You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 06, 2016, 02:24:44 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)  (Read 10257 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #25 on: June 22, 2008, 11:34:19 PM »
I'll probably stick with 3.5 + Tome upgrades, simply because I know I can trust stuff by Frank & K (for one thing, they actually show the math behind it rather than saying "Trust me, my name is on the front cover.") and their stuff is plain awesome. Fantastic flavour, ways of explaining the weird things that exist, actual balance, and things are generally awesome all the time.

I *have* heard that Jason is more interested in adding flavour to the Sorcerer than actually making it comparable to the other full casters (or for that matter, changing more glaring problems - the monk is still a joke). But if there's an actual improvement to abilities thrown in as well, I won't complain. Is there an option for "No, I'm not the descendant of a dragon or whatever. I am just that damn good." or does every Sorcerer have to have "Mummy fucked a (strange creature)" in order to get their special powers?

While it's all well and good to say "they want their favourite wizard to not get a nerf", the fact of it is that the best point of balance is this: can it contribute meaningfully, and survive most of the time, in a level-appropriate encounter? This means that MONSTERS are the way you balance the classes. And that means that, at levels higher than 5, you look at the Wizard, Cleric and Druid, assume they won't use the particularly abusive abilities (just change those individual tricks), and fix everyone else to compete at their level.

Yes. That means that at high levels, Wildshape and friends need to be changed to a decent buff that doesn't win the game (sounds like they did just that), Gate shouldn't be used to call in creatures you couldn't reliably defeat as a party (ie "CR higher than the party level"), but most of all, the fighter and friends need to be doing as much as the wizard is. Not the other way round. To those who have a hard-on for Tolkien's crap: only play level 1-5 games. Done. Above that, fighters are: the Iliad, THIS IS SPARTA!, Beowulf, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Hercules, and (as much as I hate to reference it) Dragonball. They are not "Derp de derp derp, I stand and hit with sword."

Now, I've never believed that Wizards can do everyone else's job, but they are able to cover all bases, given planning. In reality, everyone should be able to cover all bases in a pinch - just not being as good at those things as their specialty. As for what they can do:
Traps: summon monster, tell monster to wander in front of the party all the time. Or Dispel magical traps.
Searching: if it's magical (including any trap with a DC over 20), Detect Magic will basically find it. If not, they can't find it, and that's okay.
Any time-is-not-of-the-essence scenario, including out-of-battle healing: Planar Binding. Seriously, they can summon Outsiders with Raise Dead as a (Sp).
Combat: Damage is for chumps. First level they bust out Sleep, Grease and Colour Spray (save-or-lose spells). From then on, it's Charm Person/Monster (combat over), Hold Person/Monster (Hold = coup de grace), Dominate Person/Monster (combat over + a free cohort! This is an example of a spell that needs to be dropped), Finger of Death, Forcecage (look, Ma, no save!), Wail of the Banshee, Power Word: Kill... I crossed out the ones that presumably don't exist any more in Pathfinder.
They can also bring Wall spells up, so as to tell the monsters "You stay there/go here." Combine it with Evard's Black Tentacles of Forced Penetration and/or Acid Fog, and they have done a better job than any "tank" ever will.
Also, they can fly, turn invisible, and see invisible things. They can also say "Who cares about my AC? You have an automatic 50% miss chance if you hit, and/or have to roll to see which of the five of me you actually target. Four of them are illusions, though."

And really? That's okay. That's the kind of stuff everyone should be doing (in their own manner). So if the Wizard can indeed still do those, that's okay. It's seriously better than 4E with its "Lol, no-one can do anything now! Look! 2 [W] + Strength plus you KNOCK THEM BACK FIVE SQUARES!", but the question that has to be asked is "Why can't everyone else do the equivalent of those things?"

Far Eyes: lose two caster levels? The Rainbow Servant gives +1 caster level at every level. Sure, the CHART shows that you lose two caster levels, but the text (under "spellcasting") says "at every level you gain..." WotC pointed out that when two sources disagree, you go with the text, not the chart. So your Warmage/Beguiler ends up being able to spontaneously cast their entire list, plus the entire Cleric list, plus those domains.

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #26 on: June 23, 2008, 12:13:08 AM »
Acctually there are a couple of variations on the sorcerer bloodlines that dont involve interbreeding. The ones that do include Abberant (the far realms), Infernal (Devils and the 9 hells), Abbyssal (Demons and the infinate layers of the abyss), Celestial (angels, Eladrians, Guardianals, and Archon's, oh my!), Draconic (Dragons obviously), Elemental (the four primary elements but who says you couldnt add more?), Fey (Fairies, Nymphs, dryads, and who knows what else), Arcane (your family has always practiced magic but while your ancestors might have been wizards you have learned magic through innate talents), and Undead (Maybe you were born dead and were revived but later developed power from it? Maybe your an odd off shoot of a vampire or lich?)

The one that isnt determined by an ancestor breeding with something is Destined (Fate itself has granted you magic power. Maybe your a chosen one or the child of some prophecy?) but you could also include Arcane and undead with some different ideas

You are right about the monk still being a joke though

If wizards are burning all these spells to be more effective in the encounters then the solution to me isnt the game system but the DM. The first thing that Dm should do is talk to the player and tell them to stop overshadowing the rest of the group. If they dont comply what they need to do is put in more encounters and give the players (or at least the wizard) less time to rest and get those spells back. Nightly patrols finding that party are a great way of doing so and if they wizard is taking all the glory in these earlier encounters then the other players should easily be able to pick up the slack

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #27 on: June 23, 2008, 12:45:06 AM »
Well, I'm glad there's the option for "I'm just amazing because I am!" And yeah, Arcane and Undead both seem to also have less to do with your parents being the reason you're good at what you do.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #28 on: June 23, 2008, 11:04:20 AM »
As long as magic is an auto success (Saving throws don't count, besides half an effect is still a success) I want no part of it.  So for those of you who love 3.x and want it to continue, then I say:

Happy Gaming!

Offline Far eyes

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2008, 11:19:56 AM »
Auto success, like disintegrate at lvl 20, 40d6 Vs 5d6 or Finger of Death Dies vs 3d6+20.


Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #30 on: June 23, 2008, 01:18:26 PM »
Knock opens doors and locked boxes at minimum maximum range of 120ft (Most traps don't reach that far), Fly allows one to not have to touch the ground, Tenser's Floating Disk is a wonderful make shift palanquin, the various Summon Monster spells can call up wonderful back up...  And if you ever get tired, Rope Trick or Mordenkienan's Mansion are almost impregnable fortresses.

And if the wizard is smart/high enough, he/she will have those spells and not have to worry about the rest of the party, if they really don't want to.

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #31 on: June 23, 2008, 10:09:08 PM »
There are no save or die spells now, I believe thats the 3rd time someone has said that in this thread.

you know Chris a lot of your complaints about the wizard can easily be handled with a clever DM or just a talk with the player. If you have 4 locks on a door a Knock spell is only going to undo 2 of them and unless the party lacks a rogue to pick locks then a wizard is unlikely to have more then 1 memorized. Fly also lets you circumvent some dangers, but that can be delt with by placing powerful air currents in certain areas, dispel magic traps that trigger on proximity or just go off every xdx rounds, or spikes that drop from the cieling to a hieght of 5 feet every other round.

Once you get even mid level the summon monster spells become little more then an annoyance. Even at summon monster 9 the highest CR you can bring out is I think 13 and thats vs CR20-23 encounters. Even at that level why arent the enemies using spells like Protection from X or Magic circle vs X to keep summoned creatures away, or failing that, why arent they using dispel magic to just get rid of them?

I think Rope trick and the Mansion need to remain though. Wizards have called up safe havens out of nowhere since the dawn of time and I consider it an iconic ability. Even if a wizard summons it in the middle of combat to give himself a chance to recuperate whats stopping all those enemies from getting ALL of their allies together to attack the second he comes out, dispeling the spell, or just running away?

The best way to fight magic is with magic. Where are all the goblin adepts? Ogre mages? Devils with class levels? I really just think its bad DMing with a smart wizard that you've encountered. With that said, if you want to keep this anti 3.x wizard stuff going then how about making another thread titled something like "Why I dont like wizards". This thread is about pathfinder not the 3.5 wizard and how they "owned" the previous system.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #32 on: June 23, 2008, 10:22:23 PM »
Brandon, I'm just relating the spells that I once had a Wizard player memorized.

This guy was good, if he needed more than what he had, he'd have a wand or a ring of it.  He also made amazing use of cantrips.  Problem was, he was too good and some of the other players (Who never said anything) started to get bored not having to worry about anything, because odds are, he had it covered.

Now, Pathfinder uses this as a base, and frankly as long as it does, I'm leery of it.

But I'm STILL not sold on 4e...

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #33 on: June 23, 2008, 10:30:56 PM »
Chris: It's not a problem with the Wizard, Cleric, Druid and properly played Rogue. It's a problem with everyone else. Aside from a handful of abusive spells/tactics, the monsters are made to the power of "Wizard and friends: here is a challenge. Everyone else? Fuck off." If you don't think people should be doing crazy good stuff, I suggest playing low level, or 4E where no-one does anything useful, or a White Wolf game where the best ability is "Allies 5: The entire US marine corps".

Seriously, what wizards do HAS to be the base. But every other class needs to be brought up to that base. See: the Tome material by Frank & K. And when that happens, everyone has some ability to temp in for anyone else's job, but no-one is outshined by anyone else. Pathfinder makes the mistake of not bringing everyone else up to that level.

There are no save or die spells now, I believe thats the 3rd time someone has said that in this thread.

Sleep. Colour Spray. Charm/Hold/Dominate Person/Monster. Forcecage. Tasha's Hideous Laughter. PW: Stun. Deep Slumber. Anything else that causes Paralysis/Sleep/Coma/Helplessness/Stun/Nausea.

Sure, they don't actually kill the target, but it's still a Save-or-Die to most people (or Save-or-Lose to be precise). Except for Forcecage, which doesn't allow a save. You just cast it and move on. If you *have* to kill the foe, you cast it, then place down an acid fog, black tentacles and wall of fire.

Quote
you know Chris a lot of your complaints about the wizard can easily be handled with a clever DM or just a talk with the player. If you have 4 locks on a door a Knock spell is only going to undo 2 of them and unless the party lacks a rogue to pick locks then a wizard is unlikely to have more then 1 memorized.

There isn't a problem with wizards here. Everyone should be able to open a frigging door. I'd argue that if the party lacks someone who can pick locks, it'd be rude to place too many locks or traps in the area as a DM. You can't just say "Nobody wanted to be minesweeper? HA! Suck my dick!"

And the fighter can smash the door down. If the doors are all made of adamantium, they can instead smash the walls down. There are usually options. It's not like "open a door" is a special magical challenge. Now the fighter *should* be able to smash traps into not working - throwing a weapon to destroy the mechanisms, scratching the runes so that they stop working etc. This is a case of "Not the wizard's fault."

Quote
Fly also lets you circumvent some dangers, but that can be delt with by placing powerful air currents in certain areas, dispel magic traps that trigger on proximity or just go off every xdx rounds, or spikes that drop from the cieling to a hieght of 5 feet every other round.

Or just give everyone the ability to fly/gain a climb speed (in dungeons)/jump really high and fight mid-air. I mean, we're talking about incredible heroes, after all.

Quote
Once you get even mid level the summon monster spells become little more then an annoyance.

Exactly. Occasionally you might summon one that can cast healing spells, for the HP, or you might send one to set traps off for you, but that's about all.

Quote
I think Rope trick and the Mansion need to remain though.

This is a tricky one. On the one hand, it's an iconic ability, on the other, it just breaks the game when you tell casters "You don't need to abide by the same rules as everyone else. Here, you get one encounter per day."

I'd prefer it if spells couldn't be regained in those areas, or something similar. So the party could sleep, lose their fatigue, have a meal, cast healing spells and all that, but could not regain everything.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #34 on: June 23, 2008, 10:43:26 PM »
Part of my issue, and this is not Pathfinder but 3.x, has been the over reliance of magic.  Most parties I played with (3) and all the other anecdotes I've heard on-line (And not only from those who complain, actually, most of them were absolutely happy with it) is that the entire party based it's tactics completely on what the Casters (Both Wizard and Cleric) had available.

And if one or the other magic user was some how removed from the fight (Either by death or some other contrivance) the party folded faster than Superman on laundry day.  And often if they stuck it out, they might have had a chance.

Also, one thing that seems common is that whenever the Wizard or Cleric have blown their wads, the party holes up for the night.  And it's not because the Wizard whines about it (Although that did happened sometimes) but because all the other players are afraid to push on because of the lack of real firepower.

That saddens me, I want every class to be useful, to be able to cover each other if one falls.  Maybe not with the same tools as the others, but able to handle whatever challenge is available in case one falls or happens to be missing.

In 3.x there isn't, and unless they radically change the system (Which they can't really) then Pathfinder won't change enough for me.

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #35 on: June 23, 2008, 11:05:21 PM »
Im just done talking about wizards now and unless it specifically has to do with Pathfinder arcane spells, wizard specifics, or anything specifically Patherfinder then Im going to ignore it at this point.

So lets move on to something else. I got done reading the barbarian today and its very different. Constitution is an Infinatly more important ability score then it was in previous systems. Rather then rages per day a barbarian now gets Rage points and can spend a single point to enter rage. They also get rage powers that are like supernatural abilities a barbarian can use after spending more rage points. Some include my earlier example of making your weapon add elemental damage, adding you barbarian levels to attack or damage rolls (not both), or improving your DR. A barbarian can now rage more then once per an encounter as well but after they leave rage they are fatigued for a number of rounds equal to the rage points they spent x 2. I thought that these ideas gave the barbarian a lot more flavor

Offline Far eyes

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2008, 11:14:05 PM »
The new rage system is a nice idea, most rage powers are a waste of Rage points.

Honestly though I would and am keeping every enervate, Finger of death and power word Pawn spell in my 3.5 game. Simply because these are tools I use to make a world ware magic can be screwy

Pathfinders fighter or barbarian don’t really come close to anything close to wizard after lvl 6 or so and honestly I don’t want to loose spells, that’s why I have Spell Comp and Comp Mage, PHB2 I like having a lot of spells

If I want a game witch is less dangerous and more action packed I will go with a 4e game.

The new grappling and sunder rules are a bit better, the grappling one is actually pty retarded when you look at it. But no I wouldn’t call pathfinders AP idea good, because they are trying to bend 3.5 int what 4e is.

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #37 on: June 23, 2008, 11:56:13 PM »
That saddens me, I want every class to be useful, to be able to cover each other if one falls.  Maybe not with the same tools as the others, but able to handle whatever challenge is available in case one falls or happens to be missing.

In 3.x there isn't, and unless they radically change the system (Which they can't really) then Pathfinder won't change enough for me.

The Tome Series. Seriously. http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=48453

Offline Xillen

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #38 on: June 24, 2008, 07:03:27 AM »
Don't the keen players always take a bit of that focus?

I once ran a campaign with one player rolling a Half-Ogre with a Spiked Chain, focussed on tripping opponents. In no time, the entire party's tactics was based around the half-ogre's weapon reach. Casters made sure to stay in it and move with it, Rogues used it to great advantage for flanking, others used it as a base to attack from, move out and then back in.

If you have one player who's willing to take up all the possibilities, then that will almost always have a big impact in the game.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #39 on: June 24, 2008, 04:22:16 PM »
Xillen, the Half-Ogre isn't in the 3.x books, whereas the magic the parties I had were all from the PHB.

And that's not including the horror stories from the net.

Also, didn't your players Enlarge the Ogre to be more effective?

Offline Xillen

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #40 on: June 25, 2008, 07:46:26 AM »
No. The Half-Ogre is not a humanoid, so enlarging him would not have been an easy trick.

I guess you could accomplish something similar by taking a human or half-orc fighter, and have a wizard or cleric cast enlarge on them, but that would make him quite depending on the others.

I was kinda assuming we counted in the WotC supplementals. My bad.

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #41 on: June 25, 2008, 10:48:40 AM »
Acctually the half ogre first appeared in savage species for 3.0 and then again in races of Destiny for 3.5. I think that when your group finds a good tactic theyre going to use it and plan around it as long as its effective no matter what the tactic is. Lets face it though, the second that clerics run out of healing spells (or in pathfinder it will be channel energy uses and healing spells) theyre going to want to rest whether you're going easy on them or not.

Offline Xillen

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #42 on: June 25, 2008, 10:59:29 AM »
I think Chris meant the Core books. And yeah, tactical parties will do that.

I can still remember the first time I played a cleric. It was in 2nd edition, and the group was battered up pretty badly, so they decided: "Let's spend the day here to rest." Naturally, since we weren't going to do anything that day, I stacked on healing spells and played baindaid in the morning. Then they decided that now that everyone was on decent health again, they might as well continue adventuring that day.

That was the first and the last time I played band-aid in the morning. Since then, on rest days, I'm doing the healing in the late evening.

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #43 on: June 26, 2008, 12:07:32 AM »
I've seen Clerics simply declare "I worship the god of war. You can handle your own healing. I simply buff myself and fight."

One friend had a hilarious way of teaching the cleric a lesson: he pestered him halfway into the 1 hour prayer for spells. After a day or two without any spellcasting, the cleric calmed down a bit and played with the rest of the team - he prepared his combat spells, but accepted that he might need to occasionally convert to a cure.

Ideally, everyone should have healing capacity (no, potions don't count) - that way, it doesn't fall on one character to do all the healing. Everyone can pitch in/cover themselves, and so saying "I'll be cleric" does not mean "I'll be the band-aid box." That'd also mean that the "healer" roles wouldn't need to be given crazy good benefits just to make them attractive (see: casting in full plate with a Cleric full BAB, d8 hit die and 2 good saves).

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #44 on: June 26, 2008, 12:18:57 AM »
As far as clerics go there needs to be less selfishness on both sides. Clerics need to understand that on occasion they need to do some healing. At the same time everyone else needs to realize that they shouldnt be expecting a cleric to ONLY heal.

This is where Pathfinder helps fix that because use magic device can be an effective skill for everyone. If a person wants healing they just need to buy a wand of Cure X wounds and use it on themselves. Its not a perfect solution but its one more thing that I find good about pathfinder

Offline kongming

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #45 on: June 26, 2008, 03:11:14 AM »
Its not a perfect solution but its one more thing that I find good about pathfinder

Actually, I'd argue that it IS a perfect solution - it means that anyone can heal themselves out of combat - and seriously, at the rate you use them, they're dirt cheap - but the cleric and druid have access to the bigger healing for in-combat when needed.

Of course, the cheapest option is a trap of Cure Minor Wounds. Yes, a trap. That costs 250 GP, and creates a device that, when triggered (for instance, a ball trapped to trigger when you touch it), casts Cure Minor on you and automatically resets. Infinite uses.

I'm seriously not sure whether to say "That's dumb. Simply make it a use-activated item for 900 GP, not a trap." or to say "That's pretty funny. DO IT!"

Offline Xillen

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #46 on: June 26, 2008, 06:31:25 AM »
I've seen Clerics simply declare "I worship the god of war. You can handle your own healing. I simply buff myself and fight."

One friend had a hilarious way of teaching the cleric a lesson: he pestered him halfway into the 1 hour prayer for spells. After a day or two without any spellcasting, the cleric calmed down a bit and played with the rest of the team - he prepared his combat spells, but accepted that he might need to occasionally convert to a cure.

Oh, defenitely. But if we decide to rest for the day, then even when worshipping a god of war, it would be sort of pointless to fill myself with buff spells and not use them all say, since we're resting, while I could've boosted up the group. The problem was that after I boosted up the group, the group suddenly decided to take action that day. And since I was completely out of spells, I just hung around in 2nd rank with my halberd, while the warriors up front took a beating without any heals from me to back it up, since I already burned all my spells.

You can make such a trap for 250 gold? :o Anyhow, that's where the DM has to step in and say "no!".

Wands of Cure Light Wounds is the first thing group gold is usually going to. Yeah, it's the cleric or druid that uses it, but it'll benefit the party, so the party better cough up the money for it!

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #47 on: June 26, 2008, 12:28:33 PM »
I think you missed the point there Xillen, I was saying that with Pathfinder having no limit on how many ranks you can put in a non-class skill you could max out use magic device and then anyone could use a wand of Cure X wounds to heal themselves in or out of combat. While in 3.5 only the divine casters or the rogue could do that

Come to think of it, this also helps aleviate the magic problem for lower level spells too. Theres nothing stopping the fighter from taking ranks in use magic device and putting up some walls to create a bottleneck that enemies have to meet him at to engage the group.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2008, 12:38:00 PM by Brandon »

Offline Xillen

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #48 on: June 26, 2008, 01:05:07 PM »
I was mostly referring to Kongming's example about clerics.

And yeah, I could see how everyone would be able to heal him or herself out of combat with use magic device, but I don't really see it's importance. Does it really matter that much if I use it on myself, or if I give my wand to the cleric so he can use it on me?

Unless you mean groups could run without Cleric/Druid/Healer/Favored Soul/Factotem, where I guess you'd be right.

Offline BrandonTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder D&D (aka 3.75)
« Reply #49 on: June 26, 2008, 01:13:36 PM »
Well I didnt realize the usefulness of the use magic device thing till Kongming mentioned it. I think that if a group of people are going to invest ranks in the skill and be responsible for their own healing then yes a healing focused character probably wont be needed. I also think that it will free up even more spells for clerics to use in offensive ways and thats a good thing IMO.

At higher level I think youre going to need spells higher then 3rd level to survive but considering how much money you have at those levels I dont see a problem with anyone picking up a use activated, infinite charge, item that does heal when you use it.