Pathfinder 1E Your experiences with broken Pathfinder characters? (edit: more accurately, w/1 avg PF character when the rest of the party is meh)

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

The tactical teams from previous responses are good advice.

I might eventually start a House Rules thread on this topic, but first I wanted to hear what other gamers have experienced on this topic.

I have a group of 7th level PCs:
* A warforged fighter/warforged juggernaut. AC 23.

This is Pathfinder? I don't know if there's a balance issue there, but ...

* A half-orc dragon shaman. AC 20.
* A human summoner. AC 17.
* A human wizard. AC 12.

Why isn't he or she using Mage Armor? That's an all-day buff, it should be counted in the math.

* aaaand an aasimar sorcerer 3/zen archer monk 4.

The aasimar's AC is 10 + 6 Wisdom + 2 Dex + 1 monk = 19. Typically she adds mage armor (+4 armor), and when she knows trouble's a-brewing she'll add on shield (+4 shield) and reduce person (an extra +1 Dex and +1 size), for a total of AC 29. She asked about the Qiggong Monk, which would have let her trade out slow fall for barkskin, adding another +2, and when I actually looked at her math and realized how ridiculous she was, she pointed out that she hasn't even taken Dodge.

Oh, and her attack bonus as a Zen Archer is +12 (base 4, +6 Wisdom, +1 weapon focus, +1 enhancement), which is the same as the fighter. Plus she runs faster and doesn't have to engage in melee. She has a +7 Reflex save (the fighter has +1).

Now maybe I've drunk too much D&D Next kool-aid, but I hate the amount of math and stacking of weird bonuses that goes on in 3.5/PF. Has anyone successfully fixed the problem? Do I just need to send high level wizards with empowered Magic Missiles at her?

Pretty soon that monk will have Spell Resistance, so no...

The problem you're running into is using too many sources. I don't get why DMs make this mistake and then complain about these results. The summoner and Zen archer archetypes aren't from the core rules. Neither is the dragon shaman, a class I know nothing about, so I'll leave that one alone.

Admittedly the core rules have loads of balance problems as is, but a DM is more likely to know how to deal with them.

 

[Starfox]

I really think I'd rather just convert to a system where my intuition about how challenging something should be in a 'Hollywood physics' world is matched by the system. John McClane survives Die Hard because he's a scrappy hero, not because he was kitted up like a magic Christmas tree.

I agree very uch with this. I call this the "laser sight" effect (from how laser sights worked in TORG), and it is very prominent in 3.x/4E/Pathfinder. What you read in the character profile is NOT what you get - you have to include a gazillion little cumulative bonuses.

When I made my homebrew I really put a lid on the effect (see sig), but that might not yet be in a form readable withput some hand-holding from me. I do suggest changing to another game if this bothers you overmuch. Preferably one with a bell-curve skill resolution system and less twinking. Sadly, I have no really good suggestion for which one.

 

[Clyde Lee Graham]

Good lord, AC 20 + level is "good"? Okay, see, this is where I want to flip out and stab D&D in the face.

I want to play D&D to be a big guy in full plate with a shield, or a nimble guy in leather, or maybe a kung fu guy who dodges because he's all zen and stuff.

I don't play D&D because I want to buy items that give me +1 deflection, +1 natural armor, +1 enhancement armor, +1 enhancement shield, +1 luck, and boosts to my Dex. That stuff really REALLY bores me, especially as a GM because a ruleset that requires those items just causes me to spend pointless time picking out gear of appropriate value in order for an enemy to be a decent challenge.

I definitely don't want to have to include giants, nets, and NPCs with dispel magic in my 'fantasy spy mission' adventure, simply because one PC is not threatened by mortals. I was running 4e before, and got fed up with the way it let players stack tons of debuff effects on prominent enemies, so we switched to PF, and now it's the math that's beating me up.

I really think I'd rather just convert to a system where my intuition about how challenging something should be in a 'Hollywood physics' world is matched by the system. John McClane survives Die Hard because he's a scrappy hero, not because he was kitted up like a magic Christmas tree.

. . .

I may be somewhat emotional as I'm writing this.

There is something to be said for "Is this the right system for me," but this isn't a huge difference from 1st ed. AD&D even... AC 20 is roughly the equivalent of AC0, IIRC.

I would also ask, is this Monk actually contributing much to the fights? They're good at not being hit, but their ability to do damage is quite low. I've played that character in D&D 3.5... it got very frustrating once we started fighting opponents that weren't medium humanoids. I could be obnoxious with trip, but try tripping something with four legs, or larger than medium, and I was useless against anything with DR greater than what I could bypass. Also, as I noted before, they can't AoO with the bow *yet* and they gave up Evasion as well. Yes, this character is over-optimized but I don't think it will be a huge problem. They become the character that gets ignored so the bad guys can geek the Mage and the Healer first.

What that Monk could be good at is tumble into flank and aid another for another character... though if they want to be obnoxious there, they should be a Halfling.

 

[Celebrim]

Good lord, AC 20 + level is "good"? Okay, see, this is where I want to flip out and stab D&D in the face.

I want to play D&D to be a big guy in full plate with a shield, or a nimble guy in leather, or maybe a kung fu guy who dodges because he's all zen and stuff.

Ok, not seeing the problem there.

I don't play D&D because I want to buy items that give me +1 deflection, +1 natural armor, +1 enhancement armor, +1 enhancement shield, +1 luck, and boosts to my Dex. That stuff really REALLY bores me...

Then why do it? Why allow for example players to buy items?

especially as a GM because a ruleset that requires those items just causes me to spend pointless time picking out gear of appropriate value in order for an enemy to be a decent challenge.

I'm not having that problem. You are at 7th level. I don't understand how optimization is necessary to challenge 7th level characters. I don't understand how magical items are necessary to challenge 7th level characters.

I definitely don't want to have to include giants, nets, and NPCs with dispel magic in my 'fantasy spy mission' adventure, simply because one PC is not threatened by mortals.

Ok, so what do you want to include in your 'fantasy spy mission'? Presumably, fantasy spies, right? I'm guessing that you are trying to challenge the party with things like 4th level rogues or 6th level rogues, and you really aren't getting that without elite stat arrays, and lots of stupid magic gear (that is just going to fall into the hands of the PCs anyway) that you are talking about CR 2 to CR 3 sort of challenges because 3e has typically vastly overestimated the CR of humanoid NPCs and of support class NPCs in particular. I mean, basically speaking, you've got a party of 5 James Bonds, and I'm betting you are trying to counter them with the sort of things 1 James Bond overcomes in spy movies. If you wanted versimilitude to spy movies, you probably shouldn't play with an ensemble cast of 5 characters, because what you have now isn't 'spies' but an elite commando team. If you want versimilitude to 'Die Hard', keep in mind you have 5 characters that are already above John McClanes level. Twenty terrorists isn't a challenge. You need 100 of them just according to 'Hollywood Physics'. Moreover, those terrorists ARE kitted up like a Christmas tree with 'magic items' - high tech gizmos and weapons - and even then the only way to even up the odds against John McClane was to arrange that not only was he basically unarmed, he didn't even have any shoes.

But ok, you want to challenge a 7th level party with basic unelite rogues, you are going to need to treat a non-elite rogue of nth level as its real CR. That means something like 5 8th level rogues without any other special advantages. That will be about 5 CR 5 enemies. Or you can just tailor the stat block to what you need without worrying about the underlying math. You'll need something like melee +10, 3d6 damage, AC around 20, 38 hit points, all saves at +5, special quality evasion. Ok, there's a stat block, don't worry about class or level. Good enough to go with. Have your battle. I'm not seeing the problem.

 

[Clyde Lee Graham]

Or, I suppose, you could ditch most of the magic item bonuses entirely and use the Inherent Bonuses rules from 3.5 DMG2.

http://tgd.wikidot.com/inherent-bonuses

 

[billd91]

I really think I'd rather just convert to a system where my intuition about how challenging something should be in a 'Hollywood physics' world is matched by the system. John McClane survives Die Hard because he's a scrappy hero, not because he was kitted up like a magic Christmas tree.

News flash. That character giving you trouble with the high AC? That's the character closest to John McClane you probably have got. Why? Because she's the one with the most ability to avoid being hurt by the challenges you're throwing at her which means she has the most plot armor/immunity out of the whole group. And that's exactly what protagonists in action movies have.

But if you want to pump up the challenge without giving out magic loot you need to build up the bad guys differently and there are some ways to do it:

• give them templates like Advanced
• give them extra fighter levels - good for pumping up their combat modifiers while giving you feats that could be spent on still more modifiers - including save bonus and skill bonuses
• give them extra NPC class levels - also pump up general modifiers without giving away more significant class powers
• give them one-shot magic items (potions) to give out mage armor/barkskin bonuses
• and, importantly, throw out expectations of what an appropriate amount of gear is for the NPCs. Underequip them if you overbuild their levels so that the stats reach what you want without dropping more magic in the hands of the PCs.

 

[Clyde Lee Graham]

Jokingly, I'll point out that McClane is a bad example... he gets hit a lot, either he's got a lot of hit points or converts lethal to non-lethal.

 

[knottyprof]

I definitely don't want to have to include giants, nets, and NPCs with dispel magic in my 'fantasy spy mission' adventure, simply because one PC is not threatened by mortals. I was running 4e before, and got fed up with the way it let players stack tons of debuff effects on prominent enemies, so we switched to PF, and now it's the math that's beating me up.

Funny you should mention the math. Played last night and I compared Pathfinder math to the commercial where the father is doing a simple math problem with his young daughter and she gets the answer wrong because she didn't include all the hidden phone charges. Again, in principle and theory I am a fan of Pathfinder but things like the multiple little conditional adjustments tend to slow down combat compared to earlier D&D editions.

 

[Jack99]

Good lord, AC 20 + level is "good"? Okay, see, this is where I want to flip out and stab D&D in the face.

I want to play D&D to be a big guy in full plate with a shield, or a nimble guy in leather, or maybe a kung fu guy who dodges because he's all zen and stuff.

I don't play D&D because I want to buy items that give me +1 deflection, +1 natural armor, +1 enhancement armor, +1 enhancement shield, +1 luck, and boosts to my Dex. That stuff really REALLY bores me, especially as a GM because a ruleset that requires those items just causes me to spend pointless time picking out gear of appropriate value in order for an enemy to be a decent challenge.

I definitely don't want to have to include giants, nets, and NPCs with dispel magic in my 'fantasy spy mission' adventure, simply because one PC is not threatened by mortals. I was running 4e before, and got fed up with the way it let players stack tons of debuff effects on prominent enemies, so we switched to PF, and now it's the math that's beating me up.

I really think I'd rather just convert to a system where my intuition about how challenging something should be in a 'Hollywood physics' world is matched by the system. John McClane survives Die Hard because he's a scrappy hero, not because he was kitted up like a magic Christmas tree.

. . .

I may be somewhat emotional as I'm writing this.

May? hehehe

Aye, I agree completely. In a good game system, the DM should never have to tailor make encounters with very specific monsters or NPCs with very specific abilities/gear in order to be able to challenge individual PC's just a little bit.

 

[billd91]

Aye, I agree completely. In a good game system, the DM should never have to tailor make encounters with very specific monsters or NPCs with very specific abilities/gear in order to be able to challenge individual PC's just a little bit.

Doesn't this imply that superhero game systems, or game systems that model the superhero genre, can't be good game systems? Superhero comic books are loaded with very specific opponents to challenge very specific abilities and gear of individual heroes.