The 'not playing Pathfinder anymore' discussion gets really wonky in a game that has two entire first party books full of optional rules and subsystems. Even just staying in the realm of Golarion means that spaceships and space aliens are technically canon in that universe so even the genre isn't even solid.The question asked by the OP isn't "are you playing something that can technically be called Pathfinder?" The question is "are you playing the same game you were before?" If you're running heavily alternate rules, even if they were published under the Pathfinder imprint, you're not playing the same game. Even with exactly the same rules a change in tone can make the game unrecognizable.
By that logic a lot of paizo adventure paths amounts to a different game. But if using in house alternative rules constitutes a different game than before then we're talking about a very broad definition. This means that the addition of any class past the core rulebook can drastically change the game. Not that this is a negative thing. If it's for the better then it doesn't matter, but I think it does make the question kind of pointless, especially under those parameters.
Some people have already touched on this in this thread so sorry for the repetition. I think we need to recognise that some groups like the martial caster disparity and for some groups it is a non issue, even to the extent that in some cases they are oblivious to the issue.
To cater for everyone the solution to the caster martial disparity needs to be modular so that it can be added or removed without disrupting any other rules. It also needs to work with the existing adventure paths.
I have noticed that adding a mythic tier makes a big difference to a martial and very little difference to a full caster. It doesn't solve the problem but it does reduce it. Based on this it makes sense for the solution to be a package of powers that gives martials more options both in and out combat. And then we can leave the casters as they are currently and thus not overly disrupt the existing rules or adventure paths.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have noticed that adding a mythic tier makes a big difference to a martial and very little difference to a full caster. It doesn't solve the problem but it does reduce it. Based on this it makes sense for the solution to be a package of powers that gives martials more options both in and out combat. And then we can leave the casters as they are currently and thus not overly disrupt the existing rules or adventure paths.
I've noticed the opposite effect: Mythic levels crank the martials' combat prowess up to 11, which was never the issue. Meanwhile, Wild Arcana makes Schrodinger's Wizard real right from the get-go.
Okay, if we're looking at an overhaul that doesn't disrupt the Class system (which, quite honestly, may be at the root of the problem), here is a basic idea that could provide a template for redistributing 'narrative control' (which in this case only means certain mechanics) without making Martials 'casters', or 'powered', or some such:
I played a side-scrolling, web-based shooter today (which will remain unnamed). You have a number of characters or avatars you use to fight, each of which has a certain strength in terms of ranged or melee combat and possibly a form of 'spell' combat.
To simply create a 'switch-hitter' in PF is a forgone conclusion. Rarely does anyone attempt such a build, but it seems completely legitimate to suggest that a Martial could be efficacious at Melee, at Range, and at...
Area of Effect? Maneuvers? Social Skills? Out-Of-Combat? Etc...
Therefore, have Martials of a given class choose 'Priorities'.
You are given 1,2,3, and if you choose to spend all 3 on combat types, you're an absolutes bad-ass at combat, but don't expect to do much else besides. If you choose 1: Melee; 2: Ranged; 3: Social, you're going to be a great switch-hitter who can also contribute to Social.
If you go 1: Social; 2: Melee; 3: Ranged, as a Martial you'll pick up amazing tactical/leadership skills that give boosts outside of combat, but will not be a total bad-ass as example #1.
I have noticed that adding a mythic tier makes a big difference to a martial and very little difference to a full caster. It doesn't solve the problem but it does reduce it. Based on this it makes sense for the solution to be a package of powers that gives martials more options both in and out combat. And then we can leave the casters as they are currently and thus not overly disrupt the existing rules or adventure paths.I've noticed the opposite effect: Mythic levels crank the martials' combat prowess up to 11, which was never the issue. Meanwhile, Wild Arcana makes Schrodinger's Wizard real right from the get-go.
Interesting viewpoint.
Schrodinger's wizard exists without mythic rules, adding a mythic tier does not add any noticeable power to a well optimised wizard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some people have already touched on this in this thread so sorry for the repetition. I think we need to recognise that some groups like the martial caster disparity and for some groups it is a non issue, even to the extent that in some cases they are oblivious to the issue.
To cater for everyone the solution to the caster martial disparity needs to be modular so that it can be added or removed without disrupting any other rules. It also needs to work with the existing adventure paths.
The OP did say what he wants is to form 1/2 pages with house rules to apply to his table , he isnt after a bunch of changes to pathfinder itself. He just also doesnt want 100 pages of changes.
Trying to apply some of the changes here to everyone would be quite the poor call anyway since like you said , there are some players that want change , not everyone , plenty are just fine with things right now.
Here's another basic delineation which may serve to enable Martials to contribute equally in relation to Casters, while preserving the 'Magic/Non-Magic' divide: the division of the narrative 'gamespace' into 'tactical' and 'strategic' spaces:
to wit:
Martials and Casters both should have clearly defined spaces in terms of both strategy and tactics, which may overlap, but are generally interdependent.
In Combat (i.e. 'tactical'):
1) Martials provide cover and support for casters.
2) Casters buff and enable Martials.
3) Casters have limited and precious 'Alpha strikes/nukes/etc.' and crowd control that can critically effect outcomes, BASED ON MARTIAL SUPPORT.
4) Martials target enemy casters as a priority, and are enabled in doing so by caster support
Out of Combat (i.e. 'strategic'):
1) Casters have specific Knowledge bases, critical for Lore and knowledge of enemy Tactics
2) Martials have knowledge of advanced Tactics, allowing for situational buffs, etc.
3) Martials can muster forces, providing supplies, Boons, items, etc.
4) Casters can call upon separate but similar resources..
Here's a question for the peeps out there, based on the challenges presented at various 'levels of power':
Place these challenges into meaningful categories. How are they grouped? Are they tactical or strategic? Are they (Range: Touch) or (Range: Reach), or (.. Close ... Short, .... Medium, ..... Long ..... etc)?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anzyr, where does rope trick say that it prevents the demonic influence form screwing your rest? In fact, rope trick,even has an entrance to it, leading into the place you came from.
Do the various hut/house spells state they prevent supernatural effects from affecting those inside? I would check, but don't have my books on holidays.
The point of my post is that for every scenario you come up,with at high level that makes it seem like Martials suck, people can come up with some where casters suck too.
What about Faerun when the weave broke, or mystra was murdered?
What about dark sun, where arcane casters are hunted and killed on site?
Both of those settings are fully supported by Pathfindes rules. Both of those entire settings make casters pretty damn useless or at least dangerously unreliable.
How about an area of magical instability.
What happens when your God can't grant spells in a blighted area protected by his arch nemesis?
All of these things are possible, and easily run at very high level. Casters could get around it with gear. Just like Martials get around all the other contrived scenarios people com up with to make them look like chumps.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anzyr, where does rope trick say that it prevents the demonic influence form screwing your rest? In fact, rope trick,even has an entrance to it, leading into the place you came from.
Do the various hut/house spells state they prevent supernatural effects from affecting those inside? I would check, but don't have my books on holidays.
The point of my post is that for every scenario you come up,with at high level that makes it seem like Martials suck, people can come up with some where casters suck too.
What about Faerun when the weave broke, or mystra was murdered?
What about dark sun, where arcane casters are hunted and killed on site?Both of those settings are fully supported by Pathfindes rules. Both of those entire settings make casters pretty damn useless or at least dangerously unreliable.
How about an area of magical instability.
What happens when your God can't grant spells in a blighted area protected by his arch nemesis?
All of these things are possible, and easily run at very high level. Casters could get around it with gear. Just like Martials get around all the other contrived scenarios people com up with to make them look like chumps.
I really hate this "It's totally balanced, since you can be a jerk to people who play casters"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anzyr, where does rope trick say that it prevents the demonic influence form screwing your rest? In fact, rope trick,even has an entrance to it, leading into the place you came from.
Do the various hut/house spells state they prevent supernatural effects from affecting those inside? I would check, but don't have my books on holidays.
The point of my post is that for every scenario you come up,with at high level that makes it seem like Martials suck, people can come up with some where casters suck too.
What about Faerun when the weave broke, or mystra was murdered?
What about dark sun, where arcane casters are hunted and killed on site?Both of those settings are fully supported by Pathfindes rules. Both of those entire settings make casters pretty damn useless or at least dangerously unreliable.
How about an area of magical instability.
What happens when your God can't grant spells in a blighted area protected by his arch nemesis?
All of these things are possible, and easily run at very high level. Casters could get around it with gear. Just like Martials get around all the other contrived scenarios people com up with to make them look like chumps.
What you wrote basically amounts to "if we mess with magic then casters have problems". Yes, of course, if we change the rules then casters have an harder time than they usually do. But unlike with martials you actually have to constantly use these very limited tropes (basically anti magic fields or wild magic zones... let's all play in Alkenstar and the Mana Wastes people!).
So no, while a fighter can never solve some situations on his own in higher play, you have to actively change the setting rules or make ample use of the same gimmicks time and again in order to give casters an hard time (which is NOT ballancing them btw).As for your setting examples:
Edit: as I said before if you want to reduce the divide without killing class differentiation (something no one really wants) you have to REDUCE the power and versatility of spells. Casters still need to be king when doing their thing but they also need to take a step back when dealing with roles belonging to other classes, and the key to do this is to change spells, acting on durations, casting time, sometimes tone down effects. I posted a list of the guidelines I think would be effective before but in general spells should not be allowed to trivialize encounters and whole game mechanics like the skill system or environment effects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting viewpoint.
Schrodinger's wizard exists without mythic rules, adding a mythic tier does not add any noticeable power to a well optimised wizard.
Schrodinger's Wizard can be briefly explained as the fallacy that a wizard will always have the appropriate spell on hand to solve any problem. In reality The wizard's limited spell slots, funds and time means it is unlikely (but not quite impossible) that the wizard can reliably pull this off in practice.
That changes with the introduction of the mythic system. The Archmage and Hierophant paths both get path abilities (at tier 1) that allow them to cast any spell from their spell list without preparing or even knowing it first - Inspired Spell and Wild Arcana. That means that at X times a day a wizard can choose any one spell he can cast, out of the ~1200 wizard spells published by Pathfinder, to solve any particular problem he has encountered.
They've basically taken the pre-nerf Paragon Surge combination (which was widely considered one of the most broken options in the game), somehow turned it up to 11, and sent it out into the world as a baseline mythic path ability. It's an incredibly powerful ability and will massively impact the power of a full caster if put in play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That comes dangerously close to saying that people aren't playing "right".Spheres of Power helps with the arcane side of things, bringing it down a bit closer to the realm the martial deals in. (thanks, Malwing!)
Bringing martials up is the other half, and there are 3pp systems that do that.
Either way, though, you're no longer playing Pathfinder really. It may be better - for your table - but it's just like home-brewing your own solutions. (Kirth's is a great example of professional-level home-brewing imho.)
Not at all.
If you're playing Kirthfinder, are you still playing Pathfinder?
There's no "right" or "wrong" about it. I have no judgments about changing or modifying a system. I do it all the time to make the system work for my campaigns and to tell the stories I want to explore.
Pathfinder is, itself, a home-brew of 3.5. And the group that developed it published it, and many people liked it and adopted it as well. And they realized: "Well, we're not playing D&D any more, so we need to call it something else."
Not that this furthers the discussion on how to "fix" the system.
More than that though, Pathfinder started as adventure paths. The entire product line took shape as a vehicle to better grow the adventure path line, and even if it's grown beyond that, that was still the root of the whole company. I actually own most of the adventure paths, and I play more in Paizo APs than in any other type of game, and I actually ran into an interesting phenomenon - Paizo's APs, the root of what Pathfinder is, are actually much more playable and smooth when you use 3pp materials instead of having to deal with the unpredictability of wizards or the inadequacy of Fighters. Try it sometime. Run Jade Regent with a party...Spheres of Power helps with the arcane side of things, bringing it down a bit closer to the realm the martial deals in. (thanks, Malwing!)
Bringing martials up is the other half, and there are 3pp systems that do that.
Either way, though, you're no longer playing Pathfinder really. It may be better - for your table - but it's just like home-brewing your own solutions. (Kirth's is a great example of professional-level home-brewing imho.)
Or you could play Legacy of Fire with a Bard, Vizier, Oracle, Warder, and Druid... and then a Bard, Vizier, Oracle, and Cleric NPC... and then a Bard, Vizier, Spiritualist, and Cavalier... and then a Bard, Spiritualist, Cavalier and Battle Lord... and then a Bard, Spiritualist, Rogue NPC, and Battle Lord... and then a Spiritualist, Vizier, Rogue, and Battle Lord.
Dice are Brutal. #insidejokesaboutPCdeathandabandonment
On topic. I actually don't mind having a decently played tier 2 or tier 1 caster in a party, if only because I think most adventure paths assume that power progression. In my limited experience, it does seem that large parts of balancing encounters to level is with a wizard or cleric spellcaster progression. I.E - These encounters should be okay for a 5th or 6th level party because they're have 3rd level spells like haste, dispel magic, and invisibility purge. It can also be hard for tier 3 classes to get spells like teleport or fly, mass in time with when challenges might expect a party to have them.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting viewpoint.
Schrodinger's wizard exists without mythic rules, adding a mythic tier does not add any noticeable power to a well optimised wizard.
Schrodinger's Wizard can be briefly explained as the fallacy that a wizard will always have the appropriate spell on hand to solve any problem. In reality The wizard's limited spell slots, funds and time means it is unlikely (but not quite impossible) that the wizard can reliably pull this off in practice.
I call this "the Schroedinger's Wizard Fallacy Fallacy". Wizards have free Scribe Scroll and the ability to leave slots open and ready spells on remarkably short notice, meaning that while a given wizard may not have the exact-right-super-perfect spell for a given situation, the odds that they have a useful spell capable of addressing the problem are actually pretty good. Anecdotally, I can recall a conversation I was involved in where someone was claiming that a poster was using "Schroedinger's Wizard" in an argument, and said something to the effect of "Sure, a given wizard may be able to fly, turn invisible, dispel magic, throw fireballs, buff the group, teleport, make himself impossible to hit, summon up monsters specifically useful to the situation, and even do some emergency healing, but an actual wizard would have to pick which of those he wanted" after which they were immediately shown that a wizard of the level under discussion (I think it was 9) could actually do all those things with spell slots to spare, not even having to discuss the fact that most wizards I've seen in action will actually carry scrolls of their common utility spells to keep their slots free for more niche or save-based options (note that scrolls are both very cheap, and a wizard can easily crank out at least 1 scroll of 2nd level or lower each day, even while adventuring, fairly easily).
Also anecdotal, I've actually seen a few threads lately where someone was called out on touting "Schroedinger's Wizard", so they actually provided the full write-up for the wizard who could do all the things they mentioned. Generally, the side that said the silver bullet wizard was a white room abstraction not something that could actually come together failed to respond to these refutations of their challenges.
I'm sincerely surprised I don't see more Schroedinger's Wizard's in my experience as a GM considering the existence of Fast Study.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just woke up and checked my stuff and noticed that Endzeitgeist reviewed Spheres of Power this morning. It gained 5 stars, seal of approval, nomination for best of 2015, and an Essentials tag, with parts of the review saying "The system’s core rules fit comfortably on two pages. That’s a GOOD thing. Even better, the presentation is so simple and concise, it renders grasping the system hilariously easy. " and "you get magic that is less prone to resulting in nigh-godlike omnipotence casters at high levels " and ", sphere casting is much (MUCH!) better balanced than vacian spellcasting and the introduction of the material herein should end the martial/caster-strife for most groups.".
I keep saying it, but replacing spells with spheres is not only efficient but it is actually easier, because spheres are laughably easier to grasp than spells.
In fact third party casting in general eliminates the problem but spherecasting has the ability to replace spellcasting with minimal fuss.
Spherecasting is the obvious answer.
I call this "the Schroedinger's Wizard Fallacy Fallacy". Wizards have free Scribe Scroll and the ability to leave slots open and ready spells on remarkably short notice, meaning that while a given wizard may not have the exact-right-super-perfect spell for a given situation, the odds that they have a useful spell capable of addressing the problem are actually pretty good.Interesting viewpoint.
Schrodinger's wizard exists without mythic rules, adding a mythic tier does not add any noticeable power to a well optimised wizard.
Schrodinger's Wizard can be briefly explained as the fallacy that a wizard will always have the appropriate spell on hand to solve any problem. In reality The wizard's limited spell slots, funds and time means it is unlikely (but not quite impossible) that the wizard can reliably pull this off in practice.
Fair enough, but do you disagree with my analysis of the power boost a full caster gets from one mythic tier?
A regular wizard needs the experience and foresight to learn and prepare the right spells as well as the WBL and time to invest in scrolls. While I absolutely agree that the Batman wizard is possible, it has some pretty stringent requirements on the player.
Conversely, a mythic wizard with Wild Arcana turns into Captain Hindsight with the power of Time Travel.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting viewpoint.
Schrodinger's wizard exists without mythic rules, adding a mythic tier does not add any noticeable power to a well optimised wizard.
Schrodinger's Wizard can be briefly explained as the fallacy that a wizard will always have the appropriate spell on hand to solve any problem. In reality The wizard's limited spell slots, funds and time means it is unlikely (but not quite impossible) that the wizard can reliably pull this off in practice.
I call this "the Schroedinger's Wizard Fallacy Fallacy". Wizards have free Scribe Scroll and the ability to leave slots open and ready spells on remarkably short notice, meaning that while a given wizard may not have the exact-right-super-perfect spell for a given situation, the odds that they have a useful spell capable of addressing the problem are actually pretty good. Anecdotally, I can recall a conversation I was involved in where someone was claiming that a poster was using "Schroedinger's Wizard" in an argument, and said something to the effect of "Sure, a given wizard may be able to fly, turn invisible, dispel magic, throw fireballs, buff the group, teleport, make himself impossible to hit, summon up monsters specifically useful to the situation, and even do some emergency healing, but an actual wizard would have to pick which of those he wanted" after which they were immediately shown that a wizard of the level under discussion (I think it was 9) could actually do all those things with spell slots to spare, not even having to discuss the fact that most wizards I've seen in action will actually carry scrolls of their common utility spells to keep their slots free for more niche or save-based options (note that scrolls are both very cheap, and a wizard can easily crank out at least 1 scroll of 2nd level or lower each day, even while adventuring, fairly easily).
Also anecdotal, I've actually seen a few threads lately where someone was called out on touting "Schroedinger's...
I did exactly this in my experiment of playing four wizards through Rise of the Runelords. Straight from the beginning my four wizards were scribing scrolls once a day (only takes two hours at low levels, so you can do it at the end of an adventuring day). Gaining four scrolls a day quickly adds up and opens up the possibilities. I completey eliminated the spell limit per day by the time I hit level 3 and was going to Thisletop, which made the final chapter of book 1 pretty easy. And I still had money left over.
Even level 1 wizards do not need a martial to protect them, just add another wizard and they'll be fine. When you throw in a Druid or cleric or another 9th level caster that's even better than the wizard in martial combat, it gets worse.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anzyr, where does rope trick say that it prevents the demonic influence form screwing your rest? In fact, rope trick,even has an entrance to it, leading into the place you came from.
Rope Trick prevents demonic influence in that area because rope trick creates "an extra-dimensional space that is outside the usual multiverse of extra-dimensional spaces." Furthermore, the entrance is no good to anything that is outside the rope trick because:
"Spells cannot be cast across the extra-dimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extra-dimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot-by-5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can't see through it."
So the demonic influence cannot cross it without fiat. (You do know even without your books you could have used your internet connection to just look up the rules right?)
Ultimately though, your answers are "fiat until the caster is useless". Which is an incredibly unhelpful argument when trying to disparity. Please think of non-fiat solutions or changes, because saying "Well I can say the caster is useless!" is not a meaningful contribution to the discussion.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A quote by Endzeitgeist
"Spheres of Power by Drop Dead Studios
Why it’s essential: Because this massive tome eliminates vancian casting in favor of a more balanced, less exponential system. Beyond superb balancing, the mastery of crunch is pronounced and this huge book simply allows you to tell different stories – so, as far as I’m concerned, each campaign should consider whether this does not suit its needs better. Oh, and it plays well with psionics, pact magic, akashic mysteries… Yes, this is awesome!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love Spheres of Power and believe it does truly help with the disparity issue being discussed. I have wondered how to best use the system with monsters and enemy spell casters because I don't want to have to do a lot of conversion work.
I love Spheres of Power and believe it does truly help with the disparity issue being discussed. I have wondered how to best use the system with monsters and enemy spell casters because I don't want to have to do a lot of conversion work.
What we really need is a Spheres NPC Codex but at this point I leave spells and spell-likes from monsters alone treating them as monster abilities or exclusive GM tools.
One way that I looked at it in one game is that spherecasting is magic before spells and spells are just spheres that became spells using the spellcrafting feat.
|
If your solution to the caster/martial disparity is to put the blame on the payers and the DM your not only highlighting the problem IMO. You might as well say your overweight not because you have poor eating habits. It's the fault of the people who make the food because they make it taste so good.
Didn't people try to do that a few years back when they sued McDonalds? :P
Honestly, I tend to run enemies as written, without bothering to convert them.
Does this create a power imbalance between PCs and NPCs because the default spell system is more powerful than Spherecasting (which is kind of a nerf to the standard system)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I tend to run enemies as written, without bothering to convert them.Does this create a power imbalance between PCs and NPCs because the default spell system is more powerful than Spherecasting (which is kind of a nerf to the standard system)?
Not really. Monsters and NPCs tend to run more themes and flavor decisions so are naturally much weaker. Plus a lot of their resources at higher levels are designed to resist rather than challenge the power level of spellcasting PCs which can be wasted resources or make no difference as spherecasters are still 'powerful' just not diverse in silver bullet solutions.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My recommendations:
1. Do away with the idea that magic can do *everything*. "Knock", in its current form, shouldn't really be a spell. Magic spells for magic locks, technical know-how for mechanical locks. This would also go a long way in-Universe to explain why mechanical locks are still in use, and create more interesting challenges as vaults and dungeons use layered magical/mechanical defenses.
2. "Unchain" (har har) melee characters from having to stand still to get all of their iterative attacks. A high level fighter should be able to clear a room with the greatest of ease, not stand in the doorway and have to wait for people to crowd him.
3. Martial classes should have more utility abilities. A big part of the problem is that pure martials often have nothing to do outside of combat, and in-combat struggle to keep up with Wizards, who get the best of both worlds. I would bump Fighters and Paladins up to 4 skill points per level, and perhaps give fighters some kind of 3/day bonus die (1d4? 1d6?) to skill rolls based on a chosen physical attribute (STR/DEX/CON). This should make them feel a bit more action hero-y.
4. Extend cast times for...just about everything, really. Alternatively, implement spell activation rolls. One of the annoying things about *playing* a caster is that magic isn't terribly interactive for the player. You point at someone, and *they* make all the rolls to see if your spell works. Again, Pathfinder Unchained has some interesting mechanics for making this happen.