|
Silver2195 posted:The other difference is that focus spells are, well, spells, meaning that “supernatural” martial classes like the Monk get them, but Fighters do not. This is also somewhat ironic, because the difference discussed above presents a clear justification for Fighters getting powers like this. It makes sense that certain maneuvers could take a lot of Fighter’s stamina, while the lore justification for the 4e version is less clear to me; maybe each encounter power is putting strain on a different muscle? This level of "verisimilitude" is one of the things that 4E design intentionally wanted to get away from. Specifically, a demand for a high standard for versimilitude w/r/t how the design "justifies" why martials can do Cool poo poo, but basically a braindead, uncritical "herp derp magic can do anything" take on why casters can do Cool poo poo. Nobody cares why the fighter can only do one Powerful Shove per fight. It doesn't loving matter.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
Fair Bear Maiden posted:I mean, focus points are similar to encounter powers but they're more granular in terms to how often you can use them during the adventure day, which is probably more daunting for the players but also instantly plays better to the 3.5/Pathfinder audience (and frankly to me, even though I don't really have critiques of 4th ed. because it was hard as balls to find a group to play it with when it came out, so I just never did). It also matters that you can actually be denied focus point recovery if you don't have the 10 mins on hand, which might come up if you're trying to preserve buffs (or running away from something). Encounter powers have no such limits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:It also matters that you can actually be denied focus point recovery if you don't have the 10 mins on hand, which might come up if you're trying to preserve buffs (or running away from something). Encounter powers have no such limits. You had to short rest to get back encounter powers. Which took 10 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:00
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:This level of "verisimilitude" is one of the things that 4E design intentionally wanted to get away from. Specifically, a demand for a high standard for versimilitude w/r/t how the design "justifies" why martials can do Cool poo poo, but basically a braindead, uncritical "herp derp magic can do anything" take on why casters can do Cool poo poo. In this case, the issue isn’t a Fighter doing Cool poo poo but a restriction on Fighters doing Cool poo poo. A Fighter than could do multiple Powerful Shoves per fight would be stronger, not weaker. The flip side of “magic can do anything” is “magic can have any drawback.” (Unfortunately various editions of D&D haven’t been very good at taking advantage of this to balance magic.) Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Jul 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:You had to short rest to get back encounter powers. Which took 10 minutes. I think that short rests were 5 minutes by default, but yeah, encounter powers needed to be manually recharged and that recharging process could be interrupted. Ironically, D&D 5e has literal encounter powers in the form of abilities or resources that explicitly recharge when you roll initiative. Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Jul 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:In this case, the issue isn’t a Fighter doing Cool poo poo but a restriction on Fighters doing Cool poo poo. A Fighter than could do multiple Powerful Shoves per fight would be stronger, not weaker. That's not the point. Fighters have always been able to "attack all day." The idea of introducing powers that they have a limit on was (relatively) novel, and the demand was for justification for any limit. Either fighters should be able to do it all day (thus requiring it to be relatively weak), or never, because [extremely poor understanding of physics and physiology]!!! quote:The flip side of “magic can do anything” is “magic can have any drawback.” (Unfortunately various editions of D&D haven’t been very good at taking advantage of this to balance magic.) D&D's magic has never had any substantial drawbacks. Unless you're playing a wild sorcerer or are under the effects of certain spells, there's not even a chance for spells to fail. D&D's magic balance is nonexistent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:D&D's magic has never had any substantial drawbacks. Unless you're playing a wild sorcerer or are under the effects of certain spells, there's not even a chance for spells to fail. D&D's magic balance is nonexistent. You’re not really disagreeing with me here; D&D in general has been bad at this. My point is that “realism” was never actually the issue; designers either not understanding or not caring about balance was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:30
|
|
|
Kinda wondering if Piazo's plan for cantrips is to move more of the bread-and-butter damage stuff into focus spells and mostly have cantrips be the bargain bin spells with only a few specific standouts so that non-caster classes that spec into magic can have some fun with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:07
|
|
|
HidaO-Win posted:Additionally, cantrips being below a martials strikes in damage is intentional, so that spell slots can outperform a martials strikes. I would absolutely agree with this trade-off if the latter part were even remotely true. Slot spells can outperform martial Strikes if you're using strong save-or-sucks like Slow or hitting 5+ targets at once with area damage, but any other kind of damage spell is pretty much a joke if you actually math out averages and compare it to a martial build that at least tries to be effective. Martial damage just has way more tools available for optimization (flat-footed, Haste, Heroism, damaging weapon property runes) that spells with saving throws can't exploit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
I was hoping spellcasters would get an item that gives +1/+2 to hit AC with spells like Kineticists but apparently the lead designers have come out saying that it won't happen for reasons I frankly don't understand since they've already done it for one class.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:22
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Slot spells can outperform martial Strikes if you're using strong save-or-sucks like Slow or hitting 5+ targets at once with area damage, but any other kind of damage spell is pretty much a joke if you actually math out averages and compare it to a martial build that at least tries to be effective. Are you sure? Last I checked on math, you get a AOE spell hitting a single target at 0.5 of a melee martial's turn. And then the fact you can do that at range...
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:34
|
|
|
Clerical Terrors posted:Kinda wondering if Piazo's plan for cantrips is to move more of the bread-and-butter damage stuff into focus spells and mostly have cantrips be the bargain bin spells with only a few specific standouts so that non-caster classes that spec into magic can have some fun with it. I think the numerical difference is vastly, vastly overstated, 1.5-ish average damage does not matter at all and cantrips are roughly as useful as they ever were the actual problem is that it was cut off the damage floor instead of the damage ceiling, and the big issue with low level casters is a vastly reduced ability to impact the game compared to both martials of the same level and casters of higher levels this change doesn't matter past like, level 5, but the biggest pain point for casters is those first few levels, so...
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:59
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:Are you sure? Last I checked on math, you get a AOE spell hitting a single target at 0.5 of a melee martial's turn. And then the fact you can do that at range... I mean the 5+ wasn't a specific calculation I was throwing out, it was just shorthand for a large number of targets. I've got an elaborate google sheets table for a variety of builds across all levels from 1-20 because the math can be pretty opaque if you don't do that, and the DPR of the lower-end martial builds (generic flurry bow Ranger or Multishot Fighter) do work out to about 2x the damage per target of a fully heightened Fireball with Dangerous Sorcery per target. Some of the more optimized martial builds I've worked out (agile two-weapon Fighter with Bard archetype for self-cast Heroism and Haste) are another 2x more than even that, and keep in mind that you're using your highest-level once-per-day resource here to do what the martial character does every round split across multiple targets. Even then you also have to account for Whirlwind/Avalanche Strike martials with reach being a thing and eating your lunch. You can even do that as a Rogue with Debilitating Strike and debuff the hell out of the entire room while you're at it on a class that also gets to be a skill monkey.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 02:30
|
|
|
Clerical Terrors posted:Kinda wondering if Piazo's plan for cantrips is to move more of the bread-and-butter damage stuff into focus spells and mostly have cantrips be the bargain bin spells with only a few specific standouts so that non-caster classes that spec into magic can have some fun with it. I wouldn't mind focus spells being a bigger deal but I feel like the nerf to cantrips was completely unwarranted and frankly, lots of attack cantrips should just have gotten buffed up to the better choices levels. Daze in particularly is offensively bad. Probably the worst spell in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 03:47
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:I mean the 5+ wasn't a specific calculation I was throwing out, it was just shorthand for a large number of targets. I've got an elaborate google sheets table for a variety of builds across all levels from 1-20 because the math can be pretty opaque if you don't do that, and the DPR of the lower-end martial builds (generic flurry bow Ranger or Multishot Fighter) do work out to about 2x the damage per target of a fully heightened Fireball with Dangerous Sorcery per target. Some of the more optimized martial builds I've worked out (agile two-weapon Fighter with Bard archetype for self-cast Heroism and Haste) are another 2x more than even that, and keep in mind that you're using your highest-level once-per-day resource here to do what the martial character does every round split across multiple targets. So I feel the need to point out you're comparing a) aoe damage to ST damage, and b) one spell to two setup turns and two spells before it can even count for something. For instance, that TWF you're referring to has to cast Haste turn 1, then cast Heroism turn 2 (being able to get off one-two strikes in there if you're lucky), and then it can start being a comparison. I've also GMed into Whirlwind Strike fighter with reach and Combat Reflexes, and honestly unless it's also paired with Haste it runs into complications relatively frequently. But like, let's take the example of a ranger with flurry. At level 10, going above and beyond their offensive gear, they might have a +2 weapon with 2 damage runes for 4d6+4 per shot (18 avg/41.5 crit), shooting at +21/+18/+15. Against moderate level 10 AC of 29, that averages 15.2/10.2/7.5 on those shots, getting an expected 32.9-40.4 on one target. Cone of Cold, meanwhile, averages out to 42 on a failure, DC 29. On a moderate Ref of level 10 (+19), that expects 33.6 on each target. So one casting does the same to each target as this ranger with extra money does every turn (if they have to select a new prey), and they can do this 4x before they need to look at any other spells they have. (This isn't even Dangerous Sorcery, this is just base.) One level higher, and they can also slot in up to 3 Chain Lightning for 52 to each target hit (58 with Dangerous Sorcery). If they're Elemental Bloodline, Elemental Toss for 5d8 in one action can also be added in. I just don't see how your numbers work out here. Cyouni fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 03:48
|
|
|
Jen X posted:I think the numerical difference is vastly, vastly overstated, 1.5-ish average damage does not matter at all and cantrips are roughly as useful as they ever were I wonder if any of that is intentional? I know in every edition up until 4, there was a pretty explicit understanding that full casters like wizards would be weaker by comparison at lower levels, then stronger by comparison at higher ones
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
Jon posted:I wonder if any of that is intentional? I know in every edition up until 4, there was a pretty explicit understanding that full casters like wizards would be weaker by comparison at lower levels, then stronger by comparison at higher ones I'm sure I've mentioned this before but when my players ran through Alkenstar without any magic, spells weren't really missed until level 5 or 6 and levels 7-10 were extremely rough. Only one of them even had the option of surviving the campaign but she went back into the equivalent of a burning building to try and save the rest and failed. At least the bbeg was stopped by everyone's heroic sacrifice. The CCing sorcerer in AV has been shutting down encounters hard and she's only level 6. Edit: Any word on Hideous Laughter or Slow getting nerfed? KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 05:19
|
|
|
The boss of Book 3 in our Strength of Thousands game crit failed his save against Slow and we were all kind of shocked it wasn't an Incapacitation spell. Sucked for him!
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 06:39
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:So I feel the need to point out you're comparing a) aoe damage to ST damage I mentioned in my first post on the subject that AoE damage was still a niche where damage casters could excel given enough targets, though. It's their single target damage spells that are hot garbage. Cyouni posted:and b) one spell to two setup turns and two spells before it can even count for something The prep-time is pretty moot too. Even if that particular build needs to burn some setup actions before performing effectively for the rest of the encounter, a spellcaster can literally only use their highest level spell slots ~3 times per day. That's not going to last you more than one encounter before you're falling even further behind. Cyouni posted:I've also GMed into Whirlwind Strike fighter with reach and Combat Reflexes, and honestly unless it's also paired with Haste it runs into complications relatively frequently. Cyouni posted:But like, let's take the example of a ranger with flurry. So it looks like you went with a shortbow over a longbow, which is not a terrible idea but Point Blank Shot from a quick dip in either Fighter or Archer would let you keep the longbow damage dice while ignoring the Volley trait when you need it (and you won't always need it). You also aren't using a compound bow which you could afford way before level 10, so that's a little extra damage per shot from just picking Strength as one of your four regular boosts. You're also only making three shots when you could get a fourth via Hunted Shot, but perhaps you're assuming that you need to Hunt Prey for a new target every round; not a ridiculous concern, but again a conservative estimate when an encounter against same-level enemies should usually only be like 2-3 targets. Accounting for those adjustments, my numbers are 44.65 DPR for 4 shots, or 36.38 DPR for only 3. For the spellcaster, you've decided to upgrade from Fireball to Cone of Cold for more damage from a spell that affects a conical area instead and therefore requires slightly more tricky positioning to avoid friendly fire, but I'll ignore that. The rest of your numbers are also what I'm using, but you got 33.6 average damage per target when it should be 31.5; half damage for success on a natural 10-19 (50% * 0.5), no damage for a critical success on a natural 20 (5% * 0), full damage for a failure on a natural 2-9 (40% * 1), and double damage for a critical failure on a natural 1 (5% * 2). That's 75% total effectiveness and you got 80% somehow. That is still more than 50% of even the four-shot turn of the build I used, but once again we're also assuming no influence by other party members. While frightened would help both characters, a target being flat-footed or a bard using Inspire Courage would help the martial character drastically while doing nothing at all for the spellcaster. You mentioned bumping things up to chain lightning in a level, but in 2 more levels the ranger would get a 3rd weapon dice and a 2nd deadly d10 from a striking rune, as well as Distracting Shot to make a target flat-footed for a round whenever you crit it or just hit it twice. Distracting Shot and Greater Distracting Shot are also reliable enough for Sneak Attacker to usually be a strict damage increase. You can also get a Speed property rune at 16th instead of a third damage rune for a fifth attack every round without even needing a support caster. The martial character just scales better and better in damage output as time goes on compared to the spellcaster. Vanguard Warden fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 06:40
|
|
|
Casters can't outdamage martials and they shouldn't. Casters have a lot of versatility which means they can choose the save they targeting, aim for specific weaknesses, debuff, buff etc. depending on what the situation requires. Like a fireball isn't going to match the martials in damage in a normal situation, but what if the situation is very advantageous for a fireball? The enemies could have very low reflex saves or a fire weakness and then suddenly the fireball is a great option in that specific moment. Sometimes you just also have a situation where a bunch of additional damage is exactly what the party needs to end the fight. Andrast fucked around with this message at 10:04 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 07:32
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Yeah, that's why you always pair 3-action abilities with something similar to a Haste effect. It's already one of the best spell effects in the game for any martial character, but not getting it in a Whirlwind Strike build is like a Rogue not bothering to hide or flank for Sneak Attack. Even if you or someone else in your party can't cast it, you can still get Boots of Speed. You might also still be able to get free movement by riding an Animal Companion as a mount with Mature Companion, but I haven't seen if the remaster stuff has broken that yet. Vanguard Warden posted:So it looks like you went with a shortbow over a longbow, which is not a terrible idea but Point Blank Shot from a quick dip in either Fighter or Archer would let you keep the longbow damage dice while ignoring the Volley trait when you need it (and you won't always need it). You also aren't using a compound bow which you could afford way before level 10, so that's a little extra damage per shot from just picking Strength as one of your four regular boosts. You're also only making three shots when you could get a fourth via Hunted Shot, but perhaps you're assuming that you need to Hunt Prey for a new target every round; not a ridiculous concern, but again a conservative estimate when an encounter against same-level enemies should usually only be like 2-3 targets. Accounting for those adjustments, my numbers are 44.65 DPR for 4 shots, or 36.38 DPR for only 3. Remember also that if we're considering positioning, lesser cover is a thing that'll frequently be an issue, which will significantly cut your damage there. Shooting through allies? Lesser cover. Shooting at someone around a corner? Already standard cover. This matters a lot more when we're talking about the flurry ranger, a character where having to deal with any issues to just standing there in a white room significantly cuts their damage. Vanguard Warden posted:That's 75% total effectiveness and you got 80% somehow. That is still more than 50% of even the four-shot turn of the build I used, but once again we're also assuming no influence by other party members. While frightened would help both characters, a target being flat-footed or a bard using Inspire Courage would help the martial character drastically while doing nothing at all for the spellcaster. Vanguard Warden posted:You mentioned bumping things up to chain lightning in a level, but in 2 more levels the ranger would get a 3rd weapon dice and a 2nd deadly d10 from a striking rune, as well as Distracting Shot to make a target flat-footed for a round whenever you crit it or just hit it twice. Distracting Shot and Greater Distracting Shot are also reliable enough for Sneak Attacker to usually be a strict damage increase. You can also get a Speed property rune at 16th instead of a third damage rune for a fifth attack every round without even needing a support caster. The martial character just scales better and better in damage output as time goes on compared to the spellcaster. But let's take Distracting Shot at level 12 as an example vs Chain Lightning. That's +23/5d6+4 for an average of 21.5 (54 crit) + 3.5 (7) if flat-footed. Vs moderate AC of 32, that expects 16.15/11.7/9.4, for an average of 37.25 on three shots and ~46.65 on four. Absolutely uninvested spellcaster still does Chain Lightning at 52 average, DC 31. Assuming an Extreme encounter of four creatures of equal level, it averages 36.4/32.8/29.5/26.5. That's still three turns worth of damage of this hypothetical ranger getting four attacks per round for three turns straight. This spellcaster (on a sorcerer) can do this four times in a row, and this is on relatively high-level enemies for an AoE. An elemental sorcerer, however, might not do this, and instead cast Elemental Blast for budget fireball. This is basically resourceless, between their slotted spells and focus points. On the equal level enemy, it averages 35 damage for expected 24.5 on each. So assuming they hit two targets on this, they're still outdamaging the ranger in a given turn even if the ranger literally gets four shots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 07:35
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:You say that as though that isn't an investment. Boots of Speed, for instance, is 1/day, which is incredibly inconsistent when there generally should be more than one fight per day. Having a person cast Haste on you literally every fight is again, another person's turn and spell investment which should be considered. Having a magic weapon is an investment too, it doesn't mean that you don't do it. If you're worried about something being inconsistent because it only works for 1 fight per day, then I have bad news about your spellcaster's Cone of Cold slots. Regardless, it's still just one option of many, and a Wand of Haste is only 360 gp if someone's worried about their 3rd-level slots. Cyouni posted:First off, 4d6+4 is both a compound shortbow with 18 Str (again, 4 boosts there for +2 damage) and weapon specialization. Cyouni posted:Similarly, a dip in Fighter/Archer is two feats (and an action to enter the stance), which is again not no investment. You wrote some more on the same subject later on, where you point out how the spellcaster doesn't have any feat investments as a positive quality, even though there are no feats to invest in. You can get items and feats that give you more spells or add some minor tweaks like more range or a wider area, but your spell damage isn't going anywhere outside of Dangerous Sorcery and the target's chance to save against you isn't going anywhere outside of an apex item or Frightened (and literally the only source of a circumstance penalty to Reflex saves I've ever seen, Catfolk Dance). Cyouni posted:Especially since in any turn you'd use it that'd actually cut your DPR, all of that is quite a bit. In practice, that's significantly lower. In a turn where you have to do both hunted prey and PBS, that cuts it to a significantly lower 28. You continue on to mention needing to worry about lesser cover, and the same idea applies there. I'd be way less worried about taking a -1 to my shot than my Cone of Cold team-killing the party's barbarian. Andrast posted:Casters can't outdamage martials and they shouldn't. Casters have a lot of versatility that lets which means they can choose the save they targeting, aim for specific weaknesses, debuff, buff etc. depending on what the situation requires. The problem with that is that some people like the idea of "I'm the mage who blows people up with magic lasers", and the game provides the spells that make it seem like they can do that, but then it sucks. Like even if you use True Strike with Disintegrate, unless the target's Fort save is hilariously low you'll do less damage with your highest level spell slot than the archer will spamming arrows for a round. Vanguard Warden fucked around with this message at 09:58 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 09:55
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:The boss of Book 3 in our Strength of Thousands game crit failed his save against Slow and we were all kind of shocked it wasn't an Incapacitation spell. Sucked for him! bosses can critfail against skunk bombs as early as level 1 and it is always hilarious
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 14:00
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:The boss of Book 3 in our Strength of Thousands game crit failed his save against Slow and we were all kind of shocked it wasn't an Incapacitation spell. Sucked for him!
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Eh, from what I've seen games running Free Archetype are more common than not right now. Like sure, that's a feat slot taken up, but what else were you going to use it for? As I keep mentioning, damaging spells have pretty much no way to scale their effect with feats or items outside of Dangerous Sorcery and Shadow Signet, so trying to compare two characters who just forgot to take feats or buy magic items is a false equivalence. The thing is that 2e spellcasters are versatile by default. That's the point. If you want a caster that only uses blasts and to scale harder with that, you want a kineticist. Because if you give a caster all the scaling tools that martials get in feats, then it's just 1e with maximized empowered fireball trick all over again and martials are wondering why they exist. (But yes, ST spells should be better - a slot consistently scales at 1.5x AoE, which isn't a great comparison. Then again, we also have the problem of a higher level caster pointing at a party member and they explode, so...)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:The thing is that 2e spellcasters are versatile by default. That's the point. If you want a caster that only uses blasts and to scale harder with that, you want a kineticist. Agreed. You can also play a Psychic and have less utility/spell slots and deal absurd levels of damage all day long. Wizards aren't supposed to be directly compared to dps striking martials in terms of raw damage. They do other things that are frankly more important.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
The only problem I have with that is the way Paizo describes the wizard in the PHB. There's no indication that they are weak at dealing damage and are support characters that's easy for new players to understand. The flavor is around wizards being studious and the way they learn, not what they learn. There are plenty of blast spells and my original plan was to use acid arrow/true strike and be an acid wizard. I've redone my build to switch to support and it's so much better. I just count all the extra damage that martials do because of my buffs as my damage in my mind. Maybe it will be more apparent in the remaster of the game that wizards are support. Playing a psychic has different gameplay and I don't think the kineticist is fully done yet. I don't see it on AON at least.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:The only problem I have with that is the way Paizo describes the wizard in the PHB. There's no indication that they are weak at dealing damage and are support characters that's easy for new players to understand. The flavor is around wizards being studious and the way they learn, not what they learn. There are plenty of blast spells and my original plan was to use acid arrow/true strike and be an acid wizard. I've redone my build to switch to support and it's so much better. I just count all the extra damage that martials do because of my buffs as my damage in my mind. Maybe it will be more apparent in the remaster of the game that wizards are support. Kineticist is done, and the book has gone out to Paizo subscribers, but the actual release date is next week, and AON updates are usually a few weeks behind that. Expect it to show up there in mid August.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Nice, I'm pretty excited to see that when it comes out next week. I kind of sounds exactly like what I wanted for my wizard. My favorite thing about Paizo is they release a lot of stuff, but it is hard to keep up with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 17:35
|
|
|
I have the book, the Kineticist is pretty loving rad. I already have 3 different ones I want to build and find games for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
We just had a TPK at level 2. Now, I could literally spend the next 10 minutes talking about the tactical mistakes we made in the build up to the fight as well as party inefficiency. But I also feel like the boss we fought was overtuned. I'm a fighter with 30 hitpoints (18 strength) and I got crit for 34 damage in the opening attacks with no healing whatsoever available. The only theoretical way I could have survived it was making different choices at level 1. The boss we were fighting was an elite level 3. Basically nothing touched him. And we're obviously low level enough level that we don't exactly have a dearth of tactical options. My DM doesn't seem to agree with me that the encounter was overtuned (and we certainly could have won...had rolls been kinder). Am I the one in the wrong here? Edit: And I want to be clear, I fully support all his decisions. We were the ones who ultimately made mistakes, and the dice rolls determine our fates- I accept that. But I also feel like that was an encounter we simply shouldn't have had with some more RP-focused players in the group. Nelson Mandingo fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
How many people are in your party? And what was the boss? An Elite level 3 against a party of 4 level 2s, for example, is only a moderate encounter per the rules, but depending on its abilities and your party makeup, that can swing a bit. And tactics are pretty important, so that's also relevant here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:My DM doesn't seem to agree with me that the encounter was overtuned (and we certainly could have won...had rolls been kinder). Any advice? I don't think you are giving enough context for anyone to give you advice. I'm not even sure what you are asking, do you want advice for interacting with your GM, character and party building, or tactics? Edit: Bad luck happens but it can be mitigated. At low levels don't end your turn next to solo enemies without raising a shield. Someone should have access to reliable emergency heals because crits will happen. Everyone should try to cap their AC if at all possible. Sometimes you need to run away and rethink your approach. +1 bonuses and -1 penalties are a really big deal. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 18:50
|
|
|
3 Action Economist posted:How many people are in your party? And what was the boss? Gotcha, then it was just us. I accept that. This is Ruins of Azlant converted to 2E. Grindylow caves. Yeah, four level 2's. Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard. But we foolishly wasted our heals and don't have medicine feats yet (sigh). In hindsight we should have retreated and done a long rest. That was our biggest mistake. But I also feel like we're against a timer is why we pushed on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
Did you flank? A. B. F. A. Always B. Be F. Flanking Always be flanking.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I don't think you are giving enough context for anyone to give you advice. I'm not even sure what you are asking, do you want advice for interacting with your GM, character and party building, or tactics? Yeah no I had my shield raised, but I've done the math over and over and basically surviving the hit was in many scenarios up to different choices at level 1 character roll. And that's why it didn't feel great. My main question after thinking about it all was the 34 crit just to me seemed completely out of line and overtuned considering the level of content. Because that's more than 100% of my health as the highest health character. But apparently it's not. So hey that was all on us then. I definitely know the mechanics of step or move out of combat to eat actions too. But there was no real way to avoid that. I could have run away and had he chased me that's still a 1 shot crit. quote:Did you flank? I was dead in round 2 from a single hit more than 100% of my health. I was actually positioning him so our rogue could flank. Nelson Mandingo fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
3 Action Economist posted:Did you flank? I think Champions are really underrated because being able to survive a round standing next to a dragon so everyone else in the party can run in, get a flanking attack, and get the hell out is amazing. Kinda related, delaying your initiative to set up better synergies is the most important thing that my players forget to do. Casting fear right before the enemy goes is trash. Everyone else delaying until after you cast fear wins fights. The same can be said for waiting until after your champion moves to flank, sorcerer or rogue bon-mots, or even just letting your archer go before you move to provide lesser cover to your enemies. KPC_Mammon fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:04
|
|
|
Yeah, I was gonna say, as a level 2 PC I've done more than that in a single crit myself, so if I can dish it out I would not be shocked to see similar coming back at my face. E: Now, granted, yeah, 34 would drop either of my level 2 fighters as well, so I probably would've called for a retreat from a spicy looking foe if I knew our party was running on fumes. Kyrosiris fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Jul 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Yeah, four level 2's. Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard. But we foolishly wasted our heals and don't have medicine feats yet (sigh). In hindsight we should have retreated and done a long rest. That was our biggest mistake. But I also feel like we're against a timer is why we pushed on. From a gameplay perspective, I think fighting a boss when short on resources (especially heals) was absolutely the biggest problem here. For further advice, I have found that the best strategy for bosses is to try to get a bunch of debuffs on them through maneuvers, spells, etc. Spellcasters should make sure that they are using spells which still have a decent effect on a successful save from the enemy. Martials should try not to end their turn next to the boss if they are a melee bruiser. Their actions are much more potent than yours, so if you can trade actions (e.g. you move to force them to move) you are coming out ahead. And, for what it's worth, although an L+2 enemy is only a moderate encounter by XP, it's still very scary for a low level party. I usually don't start throwing L+3 enemies at the party until level 5 or so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
VikingofRock posted:From a gameplay perspective, I think fighting a boss when short on resources (especially heals) was absolutely the biggest problem here. Oh yeah. That was a nice lesson there. I...well....another thing why I think it is overtuned, I don't want to come off like I'm badmouthing other players. Because I'm not. People should make the decisions they want and I respect that but yeah our cleric and wizard certainly have....not optimal choices. I think they're clearly more RP players. Which I want to stress I don't care about. But that's another aspect of why I reflexively feel that this was a bit overtuned and not taken into consideration. Again I don't want to come off like I'm badmouthing my DM or other players. They're great. Enjoy them and this setting but as an example a cloistered priest probably shouldn't try to play like a war priest, and have terrible cantrips like no divine lance, Daze, Approximate, Alarm...etc....And I don't wanna be the guy to be like "Your character sucks." Clearly our biggest and only real problem was using too many heals early and not taking more time to just use medicine out of combat. We had a lot of advantages. RNGJesus showed his disfavor for our tactical mistakes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:18
|
|