|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Possibly over exposure of the archetype, either in your region or as part of the many Oracle guides online. I Retrained my Oracle out of Dual Cursed because every other Oracle I encountered was Dual Cursed. It's been around for a very long time, and builds are usually similar.
Kind of like when a Magus sits down at the table. They're probably going to be using shocking grasp. Same for an Oracle having two curses. It's original and exciting for newer players, but somewhat tiring for older ones.
|
|
I would say that you just got lucky.
There's nothing that says you need to be told the result of the dice, only that you get to force the reroll before results are announced (not the total number, but the consequence: hit or miss, made or failed save, etc).
So:
1. Nothing obligates the GM to tell you the die result.
2. Nothing says or even suggests that you can't reroll a 1 or a 20.
3. Quickly saying the result so fast you can't say "Misfortune" is bad form.
This is how it should work:
GM says, "The troll swings at Fred," and picks up his dice.
Bob says, "Misfortune!"
GM picks up a second dice, rolls, and selects the lowest one.
Fred says, "I cast Fireball, DC is 16."
Bob says, "Misfortune on Ogre 2!"
GM rolls two dice for Ogre 2's save and selects lowest.
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht
|
I've GMed for several Dual-Cursed Oracles (pretty much 75% of all Oracles I've seen), and I sort of agree with Faan. Forcing rerolls is very, very powerful. At first I was annoyed with them, but by now it's more a weary resignation. I don't whine about it because I've accepted it by now, but I do think it's way stronger than any other option available.
As for your GMs, all of that is very much not done. The tricky part of the Oracle is that it forces all the rolls the GM makes to be out in the open, because it's technically "before the results are revealed." That means you need to be able to see the dice ("okay, you're going to have to reroll that 18"), which takes away some of the mystery of the GM. Because now you can calculate its exact to-hit or save or such. Basically, it turns the game from regular Pathfinder into a "guess the modifier" game. "Okay, my monster rolled a 12 on the die to hit you. Your AC is 25. Do you want to risk this?" If the game's played properly, until every enemy has been targeted with Misfortune, there is no secret information anymore and slows the game down immensely.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A young woman wanders in, looking vaguely confused. "Hello? Am I in the right room?"
She pauses and gives bobtheprettygood an appraising look. "Oracles with double-curses? Someone once told me that I was dual-cursed but I wasn't really sure what they meant - sometimes my limbs are slow to move and I'm the biggest klutz but I never thought of them as curses."
"Anyway...sometimes I can make the bad guys be extra unlucky, but it doesn't always work the same way every single time. Usually I make sure to ask the Almighty Gee-Em how to best use my powers each time I get sent on a mission somewhere. Most of them have been willing to help me make the most of them without totally throwing their grand plans out of whack," she adds with a shrug.
"And besides, I can do other things too! Like make cornbread. All of my New Friends that I meet seem to love cornbread," she smiles before wandering back out.
______
Basically I always make sure to ask the GM (especially if it's one that I've not played with before) how they wish to handle Corona's Misfortune ability before the game officially kicks off. So far I've not met any hostility (that I could determine anyway) from GMs or other players while playing her, but I also play online and things tend to operate a little differently on Play-by-Post than IRL. I've had some GMs that allow me to force a reroll after the result of the original roll has been posted but I've had others that prefer I simply call out when I want to use a Misfortune (such as when an ally is attacked or required to make a save) and they do both rolls at the same time. Although I suspect the intent is that the ability function like how Deighton and Quentin have stated (you see the roll and then decide if you want to risk forcing a reroll or not), it's not a big enough deal to me personally that I'm inclined to argue if the GM wants to handle it differently.
And if I were to wind up at a table with a GM or players that really didn't like such a mechanic then I might be a little bummed initially, but hey...there's plenty of other helpful stuff Corona can do in a pinch. Like bake tasty breads :)
|
It is somewhat annoying to me in that it really breaks the flow of the game as almost every round of combat includes a "wait, let me think if I want you to go back and do that again." It slows it down and adds a lot of decision-making. However some of your examples seem a bit extreme if the GM is trying so hard to keep you from using your class abilities.
I've had someone tell me that I don't actually get to know what the die number rolled is, because it lets me guess bonuses to hit and to saves.
I have this concern as well. Not so much from the Misfortune ability but from experienced players in general. If the sorcerer uses a spell with a Will save, sees a 5 on the die, and hears that the enemy made the save she is likely to switch to a reflex or fortitude save for the next spell. Not so much if the die shows 18. For experienced players its not even deliberate, they do the calculation unconsciously. So I roll in secret a lot of the time. When there are reroll powers involved (dual-cursed) I usually say "OK, I'm not going to reveal the numbers, but if you want to use the power just give me a number. Like 'if that was above a 10, reroll it.' Or 'The first time any enemy rolls a natural 20 on attack, make it reroll (if I can legally use the power).'"
And not just for me, but for the others at the table who have to pull the weight of my now ham-strung oracle.
If your oracle is truly ham-strung just by not being able to effectively use misfortune, you might want to peruse some of the threads on "how can I contribute effectively" that are around the boards. Not saying I'm OK with a GM arbitrarily closing down a class ability, just that when you get that GM you can do something else. (Most spontaneous casters are a bit painful to play for the first 3 levels, but that's a different discussion.)
Now that was ludicrous.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, I have no problem with Dual-Cursed Oracles.
I tell the party I am rolling openly. I make the assumption (publicly) that any save below a ten that is will or fort save will be rerolled. I also make the assumption (publicly) that any monster roll of a 20 will be rerolled.
This saves a lot of time, and moves things quickly.
Corona, I have GMed for you, and your character is awesome. Don't feel bad about playing who you are.
Yours,
Hmm
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I've GMed for several Dual-Cursed Oracles (pretty much 75% of all Oracles I've seen), and I sort of agree with Faan. Forcing rerolls is very, very powerful. At first I was annoyed with them, but by now it's more a weary resignation. I don't whine about it because I've accepted it by now, but I do think it's way stronger than any other option available.
You've never seen that with any other class because its not an uncommon ability? At least in the case of the Dual-Cursed it restrained.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I am really not a fan of the ability, it breaks the flow and has quite a number of uses per day - basically, the GM has to wait a moment between every roll. The fact that the ability only costs and immediate action really increases the power level by quite a bit.
Strictly speaking, the GM does not have to roll in the open, he could just tell you the number every time... (which would very likely cost a lot of time and be quite annoying... but might force the session to stop before the final encounter due to time).
I usually roll in the open for a number of reasons, Blade's Tiger named a couple of those, it just makes it a bit more social..(the giant didn't just kill you because the DM didn't like that joke you just made... your head was turned into marmalade because the dice wanted it. The opposite happened to me in a scenario where it is rather hard to get a second pp, the BBEG was about to shot her hostage and ...rolled a natural one ^^ )
Of course, I still have to make some rolls in secret and this ability makes that rather complicated.
These days I would also have power concerns, I just talked with a GM about a player who took it as a one level dip.
--
If someone ever takes another stab at this one.. the "roll twice takes lowest" abilities are much less distracting.
Oh, and using it on you teammates really sounds very cheesy, that alone would deserve a clarification.
EDIT: Rules discussion and their rulings aside.. if the archetype makes your local GMs that unhappy I would suggest reconsidering playing the character. It is true that GMs complain about a lot of things, but there is nobody forcing them to GM or offer their games as public games (as opposed to invitation only).
If this ability significantly reduces their fun this is a real concern.
EDIT2: There have absolutely been times, where a character has torn through a scenario with a "cheesy" ability, and there are some cases where I might have steered my players away from an option.
There have been times where I had considered offering less tables as public tables - or in other words, invite all players except the ones that annoy me.
I feel, that while understandable from the GM's point of view, this really does not help PFS... but for any GM who has players that significantly reduce his or her fun .. the option is on the table.
|
What I would do is give the GM your "standard orders" -- ie "reroll any attack roll 15+" or "reroll any saving throw in double digits". And then, you can update those standing orders during the fight, as circumstances dictate -- but again, there's no reason not to tell the GM what those are *before* they roll.
Because seeing the actual roll doesn't give you any new information. You should already know when you are going to force a reroll. If you don't, then you *are* going to be slowing down play as you consider the option after ever single roll.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Corona,
You're welcome at any table I GM.
Plenty of broken classes/archetypes/builds out there. About as many of them as there are broken players and GMs.
Seems like this sort of issue could be settled during recruitment in PbP or during sign-ups in face-to-face play.
We all have our favorites and our pet peeves, so I'm in no way dissing the opinions expressed by anyone in this thread.
Life's too short to play a game with a group that disapproves of your PC-lifestyle choices.
Explore, report, cooperate, and tolerate!
Larry
PS Unless they exhibit poor personal hygiene. (One of my pet peeves.) ;-)
|
I've never had to GM for a dual-cursed oracle (that I can remember), but I don't use a screen and roll in the open for PFS, so I don't think it would be too much of an issue. For a GM that does use a screen, I like what Kevin Willis and pH Balance have suggested. Give the GM guidelines on the type and how high of a roll you might want to force a reroll on. Update it as needed. "He's wielding a scimitar? I'd like the chance to force him to reroll an 18 or higher." If there's a particularly important attack or roll that you think you might want to make the GM reroll, let them know before they roll. That's what I tend to do with Inspiration or my folio reroll. "Before I roll this Will save, I might want to add inspiration depending on the result, so don't tell me whether I succeed or fail right away."
If the issue truly is the GMs holding a grudge against the ability, the best thing to do is to try to make it as easy as possible for them during the game. If they're still taking an antagonistic stance toward the character, and you can't talk it out with them, then probably just don't play that character at their table. Not a great solution, but an option.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a 30 foot range, can only be used once per round (and locks out all other immediate and swift actions) and can only be used once on any given foe.
It is powerful, but on the scale of Zen archer to pounce barbarian, misfortune isn't even on the chart.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Hi all,
I've got a duel-cursed oracle that has just hit third level, and I have a problem. I've played with 3 different GMs so far, and the reactions I've gotten range from annoyance at having to deal with the Misfortune ability, to someone saying that the only character they hated more was someone summoning multiple monsters each round.
I've had someone tell me that I don't actually get to know what the die number rolled is, because it lets me guess bonuses to hit and to saves. I've been told that I can't force a re-roll on natural 1s or 20s, because the result is automatic. I've had someone who made the effort to call out the total of the roll faster than I could react to. And if I'm not sitting where I can see the roll, well, I'm just out of luck.
Suffice to say, the game suffers. And not just for me, but for the others at the table who have to pull the weight of my now ham-strung oracle. Is this a universal attitude toward the oracle's Misfortune ability, or did I just get lucky?
First, let me say I'm sorry to hear you've been treated that way. It's not acceptable for a GM to act spitefully, especially to someone you who hasn't done anything to you. Even if he's using an ability that the GM had bad experiences with when playing with others.
.
With that in mind, I do have problems with this power. I think it's drastically unbalanced, which is shown by:
- The number of people willing to dip a level into oracle and accept two curses, just to get this ability.
- That people with other caster classes are willing to sacrifice a level to dip for this power.
- Comparing it so other reroll abilities, all of which are considerably more limited in use and more expensive.
- The sheer amount of bile it causes GMs to heave. That's an indication there is a problem with the ability.
It seems you're playing a true oracle, but that's the exception in my experience; I mostly see other people with Charisma-based caster classes dipping for it. Paladins trying to completely nail down their saving throws, sorcerers and bards using it to force rerolls on hard saves.
I recently GMed for a Thundercaller bard with an oracle dip and this power. That means every combat starts with spending a performance round on a Sound Burst followed by Misfortune if the monster saves. So every combat has a high chance of the monster being stunned in the first round, which generally decides the combat (drops weapons, can't use control effects, can't react to PCs moving around it).
Why are dedicated casters willing to sacrifice a level to gain this ability? Because forcing enemies to reroll saves is really that good. Compare it to the Persistent Spell metamagic feat, which increases spell level by 2. It's clearly cheaper to dip one level in Oracle than to wait for spell slots two levels higher.
How big is the effect of "roll, then reroll if the roll looks good"? Let's assume a decently-specced caster with access to spells that hurt Fortitude, Reflex and Will. It's usually not that hard to guess which save will be the enemy's weakest, so we're targeting that. Let's say that the enemy has a +3 on its worst save while the caster forces DC 16 saves. This is probably being generous on the monster. But it means the monster needs to roll a 13 to save, or a 40% chance to save.
The caster might not be quite sure when he'll force a reroll, but anytime the monster rolls a 13 seems like a good enough moment; chances of the monster rolling lower are good at this time. So assume the caster uses Misfortune any time the monster rolls 13+ on his first roll.
Now the monster's chance to save becomes 0.4 * 0.4 = 0.16. This is roughly comparable to raising the DC so that the monster saves only on an 18+. So that's a +5 DC hike. Compare how many feats/headbands that normally requires.
You may say "but you can only use it once per target". True, but that's enough. How many Persistent spells does it normally take to totally screw someone?
---
But we're not done yet. Misfortune also allows you to force rerolls on allies (including yourself). If we look for another ability that allows a once-per-day immediate action, we come to the Luck domain. That allows you to reroll one d20 per day (more at L12). But you don't gain that ability until level 6 and it affects only you.
Or just compare it to the Fortune revelation of the dual-cursed oracle itself; that's one d20 per day for yourself (more at L10), and you don't gain it until L5.
Compare the ability to reroll saves to a shirt/folio reroll. That one clocks in at $10-20 for a single person once per session. Misfortune works for the whole party, once per adventuring day.
---
TL;DR - Misfortune is waaaay OP, and this is why GMs react so strongly. It gives the whole party a shield against bad luck, and makes strong casters even stronger.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IME how you use misfortune is important. If you spam it at every opportunity it will grate on the GM and oft times the players as well. Rerolling is a huge advantage as the math shows, much more powerful than the typical bonus/penalty to a roll, though it does have some limitations. IMO the key is to use it sparingly and only for significant circumstances. For example, my dual cursed Oracles always ask the GM if a critical threat is visually noticeable. I don't care what the number on the die is, just whether or not I can tell when a serious blow is about to be landed. If so, then I just ask the GM to give me a heads up when that happens. So the GM can help themself avoid the spamming by giving me the chance to introduce some "luck" into the most significant of events. Even then I rarely use it on enemies, but more so on allies which admittedly is not how it "should" work. With a name like MISfortune it should be the other way around, but the wording allows for it.
One of the faults of the oracle's misfortune vs the hex, is that the former is a replacement roll. The latter rolls twice and takes the worse which much more effectively imposes a penalty. However, the oracle version can actually hurt you some times. On more than one occasion I have misfortuned a monster into criting an ally by mistake. This happened much more often back when I was more liberal in using it, but sometimes if a PC is significantly wounded and another hit could take them down, any potential hit could be misfortuned. Then, oops, a normal hit is rerolled into a crit. Also, on a save a player is not sure if their mid-roll will be high enough so the misfortune is used and they reroll a successful save into a fail. So just be careful. Sometimes death is better ;-)
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I wonder how the Paizo staff would rewrite the rules if they had the chance to go back and start over... knowing what they know now about how each one affects complications and delays in gameplay.
Anything that has a "stop and do it over again" effect would surely get a LOT of scrutiny.
No no it wouldn't. The highest level character I have pretty much has worst stop and do it over again effects than the Oracle and whose primary gimmick is statistically on par if not better than Misfortune. Hell, if I built her out correctly she would be better than misfortune because misfortune is still up to random chance.
EDIT:My Bard is the same way though she can't force rerolls on enemies but on allies she is able to.
|
|
The negative attitude toward Dual-Cursed oracles expressed in this thread is surprising to me.
The problem with anecdotal evidence is that it does not accurately reflect the reality. For example, Lau Bannenberg feels the huge volume of players willing to dip Dual-Cursed oracle solely to gain Misfortune is evidence of it being too powerful. In contrast, I have never even heard of such a tactic in play or theorycrafting. Based on this thread (an anecdote), the tactic is limited to Europe--of course, it will take off now that it has been spoken. ;)
I do have an issue with GMs suggesting that it is perfectly OK to dictate what legal characters a player can or cannot play in PFS. Do I say, "No Herald Callers at my table. It slows things down too much?" No. In my opinion that would be against the spirit of organized play.
|
|
I do have an issue with GMs suggesting that it is perfectly OK to dictate what legal characters a player can or cannot play in PFS. Do I say, "No Herald Callers at my table. It slows things down too much?" No. In my opinion that would be against the spirit of organized play.
That's a little unfair. Remember the game rules are not written FOR PFS, we are just using them for the campaign. The standard assumption is that the GM can tailor the game and events to match the skill level of the players and the power level of their characters. However in PFS that ability is significantly reduced. While I'm not saying GMs should have the power to ban certain builds from their table, it should not surprise anyone when GMs or even players dislike playing with certain "OP" builds that take advantage of the GM's RAW limitations, especially if the player is really pushing the bounds of spamming their abilities to solo or curb-stomp the adventure. Sure we can equate that to a player issue vs a rules and/or character issue, but the rules as written certainly can encourage that behavior and it's up to the individual to decide when enough is too much.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I do have an issue with GMs suggesting that it is perfectly OK to dictate what legal characters a player can or cannot play in PFS. Do I say, "No Herald Callers at my table. It slows things down too much?" No. In my opinion that would be against the spirit of organized play.That's a little unfair. Remember the game rules are not written FOR PFS, we are just using them for the campaign. The standard assumption is that the GM can tailor the game and events to match the skill level of the players and the power level of their characters. However in PFS that ability is significantly reduced. While I'm not saying GMs should have the power to ban certain builds from their table, it should not surprise anyone when GMs or even players dislike playing with certain "OP" builds that take advantage of the GM's RAW limitations, especially if the player is really pushing the bounds of spamming their abilities to solo or curb-stomp the adventure. Sure we can equate that to a player issue vs a rules and/or character issue, but the rules as written certainly can encourage that behavior and it's up to the individual to decide when enough is too much.
No it really isn't that unfair given that as I said earlier its not like Paizo hasn't designed comparable abilities after the fact.
|
I've yet to have any issues with my one dual-cursed oracle with regards to misfortune. Not the way I RP him on the other hand...
As other have said it is all about the way you interact and talk with the GM about the ability. And make sure that it is not slowing things down.
(I play him as a slightly pacifistic pothead of a kitsune)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember the game rules are not written FOR PFS, we are just using them for the campaign.
The Additional Resources and Campaign Clarifications, however, are written for PFS. The OPC has removed or altered plenty of options.
I'm not saying that an individual can't feel like 'Ability X' is over-powered or under-powered or contrary to the flavor of the campaign. I'm not saying you aren't allowed to feel frustrated when 'Ability Y' appears at your table. A person's feelings and opinions are theirs.
What I'm saying is that, as I understand my responsibility as a GM, I'm supposed to separate my personal feelings about any race, class, feat, ability, or spell from the player playing it, set aside those feelings, and make sure everyone at the table has a good time.
Because, if it is up to the GM to decide what builds they'll accept at their table, we get this:
GM Bob dislikes Ability X
Regular Player Joe knows Ability X gets under GM Bob's skin and uses it all the time
GM Bob declares he will no longer GM for any build with Ability X
Two month later, New Player Fran shows up and has a character with Ability X
GM Bob says, "I'm sorry, Fran, I decided two months ago that I won't run a game for any player with a character that uses Ability X because I feel it's overpowered. But feel free to make another character. I'll even help you."
New Player Fran, who spent hours learning the rules, PFS rules, and pouring over the Additional Resources and Campaign Clarifications before she spent hours building her character's backstory feels gut punched, says "No, thank you," and goes home.
Maybe your area has tons of PFS tables. Where I play, I'm lucky to get 2 tables. A GM saying they won't run X build means I'll never get to play X build (except on PbP, which I like, but not everyone likes PbP).
In summary, everyone is entitled to their personal feelings about different things in PF. Everyone is allowed to bar a player for harassment (of themselves or other players). Everyone is even allowed to express their personal feelings to their players in a non-confrontational manner. However, I argue that PFS GMs are not allowed to dictate builds or party composition at their table based on those opinions (or anything else, including personal dislike of the player who is annoying but not harassing anyone).
|
|
It's a 30 foot range, can only be used once per round (and locks out all other immediate and swift actions) and can only be used once on any given foe.
It is powerful, but on the scale of Zen archer to pounce barbarian, misfortune isn't even on the chart.
I think part of it is the GM being annoyed by being forced to do something and the break in flow of the game. Often the exchange is:
GM: so xyz happe....
Player (interupting): reroll that please.
|
|
Let me frame the situation in a different perspective:
Note: These are for the purpose of example and do not represent my feelings on the issues.
I am running PFS tables at GenCon.
I greet my players cordially and present them with a laminated sheet outlining my personal preferences as a GM.
1. No firearms. I just feel that firearms disrupt the fantasy feel and it really interferes with my enjoyment if there are firearms used in the scenarios I run.
2. No half-orcs with sacred tattoos and Fate's Favored. I've seen so many half-orcs with sacred tattoos who all seem to be favored by the fates that it just really makes it so that I'm not enjoying running if half-orcs have +2 to all saves.
3. No summon monster/summon nature's ally. It just really slows things down, and we won't finish on time if you use these spells.
4. No more than one pet at the table. It just really slows things down if everyone has a combat pet of some sort, and we won't finish on time if you bring more than one. Please decide among yourselves who gets to have a pet.
...and this one might be a little too hot button:
5. You must play a character of the same gender as you. I feel very uncomfortable playing with male players playing female characters and female players playing male characters. You can play any build, but for the duration of our session together, your characters are the same gender as you.
Are any of those things OK to say at GenCon? I ask what I believe to be rhetorically.
|
|
While you are correct that a PFS GM is not, by rule, allowed to dictate what builds can be played at their table, they do have the ability to not run a game if said build is present. That is essentially doing the same thing, but is legal. Course, IMO that is bordering on jerkish behavior and really no better than the player from your example that knows the GM dislikes a certain thing and shoves it in their face as often as possible. And refusing to run a table once the players arrive is a good way to get yourself removed from the GM list. Although that also can be problematic if you are in a small community with limited GMs.
The point is, the GM-player relationship is a collaboration. Players should chose to play characters that will not only enhance the story, but not take advantage of the inherent limitations of the GM and especially not taunt them with builds they know the GM dislikes. At the same time, the GM should genuinely give every player the benefit of the doubt, not run in a adversarial manner, and address issues on a case-by-case. In almost every case of a GM "hating" a build it is the player's actions, not the game mechanics, that are at fault.
The reality is some player/GM styles and preferences just do not mesh well and would never be together in a home game. Its is only in PFS' arena of community play do we see these opposing forces thrown together. Sometimes, its better to just walk away or avoid each other than to "force" the other players at the table to endue uncomfortable interactions.
[/soapbox]
|
Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The negative attitude toward Dual-Cursed oracles expressed in this thread is surprising to me.
The way I see it, it's a popular and powerful option that's much better than simlar options at the same level, and even far beyond that. Slumber Witches also get a lot of hate, simply because that hex is much more powerful than any other regular Hexes available at level 1. It's about on par with Ice Tomb, in that both Hexes, if successful, completely neutralise a combat encounter. Ice Tomb has some rider effects, but the main thing is that paralysed/unconscious effect. Most really powerful Oracle Revelations come at level 7+ or 12+ or something like that. and as Lau said, for some reason Fortune becomes available 4 levels later, and only works on yourself (with extra uses down the line). If the abilities had been switched (self-reroll once per day at 1 and further, other reroll at 5), it seems much more reasonable.
Also, while there are many shutdown abilities, it's very feel-bad. Colour Spray knocks out enemies, Hold Person makes them useless, and so on. But Misfortune is rubbing salt in the wound: you know something would have succeeded, and you deflected it. for GMs, that can become an uphill struggle. In the back of your head, you know that as long as that Oracle is in the party, your monsters will most likely keep missing their attacks or failing their saves. you can only prepare that many Hold Persons, but Misfortune is unlimited. It's basically like the difference between black and blue in Magic: the Gathering. Blue has access to counterspells, black has creature kill spells. I completely accept the risk of my creatures getting killed before they've done something useful, as at least they've wasted my opponent's resources. But I get irrationally angry when my creatures get counterspelled. In essence, it's the exact same thing, but the other player basically saying, "nope, you don't get to have any fun" feels much worse. That's the frustrating thing about Misfortune: you see the potential your monsters would've had, but every time you see your player going, "nope, let's try that again." I also have a very deep-rooted hatred against Mental Block, much more so than Colour Spray. At least Colour Spray finishes fights. Mental Block gives the opponents the illusion they've still got a chance, but in essence they're completely gimped. All they can do is swing their sword. And while full-BAB classes don't care that much, it's still very feel-bad on the GM's end.
|
|
Nobody here, even in the OP's post, are disallowing Dual Cursed Oracles, so I see no need for the "different perspective" that you pose.
Seems like something that would only rile up a thread.
EDIT: this was in reply to Blake's Tiger; Bob just decided to play his Ninja today.
My intention is not and was not to rile up the thread.
But, respectfully, someone did (I reread the thread to make sure I wasn't hallucinating), and then someone backed them up.
I appreciate Bob's second response much more than his first. I wish that had been his first response, but if wishes were fishes...
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
The negative attitude toward Dual-Cursed oracles expressed in this thread is surprising to me.The way I see it, it's a popular and powerful option that's much better than simlar options at the same level, and even far beyond that. Slumber Witches also get a lot of hate, simply because that hex is much more powerful than any other regular Hexes available at level 1. It's about on par with Ice Tomb, in that both Hexes, if successful, completely neutralise a combat encounter. Ice Tomb has some rider effects, but the main thing is that paralysed/unconscious effect. Most really powerful Oracle Revelations come at level 7+ or 12+ or something like that. and as Lau said, for some reason Fortune becomes available 4 levels later, and only works on yourself (with extra uses down the line). If the abilities had been switched (self-reroll once per day at 1 and further, other reroll at 5), it seems much more reasonable.
A lot of the more powerful Oracle revelatios are first level. Stars and Shadow are the two that I'm aware of. Shadow grants you acess to spamable rerolls and a great expanded spell list and Stars lets you have super color spray.
Edit:This does remind me that there is a wand equivalent of misfortune too.
|
...Seems like something that would only rile up a thread...
As you can see from the previous responses, some GMs have personal issues with your build (and other powerful builds, I'm sure). Will they like it? No. That's not going to change. Some GMs don't like character builds that can end encounters with one or two abilities. Are they supposed to run with PFS legal builds? Yes (unless they back out of the game, which leads to its own set of problems as mentioned above). GMs making up rules (ie: can't force rerolls on natural 20)? Make sure to have the book with you, talk to the GM ahead of time, and make sure you're on the same page with how the rules work. I often take a bit of time at the beginning of games (both as a player and GM) to try to clear up rules issues we might run into.
With any large organization, you'll find a wide range of opinions and styles. If you were at a table where I was GMing, I would have no problem with your character - it's a legal PFS option, and I wouldn't penalize a player just for making a powerful character. I also don't have a problem with characters steam-rolling encounters - as long as the other players on the table are on the same page, and it's not ruining THEIR fun (always an important consideration when discussing these kinds of things). Other GMs might grind their teeth, and you may end up seeing that aggravation result in unfair rulings. Sadly, some GMs feel that for THEM to have fun, they need to provide challenging fights for the characters.
For the most part, the golden rule applies here - don't be a jerk. If you're seeing your character aggravate a particular GM, try to be flexible. Play another character if you have an option. Sit at a different GMs table if you can. If that doesn't work, talk with the GM, and try to clear up some confusion she/he may have ("Hey, you know, I can only use it once per round, as well as once per target."). Do what YOU can to be considerate.
I feel that it's the GM's job to make sure the PLAYERS are having fun (I hate hearing GMs say after a character obliterated an encounter, "...but *I* want to have fun, too!" as if the only way for the GM to enjoy things is to be able to beat up on characters). I think the GM should be enjoying his experience due to the 'joy' he is providing...however, not everyone feels that way. Each person, players and GMs, get their own joy through various aspects of the game (ie: we all have fun in our own way). You are playing a group social activity. The only thing you can directly affect and change is by the actions YOU take.
Sorry - that's not really a solution to things. That's just my opinion on your situation, as an experienced player and GM. Good luck with your future games!
|
|
The 2 cents of an oracle super-user (way too many oracles played in PFS and home games to date...)
- I can agree with the regionality of this phenomenon; I GM at conventions in 3 different regions and (up until a year or 2 ago) was highly active in my local scene, and I rarely see dual-cursed at tables, and never have I see someone 'splash' for it. (Again, personal experience.)
- This is one of those items you inform your GM of at the start of the session (I ask specifically for 'unusual' bits I need to know about, but even if I didn't this is something you volunteer) and as a GM, I suggest (as I do) that you just don't jump too far ahead of yourself until you've 'soaked' the misfortunes out of that player for a particular scene/combat. Even better if said player is one who volunteers a theory of theirs on when they'll use it, but I don't depend on them. Mostly I just look their way with a moment's pause whenever the roll's face is double digits and see if they want to jump in. (I am a fairly open roller, I just make it more openly viewable if I have something like Misfortune at the table.)
- This is also one of those things the player should be considerate about so as not to generate sadness on your GM's part. (Heavens oracle is another such - be nice with your power.) (Oh, and for the love of all GM's sanity, please don't cross those two streams. Cause that IS asking to be branded a problem player.) Work with your GM, not against him (advice that's good for all seasons) and everyone can have a good time.
|
|
I think I tried the dual curse Oracle once, not for PFS. Not a fan of the misfortune or the fortune, but since both are optional, doesn't really matter. I dislike the loss of extra class skills and the replacement spells, but it's nice getting extra revelations.
In terms of balance, I think the archetype is too powerful for what it trades out, and I don't mean the optional revelations. Having an extra curse and losing class skills is not a fair trade for getting two extra revelations. Revelations are just too powerful for that trade, and, honestly, most of the curses are beneficial. As is, the Extra Revelations feat is pretty OP.
Oracles, in general, are very powerful.
Latest Oracle I've been doing is a Heavens Oracle. Color Spray and Awesome Display (Su) is just ridiculous. 2nd level before I could use it, but very, very potent.
|
|
5. You must play a character of the same gender as you. I feel very uncomfortable playing with male players playing female characters and female players playing male characters. You can play any build, but for the duration of our session together, your characters are the same gender as you.
That's a first i've heard of a GM calling that one.
I can understand your pov regarding the other points about 'yet another PC with [X]'.For example: While i only GM PBP, i won't refuse martials using the Fey foundling trait, while i do find out on their sheets that the trait is in no way related to the PC at all.
That aside, sure, from a GM's perspective the forced re-roll 'can' be annoying, but there's the limit of times per round, times per creature, and it is still a 50% chance the save is positive anyway.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Story Time:
** "The Misfortune Revelation says 'you can force a creature within 30 feet to reroll any one d20 roll that it has just made' but he didn't roll a d20, he swung a sword at you, so you can't use that power on him now. You could use it if you were gambling with him." **...
|
|
5. You must play a character of the same gender as you. I feel very uncomfortable playing with male players playing female characters and female players playing male characters. You can play any build, but for the duration of our session together, your characters are the same gender as you.That's a first i've heard of a GM calling that one.
I've actually seen that mentioned in the past here on the forums. I don't remember the context - if it was something that actually happened, or someone talking about a hypothetical jerk GM like Blake's Tiger was in this thread.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I greet my players cordially and present them with a laminated sheet outlining my personal preferences as a GM.1. No firearms. I just feel that firearms disrupt the fantasy feel and it really interferes with my enjoyment if there are firearms used in the scenarios I run.
2. No half-orcs with sacred tattoos and Fate's Favored. I've seen so many half-orcs with sacred tattoos who all seem to be favored by the fates that it just really makes it so that I'm not enjoying running if half-orcs have +2 to all saves.
3. No summon monster/summon nature's ally. It just really slows things down, and we won't finish on time if you use these spells.
4. No more than one pet at the table. It just really slows things down if everyone has a combat pet of some sort, and we won't finish on time if you bring more than one. Please decide among yourselves who gets to have a pet....and this one might be a little too hot button:
5. You must play a character of the same gender as you. I feel very uncomfortable playing with male players playing female characters and female players playing male characters. You can play any build, but for the duration of our session together, your characters are the same gender as you.
Are any of those things OK to say at GenCon? I ask what I believe to be rhetorically.
You could "say them" but if you tried to enforce them, don't expect to stay a PFS GM for very long. Fine for casual play in home games, though none of these are particularly reasonable requests to surprise players with at a convention.
Regarding slowing things down, you could require the players run their turn on a timer, with excess actions to the time being lost. Summoned creatures and companions can be limited this way. But blanket bans because you've run with incompetent players in the past isn't really very reasonable. I have played with companion animal PCs or PC summoners that actually knew their stuff and it doesn't have to slow things down.
That gender thing is just a can of worms with no real gain. Don't look at the player at all, if the visual appearance of the player matters to your RPing of their character. Just see their model (and you can certainly require a model/miniature) and base your RP on that.
As for firearms, I think those are as fantasy friendly as spamming wands (not a fan of wands being so common), but players are allowed their own characters per PFS. That Half-orc thing is petty. Complain to Paizo if you want something changed for PFS (like banning firearms or a racial trait), but a PFS GM isn't allowed to change their policy on character creation.
|
|
In terms of balance, I think the archetype is too powerful for what it trades out, and I don't mean the optional revelations. Having an extra curse and losing class skills is not a fair trade for getting two extra revelations. Revelations are just too powerful for that trade, and, honestly, most of the curses are beneficial. As is, the Extra Revelations feat is pretty OP.Honestly, for most Mysteries, I don't find this to be true at all. Most have maybe two really strong ones you definitely want and then a few which are sort of Ok and then useless rubbish you will never use or which simply mimic spells you can easily pick up.
Battle is probably the main exception to this and possibly Time.
Depends how you build them, I suppose. I find the Oracles to be very strong, but each one does depend greatly on what you are trying to get them to do.
|
|
Depends how you build them, I suppose. I find the Oracles to be very strong, but each one does depend greatly on what you are trying to get them to do.Oracles are extremely strong but their strength comes from a combination of having access to an exceptional spell list, a number of very good revelations as well as extra benefits from their curses.
That doesn't change the fact that a lot of revelations are terrible and that you can easily get by with only having two or three for most mysteries.
Kinda curious, can you give an example of terrible mystery options? Definitely some of them don't work well together, but what are you thinking of for terrible options?
I do, really wish, there was a dual-mystery oracle archetype. Many times I've wanted to combine mystery selection.
|
|
Awesome Display: The reason you went heavens, turns colour spray into a game ender for you entire career.
Coat of Many Stars: +4 armour, on a class that can already wear medium armour and has magic vestment on its list so doesn't even need to enchant it. At level 7 it becomes equivalent to a breastplate, which you have had since level 1. At level 11 its the equivalent of a +2 breastplate, which you can already do with magic vestment. What's more, the stupid thing doesn't even last all day so you need to carry around some armour in case you get caught short.
Guiding Star: Sort of vaguely useful provided you are adventuring at night and it isn't cloudy. The free extend is nice but extend rods are cheap and plentiful.
Interstellar Void: Standard action, short range, low damage, targets the worst save, only gets a decent rider at level 15, you have far better things to do with your standard actions.
Lure of the Heavens: You can fly for minutes per level at level 10, just when you just received Overland Flight as a spell known.
Mantle of Moonlight: Immunity to Lycanthropy, about as niche as such abilities get, unlikely to ever come up.
Spray of Shooting Stars: A small number of low damage tiny AoE's using the most commonly resisted type of energy which also allow a save for half damage. Again you have much better things to do with your standard action. I suppose it might give you something to use against swarms if you didn't take the blackened curse or haven't reached flame strike yet.
Star Chart: 1/day commune at 7th level....
Hate the paizo site cut off on long posts. Hmmm...guess I disagree, mostly. For starters, a 12th level character only have access to 4/10 revelations without feat or dual curse access. So you really need only like 4/10.
I actually took heavens because my PC is a paladin/oracle and I don't actually intend many levels as an oracle. Awesome Display isn't level depenent (CHA dependent). Lots of good revelations in Heavens, but most require actually spending levels in oracle, which this character isn't planning to do. Color Spray is a very nice non-lethal takedown option for my Paladin.
I think you overlooked Mantle of Moonlight, since it can also force rage on enemies. This is pretty potent, as rage limits actions. You can use this to shut down enemy spellcasters (cause they can't cast spells while raging).
As I read it, the first two abilities for Lure of the Heavens (Su) are constant and only the use of fly is limited by minutes. So you can, indefinitely, leave no tracks and avoid ground based hazards. Contextual in use, but not weak.
Intersteller Void (Su) and Spray of Shooting Stars(Su) are both damaging abilities that scale by level with no upwards cap on damage. They are also Su abilities, so they can't be countered or easily shut down.
Dweller in Darkness (Sp) is a good spell. The other neat thing about Sp revelations is that the DC is based on your oracle's revelation DC, not the normal DC of spells (10 + 1/2level + CHA mod). This means their DC scales better than the spells would normally. And Sp abilities can't be countered (if they ever comes up for you).
Regarding the many weightless Oracle armor options. Not terrible, but never overly strong. Armor, in general, is really only useful if things are trying to attack you. If your oracle is Dex based, or just has low Str, this Revelation might be worthwhile. Most combats won't last longer than an hour, so there's not a huge need for constant armor. Plus, in theory, you'd need endurance to sleep in medium armor, and it's not worth a feat for me.
I agree with you on the others.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sadly, some GMs feel that for THEM to have fun, they need to provide challenging fights for the characters.
(...)
I feel that it's the GM's job to make sure the PLAYERS are having fun (I hate hearing GMs say after a character obliterated an encounter, "...but *I* want to have fun, too!" as if the only way for the GM to enjoy things is to be able to beat up on characters). I think the GM should be enjoying his experience due to the 'joy' he is providing...however, not everyone feels that way. Each person, players and GMs, get their own joy through various aspects of the game (ie: we all have fun in our own way). You are playing a group social activity. The only thing you can directly affect and change is by the actions YOU take.
I get a lot of enjoyment as a GM out of the fun the players are having. It's really cool to see players working together to solve a problem, like a particularly tricky enemy that they can only take down by working together in a novel way.
What I don't really agree with is the sentiment that it's bad for the GM to enjoy challenging the players. As a GM of course you're not trying to "win". But you do want to show off. If you have a cool monster with unusual abilities, you want a chance for it to use those abilities. By the end of the fight the players the players will have beaten it, but they'll remember that they fought something new and surprising.
So what really grates on me as a GM is shutdown builds. They figure out the monster's weak save, and use disabling abilities to prevent it from ever having a chance to do its unique thing. The mutant chimera's performance in the combat is exactly the same as the troll samurai oor the fetchling ninja because both got blinded/dazed/slumbered before they ever got to do something.
The players weren't challenged to find out what makes this monster tick, what tricks to use to take down this particular enemy. They used the same tools they use on everything else.
The players weren't "wrong" - it's a sound tactic. It works on almost everything, it avoids undue risk, and the first couple of times you avoid a difficult fight with it, it's exhilarating. But then it starts to make the game less interesting, because every fight becomes the same routine. And you can't forbid people to play this way because it's perfectly legal, and good tactics. But I really wish Misfortune had been designed differently.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
A lot of the more powerful Oracle revelatios are first level. Stars and Shadow are the two that I'm aware of. Shadow grants you acess to spamable rerolls and a great expanded spell list and Stars lets you have super color spray.
Edit:
This does remind me that there is a wand equivalent of misfortune too.I am not seeing any spammable reroll in the Shadow Mystery.
Ill Omen is OK but it only affects the next roll the target makes which is quite different. It also allows SR.
Channel characters who worship Pharasma can hand out rerolls to their entire party every time they channel.
Shadow's reroll is a spell you can only gain access through one of the better revelations. That's kind of why I kind of roll my eyes at the whole argument of misfortune being so powerful. If you spec out something with the best abilities you generally after going to end up granting rerolls or statically close enough.