Gallant Armor wrote: *How is that not the point? The martial classes you listed are still viable without their per day abilities and their uses of per day abilities are recoverable. They are far less dependent on per day resources than a caster relying on their spells.
*It works on any caster that is dependent on per day spells. If a caster is mainly using martial attacks, then it obviously wouldn’t apply. Most of the examples of C/MD given are about the wizard, so that was the focus of my response.
*If options exist, both sides can use them. If the wizard is dominating encounters it would make sense for the enemy to employ these methods. I’m not saying that they should be used, only that that could be used if a game is severely unbalanced.
*Acid Arrow and Stone Call deal pretty pathetic damage. Also, stone call makes the area difficult terrain which isn’t going to do your party any favors. The point is that buffs can’t really cause C/MD in my opinion. For martials any save effect is likely to be an additional effect on top of damage, they should still be effective without that ability. I never said anything about touch AC as that can be difficult to get to significance.
*I listed the counters in my original post, I didn’t go into depth or list the tactics they apply to as I figured that would be obvious:
True Seeing/Blindsight – Useful against illusion spells including Invisibility, Blur, Displacement and Mirror Image.
See Invisibility/Invisibility Purge – Useful against invisibility
Energy Immunity/Energy Resistance – Useful against effects that do energy damage
Teleportation blocking (Dimensional Anchor, Forbiddance, Teleport Trap, Dimensional Lock) – Useful against teleporting effects such as Teleport and Dimension Door
Protection from scrying (lead lined inner chamber, detect scrying) – useful against scrying
These are all just examples, the point is for the world to react to your players. If the enemy knows that the party uses certain tactics then they can be prepared for those tactics.
*In my original post I said “Have logical in-game repercussions for using certain tactics” and include an example of that. If my example doesn’t seem logical to you then create your own repercussion or have no repercussion at all. The point is that there should be consequences for actions. Daily sending spells to each important location would be a perfectly logical thing for a leader to do. Also, if the party is repeatedly scrying and frying the same organization, each local boss would make sure to keep a large contingent of guards close by. As I have repeatedly said, there are plenty of ways to subdue enemies if you don’t wish to kill them. For example; one attack with nonleathal damage should be enough to give the enemy a buffer so they won’t be killed.
These are all just general ideas. This isn’t a template to follow, these are things to consider when trying to deal with C/MD. They can be applied to varying degrees in many ways depending on party composition and what the specific issues are. A lot of this depends on the type of enemy the party is facing and the time scale. If the party is taking time off to craft, the enemy has time to prepare/move around resources. If there is no cohesive, intelligent group joining the enemies from encounter to encounter then some of these suggestions may not apply.
- A martial class that primarily uses per-day abilities that runs out is basically a Warrior. Usually they'll have other abilities but generally their "oomph" comes from the per-day stuff. It doesn't matter that they're better than a Wizard without spells, not every caster is a Wizard. Druids get Wildshape, Witches (and a few other classes) get hexes, Clerics and Oracles get hours/level buffs and 3/4th BAB. Also did you actually look at those recovery methods? Destroyer's blessing requires, while raging, a successful sunder. So you can't use it when you're out of rage and you need more than one attack (or greater sunder) to actually hurt anything while doing it. The Ki Mat takes one hour to get back one point (maybe). Wyroot requires a confirmed crit (usually with a poor crit profile). Assuming they're available at all.
- Again, if your advice is just screw the spellcaster if they get out of line then you don't need special methods to do so. The GM is entirely responsible for the world. If they want to "rocks fall everyone dies" then they can, even if it takes the form of "great wyrm red dragon vs level 1 party". Or as you keep suggesting, minions who exist only to shave off spells from the party. Nobody likes the bombs in Final Fantasy, why would I do the same thing in Pathfinder?
- Snowball did 1d6/level capping at 5d6. Acid Arrow does 2d4 + 2d4/3 levels. If Snowball was so damaging, why is Acid Arrow not? Also I never said they were great damage, just that a no-save no-SR ranged touch attack exists. Core rulebook even (and I think dates back to AD&D? Melf maybe?).
- Sure, and the next step is what creatures are good for this. Best at the lowest level they can appear (as some of those effects are quite early on).
- A level 4 or 5 spell. Multiple level 4 or 5 spells. So the local bandit lord better have a level 8 Cleric or level 10 Wizard working for him if he wants to know his hideouts got sacked. See, this is the problem. This is decent advice for running a large evil organization that will take the party to level 12 or so (or higher). And almost utterly useless outside of that. You keep giving advice that only works on certain classes or in certain situations and never mention that.
Look, the problem is that most of this is bad advice. It's like saying people should drink milk after they've been poisoned. It's potentially true but very explicitly just for ingested poison. Milk ain't helping a rattlesnake bite. You posted that nobody on the other side had tried any of your advice. I have. It didn't work because, in order: Druid, Druid, personal preference, spells that ignore this, spontaneous casters, already being done, and personal preference. If your advice requires conditions that are not given by the advice then it's bad advice. And clearly your advice requires those conditions. At the very least you need to address the elephant (Druid) in the room. Probably Summoner too.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy.
Desha wrote: WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
I think this is a really good point. As I mentioned, all the fixes suggested for the caster/fighter disparity involve something drastic such as re-writing the combat rules and all combat feats, banning full casters, or re-writing the magic system (to Spheres of Power).
In any of those cases, Paizo runs the risk of changing Pathfinder too much and alienating a huge chuck of players, like 4th addition did. So the question becomes, will the cure cause more harm than the current problem?
I've also mentioned that my group doesn't want to use Spheres of Power or Iron Heroes, so in my case, I think the cure would be more dangerous than the disease.
What does this have to do with the conversation? This is an advice thread where people are asking for help not a product thread asking for rewrites. There are probably some evidence that pathfinder is struggling now with 5e taking over all the gaming stores but that's beside the point. Lots of people seem concerned about someone trying to ruin their game so they have to derail threads with doomsaying and prevent people from getting the help they're looking for. Sorry to hear that people haven't been nice to you. Gamers frequently use Charisma as a dump stat, if you get my meaning.
You seem to have entered deep into a discussion that has spanned many threads. Let me summarize my feelings;
Popular consensus is that there is a disparity between fighters and casters. My own opinion is that this disparity is less of a problem than;
A) Ultra optimized players of any class that try to control or break the game.
B) Extremely inexperienced players.
C) Inexperienced or spiteful GMs.
In the past I've suggested improving fighters by;
1) Giving them 4+ Int bonus skill points per level
2) Having Bravery add to all Will saves, not just fear
3) Giving them a suite of abilities like skill unlocks, but with weapon groups. However I now think giving them the Martial Flexibility feature from the Martial Master would be better.
Consensus seems to be that this isn't nearly enough and that the disparity is baked into the system. That the only way to fix it is to re-write combat rules and feats or the magic system. I feel that either of these could alienate more people than it appeases (and end up being extremely expensive for paizo and players). I don't feel that this is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
I hope that you and your group find a solution that works for you.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy. He is quoting one of the devs. Jason Buhlman I believe.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy. I think your sarcasm detector needs new batteries.
Reviewman wrote:
He is quoting one of the devs. Jason Buhlman I believe.
James Jacobs, actually.
Bob Bob Bob wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: *How is that not the point? The martial classes you listed are still viable without their per day abilities and their uses of per day abilities are recoverable. They are far less dependent on per day resources than a caster relying on their spells.
*It works on any caster that is dependent on per day spells. If a caster is mainly using martial attacks, then it obviously wouldn’t apply. Most of the examples of C/MD given are about the wizard, so that was the focus of my response.
*If options exist, both sides can use them. If the wizard is dominating encounters it would make sense for the enemy to employ these methods. I’m not saying that they should be used, only that that could be used if a game is severely unbalanced.
*Acid Arrow and Stone Call deal pretty pathetic damage. Also, stone call makes the area difficult terrain which isn’t going to do your party any favors. The point is that buffs can’t really cause C/MD in my opinion. For martials any save effect is likely to be an additional effect on top of damage, they should still be effective without that ability. I never said anything about touch AC as that can be difficult to get to significance.
*I listed the counters in my original post, I didn’t go into depth or list the tactics they apply to as I figured that would be obvious:
True Seeing/Blindsight – Useful against illusion spells including Invisibility, Blur, Displacement and Mirror Image.
See Invisibility/Invisibility Purge – Useful against invisibility
Energy Immunity/Energy Resistance – Useful against effects that do energy damage
Teleportation blocking (Dimensional Anchor, Forbiddance, Teleport Trap, Dimensional Lock) – Useful against teleporting effects such as Teleport and Dimension Door
Protection from scrying (lead lined inner chamber, detect scrying) – useful against scrying
These are all just examples, the point is for the world to react to your players. If the enemy knows that the party uses certain tactics then they can be
... I think a huge issue with the C/MD discussion is the expectation of some one size fits all solution. This in unrealistic as there are many different classes that can break the game in different ways. You seem to read my suggestion in the most narrow way possible, when they can be applied in many different ways depending on the situation.
Basically at this point it would come down to specific suggestions as to how to fix each individual game as that is the only solution you will accept.
*The point is that martials are far less dependent on their per day resources than casters. In general, if a caster and a martial are both out of per day resources, the martial will be in a better position. Hex uses are a notable exception as you said, they have a high potential to break a game and don't need per day resources/concentration checks. A general solution would be high saves, and there are specific solutions such as immune to mind affecting depending on the hexes used. If wildshape is breaking your campaign it has more to do with natural attacks being OP than C/MD.
*If you allow casters to stay in the back without being challenged and they are breaking the game by being too powerful, you are being too easy on the caster.
*Snowball does 5d6 normally, with intensify bringing that up to 10d6 competing with the same slot as acid arrow assuming no Magical Lineage or other such effects. 2d4 per round is just terrible, even comparing it to a normal snowball it would take 4 rounds to overtake it's damage.
*
* Scrying and teleport are 4th and 5th level spells, so I'm not sure what the issue is. If you get spells, they get spells as well. Again, I am giving general advice with specific examples. If you post the specific issues you are facing and the limitations of the campaign, we can try and solve your particular problems. In general it is up to the GM to challenge the party. If the party is walking through encounters due to certain tactics, there should be a counter to those tactics.
I am not upset if people dismiss my advice as it may not work for everyone. My issue is that any attempt to provide solutions is met with hostility and examined in the most pedantic way possible. Specific exceptions don't mean that general advice isn't useful.
Gallant Armor wrote: I think a huge issue with the C/MD discussion is the expectation of some one size fits all solution. This in unrealistic as there are many different classes that can break the game in different ways. You seem to read my suggestion in the most narrow way possible, when they can be applied in many different ways depending on the situation.
Basically at this point it would come down to specific suggestions as to how to fix each individual game as that is the only solution you will accept.
*The point is that martials are far less dependent on their per day resources than casters. In general, if a caster and a martial are both out of per day resources, the martial will be in a better position. Hex uses are a notable exception as you said, they have a high potential to break a game and don't need per day resources/concentration checks. A general solution would be high saves, and there are specific solutions such as immune to mind affecting depending on the hexes used. If wildshape is breaking your campaign it has more to do with natural attacks being OP than C/MD.
*If you allow casters to stay in the back without being challenged and they are breaking the game by being too powerful, you are being too easy on the caster.
*Snowball does 5d6 normally, with intensify bringing that up to 10d6 competing with the same slot as acid arrow assuming no Magical Lineage or other such effects. 2d4 per round is just terrible, even comparing it to a normal snowball it would take 4 rounds to overtake it's damage.
*
* Scrying and teleport are 4th and 5th level spells, so I'm not sure what the issue is. If you get spells, they get spells as well. Again, I am giving general advice with specific examples. If you post the specific issues you are facing and the limitations of the campaign, we can try and solve your particular problems. In general it is up to the GM to challenge the party. If the party is walking through encounters due to certain tactics, there should be a counter to those tactics.
I am not upset if people dismiss my advice as it may not work for everyone. My issue is that any attempt to provide solutions is met with hostility and examined in the most pedantic way possible. Specific exceptions don't mean that general advice isn't useful.
I don't expect a universal solution. I expect that if you convert a car to only run on diesel you tell the person you're selling it to. If your solutions have limitations you need to make that clear. I'm not reading your advice narrowly (well, maybe the last one). I'm literally telling you I've used your advice and it didn't work. It didn't work because of those limitations you failed to mention.
- Yes, if you strip away literally every class feature the Cleric has (except the domain abilities maybe?) then the Barbarian is better. Why stop there? Why not cut out their tongue too? A martial character who can't talk will be much better than a spellcaster who can't talk. Oh and you better use up all their consumables too, otherwise the Wizard will just use their scrolls or wands or staffs or magic items or all the other things they can make for when they run out of spells. And if you do that then the party probably should stop since all their healing is gone. And that's not even getting into the (last I checked unsettled) question of whether it's easier to exhaust martial per-day abilities or every per-day ability a spellcaster has. Every spell plus every domain/school ability? I don't think so. Anyway, the advice you seem to be giving here is "Drain every resource the party has".
- For the third time, that's not what you said. You listed spells to specifically target spellcasters. Only one of them is actually usable in-battle (Spellcrash), one requires repeated castings to have any real effect and the other only prevents sleep. In order to actually hinder the spellcaster they have to be hit with them well in advance. In order to be effective they have to come in either large volumes or with high DCs and the lowest is level 4. So either lots of minions spamming it and dying easily or one high level minion using it and then also dying easily because they're only affecting one party member. It's like giving a bunch of goblin sorcerers scrolls of Finger of Death. The encounter basically exists to self destruct, potentially causing massive damage. And you're suggesting that, only exclusively targeting the Wizard. The advice you seem to be giving here is "If the Wizard gets out of line you can always reign them in, just use suicide bombers".
- Snowball did 1d6 per level normally. It only does 5d6 at CL 5+. It only does 10d6 with Intensify at CL 10+. Not level 3 when you first get Acid Arrow (which does 4d4 total at that level). Also you're still missing the point. A no-save no-SR spell exists for those high SR high save monsters. It has existed since Melf. If we're going to start judging on quality I've got all kinds of complaints about martial abilities. The advice you seem to be giving here is "Inflate numbers that affect the spellcasters while leaving other numbers alone".
- If we're assuming Teleport then the party Teleports to the boss, kills them, and Teleports back. Attacking en masse means the enemies die to the party and the rest of the city the party is in. Guards, adventurers, however they were going to defend themselves already. Killing an NPC basically requires the party isn't around and since they can Teleport that's a bad assumption. If you're only giving advice for that specific example then you need to make that much clearer. Because I was referring to the multiple times (admittedly some in other threads) where you've used Teleport as shorthand for "skipping encounters". There's a lot of ways to skip encounters that don't use Teleport. My example was sneaking into somewhere using Stealth and killing the boss. That can happen at level 1. When every counterexample you throw at me involves mid level enemies who are also part of a large evil organization throwing around 4/5 level spells, that's bad advice. The advice you seem to be giving here is "punish players for not committing genocide".
Now I'm aware that last one is a bit hyperbolic but I just can't shake the feeling that having consequences for unfought encounters would seem to encourage the players to murder the @#$% out of everything they meet that might be a threat later. You mentioned nonlethal damage but unless the party rounds them up and turns them over to the authorities then knocking them out is literally the same as sneaking past them. They're just going to wake up, now with the knowledge of what the party looks like and how they fight. That's worse than just sneaking past them actually.
Anyway, the first bit of advice seems awful, especially if it hits the martials before the spellcasters. Especially if any of those spellcasters decided to be competent in melee (Druid, Cleric, Oracle).
The second bit of advice is similarly terrible. Might as well hand out slaying (party member) arrows to every minion while you're at it.
The third bit ignores all the non primary spellcasters who also target those numbers and will be more screwed than the spellcaster (since they usually don't have other options). Other classes care about those numbers too.
The fourth bit (the real version, "have consequences for in-game actions") isn't bad, if that's what people want to run. Not every GM wants to simulate what's happening in the entire world all the time (or the country level, or the region level, etc.). Every example you give, however, comes across as petty, vindictive, and otherwise terrible. Seriously, "if they skip encounters kill someone they like" is literal advice you gave.
Assuming no use of 3PP and all players were close enough in skill level the best method our group has is a character building session. We get together and discuss characters to determine optimization level.
Usually this leads to everyone being a partial or full caster or at least a very optimized bruiser.
A self flanking Wolf Mounted Hunter is pretty good and does an amazing job of replacing most Ranger concepts.
Serghar Cromwell wrote: Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy. I think your sarcasm detector needs new batteries. Or a sarcasm detector doesn't work too well on text-based mediums without extremely obvious cues, this being one of those times.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy. I think your sarcasm detector needs new batteries. Or a sarcasm detector doesn't work too well on text-based mediums without extremely obvious cues, this being one of those times. To be fair I would have gotten confused if I didnt know that was a quote from a Paizo dev too.
What was the quote in question, in context?
Omnius wrote: What was the quote in question, in context? Here you go.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Serghar Cromwell wrote: How can it be a feature of the game if it's a myth propagated by people with agendas? The mechanics of the game objectively prove it to be a feature, saying it's a myth is likewise "a myth propagated by people with agendas."
In short, you're the Pot calling the Kettle black, buddy. I think your sarcasm detector needs new batteries. Or a sarcasm detector doesn't work too well on text-based mediums without extremely obvious cues, this being one of those times. You're right, of course. I just got snippy because the word choice in your response set me off.
In my defense, it's a post thats been joked about ever since it was made, so I thought it was an obvious cue.
WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
Popular consensus is that there is a disparity between fighters and casters. My own opinion is that this disparity is less of a problem than;
A) Ultra optimized players of any class that try to control or break the game.
B) Extremely inexperienced players.
C) Inexperienced or spiteful GMs.
An analogy to describe what you're saying:
Analogy: You break your leg and go into the emergency room. You're told that they'll get to your leg as soon as they finish curing cancer.
Doesn't matter if another problem is worse, this thread is about this problem. If you want to discuss a different problem, you are allowed to make a new thread.
Hey hey everyone!
I've been away for most of the week. How is the thread going?
Anything new?
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
The source does not make that an accurate assessment. The style of play seen in all official material (PFS modules and APs) does not do what James says it does past the lowest levels.
He is factually incorrect that the problem is the fifteen minute adventuring day, and that the mages' resources are significantly limited past the lowest levels, especially when we're not looking at the Wizard, but rather the Druid, Summoner, Witch, or Shaman, with their various sundry all-day abilities and pets. Staying power, as implemented in the system, is a failed notion as a balancer, particularly because the classes supposedly limited by it gain so much staying power so fast and can do so many different things.
He says casters have to be careful about using up all their resources at once, but you really only need a spell or two an encounter, and you get way more than that real fast. And you literally can't spend all your resources at once.
Also, James is literally obligated to maintain the party line.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
ALSO, BARBARIANS.
BARBARIANS AM ALWAYS STILL HERE.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Omnius wrote: The source does not make that an accurate assessment. The style of play seen in all official material (PFS modules and APs) does not do what James says it does past the lowest levels.
He is factually incorrect that the problem is the fifteen minute adventuring day, and that the mages' resources are significantly limited past the lowest levels, especially when we're not looking at the Wizard, but rather the Druid, Summoner, Witch, or Shaman, with their various sundry all-day abilities and pets. Staying power, as implemented in the system, is a failed notion as a balancer, particularly because the classes supposedly limited by it gain so much staying power so fast and can do so many different things.
He says casters have to be careful about using up all their resources at once, but you really only need a spell or two an encounter, and you get way more than that real fast. And you literally can't spend all your resources at once.
Also, James is literally obligated to maintain the party line.
Let us also not fail to acknowledge the fact that Paizo has yet to release an adventure or adventure path where characters get to the "20th round of the 20th battle of the day" just to put proof to the notion that caster/martial disparity is not a concern. Even the big bad boss fights don't make it that far, with that many lead-up fights, mostly because most players don't care for that kind of slog-fest, even if they are the murderiest of murderhobos.
Sure
So in my group we have had two effective methods.
1. A character building session where we look at roles and try to create a cohesive unit. While this does produce balanced parties it rarely leaves a pure martial in the party. Lots of 6th level casters. Upside is that the party is relatively balanced.
2. We dont use Paizo classes. It honestly doesn't make you steamroll or get steamrolled unless you decide to use some of the lower quality 3PP. Anyone looking to go this route look at Sphere's of Might/Power and stuff from Amora Games.
I just had a session like that, where we wound up with a fighter, a sorcerer, an arcanist, a witch, and a blodrager.
...
We forgot the healer. I just now realized that.
Witch can easily sub in as a healer though, and with 3 others that can cast spells, pretty sure you'll have enough Cure light wounds or Wands around.
Also while I'm here about the running of third parties; I've had more experiences with busted or combersome 3rd Party classes than the usual Caster/Fighter issuse(Machinesmith from.. God how long ago was that?)
I guess we're going to have to. The witch can use CLW and the sorc has UMD, so we're fine. Probably.
@MerlinCross: Depends on what you're going for, really. Spheres of Power/Might is pretty solid. Pact Magic and Strange Magic are also rather well-made.
Gonzo is... well, Gonzo isn't something you play because you're worried about balance. XD
MerlinCross wrote: Witch can easily sub in as a healer though, and with 3 others that can cast spells, pretty sure you'll have enough Cure light wounds or Wands around.
Also while I'm here about the running of third parties; I've had more experiences with busted or combersome 3rd Party classes than the usual Caster/Fighter issuse(Machinesmith from.. God how long ago was that?)
Yeah I'd say at least 50% of 3pp is unbalanced or at least inelegant design. Its definitely worth doing research on the products before buying them. Even SoP has problems such as weather sphere being busted, but it's way easier to spot.
Spjere's of Might is plain what Martials should be.
Just decide to go evil and pick up some wands of infernal healing? It's on the Bloodrager list too!
PossibleCabbage wrote: Just decide to go evil and pick up some wands of infernal healing? It's on the Bloodrager list too! We're heroes!*
*and this isn't PFS so we have to care about evil spells.
Trinam wrote: PossibleCabbage wrote: Just decide to go evil and pick up some wands of infernal healing? It's on the Bloodrager list too! We're heroes!*
*and this isn't PFS so we have to care about evil spells. Semi related to CM/D. Spells like Infernal healing take forever to heal players. Sometimes that is fine, like after fighting a Chimera attacking a Caravan or something. In a situation like infiltrating a castle, raiding a dungeon, or any other unified environment it's a huge risk. When my players decide to camp in a room for 3-5 minutes looting and healing after a combat I occasionally reallocate forces depending on how careful they were. One time I had someone from the next room encounter wander into the room to ask to borrow a deck of cards and start the fight early when he saw the party healing.
Part of mitigating disparity is having NPCs act realistically. Combat is loud, people walk around, and when you're someplace people don't want you to be wasting time is not a good idea.
Irontruth wrote: WhiteMagus2000 wrote:
Popular consensus is that there is a disparity between fighters and casters. My own opinion is that this disparity is less of a problem than;
A) Ultra optimized players of any class that try to control or break the game.
B) Extremely inexperienced players.
C) Inexperienced or spiteful GMs.
An analogy to describe what you're saying:
Analogy: You break your leg and go into the emergency room. You're told that they'll get to your leg as soon as they finish curing cancer.
Doesn't matter if another problem is worse, this thread is about this problem. If you want to discuss a different problem, you are allowed to make a new thread. So you take two sentences, out of the context of the rest of the post (even leaving in the part where I say "Popular consensus is that there is a disparity between fighters and casters"), and call it irrelevant. I was trying to establish the severity of the problem, at least for me and my group(s).
By your own analogy, that's like trying to establish that a hairline fracture in a leg is less severe than multiple compound fractures. Thus the hairline fracture gets a brace and pain meds (minor class adjustment) and not a complete amputation (re-writing a major chuck of the game).
So, what is your solution to the fighter/caster disparity problem, since my solution is irrelevant?
master_marshmallow wrote: VMC cavalier, Order of the Stars, and the feat Believer's Boon can make a fighter who gets reliable self healing, but you'll have to waste a couple feats on it, but you know, fighter.
I'll take full responsibility for that not being full knowledge of the internet yet, I was saving it to debut in my guide.
I will be keeping an eye open for a full right up on this I'm interested how much healing can be gained.
|
