| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No Summoners. Unless you use the Unchained fix of the Summoner.
Really, any book is doable for this. All characters are nominally created equal. (Though the Unchained Rogue fixes a lot of problems that the old Rogue suffered from.)
If your campaign can handle a wizard, it can handle anything from any other Paizo released book. The adventure itself even uses materials outside of the Core Rulebook (for example, Erylium is a Witch and Nualia uses Subdomains. Both of which are from the APG.)
But ban not-unchained summoner. And if you have a rogue, be a decent human being and let them use an unchained rogue. Same for Monk. Barbarians are fine either core or unchained. Also I'd use the unchained alternate rules for BAB progression to help make multiclassing less terrible.
APG is surprisingly balanced, with very few things that stand out as overly powerful. I generally allow everything except for the Summoner.
Be advised, though, that a player abusing the slumber hex can ruin many encounters. There are many enemies with very low will saves in this AP, especially in books 3 and 4.
I wouldn't ban the class or even the hex but I'd somehow try to limit its use, if only by asking the player to use it sparingly, only when there's a larger number of foes (so one slumber doesn't outright end the combat) or as a last resort if all else fails.
I'll also echo what the others have said: Allow the Unchained Rogue and Monk. The core versions of those classes are notoriously bad. Not as unplayable as some players will claim, but they are the weakest classes and can use the unchained buff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Master Summoner archetype aside, the Summoner is only going to be a problem if you've players who are willing to abuse the stupid spell list it was given. Which isn't really that hard to avoid. That said it does tend to be a bit overwhelming to newer dms who don't know how to handle it even with the better spell list, and it can bog things down if the player isn't time efficient at handling summons.
The rest of the APG classes range from balanced to bad, but you don't have too much to worry about from it. The only class that has ever managed to truly rival the Wizard in his vaulted tower of godhood has been the Summoner, so most classes aren't going to cause that much havoc with the game.
Lot of people complain about Slumber Hex, but honestly the Witch doesn't have that great a spell list. It's lacking many staples in it. Slumber Hex itself is really powerful against solo encounters against enemies with bad will saves, and those do pop up in that game a fair bit in the mid range modules. But that's more bad encounter design than the witch's fault, and there's way better classes that trivialize those encounters than the witch.
I'm considering running this campaign too and I'm quite new to Pathfinder itself. This leads to a couple of questions, connected to the classes highlighted in this thread - Summoner and Rogue.
Why is the Summoner such a 'bad' class and why is the Rogue under powered?
EDIT: Apologies for hijacking the thread by the way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is the Summoner such a 'bad' class and why is the Rogue under powered?
The (unchained) Summoner has a ridiculous spell list, with access to many spells before any other class (haste as level 2 spell being the prime example). He also has the ability to cast summon monster multiple times per day with no additional cost, faster casting time (standard action instead of one round) and ten times the usual duration. Those things alone make for a very powerful class. The complete customizable Eidolon can be very powerful as well, and with the right build and a few buffs becomes nearly unkillable.
There are a few hard counters to summoners and their eidolons but it's rare for an NPC to use any of those like the spell Dismissal.The Unchained Summoner makes building an overpowered eidolon much harder and nerfs the spell list to something reasonable. It's still a very powerful class, though.
The rogue is quite fragile, has the worst saves of any class in the game (only reflex is good and that's considered the least important save) and its only noteworthy damage-source sneak attack is extremely circumstantial with many foes being immune or at least able to avoid it most of the time with good positioning. So often the rogue ends up unable to do much damage in many combats.
I've read up a little on the Summoner and they do seem rather powerful.
I'm very new to Pathfinder (and D&D type d20 games in general) and am still getting to grips with the core classes and their level progression.
How does the Unchained version of the Rogue improve on the Core version?
Every table is different so its hard to give out blanket "do not allow" statements.
Instead I will say this. Do not allow the summoner unless you and the player understand it fully.
If your player wants a witch then no that evil eye allows for continuous uses as long as there is a different affect each time. Also be aware of the sleep hex for single creature boss fights. In other words do not use a single creature as a boss or the fight might end quickly.
Also know that the dazing metamagic feat is powerful, and no monster in the game is immune to the daze condition.
Other than that I don't seem to be able to recall any problems.
I've read up a little on the Summoner and they do seem rather powerful.
I'm very new to Pathfinder (and D&D type d20 games in general) and am still getting to grips with the core classes and their level progression.
How does the Unchained version of the Rogue improve on the Core version?
The core rogue is really weak. The unchained one makes it more respectable.
If you are really new to PF then I would not allow the summoner yet.
Unchained Rogue fixes quite a few problems that held back Core Rogues.
1. Unchained Rogues get access to Weapon Finesse as a Bonus Feat at level 1. Also they gain the ability to use Dexterity instead of Strength to determine damage with melee attacks using 1 type of weapon at level 3 (and a few more unlocked later.). This makes most rogues become less Multiple Attribute Dependant, and can start affording better starting stats. Also this means the Rogue isn't forced to waste their 1st Rogue Talent taking "Finesse Rogue" 90% of the time.
2. Debilitating Injury applies a debuff to the recipient of the rogue's sneak attack. This makes sneak attack more useful for something besides raw damage. Also the rogue gains double the benefit from the debuff. One condition the debuff inflicts gives the Rogue essentially a +4 to hit, which is fantastic because being a 3/4 BAB Class, rogues were one of the few cases of a 3/4 BAB class with no means of boosting their own accuracy.
3. The Skill Unlock mechanic gives Rogues something unique that they can accomplish with skills. This makes the Rogue not completely outclassed by any Bard and other Skill Monkeys who have built-in skill bonuses.
4. Sneak Attack is errata'd to hit creatures in concealment that is not Total Concealment (fixing the problem of WANTING to be with a rogue in a dark alley because they couldn't hurt you there)
5. Universally Better Rogue Talents
6. Danger Sense (better than Trap Sense) also gives the rogue a bonus to avoid being suprised by a foe so it's not useless once all the traps have been disabled.
6. Capstone ability (which rarely if ever comes up) now scales off Dex instead of Intelligence).
|
Thank you everyone for your input/advice. I will put it to good use. I must admit I have not yet looked at the unchained classes, but after reading everything here I intend to do just that. I am really intrigued buy what ElSilverWind has said about the Unchained Rouge (now I want to make one for myself) and definitely want to read up on it.
Based on what I have read here I will probably not allow Summoner or Gunslinger (I don't allow guns in my campaign anyway). I will probably allow Unchained rouge and / or Bard (after I have done a little research).
As a follow up I would ask if their is anything else in the APG that I should consider restricting for Rise of the Runelords. FYI I do intend to use Hero Points.
Arbarth
Old School GM
|
In my current campaign (halfway through book 3)there are two players running characters from APG. They are playing a witch and an Alchemist. Neither one seems to unbalance things too much. My biggest problem has been dealing with the fact that there are 5 players. In fact, there is only one player using CRB classes (Cleric 4/Paladin 3).
|
I am playing in a game with a witch and an alchemist. We are about 1/3 of the way through Skinsaw.
Don't worry too much about the witch using the slumber hex. Yes there are times it is awesome. Our GM hated it all through Burnt Offerings, but now we're in the middle of Skinsaw Murders and the slumber hex is worthless through a big chunk of the module.
Our problem is our alchemist keeps pissing off all the townsfolk. He's a bit on the CN side, but it has been in good fun and when the actual fecal matter hits the oscillating air mover he behaves himself, so its all good.
Slumber is mostly useless in Skinsaw, that's correct. However it can be very very powerful in pretty much every single one of the other 5 chapters.
Gunslingers are not in the advanced players guide. They are in the Ultimate Combat book, and they are not a problem as long as you don't allow anything beyond the early weapons or anything allowing them to double up on attacks such as TWF or double barreled guns.
|
No Gunslingers in case anyone wants to play one. Their too many opponent who have a low touch AC. Unless you want a player character to almost never miss. Don't allow it imo.
The dragon Arkhyst did a "one shot, one kill" on my musketman. While the gunslinger is a hard build to play against in this campaign, my players have quickly learned that he's also a liability that requires as much protection as the conjurer.
The only thing that sucks is a I can't validate spells like bullet shield since Karzoug has been trapped for 10k years, and guns weren't around during the Thassilonian Empire.
|
|
Slumber is mostly useless in Skinsaw, that's correct. However it can be very very powerful in pretty much every single one of the other 5 chapters.
There are few places where you are obligated to have enemies stuck alone, so there are real limits on Slumber. NPCs should be using a move action to wake each other up. Our GM quickly learned that in Burnt Offerings.
Slumber is mostly useless in Skinsaw, that's correct. However it can be very very powerful in pretty much every single one of the other 5 chapters.There are few places where you are obligated to have enemies stuck alone, so there are real limits on Slumber. NPCs should be using a move action to wake each other up. Our GM quickly learned that in Burnt Offerings.
Waking someone up is a standard action. Slumber says it works like sleep, sleep says "Awakening a creature is a standard action".
So depending on the initiative order, a single slumber can make the foes waste two complete actions (slumbered foe misses his turn, the other one wastes his turn waking him up). And that's on top of the wasted time (and provoked AoOs) from standing up and picking up the weapon and the threat of a coup de grace. Unless you rule that the target sleeps without falling prone or losing his weapon somehow.
Having multiple enemies takes the bite out of slumber. But for something even a level 1 witch can do all day long, it's still pretty powerful.
No Gunslingers in case anyone wants to play one. Their too many opponent who have a low touch AC. Unless you want a player character to almost never miss. Don't allow it imo.The dragon Arkhyst did a "one shot, one kill" on my musketman. While the gunslinger is a hard build to play against in this campaign, my players have quickly learned that he's also a liability that requires as much protection as the conjurer.
** spoiler omitted **
|
|
Having multiple enemies takes the bite out of slumber. But for something even a level 1 witch can do all day long, it's still pretty powerful.
Very true. There's no dispute that slumber is a damned good ability. And a GM does have to plan for it when there is a PC witch in the party or it will wreck encounters very easily. Once you do get into the mind-set to plan for it, it does drop from a game killer to just an insidious pain in the arse to cope with; but that does affect everything else you do as a GM.
I think maybe there should have been an upper limit on how often a day a witch can hex (say 3 + prime caster stat mod like other secondary caster abilities); though that would still leave slumber as an encounter wrecker. Think about it. A wizard uses his starting combat school power 3 + INT per day. Sorcerers use their starting combat bloodline power 3 + CHR per day. The limit on hex is that you use it once per target, but there's no practical limit on how many times beyond that. That would still have hex being a powerful class feature; but a witch would be more careful about spamming abilities like slumber; lest they run out.
Witch is a constant headache. Summoner is far more tolerable, but has its own problems. Gunslingers as well. Why not try RotR without the APG? Be aware that a very large majority of the fights is against single creatures. You would have to rework maybe 90% of the encounters to make it "witch friendly".
For what it's worth, our GM was more than happy to set us up with APG stuff once he got a copy of it. I'm enjoying adding 'invulnerable rager' to my abilities, for one; everyone loves DR half level/- , right?
|
|
Witch is a constant headache.
What makes the witch so troublesome from a GM stand point? I don't have any players who look at it, but I always thought the summoner was more irksome, especially if GM allows the Master Summoner archetype. I have a summoner in my game, but he takes the role of buffer/healer more than combatant.
"You are attacked by a..."
"I slumber hex it."
"Well, it's a..."
"Is it undead, elven, construct or an ooze?"
"...no."
"Then it has to make a DC 26 Will save."
"Seriously? 26?"
"Well, it is what I have gone for in my build."
"...it fails. It falls asleep."
"Great, coup de grace, loot, next room."
"Okay. In the next room, you're attacked by a..."
"Slumber hex DC 26."
GMing for a witch character is a complete and utter borefest. Everything gets hit by the same bloody hex. If it is alone and not one of the few exceptions, it will go down. And then you get into "why is it we're just fighting undead and elves lately?" territory. It is a massive headache. Banning the witch is a far easier decision.
Is it just the slumber hex that's the issue or are the other hexes a problem as well? It seems kind of extreme to ban the entire class if the problem is just one option the class has.
Witch is a constant headache.What makes the witch so troublesome from a GM stand point? I don't have any players who look at it, but I always thought the summoner was more irksome, especially if GM allows the Master Summoner archetype. I have a summoner in my game, but he takes the role of buffer/healer more than combatant.
The slumber hex can easily end single creature boss fights, but I often suggest to GM's not use them without minions. While the slumber hex is the sexy hex the misfortune and evil eye hexes can take a boss and effectively make him into a mook as far as his effectiveness. At least with the sleep hex I can just have a minion wake him up, and the creature can't be affected again until 24 hours have passes. With the evil eye hex even failing it brings good results to the PC's.
Personally I like the witch, but as a GM you need to be ready for the hexes.
Summoners are ok as long as the player understands how they work. They are easy to optimize though so that might be a concern.
Last, but not least: What works at one table may fail at another. I would only look into factual statements vs "play experience". As an example "a witch is too good" is a subjective statement". A witch with hexes A, B, and C can do _____ and therefore ____ is a factual statement. You can then decide if that is something you can(or want to) deal with at your table.
The slumber hex was an example. Misfortune is pretty much as bad. Icy prison is worse. Add in the stuff a witch can do with feats etc, and hexes truly become bothersome. That "save once and be safe for 24 hours"? Yeah, no. And of course, cackle maintains them indefinitely. I have played as GM for a witch character. There is nothing sexy about the hexes, it just turns the game into guessing how much you can tailor the enemies to the witch without the player considering you a dick. If you do not, I describe what happens above. Oh, and for the record, with ninety percent of AP fights as single monsters, "being ready for the hexes" means actually designing the entire AP worth of combat again.
|
Witch is a constant headache.What makes the witch so troublesome from a GM stand point? I don't have any players who look at it, but I always thought the summoner was more irksome, especially if GM allows the Master Summoner archetype. I have a summoner in my game, but he takes the role of buffer/healer more than combatant.
To be fair I COULD solo many encounters in the campaign but I am also playing a wizard and NOT a master summoner in our game but I find it better for the players that I enhance them to shine but the defenses that I can get up quickly is very staggering.
I admit I don't have much respect for witches as you can kill the familiar and really hurt them and the range is 30 ft so a good archer build from distance can kill them but we haven't really had any one push a good witch at our tables.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slumber functions "as per the spell sleep." That means it's got all the same limitations as Sleep:
1) Anything with immunity to compulsions, mind-affecting effects, or enchantments cannot be affected by Slumber. Anything with bonuses on saves against any of those gets to use them.
2) Anyone with Protection from [Player's Alignment] running is immune.
3) Sleep allows spell resistance. If the monster has SR, the witch has to roll a caster level check against it. If the witch fails to overcome SR, I might allow them to try again, because they didn't get as far as making a save.
1) True.
2) False. As per this FAQ protection from alignment only works against spells that allow you to command the target (i.e. charms and dominations). Effects like Sleep and Confusion are not included.
3) False. All hexes are supernatural abilities and ignore SR.
But honestly, the best response is to talk with your player about it. Tell them "I'm glad you're having fun, but dude, from this side of the table it's boring and frustrating. Try something else once in a while." Sometimes you just need to address something out-of-game.
There is a simple enough problem with this: The witch HAS nothing else. Unlimited save or sucks is THE reason to play the class. What, you expect her to pull out a bow and pew pew pew?
Or maybe you meant "try something else" as in "play some well-designed class instead"? That, I can agree with. I don't want to end up where I have to rebuild more or less every single encounter in an AP to cater to one player, and even when having done so I still run the risk of being called a vindictive GM for trying to make the game fun for ALL the players, not just the one who gets the jollies from hitting monsters with the same ability EVERY SINGLE TIME with a massively pumped focus for that. True, barbarians end up in the same place sometimes, but there are way more counters to them.
In my current campaign (halfway through book 3)there are two players running characters from APG. They are playing a witch and an Alchemist. Neither one seems to unbalance things too much. My biggest problem has been dealing with the fact that there are 5 players. In fact, there is only one player using CRB classes (Cleric 4/Paladin 3).
I am playing in a game with a witch and an alchemist. We are about 1/3 of the way through Skinsaw.
Funnily enough, I'm running a game with a witch and an alchemist, and we're about a third of the way through The Skinsaw Murders! I have six PCs in total, and none of them is straight out of the CRB. The other four are all using CRB classes, but with archetypes, races and alternate abilities from the APG and other Paizo books. I ruled out summoners and gunslingers for the game.
The witch hasn't been a significant problem so far - although she does use slumber a lot of the time, she hasn't optimised for the save DC, and she does do other things, too.
|
|
The witch hasn't been a significant problem so far - although she does use slumber a lot of the time, she hasn't optimised for the save DC, and she does do other things, too.
Similar to my game. In fact, the witch in my game has been more of a thorn in my side from her uncanny ability to prepare just the right arcane spells for a day to subvert my evil plans. Even if she was spamming the Slumber hex, as long as the players are having fun, I don't really care. We laugh a lot when we play and I play up my annoyance with their success be shooting the GM's Evil Eye over my GM Screen. Even if they cake walk the whole thing, if they have fun, so do I.
And if the players are NOT having fun, because slumber hex to everything? Specifically, the OTHER players...
I frequently ask my players if they are enjoying themselves. And they have told me, each time, that they are. I've seen situations where it was to me a cakewalk and they they were sure they were going to lose. Encounters that they were challenged by. To my group, being dropped to under half hit points is fingernails clinging to an object, while having someone under 0 hit points (more often than not the GMPC, which is their front line and whom the group has teasingly referred to as "danger lemming") means... well, I'm not quite sure what it means, but the group doesn't consider that a fun fight.
The only gripe I've heard is from one player about another player distracting a third and delaying things as a result. A second player does take her time in deciding her course of action, but the grouser doesn't mind that as much because when she DOES decide? Well, let's just say that player has defeated several foes with one well-placed spell.
So before deciding your players are not having fun?
Ask them. And ask them what might make things better, in their eyes.
If there is a majority of players who feel that witch player is diminishing their fun by steamrollering encounters or the like (which can be dealt with by revamping characters to have greater resistance or even immunity to enchantment/charm)? Then talk to the other player and offer to let that player alter their character sheet.
Don't just assume.
Witches are overpowered?
People need something to b*$*% about I guess.
I recommend trying the rules forum, they love complaining about everything over there.
Witches are boring, and bring too much redesigning to the table. If you have a fight against a solo monster you need to witchproof, you need to add minions. However, if you do, you straight up add difficulty, meaning you will need to rebuild the single monster as well.
I've never had that issue honestly, and my wife loves witches!
It's the first I've heard of it. :-)
And witches are anything but boring. :-)
Still, to each their own. :-)
To each their own.
No foe should ever be a solo foe. Economies of Action are always hurting solo enemies. You can compensate for that by having the solo enemy have the Mythic Agile template (second round of full action which they go on +20 their initiative) but even so... solo encounters may seem dramatic but NEVER work out.
Well, someone ought to have told Paizo that regarding the APs. Funny how that never happened.
They know. They don't care. It is thematic for four heroes to face down a solo villain. The fact that every single time the villain is curb stomped doesn't factor into things. Unless they're a Conjurer who has the opportunity to summon things... or a Cleric with that Summoning Feat.
Generally, no. Even if a single villain summons huge amounts of monsters, one or more of the PCs will still be able to reach them in the first round.
Unless the party doesn't have invisibility detection and the villain cast Invisibility. Seems summoning monsters to do your killing is not in fact a directly harming attack. ;)
|
|
While I can't speak for or against the Witch, the Gunslinger (Musket Master) in my campaign was a pain for a long time. With his feats, he was able to use touch AC for anything within 55 feet, and for a long time, he ruled the field. But now, while hitting touch AC still sucks, he's died twice because he has been so focused on that 55 feet, forgetting that the enemy can close with him, and they usually hit harder than he can take.
The point I'm trying to make is that every class has its strength's. Every class has its weaknesses. While some might be overpowering in the beginning, it doesn't mean they stay that way. The way this campaign is built, by the time the good guys reach the more powerful bad guys, the bad guys know the party's tactics and strengths/weaknesses. Any player who is a one trick pony is going to fail, because the GM can and should adjust Karzoug's and Mokmorian's and other's tactics to compensate. I was recently given a very valid argument for why Karzoug SHOULD have bullet shield even though guns weren't around during the Thassilonian Empire. So he will have bullet shield.
I'm not doing this to neuter my one player, but to allow for others to have glory, and for the final fight to be a challenge (assuming they reach it before he escapes and real..... well, you know). Enemies of high intelligence are SUPER smart, and should be played as such. While I consider myself fairly intelligent, I'm no 20+ Intelligence. So I compensate by adjusting on the fly, yes, sometimes, I fudge dice rolls. I don't do it to kill characters, but I do do it to make the game epic.