| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the GM doesn't take steps to keep pressure on parties when they are facing multiple lower level enemies at a time, by pushing lower threat level encounters into encounter chains, the party will quickly come to the opinion that lower level monsters are never actually a threat that need to be dealt with quickly, and casters will end up firing off cantrip after cantrip every time they see two or more opponents, especially when Electric Arc is a pretty good option that shines brightest when...
Yeah. Its important for everyone at the table to keep in mind that "We only ever run into things that benefit from the Incapacitation trait!" Isn't an issue with the trait, or the spells. Its an issue with the Encounter design.
And unfortunately, its an issue that doesn't make a ton of intuitive sense until after you've actually played 2E, and started to absorb some of how the system works as a whole.
As for the order or operations for boosting the result and reducing the result, is an interesting question in theory. I don't believe you are very likely an extremely rare situation where it might be relevant, since facing creatures that are several levels higher than you, I don't imagine you are normally going to be hitting the 'increased' critical hit (critical fail save) window, due to the way numbers are going to go. Certainly you hit those windows with the mook enemies, but they won't trigger incapacitate.
The P2 design was stressing turning these spells that used to be encounter enders, that were binary in their use into non-binary results that can in ideal situations potentially end a minor encounter, or produce some useful debuff to the situation in many cases when the ideal isn't met.
Although I'm fine with the acknowledgement that monsters and players can have different rules, but I get the impression that most of those advocating removing incapacitation trait for use by the players. I imagine they would have trouble with the idea of falling en masse to a first level color spray or sleep spell cast by one of a group of mook cultists 3-5 levels lower than them who are spamming the spells at them.
My suggestion if you feel it is too strong as presented. Make the incapacitation effect tiered. If the target is higher than double the spell level (or incapacitation level) then have it drop the critical failed save, or critical Hit effect down one step to a regular hit/fail, unless it misses the mark by 2 level, in which case you apply the incapacitation trait as per the book (dropping all levels one step)
This leaves incapacitation effects using on-level resources/effects still with significant debuffs even against most boss's in encounters, but it does limit spamming lower level slots and the reliance on the trying to spam for a critical form of the most extreme debuff against the boss.
I'd recommend having people try incapacitation as is first. And in my opinion if you plan to remove incapacitation, the first encounter you play after doing so needs to involve mook spellcasters specializing in incapacitation spells, before you decide to keep the removal. (you might also be able to use a large number of mook ghouls or something similar) I say that to make sure that is really what you as a group want.
The most logical non-RAW option to me is just go by caster level.
Since other abilities go off creature level (like monk's stunning fist), it might seem off to some people that casters have to go off of spell level, while monks and barbarians & such go off of character level.
I have just been using creature level +1 without much problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And yet another person discovers the terribleness of Incapacitation.
If I was you, I'd start making sure I understand how spells work and look for spells that don't have incapacitation. Those penalties by Frightened and Sickened are good and help your party. Focus more on those.
Incapacitate spells generally aren't worth using even if they didn't have the incapacitate trait. They usually allow for more saves than non-incapacitate spells and an even higher chance of not doing much even against targets they affect fully.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
And yet another person discovers the terribleness of Incapacitation.
If I was you, I'd start making sure I understand how spells work and look for spells that don't have incapacitation. Those penalties by Frightened and Sickened are good and help your party. Focus more on those.
Incapacitate spells generally aren't worth using even if they didn't have the incapacitate trait. They usually allow for more saves than non-incapacitate spells and an even higher chance of not doing much even against targets they affect fully.
They never work if you dont take chances on them and look for cases to use them.
Its going to be hard for my cleric to be convinced to not have a Calm Emotions in her top slots, after that time she got 3 of 4 foes with it and essentially killed an encounter.
Even in situations not quite that good, removing one or two mooks for the entire encounter (or until they can be dealt with one at a time) is still worth it.
Not being universally useful is not the same as being useless.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
In practice, I've found having an Incapacitating Option, maybe 2, to be worthwhile. I wouldn't load up my whole list with them.
And yet another person discovers the terribleness of Incapacitation.
If I was you, I'd start making sure I understand how spells work and look for spells that don't have incapacitation. Those penalties by Frightened and Sickened are good and help your party. Focus more on those.
Incapacitate spells generally aren't worth using even if they didn't have the incapacitate trait. They usually allow for more saves than non-incapacitate spells and an even higher chance of not doing much even against targets they affect fully.
They never work if you dont take chances on them and look for cases to use them.
Its going to be hard for my cleric to be convinced to not have a Calm Emotions in her top slots, after that time she got 3 of 4 foes with it and essentially killed an encounter.
Even in situations not quite that good, removing one or two mooks for the entire encounter (or until they can be dealt with one at a time) is still worth it.
Not being universally useful is not the same as being useless.
Calm Emotions is a particularly nice incapacitate spell, especially if facing multiple enemies of equal or lower challenge. One of the few exceptions. It doesn't apply to all Incapacitate spells.
Calm Emotions pretty much nixed my idea of changing incapacitate. I don't need multiple battles of enemies standing around while the party murders people piecemeal.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a signposting issue, too.
Imagine you're going to the Fire and Ice themed dungeon. When you get to the fire level, are you really shocked and disappointed that fireball doesn't do much? Not really, it was signposted pretty clearly that you were going to need different spells for different parts of this dungeon. And you know that fireball is going to wreak havoc when you get to the ice level.
Figuring out just when to drop incapacitation spells, and at what spell level, isn't nearly as easy to see. Which leads to more baffled and disappointed players.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen Sleep end encounters at low levels already, I'd very much like to avoid that becoming a trend for the next 16 levels of combats. If I wanted to GM for a campaign where the party casters could single-handedly put down bosses with the right spell choice and just a little bit of luck then I'd still be running 1e.
|
|
I've seen Sleep end encounters at low levels already, I'd very much like to avoid that becoming a trend for the next 16 levels of combats. If I wanted to GM for a campaign where the party casters could single-handedly put down bosses with the right spell choice and just a little bit of luck then I'd still be running 1e.
Absolutely. What I said about signposting, how about this one?
"Don't expect to drop the boss with an incapacitation spell. Against any real boss it's a desperation move. But they're good for quickly taking out mooks that would be flanking you and harassing your squishies, leaving your hands free to focus on the boss."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely will not use this feature in any games I DM. This has got to be the WORST feature of PF2E that I have come across so far
Be prepared for your 23rd level BBEG to be defeated by the party in the first round of combat when it rolls a 2 on its save versus a first level sleep spell. Fun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely will not use this feature in any games I DM. This has got to be the WORST feature of PF2E that I have come across so farBe prepared for your 23rd level BBEG to be defeated by the party in the first round of combat when it rolls a 2 on its save versus a first level sleep spell. Fun.
It is called an anticlimax, used far too litte in most of our standard fantasy stories and at least as memorable as a full grown climatic battle.
"Do you remember when your Wizard blew that arrogant BBEG out of the water with a witty one-liner and a single spell like they usually only do in movies?" "Yes, that was quite epic!"
However please note that despite not sitting well with me during my characters early PF2E career as per now I am fully ok with the current implementation of the incapacitation rules.
One of the big problems of incap spells is not that they are generally bad, quite the contrary, they can be brutal, but that they are often perceived as being too situational (even if you have all the info about the strength of your opposition). And as such many players will simply chose a spell that is moderately effective 100% of the time over a spell that will be brutally effective 50% of the time (don't call me on the numbers, perception does not necessarily match reality), especially as the later will most likely let you down when it matters most, which for most players will be boss fights. For those players it simply does not matter that the heightened incap spell would have cleared the "room before the boss" in one go, saving the party valuable time and ressources for their final fight, they only see that it is very unlikely that it will affect the boss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But at the table playing PF2, you've either got the caster that can one-shot the BBEG in "epic" fashion doing that to literally all the opposition along the way (which is a problem if other characters aren't similarly capable for doing the same) or you've got all these battles in which there's give and take and a party-worth of characters contributing juxtaposed with the "big bad" being the easiest challenge in the set.
So you get situations like "Do you remember when we had that really awesome boss fight with the demons and that wizard that was hidden behind an illusory wall and projecting spells into the room?" "Dude, that wasn't the boss fight... the boss fight was that one witch lady that didn't even get to take a turn." "Really? I don't remember that fight." "I'm not surprised. I only remember it because that's when my character got the magic staff they've been using since." just as, if not more, often than the "that was epic!" ones in my experience.
Well yes and no. Parts of the no is due to the fact that it apparently still is a generic trope for any fantasy genre that BBEGs actually have to be physically (or magically) powerful whereas in reality they almost never are. For example in the here and now nobody would expect an epic fight with the leader of any country or organisation after you managed to overcome his probably elite bodyguards.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the main difficulties in setting up the "whole party versus a solo baddie" big fight is the inherent action economy advantage that the "four people" have over the "one baddie."
Given the opportunity, the party would leverage that even more if they could. But "let's paralyze the dragon then poke it to death" is not really the sort of drama we're looking to cultivate when we stage "our heroes fight a dragon".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well yes and no. Parts of the no is due to the fact that it apparently still is a generic trope for any fantasy genre that BBEGs actually have to be physically (or magically) powerful whereas in reality they almost never are. For example in the here and now nobody would expect an epic fight with the leader of any country or organisation after you managed to overcome his probably elite bodyguards.
I feel like I need to bring up the existence of Metal Wolf Chaos here :)
Or at the very least, Air Force One.
"Get off my plane!"
Well yes and no. Parts of the no is due to the fact that it apparently still is a generic trope for any fantasy genre that BBEGs actually have to be physically (or magically) powerful whereas in reality they almost never are. For example in the here and now nobody would expect an epic fight with the leader of any country or organisation after you managed to overcome his probably elite bodyguards.I feel like I need to bring up the existence of Metal Wolf Chaos here :)
Or at the very least, Air Force One.
"Get off my plane!"
I admit that an argument can be made about looking from a todays point of view versus taking a historical point of view. So while most modern leaders would probably not be able to put up much of a fight things would surely look very different when confronting Attila or Genghis Khan in their prime. Which however does not change the fact that on a personal level I find that the standard trope of having a BBEG behind it all a little boring, and that there would be less problems with the incapacitation rule if the culmination point of most chapters, adventures or paths would not always be BBEG fights. But thats just personal preference.
I admit that an argument can be made about looking from a todays point of view versus taking a historical point of view. So while most modern leaders would probably not be able to put up much of a fight things would surely look very different when confronting Attila or Genghis Khan in their prime. Which however does not change the fact that on a personal level I find that the standard trope of having a BBEG behind it all a little boring, and that there would be less problems with the incapacitation rule if the culmination point of most chapters, adventures or paths would not always be BBEG fights. But thats just personal preference.
Well yes and no. Parts of the no is due to the fact that it apparently still is a generic trope for any fantasy genre that BBEGs actually have to be physically (or magically) powerful whereas in reality they almost never are. For example in the here and now nobody would expect an epic fight with the leader of any country or organisation after you managed to overcome his probably elite bodyguards.I feel like I need to bring up the existence of Metal Wolf Chaos here :)
Or at the very least, Air Force One.
"Get off my plane!"
I wasn't really disagreeing or arguing with you, so much as illustrating that modern media does contain examples of modern leaders being "badass"...
...while using examples that are either patently absurd, or which generally aren't taken seriously :)
That said, the Pathfinder setting is one where its possible for an individual to gain enough personal power to exert influence over groups or nations by "force" all on your own. Thats not really a consideration in reality.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. Last night my players had an extended conversation about what to do with an unconscious blood hag. They hoped to imprison her so she couldn't kill or eat anyone else, but I pointed out her ability to turn into fire and essentially gaseous form her way out of any cage without needing somatic components to cast spells meant she was basically uncontainable.
The party all agreed execution was the only practical solution, but one player was really uncomfortable not going through some sort of trial first. The problem is Nimrmathas doesn't really have centralized government at the best of times, and in the middle of a war the PCs were basically the closest thing to elected leaders the region had.
I told the player that the reason why governments work in the real world is because we are basically just fragile sacks of meat, and any given one of us could be stabbed in the back or otherwise easily killed. That means it is in our interest to collectively prevent that from happening have procedure to contain people without actually killing them.
But on Golarion, there are creatures you can't contain. Worse yet, there are creatures that can solo armies and who you can't simply take out if they start to become problems. You can't make Baba Yaga stand trial because she has so much literal power she can dictate who gets the throne of a nation every century and no one can do a thing about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is called an anticlimax, used far too litte in most of our standard fantasy stories and at least as memorable as a full grown climatic battle.I definitely will not use this feature in any games I DM. This has got to be the WORST feature of PF2E that I have come across so farBe prepared for your 23rd level BBEG to be defeated by the party in the first round of combat when it rolls a 2 on its save versus a first level sleep spell. Fun.
While I can say that with respect to having a good laugh, sure.
But there's a difference between good storytelling by subverting expectations with comedic results and "sheer dumb luck caused X to happen when it otherwise wouldn't have".
And the biggest problem with this is the GM has little say in the story in the above scenario without handwaving the outcome. The players deserve narrative power, some would say collectively equal to the GM (I would say this), but a single player having more narrative power than the GM due to the rules? Not ideal at all IMO.
The central figure of being anticlimactic is to be disappointing or unsatisfying.
Saying "nah that's a good thing" when by definition something that is disappointing/unsatisfying is the nature of anticlimax just seems like a huge stretch to me.
Are there moments where clever/funny circumstances can cause unexpected outcomes that are ultimate good for storytelling? Of course.
I don't see how "I use my level 1 spell to beat the BBEG" even remotely falls into that category though, but I suppose that's subjective. I'd wager most wouldn't consider it an "under utilized gem of storytelling" or whatever is being implied.