In my nearly 40 years of playing D&D and its descendants (including Pathfinder), I have never personally experienced the alleged "caster/martial disparity", either as a player or as a GM.
more...
Thank you for sharing your experience Haladir. I would like to ask everyone who has not experienced the C/MD in play to take a look at the following list of possible reasons, and see if the list applies, or if there are other reasons.
- Most of your play happens under 10th level.
- Players don't choose to play pure martial, or pure caster characters.
- Caster players don't optimize, and/or martial players optimize heavily.
- There is a spoken or unspoken agreement not to use some options and spells.
- The GM is highly skilled in pacing, presenting a campaign setting, presenting challenges, and giving rewards that even out or minimize the disparity.
- The GM alters dice rolls, and/or encounters so that everyone has fairly equal amounts of success.
- The group views combat and/or other rules heavy parts of the game as something to get resolved as quickly as possible, in order to move on to more roleplay and storytelling elements.
- House rules.
Thanks!
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for sharing your experience Haladir. I would like to ask everyone who has not experienced the C/MD in play to take a look at the following list of possible reasons, and see if the list applies, or if there are other reasons.
Thanks!
•Most of your play happens under 10th level.
Nope. Multiple campaigns to or past level 20.
•Players don't choose to play pure martial, or pure caster characters.
Playing in a game right now with an arcanist and a fighter.
•Caster players don't optimize, and/or martial players optimize heavily.
We optimize for theme, not power.
•There is a spoken or unspoken agreement not to use some options and spells.
Nothing is off limits from first party sources, but no one would use Antagonize. Sacred Geometry came up as possible to ban but no one wants to take it.
•The GM is highly skilled in pacing, presenting a campaign setting, presenting challenges, and giving rewards that even out or minimize the disparity.
Yes.
•The GM alters dice rolls, and/or encounters so that everyone has fairly equal amounts of success.
I don't do this. In one of my groups all GM rolls are in the open.
•The group views combat and/or other rules heavy parts of the game as something to get resolved as quickly as possible, in order to move on to more roleplay and storytelling elements.
There's a little of this but we do enjoy combat.
•House rules.
Only for rolling hp and healing spells (can choose to have GM reroll and take second result).
We do tend to interpret spells fairly harshly - they do what they say and not anything else, and if there's a rules question, it is usually decided as whatever make magic less powerful. For example, simulacrum efreeti can't grant wishes. You have to know about a monster in character to polymorph into it (through Knowledge or direct experience). That sort of thing.
Alright, so now I'm curious. Improved Vital strike pegs it at level 11 at the lowest. Improved Cleaving Finish doesn't change that assessment. That reach seems to imply a reach weapon with Enlarge Person. So... a Naginata or Hooked Lance? It's a d8 either way, so 1d10 enlarged. Minimum 6, maximum 60. Power Attack is +9, +36 total. The weakest dragon at CR 11 has 126 HP. So we need 7.5 in extra damage, easily doable. Of course, if the GM is building it it's probably not an "easy" battle, so let's go CR 14 "boss". Lowest is 184 HP. So we're going to need 22 extra damage on every hit. +4 WT, +5 weapon, +2 WS, need a Strength of 26. So maybe possible, as long as the damage rolls were max. More realistically the weapon damage was 33 and we need 29 damage extra, so a Strength of 34. +4 mutagen, +2 Enlarge Person, +6 belt, both level ups into Strength it might just barely be possible.
Either way, I'm curious about the actual build and the actual dragon. Because that was the absolutely weakest dragon. The hardier ones add another 30-50 HP and need Blue Whale levels of Strength to kill in a single hit, even with a x4 crit. Oh, and the absolute best gear in all cases. Higher levels (even just one higher) will at least increase the damage but monster HP grows much faster than player damage. Three CR higher added 60 HP, for instance.
The campaign ended at 11th level, right after Improved Vital Strike was picked up.
Permanent Enlarge Person + Lunge = 15' reach.
They also had a number of cracked vibrant purple ioun stones for things like Shield and Longarms. (Which is why I said 15'-20')
The weapon was a scythe with the impact property:(12d6+90/19-20/x4)
- on a crit that goes to 24d6+180 avg crit = 264, crit that killed the dragon was ~290
Single class fighter, so no mutagen nonsense. She did have a +2 inherent bonus from a found tome and gloves of dueling.
In my experiences on both sides, I find the caster/martial disparity is very group-dependent. It you have a series of players who know how to play there's very often no disparity, however newer players seem to get hit with it pretty hard.
Honestly, I find more of a balance issue when it comes to rolled stats. The player who get's lucky and optimizes everything so there are no downsides to the character.
To the class disparity though. A diverse party is best, so that they have power spikes at different stages of the game. Fighters and Str-based martial characters are pretty good out of the box, their downside being that their classes don't tend to offer much for fighting higher level monsters with things like damage reduction. There's mid-range good around level 8-10 characters like Rogues, Sorcs and skill-based characters, as by this point their spell lists or feat options are big enough to start making major differences. Then there's the late bloomers like Wizards who in the early levels can be a bit of a quick burning candle with their limited options, but once you get to the highest levels they have access to the strongest powers in the game, and with caster level bonuses to their earlier spells still pack a wallop.
Martial classes need supplementing from magic items and whatnot to give them new options. Example, I have a vigilante character, dex-based so she requires a number of feats to pop off. Her big power spike is going to be around level 8, up until that point she doesn't provide a lot to the party compared to the Barbarian (who rolled all positive modifiers for his stats compared to everyone else who used point buy, and it shows), but once she gets to that spike she'll likely match him. Higher than that however, she'l likely fall off to our Sorc unless she gets a number of magic items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here are some of the most common reasons it might not affect your games:
- Most of your play happens under 10th level.
- Players don't choose to play pure martial, or pure caster characters.
- Caster players don't optimize, and/or martial players optimize heavily.
- There is a spoken or unspoken agreement not to use some options and spells.
- The GM is highly skilled in pacing, presenting a campaign setting, presenting challenges, and giving rewards that even out or minimize the disparity.
- The GM alters dice rolls, and/or encounters so that everyone has fairly equal amounts of success.
- The group views combat and/or other rules heavy parts of the game as something to get resolved as quickly as possible, in order to move on to more roleplay and storytelling elements.
- House rules.
- We tend to play published, so most go to 16-17
- Most people play either pure caster or pure martial. At a table of six pleyers we don't see more than 1-2 hybrid characters.
- The two biggest optimizers alternate between martial and caster.
- Leadership is banned. has no affect on disparity.
- GM skill level and time availability greatly impact campaign flow. We take turns GMing and typical have several campaigns run on alternating weekends.
- GM rolls are typically done in the open. With six players instead of four, most encounters are modified to some extent.
- We use a solid mix of roleplay and rules debate - most rules debates are settled arbitrarily and reviewed over group email after the game.[
- Very few, and all posted in writing at the start of the game. They don't really get into caster/martial disparity - Leadership, a few Mythic abilities (e.g. Undetectable) etc.
Interesting! I had not considered things like rolling for ability scores and HP affecting balance, but they can have a substantial affect.
I also had not given much thought to party size. I will have to think about that awhile.
Thanks for the responses, and please keep them coming!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
I'm wondering if Mythic Vital strike is involved in those numbers at all
Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
That is completely true. So true in fact that I disagree myself.
Well, it kind of depends. If that level one wizard is taking advantage of being a SAD ability score class, and cranks his intelligence up to 18 or 20, that would tie into the disparity. I feel that for an int up to 17 at character creation, the class is balanced well, at least for a little while. The wizards power is kept in check for a few reasons. For example, the wizards DC 14 spells and DC 13 cantrips are not a sure thing. The spells are a very limited resource, crafting hasn't really kicked in yet. If the wizards casts color spray and the creatures make their saves, the wizard is within 15' and is at risk of getting dropped by an attack or two.Once you get up towards the mid-levels, that is when I feel the CM/D kicks in progressively. If you max out your Int, and keep it maxed out, wizards can be ridiculous from day one.
|
Okay, if my example isn't good then how about you give an example of "Good GMing" that allows a mundane person to shine while in a party of casters instead of just calling everyone bad?
I gave several examples in my reply, but really it depends on the exact characters and the abilities they have. I've had plenty of games where I needed to give the casters chances to shine in the face of optimized martials.
The point is, the GM has unlimited power. If you can't keep the game interesting for everyone with unlimited power then you are doing something wrong.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
Yeah, I certainly don't consider that part of C/MD. I see almost no difference between your wizard example, and a 1st level fighter dropping two foes in a single attack using Cleave. In fact, the fighter is in a better position because if he fails, he can survive the counterattack better.
Your statement makes me wonder what you think wizards should actually be able to do...if they shouldn't have out-of-combat narrative power, and they shouldn't be able to contribute in combat, what's left?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
Yeah, I certainly don't consider that part of C/MD. I see almost no difference between your wizard example, and a 1st level fighter dropping two foes in a single attack using Cleave. In fact, the fighter is in a better position because if he fails, he can survive the counterattack better.
Your statement makes me wonder what you think wizards should actually be able to do...if they shouldn't have out-of-combat narrative power, and they shouldn't be able to contribute in combat, what's left?
Or he can be a Human Fighter with Rapid Shot and make multiple attacks from the comfort of his own range. Or he can be any sort of ranged character and proactively kite his enemies until their death. But in both of those instances, an enemy can theoretically fight back, either indirectly or in kind; with Color Spray, it's Save or Die, and those who fail the save can't fight back, no matter what they do.
Never said anything about Wizards not having narrative or combat power. All I said is that one person's perspective of Caster/Martial Disparity may not be the same as another's, and thereby creating a difference of what one would and would not constitute as Caster/Martial Disparity.
The Color Spray example above proves this point, since we have one poster saying it's overpowered since martials don't have comparable options, another saying it's not overpowered if the Save DCs aren't hyper-optimized, and another who says it isn't overpowered at all, no matter the circumstance. The idea that the Caster/Martial Disparity is subjective to personal interpretation of what it actually is, and not objectively defined, only demonstrates that there will be people who don't ever see it, and that there will be people who do see it, which is similar to how people perceive optical illusion tricks.
|
Great examples being given here, thanks all.
One thought that stuck me as interesting is the idea that 'skipping encounters' is bad. I've usually seen it more as a choice than a good/bad thing. Yes, players can skip encounters, but then they don't get the XP / treasure / information / McGuffin / whatever from those encounters either. The Legacy of Fire AP even has...
... so I can't imagine that AP writers (for example) are always assuming the PCs will be doing each and every encounter. I can see the frustration if you've worked hard on a homebrew encounter and it's skipped, but in those situations I tend to just put it on the back burner for another time - maybe it'll be useful later or in another game, with a little re-skinning?
Of course, again, this is just my experience - I imagine if I was trying to run only published material and the PCs just skipped most of it time and again I'd get a little frustrated, but in a homebrew you can just recognise those tactics and incorporate them into your future design work for the group ('You teleport everywhere? That's great! The king comes to you and asks if you could just pop over to...').
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, if my example isn't good then how about you give an example of "Good GMing" that allows a mundane person to shine while in a party of casters instead of just calling everyone bad?I gave several examples in my reply, but really it depends on the exact characters and the abilities they have. I've had plenty of games where I needed to give the casters chances to shine in the face of optimized martials.
The point is, the GM has unlimited power. If you can't keep the game interesting for everyone with unlimited power then you are doing something wrong.
Where? Are you referring to this?
Tell me. How does the tiny animal Druid, Elemental, Familiar, or Arcane Eye unlock the chest that the secret plans are in? How do they bluff the manor servants to hand over information? Heck, without hands how do they open even UNlocked doors and windows? How well does a familiar, completely on its own, figure out what to do when unexpected obstacles come up? At that, how dysfunctional is this party that the Wizard can't cast the invisibility spell on the Rogue rather than his familiar? Last I checked, +37 stealth was better than +28.
plenty of improved familiars have hands, heck some even have their own spells. So opening doors, talking to people, unlocking stuff are all easy for it using it's skills. Many improved familiars have high int and familiars get increasing int as they level. Easily smart enough as it's probably smarter than half the party, possibly smarter than the rogue if they are having high DEX and high charisma. So the familiar is still able to successfully do this mission.
the druid as an elemental has hands and can manipulate stuff, so opening things isn't an issue. And as to reaching things, that's what earthglide is for. Now he'll likely not be able to talk to people well. But if you're on a stealth mission many would opt to not be seen over talking to people.
My point is, there's not really problems you can have a mundane solve that a caster can't unintentionally be able solve too, often with either lower risk or better results.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great examples being given here, thanks all.
One thought that stuck me as interesting is the idea that 'skipping encounters' is bad. I've usually seen it more as a choice than a good/bad thing. Yes, players can skip encounters, but then they don't get the XP / treasure / information / McGuffin / whatever from those encounters either. The Legacy of Fire AP even has...
** spoiler omitted **
... so I can't imagine that AP writers (for example) are always assuming the PCs will be doing each and every encounter. I can see the frustration if you've worked hard on a homebrew encounter and it's skipped, but in those situations I tend to just put it on the back burner for another time - maybe it'll be useful later or in another game, with a little re-skinning?
Of course, again, this is just my experience - I imagine if I was trying to run only published material and the PCs just skipped most of it time and again I'd get a little frustrated, but in a homebrew you can just recognise those tactics and incorporate them into your future design work for the group ('You teleport everywhere? That's great! The king comes to you and asks if you could just pop over to...').
Per the rules skipping the encounter awards the same amount of EXP as fighting the encounter, though you do lose out on the other stuff.
That's my experience. Your miles may vary.Well, I guess since that guy never experienced it, everyone else just doesn't know what they are doing...
As I said: "That's my experience. Your miles may vary."
I never said that others don't experience it or that if they do they're doing it wrong.
I am merely saying that I have never personally experienced this as a problem in my games.
Please do not put words in my mouth.
In my experience? I have seen it happen in almost every game, in every system I've played that has magic in it. Even if no one complained about it.
I've even seen it in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, a system that makes casters' lives as much of a horrific pain in the ass as possible.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your criterion for C/MD is that magic exists at all, I'm not sure that fantasy is the right genre for you. The whole point of magic is to be able to do things that can't be done mundanely - that's what makes it magic.
From a purely system-neutral POV, if you have a "wizard" character and a "warrior" character, if the wizard's magic can't do anything that the warrior can't do, then why play a wizard at all? Just play the warrior and do wizard stuff too. Similarly, the warrior should be able to do stuff that the wizard can't - and I know that's where some people think Pathfinder breaks down.
The only time I've ever seen the "caster solves the whole adventure on their own" phenomenon was when they were combined with rogue somehow, like an arcane trickster. Wizard + good skills and rogue stuff is actually quite good.
Plus, there are games in the d20 family that have largely completely obliterated Caster/Martial Disparity while remaining entirely fantasy. They may have made different choices you don't agree with, but they did obliterate C/MD completely while remaining "high fantasy."
I mean, all it takes in 13th Age for the fightiest fighter to be as good at out of combat magic as the wizardiest wizard of the same level is a single feat which they can take at 1st level (Wizards get that feat for free.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your criterion for C/MD is that magic exists at all, I'm not sure that fantasy is the right genre for you. The whole point of magic is to be able to do things that can't be done mundanely - that's what makes it [I]magic/[I].
That's why the C/MD problem is unsolvable as long as Mundane Fighting Men and Magic Users are presented as equally valid and powerful options when they aren't, almost by definition.
Again, a fix we often see is to cap everyone's level at 6. I think another fix would be to cap the Fighter class at 6 with Prestige/Archetype options for some kind of magically-empowered Fighter beyond that: Eldritch Knight (arcane), Paladin (divine), and so on, with other mundane classes like Rogue having analogous advancement.
... All I said is that one person's perspective of Caster/Martial Disparity may not be the same as another's, and thereby creating a difference of what one would and would not constitute as Caster/Martial Disparity....
The idea that the Caster/Martial Disparity is subjective to personal interpretation of what it actually is, and not objectively defined, only demonstrates that there will be people who don't ever see it, and that there will be people who do see it, which is similar to how people perceive optical illusion tricks....
While it is subjective, and often based on individuals perceptions, we can define the CM/D.
The definition I use is: "The caster/martial disparity is a tendency for higher level magic using characters to outshine their non-magic using counterparts in many aspects of adventuring. "I also define five aspects that really embody the specifics of the CM/D. I have been beating it like a dead horse lately, but click on my name for the full document. Also, Jiggy wrote a fantastic document, Dispelling Myths: The Caster-Martial Disparity that further defines the C/MD.
It's important to remember that there are numerous balance issues that affect all aspects of the rules. There are unbalanced spells, feats, magic items, class abilities, etc. And all of these can depend on level, party compositions, and general group dynamics. Some people even recognize these imbalances and view them as a positive rather then negative feature.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Grotesque chanting to taboo gods
Someone finally making sense in this thread.
Wow, apparently posting on your phone can cause your post to spontaneously turn into a bunch of gibberish. Flag and move on, please...
**EDIT** Also note that mine wasn't the only post to be subject to this strange eldritch horror, suggesting that this isn't some one-time issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your criterion for C/MD is that magic exists at all, I'm not sure that fantasy is the right genre for you. The whole point of magic is to be able to do things that can't be done mundanely - that's what makes it [I]magic/[I].That's why the C/MD problem is unsolvable as long as Mundane Fighting Men and Magic Users are presented as equally valid and powerful options when they aren't, almost by definition.
Again, a fix we often see is to cap everyone's level at 6. I think another fix would be to cap the Fighter class at 6 with Prestige/Archetype options for some kind of magically-empowered Fighter beyond that: Eldritch Knight (arcane), Paladin (divine), and so on, with other mundane classes like Rogue having analogous advancement.
I don't think this would work for a lot of groups, since raw power and being equal isn't always the goal.
Let's Take the Avengers as an example. Some times I want to play Thor, sometimes I want to play Cap or Blackwidow. They are not even close to equal in power but they both exist in the same narrative and they are all important members.
I wouldn't want to roll up a Blackwidow style character then be forced to find Mjolnir mk2 and become Thor.(All this being said, if that is something that your group wants I would love to see it as an option but I wouldn't want to see it become say a core rule).
The thing is, tabletop games follow a different set of rules from other media. A classic is don't split the party, and it's not just because it's likely to get PC's killed. While a book or movie can cut away to follow different characters in different locations, you can't do that for too long at the gaming table before people get bored.
Honestly I haven't even watched the Avengers (not a fan of superheroes in general) but I really wonder how much stuff the writers will have to make up to give Black Widow something to do while Thor et al. are fighting Thanos.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I played a Rogue once in a (non-Paizo, I think) published AP. I felt like I was doing pretty well, until I tried to sneak into a hobgoblin camp and immediately triggered an Alarm spell. Alarm isn't a trap so without access to detect magic I had no way of getting around it.
Well, something went horribly wrong there. It's a x4 crit weapon, why are you multiplying the damage by 2? Either it should be doing twice as much damage or half as much. Also either Vital Strike was included (and those dice shouldn't be multiplied) or it wasn't (and should be).
You don't multiple the extra dice from vital strike.
With Improved Vital Strike and a x4 weapon it just happens to double the dice rolled.
Scythe (2d4) enlarged (2d6) with impact (3d6) (I did the weapon size chart wrong last time). So 12d6 on a crit, adds 6d6 from Improved Vital Strike. 18d6 total. 108 max, 63 average. I'm going to continue to assume a +5 weapon but will note that a +5 impact weapon is about 110% of WBL for a level 11. +4 WT +5 weapon +2 WS +9 PA gives us +20. If we want +90 at the end we only need +23 damage total (so 16 Str). It maxes at 198 damage and will only kill the lowest health CR 14 dragons though. If we want the +180 damage we're going to need +25 additional damage from Strength and other sources (bards, Good Hope, etc.) which requires 32-38 Strength. Starting 20, +2 level up, +2 enlarge, +2 inherent, absolutely need that +6 belt (and the bard double buffing). I mean, it's technically possible but at this point the Fighter needs a bard going first and as much cash as a character four levels higher (and basically no other magic items). Oh, and even then it'd cap at 288 damage, not reaching 290.
See, this is why I ask. Someone did those numbers wrong. Whether it's what you're relaying to me or the player themselves, I don't know. But the numbers are...
I really shouldn't do math from memory on another persons character. I got a few numbers wrong, some higher, some lower.
Female human (Azlanti) fighter 11/Champion 1
CN Large humanoid (human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +2
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 23, touch 10, flat-footed 23 (+12 armor, +1 deflection, +1 natural, -1 size)
hp 108 (11d10+38)
Fort +12, Ref +10, Will +11 (+3 vs. fear); +4 vs. effects that cause you to lose your grip on weapons
Defensive Abilities hard to kill
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee crimson rain +29 (9d6+99/19-20/×4)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks mythic power (5/day, surge +1d6), weapon trainings (heavy blades +4, warrior spirit)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 29, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 10
Base Atk +11; CMB +18 (+23 bull rush); CMD 32 (36 vs. disarm, 36 vs. sunder)
Feats Advanced Weapon Training, Advanced Weapon Training, Cleave, Furious Focus[APG], Great Cleave, Improved Critical (scythe), Improved Vital Strike, Lunge, Power Attack, Vital Strike[M], Weapon Focus (scythe), Weapon Specialization (scythe), Weapon Trick (two-handed Weapons)
Traits indomitable faith, reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +1, Climb +11, Fly -2, Handle Animal +4, Intimidate +14, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +13, Perception +2, Survival +6, Swim +12
Languages Azlanti, Common
SQ armor training 3, fleet charge[MA], legendary item[MA], legendary power, legendary surge, mythic bond
Combat Gear oil of bless weapon (5), potion of enlarge person (5), potion of fly; Other Gear +3 Gray Maiden plate, crimson rain, amulet of natural armor +1, belt of giant strength +4, cloak of resistance +3, gloves of dueling[APG], ring of protection +1, masterwork backpack[APG], 44 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Advanced Weapon Training You are specially trained to use your weapon skills in new ways.
Prerequisites: Fighter level 5th, weapon training class feature.
Benefit: Select one advanced weapon training option, applying it to one fighter weapon group you h
Advanced Weapon Training You are specially trained to use your weapon skills in new ways.
Prerequisites: Fighter level 5th, weapon training class feature.
Benefit: Select one advanced weapon training option, applying it to one fighter weapon group you h
Armed Bravery (+3/+6) (Ex) Add bravery bonus to will save, Intim. DC to demoralize you increases by amount shown.
Armor Training 3 (Ex) Worn armor -3 check penalty, +3 max DEX.
Cleave If you hit a foe, attack an adjacent target at the same attack bonus but take -2 AC.
Fighter's Reflexes (Weapon Training [Blades, Heavy] +4) (Ex) While not denied Dex bonus to AC, add training bonus to Reflex saves.
Fleet Charge (Ex) As a swift action, use 1 power to move speed & attack (+1 bonus, bypass all DR).
Furious Focus If you are wielding a weapon in two hands, ignore the penalty for your first attack of each turn.
Hard to Kill (Ex) Automatically stabilize when dying, and only die at neg Con x 2.
Legendary Power (2/day) All legendary items contain a pool of power - at least two uses that recharge each day. This power is called legendary power, and it works differently than mythic power. Any creature bearing the item can expend the items uses of legendary power, whet
Legendary Surge (+1d6 to Attack Rolls - All, Combat Maneuver Checks) All legendary items have a legendary surge ability, similar to a mythic character's surge ability (see page 170). It can be used only on specific rolls or checks based on the nature or purpose of the legendary item - see the Legendary Surge sidebar o
Lunge Can increase reach by 5 ft, but take -2 to AC for 1 rd.
Mythic Bond A legendary item is typically bonded to a single mythic creature. Others can pick up and use a legendary item for its basic functions (like hitting a foe with a legendary mace), but only the creature bonded to the item can utilize it fully.
A myth
Power Attack -3/+6 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Surge (1d6) (Su) Use 1 power to increase any d20 roll by the listed amount.
Vital Strike [Mythic] Vital Strike multiplies dam bonus by 2, 3, or 4.
Warrior Spirit +4 (Weapon Training [Blades, Heavy] +4 [Ex], 5/day) (Su) Standard action, add enhance bon or item powers for 1 min.
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +4 (Ex) +4 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Trick (Two-Handed Weapons) You may perform weapon tricks with the chosen weapon type.
Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Inc.®, and are used under license.
...mythic...
...Vital Strike [M]...
Now 'ere's yer problem.
Seriously, mythic is horribly unbalanced, and mythic vital strike is one of the reasons why. Shockingly enough, throwing on a crit with a 4x weapon does not improve things.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My experience? It's a myth, perpetuated by people with agendas, people who have never really played the game and are just spending 7 years and couple thousands posts theorycrafting and people who play some kind of borderline PVP "let's kill the GM, I mean, the world faster than it kills us" game where everybody is trying to win D&D ahead of everybody else at the table. Also, twentysomething anime fanboys.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My experience? It's a myth, perpetuated by people with agendas, people who have never really played the game and are just spending 7 years and couple thousands posts theorycrafting and people who play some kind of borderline PVP "let's kill the GM, I mean, the world faster than it kills us" game where everybody is trying to win D&D ahead of everybody else at the table. Also, twentysomething anime fanboys.
You don't actually believe that everyone who disagrees with you is simply arguing in bad faith, do you?
Troll post, flag and move on.
|
|
hah, hard not to totally agree with the bag for once. :)
The big reason why I don't agree is that I have played with players who were very much into optimizing the hell out of their characters, did a lot of theorycrafting, had a quite competitive play-style (probably also liked anime, as do I) and still were able to participate in a game without disrupting it for anyone else.
This said, I think that if CM/D becomes a problem has in fact very much to do with the personality of the GM and the players and their views on the game* and much less with the actual rules. Which also means, that part of avoiding that problem can just be done by avoiding playing with players that would make that into a problem. So far I obviously had the luck never to run into that problem (and I admit that I sometimes wonder if Gorbacz isn't right about the myth part), but then there's enough evidence to the contrary, and especially if people say it's a problem to them whose opinion I appreciate very much in general, then that's reason enough to take it as a valid concern. I just happen to think that in discussions like this, the problem often gets exaggerated very much, especially when numbers get thrown around, but then, that may be because in my experience I have seen these numbers come up very rarely at the table.
Personally I have once been "accused" of playing D&D 3.X with the wrong mindset while still thinking about it with AD&D experience in mind. And while that person might not have been totally wrong about my playstyle being heavily influenced by AD&D (especially 2nd), I don't think that it makes me playing 3.X wrong especially when it allows me to play the game without running into most problems that get attributed to 3.X/PF.
[IMHO]In the end the rules of any RPG system are only a tool to allow a group of like-minded people to collaboratively tell epic stories about heroic characters saving their part of the world from a looming disaster against all odds. Some tools might be better suited to tell particular stories, others try to give you a lot of options to allow you to decide what kind of story you want to tell. I prefer the second approach which is a huge reason why I play PF as my main system. PF presents you with tons of options to allow you to choose and pick which options to use in any particular game. But even when some options are clearly better than other options, that does not mean that you have to pick the better one and it also does not mean that picking the better one will lead to problems with CM/D. You can still have Gandalf and Sam Gamdschie in the same group, as long as your story allows for that kind of characters.(Or you can have Conan standing next to Rincewind, if you want to have that. :D) And to me, that's not a weakness of the system, but a strength.
*I think that the Color spray example in this thread is a fine example for that. As is the question if a GM should be able to let every character shine once in a while, or if the system should take care of letting everyone shine equally and simultaneously all the time.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disparity clearly has the potential to exist in a game at say, level 9. For example:
There are lots of threats in the game that have simple magical solutions, but which are hard or impossible to deal with non-magically. Like a flying invisible enemy launching fireballs at you, or being dead and wanting to come back to life.
There are few, if any, threats in the game that need martials. Many magical PCs can also do fairly well in melee. A wizard can use spells like Dominate Person to create minions who can substitute for martials. (A martial trying to substitute for a wizard with magic items will find it a lot harder.)
Many problems that could be dealt with non-magically are still far easier with magic. "We're in danger? We'll teleport out." "We need to sneak? We'll use invisibility."
So it isn't a non-problem. It is more like a problem that can be 'solved' by:
(a) Not worrying about it.
"Hey, Wizard, instead of me breaking into the prison to rescue the captive, why don't you just teleport in and then teleport him out?"
"Great idea, buddy!"
(b) Intentional or unintentional underperforming casters:
"I cast lightning bolt again. 16 damage. Reflex save for half."
(c) Restrictive GMing:
"The entire base is covered in a magic field that wards against teleportation, invisibility, scrying or shapechanging. Who are you sending in to scout?"
"My familiar."
"It's also warded against familiars."
"In that case, we'll send the Rogue."
I suspect people who haven't experienced it are using one of these techniques.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've always considered 'caster/martial disparity', '15 minute adventuring day', 'rogues suck', and various other accepted realities on this board different examples of what I would call 'poor GMing'... or perhaps 'enforced poor GMing' in the case of PFS.
None of these things should be an issue in a home game run by any half way competent GM. Setting up opportunities for each character to shine and/or be challenged is just part of the job... not even one of the more difficult parts.
Maybe so, but it seems to me that this particular set of rules we have are imposing a circumstance penalty on your good DMing check. Maybe you've got a high enough bonus to breeze past the check anyway, but that's not the same as denying the existence of the -5 (or whatever) circumstance penalty. ;)
Anyway, to answer the OP's question (with a caveat - my main group switched to 5e and I haven't kept up with new Pathfinder material since 2015/2016 or so, so my anecdotes are a bit dated), yes it's cropped up at the table. I used to come post here a lot about it precisely because of observing it in our game.
My answer to the question about what level it crops up at is that the levels at which it gets impossible to ignore can change very sharply based on campaign, party, types of characters (and players), etc. though. In a neutral/good party that worked pretty hard at supporting its martials (STAP converted to Pathfinder), for example, it got really hard to ignore around thirteenth or fourteenth level or so. In an evil party (Way of the Wicked) it was clear by 7th level and impossible to ignore by 9th, with enormous mileage out of spells like divination and other spells like dominate person used without the moral/alignment constraints that a different party might put on them.
My experience? ...
Damn it Gobacz! I just bought this brand new Sarcasm Detector, and now the needle is all bent! That's just great!
The Color Spray example above proves this point, since we have one poster saying it's overpowered since martials don't have comparable options, another saying it's not overpowered if the Save DCs aren't hyper-optimized, and another who says it isn't overpowered at all, no matter the...Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
Yeah, I certainly don't consider that part of C/MD. I see almost no difference between your wizard example, and a 1st level fighter dropping two foes in a single attack using Cleave. In fact, the fighter is in a better position because if he fails, he can survive the counterattack better.
Your statement makes me wonder what you think wizards should actually be able to do...if they shouldn't have out-of-combat narrative power, and they shouldn't be able to contribute in combat, what's left?
Yeah, I played a gnome who sorta specialized in Color spray. Here's the problem- you have to get out in from of your party and cast the spell when the foes are 10 or 15' feet away. If they make their save, you are in for a world of hurt.
It is a good spell, certainly, and works really well on taking down 2-3 weak willed mooks, under 5 hd. Very situational but really works well in that sitrep.
But a archer with rapid shot works almost as well and keeps working at ranges up to hundreds of feet, vs foes with many more HD.
If your criterion for C/MD is that magic exists at all, I'm not sure that fantasy is the right genre for you. The whole point of magic is to be able to do things that can't be done mundanely - that's what makes it [I]magic/[I].That's why the C/MD problem is unsolvable as long as Mundane Fighting Men and Magic Users are presented as equally valid and powerful options when they aren't, almost by definition.
.
But in many peoples expereince, they are equally valid and powerful options. In the Devs own game they dont see this as much of a issue. In my games- not much of a issue (until really high level), in Haladirs game it's not much of a problem. So, why do you inists it is a problem for everyone? It is actually a problem in your games? Did you ban full spellcasters? Or all magic?
And yes, it is kinda a design issue form OD&D where to start fighters were supposed to outclass wizards then wizards were supposed to become very powers- at about the time they retired.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Color Spray example above proves this point, since we have one poster saying it's overpowered since martials don't have comparable options, another saying it's not overpowered if the Save DCs aren't hyper-optimized, and another who says it isn't overpowered at all, no matter the...Another thing to consider is varying perceptions and conceptions of what the Caster/Martial Disparity actually is. One person's instance of evidence for Caster/Martial Disparity, another would not consider as such.
For example, a 1st level Wizard casts Color Spray and half of the enemies fail their saves. To me, this is a matter of Caster/Martial Disparity, but to others, they believe it's just the nature of the game, and as such wouldn't consider it a "Disparity" at all.
Yeah, I certainly don't consider that part of C/MD. I see almost no difference between your wizard example, and a 1st level fighter dropping two foes in a single attack using Cleave. In fact, the fighter is in a better position because if he fails, he can survive the counterattack better.
Your statement makes me wonder what you think wizards should actually be able to do...if they shouldn't have out-of-combat narrative power, and they shouldn't be able to contribute in combat, what's left?
Yeah, I played a gnome who sorta specialized in Color spray. Here's the problem- you have to get out in from of your party and cast the spell when the foes are 10 or 15' feet away. If they make their save, you are in for a world of hurt.
It is a good spell, certainly, and works really well on taking down 2-3 weak willed mooks, under 5 hd. Very situational but really works well in that sitrep.
But a archer with rapid shot works almost as well and keeps working at ranges up to hundreds of feet, vs foes with many more HD.
Not an issue if your save DCs are high enough. Immunities are much more worrisome than successful saves if that's the case, which for optimizers, it usually is. This also assumes my fellow party members don't go after me, which, while a more legitimate concern, isn't always a problem.
It can still function in higher levels. A bad Save with a 1 round stun and a familiar to confiscate the dropped weaponry results in a mostly harmless bad guy. It starts to lose effectiveness by 10th level, when more and better spells are available.
Archers are fairly fickle starting out since they are very damage dice reliant. They could kill two enemies, one enemy, or just simply wound a guy. They get stronger over time, but against CR appropriate foes, a 1 round full attack will kill them on average, which, while par for the course, isn't beating a massive wipe out of enemies from a single, well-chosen spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But in many people's experience, they are equally valid and powerful options.
So which is the harder fight for a lv10 party? A lv14 NPC geared fighter or a lv14 NPC geared wizard? Both are a CR 13 fight so a CR+3 fight for this lv10 party. Is the fighter equally hard to deal with and the two are equally valid and powerful CR 13 enemies. Or is the wizard a much harder and difficult fight because of the magic he can throw around and the fighter easier since his gear is bad for his level and cause he can't really deal with all situations of flying, invisible enemies, being outmatched in actions, and whatnot that the party can throw at him?
But in many people's experience, they are equally valid and powerful options.So which is the harder fight for a lv10 party? A lv14 NPC geared fighter or a lv14 NPC geared wizard? Both are a CR 13 fight so a CR+3 fight for this lv10 party. Is the fighter equally hard to deal with and the two are equally valid and powerful CR 13 enemies. Or is the wizard a much harder and difficult fight because of the magic he can throw around and the fighter easier since his gear is bad for his level and cause he can't really deal with all situations of flying, invisible enemies, being outmatched in actions, and whatnot that the party can throw at him?
What with potions and magic gear and a DM that sets them up in a good tactical position, but can be equally bad. I mean, does the wizard know the party is comeing? What the party consist of? When they will get there?
However, if you are just walking down a corridor and meet either one without them having time ot prep- well the fighter is far more dangerous.
|
|
My experience? It's a myth, perpetuated by people with agendas, people who have never really played the game and are just spending 7 years and couple thousands posts theorycrafting and people who play some kind of borderline PVP "let's kill the GM, I mean, the world faster than it kills us" game where everybody is trying to win D&D ahead of everybody else at the table. Also, twentysomething anime fanboys.You don't actually believe that everyone who disagrees with you is simply arguing in bad faith, do you?
Of course not, theorycrafters and borderline PVPs are just deeply misguided. No bad faith there.