|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Errenor wrote: Ravingdork wrote: I mean that I as a GM would not allow someone to substitute Class DC for Spell DC or vice versa unless a rule specifically allowed for it. Ok. So what DO you do in this situation (base class doesn't have class DC and some archetype demands it without giving it)? They do have a class DC. It is 10 + Key Ability Score as they are Untrained.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Guntermench wrote: Errenor wrote: Ravingdork wrote: I mean that I as a GM would not allow someone to substitute Class DC for Spell DC or vice versa unless a rule specifically allowed for it. Ok. So what DO you do in this situation (base class doesn't have class DC and some archetype demands it without giving it)? They do have a class DC. It is 10 + Key Ability Score as they are Untrained. That's certainly an interesting take, and likely one I would take up. (A good reason to warn inappropriate characters away from it.)
I'm not sure it's true though. After all, many classes mention when you're untrained in something, such as armor.
Class DC may well be Null.
Captain Morgan wrote: HumbleGamer wrote: I see powerful snare somehow mandatory by the level you get it, mostly because the more you level up, the less the snares you'll get.
You'll also be stuck with specific snares, because you have to always go for the max DC you have, so it comes in handy being able to either get the max DC available, as well as choose between a larger pool of snares.
Obviously, you won't pick up lvl 1 snares at lvl 15, but being able to opt for a lvl 14 or 13, if required, while giving them the DC of a lvl 15 is IMO gold either for flavor purposes and versatility.
Lvl 10 class feats are in a bad spot as there are plenty of possibilities for either class and archetypes, but if you are lucky enough to be played with FA you won't have to worry about it that much.
What bothers me the most is how to deal with them during combat.
They are obviously supposed to be used as combat actions, but I expect a load of party trying to exploit it in the same way. Putting them on hallways, concealing them, and luring enemies there in order to trick them into huge free damage.
Plus, I have seen many players going for an indefinite number of snares in the same spot, making the damage *2/3/4, while every single damaging spell we have always points out that enemies caught by multiple hits don't get hot multiple times.
I like snares effects, but they are not balanced when it comes down to in combat placement, and they may end up being a total exploit if used outside the combat.
I think they could have been way better ( though it's always up to the DM how they can be used or not).
Woah dude. I disagree with every single thing you wrote there. If you like to exploit stuff I can see "some" disagreements.
Leaving apart how one can possibly deny the major availability of snares at lower levels than higher ones.
Where do they say that? Going by the list of proficiencies they generally just say what you are trained in.
Class DC wrote: A class DC sets the difficulty for certain abilities granted by your character’s class. This DC equals 10 plus their proficiency bonus for their class DC (+3 for most 1st-level characters) plus the modifier for the class’s key ability score. Core Rulebook pg. 29
Their proficiency bonus is 0 from being Untrained, so it's 10 + KAS.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Errenor wrote: Fixing obviously broken and extremely easily mendable things is kind of responsibility of a GM. Only if you see something as 'obviously broken', though, which doesn't seem to be the case for the other GM here.
I mean it's clear you have a pretty strong opinion about how the feat should work, but it seems like that energy would be far better directed at Paizo, because they're the ones who chose to design the feat to work in this fashion in the first place.
Not a random dude online for not agreeing with your houserule.
HumbleGamer wrote: It's unlikely that paizo decide to forbid a class from taking a generic archetype. That's a bit of an overstatement. No one is 'forbidden' from taking the archetype. But one specific feat option within that archetype doesn't work for certain characters. As pointed out upthread, just using top level snares for damage is completely reasonable regardless.
Squiggit wrote: I mean it's clear you have a pretty strong opinion about how the feat should work, but it seems like that energy would be far better directed at Paizo, because they're the ones who chose to design the feat to work in this fashion in the first place.
Not a random dude online for not agreeing with your houserule.
Well, instead of spending your energy on lecturing me how to direct my energy you could yourself just direct your energy to redirect this issue to Paizo if you know how. Because I don't. Or better to say I think I did all I could. Also this is not the only place where the issue of class DCs is mentioned. And 'a random dude' is fine, none of my energy is actually going to him, thanks for your concern.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Let's all hold hands and scream at Paizo in unison.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ravingdork wrote: Let's all hold hands and scream at Paizo in unison. Yep.
For making Class DC versus Spell DC a thing in the first place? And putting all sorts of litte edge cases everywhere? If you don't want casters to do this then say so clearly.
Along with the complexity that is Innate Spell DC and Casting DC from different traditions. Highly complex ways of getting bad DCs, which ultimately means you are at a huge penalty so don't do this.
Stop creating trap options for new players to be disappointed with.
@squiggit: assuming the player would be always able to unlock all the snares the moment they "ding! Lvl up!", I can see it a less impactful issue.
But, at least in my experience, most AP doesn't leave you enough room to properly craft/discover during the given book.
Don't get me wrong, as you can do it anyway ( who cares about time issues or consequences), but I happened to see either DM allowing downtime and other who tend not to, if the plot urges.
Anyway, in my opinion class DC sucks and should be made the same for every class, spellcaster or not.
I'm going to posit that "Class DC as a concept sucks" is getting a bit off-topic for "is a kobold bard with snarecrafting viable?"
I'm not saying that it's not a conversation worth having, but... perhaps in a new thread?
Errenor wrote:
Fixing obviously broken and extremely easily mendable things is kind of responsibility of a GM. So no, I don't see it as unfair at all.
That seems to be an exceptionally dramatic way to describe an archetype feat that isn't equally good for all characters.
A class feat that calls for Class DC on a class that lacks proficiency (not "doesn't even have one!!!" unless a sorcerer also "doesn't even have AC!!!" just because they're not proficient in armor--you can still calculate it, it's just pretty bad), like the Magus one? That's clearly an issue. But a feat accessible to many characters will never be equally useful to all if them.
Errenor wrote:
Don't tell me that this feat was intended to not work for a lot of classes, please.
It's not a class feat. That's normal.
Sanityfaerie wrote: I'm going to posit that "Class DC as a concept sucks" is getting a bit off-topic for "is a kobold bard with snarecrafting viable?"
I'm not saying that it's not a conversation worth having, but... perhaps in a new thread?
Yeah, I gotta second this. I appreciate all the advice people have given me in this thread, and I know what to plan for now. That's all I was after when I made this thread.
|
