Invincibility disparity is A Thing.
While GMing, if a PC seems invincible, it can feel like the player broke the game. Why are these monsters bothering to attack him? Can't they see that they'll never hit his AC? If the last two spells just bounced off his saving throw, why the evil caster try a third time?A character with powerful narrative agency (but no invincibility) can break a campaign, but generally only by doing clever things the GM didn't think of, and they have to be careful because if they slip up they could die at any moment.
A character with unhittable AC and high saving throws can simply kick down the door, kill everything in the room, and move on, without needing to do anything interesting. From the GM viewpoint, that's a more serious problem.
Possibly true, yes, but in this case the character is far from invincible. I've never gone down, but I've been in single digit hit points multiple times.
Emerald Spire is badly designed to deal with someone getting into a caster's face. Many of the end level fights have, so far (level 5, or 6) taken place in small rooms against a single, or at most 2, bad guys.
But no, I'm short on AC. Far from unhittable. :)
If you're trivializing everything because of Paladin smite the last floor might be the absolute worst time for your GM to ramp up the difficulty... you start to fight less "evil stuff that took over the spire" and more "neutral stuff that built the thing in the first place". You will be very short on Smite targets towards the end of the adventure.
|
If you're trivializing everything because of Paladin smite the last floor might be the absolute worst time for your GM to ramp up the difficulty... you start to fight less "evil stuff that took over the spire" and more "neutral stuff that built the thing in the first place". You will be very short on Smite targets towards the end of the adventure.Smite is one of his pet peeves (a big one, of course, but not the only). Specifically that smite bypasses all forms of DR on the target creature.
I won't say it was completely unintentional, but I didn't plan for an evil-caster-chasing-beat-down-machine paladin when I built him. It just so happens that many of our fights have gone 'the caster does something horrid, make a save.' 'I pass, move adjacent, mark him as my smite target, and hit for some significant portion of BBEG's hit points'. BBEG tries to take a 5' step to cast safely and, whoops, paladin's still there! Tries to cast defensively and fails because 15+2x level is not an easy check for spells at the caster's top level.
So, DM ends up feeling like 'wow, this fight that was supposed to be an awesome test of their capability was complete crap because zilvar just wtfpwned the bad guy'.
The point of all this is that CM/D is often a subjective subject. In this specific instance, I wouldn't be able to bribe my GM into believing in the concept of CM/D because recent experience tells him that (his NPC) casters don't ever get to do interesting things, because zilvar's paladin is a meaniepantsdouchebag and carries badwrongfun around in a big bag o' SMITE.
:)
Just point him to myth #1. The C/MD isn't subjective, at least it isn't totally subjective. Player skill can influence table experience with it, but on a fundamental level it exists. I believe that's another one of the myths mentioned in the OP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How much would limited spellcasting from Unchained help?
Would the Simplified spellcasting option expand power or limit a caster's power do to less spells?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mostly play at low levels so I don't run into this problem. One thing I have not seen mentioned in this debate is most of the higher level martial things can have some quite deep prerequisites to get like manyshot while casters don't have to say know how to levitate to pcik fly as a spell for a sorceror.
The out of combat abilities and other things of casters gets broader to do more things while leveling up. If you take a class like say ranger which is a martial with a fair amount of non combat abilites at low level has lots of non combat useful abilities other than a few of its 4 level spells.
Also part of the reason it can be apparent for combat is at low level full casters are using their 1st level spells for combat but when they gain enough higher level spells for encounters then you can use those for utility spells as they will be stronger spells and have higher saving throws. Martials don't have this they just get bonuses to what they already have and some new abilities.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
How much would limited spellcasting from Unchained help?
That would help somewhat, but primarily only with combat, which was always the smaller element of the disparity. Even with limited spellcasting, overland flight still lasts longer than an American workday, endure elements is completely unaffected, wands of CLW are still relied on by martials in order to "go all day" like people keep trying to point out they can do, teleport still carries a party of four with the same consistency it's always had, plane shift still lets the caster decide that the party's gonna have breakfast in heaven today, and divination's new 77% chance of getting a useful answer from God is still infinitely superior to the martial's 0% chance.
It's a step in the right direction, but a very small one.
Would the Simplified spellcasting option expand power or limit a caster's power do to less spells?
This would actually make things worse. Casters have lots of low-level spells available that neutralize obstacles so efficiently that the use of the martials' skills is completely overshadowed. Normally, the caster has to at least go to the trouble of scribing scrolls for some of the more situational utility spells, but Simplified Spellcasting removes even that cost, small as it was.
I find it interesting that sometimes all casters are lumped in together. Casters are talked about as if they have the abilities of all casters when in fact they each have their specialities. If clerics want to be casting knock or invisibility then they need to be built specifically to do that, which means they are giving up other powers.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find it interesting that sometimes all casters are lumped in together. Casters are talked about as if they have the abilities of all casters when in fact they each have their specialities. If clerics want to be casting knock or invisibility then they need to be built specifically to do that, which means they are giving up other powers.
I'm struggling to figure out how the distinction you're pointing out is significant enough to really make a difference.
Sure, the wizard can't make CLW wands or ask God a question and expect a useful answer, but he can still teleport, fly all day, have breakfast in heaven, and summon extraplanar beings to do his bidding. Sure, the cleric can't fly all day or teleport, but he's the only reason fighters can claim to go all day, he can walk on air, he can have breakfast in heaven, he can ask God a question and get an answer, and he can raise the dead.
But yeah, when comparing to a martial who can do none of those things, let's make sure not to accidentally blend those two lists, amirite?
I find it interesting that sometimes all casters are lumped in together.
Martials are also all lumped together.
How much would limited spellcasting from Unchained help?That would help somewhat, but primarily only with combat, which was always the smaller element of the disparity. Even with limited spellcasting, overland flight still lasts longer than an American workday, endure elements is completely unaffected, wands of CLW are still relied on by martials in order to "go all day" like people keep trying to point out they can do, teleport still carries a party of four with the same consistency it's always had, plane shift still lets the caster decide that the party's gonna have breakfast in heaven today, and divination's new 77% chance of getting a useful answer from God is still infinitely superior to the martial's 0% chance.
It's a step in the right direction, but a very small one.
I don't know that unchained mechanic being referred to, but how about increasing the cost of spellcasting in some other way? (Like halving the number of spells per level you can cast, rebasing the experience point awards so that you are expected to face more encounters per day than currently, only letting casters regain half their "spent" spells per day or something?)
Those were just illustrative, not thought-through suggestions (so I wouldn't suggest anyone bother analysing those specific suggestions) - but in principle, is there a way to leave the classes essentially the same (in feel) and tweak the relative cost of spellcasting, so that a caster has a more significant resource-management problem?
Those were just illustrative, not thought-through suggestions (so I wouldn't suggest anyone bother analysing those specific suggestions) - but in principle, is there a way to leave the classes essentially the same (in feel) and tweak the relative cost of spellcasting, so that a caster has a more significant resource-management problem?
Unchained actually has a different variant that does this sorta thing. Simplified Spellcasting.... which also makes more sense than vancian in that your memory doesn't change as you level, instead you just get better at remembering the more simple spells And it makes playing a caster easier because you don't have to deal with spending twenty minutes preparing your spells at high level
Basically you keep track of only your 3 highest levels of spells, and all the other spells are placed in a pool that you can use on the fly. Lowers the spells per day by a big amount without making it so casters can't use their high level spells, just means they're more likely to be careful with their spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In other words, a rogue could spend 3 games looking for clues to get the special key he needs to get into the kings vault, casing its hiding place, and then stealing the thing, a wizard could just look at a picture and fabricate it in 10 minutes or call on an earth elemental to roll through the floor and steal it..
This is the real source of the "CMD" disparity. People insiting that spells can do things they simply can't do. And the DMs that nod and let them get away with it. You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate. and an Earth elemental can not phase through any ground that's not natural earth.. i.e. anything that's been worked.
Those were just illustrative, not thought-through suggestions (so I wouldn't suggest anyone bother analysing those specific suggestions) - but in principle, is there a way to leave the classes essentially the same (in feel) and tweak the relative cost of spellcasting, so that a caster has a more significant resource-management problem?Unchained actually has a different variant that does this sorta thing. Simplified Spellcasting.... which also makes more sense than vancian in that your memory doesn't change as you level, instead you just get better at remembering the more simple spells And it makes playing a caster easier because you don't have to deal with spending twenty minutes preparing your spells at high level
Basically you keep track of only your 3 highest levels of spells, and all the other spells are placed in a pool that you can use on the fly. Lowers the spells per day by a big amount without making it so casters can't use their high level spells, just means they're more likely to be careful with their spells.
Okay, that makes sense. Does that work do you think (in principle, I mean - perhaps the unchained system would need to be curtailed even more or loosened a bit or whatever)?
It seems to me that if magicusers were still the super-powerful but had to marshal their resources carefully it would both create a genuine need for martial companions, whilst also representing many fantasy stories a little better (it's relatively common for the wizards to be able to do almighty things but to get tired/be corrupted/attract enemies/etcetera... and hence they don't just solve everything).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate.
According to what? It'd require a craft check as per the rules, but otherwise there is nothing stopping it.
and an Earth elemental can not phase through any ground that's not natural earth.. i.e. anything that's been worked.
They can go through worked earth.... They can't go through metal.
Does that work do you think?
It seems to me that if magicusers were still the super-powerful but had to marshal their resources carefully it would both create a genuine need for martial companions, whilst also representing many fantasy stories a little better (it's relatively common for the wizards to be able to do almighty things but to get tired/be corrupted/attract enemies/etcetera... and hence they don't just solve everything).
It's better, but doesn't really fix the issue since it doesn't increase the agency of non-casters. Just focuses the agency of prepared casters to a degree.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Somewhat related note: is there anything a Rogue can do about an Alarm spell? I was certain that it was considered a trap that Rogues can detect and disable but it came up in a campaign recently and I found my Rogue's investment in stealth completely invalidated by this level 1 spell.
You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate.According to what? It'd require a craft check as per the rules, but otherwise there is nothing stopping it.
[
The fact that you don't have the faintest clue of the key's composition, or shape makes it Craft check Impossible.
You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate.According to what? It'd require a craft check as per the rules, but otherwise there is nothing stopping it.
and an Earth elemental can not phase through any ground that's not natural earth.. i.e. anything that's been worked.They can go through worked earth.... They can't go through metal.
It's better, but doesn't really fix the issue since it doesn't increase the agency of non-casters. Just focuses the agency of prepared casters to a degree.Does that work do you think?
It seems to me that if magicusers were still the super-powerful but had to marshal their resources carefully it would both create a genuine need for martial companions, whilst also representing many fantasy stories a little better (it's relatively common for the wizards to be able to do almighty things but to get tired/be corrupted/attract enemies/etcetera... and hence they don't just solve everything).
Focusing the agency of casters is a better approach than turning martials into GoKu
Focusing the agency of casters is a better approach than turning martials into GoKu
This is highly subjective. Though regardless, increasing the agency of martials does not require "making them anime". Goku is also a weird example, since I don't think I've ever seen a martial fix that gave them lasers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Martials are already Goku...technically they're more Jojos from the massive amount of damage they can take without going down. That's one of the most prevalent anime tropes out there seconded only by the improbably large swords and dual wielding.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, since I have said things like you can increase agency without going anime or damaging themes of the classes, I'll put some money where my mouth is and give an actual example.
Cavalier
What do people think?
Speaking of JoJo, I decided to add Hamon to the game in the form of a feat that allows ki users to do more damage with weapons (including improvised weapons) and add anti-undead effects to their attacks.
That doesn't really have anything to do with the main topic. I just felt like sharing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, since I have said things like you can increase agency without going anime or damaging themes of the classes, I'll put some money where my mouth is and give an actual example.
Cavalier
Combat: Done already, though personally I'd chuck some samurai abilities on top but it's not technically necessary.
Downtime: Give them a bonus to obtaining influence and possibly give them unique ways to expend influence... Possibly tie in with orders. in addition, get them a bonus when it comes to leading teams and organisations. They're leaders, make them leaders.
Investigation: Give them a hand in gathering information and getting contacts. Whether it's being able to intimidate a peasant into giving you info or you'd make their life miserable because of your place in society, or using your noble ties to find out info on a rival, cavaliers should be able to get information and find experts without too much trouble.
Social: They're knights and aristocrats, give them social maneuvering abilities so they can be great courtiers. They might also gain some method of bypassing authority. I mean, who would throw a knight in jail. Also, make sure that when they are higher level they have things like planar contacts that they can call on for favours.
Terrain Manipulation: Not sure to be honest.... Could use one of your planar contacts.
Travel: Give them new options for mounts such as dragons, pegasus, giant eagles, etc., each with a minimum level. Maybe also make them able to do things like keep riding a creature that's earth gliding or dimensional door'ing and stuff.
Other: Give them a friggin scaling bonus to ride checks. What do people think?
I definitely think upgrading to legendary-level mounts is something Cavaliers should have baked in. I think a lot of the other stuff should be tied to which order you select (an Order of the Lion Cavalier is going to have very different social benefits than an Order of the Cockatrice, for example).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, since I have said things like you can increase agency without going anime or damaging themes of the classes, I'll put some money where my mouth is and give an actual example.
Cavalier
Combat: Done already, though personally I'd chuck some samurai abilities on top but it's not technically necessary.
Downtime: Give them a bonus to obtaining influence and possibly give them unique ways to expend influence... Possibly tie in with orders. in addition, get them a bonus when it comes to leading teams and organisations. They're leaders, make them leaders.
Investigation: Give them a hand in gathering information and getting contacts. Whether it's being able to intimidate a peasant into giving you info or you'd make their life miserable because of your place in society, or using your noble ties to find out info on a rival, cavaliers should be able to get information and find experts without too much trouble.
Social: They're knights and aristocrats, give them social maneuvering abilities so they can be great courtiers. They might also gain some method of bypassing authority. I mean, who would throw a knight in jail. Also, make sure that when they are higher level they have things like planar contacts that they can call on for favours.
Terrain Manipulation: Not sure to be honest.... Could use one of your planar contacts.
Travel: Give them new options for mounts such as dragons, pegasus, giant eagles, etc., each with a minimum level. Maybe also make them able to do things like keep riding a creature that's earth gliding or dimensional door'ing and stuff.
Other: Give them a friggin scaling bonus to ride checks. What do people think?
I think that's very good, and possibly worth a thread of its own. I'll take a shot at monk:
Monk
The fact that you don't have the faintest clue of the key's composition, or shape makes it Craft check Impossible.You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate.According to what? It'd require a craft check as per the rules, but otherwise there is nothing stopping it.
I dunno, I had a locksmith do exactly the same thing for me without using magic. I had locked myself out of my car -- he took one look at the lock, grabbed a random-looking piece of metal and a file, and handed me a working key a few minutes later.
That sounds like a Craft (locksmith) check to me. And it sounds like exactly the sort of thing a fabricate spell would allow. I certainly see nothing in the wording of the spell that suggests that a mundane locksmith can make a key to match another one he's never seen, but a wizard can't.
Downtime: Monks are used to making do with very little; they can obtain or jury-rig mundane equipment for approved uses at an increasingly large discount, representing scavenging, begging, or getting donations.
I don't really see that as monk-y. I mean, monks do make do with very little but I'm not sure about how they get those result from that. Perhaps something to do with meditation, where they can make mindscape type stuff or something. The other stuff though sounds great.
I've personally been thinking of giving monks different powers associated with psychic disciplines so that'd be drug using, entering dreams, and manasuptra stuff. So we add that sorta stuff into monk as well.
|
|
Downtime: Monks are used to making do with very little; they can obtain or jury-rig mundane equipment for approved uses at an increasingly large discount, representing scavenging, begging, or getting donations.
I don't really see that as monk-y. I mean, monks do make do with very little but I'm not sure about how they get those result from that. Perhaps something to do with meditation, where they can make mindscape type stuff or something. The other stuff though sounds great.
I've personally been thinking of giving monks different powers associated with psychic disciplines so that'd be drug using, entering dreams, and manasuptra stuff. So we add that sorta stuff into monk as well.
Parallels between ki and psychic energy are pretty cool and obvious angles to work (I think 3.5 strongly hinted at connections between monks and psions, and I think 4e just said "monks tap the same power source(s) as psions", so I could see a redesigned monk being a psychic class very easily, and there's a lot of good potential to work with.
Parallels between ki and psychic energy are pretty cool and obvious angles to work (I think 3.5 strongly hinted at connections between monks and psions, and I think 4e just said "monks tap the same power source(s) as psions", so I could see a redesigned monk being a psychic class very easily, and there's a lot of good potential to work with.
And we must not forget the most common monk fix "Play a psychic warrior ". :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All I can say is that I have not personally experienced any particular caster/martial disparity in all my years of 3.5 OGL or PFRPG gaming. This is true on either side of the GM screen.
In fact, it's been my experience that martials tend to dominate combat.
Caveat: My players and I prefer low-to-mid-level play, with our "sweet spot" at level 5-9. I've never played in or run a PFRPG game beyond level 12.
My conclusion is that if there is indeed a martial/caster disparity, it probably only happens at high-level play.
Again, I'm basing this solely on my own anecdotal experience of the past dozen years. Your experiences may vary based on play style and level of system mastery.
Everyone's experience is different I guess. In the case of my group, it took all of 7 levels before the arcane caster made the martials obsolete. My melee inquisitor doesn't even need to draw a weapon anymore, I can just stand in front of the caster, take a couple hits, and watch him destroy everything within a couple rounds. I don't of course, because that would be boring, but it's really not necessary to actually do anything in combat anymore.
|
The fact that you don't have the faintest clue of the key's composition, or shape makes it Craft check Impossible.You can't duplicate a key you don't have with Fabricate.According to what? It'd require a craft check as per the rules, but otherwise there is nothing stopping it.
[
Link for minor creation
Link for FabricateLink for Major Creation
So lets start with Fabricate. Sure, I don't know what this key is made of but I can safely assume it's not mashed potatoes and is likely something that could work in a lock. Second I can probably look at my key ring and get a good idea of what's common like say iron and give it a shot and I'm willing to bet unless my GM is getting really strict about how you read that spell I'll get it and poof I've got my key. But lets say you go strict, I could just make a skeleton key.
Now I've got 3 keys with a +10 to beat that lock for the price of one and if I'm feeling really clever a couple of those spare swords I picked up from those bandits, that picture of the key, my excellent craftsmanship (enhanced by crafter's fortune), and maybe an hour in a nearby mine might well let me make all the very accurate dupes I want. I have dozens of chances at that door now and all the spells I want for when I do it and since I'm good at making keys (Craft check remember) my skeleton keys are probably even better at opening this particular door than other ones (so they are likely a +12 or better).
Also
Or, I could do the same thing as before but instead of fabricate I pop minor creation, make the key out of darkwood (it's vegetable matter)and if I'm worried about it breaking throw Ironwood on it. I've got the crafting skill as established before, if my GM needs me to make a check I'll gladly do it (and probably succeed).
Or, finally I could just do major creation and make an adamantine duplicate (keys can be made of lots of stuff) at the door and use that. And if it doesn't work I can just take the thing and pry the lock out of the door like butter since adamantine ignores hardness less than 20.
Or or, I could ask what it's made of when I get the image and with any luck the guy who gave me the image will know gimme a description, a DC 10 Knowledge (dungeoneering) will tell me the metal, and my Craft skills will fill in any gaps I might have between here and fabricate.
All of that takes about 10 mins or so of in game time to execute, lasts more than long enough, and took me 5 mins to think up.
Also...
a wizard could just look at a picture and fabricate it in 10 minutes or call on an earth elemental to roll through the floor and steal it..
came right out of the quote you pulled from me.
So again, that level of versatility can cause A LOT of issues at the table both for players, the aforementioned caster who wants to be challenged but have fun with his friends, and the GM who's trying to prep this thing.
|
My take on the issue is as follows:
The problem is real, but depending on GM and group may not be as big an issue as some claim. For others, it's a huge problematic issue.
The basis of the C/MD issue is in the capabilities of martial characters vs casters. At low levels a caster is extremely weak. They can only cast a small handful of times per day, their spell selection is limited, they have low hit points, crap damage dealing capabilities, and low armor class,
Conversely at low levels martial types tend to have good hit points (still low, but not painfully so), good to great Armor Class, reliable capabilities that can be used all day long, and potentially devastating attack capabilities.
It's as the party levels that problems develop. Martial characters gain Armor Class slowly and at high cost. There's also a hard limit to what the martial can achieve AC wise. Once the fighter has a +5 tower shield, +5 mithral full plate, +5 ring of protection, and +5 amulet of natural armor there's not much more they can do to increase their AC. Meanwhile badguys get increasingly higher to-hit until it gets to the point where your maximized AC is effectively tissue paper.
Casters however can pick up defensive spells fairly early on which can negate the need for high AC. They can stack miss chance, to-hit penelties, and other effects to negate the need for high AC. Oh, and still acquire a decent AC rating. All it takes is a bit of crafting and a few hours a day memorizing spells.
Damage wise, martials can be at even more of a disadvantage. While a level 1 barbarian if built right and equipped right can potentially deal upwards of 40 damage in a single round, the damage dealing capabilities of a martial never really increase that much. Power attack for an eventual +5 (or +7.5) damage, a +5 weapon, improved critical, and vital strike feats will improve your damage capability.
Your scythe wielding fighter's damage is never going to increase too dramatically though. At level 1 your 18 Str power attacking fighter will deal 2d8+9 (x4 crit) with that scyth. At level 20 with Improved Vital Strike and greater weapon specialization, you'd be power attacking for maybe 2d8+45 (19-20 x4 crit) And that may sound impressive. It's very respectable damage, and rather reliable damage too. You're GOING to deal at least 47 damage so long as precision damage can be applied.
Then the wizard tosses out a maximized and empowered fireball for 90 damage. More if the proper traits, feats, and other goodies are added in. And he does this to an area, where as your fighter was only hitting a single foe. Yeah, your fighter has a 10% chance to deal more damage then the wizard's fireball. But here's the thing, even just a maximized fireball will consistently deal more damage then your fighter. Hell, a maximized magic missile will deal a flat out 20 damage to a target. No chance of missing. That's just under half your fighter's standard damage output, from a maximized level 1 spell.
Low level casters are balanced by their limited spell selection and limited spells per day. But as the caster goes up in level, they grow exponentially in power. Where as martial classes have a much more linear progression in capabilities. Not to mention hard limits in what they can achieve with an optimized build that are generally lower then a non-optimized caster.
A good game master can balance this to an extent. The GM decides what resources are valid. Don't like the number of powerful options in Ultimate Magic? Say that book isn't legal for your game. Don't want your wizard casting Limited Wish and Wish? Well, to an extent you can prevent that by not having the spell available in spell books the player comes across.
But eventually, wizards do outstrip martial types in raw capability. And there's only so many times you can toss a hard counter to casters at the party before it ruins the campaign.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My take on the issue is as follows:
You seem to be missing one of the very major components of the issue. That martials can only fight, while casters can fight, infiltrate, teleport, make minions, fly, remove status afflictions, get perfect information, become undetectable, raise people from the dead, mind-control people, alter landscapes, etc.
It's not only a combat issue, it's the issue of All martials can do is stab and casters can do Everything. There is more to pathfinder than combat, but that's the only part of the game some classes are able to play in.
|
|
My take on the issue is as follows:
The problem is real, but depending on GM and group may not be as big an issue as some claim. For others, it's a huge problematic issue.
The basis of the C/MD issue is in the capabilities of martial characters vs casters. At low levels a caster is extremely weak. They can only cast a small handful of times per day, their spell selection is limited, they have low hit points, crap damage dealing capabilities, and low armor class,
Conversely at low levels martial types tend to have good hit points (still low, but not painfully so), good to great Armor Class, reliable capabilities that can be used all day long, and potentially devastating attack capabilities.
It's as the party levels that problems develop. Martial characters gain Armor Class slowly and at high cost. There's also a hard limit to what the martial can achieve AC wise. Once the fighter has a +5 tower shield, +5 mithral full plate, +5 ring of protection, and +5 amulet of natural armor there's not much more they can do to increase their AC. Meanwhile badguys get increasingly higher to-hit until it gets to the point where your maximized AC is effectively tissue paper.
Casters however can pick up defensive spells fairly early on which can negate the need for high AC. They can stack miss chance, to-hit penelties, and other effects to negate the need for high AC. Oh, and still acquire a decent AC rating. All it takes is a bit of crafting and a few hours a day memorizing spells.
Damage wise, martials can be at even more of a disadvantage. While a level 1 barbarian if built right and equipped right can potentially deal upwards of 40 damage in a single round, the damage dealing capabilities of a martial never really increase that much. Power attack for an eventual +5 (or +7.5) damage, a +5 weapon, improved critical, and vital strike feats will improve your damage capability.
Your scythe wielding fighter's damage is never going to increase too dramatically though. At level 1 your 18 Str power attacking...
Okay, let me stop you right there. You DO realize that a dedicated martial character can put out upwards of 100 damage around level 10 if they're built for it, right? Your wizard throwing out maximized fireballs? That's a 6th level spell slot. 8th if it's empowered. My archer is doing that every round WAY before you get that. You get, what, a couple of those as well, right? If you REALLY wanted to deal a ton of damage, you'd cast Dimension Door on the martial guy. And haste. There's a reason why those spells are so darn good.
Martials have never been bad at damage, and they almost always outshine casters at doing raw damage (though a few hybrids, like the druid and summoner, get to just be great at everything). But it really doesn't matter, because the C/MD isn't about damage anyways.
Okay, since I have said things like you can increase agency without going anime or damaging themes of the classes, I'll put some money where my mouth is and give an actual example.
Cavalier
Downtime: Give them a bonus to obtaining influence and possibly give them unique ways to expend influence... Possibly tie in with orders. in addition, get them a bonus when it comes to leading teams and organisations. They're leaders, make them leaders.
Social: They're knights and aristocrats, give them social maneuvering abilities so they can be great courtiers. They might also gain some method of bypassing authority. I mean, who would throw a knight in jail. Also, make sure that when they are higher level they have things like planar contacts that they can call on for favours.
Terrain Manipulation: Not sure to be honest.... Could use one of your planar contacts. What do people think?
You need influence to be a thing that exists outside of pure Magic Tea Party in order for that to matter.
Planar Contacts? The Cavalier has the planar-contacts-making ability of an equivalent-level Commoner.
You need influence to be a thing that exists outside of pure Magic Tea Party in order for that to matter.
.... it is already. Influence is a form of capital.
Planar Contacts? The Cavalier has the planar-contacts-making ability of an equivalent-level Commoner.
I think you've misunderstood, these are ideas on stuff to add to the cavalier so it has more agency, not saying agency that it already has. I know it has no planar contract making abilities, I'm saying it Should get such an ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be honest here, I read it the same way as them. If you meant Influence from the downtime rules, you should capitalize it (or italicize, or something to indicate it's a specific term and not just normal english).
*Shrug*
I was talking about Downtime, so I used a term from the downtime rules.That being said, that's a terrible idea. Not everyone plays with the downtime rules, forcing people to use them to make full use of their class is adding layers of complexity for at best minimal gain.
*Another shrug*
I personally think classes should have some interaction the downtime system since casters can use it to do things like craft magical items cheaper so I put it as a category of agency. Personally, I see it as a waste if a class makes perfect sense to gain a benefit in a situation... and then not get it without an archetype that trades away stuff, just so you can get stuff the class should have by default. But nothing requires that you use the downtime system so those class abilities would be optional as well... so I don't really see the issue.Plus I think casters play this game better still, someone more familiar with the downtime rules could confirm that.
So what? The point of that post wasn't to make them better than casters at every one of those points. It is merely to increase the agency of cavaliers.
Planar Contacts is probably similar as it sounds like you're creating an entirely new game subsystem (with all that that entails) instead of working with what already exists.
You do not need a whole subtype just to give a class contacts. For godsake, planar contacts actually even easier to handle than non-planar contacts when it comes to abilities since you can offload mechanics to effects like Planar Ally. I mean hell, there is actual already a class in PF that gets planar contacts as a class feature.
I know you're just spitballing but if it's too broad (or impossible to implement) then there's no point in discussion. A +1 to Diplomacy on the full moon and Charm Person at-will are both "better at convincing people to do things", but wildly different in usefulness.
There is a thing called Good Faith. Please do not assume the people you are talking to are idiots. I wrote "give them social maneuvering abilities so they can be great courtiers." as a broad thing, because there are a lot of different ways you can actually do social maneuvering mechanically, but I severely doubt anyone would do something like +1 Diplomacy on the full moon or Charm Person at-will for cavalier. I am a homebrewer, this forum has homebrewers. We don't automatically become idiots if we say or suggest things during brainstorming.
All I can say is that I have not personally experienced any particular caster/martial disparity in all my years of 3.5 OGL or PFRPG gaming. This is true on either side of the GM screen....
Again, I'm basing this solely on my own anecdotal experience of the past dozen years. Your experiences may vary based on play style and level of system mastery.
Um...
[Myth #1 (only combat issue); #6 (can't count on having right spell for right occastion); #7 (doesn't happen in actual gameplay)] .
I never made any specific claims to points 1 or 6.
Let me address #7, as Jiggy put it, "Unfortunately, it's difficult to discuss because the people who say it tend not to give much to go on. Often, they just sort of declare it and expect that to settle the matter."
Well, it is difficult to discuss: It's pretty much impossible to "prove" by argument that you're not experiencing something.
The way I play, I just don't see a martial/caster disparity. In every game I've ever run, the martials pretty much dominate combat; rogues and bards tend to dominate RP encounters; and casters have their moments in the spotlight when they have the perfect situational trick up their sleeves.
I think the biggest determination of whether you observe C/MD in real-world play is the number of encounters per day that the party typically faces. If you have too few encounters, then casters' uses-per-day limitation ceases to be actual limitation, throwing game balance off.
I don't play PFS, but my understanding is that the typical scenario assumes 5-7 encounters total: which is about the maximum you can reasonably expect to get through in a 4-5 hour play session. Since PFS is episodic, the end of the scenario almost always means the end of the adventure, and the PCs can then go back and recharge their abilities.
If you are always playing a 5-7 encounter adventuring day, then I will concede that casters have a distinct advantage: In this style of play you're pretty much bypassing the "resource management" limitation of casters-- especially once you get up past level 7. If you know you're only going have seven encounters and then you're done, then a caster can afford to blow all their spells/uses-per-day abilities.
This style of play devalues the benefits of PCs without daily limits on their primary abilities, such as fighters and rogues. Abilites without a daily limit aren't as flashy or powerful; their power is that they never run out.
My group's play style tends to go 15 or more encounters before the PCs get a chance to recharge. In this style of play, casters have to carefully manage which spells they cast when. They can't always lead a fight with their biggest bang, or use their invisiblity to sneak past every guard, or use divinitation magic to look past every door. In my games, the rogues have to take lead on sneaking around with Stealth; the fighters have to do the heavy lifting in combat; and the wizards' biggest contribution out-of-combat is often their Knowledge skills to get past puzzles or to figure out the big picture. (In combat, a 9th-level wizard still resorts to throwing ray of frost at enemies, because they feel they have to hang on to more powerful spells for bigger challenges later.)
So, sure, if you're playing PFS or running a home game with the "15-minute adventuring day," then casters do have an advantage: their ability daily use limts cease to be a limitation.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I see it, at its heart, CM/D is about one group of players getting to have more fun than the others.
Eh, not exactly. There's an important distinction you're failing to make.
The existence of the disparity is entirely independent of who is (or isn't) having fun.
The disparity exists objectively. The fact that casters can fly, turn invisible, travel the planes, cure HP damage, foretell the future and summon fantastical minions is not subjective; it's objective fact, written right there on the page in black and white. The fact that martials can't do those things is similarly objective, not subjective. The disparity exists.
How the disparity affects (or doesn't affect) people's fun at the table? That is the part that's subjective. Some people are bothered by it, some don't care, some actually like it and would be upset if it were gone. The fun varies; the fun is subjective.
The disparity exists. It just doesn't negatively impact the fun for everybody.
Now, I realize this isn't quite pertinent to your post, but I felt it was worth bringing up in general, and in fact I wish I could go back and edit the OP to include it. Very often, when someone tries to discuss the C/MD, others will use an argument that's along the lines of "My games have been fun, therefore there isn't a disparity." From there it escalates to the accusations of non-teamwork or only-in-theory or whatever else, because some folks just can't accept that a game they're having fun with could simultaneously have a major design flaw. :/
If you are always playing a 5-7 encounter adventuring day, then I will concede that casters have a distinct advantage
Isn't the default assumption in the maths of the game that each CR appropriate fight should take up 1/4 the resources of the party, leading to around 4 encounters per adventuring day?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@Haladir: It sounds to me like you've fixed the C/MD in your games by inflating the encounter per day expectation, which I admit I wouldn't have guessed would be sufficient. If I may ask, what sorts of stories do you tell in which a 15-encounter day makes sense narratively? Do you struggle to justify them? Also, what do you do about using scrolls and wands for utility spells so that spells per day is less of an issue (especially for wizards, who get Scribe Scroll for free)? Inquiring minds want to know. :)
If you are always playing a 5-7 encounter adventuring day, then I will concede that casters have a distinct advantageIsn't the default assumption in the maths of the game that each CR appropriate fight should take up 1/4 the resources of the party, leading to around 4 encounters per adventuring day?
Huh.
Well, if that is indeed the case, and if that's how people are desiging their adventures, then I will concede the C/MD.
That's just not how my group plays.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
THE CASTER/MARTIAL DISPARITY ISN'T ABOUT COMBAT. It's myth #1, guys! You keep bringing up examples of "well, the group needs more encounters" or "My character owns combat, and he isn't a caster", but that's not what it's about, lol!
Just read Jiggy's post. ^
And yes, as he said, this isn't about one group of players have more fun than the others. It has to do with the narrative/problem-solving power of spellcasters relative to mundane martial characters.