Guy was the only one that had any fun), then my advice would be to start organizing games on your own, so you can choose who to invite to your games.
|
So instead we should let players "curb-stomp" the scenario and finish early with no challenge at all?Yep. You can use the extra time to ask him to show his resources and politely inquire as to how exactly he got that build to do what it did.
Bingo.
More than once I've had players at a 10-11 table whose "source" was d20pfsrd or HeroLab. Some of whom were using 3rd party feats/archetypes from d20pfsrd or who hadn't even checked the "PFS legal" box in HeroLab.
1) talk to the player and ask him to pull back his power gaming
This may or may not work but it's certainly worth a try.
One of my favorite stories to tell occurred when I was playing Where Mammoths Dare Not Tread at a convention. The first fight took nearly two hours. It was a very enjoyable fight with players doing fun things and lots of laughter. The GM said "we're going to have to skip the optional, I hope we make it through the rest." The players - who knew each other if not those particular characters - all looked at each other and said "nah, we can step it up." During the next fight the bloatmage starts blasting, the paladin smites, the bard stops trying to trip huge creatures and buffs instead, the control caster starts casting control spells - instead of the goofy stuff we were doing in the first fight. Took less than 5 minutes.
|
Especially at a 10-11 table, I expect any player to be able to break down how one of their stats got to a specific number. If you think a number is too high, ask them. They should be able to tell you that the 50 damage comes from +5 STR *1.5 for 2-handing, +9 Power Attack, etc.
50 damage on a full attack is ok for that level, although 50 damage per individual attack would definitely get me to ask questions. What's really bugging me is the touch AC of 35.
That being said, if the character all checks out, then there's not much you can do with the character's build. However, look at the other people at the table. If they're not having fun, then point that out. If they are having fun, then you're doing your job. Your responsibility is not necessary to challenge the players, your responsibility is to help everyone have a good time. While often this is correlated with challenge, it is not always the case. (A lot of times, if a group of players is coming off of a TPK the previous session, they're usually not looking for a challenge this game, for example.)
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Honestly, +22 to hit and 168hp sounds a bit wussy for a 10-11 boss monster. That's more what you'd expect in the 7-9 range. Actually, we ran into someone like that in the 6-7 tier recently, was pretty tricky for our level 7 party. Especially since he also had mirror image and displacement going.
Did the monster have other defences that didn't come into play enough? Maybe miss chance? Was he supposed to be attacking from range?
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
If he is, like you said, "That Guy", and you are not the only one who thinks that, then you wont gain anything by banning this particular character.
While auditing is good, the chance that this person will just build a similar character is very high.
Talk to the guy first. See if you can come to an agreement. Toning it down unless the party is sure to loose works well.
If he doesnt want to listen and regulary causes other players to not have fun at the table, take it up higher, to a VL or VC. They can have a much sterner word with the guy.
Honestly, +22 to hit and 168hp sounds a bit wussy for a 10-11 boss monster.
To put it in perspective, the monster creation guidelines suggest that a CR 13 monster should have +22 to hit, about 180 hit points, and should do about +45-+60 damage. That's the same to-hit and more hit points than what we're describing.
CR 13 doesn't sound like a boss monster for an 11th level party to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, +22 to hit and 168hp sounds a bit wussy for a 10-11 boss monster.To put it in perspective, the monster creation guidelines suggest that a CR 13 monster should have +22 to hit, about 180 hit points, and should do about +45-+60 damage. That's the same to-hit and more hit points than what we're describing.
CR 13 doesn't sound like a boss monster for an 11th level party to me.
Welllll.....
The APL of a 10-11 should probably be around 10 (some 9s playing up). CR13 would be considered a "hard" encounter for a group of 6 and an "epic" encounter for a group of 4 or 5. Using the guidelines in the CRB. The problem is that by that point most PFS characters are far beyond what the game designers expected level 10s to be in terms of the power curve. (See other threads for discussion on that point).
Two factors keep the writers from simply raising the CR of the final encounter. PFS scenario writers are given a "budget" of CR to use in their scenario. If they assign too much of it to the final encounter they end up with the rest of the scenario being a complete cakewalk. The intention of the budget (which isn't set in stone, it's somewhat negotiable) is to help set the time it takes to play a scenario. (Theoretically an epic encounter should take approximately as long as two challenging encounters.)
More importantly the Paizo developers don't want to make scenarios only winnable by optimized characters. A +22 to hit, 40-60 dmg, 180hp enemy could be very difficult for a core rulebook cleric, bard, monk, and rogue. And that's excluding any magical abilities or terrain advantages. The scenarios that are considered "really hard" - like Waking Rune - receive a lot of negative feedback. Non-optimized characters simply don't have the power necessary to survive.
TL;DR - That's an appropriate challenge for a non-powergaming party.
So ultimately I am wondering if a GM can just say, "you can't play that character"?
You can't say that in PFS, but you can say this:
- "OK, run me through the build. Show me how you got to 40 AC, 35 touch, and 50 damage per hit."
- "OK, I'm out."
That 2nd option is a little touchy, because while you are 100% allowed to walk away from a game (nobody can force you to run a game!), if you do it often enough your Venture Captain may hear about it, or may be upset that a bunch of players were left hanging, and eventually ban you from PFS -- not because you're wrong, and not because you're a bad guy, but because you're unreliable. But that's a negotiation. If you did it once, it'd probably be chalked up as a fluke.
If you're doing sign-ups on warhorn.net, you could see in advance if that player is in the game, and only GM games that are filled with other players.
Also, it sounds like you need to start thinking about other ways to challenge players. When you realize that a PC in the group has 40 AC and does 50 HP damage per hit, you've got to look at your challenges and run them differently. No more head-to-head fights. No more exchanging blows. Take a look at what enemies are left in the module and start highlighting abilities that keep them out of harm's way, and abilities that do something other than melee attacks.
For example:
For example #2:
Hopefully that gives you some ideas for getting around the tanky PC. Just remember to press the monsters' advantages; you don't have to fight the way the PC wants you to fight. If the PC has amazing AC and fort saves, then target his will saves. If all his saves are high then target his ability to swim or run or fly. If he has answers for that, then target his ability to sneak or do diplomacy, and so on.
|
|
50 damage on a full attack is ok for that level, although 50 damage per individual attack would definitely get me to ask questions. What's really bugging me is the touch AC of 35.
I've seen monks built for defense reach those heights of touch AC, but usually only while fighting defensively and using Combat Expertise. It's theoretically doable without those at level 11 but it's almost your entire wealth spent on defensive items.
I've seen a tower shield specialist come very close but again... built as a defensive beast with very little offense.
Start with Plumekith Aasimar, 20 dex, 18 wis
11 level of monk. Add both level-up bonuses to dex
Dex Belt +6
Wis headband +6
Monk's robe
10 base
9 from dex
7 from wis
4 from monk levels (robe)
Fate's favored + Jingassa = 2 luck
DRP Ioun = 1 competence
Ring of Prot +2 = 2 deflection
That's 35 right there. There's several other ways to squeeze an extra point or two onto your ability scores or to get more touch AC.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While everyone is right that you can't change stats, and your only legal option is to run as written or walk away, this is an issue that hits every Lodge at some point. Talk to your coordinator, explain your issue, and tell them you don't enjoy GMing under these circumstances. When a coordinator gets complaints about the same player from several of their GMs, they had better look into it, or suddenly not have enough GMs to run games. But that's an after-the-game approach.
During the game, if someone minimizes all of the other PCs in the first couple combats, I will stop the game and ask them to tone it down. While they are "legal", they are interfering with everyone else having fun. (At this point, if the other players don't agree and are fine with being spectators, then I drop it and continue.)
No PC needs to alpha strike in the first round every combat, and if they can't or won't tone it down then they need to go. If no one else gets to play and they don't like it, then the player is breaking the "don't be a jerk" rule and needs to be dealt with. Breaking the "don't be a jerk" rule without addressing their behaviour is one of the only ways GMs get to kick out a particular player from a public PFS game.
Now, every time I have done this, the player has always toned it down. For some players, designing an optimized PC is the part of the game they like; the scenarios are just tests of the build. They sometimes forget that it's a group game, but when reminded they can concentrate on the other parts of their build, do more roleplay, or just go on delay so the others can go first sometimes. I have also found my tolerance for overpowered gamers has grown over time, so that I look for the other areas of the game (such as roleplaying or story or lore) for my enjoyment.
Another thing to suggest to these players: when you're so good that you always win, sometimes you fight left-handed, just for the challenge. Or fight using non-lethal damage. Or a secondary weapon. You don't need to show how good you are every round. (If the player does need to show this every round, they are a problem for the game.)
For players who disagree with what I just said: know that there are GMs and other players who LOVE this style of game, and they will serve you much better than forcing your build onto folks who don't.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last thought: this is also a time to evaluate what you like about GMing. If you only enjoy the game when the PCs are dying (or the NPCs are winning), you might need to re-evaluate.
Overall, the PCs are supposed to win on the battle amp. The GM doesn't win on the battle mat, but after the game, when players are talking about how much fun they had, and how the cool NPC was awesome, and how they found out a cool bit of lore that fits their character's motivations, and how we almost died that one time but Billy pulled out a <redacted> that got us through, etc.
Honestly, +22 to hit and 168hp sounds a bit wussy for a 10-11 boss monster.
I'm sure someone here is going to figure out what module and monster that was, and then 2nd guess this poor GM's entire combat. Hindsight is 20-20 and all.
However, just wanted to mention the final boss fights for the 2 tier 10-11 modules I was just posting about:
- Fury of the Fiend: AC 27, HP 157, attack +22
- Sarkorian Prophecy: AC 19 (!!!), HP 132, attack +8 (!!!)
So if you thought that +22 and 168 HP was weak, these modules are even weaker. And by PFS rules, we can't do any stat block inflation. We're just stuck with them being sucky.
So there may be a legitimate complaint in that regard. Maybe the modules are failing to deliver a challenge, and the PFS rules are possibly hamstringing the GMs. Also, what's with all the BBEG fights having no mooks to soak up a few attacks or otherwise eat up player actions?
|
|
I guess I just find it difficult to run an effective scenario when I have a character that hits all the scenario monsters on a two, but the monster needs to roll 18's to hit the PC's. Makes the whole adventure seem pointless.
Welcome to high level play. There is nothing you can (or should) do about it. It's the nature of the beast.
The stats you provided are not out of the ordinary at all. At the same level I regularly teamed up with a figher that averaged close to an averatge 70 damage per hit, with burst in the 300 range. It's par for the course. I knew a level 11 fighter with an AC close to 50 (and a touch in the same range).
Last week we played at level 15. We discovered quickly he who won initiative (including the bad guy), "wins". You'll just have to suck it up and realize it's the way things are.
I've seen monks built for defense reach those heights of touch AC, but usually only while fighting defensively and using Combat Expertise. It's theoretically doable without those at level 11 but it's almost your entire wealth spent on defensive items.
** spoiler omitted **
OK, now that your spoiler text shows the 35 touch AC is possible and legit in PFS, make that same build also do 50 HP damage per hit. Remember, you've just spent all your wealth to get the touch AC up. How do you get to a consistent 50 HP damage with very little cash left for gear to do it?
The reason I ask is because I'm trying to gauge how likely it is that the PC is legit. If you can trivially add in 50 HP damage per hit to the character you built, then it sounds like the OP has nothing to complain about. If it's even a little bit of a challenge, then the OP might really want to press for a character audit. It may be that the character audit turns out fine! The player may have done amazing work and it's all legit! However, I recently did a character audit and found a player got "amazing" damage and AC by giving himself a 40 point buy. That's completely not OK, so he had to nerf his character right there in the middle of a fight.
So how likely is it that the player has a legit build in this case?
|
|
Also, what's with all the BBEG fights having no mooks to soak up a few attacks or otherwise eat up player actions?
See my post above. Adding additional combatants eats up CR budget in a hurry. The few times you do see mooks they really are mooks. And their CR cost means the BBEG is weaker as well. I absolutely agree with you, though. Once you reach level 8 or 9 enemies (especially straightforward smack-em-up types) of the players' APL-1 aren't really much of an additional hindrance unless you clog the area with them. Determining CR is one of the things Paizo may want to revisit in the future.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any scenario written before Advanced Class Guide came out is usually a bit weaker than the common PCs now.
Any scenarios written before Advanced Player's Guide came out are pretty weak compared to current PCs. There are just so many options that can be combined by a good PC designer to add +1 to +3 CR or even more to a given PC in 'limited' circumstances.
The biggest problem (which I think John has been addressing) is to get PCs out of the "limited circumstances" PFS scenarios offer: max 3-5 fights, no fights that are too hard, never outnumbered, can always rest, nice big rooms so everyone can do their thing, etc. A lot of the newer scenarios go way outside this realm - there are scenarios where if you fight you lose, and if you can't schmooze you lose; there are fights in different environments, and with scarier creatures.
|
|
OK, now that your spoiler text shows the 35 touch AC is possible and legit in PFS, make that same build also do 50 HP damage per hit. Remember, you've just spent all your wealth to get the touch AC up. How do you get to a consistent 50 HP damage with very little cash left for gear to do it?
Where's Taco when you need him to explain a thing or two?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Determining CR is one of the things Paizo may want to revisit in the future.
This, this, a thousand times! I'm not a fan of this numerical balance idea anyway, since the CR system doesn't really work well, especially at low levels and high levels. And the idea that the world will be delivered to you in bite-sized chunks irrespective of your choices encourages the meta-builds that are often the most powerful. The other restrictions of a PFS scenario also play into this. If PCs weren't so sure of 4 fights max, a chance to rest, and the ability to PP out of any issue, different build choices might become important.
Although, if we just said that PCs are now a CR of character level +2, we could make a decent adjustment mid-stream until the (eventual) reboot.
|
|
OK, now that your spoiler text shows the 35 touch AC is possible and legit in PFS, make that same build also do 50 HP damage per hit. Remember, you've just spent all your wealth to get the touch AC up. How do you get to a consistent 50 HP damage with very little cash left for gear to do it?I've seen monks built for defense reach those heights of touch AC, but usually only while fighting defensively and using Combat Expertise. It's theoretically doable without those at level 11 but it's almost your entire wealth spent on defensive items.
** spoiler omitted **
Oh, I dont' think it is possible to combine the two. You really need to be two-handing to do 50 damage in a single (non-crit) attack. Even then that's towards the top of the range (unless you are mounted charging or using abilities like smite or challenge). My point was that the touch AC is possible only in a very defensive build.
|
|
I guess I just find it difficult to run an effective scenario when I have a character that hits all the scenario monsters on a two, but the monster needs to roll 18's to hit the PC's. Makes the whole adventure seem pointless.Welcome to high level play. There is nothing you can (or should) do about it. It's the nature of the beast.
The stats you provided are not out of the ordinary at all. At the same level I regularly teamed up with a figher that averaged close to an averatge 70 damage per hit, with burst in the 300 range. It's par for the course. I knew a level 11 fighter with an AC close to 50 (and a touch in the same range).
Last week we played at level 15. We discovered quickly he who won initiative (including the bad guy), "wins". You'll just have to suck it up and realize it's the way things are.
The problem with your assertions is that you just said, heres one fighter that gets 70 DPH, and here's a different fighter with an AC close to 50. So the character that does both is 100% valid.
I recently played a game where one martial focused on defence. He got that stratospheric AC. But his damage wasn't great. The other martial focused on Offense, and got that high DPH, but anything that could hit the defense focused PC hit the offensive focused PC easily.
Its doing both together that's causing the real problems.
Oh, I dont' think it is possible to combine the two. You really need to be two-handing to do 50 damage in a single (non-crit) attack. Even then that's towards the top of the range (unless you are mounted charging or using abilities like smite or challenge). My point was that the touch AC is possible only in a very defensive build.
So then in your professional, 4-star GM opinion, it might really be worth it to do a character audit? The odds of the character being able to accomplish all these things is remote?
I edited my post (the one you replied to) but edited it too late -- after you had replied. Something I mentioned there and will repeat here is that the last time I found someone doing "unlikely" good damage, I did a character audit and found the PC had a 40 point buy. I'm wondering how likely it is that the PC in the OP's game is similarly rule-breaking.
|
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Plains
|
My thought is that the next time your problem player is scheduled to play at your table with that character, let him know ahead of time that he needs to submit his character for a character audit. There really isn't time during the game to do a proper audit beyond asking where he gets all the bonuses and adding them up on the fly.
Make sure he brings all the source books he's referencing and that you have a copy of the additional resources list with you when you do it.
|
|
Oh, I dont' think it is possible to combine the two. You really need to be two-handing to do 50 damage in a single (non-crit) attack. Even then that's towards the top of the range (unless you are mounted charging or using abilities like smite or challenge). My point was that the touch AC is possible only in a very defensive build.So then in your professional, 4-star GM opinion, it might really be worth it to do a character audit? The odds of the character being able to accomplish all these things is remote?
I edited my post (the one you replied to) but edited it too late -- after you had replied. Something I mentioned there and will repeat here is that the last time I found someone doing "unlikely" good damage, I did a character audit and found the PC had a 40 point buy. I'm wondering how likely it is that the PC in the OP's game is similarly rule-breaking.
Yes, do an audit. I will qualify that there are two things that might make such a build possible. One is that the player is using one or more magical items in a way the designer didn't intend. It could be legal but it would also meet most people's definition of "cheesy power-gamer."
The second is a plethora of short-duration buffs. One of the things that always surprises me is how little time most GMs tick off for activities. Walking from one end of the Grand Lodge to the other is going to eat up any minute/level buff that isn't from a 10th level caster and extended. Some players think that if they cast greater heroism outside a dungeon door it should last all the way through the last fight. No matter how much time they spend talking or reading books in the library room. If they cast shield of faith they want it to still be up regardless of how long it took to heal back up from the last fight and search the bodies for loot. For me, any time spent talking (even discussions within the party) is real time. Searching is commensurate with the density of items (unless the scenario specifies a length). You will get pushback from players if you start to enforce this, but it's important to do to keep the power level/action economy where it should be.
Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis
|
So instead we should let players "curb-stomp" the scenario and finish early with no challenge at all?This player had run the scenario before. and complained when I upped the boss statsYeah...about that...
** spoiler omitted **
The answer is "yes." While it is unfortunate that, many times, one character makes entertaining scenarios less interesting, the fact remains that all GMs must run the scenarios as written. They must use the monsters as written, follow the tactics provided (adapting them when the characters do something that makes the written tactics impossible, etc.)
Others have given good advice on what to do; changing the monsters (making them more powerful, adding more of them, etc.) is expressly what you may not do.
Although, if we just said that PCs are now a CR of character level +2, we could make a decent adjustment mid-stream until the (eventual) reboot.
Did you know that the PFS rules for determining a group's level of power does not follow the rules in the Core Rulebook? And did you know that the Core Rulebook is based upon D&D 3.5 where a different and more exact system is used?
In other words, with each new "level" of rules, we've made CR more & more fuzzy, and thus more & more difficult to gauge. So it's a problem of our own making.
Here is the problem, illustrated by each "system" that calculates party level, using 7 adventurers of 3rd level as an example:
- PFS: sum of character levels divided by # of PCs, so 21/7 = 3.
- Pathfinder (no Society): sum of character levels divided by # of PCs, but add 1 for big groups, so 21/7 = 3 + 1 = 4.
- D&D 3.5: sum of character levels divided by four, so 21/4 = 5.25!!!
As you can see, Pathfinder not only beefed up PCs, but made it so that big groups come out with an average level that is lower. So you're throwing weaker challenges at tougher characters; it becomes more of a cakewalk. And then PFS modified even that so that the PCs get even weaker challenges.
In other words, in D&D 3.5, that group of adventurers would be going up against a tough CR 5 or 6 monster, but in PFS it's "fair" and "by the rules" for that same group to go up against a CR 3 monster. No wonder players find it easy. And no wonder that Pathfinder Society is having problems with overpowered characters.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where's Taco when you need him to explain a thing or two?OK, now that your spoiler text shows the 35 touch AC is possible and legit in PFS, make that same build also do 50 HP damage per hit. Remember, you've just spent all your wealth to get the touch AC up. How do you get to a consistent 50 HP damage with very little cash left for gear to do it?
Meditating on all of the violence Taco has caused to increase Taco's chance of joining Korada in the afterlife.
Taco
Aldori Swordlord Fighter 7/ Aldori Swordlord PrC 1/ Duelist PrC 5
Taco's armor build is as such
celestial armor: 9
29 Dex: 8 (max from armor)
18 Int (from the Duelist PrC): 4
Ring of Prot +2
Amulet Natural Armor +2
Aldori swordlord shield bonus +2
Dodge +1
Jingasa of Fortunate Soldier +1
--------------------------------------
Total AC 39
Touch and Flat Footed AC 26
I get a bonus when fighting defensively, both to AC and the penalty to hit (IE, it goes down). Also, if I attack defensively as a full round action I receive an additional +2 bonus to my AC.
Taco's weapon attack and damage:
+3 Keen Aldori Dueling Sword
+26/+21/+16 d8+19
The Dueling sword is a finesse weapon and the ASL PrC lets me apply dex to damage instead of str. Also, I receive a +5 to hit and damage from the Duelist PrC. Add on the normal fighter feats of weapon spec and focus, you get the above.
I am happy to email anyone Taco's Hero Lab sheets if you want to look at them. Send me a PM with whatever address you want them sent to.
|
|
Where's Taco when you need him to explain a thing or two?OK, now that your spoiler text shows the 35 touch AC is possible and legit in PFS, make that same build also do 50 HP damage per hit. Remember, you've just spent all your wealth to get the touch AC up. How do you get to a consistent 50 HP damage with very little cash left for gear to do it?
Meditating on all of the violence Taco has caused to increase Taco's chance of joining Korada in the afterlife.
** spoiler omitted **
I am happy to email anyone Taco's Hero Lab sheets if you want to look at them. Send me a PM with whatever address you want them sent to.
I'm not sure why taco was asked for, neither his ac nor his damage are as high as the ranges specified, and his level is 13, not 11.
|
|
Determining CR is one of the things Paizo may want to revisit in the future.This. I tried building encounters using APL to CR in my home campaign for a while. It isn't terrible at low levels with very restricted access to material beyond the CRB but the higher the level the characters get and the more access to stuff published after the CRB they get the less worse it gets.
Realistically a PFS 10-11 BBEG encounter should have a CR between 15 and 20 (leaning more towards 20 than 15). But that would slaughter some core parties and parties without power gamers and it would take up a lot of time even for tables that could handle it.
The highest (non-Waking Rune) CR I have seen in a 10-11 is - I think - CR15. And you weren't expected to fight that. CR20 would be beyond the pale. Bear in mind that a 17th level (normal array) wizard is a CR16. I wouldn't want 9th level spells thrown at my 10th level characters on a regular basis. Short of an entire book (maybe just Player Companion length) revamping CRs into a much more complicated system it has to be done on a case-by-case basis.
John and Linda spend a lot of time reviewing encounters to make sure they are reasonably challenging. That's what developers do, they develop scenarios to be the most fun for the widest swathe of players. The real statement of problem here as I see it is "a horribly built character only reduces the fun for himself (when he dies to the first fireball). But a heavily optimized character can reduce the fun of everyone at the table (including the GM) except for herself."