|
I dunno about that. I think in many cases the battlefield doesn't really permit a great deal of skill on either side; people encounter each other at about 1-3 Move actions apart with relatively uncomplicated terrain.
So this would be agreeing with me most of the time so.. progress :)
I've had much more interesting encounters in situations were more complicated terrain was used (Tapestry's Toil top of the stairs scene, Storval Stairs end fight). Much more maneuvering around, rather than just "how do we deploy into this room and get to the caster".
I really don't see how player skill is going to matter much here once initiative is rolled. A good player will have built for difficult terrain, flying, etc. but taking the shortest route is mostly a matter of counting squares.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Evil overlord rules for bad guys
I will not stand directly in a charge lane from an open door.
I will have a will save
I will never buff in combat. On a good night i have 18 seconds of life. If i didn't cast it when sir clanks a lot stood outside the door for 15 minutes plotting to put guidance on everyone, its too late now.
If i am ranged, I will be hard to reach.
If I am melee, I will wait in a spot that makes it hard to shoot me from 800 feet away.
I Will NEVER drink a healing potion. EVER. Getting 1d8+1 hit points back is not worth being hit 4-7 times. If I am not fighting to the death, my survival strategy will be correlated to my movement rate, or the movement rate of my escape plan.
I will leave tactics open
If my deity is canonically opposed by both Asmodeous AND saranrae (and probably everyone in between), i will not full round cast a spell that provides anyone opposed to my religion a +4 to their will save.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I've had much more interesting encounters in situations were more complicated terrain was used (Tapestry's Toil top of the stairs scene, Storval Stairs end fight). Much more maneuvering around, rather than just "how do we deploy into this room and get to the caster".I really don't see how player skill is going to matter much here once initiative is rolled. A good player will have built for difficult terrain, flying, etc. but taking the shortest route is mostly a matter of counting squares.
What I'm getting at is that more skill gets involved if features like these come into play:
- unsafe-looking rope bridges between platforms that the BBEG might decide to fireball
- hostages
- conveyor belt stuff, leading to some certain-death spot
- archers on towers providing the enemy with covering fire if the PCs take the obvious route
- traps that the bad guys know not to step on
- Wall spells used intelligently to separate the party (but: make sure people have something to do on both sides
- ways for the enemy to be useful while also taking cover from PC ranged attacks (arrow slits)
- murder holes
- enemies that attack the party from behind after all the melee types have gone to the front
These can all make combat much more interesting than a race to see who does more damage/who can hold out longer.
|
I find the difficulty and length of a BBEG fight, especially a solo battle, swings wildly based on a single die roll - initiative. If the BBEG gets a poor initiative, they may never get to go, period. I'm not sure how to fix that, unless NPCs and monsters are allowed to Take 10 on initiative, or maybe set a special BBEG rule that the GM rolls, but anything below a 10 gets automatically bumped up to a 10?
The Quick Mythic template for all BBEGs should do the trick.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I find the difficulty and length of a BBEG fight, especially a solo battle, swings wildly based on a single die roll - initiative. If the BBEG gets a poor initiative, they may never get to go, period. I'm not sure how to fix that, unless NPCs and monsters are allowed to Take 10 on initiative, or maybe set a special BBEG rule that the GM rolls, but anything below a 10 gets automatically bumped up to a 10?The Quick Mythic template for all BBEGs should do the trick.
So, if the big bad is guaranteed to act first, why bother taking improved initiative?
If the PCs deal too much damage, we boost the bad guys HP. Okay, so what is the point of boosting your damage?
If the PCs kill the mooks too quickly, we add one more. Okay, so what is the point of rolling crits? They just make combat harder?
Choices should have consequences. That means bad choices should make things harder. But that also means that good choices should be rewarded, not make things harder.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My wife has a scroll scoundrel rogue that has a hard time rolling under 30 on a diplomacy check, even if no one else in the party is helping. She pretty regularly breaks 40. That means she is beating just about every diplomacy check that comes up in game by at least 5 if not 10. Are you saying that if she sits down at the table, I should raise the difficulty of all diplomacy checks by 5?
Of course, to do this, she traded away a lot of feats and talents and gp that she could have used for AC and Damage. So should I reduce the HP and to hit of all the enemies to compensate?
At what point does "I want to make it challenging" mean "Okay, roll over 16 on this d20. Don't worry about your stats."
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
flying greater invisible scorching rays
bane striking triple shot archer
140(?) foot move spring attackers who have access to teleport portals that increase their speed by 50% and allow them to never be vulnerable to ranged strikes and have blur?
The gm thread for that scenario is full of TPKs and mission fails.
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht
|
I'd like to see the option of "advanced players". Not necessarily hard mode, but the option to change the numbers slightly if you see your table's breezing through things. Things like slapping the Advanced template on things, more mooks, or just increased HP, so the enemy can stand for a few more rounds and actually be a threat.For what it's worth, you said "not necessarily hard mode" but then you listed exactly the types of things that are done in hard mode. To paraphrase, it seems like you said, "don't call it hard mode, but do exactly everything that hard mode does." Just, you know, FYI. You probably don't care. But if you haven't read a module with hard mode, then you might not have known, and now you do.
Thanks for that. Didn't know what hard mode entailed, but should've guessed it's something like that. Someone mentioned mentioned that everyone should agree to do hard mode before doing so, and I sort of agree, but I'd also like to have the freedom of the GM to do so on the fly for only one encounter or so. I've often secretly given my players the higher tier monsters, but with slightly less to-hit or HP, just because it'd make for a more interesting fight (especially season 0-3). Not entirely according to the rules, but my players didn't blow through too many resources and I'd hate to present them an encounter that takes half an initiative count to resolve.
Anyway, point is, I'd like to see some suggestions that acknowledge PFS might sometimes be on the easy side. I have to admit, since season 5 or 6 that's decreased significantly, but giving GMs permission to adapt to the players would be appreciated. I've seen so many encounters (on both side of the table) where the GM went, "Well, this'll be a cakewalk for you guys, but it's in the scenario..." I've played scenarios where the GM gave us high tier encounters and we couldn't even tell the difference.The only problem I see is that it's easily abused and GMs might judge their players's strength incorrectly, leading to a TPK. But if used responsibly, I'd love to see that, rather than a GM having to ask before every single encounter, "okay guys, want the high or low tier?"
|
|
- unsafe-looking rope bridges between platforms that the BBEG might decide to fireball
- hostages
- conveyor belt stuff, leading to some certain-death spot
- archers on towers providing the enemy with covering fire if the PCs take the obvious route
- traps that the bad guys know not to step on
- Wall spells used intelligently to separate the party (but: make sure people have something to do on both sides
- ways for the enemy to be useful while also taking cover from PC ranged attacks (arrow slits)
- murder holes
- enemies that attack the party from behind after all the melee types have gone to the frontThese can all make combat much more interesting than a race to see who does more damage/who can hold out longer.
It is a list of cool things. Unfortunately, besides the convayer belt why do we even have these things? most of them involve character preparation. Conveyor belts in a stop action game are prett complicated.
As cool as they are, what they tend to do is to put more trouble on martials, which are the very catagory of people who are supposed to be interacting with them and having fun with them. Casters have more easy solutions to all of the above problems, especially if you don't want the rule to rely on the dm doing it on the fly: blocking an arrow slit with stone shape is pretty strait forward. Doing it with a large steel shield is a little trickier. Cover from the hostage? I have magic missile. Need to do subdual damage? 3k rod and i'm good to go. Walls? Teleport.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've often secretly given my players the higher tier monsters, but with slightly less to-hit or HP, just because it'd make for a more interesting fight (especially season 0-3). Not entirely according to the rules, but my players didn't blow through too many resources and I'd hate to present them an encounter that takes half an initiative count to resolve.
Please don't do this. As someone who likes their local venture officers, and who reports and schedules games, this almost inevitably leads to PC deaths, which then have to be retconned, and then I have to reschedule games with a different GM without offending people, and I wind up with people who won't sit at the table with other people, and it gives me headaches and lost GMs.
I know you are trying to be responsible, but it is only a matter of time before you have a run of bad luck. And if you have a run of bad luck and someones race boon character dies because you altered the scenario, it is going to be your fault, and it is going to take an annoying amount of work to fix it.
It's bad enough when it is on accident.
I've played scenarios where the GM gave us high tier encounters and we couldn't even tell the difference.
Honestly? I have had GMs give us the high tier. It happens by mistake sometimes. You can tell, even if they don't hurt you too badly, it is easy to tell. And if some of you are high tier, and some of you are low tier, and the GM sends in the high tier boss, someone in the low tier is probably going to die.
The only problem I see is that it's easily abused and GMs might judge their players's strength incorrectly, leading to a TPK.
I've seen the later more than the former honestly, but if you just stay around this forum long enough, it comes up about once every 3 months.
But worse, part of the reason that GMs *are* so constrained in PFS is that people keep doing stuff like this, and then we get TPKs and then people come on here and complain, and then we get our hands tied back even more.
Frankly, if you are having to shift up tier to give people a challenge, you are either running way to much season 2 stuff, or you are not running the NPCs effectively, or your players are intentionally or unintentionally cheating. Honestly, I would start checking builds. Very often when someone comes in with an truly awesome build that lets them walk through everything, they have missed or misunderstood something.
This is a problem. I've been playing PFS for the last year at various conventions, and, while I have enjoyed myself, in the 20+ games I've played so far
—no one has died
—nothing really bad has ever happened to a PC (petrification, domination, curse etc)
—we've never had to flee an encounter, regroup and try again
—no enemy has ever escaped
—no BBEG has lasted more than maybe 3 rounds
—every single possible goal/treasure/award for the scenario was accomplished/found/awarded every single time
I could almost also add that not one character at any table has been knocked unconscious, but that did happen, once, on my very first adventure (The Confirmation) vs. the little minotaur. That's also the best fight I've participated in, and I had the most fun in it because I actually thought we might die.
Otherwise, no one has been knocked unconscious either.
I've also had a distressing number of GMs who personally apologize to the player every time a monster hits hard.
If I don't feel like I could've died or truly failed, I don't actually feel like I accomplished something.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Maybe this is a regional thing?
I almost wiped the party in 6-02. I actually had a barbarian announce he was entering rage, in order to bring his hit points positive, so that he could take a full withdraw and run for the exit. (Gives a new meaning to the term "rage quit") If I remember correctly, the entire final combat lasted 6 rounds and came down to a single consumable (as in if that last roll had missed or not done enough damage, the remaining PCs were dead.
Port Godless has been a TPK just about every time it has been run. (The one exception is when I ran it, when it was only *almost* a TPK.)
We managed to wipe on Horn of Aroden, but that was pure bad luck. (mostly first level party got pulled high by a single level 5 druid, who didn't have hardly any combat abilities...)
5-01 has been miserable, with almost no one actually getting both PP.
Hellknights feast almost never awards 2 PP
I only survived a scenario just recently because we realized at the very last moment that phantasmal killer is not a death effect, and therefor breath of life does work on it. (Yeah, I failed 2 saves *plus* a folio reroll!) Otherwise I would have been perma-dead in the first half hour of the scenario. And that was a grandfathered early entry bloat mage...
I failed by 2 on a roll to knock a PC off a 70 foot cliff. (It was a pregen admittedly)
I had one PC need 2 breath of lifes in one fight when I GMed Sealed Gate, and since they both came from gloves of first aid, that means someone was out 4500 gp.
And of course, the most awesome TPF (Total party failure) which I was not at the table for, but was near the con desk when the players came to complain:
Party bloat mage cast Haste for 9 rounds.
BBEG used a fear effect, and everyone failed their save.
The fear effect lasted one round longer than the haste. By the time the party had stopped running, turned around and and headed back at normal speed, the BBEG had gathered up all his stuff, had gathered up several items that the party had dropped as free actions to draw weapons, and was now far, far away...
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht
|
I've often secretly given my players the higher tier monsters, but with slightly less to-hit or HP, just because it'd make for a more interesting fight (especially season 0-3). Not entirely according to the rules, but my players didn't blow through too many resources and I'd hate to present them an encounter that takes half an initiative count to resolve.Please don't do this. As someone who likes their local venture officers, and who reports and schedules games, this almost inevitably leads to PC deaths, which then have to be retconned, and then I have to reschedule games with a different GM without offending people, and I wind up with people who won't sit at the table with other people, and it gives me headaches and lost GMs.
I know you are trying to be responsible, but it is only a matter of time before you have a run of bad luck. And if you have a run of bad luck and someones race boon character dies because you altered the scenario, it is going to be your fault, and it is going to take an annoying amount of work to fix it.
It's bad enough when it is on accident.
I've played scenarios where the GM gave us high tier encounters and we couldn't even tell the difference.Honestly? I have had GMs give us the high tier. It happens by mistake sometimes. You can tell, even if they don't hurt you too badly, it is easy to tell. And if some of you are high tier, and some of you are low tier, and the GM sends in the high tier boss, someone in the low tier is probably going to die.
The only problem I see is that it's easily abused and GMs might judge their players's strength incorrectly, leading to a TPK.I've seen the later more than the former honestly, but if you just stay around this forum long enough, it comes up about once every 3 months.
But worse, part of the reason that GMs *are* so constrained in PFS is that people keep doing stuff like this, and then we get TPKs and then...
Fair points. Most of my GM sessions do seem to have been from 0 to 3. My only kill so far in PFS was on a confirmed crit with a x3 weapon on a level 1. One of my home campaign deaths also was due to x3 crits, actually, and two more deaths because the tank was absent that day and the 10 CON Warpriest was appointed to soak the Ogre. After which the rest of the party fled while the Cleric stayed behind to cover their retreat.
I must admit, the games in which we played up were all season 3 or lower, I do see that from that point on power level has increased somewhat, so that might invalidate my point somewhat.
As for the scenarios you listed in your newest post:
6-02 turned out to be terrible for us, as our GM miscalculated our APL and gave us high tier, which only one person fell into. We reverted soon after that, but that scenario's a killer. Final combat was pretty easy for us in contrast, but I've heard other parties had a more difficult time, in the same tier.
Port Godless was a close call, but ended up fine. Was one of the more tense games I've played.
Horn of Aroden was pretty easy for my party.
I got a single PP for 5-01 as well, but you don't always get full PP. I do remember that one being particularly easy to fail, though.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
yeah. season 0-3, tier 1-5 most tier adjustments were done by adding more cr 1/2 mooks. (Although even then their fondness for human hating rangers can really mess up a party that is mostly humans, half orcs and half elves)
Horn of aroden is easy, unless
your level 5 druid has just traded out call lighting, his only offensive spell for for um... something useless, I don't remember what, and has fallen back on shilleghle (sp?) Your summoner (me) is new to the class, level 2, and got too close to the front. (she ran right past my eidolon and ganked me with one hit.) The only silver in the party is the melee thief's short bow (backup weapon), who is trying to kite, but is slower than her. (and doesn't have anything to stop her from taking attack of ops when firing.)
If I remember correctly, the level 5 druid sacked to let the thief run away, and then.
That one was pure bad luck, plus my bad judgement in talking everyone into letting the guy play the level 5 druid and drag us up out of tier. But I am used to level 5 druids kicking butt.
|
|
I am kind of flabbergasted that there are really people like Yolande's groups that have had such an easy time of it. My experience in my region (Socal) has not had the difficulty be quite as high FLite's, but it's still been quite respectable.
I take absolutely no joy out of killing PCs, and even I've gotten kills. I would have a couple more, but I avoided those consciously b/c it was a new player. I rarely have a scenario in which I don't drop at least one person, and usually the steamrolls are only done on zero days for local GMs.
To give just one example, one of our local GMs just ran the Heresy of Man 3-parter (season 2, btw) and got half a dozen totally legit, by-the-rules kills over all three, and he was even merciful and pulled-back on a couple other possible kills. With maybe one exception, these characters were all well optimized. In fact, the super high DPR fighter archer died several times because he was such a threat and got targeted.
One change I would consider at this time regarding difficulty is to allow parties to voluntarily play up when out-of-tier using the same rule as hard mode (you can't do it even if one person is hazy on it). That option would allow the tables of hardcore players to get more of a challenge while not shutting out newbies.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hrothdane, the examples I quoted were over some 100 games or more. There are a lot more successes, and a few more less dramatic failures in there. (I completely forgot about The Devil We Know series. That one is incredibly lethal in one tier, and a cake walk in the other two.) I suspect, from anecdotal evidence that our regions are about on par. (I'm Central Valley, CA)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Other than that I know there have been a few PC deaths scattered around, mostly at core tables and at high level tables. I know there have been more than a few breath of life's used but do those even count?
That depends.
If they were first aid gloves, that is about 2K per spell. Scrolls are a little cheaper. Memorized spells, not so much.
I would consider a scenario below 9th level where I had to spend 2K on consumables to be a partial failure. Even in the 10-11 range, I would still feel I should have done better.
That said, even with memorized spells, there is at least a bit of a moment of terror as everyone tries to figure out how to get the priest to you without dying in less than one round.
|
|
Teamwork can make a big difference too.
Some areas are known for great player teamwork, whilst others, not so much.
I have played in games with players who had strong builds, but sucked at teamwork. Nearly got us killed, often.
Also, great builds do not equal great tactics.
Some players have a hard time adapting, and although in the right circumstance, they can obliterate encounters, they find anything different to be very difficult. This is especially true if their "great build" has a particularly horrible flaw, that they may not have even noticed before.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a problem. I've been playing PFS for the last year at various conventions, and, while I have enjoyed myself, in the 20+ games I've played so far
Conventions tend to attract a disproportionately high number of people who are really into the game. This is going to lead to more genre savey with higher build/system mastery than the scenarios are really designed to challenge.
I could almost also add that not one character at any table has been knocked unconscious, but that did happen, once, on my very first adventure (The Confirmation) vs. the little minotaur. That's also the best fight I've participated in, and I had the most fun in it because I actually thought we might die.
I usually KO someone about 1/3 adventures, and I've only had one death and one familiar.
I've also had a distressing number of GMs who personally apologize to the player every time a monster hits hard.
There's no right or wrong way to go about that. Some people cheer when their monsters are killing pcs, some people need to make sure that the players aren't taking it personaly. Depends on your style and who you're interacting with.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I haven't run a lot of tier 7-11, and I don't think I have run any of the ones with full casters, but I have a season 5 here on my desk with a BBEG who has a CL 13, DC 22 blasphemy (which means any lvl 7 or 8 characters are automatically paralyzed for at least one round, and are out of combat if they fail their save.) So there is one level 7 spell.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
In my opinion the biggest problem that PFS faces is the frequently massive difference in effectiveness between characters that are twinked out monstrosities, well made, and made by casual players.
That isn't such a huge issue more than the fact that party balance can create a TPK scenario relatively easily depending on how the scenario is written. There are effectively three scenarios that I can think of where if your party is just built to rip through combat you are screwed over pretty badly. Two of those being scenarios that lead to the next best thing to a TPK.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I've said it before, but I'll say it again. Pathfinder like other RPGs is build on the foundation of home-style campaign play. The players can use whatever rules they want (or as allowed by the GM) and the GM can run whatever s/he wants. The important key is that the GM can adjust the game to fit the player's style and character builds. Role-play heavy vs. roll-play heavy, Min-Max/optimized vs. fluffy, etc.
However, organized play is a different dynamic. Sure there are a few restrictions on player content, but for the most part, the players can play whatever they want. The GM has to follow a relatively narrow script. Yes, they can adjust tactics to some extent and can fudge the success/failure of actions with borderline results, but in the end, s/he cannot change monster stat blocks (or even the entire creature if need be), de/buff NPCs, move the encounter to a different location, etc. They are, to some extent, stuck with the expectation of RAW. Until we have a system that allows some level of customization by the GM to tailor the scenario to the players, we will always have a disparity between the players and the encounters designed to test them.
Some have proposed providing the option to buff encounters by adding templates or additional enemies, or increasing HP, etc to make them harder for players that want a greater challenge. That leads to them wanting more rewards. I mean its reasonable that if I have to face a stronger opponent, my reward would be greater, but campaign leadership is not prepared to alter the WBL curve.
I am not making a value statement on anyone's play style. All are valid as long as you aren't being a jerk to the other players. But, in the end, as long as we produce one-size-fits-all scenarios, we will always have issues. I don't pretend to have the magic pill that fixes this, but blaming the player for building an uber PC or a fluffy one is missing the point.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've found that just giving the boss of a scenario a surprise rounds really helps. It gives the big bad guy a chance to do his silly round 1 and 2 actions dictated by the tactics (which tend to be more thematic and cool than terrifyingly effective).
As a player this is very frustrating and very often both rule breaking and immersion breaking.
Its never fun to just stand there, unable to act, and take damage.
The methods the Boss has for getting a surprise round probably didn't work when the PC tried it a second ago.
Holding actions outside of combat is rules iffy at best,
Pathfinders have been hit with this tactic often enough to counter it. You see a lot of people dip a level of diviner, and my druid hasn't left batform in 2 years.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I firmly believe that most of the people who play twinked out characters do NOT actually WANT a challenge.It's like playing chess instead of checkers. I want a more advanced game but the sides are still equal.
When I got home after Sealed Gate Hard I found the product page and immediately gave it a 5/5. If Bonekeep 3 had a page for it I would have done the same because it's awesome.
I think being dismissive of what other people want isn't fair especially when my proposed solution (more hard modes) doesn't detract from the play experience of the whole campaign.
This isn't meant to be dismissive: then don't play in the organized checkers league. PFS is NOT meant to be particularly challenging, its primary reason to exist is as a marketing tool to get new players into the game. If you want a really challenging game then move to a home game. PFS is just not the venue.
|
|
And I firmly believe that most of the people who play twinked out characters do NOT actually WANT a challenge. Many say they do but I think that they are mistaken. So, making things challenging for the twinked out groups will pretty much satisfy nobody.I think its a matter of perspective on where the difficulty or skill comes in. Most of the skill and challenge you overcome is when you build your character, not when you play (this goes doubly for martials, who don't have that perfect spell for that situation) . Clever play can nudge your character a little and not understanding some basic.. basics can tank it completely. But you can't get a silk purse out of a sows ear. People ARE looking for a challange, but its to their building ability, not to the oft vaunted playing ability.
A somewhat valid point. But many of the twinked out characters are cookie cutter builds (Dex based dervish magus, double barrelled pistol wielders pre Nerf, sleep witches, etc). Not much skill or challenge in that.
I do get the mental pleasure in coming up with a really cool build. I defibitely enjoy that part of the game too. But I think many of these should never be played or should be deliberately weakened if they prove too powerful in play.
For what it is worth I DO practice what I preach. My witch trained out of his sleep hex, my swashbuckler realized he was too good and so took a level of carnivalist rogue for humour and to gain skills.
Also, it is absolutely the right of players to build twinked out characters and it is a part of PFS to deal with them. I just don't think players who build these characters should expect PFS to provide those characters a challenge
Also, it is absolutely the right of players to build twinked out characters and it is a part of PFS to deal with them. I just don't think players who build these characters should expect PFS to provide those characters a challenge
That really depends on how you define challenge. Twinked out characters who generally focus on offence might fall victim to environmental hazards (unavoidable saving throws) or skill challenges that are fairly common in PFS adventures. They are challenged in different ways than more balanced or optimized characters.
The amount of variance in scenario design, party composition and dice rolling in game should provide a fair amount of challenge most of the time IMO.
|
|
Also, it is absolutely the right of players to build twinked out characters and it is a part of PFS to deal with them. I just don't think players who build these characters should expect PFS to provide those characters a challengeThat really depends on how you define challenge. Twinked out characters who generally focus on offence might fall victim to environmental hazards (unavoidable saving throws) or skill challenges that are fairly common in PFS adventures. They are challenged in different ways than more balanced or optimized characters.
The amount of variance in scenario design, party composition and dice rolling in game should provide a fair amount of challenge most of the time IMO.
This is assuming that twinked out means glass cannon with no skills.. it most assuredly does not. Its very possible to build for all of the above.
This is assuming that twinked out means glass cannon with no skills.. it most assuredly does not. Its very possible to build for all of the above.
Sure but what is the line between a well-made character and one that is twinked out? Putting aside cheesy exploits and pulling from a dozen books to build your character how do you judge this?
|
|
This is assuming that twinked out means glass cannon with no skills.. it most assuredly does not. Its very possible to build for all of the above.Sure but what is the line between a well-made character and one that is twinked out? Putting aside cheesy exploits and pulling from a dozen books to build your character how do you judge this?
Thats kind of like deciding what driving fast means. Its relative to the observer usually.