| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I declare that most Martials balance better than casters because they're more likely to put a skill increase in Acrobatics.
This reminds me of starfinder and how my ratfolk mechanic died.
I had no investments in acrobatics. My unarmed and strength were bad. No athletics I drowned in acid.
Every character I've built since then has had either acrobatics, Athletics or a good unarmed in pf2e specifically.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I declare that most Martials balance better than casters because they're more likely to put a skill increase in Acrobatics.
Not really. Once that many casters have dex has secondary stat having a good Acrobatics is pretty common (specially for experienced players that know that if no improve their acrobatics they will end without a skill to use in Escape action).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Escape without using a spellslot :P
Especially if you are bellow level 7 or is an Occult SpellCaster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Escape without using a spellslot :P
Especially if you are bellow level 7 or is an Occult SpellCaster.Scrolls exist:P
Charm, Command, Ill Omen, Kinetic Ram, Sanctuary, Gravity Well, Levitate, Ooze Form, Paralyze, Phantom Prison
You are grappled, DC 5 flat check that
Ah crap they used attack of opportunity as well
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Escape without using a spellslot :P
Especially if you are bellow level 7 or is an Occult SpellCaster.Scrolls exist:P
Charm, Command, Ill Omen, Kinetic Ram, Sanctuary, Gravity Well, Levitate, Ooze Form, Paralyze, Phantom Prison
You are grappled, DC 5 flat check that
Ah crap they used attack of opportunity as well
And? Neither of those automatically cause the spell to fail.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And? Neither of those automatically cause the spell to fail.Escape without using a spellslot :P
Especially if you are bellow level 7 or is an Occult SpellCaster.Scrolls exist:P
Charm, Command, Ill Omen, Kinetic Ram, Sanctuary, Gravity Well, Levitate, Ooze Form, Paralyze, Phantom Prison
You are grappled, DC 5 flat check that
Ah crap they used attack of opportunity as well
And an acrobatics, strike or athletics doesn't have to deal with either.
Roll a 4 or below while grappled and your spell just fails. Not even just failed. It is lost. By by spell slot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Escape without using a spellslot :P
Especially if you are bellow level 7 or is an Occult SpellCaster.Scrolls exist:P
Charm, Command, Ill Omen, Kinetic Ram, Sanctuary, Gravity Well, Levitate, Ooze Form, Paralyze, Phantom Prison
Well, you can still do both. Try to Escape + Cast a Spell in case of failure instead of just risk to waste a spellslot, a scroll, wand usage or a staff charge and 2-action in your first trial.
Aboult suggested spells you give interesting suggestion with some funny effects mixed:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What can you do with acrobatics that you can't with a spell?
I'm a fighter. I can't do anything with a spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just like to debate as I imagine Gortle and Leo do. Nothing they stated is going to allow the use of Spell Substitution with a spellbook for clerics and druids, which started the original discussion as Leo was trying to hard sell the wizard's abilities beyond what they can do because he likes the PF2 version.
It will work in their home games if they so choose and doesn't really break anything. It would make the wizard a little more fun for some. If I played with someone that allowed it, wouldn't bother me a bit.
My original point was that other casters are more versatile than the wizard using the core rules as they are known to operate, at least the sorcerer and bard in that regard, especially so if you are playing to high level. Sorcerer and bard poaching off other spell lists allows them to fill more roles and thus allow more diverse groups to be built.
Oh, I certainly do. Also, as was shown, some people bring out rules I didn't notice.
I guess I can't help but be curious, you said "using the core rules as they are known to operate", would you not allow Spell Blending or DBI to work on dedication spell slots? If not why not?
Because as I believe the rules operate, only wizards and magus use spellbook preparation meaning "required for their class to operate" whereas other classes using spellbooks is purely cosmetic.
Cleric and druids use list preparation.
Magus and wizards use spellbook preparation.
Witch uses the familiar.
All the other classes generally use spell repertoire.
I would likely allow the magus class to use Spell Substitution.
To create a less confusing table, I tend to follow the rules in a simple fashion. Learn a Spell and the individual classes have clear methods of preparation and that doesn't change for the dedications.
If I allow Arcane Thesis Spell Substitution for multiclass dedications, then when I play a Dual Class game which we've been doing lately, suddenly the druid and cleric when paired with the wizard gain full access to this feature as well even when it is pretty clear they prepare from a list.
It's not something I feel the rules support. In my home games with Dual Class used, it sounds like a headache waiting to happen.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always take Acrobatics with my casters. Flight checks key off acrobatics. Not having one escape skill if you get swallowed can be terrible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always take Acrobatics with my casters. Flight checks key off acrobatics. Not having one escape skill if you get swallowed can be terrible.
I do too but Air Walk doesn't care about Acrobatics the way Flight does. It is a better choice all round if you have it.
Escape is by default done with your unarmed attack modifier with an option for athletics or acrobatics. So if you are not going to rank your acrobatics there is not much point. With the changes in the rules to scale everyones unarmed attack proficiency.
Still Catfall and Kip Up are nice pickups,
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just like to debate as I imagine Gortle and Leo do. Nothing they stated is going to allow the use of Spell Substitution with a spellbook for clerics and druids, which started the original discussion as Leo was trying to hard sell the wizard's abilities beyond what they can do because he likes the PF2 version.
It will work in their home games if they so choose and doesn't really break anything. It would make the wizard a little more fun for some. If I played with someone that allowed it, wouldn't bother me a bit.
My original point was that other casters are more versatile than the wizard using the core rules as they are known to operate, at least the sorcerer and bard in that regard, especially so if you are playing to high level. Sorcerer and bard poaching off other spell lists allows them to fill more roles and thus allow more diverse groups to be built.
Oh, I certainly do. Also, as was shown, some people bring out rules I didn't notice.
I guess I can't help but be curious, you said "using the core rules as they are known to operate", would you not allow Spell Blending or DBI to work on dedication spell slots? If not why not?
Because as I believe the rules operate, only wizards and magus use spellbook preparation meaning "required for their class to operate" whereas other classes using spellbooks is purely cosmetic.
Cleric and druids use list preparation.
Magus and wizards use spellbook preparation.
Witch uses the familiar.
All the other classes generally use spell repertoire.
I would likely allow the magus class to use Spell Substitution.
To create a less confusing table, I tend to follow the rules in a simple fashion. Learn a Spell and the individual classes have clear methods of preparation and that doesn't change for the dedications.
If I allow Arcane Thesis Spell Substitution for multiclass dedications, then when I play a Dual Class game which we've been doing lately,...
I was talking about DBI and Spell Blending.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also don't work if the grabbed was a critical.
If you have been critically grabbed, that means that the enemy used an action and contributed to their MAP in order to do that. It also only lasts until the end of their next turn, unless they spend another action and crit succeed again.
If the enemy is going to waste MAP and an action just to keep me restrained, I could do nothing on my turn and I'd still be meaningfully contributing to the combat.
Such a situation is so incredibly unlikely, I feel no need to plan for it.
I'd carry around a scroll of blink, just in case.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know DC 5 flat check isn't huge but it is definitely notable
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I certainly do. Also, as was shown, some people bring out rules I didn't notice.
I guess I can't help but be curious, you said "using the core rules as they are known to operate", would you not allow Spell Blending or DBI to work on dedication spell slots? If not why not?
DBI? Not sure what that is.
I would probably allow Spell Blending as it has no limitations on how you prepare spells. Seems if you have it, you can use it. It doesn't even seem to indicate as part of the same tradition, so you could trade other spell lists for wizard spells or vice versa. Pretty wide open.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I certainly do. Also, as was shown, some people bring out rules I didn't notice.
I guess I can't help but be curious, you said "using the core rules as they are known to operate", would you not allow Spell Blending or DBI to work on dedication spell slots? If not why not?
DBI? Not sure what that is.
I would probably allow Spell Blending as it has no limitations on how you prepare spells. Seems if you have it, you can use it. It doesn't even seem to indicate as part of the same tradition, so you could trade other spell lists for wizard spells or vice versa. Pretty wide open.
Drain Bonded Item
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I allow Arcane Thesis Spell Substitution for multiclass dedications, then when I play a Dual Class game which we've been doing lately,...
Dual Class changes a lot of things. Yes as a GM you should do some interpretation for balance reasons. But honestly playing RAW is not a major problem. Dual class casters have far too many slots, unless it is a very long adventuring day it won't matter. Dual class characters feel the action economy a lot. That is their real limit.
I do see that Spell Blending and Spell Substitution would work for any combination of the prepared casters as they all can put spells into spell books to make it work. Exception being Witch which has a Familiar problem.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also don't work if the grabbed was a critical.If you have been critically grabbed, that means that the enemy used an action and contributed to their MAP in order to do that. It also only lasts until the end of their next turn, unless they spend another action and crit succeed again.
If the enemy is going to waste MAP and an action just to keep me restrained, I could do nothing on my turn and I'd still be meaningfully contributing to the combat.
Such a situation is so incredibly unlikely, I feel no need to plan for it.
I'd carry around a scroll of blink, just in case.
It also means you are unable to do anything but attempt to escape. It sounds like the enemy is winning this contest to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I allow Arcane Thesis Spell Substitution for multiclass dedications, then when I play a Dual Class game which we've been doing lately,...Dual Class changes a lot of things. Yes as a GM you should do some interpretation for balance reasons. But honestly playing RAW is not a major problem. Dual class casters have far too many slots, unless it is a very long adventuring day it won't matter. Dual class characters feel the action economy a lot. That is their real limit.
I do see that Spell Blending and Spell Substitution would work for any combination of the prepared casters as they all can put spells into spell books to make it work. Exception being Witch which has a Familiar problem.
Not in my games.
List casters don't use a spell book for preparation. You are using a general, non-specific rule and attempting to apply it to all prepared casters. It's pretty clear that clerics and druids once a spell is learned is added to their list, which is what they use for preparation.
Non-specific general rules aren't applicable when something more specific applies.
You seem to think List Casters don't exist or that they get to magically choose what type of preparation they do because a general rule written in another part of book exists that doesn't apply to the specifics of how clerics and druids prepare spells and how they learn them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Drain Bonded ItemOh, I certainly do. Also, as was shown, some people bring out rules I didn't notice.
I guess I can't help but be curious, you said "using the core rules as they are known to operate", would you not allow Spell Blending or DBI to work on dedication spell slots? If not why not?
DBI? Not sure what that is.
I would probably allow Spell Blending as it has no limitations on how you prepare spells. Seems if you have it, you can use it. It doesn't even seem to indicate as part of the same tradition, so you could trade other spell lists for wizard spells or vice versa. Pretty wide open.
Drain Bonded Item seems to be non-specific. I would allow it to apply to any prepared caster class you have access to.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also means you are unable to do anything but attempt to escape. It sounds like the enemy is winning this contest to me.Also don't work if the grabbed was a critical.If you have been critically grabbed, that means that the enemy used an action and contributed to their MAP in order to do that. It also only lasts until the end of their next turn, unless they spend another action and crit succeed again.
If the enemy is going to waste MAP and an action just to keep me restrained, I could do nothing on my turn and I'd still be meaningfully contributing to the combat.
Such a situation is so incredibly unlikely, I feel no need to plan for it.
I'd carry around a scroll of blink, just in case.
That certainly would be the case if it was just 1 v 1. But in theory you have a team. If the enemy is spending its best action not doing damage and just restraining you, the enemy is certainly not winning that situation. That you can do nothing but attempt to escape is of ancillary importance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That certainly would be the case if it was just 1 v 1. But in theory you have a team. If the enemy is spending its best action not doing damage and just restraining you, the enemy is certainly not winning that situation. That you can do nothing but attempt to escape is of ancillary importance.It also means you are unable to do anything but attempt to escape. It sounds like the enemy is winning this contest to me.Also don't work if the grabbed was a critical.If you have been critically grabbed, that means that the enemy used an action and contributed to their MAP in order to do that. It also only lasts until the end of their next turn, unless they spend another action and crit succeed again.
If the enemy is going to waste MAP and an action just to keep me restrained, I could do nothing on my turn and I'd still be meaningfully contributing to the combat.
Such a situation is so incredibly unlikely, I feel no need to plan for it.
I'd carry around a scroll of blink, just in case.
I wasn’t aware the enemies fought alone.
Anyway, MAP is of little issue to most monsters unless they are far under the PC’s level. The second attack just generally means it’s not a critical hit but a regular one. Either way, now there are only 3 (assuming the standard party of 4) PCs capable of doing anything which may not be enough to deal with the threat.
I don’t think anyone is happy to lose their actions just so the enemy gets a -4/-5 to their attack.
I would do this in a heartbeat.
I don’t think anyone is happy to lose their actions just so the enemy gets a -4/-5 to their attack.
This may be worth a poll, but I am sure you are the only one.
You do realize that the MAP attack in question would most likely target the pinned PC; the PC that is now flatfooted? Suddenly that -4/-5 is now effectively-2/-3.
|
|
I would do this in a heartbeat.
I don’t think anyone is happy to lose their actions just so the enemy gets a -4/-5 to their attack.This may be worth a poll, but I am sure you are the only one.
You do realize that the MAP attack in question would most likely target the pinned PC; the PC that is now flatfooted? Suddenly that -4/-5 is now effectively-2/-3.
Yes, I am aware.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually have a bigger problem with Leo's wizard's theses assesment. I don't think spell replacement and blending between classes should work at least RAI, but I'm not sure. But here:
3) Arcane Thesis. The thesis are the most interesting aspects of the wizard because none of them, except metamagic, only interact with your wizard spells.Yes, metamagic definitely works for everything once you get it (unless there are some specific weird interactions). So everyone could get and use Silent Spell on all their spells after spending a whole lot of their class feats on Wizard dedication. Though yes, how this would interact with Psychic for example I'm not sure. Need to read the rules.
Sure...though it is not the thesis that is working with other spellcasting. The only thing the thesis is doing is allowing the gaining of a free wizard feat. Which is why I said what I did. Of course metamagic feats work with any spellcasting.
Honestly, I really don't see a strong argument that can be made for RAI 'wizard thesis only work with wizard stuffs' as a blanket thing. To be fair, I also don't completely think an opposite RAI argument could be made either. Which is why I addressed the RAW and said 'why not?' (basically making a counter too-good-to-be-true argument).
|
|
Sure...though it is not the thesis that is working with other spellcasting. The only thing the thesis is doing is allowing the gaining of a free wizard feat. Which is why I said what I did. Of course metamagic feats work with any spellcasting....
3) Arcane Thesis. The thesis are the most interesting aspects of the wizard because none of them, except metamagic, only interact with your wizard spells.Yes, metamagic definitely works for everything once you get it (unless there are some specific weird interactions). So everyone could get and use Silent Spell on all their spells after spending a whole lot of their class feats on Wizard dedication. Though yes, how this would interact with Psychic for example I'm not sure. Need to read the rules.Ok, well, but you did basically say that "metamagic only interact[s] with your wizard spells" which made me puzzled. Also, it's free wizard feat which you can use with (almost) everything, so...
Though I agree that it's not a great thesis. I have a character with it and I basically never use it at all: all essential metamagic I take as normal (meaning Reach and Silent Spell) and for everything else there's too little choice, too little use and I also always forget about it.
There are other issues we have similar questions about, like class DCs and multiclasses, and it's not clear there too. Also at least your reading doesn't look broken: if it's not for a wizard, why should it be for something else?
Honestly, I really don't see a strong argument that can be made for RAI 'wizard thesis only work with wizard stuffs' as a blanket thing. To be fair, I also don't completely think an opposite RAI argument could be made either. Which is why I addressed the RAW and said 'why not?' (basically making a counter too-good-to-be-true argument).
Looking back at my wording, you are right. I specifically said "interact with wizard spells". That was not what I meant in relation to metamagic thesis. My line of thinking was that if it somehow allowed access to some or many metamagic feats outside of wizard, it would be much more interesting. That said, I don't really know how it would be done.
I tend to operate under, if it is not disallowed by RAW, not blatantly against RAI, and not game breaking, why not?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have to add my experience into this debate now that I've played PF2e, mainly as a GM but also as a player, since the playtest and GM'd 4 Adventure Paths (one converted from 1e).
Note that my group has remained the same for years and we play, literally, every weekend. Obviously, groups may vary. We tend toward maximization in combat for the most part, but are also good at figuring out how to be good at everything (social encounters).
It is quite clear that martial character are far better at damaging opponents than casters. Over the course of a battle, a martial can impart 3 or 4 times as much damage as a caster trying to impart damage.
So if anyone is looking for a game that provides casters with the ability to match or even come close to martials in damage production, PF2 ain't it.
That being said, casters have other strengths. However, it requires system mastery to make an above average caster. There are plenty of utility spells that are still effective and a ton of good area-of-effect debuffs.
But...other spells that impose cool effects work, maybe 45% of the time with full effect. This is demoralizing to caster players and people should know this ahead of time.
It can be very boring to play a caster- lack of spells per day and automatic betterment of attack and DC causing this, in our opinion, after these 3-4 years.
It is incredibly difficult to compare martials with casters. They do very different things. It is incredibly rare that a single caster could ever hope to take a single martial. I'd rather see a better parity in the game for casters.
It's my hope the new remaster can address this. My group has discussed this and would love to see more feat options for spellcasters and spells which utilize different action costs like heal/harm.
Once again, these opinions have come from playing this game since it came out, including all the years of PF1. It's clear to use that martials do more damage in terms of hit points than casters over a combat encounter (which is ok with us), but the comparable percentage is something we'd like to see higher. For instance, if a fighter can deal 100 points of damage over the course of an encounter, we'd like to see a wizard be able to impart 60, at least, if they are specialized in such things. This has not been the case with our group over these years.
If a caster wanted to not be a damager, than allow options to increase their ability to debuff or apply other effects. Many times effects are negated or dulled due to high saving throws/low DCs.
Martials also have the ability to have incredible armor classes, furthering their ability to dominate a battle. Combined with a lot of abilities to utilize the superbly wonderful 3-action system (not hyperbole, this system is awesome), it's more fun for a lot of players to be martials instead of casters.
It's also our hope that new options for current classes come out more, rather than just new classes. Support for existing classes is a must and something we miss from PF1.
|
Have to add my experience into this debate now that I've played PF2e, mainly as a GM but also as a player, since the playtest and GM'd 4 Adventure Paths (one converted from 1e).
Note that my group has remained the same for years and we play, literally, every weekend. Obviously, groups may vary. We tend toward maximization in combat for the most part, but are also good at figuring out how to be good at everything (social encounters).
It is quite clear that martial character are far better at damaging opponents than casters. Over the course of a battle, a martial can impart 3 or 4 times as much damage as a caster trying to impart damage.
So if anyone is looking for a game that provides casters with the ability to match or even come close to martials in damage production, PF2 ain't it.
That being said, casters have other strengths. However, it requires system mastery to make an above average caster. There are plenty of utility spells that are still effective and a ton of good area-of-effect debuffs.
But...other spells that impose cool effects work, maybe 45% of the time with full effect. This is demoralizing to caster players and people should know this ahead of time.
It can be very boring to play a caster- lack of spells per day and automatic betterment of attack and DC causing this, in our opinion, after these 3-4 years.
It is incredibly difficult to compare martials with casters. They do very different things. It is incredibly rare that a single caster could ever hope to take a single martial. I'd rather see a better parity in the game for casters.
It's my hope the new remaster can address this. My group has discussed this and would love to see more feat options for spellcasters and spells which utilize different action costs like heal/harm.
Once again, these opinions have come from playing this game since it came out, including all the years of PF1. It's clear to use that martials do more damage in terms of hit points than casters over a combat encounter (which is...
I think this assessment depends highly on what players expect from martials and casters and the kind of encounters they meet. For example, encounters with many lower level thugs will see a damaging caster inflict a huge lot of damage.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My own point of view now concerning the PF2 martial vs caster balance is pretty simple : martials are all about the Strike. And casters are not.
Almost every round in every fight, a martial will use the Strike action at least once.
Casters are similarly all about casting spells. But spells have a lot more variety than Strikes : buffs, healing, attacks that target Will, Reflex, Fortitude or AC...
And casters are definitely not as good as the Martial as far as the Strike or its magical equivalent is concerned.
Just as martials are not as good as casters at using the various possibilities provided by spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have to add my experience into this debate now that I've played PF2e, mainly as a GM but also as a player, since the playtest and GM'd 4 Adventure Paths (one converted from 1e).
Note that my group has remained the same for years and we play, literally, every weekend. Obviously, groups may vary. We tend toward maximization in combat for the most part, but are also good at figuring out how to be good at everything (social encounters).
It is quite clear that martial character are far better at damaging opponents than casters. Over the course of a battle, a martial can impart 3 or 4 times as much damage as a caster trying to impart damage.
So if anyone is looking for a game that provides casters with the ability to match or even come close to martials in damage production, PF2 ain't it.
That being said, casters have other strengths. However, it requires system mastery to make an above average caster. There are plenty of utility spells that are still effective and a ton of good area-of-effect debuffs.
But...other spells that impose cool effects work, maybe 45% of the time with full effect. This is demoralizing to caster players and people should know this ahead of time.
It can be very boring to play a caster- lack of spells per day and automatic betterment of attack and DC causing this, in our opinion, after these 3-4 years.
It is incredibly difficult to compare martials with casters. They do very different things. It is incredibly rare that a single caster could ever hope to take a single martial. I'd rather see a better parity in the game for casters.
It's my hope the new remaster can address this. My group has discussed this and would love to see more feat options for spellcasters and spells which utilize different action costs like heal/harm.
Once again, these opinions have come from playing this game since it came out, including all the years of PF1. It's clear to use that martials do more damage in terms of hit points than casters over a combat encounter (which is...
This damage comparison is false and unsupportable. Casters do not deal less damage than martials over the course of battle. If you came to this conclusion after 3 years of play, you have some of the worst players I've ever heard of. If they are getting out damaged by that percentage, your players are so awful I can't even imagine what they're doing to fall so far behind in damage dealing.
The fact you don't even include how badly casters out damage martials with AoE damage indicates to me you revived this thread to start more trolling on the matter.
Casters absolutely wreck martials in AoE blasting damage and it's not even close. At the end of the fights, they don't even stay in the same ballpark.
This seems like an ambiguous attempt to troll us all and start the usual infighting.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the impression that "casters are weak at damage" comes from the notion that "solo boss fights against Level+3 enemies are the only thing that matters" (i.e. we're going to look at only the times when AoE damage barely matters). Because, yes, martials are going to be the best at doing damage against single targets (particularly those of a higher level), but this is specifically their schtick and also a thing martials usually "pay for" in terms of "exposing themselves to danger."
This is probably also where the idea that "casters are only good for debuffing" comes from, since debuffing the enemy who has superior math but only 3 actions is probably the single most useful thing anyone can do in that fight. Like Slow+"not ending your turn within the baddies' reach" means that the monster can't use any 2 action activities that aren't ranged.
I know DC 5 flat check isn't huge but it is definitely notable
My boss missed twice due to dazzle while trying to sting the party Rogue last night. Very dissapointing from a GM point of view. I came very close to getting him.....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
level -2 enemies are plenty dangerous. You just have to use enough of them and put them in an encounter site where those numbers can be leveraged effectively. A great way to do this as a GM is to have stuff in the room to do other than try to move and attack PCs. Suddenly that action economy advantage is huge when enemies are looting the treasure in the room and making a break for it while the boss is fighting the party and getting angry her goons aren't doing what they are supposed to. This is a fun way to combine a level +2 or 3 monster (depending upon party level) and a handful of 4 or 6 level -2 creatures. As a fight it could easily get out of hand if all the enemies worked together, but you as the GM you have a lever now you can switch to change things up in a way that can keep tension high and get everyone moving all over the dungeon instead of standing around with murder faces on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
level -2 enemies are plenty dangerous. You just have to use enough of them and put them in an encounter site where those numbers can be leveraged effectively. A great way to do this as a GM is to have stuff in the room to do other than try to move and attack PCs. Suddenly that action economy advantage is huge when enemies are looting the treasure in the room and making a break for it while the boss is fighting the party and getting angry her goons aren't doing what they are supposed to. This is a fun way to combine a level +2 or 3 monster (depending upon party level) and a handful of 4 or 6 level -2 creatures. As a fight it could easily get out of hand if all the enemies worked together, but you as the GM you have a lever now you can switch to change things up in a way that can keep tension high and get everyone moving all over the dungeon instead of standing around with murder faces on.
You can always improve any system with good GMing, where does this type of encounter design show up in APs and PFS scenarios?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the impression that "casters are weak at damage" comes from the notion that "solo boss fights against Level+3 enemies are the only thing that matters" (i.e. we're going to look at only the times when AoE damage barely matters). Because, yes, martials are going to be the best at doing damage against single targets (particularly those of a higher level), but this is specifically their schtick and also a thing martials usually "pay for" in terms of "exposing themselves to danger."
This is probably also where the idea that "casters are only good for debuffing" comes from, since debuffing the enemy who has superior math but only 3 actions is probably the single most useful thing anyone can do in that fight. Like Slow+"not ending your turn within the baddies' reach" means that the monster can't use any 2 action activities that aren't ranged.
This is flawed to only look at these Level +3 situations.
But the other side is not completely obvious either.
If you are fighting a bunch of Level -2 or Level -3 enemies such that the AOE is very effective, how dangerous really was the encounter? Yes the AOE speeds up the combat, but would the martials have just taken a little longer to sword them at little risk anyway?
I've been thinking about trying to replicate the D&D 4e minion with increasing attack and dmg bonuses but not touching defenses and HPs for encounters with lots of lower level enemies. This could create a bit more value for AOE. Clearing these enemies fast is a real value because they are a lot and they are hitting hard (say like Level +0s)
Actually, as mentioned above, the key is in Time To Kill. Because it is what brings an encounter's threat level down to very manageable range.
When you are facing a single enemy, the only thing that will bring the encounter threat level down is killing them. The threat goes from 100 percent to zero. There is not really an in-between stage.
When you are facing a crowd, every round you spend with all of them (or even most of them) active carries a very real threat of PCs going down. But as soon as you disable enough of them, the encounter's budget goes down to a much more easily manageable threat level and PCs end up mopping the rest up pretty easily.
The key to winning encounters in PF2 is actually written in the Building Encounters chapter.