jtaylor73003 wrote: The point stands Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion should be consider by PFS to be added back in because there are classes focus on using them to be compitive in combat. This statement is so far from the truth that it is totally insubstantial. Or is that unsubstantiated?
Wizards, in no way shape or form, require Scribe Scroll to be competitive in combat. All Scribe Scroll would do allow them to dominate combat even more than they do with their prepared spells.
Alchemists, likewise, do not need Scribe Scroll to be competitive in combat. Increasing numbers of dice of damage in a Touch AC targeted attack? Yeah, not competitive.
I have seen both, in high level PFS play, shut down an encounter, either by outright killing a single BBEG in one round, Alchemist, to shutting down a crowd of enemies, 7 to be precise, using Dazing Arc Lightning.
Sure, the well-built archer or gunslinger can remain competitive at that level, but with much higher gold expenditure. But for non-range-focused combatants? Way more gold, or other expenses, in order to be able to get into melee and deliver full attacks.
No, seriously, base your argument on anything but that either Alchemist or Wizard need Scribe Scroll to remain competitive in combat.
Maybe the Sorcerer? They have that pesky Known Spell List that seriously impedes their ability to remain as all-around useful as, say, Wizards....
LazarX wrote: steve coling wrote: Speaking from experience with previous systems.
A local player had a crafting focused wizard. He made items he could not use, armour, weapons etc. He would craft tables with his mates and just hand out items like candy. This meant they had a LOT more than wealth by level. Sure, he burned xp and TU's for it, but it allowed him to play the same character for years and severly destroy every scenario his tables faced.
Privately I would love to be able to do it. But that is why I am personally glad that crafting is not allowed.
Living Greyhawk closed that loophole when they started requiring players to track Lifetime XP, and forced retirement on that basis. That did happen, but he got some extra mileage which was overpowered.
jtaylor73003 wrote:
Still to claim that Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion would break the CR system is still a bad argument.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You are the only one I see talking about the CR system.
The basic argument has been that the item creation feats, even scribe scroll and brew potion, would make it the challenges to easy for the writes to create interesting challenges. I point out that the CR of monsters already assume a Wizard has scribe scroll, and that this argument was baseless. You defended this baseless argument.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There's nothing wrong with going against the core rules. The CR system is a guideline, not an absolute mathematical equation that goes all wonky at the slightest deviation.
Which was in response to this:
jtaylor73003 wrote:
I stating that PFS should reconsider for certain classes because it goes against the core rules.
Where I was responding to this:
Jessex wrote:
Wizards get spell focus in place of scribe scroll and alchemists get extra bombs in place of brew potions. Having a wizards primary school be harder to save against is no small thing and an alchemist starting with two extra bombs more than makes up for not being able to make potions.
kinevon wrote:
Also, to add to Jessex's post, the CR system is broken, it is not very accurate.
Just consider adding the "Young" simple template to anything that is already Dex-based. Does it really lower the CR of that creature?
I can just see the following:
Dark Stalker (CR 4)
Unchained Rogue 3 (+2 CR)
Young (-1 CR)
Is that really a CR 5 opponent?
If you weren't defending those statements you should make that clear.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The more you put into crafting the more gold you effectively get out. Its not really a limiting factor.
Yet I am asking for them to consider on a case by case. Scribe Scroll for Wizards doesn't seem to go away from it be limited by gold. Remember Pathfinder has be balanced with the idea that a wizard could show up with a powerful scroll. Brew Potion has level cap in it, no higher than third level after a while, so after a while better equipment is going to show up.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Its more like an extra cheap potion: You carry a swiss army knife of them to break out of the appropriate occasion. Fighters buy 1, maybe 2 magic weapons. Wizards walk around with small libraries.
Yes exactly that is what makes a wizard different than a fighter at low levels. Soon this spending gold on a consumble will be phased out for better equipment, just like fighter buying a better sword. I don't see how that is a bad thing.
jtaylor73003 wrote:
The point stands Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion should be consider by PFS to be added back in because there are classes focus on using them to be compitive in combat.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The wizard and the alchemist do more than fine in pfs without it. You're trying to fix a problem that simply doesn't exist. The classes are not so balanced against each other that altering them slightly from core will mess things up enough to try to implement crafting.
I disagree with you. My experience has been that the Alchemist is losing a key ability that would make it more attractive to play if you return it back to normal. Right now only a Mad bomber type or a Mr. Hype plays well in PFS. The Wizard has always benefited from Scribe Scroll to use spells they don't want to have to prepare or to boost their combat effectiveness. Look at this way a fighter can only attack once per round with a decent chance to hit without having to buy a feat, you wouldn't argue to ban Two-weapon fighting would u?
jtaylor73003 wrote:
The basic argument has been that the item creation feats, even scribe scroll and brew potion, would make it the challenges to easy for the writes to create interesting challenges. I point out that the CR of monsters already assume a Wizard has scribe scroll, and that this argument was baseless. You defended this baseless argument.
Leaving aside how many of the systems assumptions NEED to be in place, the system assumes scribe scroll with limited crafting time and a sane dm.
That means we have to either
1) limit time (which causes paperwork)
2) Institute limits on it that gamers are going to try to argue around (which causes headaches)
3) Not have crafting.
Quote: If you weren't defending those statements you should make that clear. I really can't track everywhere your thought process is going, its kind of scattered. You're tracing one thing leading to another leading to another and getting waaaay off topic.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The more you put into crafting the more gold you effectively get out. Its not really a limiting factor.
Quote: Pathfinder has be balanced with the idea that a wizard could show up with a powerful scroll No. No it does not HAVE to be balanced that way.
And that i think is the big gaping whole in your argument.
The campaigns been going on for 6 years without crafting. Cats are not singing with dogs. Frogs are not raining from the sky. Wizards are not being overpowered by fighters. Wizards get a very nice free feat in place of scribe scroll and it balances out very well.
Your rather unsupported assertions are contradicted by evidence.
Quote: Soon this spending gold on a consumble will be phased out for better equipment Erm.. no. He just buys better consumables.
Quote: Right now only a Mad bomber type or a Mr. Hype plays well in PFS. The friendly pharmacist buffing his allies can do very well. Haste takes a wand, but popping alter self/bullstrengthed combo potions for a +6 to strength or dex is pretty nice.
Alchemical allocation extracts and a bag of holding full of situational potions makes you damned near a spontaneous caster for your entire party.
Quote: Look at this way a fighter can only attack once per round with a decent chance to hit without having to buy a feat, you wouldn't argue to ban Two-weapon fighting would u? I have NO idea what you're getting at there.
kinevon wrote: jtaylor73003 wrote: The point stands Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion should be consider by PFS to be added back in because there are classes focus on using them to be compitive in combat. This statement is so far from the truth that it is totally insubstantial. Or is that unsubstantiated? In your opinion. I disagree, and back up by Pathfinder system. Would you ban Two-weapon fighting?
kinevon wrote:
Wizards, in no way shape or form, require Scribe Scroll to be competitive in combat. All Scribe Scroll would do allow them to dominate combat even more than they do with their prepared spells.
Yes they do. Wizards spend a lot time saving precious spells for that final battle, or when the battle seems to be going to a TPK. Scribe Scroll allows a wizard to use his spell more. I again point to the CR and Encounter creation rules that assume a wizard has such an ability. Please point to objective rules to back up your claim.
kinevon wrote:
Alchemists, likewise, do not need Scribe Scroll to be competitive in combat. Increasing numbers of dice of damage in a Touch AC targeted attack? Yeah, not competitive.
Alchemist get Brew Potion not Scribe Scroll. Actually compare to a Barbian doing 2d6+19 with +9 to hit, they aren't competitive. They aren't even close, and 2 extra bombs doesn't make up for it either.
kinevon wrote:
I have seen both, in high level PFS play, shut down an encounter, either by outright killing a single BBEG in one round, Alchemist, to shutting down a crowd of enemies, 7 to be precise, using Dazing Arc Lightning.
I believe you, but what level were they?? I hear stories of archers and fighters doing the same thing, so what is your point on this.
kinevon wrote:
Sure, the well-built archer or gunslinger can remain competitive at that level, but with much higher gold expenditure. But for non-range-focused combatants? Way more gold, or other expenses, in order to be able to get into melee and deliver full attacks.
I don't see your point on this. Scribe Scroll or Brew potion won't make this any worse. Seems to me you have more issues with a player building a good character than with two feats that provide minor strength increases.
kinevon wrote:
No, seriously, base your argument on anything but that either Alchemist or Wizard need Scribe Scroll to remain competitive in combat.
Maybe the Sorcerer? They have that pesky Known Spell List that seriously impedes their ability to remain as all-around useful as, say, Wizards....
How about you base your argument on objective rules instead of feelings?
No, seriously state some rules that proves that Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion will that prove your point. I point again to the CR system and the Encounter Building rules that Pazio Published.
BigNorseWolf wrote: I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote: My suggestion would be for them to let item creation feats work kind of like Gunsmithing - instead of working normally, all the feat does is grant a substantial discount (20% sound good?) when purchasing such items (for purposes of balance, we'll say that the Fame requirement for purchasing a given item is still pegged to the full price). Fame is neigh irrelevant for scroll purchases. (The no scrolls over X level until you are Y level thing is very relevant though) Wondrous items and enchanted armaments are another matter entirely though, aren't they?
You bring up a worthy point, however - maybe we'd legalize every item creation feat except Scribe Scroll, since A) Wizards getting Scribe Scroll is supposed to be about them sharing their own knowledge, and this would be too much like them scribing scrolls of spells they don't even know, which would make it B) unbalanced against Alchemists and Witches, and besides C) I rather like getting free Spell Focus instead, anyways.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Leaving aside how many of the systems assumptions NEED to be in place, the system assumes scribe scroll with limited crafting time and a sane dm.
That means we have to either
1) limit time (which causes paperwork)
2) Institute limits on it that gamers are going to try to argue around (which causes headaches)
3) Not have crafting.
I disagree. Gold per adventure still limits this completely. Do I make four scrolls of magic missle for 100gp or do I save for a wand of magic missle when I get 9 PP.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I really can't track everywhere your thought process is going, its kind of scattered. You're tracing one thing leading to another leading to another and getting waaaay off topic.
Well if you are confused by the conversation then don't get in the middle or ask questions. Also stop cherry picking quotes to make responses to without consider the entire conversation.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No. No it does not HAVE to be balanced that way.
And that i think is the big gaping whole in your argument. Gold per adventure does that. The same as with any consumables. I don't see the issue here.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The campaigns been going on for 6 years without crafting. Cats are not singing with dogs. Frogs are not raining from the sky. Wizards are not being overpowered by fighters. Wizards get a very nice free feat in place of scribe scroll and it balances out very well.
Yes we been doing it this way for a hundred years so it must be right logic fallacy. Yes that is a logic fallacy, and doesn't disprove that adding Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion wouldn't work in PFS. If we based on how long something be done, well, Scribe Scroll for a Wizard has been around since D&D 3.0 which means it is 9 years older than PFS. Pathfinder not only kept it, but also remove the experience cost so it would be more appealing to use. How about quote some rules that says otherwise?
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Your rather unsupported assertions are contradicted by evidence.
Unsupported?? Pazio says Wizards have Scribe Scroll and Alchemist have Brew Potions. Pazio says what the CR of the monsters are in its game. Pazio publish rules for building Encounters based on using CR. Right now the only unsupported argument is yours.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Erm.. no. He just buys better consumables.
Scroll goes to wand which goes to staff. Staffs aren't consumables, and I am sure there are other Wonderous Items that can give a Wizard spell like abilities that aren't consumables. This statement ignores this with hope that the audience ignores natural equipment progression.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The friendly pharmacist buffing his allies can do very well. Haste takes a wand, but popping alter...
Or could be a Cleric or Buffer type Class and do it cheaper and faster along with doing as you sugges.
Jtaylor wrote: I disagree. Gold per adventure still limits this completely. Do I make four scrolls of magic missle for 100gp or do I save for a wand of magic missle when I get 9 PP. If you have scribe scroll that isn't a question
Wand: 750 gp. 50 charges =15 gp/charge
Scroll: 25gp 1 charge = /2 for crafting= 12.5 gp/charge.
Quote: Also stop cherry picking quotes to make responses to without consider the entire conversation. I am doing no such thing. You need to consider the possibility that your responses are not nearly as air tight as you think they are. Case in point..
Quote: Yes we been doing it this way for a hundred years so it must be right logic fallacy. Yes that is a logic fallacy It is not however the argument.
You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.
You are mixing that up with the argument that things would be better with scribe scroll. That WOULD be a fallacy against that argument (appeal to tradition). But this leaves you completely naked without any basis in cr challange ratings, or the wizards build
This is also rather ironic from someone arguing that the wizard traditionally comes with scribe scroll therefore he must have it.
If your argument is that the wizard MUST have scribe scroll... you're objectively wrong. If your argument is that the game would be better with scribe scroll you have to make that point, but it will be entirely subjective.
Quote: Unsupported?? Pazio says Wizards have Scribe Scroll and Alchemist have Brew Potions. Pazio says what the CR of the monsters are in its game. 1) "Paizo" also says that you don't get scribe scroll in PFS, because PFS is part of paizo. If your appeal is to paizo, you lose.
2) The argument connecting CR to scribe scroll is yours and is beyond tenuous.
Quote: Scroll goes to wand which goes to staff. Erm... no. You buy scrolls of things you use occasionally. You buy wands of things you use all the time. You buy a staff if you use a spell a lot and need to cast it at a high caster level. Its a completely different thing than a +1 sword +2 sword +3 sword.
Quote: Staffs aren't consumables, and I am sure there are other Wonderous Items that can give a Wizard spell like abilities that aren't consumables. This statement ignores this with hope that the audience ignores natural equipment progression. Ok, that is the second most inane accusation of dishonesty I've seen on these boards. And that's saying something.
Quote: Or could be a Cleric or Buffer type Class and do it cheaper and faster along with doing as you sugges. The alchemist can do things the cleric can't, like hand out "potions" of shield and alter self.
Ok I'm not going to quote anything because there are too many points going on.
Combat Comparison
High level archer versus alchemist. My character levels 9 - 13.2 (Archer, Vanilla Fighter including relevant modifiers 5 arrows 19-20 crit range, 1d8+22 each at +30 (2 arrows)/+30/+25/+20, at level 13) played almost every adventure including Eyes with an Alchemist. In my entire career, this alchemist is probably the only character I saw who could do more damage in a round or combat than the archer (double or triple at times) against a single target, not including splash damage, hitting to touch, and versatility (in damage types, status effects, and character abilities) due to discoveries. Honestly having seen more than a few alchemists between archetypes & discoveries they are maybe the most versatile class in the game and they are combat monsters. Alchemists also have a number of tricks to increase their versatility further, ranged Breathe of Life, yep an Alchemist can do it, how about a buff that you can give someone else that they choose when to activate it, yep sure, disable magical traps, yes, do it at range, yep that too. It is a highly build dependent class but the options are huge. The loss of brew potion is not an even trade for extra bombs, however it if anything brings them back to the crowd (don't forget they still craft alchemical remedies and weapons at 1/3 cost). This breaks down even further when talking about Wizards, the stereotypical tier 1 class (probably not the most powerful of them anymore, but certainly still an example). At low level yes they will struggle (they have a longer ramp up, but never really plateau, unlike most if not all martials), but at high level when they have the gold and spells to throw around, single spells can be not just game breaking but universe changing (not quite as much in traditional PFS play with the cut-off at 6th level spells, but beyond absolutely). The archer to be good, probably does one thing - shoot arrows and depending on class probably has 2-6 good skills. A wizard can have an answer for everything (or nearly so) at their command and are probably looking at 6-10 good skills.
Time
You are completely discounting how much time goes into crafting. You want to craft that scroll of stone to flesh that you're sure will be useful, but not worth preparing, sure that I'll be 825 gold and the better part of 2 days. Do you have two full days to craft one scroll in a home campaign, maybe occasionally, but not often in my experience. PFS has an indeterminate amount of time between sessions, you want to spend a year in isolation scribing scrolls - sure no problem, you don't even need to worry about food or rent.
WBL
Wealth by level is already above average (in addition to playing at a high fantasy point buy) in PFS by on average about 20% in pure gold, with the addition of PP, and after level 5 death being basically a (bad) status effect.
CR appropriateness
Yes, monsters include scribe scroll in their calculations, but in a home campaign they can also be adjusted to actually give the party a challenge. In PFS, I can't adjust to my table having (and yes this has happened to me) 3 gunslingers (1 musket master/monk, 1 pistolero/alchemist, 1 gunslinger (archetype?)/magus/savage technologist barbarian, as well as two clerics (1 buff/heal, 1 save or suck). CR calculations are wonky but ideally would be based off of likely time for crafting, WBL, and other factors taken into account. Honestly how often are fights actually tough in PFS scenarios versus utterly trivial? (In my experience trivial is far more common). I've seen a level 7 character with cast a DC 25 oppressive boredom (2nd level spell), whereas a fairly well built NPC would be casting the same spell at a DC 16-18 more often than not. How much more powerful do you need characters to be?
GM Fiat
This point can't be made enough, in a home game crafting can be controlled by the GM, so can resources, WBL, and what you encounter, as well as how you're encounters are designed, and what tactics are employed. In PFS, at times none of those are true. Adding even more options in extra wealth, extra spells, extra versatility, etc. is IMO not necessary, and if anything would increase the amount of paperwork, headaches, and auditing that would need to happen. (At least in self auditing it already takes longer to do spellcasters than martials - especially checking sources for more uncommon spells, increasing this time is not something I would look forward to doing)
Finally, I enjoy running PFS games, I like the role play, I like Golarion as a setting (or set of settings) and I actually like running combats, but if all the fights are trivial (especially if one character trivializes all of them) it bores me, at times even frustrates me and the other players at the table (the GM is there to have a good time too, if it's never enjoyable for them you've lost a GM). In my experience in other campaigns and home games item creation feats (even "trivial" ones) including class features like Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion utterly break the game and cause far more headaches than they are worth.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If you have scribe scroll that isn't a question
Wand: 750 gp. 50 charges =15 gp/charge
Scroll: 25gp 1 charge = /2 for crafting= 12.5 gp/charge. Yes a wand is 2.5gp more expansive, but provides better action ecomony.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I am doing no such thing. You need to consider the possibility that your responses are not nearly as air tight as you think they are. Case in point..
When decided to make comments that degrade my opinion or derail the argument instead crafting argument against my opinion that is when you began to cherry pick my responses you would respond to. I can't help that you did it. I am merely pointing it out. You could always ask for clarification if you think my point wasn't clear enough for you to respond without degrading me personally or derailing the argument.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
jtaylor73003 wrote: Yes we been doing it this way for a hundred years so it must be right logic fallacy. Yes that is a logic fallacy It is not however the argument.
Really then why bring it up that you been doing it this way for 9 years??
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.
No I arguing that there has been unseen consquences that aren't being addressed by blanketing banning all Item Creation feats. I cited rules that assume that certain ones are in play, and even a class that uses one as a key ability. You have yet to provide an objective material for me to reconsider my opinion.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You are mixing that up with the argument that things would be better with scribe scroll. That WOULD be a fallacy against that argument (appeal to tradition). But this leaves you completely naked without any basis in cr challange ratings, or the wizards build
This is also rather ironic from someone arguing that the wizard traditionally comes with scribe scroll therefore he must have it.
I have not argued that. I have state that the certain item creation feats should be reconsider for PFS on a case by case basis. The reasoning behind doing so is that the original format of the game assume that this class has to feature, therefore constructs challenges that reflect that that assumption. I stated this clearly multiple times. You are either ignoring this statement or choosing to omit it. I also pointed out that one class uses it as key ability to create a favor for the class that would appeal to players that are originally drawn to the class. I used this to show that other classes that might use item creation feats need to also be reconsider again case by case.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If your argument is that the wizard MUST have scribe scroll... you're objectively wrong. If your argument is that the game would be better with scribe scroll you have to make that point, but it will be entirely subjective.
Yes it is subjective that is why I using objective evidence to support my argument. I am not just relying on how I feel about it.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
1) "Paizo" also says that you don't get scribe scroll in PFS, because PFS is part of paizo. If your appeal is to paizo, you lose.
Actually Paizo as Pathfinder System states that Wizards get Scribe Scroll.
Paizo as Pathfinder Society decided not to allow it in organize play, which only means they ignored there own rules that they can then reinstate. I arguing that they should, because it is their own rule when they designed the game. I do not simply lose because a arbitrary ruling, which this is, was made in the past, nor does my objective stop being objective because the arbitrary ruling happens to come from similar associations.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
2) The argument connecting CR to scribe scroll is yours and is beyond tenuous.
Really beyond tenuous. More feelings instead of objective evidence. Are you saying that the CR monster does not go through some formula or play testing for it to be created? That said formula or play testing did not include a base class such as the Wizard with the assumption of approitate Wealth By Level, including the Scribe Scroll given to the Wizard as a default feature?
I think we can safely assumed that the CR's have some basis in fact that Core Classes with approiate Wealth could handle them. Please correct me if I am wrong, and inform us how CR are decide that would exclude the Core Classes.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Erm... no. You buy scrolls of things you use occasionally. You buy wands of things you use all the time. You buy a staff if you use a spell a lot and need to cast it at a high caster level. Its a completely different thing than a +1 sword +2 sword +3 sword.
How so?
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The alchemist can do things the cleric can't, like hand out "potions" of shield and alter self.
How??
d20pfsrd wrote:
Creating Potions
The creator of a potion needs a level working surface and at least a few containers in which to mix liquids, as well as a source of heat to boil the brew. In addition, he needs ingredients. The costs for materials and ingredients are subsumed in the cost for brewing the potion: 25 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster.
All ingredients and materials used to brew a potion must be fresh and unused. The character must pay the full cost for brewing each potion. (Economies of scale do not apply.)
The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.
The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion (or must know the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires.
Material components are consumed when he begins working, but a focus is not. (a focus used in brewing a potion can be reused.) The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells. (That is, that spell slot is expended from the caster's currently prepared spells, just as if it had been cast.)
An Alchemist couldn't make a potion of shield because it has a range of personal. If an Alchemist chose to he could get a Discovery that allows him to allow others to use his extracts, which then has to be decided by each player if they wish to use a Discovery to achieve this.
This however doesn't make the build you suggested any more inviting than just playing a cleric, and handing out potions to buff other players along with the benefit of radius channel.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Combat Comparison
High level archer versus alchemist. My character levels 9 - 13.2 (Archer, Vanilla Fighter including relevant modifiers 5 arrows 19-20 crit range, 1d8+22 each at +30 (2 arrows)/+30/+25/+20, at level 13) played almost every adventure including Eyes with an Alchemist. In my entire career, this alchemist is probably the only character I saw who could do more damage in a round or combat than the archer (double or triple at times) against a single target, not including splash damage, hitting to touch, and versatility (in damage types, status effects, and character abilities) due to discoveries. Honestly having seen more than a few alchemists between archetypes & discoveries they are maybe the most versatile class in the game and they are combat monsters. Alchemists also have a number of tricks to increase their versatility further, ranged Breathe of Life, yep an Alchemist can do it, how about a buff that you can give someone else that they choose when to activate it, yep sure, disable magical traps, yes, do it at range, yep that too. It is a highly build dependent class but the options are huge. The loss of brew potion is not an even trade for extra bombs, however it if anything brings them back to the crowd (don't forget they still craft alchemical remedies and weapons at 1/3 cost). This breaks down even further when talking about Wizards, the stereotypical tier 1 class (probably not the most powerful of them anymore, but certainly still an example). At low level yes they will struggle (they have a longer ramp up, but never really plateau, unlike most if not all martials), but at high level when they have the gold and spells to throw around, single spells can be not just game breaking but universe changing (not quite as much in traditional PFS play with the cut-off at 6th level spells, but beyond absolutely). The archer to be good, probably does one thing - shoot arrows and depending on class probably has 2-6 good skills. A wizard can have an answer for everything (or nearly so) at their command and are probably looking at 6-10 good skills.
How much did damage did the Alchemist do? A fourth level Barbian with Greatsword +9/2d6+19 with 19-20 crit while raging vs an Alchemist 2d6+6 10 ft burst reflex save for half against the splash with 1d6 fire each round after unless the npc makes a dc 15 to put themselves out. I don't see how the Alchemist is more effective than a Barbian in combat. If you say that an Alchemist could use two-weapon fighting or rapid shot to get multiple attacks, then I remind you that the Alchemist can't do that till Level 8 with the Discovery of Fast Bombs.
Now let's say the Alchemist has the Advance Race Guide so he makes(buys) unstable ingredients for his bombs. Making it 3d6+6 damage. Still an average of 15 vs 25 and they both hit about the same. The Alchemist would need a round or two to do more damage, but usually has to sarfice the splash damage to do so.
My point is that Alchemist can't rely on doing massive damage every turn, and players find themselves either waiting for that big hit or wanting to buff other players to do it. Brew Potion would only help the Alchemist full fill that buffer role more cheaply than as it is right now.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Time
You are completely discounting how much time goes into crafting. You want to craft that scroll of stone to flesh that you're sure will be useful, but not worth preparing, sure that I'll be 825 gold and the better part of 2 days. Do you have two full days to craft one scroll in a home campaign, maybe occasionally, but not often in my experience. PFS has an indeterminate amount of time between sessions, you want to spend a year in isolation scribing scrolls - sure no problem, you don't even need to worry about food or rent.
This is completely a subjective control method. It is easier to objectively control through WBL than this, which means it is easier to test against.
PFS has removed this subjective control completely, and seems only to using WBL even with allowing Alchemist to craft. PFS has also failed to address first Section of Swift Alchemy that modifies the time for crafting Alchemy items. Which combine with lost of Brew Potion leaves a large hole in the Alchemist power compare to other Classes. I am sure other classes suffer from same type of oversight.
Joe Ducey wrote:
WBL
Wealth by level is already above average (in addition to playing at a high fantasy point buy) in PFS by on average about 20% in pure gold, with the addition of PP, and after level 5 death being basically a (bad) status effect.
This doesn't mean PFS couldn't allow Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion for the classes that would benefit the most from them.
Joe Ducey wrote:
CR appropriateness
Yes, monsters include scribe scroll in their calculations, but in a home campaign they can also be adjusted to actually give the party a challenge. In PFS, I can't adjust to my table having (and yes this has happened to me) 3 gunslingers (1 musket master/monk, 1 pistolero/alchemist, 1 gunslinger (archetype?)/magus/savage technologist barbarian, as well as two clerics (1 buff/heal, 1 save or suck). CR calculations are wonky but ideally would be based off of likely time for crafting, WBL, and other factors taken into account. Honestly how often are fights actually tough in PFS scenarios versus utterly trivial? (In my experience trivial is far more common). I've seen a level 7 character with cast a DC 25 oppressive boredom (2nd level spell), whereas a fairly well built NPC would be casting the same spell at a DC 16-18 more often than not. How much more powerful do you need characters to be?
I honestly don't care how powerful the characters are to the NPC's. I care how powerful they are to each other. I am stating that since Scribe Scroll can be safely assumed to be part of the baseis of CR, most likely only WBL, feats, and class features are used to determine CR, that should be consider on a case by case baseis.
Joe Ducey wrote:
GM Fiat
This point can't be made enough, in a home game crafting can be controlled by the GM, so can resources, WBL, and what you encounter, as well as how you're encounters are designed, and what tactics are employed. In PFS, at times none of those are true. Adding even more options in extra wealth, extra spells, extra versatility, etc. is IMO not necessary, and if anything would increase the amount of paperwork, headaches, and auditing that would need to happen. (At least in self auditing it already takes longer to do spellcasters than martials - especially checking sources for more uncommon spells, increasing this time is not something I would look forward to doing)
I disagree. They add things all the time, so what difference is one more shovel on the pile going to make.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Finally, I enjoy running PFS games, I like the role play, I like Golarion as a setting (or set of settings) and I actually like running combats, but if all the fights are trivial (especially if one character trivializes all of them) it bores me, at times even frustrates me and the other players at the table (the GM is there to have a good time too, if it's never enjoyable for them you've lost a GM). In my experience in other campaigns and home games item creation feats (even "trivial" ones) including class features like Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion utterly break the game and cause far more headaches than they are worth.
How do they do that? They are part of the original design of the game so how are they going to "break the game" anymore than so new feat or wonderous item. This is the same argument everyone else is saying, but no one is putting up any objective rules to prove it. Prove it using the rules why it would "break the game" beyond I feel it will or I feel it has. I put forth both the CR and Encounter creation rules that were designed by Paizo with the fact Scribe Scroll is on a base class.
jtaylor wrote: Yes a wand is 2.5gp more expansive, but provides better action ecomony. It does not. You can have multiple copies of a spell on a scroll. (in pfs they all have to be the same spell). Drawing a scroll of 25 magic missiles and drawing a wand of 25 magic missiles work the same way.
Quote: When decided to make comments that degrade my opinion or derail the argument instead crafting argument against my opinion that is when you began to cherry pick my responses you would respond to. Disagreeing with your opinion is not insulting you you. Pointing out that what you are holding up as fact is an argument is not degrading your argument.
The only things I've deleted are responses where I would just be repeating myself. No cherry picking occurred.
Quote: Really then why bring it up that you been doing it this way for 9 years?? You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.
Quote: No I arguing that there has been unseen consquences If you've seen them then they're not unseen.
Quote: that aren't being addressed by blanketing banning all Item Creation feats. I cited rules that assume that certain ones are in play, and even a class that uses one as a key ability. You have yet to provide an objective material for me to reconsider my opinion. I don't think that's on me.
You do cite rule A. You do cite rule B. The connection between them however is entirely of your own creation.
Quote: The reasoning behind doing so is that the original format of the game assume that this class has to feature, therefore constructs challenges that reflect that that assumption. I stated this clearly multiple times. You are either ignoring this statement or choosing to omit it. Or I think thats a really really horrible argument that lacks sense, reason, or any factual basis and have been explaining whats wrong with it
Its a silly argument. You're acting as though one tiny change in the wizard or alchemist class prevents the entire thing from working and it just doesn't.
Quote: Yes it is subjective that is why I using objective evidence to support my argument. You have not done this.
Quote: Paizo as Pathfinder Society decided not to allow it in organize play, which only means they ignored there own rules that they can then reinstate. I arguing that they should, because it is their own rule when they designed the game. Thats a silly argument.
You haven't responded to the idea that the "original elements of the game" include a DM overseeing one party and limited crafting time, things that DON"T exist in PFS. Some modifications to the game necessary for organized play necessitate other changes. This is one of them.
The heads of pathfinder society work with the people who write the rules rules of the game and confer regularly on what rules in the base system will not work under the structure of organized play. And there are MANY.
Quote: I do not simply lose because a arbitrary ruling, which this is, was made in the past, nor does my objective stop being objective because the arbitrary ruling happens to come from similar associations. Just because something is in the base system it does not follow that its right for every campaign and PFS. Stating the objective fact that "its in the base system" does not in any way shape or form objectively lead to the idea that "Therefore it should be in pfs"
Quote: Really beyond tenuous. More feelings instead of objective evidence. The argument is bad. Its a total non sequitur. If you know how to show that objectively MIT could use you in the artificial intelligence department.
Quote: Are you saying that the CR monster does not go through some formula or play testing for it to be created? No. No it most certainly does not. It gets eyeballed and estimated... on a good day. There are guidelines, there is no math. Its an art, not a science.
objective evidence
Quote: quote Erm... no. You buy scrolls of things you use occasionally. You buy wands of things you use all the time. You buy a staff if you use a spell a lot and need to cast it at a high caster level. Its a completely different thing than a +1 sword +2 sword +3 sword. How so? I'm not sure how you mean regular item progression. But scrolls, wands, and staves aren't in the same progression. They're used for different things.
Cure light wounds is a bad scroll to get. its more expensive than a wand if you know you're going through 40 of them and you know you will.
Spider climb is a great scroll to get. you only use it occasionally and your caster level doesn't matter that much.
Endure elements is a horrible spell to get on a staff: the effects don't scale and either does the duration. Fireball on the other hand is an amazing spell on a staff , since the DC and number of D6's scale with your level.
Even if you have a wand, you will still have scrolls. Even if you have a staff, you'll still have wands and scrolls.
Quote: Quote: The alchemist can do things the cleric can't, like hand out "potions" of shield and alter self. How??
The infusion discovery. It works with spells that are normally only self only. If you toss in combine extracts, Mixing your barbarian a combination cocktail with truestrike AND enlarge person mixed together will get you called back to most tables.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote: BigNorseWolf wrote: I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote: My suggestion would be for them to let item creation feats work kind of like Gunsmithing - instead of working normally, all the feat does is grant a substantial discount (20% sound good?) when purchasing such items (for purposes of balance, we'll say that the Fame requirement for purchasing a given item is still pegged to the full price). Fame is neigh irrelevant for scroll purchases. (The no scrolls over X level until you are Y level thing is very relevant though) Wondrous items and enchanted armaments are another matter entirely though, aren't they? Not really without crafting.
Level Fame* PurchaseLimit WBL Purchase limit as a % of WBL
3_____10_____1,500________ 3,000_____50%
5_____21_____5,250 _______10,500_____49%
7_____31 _____16,500______23,500_____70%
10____47 _____41,000______62,000_____66%
Pardon, formatting is terrible and this computer doesn't have excel.
*assumes 1.75 per adventure. Most PFSers are well above this.
Unless you only buy/upgrade 2 items, your fame allows purchases far in excess of what you can afford to get. Fame quickly becomes.. not worth checking.
Quote: You bring up a worthy point, however - maybe we'd legalize every item creation feat except Scribe Scroll, since A) Wizards getting Scribe Scroll is supposed to be about them sharing their own knowledge, and this would be too much like them scribing scrolls of spells they don't even know, which would make it B) unbalanced against Alchemists and Witches, and besides C) I rather like getting free Spell Focus instead, anyways. Brew potion would be the least problematic: thats really just like buying a scroll since potions cost so much. One issue with it though is that an alchemist crafting a potion at full caster level +alchemical allocation basically gets 3rd level spells out of second level slots
craft staff would make staff prices reasonable...
Craft wondrous item would be the MOST problematic. Thats nearly doubling your WBL and as you can see above fame isn't going to limit it all that much.
Craft arms and armor... doesn't seem that bad. Because the weapon price increases exponentially you can basically afford an extra +1 on it. Paladins and Magi can already do that without too much disruption.
jtaylor73003 wrote: How much did damage did the Alchemist do? A fourth level Barbian with Greatsword +9/2d6+19 with 19-20 crit while raging vs an Alchemist 2d6+6 10 ft burst reflex save for half against the splash with 1d6 fire each round after unless the npc makes a dc 15 to put themselves out. I don't see how the Alchemist is more effective than a Barbian in combat. If you say that an Alchemist could use two-weapon fighting or rapid shot to get multiple attacks, then I remind you that the Alchemist can't do that till Level 8 with the Discovery of Fast Bombs.
Now let's say the Alchemist has the Advance Race Guide so he makes(buys) unstable ingredients for his bombs. Making it 3d6+6 damage. Still an average of 15 vs 25 and they both hit about the same. The Alchemist would need a round or two to do more damage, but usually has to sarfice the splash damage to do so.
My point is that Alchemist can't rely on doing massive damage every turn, and players find themselves either waiting for that big hit or wanting to buff other players to do it. Brew Potion would only help the Alchemist full fill that buffer role more cheaply than as it is right now.
At level 10, I saw 280 in a round (no not every round, but when he chose to),at 13 I think he was at 15 splash damage per bomb. You are making a bad assumption comparing a 4th level barbarian and a 4th level Alchemist. Spell casters don't hit their stride until later whereas at 4th level a barbarian is pretty much at it's peak. At later levels the Alchemist is way more effective. A low levels it will probably be relying on Alchemist Fires, Tanglefoot bags, etc. for a lot of it's combat (which it still adds int to damage)
Pointing out the level 8 pre-req is moot as I specified levels 9-13. Hitting about the same is debatable as one is hitting to touch which barely scales (as you level they miss less and less) and they have more ways of dealing with DR early and cheaper than barbarians. And if you want to play a buffer you aren't playing an alchemist, that you occasionally do it in addition to whatever other role you choose to fill is still amazing.
Quote: This is completely a subjective control method. It is easier to objectively control through WBL than this, which means it is easier to test against.
PFS has removed this subjective control completely, and seems only to using WBL even with allowing Alchemist to craft. PFS has also failed to address first Section of Swift Alchemy that modifies the time for crafting Alchemy items. Which combine with lost of Brew Potion leaves a large hole in the Alchemist power compare to other Classes. I am sure other classes suffer from same type of oversight.
Yes, it is a subjective method of control, but it is a control that isn't even able to be called upon. Outside of a scenario there are no threats to the player to do whatever they wish, buy whatever they want, and such. They also removed age categories from players, and other such penalties, which could be implemented on players who decided to have their characters spend years between scenarios crafting, and there is no lifetime XP tracking as there were in previous campaigns to give you a pool of crafting you could do.
With no time between scenarios the lack of swift alchemy in nearly moot anyway. Honestly, I'm befuddled by the fact that you believe Alchemists need help to be viable, have you seen one at high level, are they at all well-built?
Quote: This doesn't mean PFS couldn't allow Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion for the classes that would benefit the most from them.
Yes, in a campaign where characters are already above the designed power curve with (relatively) unlimited purchasing options, they don't need to add the power of crafting to further increase the power level of the players (via extra WBL)
Quote:
I honestly don't care how powerful the characters are to the NPC's.
Since this is what CR is used to measure that doesn't make much sense.
Quote:
I care how powerful they are to each other.
Which would be valid if you were arguing for features to be added to classes on the low end of the power curve, but you aren't you are trying to further pull classes to the top of the power curve, functionally making more characters redundant.
Quote: I am stating that since Scribe Scroll can be safely assumed to be part of the baseis of CR, most likely only WBL, feats, and class features are used to determine CR, that should be consider on a case by case basis. Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion really barely even scratch the surface of CR, which is about the difficulty of the monster (and is generally calculated in an oddly similar way to RP for races). APL is used to determine encounter difficulties with a number of CR whatever creatures. And APL only accounts for the players level and makes no assumptions about class. Quote:
I disagree. They add things all the time, so what difference is one more shovel on the pile going to make.
I'm legitimately not sure what this sentence means, if you could elaborate, I'd be happy to respond.
Quote: How do they do that? They are part of the original design of the game so how are they going to "break the game" anymore than so new feat or wonderous item. This is the same argument everyone else is saying, but no one is putting up any objective rules to prove it. Prove it using the rules why it would "break the game" beyond I feel it will or I feel it has. I put forth both the CR and Encounter creation rules that were designed by Paizo with the fact Scribe Scroll is on a base class. The fact is both myself and BNW are giving you many of the same reasons that crafting (even these mundane ones) are overpowered. They increase the WBL of two of the more powerful classes in the game, they require a lot of paperwork and auditing (which given the APG summoner we have seen not work well in the past), most of the controls for crafting have been removed from the organized play setting, they further unbalance encounters, they nullify the usefulness of other classes. The arguments have been given to you, the overpowered sentence is generally used in conclusions or introductions. Aslo, in point of fact Scribe Scroll wasn't designed by Paizo - it was adopted by Paizo, by design they replaced it in their Organized play environment. (Brew Potion as a feature of Alchemist however is their design)
TL;DR - Unbalancing encounters, player WBL, and giving more power to the most powerful/versatile classes are examples of breaking the game.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
It does not. You can have multiple copies of a spell on a scroll. (in pfs they all have to be the same spell). Drawing a scroll of 25 magic missiles and drawing a wand of 25 magic missiles work the same way.
I was unaware you could do this. I will reconsider my opinion on Scribe Scroll.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Disagreeing with your opinion is not insulting you you. Pointing out that what you are holding up as fact is an argument is not degrading your argument.
The only things I've deleted are responses where I would just be repeating myself. No cherry picking occurred.
Then explain this comment:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You are the only one I see talking about the CR system.
Based off this comment you cherry pick how I was responding to other posters, and degraded me at the same time by implying I was imaging what was being talked about.
Every argument has been that Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion will "break the game" or make the challenges to easy. I pointed out that CR is how the challenges are picked, and the fact that Scribe Scroll is part of Core Character means that won't "break the game" or make it any easier than it already is.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You are arguing that the balance MUST be there or teeerrrible things will happen. Terrible things have NOT happened. Therefore that argument is wrong.
Again there could been/have been unseen problems from blanket banning craft items feats. Again you are using a logic fallacy. Saying since nothing has gone wrong for in my opinion, then there is no reason to change. I find this argument strange since new rules are added a decent pace. Are you saying no new rules should be allowed because nothing has gone wrong with the current rules??
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If you've seen them then they're not unseen.
It doesn't matter if I seen them. It matters that PFS agrees they are issues, and are willing to make changes that would make things right.
Hence I on a forum trying to prove that there is are issues to what they have decided.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I don't think that's on me.
Since my evidence is objective not subjective it is, otherwise you are just telling me how you feel which doesn't invalditate my evidence.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thats a silly argument.
This is degrading and derailing. Just because you don't like my argument doesn't give you any right to attack me personally. If you can prove me wrong than do so.
My point is that it was arbitrary decide to remove. It can arbitrary be decide to be added again, just like new rules that come out.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You haven't responded to the idea that the "original elements of the game" include a DM overseeing one party and limited crafting time, things that DON"T exist in PFS. Some modifications to the game necessary for organized play necessitate other changes. This is one of them.
The heads of pathfinder society work with the people who write the rules rules of the game and confer regularly on what rules in the base system will not work under the structure of organized play. And there are MANY.
Yes there are many issues, and some come from the rules that they decide not to use. I am pointing out that in my opinion removing certain craft item feats have harmed certain classes, even providing a class that is suffering from these decisions. The top argument has been it will "break the game". I have objective shown why it won't "break the game", so now show me objective evidence why it will.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Just because something is in the base system it does not follow that its right for every campaign and PFS. Stating the objective fact that "its in the base system" does not in any way shape or form objectively lead to the idea that "Therefore it should be in pfs"
The Core Rules, according to Pazio, are balanced to the CR of the Monsters presented in the Beastiary or other Source Books. If the Core rules don't work in the Campaign, which is what PFS, it must be carefully consider before removing it because it hurts the balance of the Core Rules with the other Sources. This blanket ban is not in the Core Rules of the Game therefore issues could/have arise. You seem to be starting from "you can't do that unless I say so" then starting from "you can do all this expect when I say you can't". Otherwise why use the Core Rules as a base for PFS if it isn't assumed that everything in it is legal till PFS says otherwise??
BigNorseWolf wrote:
You do cite rule A. You do cite rule B. The connection between them however is entirely of your own creation.
Rule A is the CR of the monster which exists(objective). Rule B is the Encounter Creation rules which exists(objective). Rule C the Wizard in the Core Rulebook starts with Scribe Scroll which exists(objective). We can logicaly assume that Rule A and Rule B are based on Rule C otherwise there be no need for Rule A and Rule B to exist. Now provide some objective reasoning why that is flawed besides I feel.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The argument is bad. Its a total non sequitur. If you know how to show that objectively MIT could use you in the artificial intelligence department.
No the argument is the fact that Pazio say that the CR is balanced to the Core Classes, if you have an issue with that then you have issue with Pazio not me. I conclude that since Pazio says it is balance that it is, and that Pazio takes into the fact that Scribe will be used when facing a Monster. You again degrade me personally instead of actually providing evidence of why my logic is flawed. I don't need to work at MIT on artificial intelligence to take Pazio at their word. I do have an intelligence over a retarded person to make a simple conculsion.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No. No it most certainly does not. It gets eyeballed and estimated... on a good day. There are guidelines, there is no math. Its an art, not a science.
More I feel so it must be true. How is that link objective?? Explain why that monster says that the CR of it is art instead of math or quality testing. I will admit if you prove this I will be the happiest camper of all time.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm not sure how you mean regular item progression. But scrolls, wands, and staves aren't in the same progression. They're used for different things.
Cure light wounds is a bad scroll to get. its more expensive than a wand if you know you're going through 40 of them and you know you will.
Spider climb is a great scroll to get. you only use it occasionally and your caster level doesn't matter that much.
Endure elements is a horrible spell to get on a staff: the effects don't scale and either does the duration. Fireball on the other hand is an amazing spell on a staff , since the DC and number of D6's scale with your level.
Even if you have a wand, you will still have scrolls. Even if you have a staff, you'll still have wands and scrolls.
Which is the same as a fighter buying/using a sword with his gold, then upgrades it to a more powerful version without having to sell it back at half cost. They both help with the encounter, they are both consider when the CR is consider, both are brought by gold, and they both have good and bad qualities that can be used.
How does one "break the game" while the other doesn't?
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The infusion discovery. It works with spells that are normally only self only. If you toss in combine extracts, Mixing your barbarian a combination cocktail with truestrike AND enlarge person mixed together will get you called back to most tables.
Cherry picking again. I clearly that this would be only way for Alchemist to pull this off. I also pointed out that you could buff said fighter as a cleric with normal buffs, and have the great ability to channel healing in a burst without spending extra feats or abilities that lower your combat effectiveness.
Joe Ducey wrote:
At level 10, I saw 280 in a round (no not every round, but when he chose to),at 13 I think he was at 15 splash damage per bomb. You are making a bad assumption comparing a 4th level barbarian and a 4th level Alchemist.
You aren't making the same mistake that you are accusing me of. You spend more time in PFS at low level than at those higher levels. If this was home game with actually 20 levels than I understand, but from what I am seeing you have multiple low levels characters instead of one high level.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Spell casters don't hit their stride until later whereas at 4th level a barbarian is pretty much at it's peak. At later levels the Alchemist is way more effective. A low levels it will probably be relying on Alchemist Fires, Tanglefoot bags, etc. for a lot of it's combat (which it still adds int to damage)
Pointing out the level 8 pre-req is moot as I specified levels 9-13. Hitting about the same is debatable as one is hitting to touch which barely scales (as you level they miss less and less) and they have more ways of dealing with DR early and cheaper than barbarians. And if you want to play a buffer you aren't playing an alchemist, that you occasionally do it in addition to whatever other role you choose to fill is still amazing.
The Alchemist as written can buff through use of Brew Potion, to remove that is to remove a key ability of the Alchemist. I also think that you are only presenting the high level as a way to derail the fact that most players spend time at the low levels and that new players start at level one, not level 8. I want discuss the levels played the most which for PFS is below level 8, when finally the Alchemist can do that cool trick.
Why did you not give answer how many d6's plus bonus damage while I did for you??
Joe Ducey wrote:
Yes, it is a subjective method of control, but it is a control that isn't even able to be called upon. Outside of a scenario there are no threats to the player to do whatever they wish, buy whatever they want, and such. They also removed age categories from players, and other such penalties, which could be implemented on players who decided to have their characters spend years between scenarios crafting, and there is no lifetime XP tracking as there were in previous campaigns to give you a pool of crafting you could do.
I will state again. Item Creation feats should be consider on a case by case baseis, for example Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion, because some classes were built them to modify their combat effectiveness, for example Wizard, or are key ability to others, for example Alchemist. I am not trying to get all the craft item feats in play, just ones that make sense to certain classes.
Joe Ducey wrote:
With no time between scenarios the lack of swift alchemy in nearly moot anyway. Honestly, I'm befuddled by the fact that you believe Alchemists need help to be viable, have you seen one at high level, are they at all well-built?
First Swift Alchemy is there. I stated that it cause a power gap because provides no benefit to the Alchemist since time is not a factor, and wasn't replace by PFS. This objectively shows that not all abilities that could be impacted by a rule where considered before making a rule.
I befuddled that you assume everyone is playing at high level. You might play with high level players, while I on the other have yet to see one over 4th. I will say again 8 levels of playing is longer than 3 or 4 levels, for a class to hit it stride in PFS. If this was home game you actually have a point.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Yes, in a campaign where characters are already above the designed power curve with (relatively) unlimited purchasing options, they don't need to add the power of crafting to further increase the power level of the players (via extra WBL)
Some classes need access to it at lower levels, because they were designed to be so. This balances them to other classes that just buy a shiny sword and swing. This balancing of the classes is what Pazio said when they made the game.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Since this is what CR is used to measure that doesn't make much sense.
CR is what says a monster is balanced to a Core Class. The Core Classes are suppose to be balanced to each other, and other classes released. I care only about balancing the classes, because removing all item creation feats has caused some imbalances.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Which would be valid if you were arguing for features to be added to classes on the low end of the power curve, but you aren't you are trying to further pull classes to the top of the power curve, functionally making more characters redundant.
I have been arguing only for Brew Potion and Scribe Scroll for certain classes, because at low level that is where the imbalance is. I have stated this repeatly.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion really barely even scratch the surface of CR, which is about the difficulty of the monster (and is generally calculated in an oddly similar way to RP for races). APL is used to determine encounter difficulties with a number of CR whatever creatures. And APL only accounts for the players level and makes no assumptions about class
The CR of the monster is play tested/created with the assumption that a character would have such a feat. I am sure that WBL is then use along with class features to create random Core PCs to test the Monster. That means a Class with a item creation feat such as Scribe Scrolls buys scrolls at half cost then are used to test that class against the monster. We were discussing how a CR of monster is play tested/created. How did you end up here?
Joe Ducey wrote:
I'm legitimately not sure what this sentence means, if you could elaborate, I'd be happy to respond.
New material comes out for Pathfinder that is then added to PFS at a decent rate. Some of these things make certain classes more powerful then others. How is adding back in certain item creation feats any different than adding new content?
Joe Ducey wrote:
The fact is both myself and BNW are giving you many of the same reasons that crafting (even these mundane ones) are overpowered. They increase the WBL of two of the more powerful classes in the game, they require a lot of paperwork and auditing (which given the APG summoner we have seen not work well in the past), most of the controls for crafting have been removed from the organized play setting, they further unbalance encounters, they nullify the usefulness of other classes. The arguments have been given to you, the overpowered sentence is generally used in conclusions or introductions. Aslo, in point of fact Scribe Scroll wasn't designed by Paizo - it was adopted by Paizo, by design they replaced it in their Organized play environment. (Brew Potion as a feature of Alchemist however is their design)
You feel it is overpowered, yet don't haven't shown single piece of objective evidence to prove it. Show objectively how they will increase the WBL anymore than in a normal game where they be allowed, because by default they are part of classes. I understand you feel they increase your workload to GM, but that is no argument of why to blanket ban them as it harms other classes to do so. The one control that matters is WBL, and it will still limit that fact when you only considers feats like Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion. Show objectively how they would nullify other characters. Show objectively how it be overpowered. I am aware that Scribe Scrolls comes from 3.5, and I am also aware that Pazio was made of ex 3.5 authors. So by default Pazio design it Scribe Scroll.
I missed a line in CR, if in fact calculated at all (there are averages and maybe ranges that things fall in and adjustments from there)
Comparing the buffing/healing ability of Alchemists and Clerics is a bad comparison. Clerics are basically designed for buffing/healing (among other options but this is probably the main one), and are generally fairly poor combatants. Alchemists are generally combatants first with other things thrown on, self buffs, buffs for others via infusion, trap finding trap sense via archetype etc. either Ranger, Warpriest, and Dragon Disciple would all make better comparisons to an Alchemist (possibly even Bloodrager, Paladin and a couple other classes). All of the ones I listed would IMO probably favor the Alchemist as a more powerful class or equal power level (while I do think some of them are quite good and fun to play) - Not to mention the casting discrepency between a 9 level caster and a 6 level caster (which disciple loosely fits, though it could go higher - depending on build and how high level you go in classes).
Joe Ducey wrote: I missed a line in CR, if in fact calculated at all (there are averages and maybe ranges that things fall in and adjustments from there) Not sure where in your post this line would fit.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Comparing the buffing/healing ability of Alchemists and Clerics is a bad comparison. Clerics are basically designed for buffing/healing (among other options but this is probably the main one), and are generally fairly poor combatants. Alchemists are generally combatants first with other things thrown on, self buffs, buffs for others via infusion, trap finding trap sense via archetype etc. either Ranger, Warpriest, and Dragon Disciple would all make better comparisons to an Alchemist (possibly even Bloodrager, Paladin and a couple other classes). All of the ones I listed would IMO probably favor the Alchemist as a more powerful class or equal power level (while I do think some of them are quite good and fun to play) - Not to mention the casting discrepency between a 9 level caster and a 6 level caster (which disciple loosely fits, though it could go higher - depending on build and how high level you go in classes).
I disagree. A Cleric has d8 HD so does an Alchemist. A cleric gets Medium Armor vs an Alchemist gets Light. Both get simple weapons. A Neutral Cleric can choose to channel negative energy doing 1d6 30ft burst save for half or positive energy for 1d6 healing vs an Alchemist has bombs that do 1d6 5ft blast with reflex save for half. A Cleric has healing spells, and is consider a spellcaster for items that require it, eg scrolls vs Alchemist has extracts that only he can use, no caster level, so he only qualifies for wands, but he can make potions to actually heal and buff the party expect in PFS. Cleric has more spell options overall through domain so different builds can be made. Alchemist is being harmed by not have Brew Potion to increase his value with him being unable to hand out extracts like spells. I take a Cleric over Alchemist in the party in PFS.
Quote: You aren't making the same mistake that you are accusing me of. You spend more time in PFS at low level than at those higher levels. If this was home game with actually 20 levels than I understand, but from what I am seeing you have multiple low levels characters instead of one high level.
Due to linear scaling of xp, you spend equal amounts of what most people would consider low level and, mid level with no high level if you are talking a full 1 - 20 track, or equal amounts per character at every level. If you'd prefer do the comparison at levels 6-7 the mid point of the careers (which incidentally IMO Barb has already peaked and plateaud give or take at 4 and the Alchemist is still on the up swing).
jtaylor73003 wrote:
Why did you not give answer how many d6's plus bonus damage while I did for you??
Well, as I specified my character was the archer, I can't remember the stats exactly of another players character. I know my own. It was a lot, for expediency we had the player switch over to a die roller in Eyes (after a couple attacks per session) to speed up play.
Quote:
I have been arguing only for Brew Potion and Scribe Scroll for certain classes, because at low level that is where the imbalance is. I have stated this repeatly.
I don;t think you understood what I meant. Scribe Scroll (Wizard) and Brew Potion (Alchemist) would be re-instated for powerful classes (tier 1 and 3 respectively) pulling them even further ahead of lower tier classes in the campaign. (Part of the penalty you take in high power classes is that they suffer at low levels - Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Oracle/Sorcerer/Shaman/Warpriest/Magus - with the possible exception of APG summoner (who still really hits their stride at mid level and Paladin - who well are fairly front loaded). I'm arguing that there is no reason for the rich to get richer when the imbalance is already being handled somewhat - in a way that gets fairly decent replacement feats. Classes are not balanced and never have been. Or why would people tell you that Druids/Gunslinger/Summoner are OP, while Fighter and Rogue suck.
As for the WBL. I will agree that WBL should take into account Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion/other crafting feats. However, the PFS design takes crafting out of the equation and instead has increased WBL, PP, and a very open marketplace. Characters who have those feats added back in would effectively be further increasing their wealth by level. So they are taking their already higher than average wealth and effectively growing it by another significant factor. As an example, WBL for a 7th level character is 23,500. My PFS characters average 29000 gp at 7th (with another 33ish PP worth another 5000-25000gp). Say that character is a wizard. Each character is going to spend 19k on equipment, consumables, etc. and the remainder scribing scrolls. The average character basically turns the 4500 into 9k for a total of 28k gp. Still not up to level 8 wealth, but about halfway between, and not up to the wealth of my average PFS level 7. - The level 7 PFS character saves 29pp for raise/restoration/recover body (total value nearly 8000 gold, plus the body recovery), they spend the remaining 4pp on wands of cure light and infernal healing. (1500gp and approximately 750hp of healing). They spend 19k on items, consumables, equipment, and 10k scribing scrolls effectively making 20k worth of scrolls. That character now has a net worth of 47500, level 9. That unbalances the game. In fact judging by WBL not having scribe scroll/brew potion could already be seen as part of the gold you earn just instead of one class getting it every class does.
A wizard with scribe scroll nullify other characters. Hmm, let's see. With his ability to nearly double his wealth, he invests in some simple items a haversack, and scrolls of unseen servant, and a masterwork tool for reading scrolls. On stat creation, takes at least 18 int and 16 wis, buys scrolls of useful cleric spells to be able to UMD them as necessary. Then has scrolls of every spell they think may be useful from the Wizard list that they know. Now something happens as in one round they pull out the scroll and cast it. What scroll - well pretty much whichever one you want because they can afford twice as many of them as any other class. An alchemist with brew potion - hands out healing items, potions of enlarge person, bull's strength, etc. Infusions of shield and see invisibility while they are at it. They functionally in addition to their bombs/etc have taken (or at least reduced) the role of buffing from everyone else.
Quote:
I disagree. A Cleric has d8 HD so does an Alchemist. A cleric gets Medium Armor vs an Alchemist gets Light. Both get simple weapons. A Neutral Cleric can choose to channel negative energy doing 1d6 30ft burst save for half or positive energy for 1d6 healing vs an Alchemist has bombs that do 1d6 5ft blast with reflex save for half. A Cleric has healing spells, and is consider a spellcaster for items that require it, eg scrolls vs Alchemist has extracts that only he can use, no caster level, so he only qualifies for wands, but he can make potions to actually heal and buff the party expect in PFS. Cleric has more spell options overall through domain so different builds can be made. Alchemist is being harmed by not have Brew Potion to increase his value with him being unable to hand out extracts like spells. I take a Cleric over Alchemist in the party... Alchemists have a healing archetype, if you'd like to compare that you can. While they are both d8 - 3/4 BAB classes they perform very different functions. This is why they are bad comparisons. Clerics are generally support casters while alchemist are ranged DPS (there are exceptions but stereo-typically). Also, the alchemist is always going to be better at hitting things throwing to touch.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Due to linear scaling of xp, you spend equal amounts of what most people would consider low level and, mid level with no high level if you are talking a full 1 - 20 track, or equal amounts per character at every level. If you'd prefer do the comparison at levels 6-7 the mid point of the careers (which incidentally IMO Barb has already peaked and plateaud give or take at 4 and the Alchemist is still on the up swing).
Yes let's compare those. According to you Alchemist and other classes do suffer at lower levels compare to several other classes. That yes Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion would have a balancing effect to make these classes more effective. I believe that is why Pazio designed them so.
Joe Ducey wrote:
I don;t think you understood what I meant. Scribe Scroll (Wizard) and Brew Potion (Alchemist) would be re-instated for powerful classes (tier 1 and 3 respectively) pulling them even further ahead of lower tier classes in the campaign. (Part of the penalty you take in high power classes is that they suffer at low levels - Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Oracle/Sorcerer/Shaman/Warpriest/Magus - with the possible exception of APG summoner (who still really hits their stride at mid level and Paladin - who well are fairly front loaded). I'm arguing that there is no reason for the rich to get richer when the imbalance is already being handled somewhat - in a way that gets fairly decent replacement feats. Classes are not balanced and never have been. Or why would people tell you that Druids/Gunslinger/Summoner are OP, while Fighter and Rogue suck.
First Pazio state these classes are balanced, and gave certain feats to certain classes to keep them as such. You are only express how you personally feel. This is not objective evidence that PFS should of removed the feats from those classes, nor does this disprove that giving those feats back will "break the game". I don't care what your feelings are. I provide you, the audience, and anyone else with objective rules that state clear facts. Fact One the Classes were designed with these feats as part of their abilities. Fact Two the CR of monsters represent what level of PCs should face, which include WBL even those who are given certain Item creation feats. Fact Three Pazio states that these things are balanced therefore one must assume they are balanced. If you personally feel they aren't balanced then you need to direct your concerns about "break the game" to Pazio.
Joe Ducey wrote:
As for the WBL. I will agree that WBL should take into account Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion/other crafting feats. However, the PFS design takes crafting out of the equation and instead has increased WBL, PP, and a very open marketplace. Characters who have those feats added back in would effectively be further increasing their wealth by level. So they are taking their already higher than average wealth and effectively growing it by another significant factor. As an example, WBL for a 7th level character is 23,500. My PFS characters average 29000 gp at 7th (with another 33ish PP worth another 5000-25000gp). Say that character is a wizard. Each character is going to spend 19k on equipment, consumables, etc. and the remainder scribing scrolls. The average character basically turns the 4500 into 9k for a total of 28k gp. Still not up to level 8 wealth, but about halfway between, and not up to the wealth of my average PFS level 7. - The level 7 PFS character saves 29pp for raise/restoration/recover body (total value nearly 8000 gold, plus the body recovery), they spend the remaining 4pp on wands of cure light and infernal healing. (1500gp and approximately 750hp of healing). They spend 19k on items, consumables, equipment, and 10k scribing scrolls effectively making 20k worth of scrolls. That character now has a net worth of 47500, level 9. That unbalances the game. In fact judging by WBL not having scribe scroll/brew potion could already be seen as part of the gold you earn just instead of one class getting it every class does.
Okay let me get this straight. The already high amount of WBL will be crushed by simply adding Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion, because it allow you to make more consumables to be used on the part. This is in contrast to the fighter who has the same high WBL barely buys consumables to be use by the party, and maintains that WBL while the Classes that do go down as the consumable is used.
Okay I am convinced. I will no longer use any of my WBL on the party, because they have the same WBL and should use it as so. I will gladly remind my other party members of this, and with glee watch them die as I run away./sarcasm
I don't see how allowing Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion does anything, but assist the party as a whole. This is the same as the fighter buying a +1 weapon before ever buying a wand of cure light wounds, yet still expecting other classes in the party to heal them if they get hurt. This why there is an imbalance when you remove the item creation feats from classes that originally get them. You change how they can fill the role that the class is design for. Wizard: with enough preparation I can kill anything. Alchemist: with enough preparation I can boost/heal/kill anything, maybe you with it.
Joe Ducey wrote:
A wizard with scribe scroll nullify other characters. Hmm, let's see. With his ability to nearly double his wealth, he invests in some simple items a haversack, and scrolls of unseen servant, and a masterwork tool for reading scrolls. On stat creation, takes at least 18 int and 16 wis, buys scrolls of useful cleric spells to be able to UMD them as necessary. Then has scrolls of every spell they think may be useful from the Wizard list that they know. Now something happens as in one round they pull out the scroll and cast it. What scroll - well pretty much whichever one you want because they can afford twice as many of them as any other class.
WBL says this could happen, but Wealth Per Adventure says no. This is only stopping this from happening right now. This poor argument to try to prove your point, since well aware that Wealth Per Adventure want any PC could realisticly do.
Joe Ducey wrote:
An alchemist with brew potion - hands out healing items, potions of enlarge person, bull's strength, etc. Infusions of shield and see invisibility while they are at it. They functionally in addition to their bombs/etc have taken (or at least reduced) the role of buffing from everyone else.
Why would this be bad?? You know that realisticly this take several sessions for this become true. You also know that during these sessions that the Martial Types are relying on healer type to use there WBL to keep them going as the Martial Type takes damage.
Overall all you feel that Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion will "break the game", yet when comes down to it comes down to the fact that you think Martial Types aren't getting enough gold. I disagree with this opinion. I repeatly stated that Pazio balanced the Classes using item creation feat. Now that I know that you feeling is merely based around greed then I understand why you argue what you do.
I feel since Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion aren't allowed, and that so many others hate to bring back, then every PFS should require all PCs to provide their own healing. No more relying on the Cleric waste spells on you to heal you up during a fight. No more relying on other Players to provide Wands of Cure Light Wounds to keep your character from dying. Don't have one too bad, better spend that WBL on healing Consumables just like the other Player had to.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jtaylor73003 wrote:
I apologize but scribe scroll is part of the Wizard class meaning the CR of a creature has only been consider that a Wizard could have a scroll that stops it in its tracks.
It's a fallacious argument. As wizards weren't stripped of Scribe Scroll leaving nothing in it's place. They get Spell Focus instead which if used correctly, makes offensive spells more effective, which on a combat by combat basis is at last as effective, if not more so, than the scribe scroll feat.
Nothing's stopping a wizard from buying scrolls up to what his Fame allows, or using scrolls found in the course of a scenario. To even consider this major a change, and it IS major, you'd have to come up with no less than a convincing argument that Wizards as they are now, are the weakest class in Pathfinder Society play.
Go ahead, take your time and work on that argument, we'll be here when you get back.
LazarX wrote: jtaylor73003 wrote:
I apologize but scribe scroll is part of the Wizard class meaning the CR of a creature has only been consider that a Wizard could have a scroll that stops it in its tracks.
It's a fallacious argument. As wizards weren't stripped of Scribe Scroll leaving nothing in it's place. They get Spell Focus instead which if used correctly, makes offensive spells more effective, which on a combat by combat basis is at last as effective, if not more so, than the scribe scroll feat.
Nothing's stopping a wizard from buying scrolls up to what his Fame allows, or using scrolls found in the course of a scenario. To even consider this major a change, and it IS major, you'd have to come up with no less than a convincing argument that Wizards as they are now, are the weakest class in Pathfinder Society play.
Go ahead, take your time and work on that argument, we'll be here when you get back. You have no argument. Pazio designed the Wizard with Scribe Scroll. Pazio designed Alchemist with Brew Potion. CR of monsters reflect this fact. These are all objective facts. Now present some objective facts that disprove this argument.
You won't because this whole thread been I feel it will "break the game". I feel that it will increase those Classes WBL. I feel you are wrong. I feel. I feel that this is waste of time to discuss with people who won't provide objective evidence to support their argument.
jtaylor,
Lots of folks with tons of experience in PFS have explained to you, at length and many times, how scribe scroll and brew potion are not necessary for Wizards or Alchemists to be extremely viable if not very powerful.
Can you just let it go?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jtaylor73003 wrote: LazarX wrote: jtaylor73003 wrote:
I apologize but scribe scroll is part of the Wizard class meaning the CR of a creature has only been consider that a Wizard could have a scroll that stops it in its tracks.
It's a fallacious argument. As wizards weren't stripped of Scribe Scroll leaving nothing in it's place. They get Spell Focus instead which if used correctly, makes offensive spells more effective, which on a combat by combat basis is at last as effective, if not more so, than the scribe scroll feat.
Nothing's stopping a wizard from buying scrolls up to what his Fame allows, or using scrolls found in the course of a scenario. To even consider this major a change, and it IS major, you'd have to come up with no less than a convincing argument that Wizards as they are now, are the weakest class in Pathfinder Society play.
Go ahead, take your time and work on that argument, we'll be here when you get back. You have no argument. Pazio designed the Wizard with Scribe Scroll. Pazio designed Alchemist with Brew Potion. CR of monsters reflect this fact. These are all objective facts. Now present some objective facts that disprove this argument.
You won't because this whole thread been I feel it will "break the game". I feel that it will increase those Classes WBL. I feel you are wrong. I feel. I feel that this is waste of time to discuss with people who won't provide objective evidence to support their argument. By that argument then any encounter that does not feature a wizard on the PC party is totally broken because your premise has been "CR assumes wizard with scribe scroll". OMG, my party has a sorcerer.... and he doesn't have the feat! I have to throw out the entire Bestiary and CRB!
The argument has never been about ICF breaking the game... It's been that it adds a tremendous amount of overhead to RUNNING it for no benefit, save for a few players who want to tweak WBL for their own benefit.
Andrew Christian wrote: jtaylor,
Lots of folks with tons of experience in PFS have explained to you, at length and many times, how scribe scroll and brew potion are not necessary for Wizards or Alchemists to be extremely viable if not very powerful.
Can you just let it go?
No people have explain how they feel. No one provide any objective evidence to say why Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion couldn't be consider to be used. Everyone ignores that Pazio designed those classes with it, and that CR are consider with those Classes having it. This objectively will not break the Game. Wealth Per Adventure will keep from Players making ridiculous amounts of the items, any more ridiculous than the number they can buy now, so this won't "break the game".
I made a claim and back it up with objective evidence. The responses I am getting are "I feel it will break the game".
I feel I am wasting my time with people who aren't willing to back up their claims. I am letting this go. What I won't let go is to is any responses that state that my argument held no water, while no one present any objective to support their claim. Understand that only reason people are against item creation feats are because they feel, not because there is an objective danger to PFS.
jtaylor73003 wrote: Andrew Christian wrote: jtaylor,
Lots of folks with tons of experience in PFS have explained to you, at length and many times, how scribe scroll and brew potion are not necessary for Wizards or Alchemists to be extremely viable if not very powerful.
Can you just let it go?
No people have explain how they feel. No one provide any objective evidence to say why Scribe Scroll or Brew Potion couldn't be consider to be used. Everyone ignores that Pazio designed those classes with it, and that CR are consider with those Classes having it. This objectively will not break the Game. Wealth Per Adventure will keep from Players making ridiculous amounts of the items, any more ridiculous than the number they can buy now, so this won't "break the game".
I made a claim and back it up with objective evidence. The responses I am getting are "I feel it will break the game".
I feel I am wasting my time with people who aren't willing to back up their claims. I am letting this go. What I won't let go is to is any responses that state that my argument held no water, while no one present any objective to support their claim. Understand that only reason people are against item creation feats are because they feel, not because there is an objective danger to PFS. 1) People have explained to you why campaign management made the choice when the campaign started. Lots of the reasons have to do with empirical and anecdotal evidence from predecessor campaigns. In other words, they've seen how item crafting has worked in Living City and Living Greyhawk. They have tangible proof that item crafting can really unbalance the game and causes the power creep race to proceed exponentially. You think Scenarios are too easy in the early seasons or too hard in the later seasons as difficulty has been ramped up, imagine what it was like back in Living Greyhawk. It wasn't good.
2) Nobody is ignoring that the classes were written that way. But you do realize that Mike Brock (campaign coordinator), John Compton (Developer) and Linda Zayas-Palmer (Assistant Developer) are the ones in charge of the campaign and they are directly employed by Paizo right? If Paizo had a problem with item crafting being banned, then they wouldn't let these three do so. This is a campaign specific rule that is supported by Paizo at large. So that argument of yours is not valid.
3) You are wasting your time. But not because others aren't giving you proof or whatever. But because you keep arguing this point at all. This is not going to change. Campaign leadership will never say never (yeah I realize the irony of that comment), but the likelihood that item crafting gets implemented into PFS is about as close as scientists have gotten to absolute zero.
Let's try this route. jtaylor73003, in my home games, I give Wizards (and alchemists) the ability to take the "PFS Option" - swapping out Spell Focus for Craft Scroll and Brew Potion for Extra Bombs.
Not a single one of my players has not taken the option.
I don't think the "Wizards and Alchemists may be underpowered" argument is going to work. For that matter, in PFS it's far easier than in a home game to have situational consumables, because prestige is more or less "free money". My characters love dropping 2PP on wands, 4th level scrolls and 3rd level potions. If I had to spend "real money" on those, I'd be much more restrained in my scroll library.
Andrew Christian wrote:
1) People have explained to you why campaign management made the choice when the campaign started. Lots of the reasons have to do with empirical and anecdotal evidence from predecessor campaigns. In other words, they've seen how item crafting has worked in Living City and Living Greyhawk. They have tangible proof that item crafting can really unbalance the game and causes the power creep race to proceed exponentially. You think Scenarios are too easy in the early seasons or too hard in the later seasons as difficulty has been ramped up, imagine what it was like back in Living Greyhawk. It wasn't good.
If there is empirical evidence than point to it. Anecdotal evidence is still I feel because it can't be verified. I provided objective evidence anyone of the responders could do the same. You are forgetting what didn't work in the past under completely different system doesn't mean that a new system could handle it. I only stated that they should consider item creation feats for classes that get them in their design.
Andrew Christian wrote:
2) Nobody is ignoring that the classes were written that way. But you do realize that Mike Brock (campaign coordinator), John Compton (Developer) and Linda Zayas-Palmer (Assistant Developer) are the ones in charge of the campaign and they are directly employed by Paizo right? If Paizo had a problem with item crafting being banned, then they wouldn't let these three do so. This is a campaign specific rule that is supported by Paizo at large. So that argument of yours is not valid
It only shows that a decision was made. This doesn't mean that they couldn't reconsider it because there have been unseen conquences to their decision. I also point out that they could just be responding to the way the community feels, but failing to look at it objectively. I don't speak for these people, neither do you. Point out so objective rules to support how Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion will "break the game".
Andrew Christian wrote:
3) You are wasting your time. But not because others aren't giving you proof or whatever. But because you keep arguing this point at all. This is not going to change. Campaign leadership will never say never (yeah I realize the irony of that comment), but the likelihood that item crafting gets implemented into PFS is about as close as scientists have gotten to absolute zero.
This is a logic fallacy. You are stating that things won't change, because that is way it has always been. This is contrary to the fact that new content is added at a regular baseis.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jtaylor73003 wrote: This is a logic fallacy. You are stating that things won't change, because that is way it has always been. This is contrary to the fact that new content is added at a regular baseis. And your logical fallacy is because they've added A +B, X must ultimately follow.
You should also note that Paizo has often not added, D, E, and F, and remove G, H, and M, when they decided that they were more of a problem for PFS play than a benefit.
Crafting has been forbidden since day 1. There have been very limited exceptions given in the case of arcane bonds and alchemists, all of which share the common quality of not adding to the administration burden of the campaign.
Crafting is one of those cases, that if Paizo gives an inch on this, you'll come back asking for first the foot, and the yard. and it would create an administrative nightmare.
Yes, you're right that we can't say with 100 percent certainty that X won't happen, But we can see probability quite well from how Paizo's acted in the past, and a quantum duplicate of Mike Brock appearing on stage at Gen Con is far more likely than this coming to be.
DrSwordopolis wrote: Let's try this route. jtaylor73003, in my home games, I give Wizards (and alchemists) the ability to take the "PFS Option" - swapping out Spell Focus for Craft Scroll and Brew Potion for Extra Bombs.
Not a single one of my players has not taken the option.
I don't think the "Wizards and Alchemists may be underpowered" argument is going to work. For that matter, in PFS it's far easier than in a home game to have situational consumables, because prestige is more or less "free money". My characters love dropping 2PP on wands, 4th level scrolls and 3rd level potions. If I had to spend "real money" on those, I'd be much more restrained in my scroll library.
Thank you for providing anecdotal evidence that you don't provide enough time for your players to craft in your home games. I doubt this is what you were trying to prove, but that is as much as you have proven as much as proven that Scribe Scroll/Brew Potion just are bad choice or just wouldn't be chosen if they were allowed.
I don't know if Players will choose those options more or not. Right now you aren't even allowed to choose the option, which is against the original design of the Classes.
I still think they should be consider it on case by case baseis. If you feel it will "break the game" then I will point to the CR of monsters that says otherwise. If you feel it will "break the game" because WBL will be increased, then I point that Wealth Per Adventure only controls an already broke WBL. If you have an objective evidence that presents an argument beyond I feel then I willing to reconsider my opinion.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jtaylor73003 wrote:
I don't know if Players will choose those options more or not. Right now you aren't even allowed to choose the option, which is against the original design of the Classes.
The original design is not a relevant argument. Campaigns generate home rules all the time. PFS does so as well. PFS substitutes one feat for another. You have failed to present any evidence that the substitution of Spell Focus for Scribe scroll has any meaningful impact on encounter balance.
jtaylor73003 wrote:
Thank you for providing anecdotal evidence that you don't provide enough time for your players to craft in your home games.
/chuckle
One of those examples is in a Kingmaker game.
LazarX wrote:
And your logical fallacy is because they've added A +B, X must ultimately follow.
What? I stated that they should reconsider. I stated that according to Pazio that there is no "break the game", because the CR of monster states that. Are you arguing that Pazio has constructed the game incorrectly??
LazarX wrote:
You should also note that Paizo has often not added, D, E, and F, and remove G, H, and M, when they decided that they were more of a problem for PFS play than a benefit.
This doesn't prove your point. This also doesn't disprove my point.
LazarX wrote:
Crafting has been forbidden since day 1. There have been very limited exceptions given in the case of arcane bonds and alchemists, all of which share the common quality of not adding to the administration burden of the campaign.
Appeal to tradition logic fallacy. This doesn't prove it will "break the game".
LazarX wrote:
Crafting is one of those cases, that if Paizo gives an inch on this, you'll come back asking for first the foot, and the yard. and it would create an administrative nightmare.
Slipperly slope fallacy. This doesn't prove it will "break the game".
LazarX wrote:
Yes, you're right that we can't say with 100 percent certainty that X won't happen, But we can see probability quite well from how Paizo's acted in the past, and a quantum duplicate of Mike Brock appearing on stage at Gen Con is far more likely than this coming to be.
This doesn't even add to the discussion. You still haven't provide anything more than I feel, to back up the original claim that it will "break the game". Everyone is well aware of how you all feel, and others might even agree with your feelings. I don't.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
You keep harping on "Breaking The Game" That has not, and never has been the point, so it's time to put that broken record in the bin where it belongs.
Get this through your head. There are reasons that network campaigns far smaller than this, have more often than not, banned item feat crafting.
It is not, and never has been about Game Breakage, it's been about Administrative Nightmare that does not add value for the stress added.
LazarX wrote: jtaylor73003 wrote:
I don't know if Players will choose those options more or not. Right now you aren't even allowed to choose the option, which is against the original design of the Classes.
The original design is not a relevant argument. Campaigns generate home rules all the time. PFS does so as well. PFS substitutes one feat for another. You have failed to present any evidence that the substitution of Spell Focus for Scribe scroll has any meaningful impact on encounter balance. I stated repeatly that Brew Potion is a key ability as part of the Alchemist. That it would allow a different build which allow more player options. The benefits of Scribe Scroll are already presented, because it part of a Core Class. PFS uses the original CR of monsters without adjusting them to reflect any changes that PFS has made. Base on these facts Scribe Scroll would already be a positive benefit to the Wizard class. I state all this repeatly. I still waiting for objective evidence that says otherwise.
LazarX wrote: You keep harping on "Breaking The Game" That has not, and never has been the point, so it's time to put that broken record in the bin where it belongs.
Get this through your head. There are reasons that network campaigns far smaller than this, have more often than not, banned item feat crafting.
It is not, and never has been about Game Breakage, it's been about Administrative Nightmare that does not add value for the stress added.
I keep stating it because that as been the number one argument since I present my opinion. The fact that it is more paperwork is merely an excuse that doesn't add to the discussion. PFS adds new content all the time which causes more paperwork, and require more GM knowledge.
If you want to put the "break the game" in the bin talk to your other posters who use as a reason that item creation feats shouldn't be allowed.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jtaylor73003 wrote: LazarX wrote: jtaylor73003 wrote:
I don't know if Players will choose those options more or not. Right now you aren't even allowed to choose the option, which is against the original design of the Classes.
The original design is not a relevant argument. Campaigns generate home rules all the time. PFS does so as well. PFS substitutes one feat for another. You have failed to present any evidence that the substitution of Spell Focus for Scribe scroll has any meaningful impact on encounter balance. I stated repeatly that Brew Potion is a key ability as part of the Alchemist. That it would allow a different build which allow more player options. The benefits of Scribe Scroll are already presented, because it part of a Core Class. PFS uses the original CR of monsters without adjusting them to reflect any changes that PFS has made. Base on these facts Scribe Scroll would already be a positive benefit to the Wizard class. I state all this repeatly. I still waiting for objective evidence that says otherwise. Irrelevant. You are the one asking for change. You have to present evidence that Scribe Scroll is a better feat than Spell Focus in how encounter design is impacted. You would also have to demonstrate why Scribe Scroll is a needed element for CR balance. Yes, PFS has changed the design of the wizard to incorporate Spell focus instead of Scribe Scroll. You need to demonstrate how making a wizard's spells more effective is of less value than giving them an item creation feat that CAN NOT BE USED IN COMBAT. The only impact on the absence of the feat is a slight rise in costs involving in obtaining a scroll. How is the Wizard with Spell Focus inferior in CR calculation to the Wizard with Scribe Scroll, given that both feats have an equal cost if not taken as bonus feats.
You are asking for a major change. You are the one who has to provide a major argumnent as to why the change brings benefits superior to the baggage and headaches it will bring. You have yet to present any evidence to back your assertions.
Unless you put a different record on the turntable, I'm turning off my headphones.
Theseus' ship replaced a nail
The boat is broken, and will not sail.
jtaylor73003:
The empirical evidence you request has been presented. You ignore it, or claim it is subjective. It is not. The Living Greyhawk Organized Campaign wound up broken at higher levels because of the magic item crafting feats, and that was with the campaign's built-in time limits for amount of crafting any specific PC could do, and still adventure.
In short, LG scenarios make Chalfon Dalsine look like a pussycat. Mainly because they had to, since the crafting was causing some PCs to be well past extremely overpowered. For those of us not abusing the crafting rules, LG became virtually unplayable.
As mentioned, the feat Scribe Scroll does not give a Wizard more direct power, all it does is reduce the cost of their scroll library. Between the higher average WbL of PFS PCs, and the boost to wealth given by being able to buy things with PP expenditure, there is nothing preventing that same Wizard from having the exact same library, for, likely, around the same end non-consumable wealth available.
Purchase a single scroll of a first level spell:
Purchase price 25 gp
Scribe a single scroll of a first level spell:
Purchase access to spell from NPC caster: 5 gp
Scribe spell in spellbook: 10 gp
Scribe scroll of said spell: 12.5 gp
Overall cost: 27.5 gp
So, for single spells, where you claim it is needed for power levels, it will be cheaper to just buy a scroll of the same spell. Note that the same cost breakdowns will continue up through the spell level of the scroll.
Note that scribing a scroll at a higher caster level than the minimum level to cast the spell involved will also increase the cost of the scroll, not to mention increase the amount of paperwork involved for each scroll.
A few other things, for your consideration:
Wizard is a legacy class, from 3.0, indeed, from Original D&D, and Paizo did not make major changes to the framework when they updated 3.5 to PF.
CR does not take any of the party member's feats, classes, abilities, or skills, into account. All it takes into account is the APL, Average Party Level, of the PCs. It doesn't care if you have a party consisting of the classic party -- Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard -- or a party composed entirely of Bards. APL is APL is APL.
And CR is CR, and doesn't care if it as calculated correctly or not. A CR 3 encounter will garner the same experience, whether it is a Shadow, or a 4th level negative channeling Cleric with normal NPC wealth, or a 3rd level negative channeling Cleric with PC level wealth. It doesn't even care if the NPC is built on the Elite attribute spread or not, and whether the Cleric's Charisma makes the Will save DC 9 or 17, or if he can channel once or 8 times per day.
I understand why The Campaign staff does not want item crafting feats but I disagree with the premise. Casters should be allowed to have crafting feat but should not be allowed to craft custom items as the pricing system for magic items is very broken. Casters that take item creation feats should simply be allowed to craft those items that they have taken feats for for the crafted cost of the item.
I can already hear people crying that will break the WBL guide line.
The WBL Guide line is broke as it does not in any way match the price of Staffs rods and most Wounderous items.
I am fine with the current system but do not like it for many reasons.
why would any arcane casters let another caster make his esoteric tools.
most arcane casters are raving paranoiacs to begin with. Arcane casters all think they are better than all of their peers so why would they trust an inferior to craft their tools. The crafting rules were made for game
management by campaign staff not for actual in game reasons.
enough of my rant. I think that crafting should be allowed but that ship has all ready sailed.
Dismissing peoples points as crying is not productive.
While you're right that people buying the aparatus of the crab at half price wouldn't hurt the game, you know full well that thats NOT what most people would do with those feats: they'd be getting half priced big six items like headbands belts and cloaks.
I think that removing the "trade scribe scroll for spell focus" and "trade Brew Potion for Extra Bombs" special rules would (assuming that the "don't break WBL" balancing act is done) result in a net powerlevel decrease for wizards and alchemists.
The idea of "1 prestige per day" crafting is basically the same as "trade prestige for money at a rate of 1/500gp."
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society
|
