Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
also
- 20 point buy tabletop/ 25 point buy pc game
- 4 man party tabletop/ 6 man party pc game
- permadeath tabletop/ raise dead-reload pc game.
WotR is made for a party of 6, one of whom is a 25 point buy full mythic demigod, the other 5 are variable point buy partially mythic monsters, all of whom it is assumed you will build to be mechanically optimal (since it's not as if you can go roleplay-heavy outside of tabletop). The monsters are operating under a rigid, stupid, and simplistic AI.
Owlcat have done basically the only thing they can do, which is amp up the difficulty via stats. Considering I and most other players are still comfortably crushing the enemy anyway, it's hard to take it seriously when people say it's overtuned.
My current playthrough is an arcane trickster ray build. Good offensive niche because it targets ranged touch. Just got done with Blackwater (somewhere people have been complaining about since day one), didn't see an enemy I wouldn't hit on a nat 2. My party is Seelah, Woljif, Arueshalae, Daeran, and a merc bard. Obviously the supports only hit on a nat 20 somewhere like Blackwater, but fully buffed up my regular attackers were hitting on rolls of 2 in perfect conditions, maybe 13 or so in unfavourable ones.
Let's see, my long term buffs (ie. minutes/lvl and longer) are still up. My Seelah has +22 to hit, but then add smite for another +5, outflank another +4, haste another +1, divine favour another +3, eaglesoul another +2, that's now +37 to attack. Suddenly the 40+ AC doesn't seem like much. For some of my other characters with less buffs they can apply, I slap greater invisibility on them, voila, now they're targeting flat-footed AC all the time on top of the +2 for being invisible. If I bothered to use Camellia or Ember I could also Evil Eye the enemy to dump -4 from their AC, fortune myself to get advantage on my rolls.
Oh, and the AC on my frontliners is pushing into the low 40s too. Which meant nothing in Blackwater was any real threat to begin with. All my companions are single-classed on the one they started on, no weird min/max multiclass shenanigans. My main is sorc/rogue/arcane trickster.
Really not sure where the problem is, Owlcat have done a pretty good job mitigating the player's overwhelming strength, yet not make the PC feel weak at all. If the enemies were using their stats straight out of the books, you'd be able to trample over literally hundreds of them without breaking a sweat.
Sure, if you min max as much as you do in unfair or hard, normal will feel easy. (I play on daring, and I feel a huge gap of difficulty between daring and normal, normal being too easy and daring too difficult)
So maybe, Core difficulty should be named challenging, like in Kingmaker, and the error was to name the difficulty below hard "Core", as if it followed the core PF rules
So you're suggesting that Owlcat deviate from the AP monster stats and buff the enemies... which is precisely what they did. Oh, wait, they didn't buff them the way you wanted based on your special snowflake suggestions so this means the changes are bad.
Suggesting the enemies to have more classes in a game where people complain about enemies having way too many classes, levels and HD, making virtually all (properly working) HD-limited spells worthless is a far worse suggestion than anything Owlcat have done with the balance.
And suggesting to buff the number of enemies in a game where sufficiently high AC/save values as well as smart usage of buffs grants you near-invincibility to virtually anything and everything regardless of the number of enemies is a clear indicator that you have absolutely no clue how the game actually works.
I'm glad Owlcat buffed enemy encounters the way they did, because reading your nonsense has made me realize that they could have made it far, far worse.
It's bad design and you should feel bad for liking it.
But even if you don't - just stop calling it "Core" because it's not anything remotely resembling "Core" rules. A "core" GM adds a template or some class levels - not random +10AC and +10 CON and constant concealment just for giggles. PF designers made a lot of broken stuff in the Bestiary - Owlcat can just copy their homework instead of ineptly tring to wing it.
Divine favor is 1 minute duration. Eaglesoul is rounds/level. Outflank is a garbage-tier feat in PNP that only shines in WOTR because mook AC is out of control. Haste and Gr Invis are absolutely-necessary spells but they're limited by how much caster you got.
So... are you just resting after every other fight? And spending the first two rounds of each fight buffing?
You have a solid DPS build but it's a glass cannon that depends on constant resting. That's a tried-and-true build, for sure, but it's also situational and NOT the benchmark for what normal "Core" gameplay would be.
I also breezed through Blackwater. And I breezed through the fight with the skeletons with 44AC - It just ANNOYED me because it's bad game design.
If they wanted the skellies to be tougher - they should have just added more class levels or the advanced template or the bloody template or ANYTHING but arbitrary +10 buffs to random stats.
100% this. I admit that the difficulty doesn't bother me - it's the hubris of calling it "Core" when it has nothing to do with core rules.
Why are you getting angry about this? As if your tuchus were hurt? Why are you so emotionally-invested in the bad design decisions of a video game?
I'm saying they should have buffed the enemies using the stuff that's actually in the Bestiary rather than made it up as they went along.
Don't give a mob +10 CON and WIS and AC. Give it +4 to all stats and +2 AC - that's the Advanced template and it's powerful but actually makes sense. The Giant and Fiendish and Fey templates all work fine too.
There are dozens of templates here - like nearly a hundred: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/
Wait seriously people are complaining about the mobs having too many HD for spells? Are they trying to use Sleep and Deep Slumber? Those are early-game spells. Banishment I could understand but I have no idea why the game is being "balanced" in this way.
And you're seriously suggesting that it would break the game if - instead of 3 skellies with +10 AC - there were 5 skellies or the skellies had +4 to core stats instead???
Core difficulty no editing
I could make a party better min/maxed for action economy... but honestly the game is easy already, why would I bother?
And yes, my main is a glass cannon... that's kinda what blaster casters are. It's not like I'm devoid of defensive tricks too, I still have the likes of shield, mirror image, greater invis, stoneskin, and such, should I need them. It's also not a frontliner, why would a back line character be built to tank?
Outflank is as good as your party and GM. An easy +2 to hit is nothing to sniff at if your GM is balancing encounters right, particularly if you're playing a class that hunts for flanking anyway, and if someone else in your group has the feat economy to take it, it's good. It shines in WotR mainly because flanking is so easy to achieve.
And yes, it is balanced around 6 party members. If it were balanced around being able to quick load, the fights would be considerably more difficult, we'd be seeing another 10 AC on everything.
The only thing I'd agree with you on is the naming. Naming it "core" is a bit of a joke and does bring about certain expectations. But getting mad because they applied a set of arbitrary buffs that's different to the set of arbitrary buffs you wanted? What's the point?
I've been GMing for years now and have given plenty of monsters arbitrary buffs in one way or another. Bit of AC here, some attack bonus there, extra will saves... whatever works really. I could go screwing around with templates and find strictly book-friendly ways to do it, but that's completely unnecessary effort when I know that all I need is a little statistical tweak to achieve the same effect. Never needed to go as far as a +10, but then again I've never run a campaign where the party is as god-tier overpowered as in WotR.
this is the official position of owlcat regarding the difficulty, again the mobs stats are buffed in correlation to the advantages the player gets.
Some of the strongest Necromancy and Abjuration spells (Undeath to Death, Circle of Death, Banishment) are made practically useless, because of enemy level and HD bloat. Evocation spells like Dictum, Holy Word and some others are made virtually useless for all non-lich mythics who cannot stack CL high enough, because of enemy HD bloat. The only HD-limited spell that works well is a spell that is bugged and ignores HD limits (Scintillating Pattern).
There are many people complaining about enemy buff DR (that is a direct result of bloated enemy caster levels which is a result of them having too many levels in caster classes) being too high and thus too hard to dispel.
And yet we have clowns like you calling for more level/HD/CL bloat.
Like, yes, Owlcat still have this strange boomer missconception that the gm (especially the virtual one) has to hate the group and also dont have a really good plan how to do it encounterdesign wise. And also yes, their games are still playable, even enjoyable at some point. for some people. But we have at this point a history of roughly 4 years of this topic, with zero gain for any side. So, whats the point here? That nobody can use the searchfunction?
The game needs to adjust those values to provide the appropriate challenge. A target AC of 44 might be appropriate for level 20 martial characters using magic items from the Core Rulebook, classes from the core rulebook, feats from the core rulebook, ability base scores from the core rulebook, support from only three other characters - all limited to the core rulebook. This game, however .... are you using equipment? Do you have inflated stats? Do you have mythic ranks? Do you have a mythic path? Do you have five other characters that can provide overpowered support?
And, oh by the way, the game offers seven preset difficulty levels plus customizable settings. "Oh no, let me play two difficulty levels above Normal and cry post about it when I find it too difficult not matching target numbers from the early stages of the tabletop game. To support my complaint completely rational point, let me pull from the highest AC creature in the game at the highest difficulty setting which happens to be called Unfair. (might be higher on unfair)"
So, again, when you try to discuss "Challenge Rating", try to know what you're talking about. (i.e. trying to provide an appropriate challenge for the encounter)
To provide a challenge.
True (at least in principle, not the details). The detail is that I didn't notice your post said CR rather than level - pretty much negates the (b) reason I gave in my first response. However, Challenge Rating based on that table does not even come close to an appropriate challenge rating for this game.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2813192610
1) So you're running mercs in your party, which most players - very much including me - don't want to do for RP reasons. OF COURSE the game is going to seem reasonable for you if you're running optimized mercs instead of the garbage companions the game gives you.
I'm not hating on you for doing it. I'm saying you're being disingenuous if you're holding up your game experience as typical for difficulty.
And - even with that - I still haven't had I fight I couldn't beat so my complaint isn't that the difficulty is "high" but that the difficulty is "BULL". AC 44 is for Great Wyrms, not nameless mooks.
2) I don't mean your caster should be a tank. I'm saying that you're compensating for the game's poor design by making an all-offense limited-use build and then quickloading every time you die.
My ideal "Core" rules experience would be one that you could reasonably Iron Man because - if you think about it - all PNP gaming is Iron Man.
3) THANK YOU
4) And that reflects poorly on you as a GM. IF you want a mob to have higher Will etc. then give them Iron Will feat and take away one of their base feats. The game is (often poorly) balanced this way for a reason. Making the rules up as you go along inevitably leads to Magical Tea Party.
Who cares??? Why does a literal nameless mook have 81AC when the actual core rules literal Tar Baphon the Whispering Tyrant has AC46?