It's Pathfinder!!!!

Like Pathfinder?

Yep	42.8%	[ 251 ]
Seems good	16.7%	[ 98 ]
No	6.8%	[ 40 ]
I'm Alpha testing it	5.8%	[ 34 ]
Whats pathfinder?	16.0%	[ 94 ]
I'm a whore	2.7%	[ 16 ]
I'm a bigger whore	9.2%	[ 54 ]
Total Votes:			[ 587 ]

[Mitsuke_Hyakka]

Interesting Tidbits. I knew that DnD has been Pg-13 for years but to go down to PG for 4e. Just another thing to ignite the flames.

[Sprainogre]

That's my understanding of things: 4th ed is PG. I was rereading one of the articles, and that was dropped as an aside. I think it was in the Realms article. I'm not too happy about that, but then again, I'm not too big on 4e all around. But that's for other threads. But, yeah, Necro has always been a bit closer to the higher end of PG13 and bordering on R. Sex and violence are a part of the game. And seeing that Necro is an imprint for White Wolf, well, it does follow. Except for a few balance issues, I really enjoyed what Necro put out over the years.

[DrakeEvancore]

I kinda like especially since it makes the villians more villianous.

[Mitsuke_Hyakka]

I posted this up on the Paizo Alpha Messageboards. If you would like a link for the thread: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/feedback/alpha2/newRules/damageSpellsNeedToDoMoreDamage&page=1

Quote:

Let's see, what can I do at this level with just your higher level slots using an Alpha Evoker 10. All cases assume that you hit or succeed.

Cone of Cold: 60 ft cone of 10d6+2 damage with DC 15+Mod 8-62 Damage Avg. 37
(Not as good an option as this next one.)

Empowered Fireball: 20 Foot radius burst Long Range spell for 10d6+2x1.5 DC 13+Mod 12-93 points of damage Avg. 55.5
(This is a considerable boost in the damage. With one spell slot two levels higher, I just increased my damage by 18.5 on average. That's a great amount of gain but still not going to bring down the Giants by itself.)

Maximized Scorching Ray: Close Range Ray spell for 2 of them Damage 4d6+4d6+2 for 50 points of damage. Avg. 50 at one or 24/26 to both
(This is not as good as the empowered Fireball of the same level of spell slot. Plus I need to make two attack rolls and have two opponents. Not really going to do much overall.)

Quickened Burning Hands: Extremely close range 5d4+2 Damage spell for 7-22 points of damage with save DC 11+Mod. Avg. 14.5
(Not really much to say about this. It's just easier to use a weapon.)

So from all this, Empower Spell is the most effect metamagic feat for a Evoker. But is this the most effective method of taking out both monsters? I mean, you use 2-9 spell slots to kill these monsters with empowered fireballs or you could use 2 Slots to use Hold Monster on both of them. Oh wait, that spell has a save each round so that in 10 rounds it has 10 chances to make the DC 15+Mod with their +7 will save. SO a total of 3-? rounds are expended just coup de graceing the creatures whom are making saves every round. If any of them break free from the enchantment, then you would have to expend more resources.

IF you just did average damage with the empowered fireball, you just took out those same giants in three rounds. That's kind of comparable.

Lets do another example. Cloudkill. The damage that the Giants are taking is 1-4 Con a round or avg. 2.5 Con while they are in the cloud so a well placed cloud could effectively take the Giants two rounds to get through. That's only 2-8 Con damage or 1-4 Hp/HD(In this case, 14-56 points of damage) Avg. 5 Con damage or 3 HP/HD or a total of 42 points of damage to these monsters. That's less effective than the empowered fireball. Now I'm not saying that it's not possible to keep the monsters in the cloud but the spell by itself is less effective. Lets look and see if you could get the spell to function to it's maximium effect. I would have to do 5-19 rounds of con damage to take out the monsters. That's powerful but I would still prefer 3 spell slots than deal with the monsters for 5-19 rounds.

Ok so the Fireball is looking like it should. Hold Monster is the champ here but it's drawbacks make it as difficult to guarantee success as any of these other spells.

In my examples above, I just picked out some of the more powerful spells from the SRD, and what did I learn, an empowered Fireball is deadlier than a higher level Evocation spell at 10th level but everything is still in balance because in two more levels, that spell begins to balance out against it's counterparts like cone of cold.

Now my test is not complete and would like some imput without flaming. Did I pick the right spells to compare the damage to? Are these the spells that are supposed to be better than the damage spells of their level? Please let me know so I could put them to the test.

[DrakeEvancore]

Nice comparison. smile

[Mitsuke_Hyakka]

Thanks Drake, I thought it was a good comparison but still need to know if it's being put up against the right spells.

[DrakeEvancore]

I believe the comparison is supposed to be compared to save or else spells and duration spells.

Another thing that should be noted about cloud kill is that none of your allies can enter that area either for the duration. Facing off against intelligent giants you can expect some bullrushing on their part to tumble allies into the very same area.

The arguement of the deadly effect increased damage spells will do against PCs against enemy spellcasters is also a compelling one.

[Mitsuke_Hyakka]

I thought so too but it always got overlooked as I brought it up.

[DrakeEvancore]

You know they're throwing all these monsters and such out that have DR and are of CR for levels. But I mean NPCs in a character class are a CR = to their level and they're likely to be just wiped out by the spells.

[LadyEladrin]

Paizo

Monte Cook Joins the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game™ Team
Co-creator of 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons® to act as Rules Consultant

Paizo Publishing®, LLC today announced that Monte Cook, the co-creator of 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons and author of the 3.5 PHB and DMG as well as the Ptolus™ campaign setting and the recent Book of Experimental Might™, has joined the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game team as a Rules Consultant.

"This is going to be a lot of fun," said Monte Cook. "Pathfinder is a fresh spin on a rules system that I love and the guys at Paizo are great to work with. They produce nothing but the highest quality products."

"Monte Cook is a legend of third edition and of the Open Gaming movement," said Paizo's Publisher, Erik Mona. "He's also a great DM, and has the best mind for mechanics I've ever seen. To have one of the original third edition designers helping us with the Pathfinder RPG is like a dream come true. With Monte's involvement, I am certain that the future of the edition he helped to create will be very long and very fruitful."

"I am really excited to be working with Monte on this project," said Paizo's Lead Designer, Jason Bulmahn. "His advice has been a great help to the Pathfinder RPG. When it comes to rules design and knowledge of the 3.5 system, there is absolutely no one better."

Monte Cook will also be contributing an introduction to the final Pathfinder Roleplaying Game hardcover, scheduled for an August 2009 release.

[SlimeGuru]

I knew Mr. Cook couldn't stay out of game design, he's just too much of a tinkerer. biggrin I can't wait to see how this is all going to shape up!

[LadyEladrin]

That's what I was thinking too; he'd be back in some way. smile I think its' great he left WotC and joined Paizo later on. biggrin

[Sprainogre]

Woot!! Monte Cook! Now I'm even more pumped about Pathfinder. I think late this week for Alpha 3 too. I wonder how Rangers are going to look, and of they bump the paladin HD back up...

[LadyEladrin]

Later this week, eh? I'll keep my eyes on my email; that's how I knew about Monte. smile

[Sprainogre]

I stop through and lurk the message boards from time to time. Although, I found out about Monte from my email.