I think I've made my point.Dude, calm down. It's just one person's opinion on another person's house rule. It can't hurt you.
I don't think anyone is actually upset, just pointing out a certain level of false equivalency. If a warrior type is made to be unable to do what they are there for at first level, then why is an equivalent hard counter for wizards only available in mythic late game?
That's kind of problematic.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think I've made my point.Dude, calm down. It's just one person's opinion on another person's house rule. It can't hurt you.
You know, when he said "I think I've made my point," he may very well have been simply expressing that he doesn't think it necessary to continue his list of examples (because, you know, he's made his point, like he said), rather than being afraid of someone's opinion and needing to calm down.
There's also a certain irony to your interpretation of a critique of your ideas, when the ideas of yours that are being critiqued are themselves a critique of somebody else's ideas. Just because someone saw fault in your ideas doesn't mean they're any less calm or any more scared than you were when you saw fault in someone else's ideas.
In most media that involved swarms, it was either treated as an area effect (you waded through it, taking a bit of damage, and moved on... the whole swarm didn't follow you to attack as one), or the swarm was warded off in some way (waving a torch to clear a path).
Typically, people don't "kill swarms" in most media... they scare them off, endure it, or just avoid them.
If swarms were relegated to trap/hazard status, instead of "hitpoint attrition combat entities", I'd be ok with that.
That's actually a really good point. I mean, I haven't seen tons of swarms in media, but there were the scarabs in The Mummy, and people either died or ran from those. (Then in the second movie, they came prepared with flamethrowers.)
Swarms as hazards rather than combatants is an idea worth pursuing, I think.
In most media that involved swarms, it was either treated as an area effect (you waded through it, taking a bit of damage, and moved on... the whole swarm didn't follow you to attack as one), or the swarm was warded off in some way (waving a torch to clear a path).
Typically, people don't "kill swarms" in most media... they scare them off, endure it, or just avoid them.
If swarms were relegated to trap/hazard status, instead of "hitpoint attrition combat entities", I'd be ok with that.
That's actually a really good point. I mean, I haven't seen tons of swarms in media, but there were the scarabs in The Mummy, and people either died or ran from those. (Then in the second movie, they came prepared with flamethrowers.)
Swarms as hazards rather than combatants is an idea worth pursuing, I think.
+1 swarms as hazards is a good idea.
Well, you have these to start off of, for a reference point.That's actually a really good point. I mean, I haven't seen tons of swarms in media, but there were the scarabs in The Mummy, and people either died or ran from those. (Then in the second movie, they came prepared with flamethrowers.)
Swarms as hazards rather than combatants is an idea worth pursuing, I think.
Yeah, they used torches to keep them at bay, and even with the flamethrowers it just kind of pushed them away and most of the swarm just ran.
Actually murderizing a swarm to deathination doesn't really come up in most media.
I... don't want to click a link labeled "ear seekers". O_O
Oh, but you're fine with leeches and rot grubs? That' speciest, sir!
I'm gonna PM you the SRDs description of bowel worms now, just for fun.
If you're going to present it as COMBAT, let it be fought (and won) as COMBAT. Not doing so because you want something cinematic is disingenuous, serving neither the story nor the enjoyment of the group.Hmm, my point is still not getting through. Sorry if this is really mercurial.
I'm not suggesting GMs intentionally add no-win scenarios to their adventures, just saying that, if the party occasionally runs into something they're not equipped to deal with, you shouldn't introduce house rules to ensure they can always win.
In the above barbarian vs swarm example (which is based on the originally proposed house rule to nerf swarms), I think it's actually kind of fun and exciting that the barbarian would encounter something he can't just chop to pieces. Maybe the wily berserker learns a thing or two from the situation and starts packing a few vials of alchemist's fire so he won't get burned (ha!) next time. :)
So, we're reducing the barbarian to doing 1d6 x 1.5 damage every round against these bugs. Same with the fighter. And the rogue. And the cavalier. And the monk. And the paladin. And the ranger. Should I go on? I mean, it's not like physical combat, with a HEAVY emphasis on melee, is the only things some of these classes are actually good at, right?
You do realize that by CR 5, swarms have about 50 hp, such as with these guys? That's a lot of alchemist's fire for a CR 5 party to have. Gods forbid you give them the fiendish simple template or instead encounter their nastier cousins. Or, is it now expected that the party front-line and second-stringer each carry a dozen+ vials minimum of both alchemist's fire AND acid on them at all times? What about these...
You realize that by the time the party encounters a CR 5 swarm they should have a decent wizard that can kill that swam with at most 2 fireballs?
Killing swarms is something spell casters are good at, let them have their day in the limelight. let the melee fighters have their fun against monsters with spell resistance.
You realize that by the time the party encounters a CR 5 swarm they should have a decent wizard that can kill that swam with at most 2 fireballs?
Killing swarms is something spell casters are good at, let them have their day in the limelight. let the melee fighters have their fun against monsters with spell resistance.
A CL 5 fireball does, on average, 17 points of damage. That's if the critter in question has no resistances to it (as some do) and does not pass its saving throw (as many of them can). That means it's three fireballs, or four if they pass at one or two saving throws of the explosive quartet of spells. This is more than any wizard except an evoker should have by that level. So, no, I don't think that's right.
On the topic of spell resistance, you have Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration, Dweomer's Essence, the Piercing metamagic feat, and more as far as ways to get through SR. It's also worth noting that SR is typically set to anywhere from CR +5 to CR +12, so the middling value comes out at about CR +8. That means an unspecialized spellcaster without any magical items that targets a creature with SR has a better than 50/50 shot of landing the spell, on average. That's a lot better than the 0/100 for slaying a fiendish wasp swarm with your awesome +2 flaming longsword you thought would at least be semi-relevant for at least a few more levels.
|
In most media that involved swarms, it was either treated as an area effect (you waded through it, taking a bit of damage, and moved on... the whole swarm didn't follow you to attack as one), or the swarm was warded off in some way (waving a torch to clear a path).
Typically, people don't "kill swarms" in most media... they scare them off, endure it, or just avoid them.
If swarms were relegated to trap/hazard status, instead of "hitpoint attrition combat entities", I'd be ok with that.
I found this post amusing, as I was having the exact same discussion with a buddy of mine yesterday. We guessed that the only reason swarms were treated like creatures was that there were essentially two types of encounters: Skill (trap) and Combat. Between those two, at some point the developers of the time went, "Eh, they're just a bunch of creatures, so combat. But different combat. Not sword-based combat."
I also commented on how in literature and film swarms are usually either a static hazard, or are avoided somehow, frequently with fire or a natural barrier.
So yeah, +1 for "swarms as hazards".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In regards to the "finding a solution for swarms" House rule discussion, I think this post by the Angry GM is relevant.
The discussion here is basically what kind of Challenge the swarms should be for a party of any level, and how Difficult that Challenge should be. Whether or not it can be dealt with in a combat sense (IMHO, hell no. It makes them the same as all other encounters), or a skill check or plot driver. "Swarms as hazards" is likely the most cinematic and story driven.
Can your Barbarian smack them with your House rule? Sure. But why? Role play it, don't roll-play it. He shouldn't have to address the swarm with dice. That's not a Challenge. That's random. Have him address it with ideas and role-playing, such as torches, or fleeing. Because then, as the DM, trying to solve the issue of "how do characters defeat swarms without area of effect" becomes much different. It's a story element.
In my games, you basically can't defeat swarms...that's not what they are for. They are for story, for tension, to be used as a driving force to move the characters in a certain direction at a certain velocity.
The Barbarian who single-handedly puts an ogre down in one room, but has to run from the little centipedes in the next is interesting. He has to get creative, think outside the axe, use teamwork, and sometimes go around. All that is up to the DM, and why you want the swarm there in the first place.
Defeating another CR 4 with a different name is boring. It's monotone. It lacks finesse. It's not a Challenge. That's why CR is kind of a lie, and used extremely poorly and, most of the time, incorrectly by most DMs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You realize that by the time the party encounters a CR 5 swarm they should have a decent wizard that can kill that swam with at most 2 fireballs?
Killing swarms is something spell casters are good at, let them have their day in the limelight. let the melee fighters have their fun against monsters with spell resistance.
A CL 5 fireball does, on average, 17 points of damage. That's if the critter in question has no resistances to it (as some do) and does not pass its saving throw (as many of them can). That means it's three fireballs, or four if they pass at one or two saving throws of the explosive quartet of spells. This is more than any wizard except an evoker should have by that level. So, no, I don't think that's right.
On the topic of spell resistance, you have Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration, Dweomer's Essence, the Piercing metamagic feat, and more as far as ways to get through SR. It's also worth noting that SR is typically set to anywhere from CR +5 to CR +12, so the middling value comes out at about CR +8. That means an unspecialized spellcaster without any magical items that targets a creature with SR has a better than 50/50 shot of landing the spell, on average. That's a lot better than the 0/100 for slaying a fiendish wasp swarm with your awesome +2 flaming longsword you thought would at least be semi-relevant for at least a few more levels.
Swarms take 1.5 damage from area spells, so it's 25 damage, and similar to the spell penetration talk, any wizard worth his salt should be able to have a swarm fail his saving throw, so yeah a 50 hp swarm, = 2 fireballs.
and when you ad that those 2 fireballs could potentially kill every swarm in the room at once.... yeah, easily dealt with. Not everything should be the fighters job.
You realize that by the time the party encounters a CR 5 swarm they should have a decent wizard that can kill that swam with at most 2 fireballs?
Killing swarms is something spell casters are good at, let them have their day in the limelight. let the melee fighters have their fun against monsters with spell resistance.
A CL 5 fireball does, on average, 17 points of damage. That's if the critter in question has no resistances to it (as some do) and does not pass its saving throw (as many of them can). That means it's three fireballs, or four if they pass at one or two saving throws of the explosive quartet of spells. This is more than any wizard except an evoker should have by that level. So, no, I don't think that's right.
On the topic of spell resistance, you have Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration, Dweomer's Essence, the Piercing metamagic feat, and more as far as ways to get through SR. It's also worth noting that SR is typically set to anywhere from CR +5 to CR +12, so the middling value comes out at about CR +8. That means an unspecialized spellcaster without any magical items that targets a creature with SR has a better than 50/50 shot of landing the spell, on average. That's a lot better than the 0/100 for slaying a fiendish wasp swarm with your awesome +2 flaming longsword you thought would at least be semi-relevant for at least a few more levels.
Swarms take 1.5 damage from area spells, so it's 25 damage, and similar to the spell penetration talk, any wizard worth his salt should be able to have a swarm fail his saving throw, so yeah a 50 hp swarm, = 2 fireballs.
and when you ad that those 2 fireballs could potentially kill every swarm in the room at once.... yeah, easily dealt with. Not everything should be the fighters job.
Sorry, I don't just assume a d20 roll is going to go one way or another. Yes, a wizard could get the Reflex DC up to about a 20 on this. Is it likely that a creature is going to fail their saving throw when the odds are in their favor? No. Does it happen anyways? All the time. The reverse applies as well.
As far as the fighter 'doing everything', let me know when they've acquired the ability to dispel magical effects with a bash of their shield, summon in a small force of magical soldiers to aid them in battle, see through illusions, yell loud enough to harm the enemy and shatter their hearing, or turn their skin into hardened stone. Or, y'know, just the basic ability to heal their own wounds in combat as well as get rid of harmful conditions now and then would be nice. Until then, they're still stuck as the 'mundane guy with weapon' class that typically gets to do nothing but fight and relies on the spellcasters for absolutely everything else.
I allow players to substitute language slots based on high INT scores to be used to choose new class skills.
Sorry, I don't just assume a d20 roll is going to go one way or another. Yes, a wizard could get the Reflex DC up to about a 20 on this. Is it likely that a creature is going to fail their saving throw when the odds are in their favor? No. Does it happen anyways? All the time. The reverse applies as well.As far as the fighter 'doing everything', let me know when they've acquired the ability to dispel magical effects with a bash of their shield, summon in a small force of magical soldiers to aid them in battle, see through illusions, yell loud enough to harm the enemy and shatter their hearing, or turn their skin into hardened stone. Or, y'know, just the basic ability to heal their own wounds in combat as well as get rid of harmful conditions now and then would be nice. Until then, they're still stuck as the 'mundane guy with weapon' class that typically gets to do nothing but fight and relies on the spellcasters for absolutely everything else.
In a typical adventuring party everyone has a job to do. Fighters dole out damage all day long, rogues open doors and find traps and help the fighters by getting in flanking position and doing backstab. Clerics heal, provide buffs, etc. Wizards provide other buffs and deal area damage, deal with problems that the others can't like levitate, passwall etc.
Everyone has some broad niche's that it's their job to cover. It just so happens that dealing with swarms is something that spell casters do very well and melee characters don't. It's similar to how rogues are good at finding traps and fighters are not.
a single character can't, nor should, be able to deal with any threat that comes along. This is a cooperative game, and it should take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
a single character can't, nor should, be able to deal with any threat that comes along. This is a cooperative game, and it should take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you.
Right there with you on the "should" (at least as far as my personal taste goes), but that's not Pathfinder. In Pathfinder, some characters/classes ARE "able to deal with any threat that comes along". In Pathfinder, it DOESN'T "take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you". At least, not past very low levels.
Don't confuse people who recognize Pathfinder's imbalance for people who WANT it to be that way. That's why there's all these houserules. (It's also part of why I don't play Pathfinder anymore.)
We roll for initiative each round--makes combat less predictable and more fun.
Ruyan.
a single character can't, nor should, be able to deal with any threat that comes along. This is a cooperative game, and it should take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you.
I don't believe I ever even hinted that I thought such a thing should be the case. Hazards? Not the fighters thing. Haunts? Ditto. Traps? He's out of his league most likely. Shutting down active spell effects? Not happening. Bringing a party member back from death? Not with their mediocre Heal skill. Circumventing natural or planar obstacles? Good luck, unless it's possible to climb or hack your way past it. Removing curses? Hah, nope! I'm fine with a cooperative game; I'd just like to see some classes have an easier time contributing to the group in ways other than, "I hit the monster and it fell down guys". Didn't realize that was too much to ask.
More to the point, though, why does everyone assume wizards always pack Evocation magic up the wazoo? That stuff is nice, but what if you want to do something besides be a blaster-caster? What if Evocation is an opposed school for you, or you're a class that doesn't get a lot (or none) of that stuff? Does the wizard in the 'cooperative game' you mentioned really mean 'Evocation magic-user'? Because if so, that's kinda sad that they're reduced to just that role. They're supposed to be the genius arcane researchers and innovators who figure out how to twist reality into a conveniently-shaped pretzel numerous times a day to make it fit into their plans. They shouldn't have to prep lots of Evocation magic in place of all the other preferred spells of their specialization just in case a couple swarm fights might show up. The cooperative game should also be a flexible one, accommodating multiple different combinations of character classes in a party, including ones that don't do 'KABOOM' magic. If it's such a necessary part of the game, then Paizo should come right out and say it. Or, better yet, make similar effects available to lots of classes fairly easily.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I have a list of houserules to make martial combat more interesting and just a little more powerful:
1. Called Shots (as per Ultimate Combat) are allowed with the following change: A called shot can be made as a standard action rather than full-round (it still cannot be combined with vital strike, charge etc.)
2. Each class has proficiency with certain combat maneuvers. A character proficient with a combat maneuver gains no special bonuses but does not provoke attacks of opportunity when using them.
There are four "groups" of combat maneuver proficiencies. Those proficient with all combat maneuvers (like fighter and monk), those proficient with no combat maneuvers (like any full caster), those proficient with "brutal" combat maneuvers (like barbarian and magus) and those proficient with "dirty" combat maneuvers (like rogues and bards), the full list of each group's classes and combat menuvers in the spoiler below:
Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Magus, Antipaladin, Bloodrager, Hunter, Skald, Warpriest, Occultist, Aegis, Psychic Warrior, Tactician, Harbinger, Warder, Warlord: Proficient with bull rush, drag, grapple, reposition, sunder and trip.
Bard, Rogue, Alchemist, Gunslinger, Inquisitor, Ninja, Investigator, Slayer, Swashbuckler, Mesmerist, Vigilante, Cryptic, Dread, Marksman, Stalker, Mystic, Aristocrat, Expert: Proficient with dirty trick, disarm, reposition, steal and trip.
Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard, Oracle, Summoner, Witch, Arcanist, Shaman, Kineticist, Medium, Psychic, Spiritualist, Psion, Vitalist, Wilder, Commoner, Adept: Proficient with no combat maneuvers.
The Medium gains proficiency with combat maneuvers depending on which spirit he channels (champion: all, guardian: "brutal", trickster or marshal: "dirty", hierophant and archmage: none)
Archetypes: Any archetypes that focus on using combat maneuvers by granting class features involving combat maneuvers or combat maneuver related feats as bonus feats (but not bonus feat options if alternative options are not combat maneuver related) have all combat maneuver proficiencies.
Creature Types: Outsiders (except for elementals and eidolons) and Dragons are proficient with all combat maneuvers.
Monstrous humanoids and humanoids with racial hit dice are roficient with bull rush, drag, grapple, reposition and trip.
Fey are proficient with dirty trick, disarm, reposition steal and trip.
Other creature types and creatures without racial hit dice are only proficient with combat maneuvers if they have special attacks or natural attacks using those combat maneuvers. (for example a wolf is proficient with the trip combat maneuver).
3. In order to incentivize using other weapon styles than two-handed, sword and board or archery using a composite bow I introduced combat style rules:
One-Handed Fighting: When fighting with a single one-handed or light weapon in one hand and not using a shield or using the off-hand for anything other than holding a small item (up to 5 pounds), you gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC.
If you have weapon finesse you may apply it and any abilities based on it to any one-handed weapon as long as you use it as described above.
Two-Weapon Fighting: A character with the two-weapon fighting feat gains iterative attacks with their off-hand weapon the same way as with their main hand weapon. For example a character with BAB +6 may make an attack at full BAB with each weapon and an additional attack at BAB +1 with each weapon. A character can attack once with each weapon at the usual penalties as part of a standard attack.
All penalties for two-weapon fighting are reduced by 2.
Ranged combat: Two-handed crossbows and two-handed firearms gain a +3 bonus to damage from the deadly aim feat instead of only +2.
Repeating- and hand crossbows are martial weapons.
4. Stamina and Combat tricks are in use, fighters get the bonus feat for free at level 1 and gain 2 bonus stamina points at first level and each even numbered level.
As an additional rule stamina regeneration works at 1 point per round rather than minute. And if you rest for an uninterrupted minute you fully regenerate your stamina no matter how large the pool.
5. Automatic Bonus Progression is used.
As an additional rule attuning to masterwork armor or weapons is a free action that can be done at will. Normal clothing always counts as masterwork armor.
-------------------------------------
My reasons for these are as following
1. and 2.: This is mainly to give martials more choice when making attacks, other than stand and full attack or move and make a single attack. As an additional bonus They can use their weapons to cause more interesting effects than bringing enemies closer to critical existence failure.
3. Almost every melee character uses one-hand and shield, or two-handed while every ranged non-caster uses a composite longobw or is a gunslinger. So I wanted to give some more viability to people who want to go for a two-weapon style, just use a single one-handed weapon without sacrificing power or make something centered around crossbows.
4. Stamina isn't a great addition to the game especially because it's difficult to remember your combat tricks available, but it is a small bonus and gives martials a little more choice and interesting ability.
The extra house rules are to give fighters an ACTUAL advantage with stamina and to not halt the party's progress for half an hour between every encounter.
5. Automatic bonus progression at face value doesn't seem to do much for martials in particular over casters, but it actually relieves martials of 100% of their need for big six items, which they depend on much more than casters. So they can spend their money on utility items that make their gameplay more interesting because they already get all the static bonuses they need on their own. At the same time casters have less money to spend on the utility items they were going to get because they don't require the big six as much.
The additional rule for masterwork item attunement allows characters to switch weapons at will without sacrificing power (as it would be with switching to a weapon you're not attuned to or with switching from that one weapon you spent all your gold on to your unenchanted sidearm), which makes things more interesting and gives masterwork items a purpose in the face of automatic bonuses.
We roll for initiative each round--makes combat less predictable and more fun.
Ruyan.
We jokingly call this Dynamic Initiative. It sound like something out of a self help book, but I completely agree with you about it being less predictable and more fun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a cleric's deity's favored weapon is simple, they gain weapon focus with that weapon. Helps make picking your deity less about "who has the optimal exotic weapon?".
Combat Maneuver proficiencies are an inspired idea.
Thank you. I hope my ideas help opening up some martial game play for others.
If a cleric's deity's favored weapon is simple, they gain weapon focus with that weapon. Helps make picking your deity less about "who has the optimal exotic weapon?".
I do the same thing but rather: if your class gains proficiency with a deity's favored weapon but that weapon is already in the class's weapon proficiencies your get weapon focus.
So it also works for warpriests and inquisitors
|
|
Combat Maneuver proficiencies are an inspired idea.Thank you. I hope my ideas help opening up some martial game play for others.
If a cleric's deity's favored weapon is simple, they gain weapon focus with that weapon. Helps make picking your deity less about "who has the optimal exotic weapon?".I do the same thing but rather: if your class gains proficiency with a deity's favored weapon but that weapon is already in the class's weapon proficiencies your get weapon focus.
So it also works for warpriests and inquisitors
When designing the pantheon for my custom game world, I made sure to give each deity a martial or exotic favored weapon. However, your house rules works well for most other game worlds.
And the way the bonus weapon focus is worded for warpriests, they can just choose a different weapon. Good stuff.
|
|
Each class has proficiency with certain combat maneuvers.
This is a great idea, but as I'm a huge fan of simpler systems, I'd probably boil it down to just this:
Fighters get the following ability at 1st level:
Powerful Maneuvers: The fighter does not provoke attacks of opportunity when attempting bull rush, drag, overrun, or sunder combat maneuvers.
And rogues get this one at 1st level:
Expert Maneuvers: The rogue does not provoke attacks of opportunity when attempting dirty trick, disarm, reposition, steal, or trip combat maneuvers.
- I allow ponies, donkeys, mules etc. to be ridden by medium sized riders but the mount is considered to be at least at medium load.
It just breaks my immersion that human sized riders can't do what people around the world did for centuries.
- For donkeys and mules I substitute the run feat with the pack mule 3pp feat
You can carry more than others of your stature.
Benefit: You gain a +4 bonus to Strength for the sole purpose of the weight you can carry (or your encumbrance).
- Quivers grant unlimited standard ammo just as spell component pouches grant unlimited casting components.
a single character can't, nor should, be able to deal with any threat that comes along. This is a cooperative game, and it should take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you.Right there with you on the "should" (at least as far as my personal taste goes), but that's not Pathfinder. In Pathfinder, some characters/classes ARE "able to deal with any threat that comes along". In Pathfinder, it DOESN'T "take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you". At least, not past very low levels.
Don't confuse people who recognize Pathfinder's imbalance for people who WANT it to be that way. That's why there's all these houserules. (It's also part of why I don't play Pathfinder anymore.)
I guess I must be playing a different game, I have yet to see a character that can handle every threat that comes along.....
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I guess I must be playing a different game, I have yet to see a character that can handle every threat that comes along.....a single character can't, nor should, be able to deal with any threat that comes along. This is a cooperative game, and it should take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you.Right there with you on the "should" (at least as far as my personal taste goes), but that's not Pathfinder. In Pathfinder, some characters/classes ARE "able to deal with any threat that comes along". In Pathfinder, it DOESN'T "take the cooperation of a variety of character types to be able to conquer the obstacles placed in front of you". At least, not past very low levels.
Don't confuse people who recognize Pathfinder's imbalance for people who WANT it to be that way. That's why there's all these houserules. (It's also part of why I don't play Pathfinder anymore.)
I find that quite often, folks who don't see the balance issues in Pathfinder are indeed playing a different game, without realizing it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If someone is griping how fighters can't deal with swarms, add more necklace of fireballs. They could have a commercial where someone hands the GM a huge bag of cheetos and "Your character finds a necklace of fireballs!"
Any character who is good at everything is for a solo game.