Good Lord This Oracle

[eyelessgame]

This is mostly a post to whine a bit about my own shortcomings as a GM.

One of my players has a high-level life-mystery Oracle.

At this point it's getting hard to challenge the party with whole classes of monster. I've whined before about the 4th level spiritual ally, and how powerful this spell is for battlefield control in any kind of tight quarters - I had to come up with some kinds of rules for how the spell related to CMB/CMD, so that it wasn't simply an ally-permeable forcewall that dealt damage to adjacent enemies.

The 6th level chains of light is an almost automatic destroy-one-opp-per-round for boss opponents, unless they have an immunity to paralysis or a godlike Reflex save. It doesn't seem like a spell you can get at 6th level should automatically doom things like CR12 ropers - and of course as an Oracle, she can toss off far more of these spells per day than any cleric could.

I'm not actually complaining that much. It's just a different class of thing to prepare for than, say, having a sorcerer character at the same level. There do not seem to be equivalent spells that are as effective at the same level on the wizard/sorcerer list. Perhaps I'm wrong. But I am used to - as a multi-decade D&D DM - having to work with the power of spells like greater invisibility, fly, scry, teleport, true seeing, and all manner of other sorcerer spells that eliminate entire classes of effective opponent. I'm just not used to having to discard the groups of opponents that those cleric/oracle spells also make powerless. There's just not a lot left to challenge PCs with, once you're in the 11-14th level range.

I'm hoping by posting this, not to complain about the game, but to know effective GM strategies and good opponents who would have a shot at providing a fun combat against PC groups containing an oracle at these levels, because while I do recognize a long-campaign GM is largely playing-to-lose the big fights, I'd still like to worry my players a bit. Any advice?

[Melkiador]

Chains of light is good but if you dig a bit, you’ll notice that a shocking number of monsters are immune to the paralyzed condition: undead, oozes, elementals, constructs, plants, incorporeal, dragons and more.

Spiritual ally isn’t bad for narrow corridors. I guess monsters could still tumble past it like any other enemy. But really, narrow corridors just aren’t that common in the mid to later levels. So many of the CR appropriate monsters are large or larger.

To challenge the party, groups of monsters can be a lot more dangerous than a single strong enemy. Swarms are also very effective.

[Joynt Jezebel]

Chains of Light also allows a new save each round. Sure it does not allow SR and keeps baddies from running away.

I tell less experienced players that divine casters have good offensive spells, just not so many as arcane casters. They often don't listen so I am going to send them to talk to you. :P

[Mysterious Stranger]

You are reading too much into Spiritual Ally. It does not act as a wall of force all it does is prevent opponents from moving through the square. It does not block line of sight or anything else.

Chains of light is also not that bad. Hold Person is only 2nd level and also paralyzes a single humanoid target. While it does not block extra dimensional movement like chains of light it does prevent the target for performing any action including using spells or spell like abilities.

[Azothath]

Advice
I assume you took notes. If the party is 11+12+13+14 that's APL 12.5 for APL+3 CR= 15 to 16 'hard' challenge rating. That will help you select monsters by CR.
Remember only 50-66% of the challenges should be martial, so you need to come up with skill, social, puzzle, trap, and other themed challenges. You said you wanted to worry them and that's good as your job is to make them sweat on occasion.

Divine casters do not have the finesses & impact of arcane casters. It's really that simple.

I'd suggest you look at some higher level PF1 Scenarios Adventure Finder Level 11 8-13,17,20, 9-00,07,13,20,23, 10-04.

Spiritual Ally:K4 is not that great with mov 30(consumes swift actn) Oracle BAB + Wis for attack (1d10+([CL/3] max 5))[Frc]dmg, one AoO(so moving through/by its square is easy after the first). I think you are just giving the spell too much via interpretation. Sum Mon 4:C4 is better.

Chains of Light:C6 decent but just paralyzes one target on a round by round basis and is over when it saves {classically saves are made at the start of the creature's turn unless the spell description dictates otherwise}. So maybe you want more than one foe or something with a bit of trickery or the right creature type.

as you posted in the Rules forum I'll end here. You might want Advice or a GM Forum.

[Diego Rossi]

Chain of Light

A rule question.
It says:
"may attempt a new saving throw each round to end the effect."

OK, when?

It doesn't say that the target takes the save at the end of his/her/its turn, nor that it costs any actions, so my interpretation is that he/she/it takes the save at the initiative at which the spell was cast, probably when the caster turn come up if that hasn't changed, and before the caster act.

I would like to know what other people think.

BTW, a spell that has a very good chance to paralyze most opponents for, at least, a turn, in middle-high games is powerful, as the other characters almost certainly will kill the target.

Wery few creatures are immune to "held in place", even if they are immune to paralysis.

[Carrauntoohil]

Diego Rossi wrote:

Chain of Light

A rule question.
It says:
"may attempt a new saving throw each round to end the effect."

OK, when?

I would agree with your interpretation as a fair one. It's one round since the last save attempt:

Quote:

he/she/it takes the save at the initiative at which the spell was cast, probably when the caster turn come up if that hasn't changed, and before the caster act.

Quote:

Wery few creatures are immune to "held in place", even if they are immune to paralysis.

Being "held" counts as helpless. Good luck with all those FORT saves for Coup de Grace attempts from the whole party if you fail a save.

[Joynt Jezebel]

Diego Rossi wrote:

Chain of Light

A rule question.
It says:
"may attempt a new saving throw each round to end the effect."

OK, when?

Very alert Diego.

I don't disagree with your way of resolving the question. But in principle the spell description should make it clear.

On the spell, it is essentially a save or die for one target. For a 6th level spell that is nowhere near excessive.

[Pizza Lord]

Spiritual ally, is the less problematic one. It's basically an up-powered spiritual weapon with some tactical allowance. In spaces with little maneuverability or room to get around it and avoid Attacks of Opportunity, it works better than otherwise. It does still only get one AoO a round like a normal creature, I see nothing that changes that.

Spell resistance does work (and dispels and ends it if it fails to pass SR), so having such a creature ready to provoke (and allow a hit) could end it. If you can plan ahead, or have it ready, spell immunity is an option. Using a 4th-level spell to counter a 4th-level spell is a hard trade, but a fair one, since at least the caster still caused the use of a spell (possibly an action if the enemy has to cast it in combat). Then you run past and provoke and it's gone. Prepared enemies who know it's a favored tactic can have it ready ahead of time.

Chains of light is troubling from the prospect of having to deal with it suddenly. Obviously if you've heard of it or the caster using it, a reasonably thoughtful foe expecting the PCs has a much better chance of being ready. A potion of paralysis is cheap, and an ally (or more) ready to spend a full round action and provoke their own AoO (or have the spell ready is even better), will grant you a new save at +4 (the spell says a new Will save, but I think that's just because such spells are typically Will saves when they aren't purposefully designed to edge-run around precedent, so it's probably fair to rule it's another Reflex save at +4). Some other way to deliver it; wand, scroll, tiny-sized syringe spear, etc.

Twitch tonic is a similar option. Only 45 gp can be imbibed an hour before hand or administered by an ally after being affected, but it's only a +2 bonus to the save, though it is alchemical, so will stack with most other bonuses.

Otherwise a periapt of proof against paralysis is 8,000 gp. The target will still be fatigued for 1d4 rounds, so that's still a tradeoff and won't completely screw the PC using chains since it will still lower Str, Dex, and prevent the enemy from running or charging for a time.

Freedom of movement is the go-to, obviously.

It also looks helpful to note that a blink effect will still have a 50% chance to avoid the spell hitting if the caster can't see invisible or ethereal, since the spell doesn't stop the blinking until it does successfully land.

Similarly, if you can't be seen, you can't be targeted, so invisibility, fog, smoke, really good Stealth checks for sniping, or staying out of close range can help. Even attacking from behind an illusory wall, which the caster can see through but others cannot, even if they save to realize it's an illusion, or from the interior of a tiny hut, which is opaque from the outside, or from the other side of a wall of fire which is opaque (but probably affects you too).

Obligatory rant:

---------------------------------------
To me, chains of light seems poorly balanced (IMO). It looks to me like a designer was purposefully avoiding normal parameters and tradition to make an OP spell. It's a spell that summons chains of 'pure light', yet isn't an evocation and isn't even a [light] spell, thus preventing someone from at least trying to counter it with a [darkness] spell (which would still be a good use, since it would waste a an action and turn of a targeted creature's ally (and the chance of having a 6th-level or higher [darkness] spell). With no attack roll. Plus a Reflex against paralysis instead of the standard of a Will save, and no Spell Resistance even though it is clearly targeting a creature with an effect "No, it's creating a 'physical' object... light... that can't be targeted or really attacked, or escape artist'd out of, or damaged!". Sorry, if it was an actual set of chains, freedom of movement wouldn't work against it (it would stop the paralysis if that was a rider to being bound by them), but the spell wouldn't let them escape or get out of the chains, since it only auto-succeeds to escape grapples or pins, which the spell doesn't do.

And then they gate it behind [Good].

Evil sorcerers and wizards can get around that. Also, have evil clerics just have the [evil] version, chains of darkness. Change absolutely nothing except the [good] tag and 'light' to 'darkness'. Seriously, '...held immobile by glowing golden chains composed of pure darkness.' So just start having the PCs attacked with it constantly and then see what tactics they come up with. That will be the best way to find out a countermeasure.
-------------------------------------------

As for when the target can make the 'new save' each round, I think without saying otherwise, it's at the start of their turn, similar to other hold or paralysis effects. Even being paralyzed, they can still take such actions and choosing to do things is something you do on your turn (like when you choose between keeping your eyes open, averting them, or closing them if a creature with gaze is around). They could wait until 'end' of their turn, but it will likely be a moot issue, since they're paralyzed and probably won't be doing much else unless they have purely mental actions or abilities. So depending on what the initiative order is (and whether the target passes, of course), it could be more or less effective (in allowing allies to attack or Coup de Grace), but that's a tactic or party thing, not an issue with the spell. A caster could delay until after the target's turn and then cast, hoping to let their allies gank the target before it can try its new save, but at least the target got to act (even if they had no clue what was coming), so still fair tradeoff.

[Melkiador]

The text of chains of light is clearly paraphrased from hold person.

Hold Person wrote:

The subject becomes paralyzed and freezes in place. It is aware and breathes normally but cannot take any actions, even speech. Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect.

Chains of Light wrote:

The creature is paralyzed and held in place, but may attempt a new saving throw each round to end the effect.

I'm sure the behavior of the text was expected to be the same as hold person by the author. The parts from hold person were probably only removed to make the text shorter so they could fit more content into the book. For instance, I think we all assume that the creature affected by chains of light are still aware and can breathe normally.

[Belafon]

Diego Rossi wrote:

Chain of Light

A rule question.
It says:
"may attempt a new saving throw each round to end the effect."

OK, when?

Unless the spell says otherwise I treat any "once per round" saving throw like an affliction/poison as clarified by the Poison blog.

The target makes the saving throw on their turn, it does not take an action (unless the particular spell says so), and they can make it at any point during their turn.

[Diego Rossi]

One of the problems of Chains of light is that there is no reason for it to paralyze someone. What it does is Binding the target with chains made of light (or darkness for the evil version).

The condition it imposes should be Pinned, not Paralyzed. Some author has the bad habit of using Helpless or Paralyzed as a catch-all category, even when there are more appropriate conditions.

Pizza Lord rant is appropriate, the spell reflects a lot of bad habits in creating spells. "The writer assumed that it would work as ..." has no place in a rulebook. Either there is a general rule to which it defaults (and there isn't one, the rules have examples all over the place) or the author explains how it works.

@eyelessgame

Against Chains of Light there is a relatively simple and inexpensive counter: Heightened Reflexes. The bard in my group is using and abusing it.
It can't be made into a potion (it has no target), but it can be made into an inexpensive wand (especially if it only with a few charges) or a scroll and added to the enemy equipment, if someone has the UMD to use it.

[Belafon]

Champions of Purity - where chains of light appears - published several things that were too strong (to varying degrees). Two more that come to mind immediately:

Burst of radiance is just too much damage for its level. Yes, it's only against evil creatures but it's AoE, automatic, no-save damage with the possibility of blinding. And most campaigns have a strong component of "fight evil." Transmuter of Korada is out of scale (find another trait that gives a flat +1 CL to all spells of a school).

[Melkiador]

You are imagining hard light chains actually grabbing the creature. But the chains are just made of light. They only paralyze the creature, because the magic lets them do that. They are still just light. Otherwise, we'd have rules for sundering or breaking the chains.

[Mysterious Stranger]

Chains of Light is a 6th level spell that only affects one target. While it does make it easier to kill the target it still requires an extra round to do so. Save or die spells are not that uncommon at this level. This is something the GM needs to be prepared for.Circle of Death cast by a 12th level caster can kill 3-4 9 HD creatures or even more of less HD. Circle of death also kills the creatures not just render it helpless.

[Azothath]

Like many GMs, the OP is just not experienced/proficient with the PF spell system. It's wonky and takes some time to figure out the foibles. I can only say Read the spell description, avoid adding anything TO spells and just do what it says. Often going back to the School descriptions, descriptors, conditions can clear things up. If you are unsure you can make a conservative ruling and research it after the game and talk to your players coming to a 'final' decision. It's a game and a long BS session at a table rolling dice and having some fun, it'll be okay.

Think about what you want to teach in the game, what dramas you want to portrait, and spread out the challenge types as all martial challenge games grow/develop poor role-players.
Do your research and read various scenarios, realize there are several ways to frame combat scenes to adjust their difficulty. Strategy and tactics are a thing. Like any good magician, smoke and mirrors, distraction, misdirection, playing with the audience's assumptions are all tools in your repertoire.

[eyelessgame]

Thank you for all the responses and discussion!

A few clarifying notes.

- yes, the primary cases where spiritual allies were most effective were close-quarters fights. The GM has to invent an adjudication for how one might tumble, overrun, or bull-rush past the ally, as these are all opposed by the ally's CMD, and the ally doesn't have one (only an AC against touch attacks). Granted, this isn't impossible to invent.

- The major distinctions between chains of light and hold monster are spell resistance and the form of save. And yes, I was specifically whining about an encounter with a roper, whose SR27 and +13 Will is almost guaranteed to laugh at hold monster but needs to roll about an 18 for its +5 Reflex save to work against chains of light (which, being a Conjuration, ignores SR).

All that said, great responses, thanks again.

[Melkiador]

If the Oracle has chains of light then they are at least level 12 and the roper is a CR 12. So, that was never meant to be a deadly encounter.

I think a lot of people feel like every battle should be deadly, but really a lot of fights are just meant to burn resources. That 6th level spell slot used to defeat the roper won’t be available for the next fight.

[Niemand]

I guess he was looking to rope-er into it...

[Mysterious Stranger]

Ropers were almost specifically designed to ignore the entire enchantment school. Will saves is their one good save and they have Iron will on top of that. Not every creature will have the same weakness.

By the way Chains of Light is also a 6th level sorcerer/wizard spell so they can do the exact same thing.

[Pizza Lord]

For a roper it doesn't have to be in easy reach, like sitting in the middle of a cave (though that is the usual roper set-up). They have a +27 Climb check, they can be up a wall, as long as they're in 50 feet of where prey would come in or pass under. Next time, give one the Silent as Stone feat and Stone Clinger. They probably get surprise, and if the oracle is hit, they can't speak and get yoinked, making a much more challenging encounter. It's not a party kill, since they have a chance to spot it, it could miss, it could fail to get the oracle (don't run it as omniscient), but at least if chains of light paralyzing them might get them a round of moving up to be able to attack or coup de grace it. A GM might rule a climbing paralyzed creature falls, I'd say probably not if it was clinging. For instance, a person paralyzed climbing a ladder or gripping a ledge doesn't necessarily let go, and Stone Clinger would probably definitely not slip free even paralyzed (I'd probably drop Iron Will or Improved Initiative for them personally). Plus, they can still attack at range or with other spells.

Or don't just have a lone roper. I mean, they aren't always loners, they do interact and are intelligent. A large (multiple) patch(es) of green slime around it can make a nice sort of moat (or just patches in the area). Green slime doesn't affect stone, and a roper is clearly described as having a rock-like exterior (granite- or marble-like, the vulkard variant is more like basalt). It can pull things targets through them if needed (probably not unless dangerous, since it likely wants to eat them itself, and while its hide is rocky, ingesting green slime is probably still unpleasant, and its strands aren't rocky, so if the target gets coated, it would probably break the strand a round later, not that the roper cares).

As for non-ropers, a spell turning effect can be quite a surprise. Chains of light is dismissible and that can be done at will as a standard action, but it requires speaking the words of dismissal, which a paralyzed person can't do (unless the spell had no Verbal component, so props if they made it Silent and good for them). Or maybe a rope trick with archers in it, since spells can't cross the threshold (but the PCs could avoid the visible range of the downward-facing window, or at least run past it, or dispel it, or find some way to fly up to it assuming the rope wasn't still dangling down.

I think I will design a roper trick spell for ropers that they can hide in and just reach their strands out of now. Edit: Okay I went and did it. Now just have to have them give up some hit dice or advance a bit for a couple casting levels.

More ranting:

-----------------------------------------
Otherwise, I am hugely against authors making new spells that break traditions purely as ways to get around creatures. I felt the same about the orb spells of 3.5, where they were obviously evocations that manipulated energy, but because someone made them Conjuration (creation), they now had no SR. But it's 'creating' fire..." So? That's what evocation does! It's in the description. Conjuration doesn't say anything about conjuring energy. I am fine with Conjuration (fire) or (air) when it conjures a creature of fire or air or an object, but a ball of fire isn't an 'object' nor is a glob of acid (in this game, where acid is an energy type for spells. A vial of acid is an object, I would have no issue with a spell summoning a vial of acid, even one that hurled that vial at a target).

Or making a spell that absolutely squash creatures that are made and designed to be challenging to casters, like golems. Before golems had Magic Immunity, they changed it to spell immunity, which would have been fine if they kept to the rules and standards, but then they started complaining "This thing that's designed to be challenging to face for X is challenging to face for X! and rather than making cool spells or designing spells, they just decided to make spells that absolutely should have SR, just not have it. "But I want to paralyze things with my spells, but stuff with high Will saves or spell resistance makes things get a save or a good chance to resist spells! Instead of taking a feat or training to raise my DCs as a character, or using a different tactic against such creatures, I'll just make a spell that ignores game balance and precedent and just... doesn't give creatures that should be strong against it have any real chance."

Change chains of light to have SR and make it Will. It also doesn't have the [light] description for something that apparently conjures and manipulated and creates a chain of 'pure light'. I get it, not everything that glows needs to be a [light] spell necessarily, but this obviously does. And the odds of running into a 6th-level darkness effect that could counter it is almost 0%, but at least the option is there as a mitigator. This spell has zero other than immunity to paralysis, and that's bad design.

Otherwise, start using it against the PCs, and note how they respond with in-game tactics to counter it. Hell, just have an NPC talking about a bad guy or someone they might fight and mention that they've been known to use "glowing golden chains of darkness!" and it's obviously the almost identical spell and how they plan to deal with it, even if that character isn't planning to do it.
-----------------------------------------

[Diego Rossi]

Again +1 to Pizza Lord rant.
Authors who call something Conjuration without Calling, Creating, Summoning, or Teleporting anything simply use a cheap tactic to avoid SR.

The base idea isn't bad, but the spell needs to be reworked so that it is a real Conjuration (so, without SR, but with something that can be defeated by physical means and a condition like Bound, not paralysis) or an Evocation (or maybe even an Illusion, but that will have a Will save) with SR.

Either way, it will be a deadly 6th level spell, but not one that bypasses all kinds of defenses simply because it is called a "Conjuration".

I am thinking of making a little contest between my players:
"Rewrite Chain of Ligh[ (and Darkness) so that it is a real Conjuration. Who makes the better version will get it as one of his spells known or in his spellbook for free as a gift from Nethys."
It would be an appropriate follow up to their last adventure.

[Joynt Jezebel]

Belafon wrote:

Burst of radiance is just too much damage for its level. Yes, it's only against evil creatures but it's AoE, automatic, no-save damage with the possibility of blinding. And most campaigns have a strong component of "fight evil."

Don't complain about one of my favourite clerical spells. And no excuses. Including being right.

I recently advised a friend who is a novice to PF1 to take this and suddenly he was effective. Beforehand he had been mostly a 2nd rate melee combatant.

[TriOmegaZero]

Burst of Radiance is just too flexible not to use it. My lore oracle recently used it to blind and damage vampire spawn without harming the unconscious ally they were threatening. Is it too good? Probably. Will I nerf it? Not a chance.

[Belafon]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Burst of Radiance is just too flexible not to use it. My lore oracle recently used it to blind and damage vampire spawn without harming the unconscious ally they were threatening. Is it too good? Probably. Will I nerf it? Not a chance.

I still remember the PFS Arcanist who made me start calling the spell "burst of cheese." 4th level and was doing 10d4 damage. And since it's PFS, the other players were guaranteed not to be evil.

Spoiler:

Human arcanist. First level feats Spell Focus (evocation) and Spell Specialization (changed to burst of radiance at 4th level). 3rd level feat Bloatmage Initiate (evocation). 1st-level exploit Potent Magic. 3rd-level exploit Metamagic Knowledge (Intensified Spell). Traits of Wayang Spellhunter (burst of radiance) and Force for Good.

Add it all up and you get a CL10 Intensified burst of radiance in a 2nd level slot.

[Melkiador]

"Burst of cheese" isn't a bad combo, but 10d4 damage at level 4 isn't exactly amazing for that level of investment. That averages to 25 damage. The average CR3 has 30 hitpoints. The average CR4 has 40. That still wouldn't be bad for softening up the enemy, but then it also has the niche of the enemies needing to be evil to get the damage.

The worse problem may be that this doesn't scale too great past level 4. The spell itself is still pretty solid for crowd control, but I don't think I'd focus so hard on the damage of a low dice spell.

[Belafon]

Melkiador wrote:

"Burst of cheese" isn't a bad combo, but 10d4 damage at level 4 isn't exactly amazing for that level of investment. That averages to 25 damage. The average CR3 has 30 hitpoints. The average CR4 has 40. That still wouldn't be bad for softening up the enemy, but then it also has the niche of the enemies needing to be evil to get that effect.

It's pretty amazing for an AoE at 4th level that is guaranteed not to damage your allies. (Though you do have to be careful with the blind possibility.)

Quote:

The worse problem may be that this doesn't scale too great past level 4. The spell itself is still pretty solid for crowd control, but I don't think I'd focus so hard on the damage of a low dice spell.

This player was very good at planning out characters, and he definitely had that in mind. The only part of that build that was "stuck" on burst of radiance is Wayang Spellhunter. All the other elements were versatile.

Spoiler:

His Spell Specialization started as magic missile so he could toss out CL5 missiles at character level 1. His plan was to switch the preferred spell to fireball at level 6, when he could still keep the burst of radiance at CL10 without the specialization. Level 7 would be a dip into crossblooded sorcerer (draconic/orc), the orc bloodline would also apply to burst of radiance. At some point he planned to take Additional Traits, one of which would be Magical Lineage (fireball).

So he was mostly a traditional fireball caster, using magic missile then burst of radiance until he got up to 6th level. And keeping burst available as a 2nd level spell after that.

[Melkiador]

I forget the details, but PFS is also easy on trick builds to a certain level, because you can do free respecs. Honestly, everyone in PFS should just be summoners at first, because those are so over-tuned at low level.

[Belafon]

Melkiador wrote:

I forget the details, but PFS is also easy on trick builds to a certain level, because you can do free respecs. Honestly, everyone in PFS should just be summoners at first, because those are so over-tuned at low level.

You can only rebuild your character for free if it is level 1. PFS does use the retraining rules from Ultimate Campaign, but with any additional cost of Prestige Points. Not to get too deep in the weeds on earning/spending those; but you don't get enough to change multiple feats every level and changing all your class levels (even just once) is prohibitively expensive.

The particular player I mentioned above didn't plan on using any rebuilding/retraining.

[Azothath]

Belafon wrote:

...

I still remember the PFS Arcanist who made me start calling the spell "burst of cheese." 4th level and was doing 10d4 damage. And since it's PFS, the other players were guaranteed not to be evil.
** spoiler omitted **

Burst of Cheese build:

Trait WayangSplhntr(Rgnl=Minitan) -1 lvl slot to metamagic on spell of 3rd or less (Brst Rad:K2).
Trait ForceforGood(Fctn=SlvrCrusade) +1 CL to [good] spells, +1 step Aura.
Spell Focus +1 DC to a school
Spell Specialization +2 CL for one spell (may change at even level) for variable level effects.
Bloatmage Initiate +1 CL to school & Med encumbrance (-10 Mov, Max Dex +3, -3 Armr Chk).
ArcnExplt1 Potent Mag Resv[1pt] for +2 CL or +2 DC.
ArcnExplt3 Metamag Know, Intensify spell (+1) +5 dmg dice. BrstRad is 5d4 at CL5.

Arcn CL 4 +1+2+1+2+1=10 DC: +1 & 1 pool pt.
===end===

yep - checks out.
just plain Evok with pool use are at +5CL and Intsfy MM (+1 SplLvl) will add dice.

Melkiador- it is actually much harder to do a 'trick' build in PFS. Many of the broken classes/feats/items are out of scope(illegal). A player can only change builds around at first level (first 3 sessions) after that it costs significant resources to Retrain. The Iconics or PreGens(pregenerated characters for temporary use) are generally pretty average builds and poor caster builds. Just tells me you had very little experience with the official campaign.

[Oli Ironbar]

eyelessgame wrote:

This is mostly a post to whine a bit about my own shortcomings as a GM.

There's just not a lot left to challenge PCs with, once you're in the 11-14th level range.

I do recognize a long-campaign GM is largely playing-to-lose the big fights, I'd still like to...

1) Anyone running a system like P1 will be stronger in one part than another, lead with your strengths and ask the table if anything else is taking away from the overall vibe.

2) PC’s should win at harder challenges as they level up, combat is just part of that. How they win, what they are winning for, and the outcomes of their wins are in the control of the main story master. Maybe using all the power that they have amassed for further good (or evil) is the next challenge.

3) Don’t fight the power game with more power, but if you do, ask the table first how they feel about harder challenges with the possibility of ‘failing forward’ where their larger objective gets harder with each combat lost, but the rewards increase. Then plan the plot points accordingly.