Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5232806" data-attributes="member: 957">A couple parts points and I’ll walk away from this thread as well.The point keeps being made that a L2 spell becomes less and less valuable as the sorcerer gains levels.  Certainly there is some truth to that, but just as certainly, it is subjective and some value remains.  Having See Invisible, or Levitate as a back pocket utility spell can remain highly beneficial well past level 14.The value of a single HP objectively declines as the character gains levels. A 6th level sorcerer with 6d6 (max HP at L1) will have 23 HP if his CON is only 10 (for reference a 4 point buy non-heroic npc defaults to this).  He is trying to pick between increasing his HP by 4.3% and increasing his L2 spells known from 3 (including a bloodline spell which is locked in) to 4.  There are a lot more than 4 worthwhile L2 to spells for a sorcerer to desire.  Also, from a simple statistical point of view, the value of the hit point his much more up to the whim of the dice.  It can make a huge difference, no doubt.  Being at 1 HP is far better than being at 0 HP, and being at 0 HP is far better than being at -1.  And obviously being dead by 1 HP sucks.  But being at -3 isn’t much worse than being at -1, and being dead by -15 is no more dead than dead by 1.  Does that remove the value of that HP?  Hell no.  But the effective value is both small and very subject to the whims of the dice.  An extra spell on the other hand is a new factor in the control of the player.  That See Invisibility could prevent the damage in the first place.  A lot of times it won’t, but at least the player has more control over the character’s fate.  Is that a very subjective position?  Yeah, very much so.  But if subjective arguments are the main thrust against me, I’ think it is fair for me to reply in the same vein.Obviously, a CON on the order of 14 is more typical for a PC and now we are talking about a less than 3% increase in HP.  (Setting aside that anyone debating the choice at this level would certainly have 3 more HP, having foregone the 3 extra cantrips.)  A fourth spell known vs. 3% in HP.Now, lets roll this character up to 14th level.  Ok, the spell is worth less.  But let’s stay with the 10 CON sorcerer.  He is going to have 51 HP.  That 1 HP paid is less than a 2% increase .  And that is pretty much worst case scenario.  The impact of the price paid for that L2 spell way back at L6 is declining faster than the loss in utility of the spell.But, that L14 sorcerer is also looking to pick between 1 HP and another L6 spell.  He may have his one new L7 spell, so this is a level down.  But I don’t think a L14 sorcerer is intended to survive on his 3/day use of a single L7 spell.  L6 spells, first of all, are L6 spells.  They are nice spells.  And they are at least as important as the L2 spells were at L6.  At L6 the sorcerer could be tossing in some bloodline power 1d6+3 power or even falling back to a crossbow in a pinch.  Crossbow is a poor option, but it is there.  At 14 the 1d6+7 isn’t as much value (just as the L2 spells as have declined), and the crossbow is a waste of an action and carrying weight.  So, the L6 spells are probably more important at L14 than the L2 were at L6.  But let’s call them equal.  For the equal merit is spell gained, the price has been cut by half.  As the character gains levels, the price of a single HP becomes less and less consequential to the character.  And if you start throwing optimized characters with 14+ CONs before enhancement bonuses into the mix (and max min analysis applies to optimizers more than any other group) then the balance becomes even further out of whack.In the end, I don’t claim that any analysis I make or anything I say matters.  In the near future the reviews of the book will be out there.  And there will be people who love it no matter what and people who hate it no matter what.  Honestly, I still strongly expect to love the book.  If this is a poor example of the book then hurray hurray hurray!!  We have one preview up, they choose it, this is what is shows.  I’m commenting on that.  Consider this a review of the preview, not of the book.Now, if this example *IS* a good representation of the rest of the book.  Then a lot of people will LOVE it.  But it won’t be long before the consensus of power creep issues hits Paizo just as hard as it hit WotC.  I don’t expect that to happen.  But I also don’t expect the market as a whole to even give Paizo an equal consideration as WotC received.  There are already people saying that the core itself has too much power creep built in.  I think that is silly and the new baseline is clearly explained and makes a lot of sense.But if I’m trying to convince people that there is not power creep in the core, then how am I possibly going to convince them that this is a good thing?Power creep is a bad thing.  This particular example is a lot of it.  But even a little “innocuous” power creep is bad.  They call it creep because the innocuous seeming bits add up and add up.Maybe I’m just supposed to either heap praise or bite my tongue. Meh.   If Paizo and/or some fanboys are upset (and I’m not accusing anyone at Paizo of actually being upset) then bite me.  I’ll come back next time and praise the good stuff and call it like I see it on the bad stuff as well.  Looking forward to the next preview.</blockquote>

Verification