Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Shoanti Tribeswoman

Arachnofiend's page

Organized Play Member. 3,998 posts (4,615 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 Organized Play characters. 8 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,998 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

There's the Celestial Totem line, but it's... not great. I think a Celestial Bloodline Bloodrager is probably the best choice for this concept.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
George Erickson wrote:
Isabelle Lee wrote:
Derklord wrote:
While we're at it, may I ask what other weapons you wrote for AA2?

Certainly! ^_^

I actually wrote all of the new weapons and armors, and was responsible for adjustments to those reprinted from older sources. In addition, I wrote all of the weapon and armor modifications and associated options, as well as a number of equipment tricks, special materials, alchemical items (including the concoctions and their table), and other assorted items. If it appears in the Implements of War, Alchemical Wares, or Equipment From Abroad sections of the book, I was responsible for it. It was a pretty big project.

I apologize: if my ??'s have been covered.

When designing the Hornbow and Butchering Axe; was it intented to create the new high damage dealer? I understand the rules you followed & don't see a problem based on the systems use and how the rules could be used to create them. Why though create two wpns that are now top of the food chain damage dealers? Other than you could, was there a consideration for the catastrophic dmg repercussions when paired with feats, spells & size that these (2) weapons could have on the natural order? Such as Giants? In a world that is supposed to be primarily Human, what were the reasons to just supplant humanities weapons w/ Orc weapons? How were the Orcs w/ numbers and these weapons ever subjugated by any race?
I appreciate the work and effort for the jobs you have taken on, I also love the creativity. I remember as 3 & 3.5 started introducing items, weapons, & armor. They allowed some very injurious ideas into the system, that were always changing the *New* Hot Weapon, Feat, Spell, or Class that players aimed for. With a new campaign starting my players are all angling for these wpns,which to me is a huge warning sign. We are all Power Gamers @ heart and if I was still playing I would also... Hence my sincere concern and questions.

Thank you, for your time and patience....

They don't supplant humanity's weapons because they're Exotic and cost an extra feat. The butchering axe is probably still not as good as the falchion outside of Vital Strike builds, even.

Personally, I'm glad to have a couple more options other than the falcata and fauchard that make EWP actually worth the feat.

Telekineticists can do a pretty good Jedi impression.

Oh yeah, a martial buffer is the Spheres of Might Commander or just anyone with the Warleader Sphere (Commander does it the best, though). Exemplar Brawler works for Paizo stuff, too.

It's weird to see people waxing poetic about the Vindictive Bastard. I thought we decided that "you can have a non-LG Paladin but all of her class abilities get nerfed" was bad with the Gray Paladin?

At least the Sin Monk turned out pretty interesting.

I think an artificer could just be an Occultist archetype, really. You can do the concept pretty well with just the base Occultist already with some minor re-fluffing.

There's the Keleshite Princess trait, though A) that locks her into being Qadiran and B) bonuses to charisma skills aren't terribly useful to a wisdom based ranger.

Smite Evil is magic that requires a particular alignment, so yeah, you can really screw a Paladin with this.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rosc wrote:

What I would like to see in 1st party (and would be willing to explore 3rd party for)

- Some kind of mechanic style class for Pathfinder.
- A damage-over-time class not unlike WoW's affliction worklock. Kineticist/Witch hybrid?
- The Oozemorph, but with more clearly defined rules and an ooze shape that isn't a weakness.
- A more socially acceptable take on the Synthesist.

The Spheres of Might Technician works for a mechanic class, and can be used as a Synthesist since one of the abilities you can pick up lets you build and get inside a big mech (there's an archetype that focuses in on that too, iirc). The Dueling Sphere offers a DOT-based playstyle by letting you stack bleed damage but I imagine you're looking for a more castery take on the concept with your examples.

Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Avoron wrote:
Vaellen wrote:
At 11th level a vital striking barbarian is doing about 6d10+30 (63ish) while the pouncing barbarian is going to be hitting for 2d10+30/2d10+30/2d10+30. Even if he only hits twice that's 82 damage.
Take a look at the beastkin berserker archetype. At 11th level, you can turn into an arsinoitherium, grab Improved Natural Attack (gore), and attack with Improved Vital Strike and Furious Finish (rage cycling) for 150+ damage as a standard action.
Yeah but that kinda just goes on to prove his point, the Barbarian is pretty much raw damage and nothing else, while the bloodrager is much more flexible, Which unless you wanna go full hulk smash on someone most, are gonna prefer the one that's the most adaptable.

The hell kind of Barbarians have you been building? Barbarians have plenty of rage powers that grant excellent utility abilities beyond raw damage.

leaper182 wrote:

In the #121: The Lost Outpost, the adventure notes specifically mention that that the GM can request a "wish list" from their players, especially for magic items they'll want in the future, so that they can be seeded in loot drops.

The only trouble is, when dealing with players who either aren't familiar with Pathfinder specifically, are playing a class that they're not incredibly familiar with for the first time, or with the concept of tabletop RPGs, how would they know which magic items they would need at later levels?

As for crafting times, I've seen a few places so far in the first two books where the adventure says, "There's a gap of a couple weeks, which is good for crafting". And then there are at least two NPCs (the alchemist and the blacksmith) who could probably make things, provided the PCs made sure to be on good relations with them.

Just my $0.02.

A player with very little system knowledge is unlikely to come up with a build that relies on specific magic items, to be fair. If nothing else the Big Six is always useful (though I'd hope the AP is written well enough to supply those regardless since, well they're kind of necessary).

I'd agree with the Unchained Summoner, but remember that the Base Summoner was essentially a 9th level caster hiding in a 3/4 BAB chassis with all of the early access spells he got.

Merm7th wrote:

Wizards are okay until they come up against a character with UMD and access to 1,650gp. My brawler spent all his money I scrolls of antimagic field(after buying armor). Loved casting it, giving himself step up, and beating the casters to a pulp.

Enemies with antimagic field come up in just about every non-PFS game I've played.

"The best way to beat casters is by casting at them" isn't exactly encouraging, all the issues with this plan aside. I dunno about you, but when I decide to play a Brawler it isn't so that I can spend all my money faking being a Wizard.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Unchained Barbarian's utility got butchered. No Spell Sunder, nerfed Strength Surge... there's probably way more than that but I try not to think of that abomination too much.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you'd have to pick a specific type of improvised weapon. Weapon Focus (Tankard) would be a valid choice, for example.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
The most ironic thing to me is that for all the complaint threads about wizards being overpowered, the screeching when people suggest altering the game world or encounter system to make things harder for them and more favorable to martials with limitless day to day abilities gets pretty intense.

Okay but like, adding weak encounters that nobody has to spend any resources to beat doesn't actually make the wizard less strong, it just means the wizard doesn't need to do anything in that encounter (leading to the wizard player being bored out of their minds). I feel like all you've accomplished is making sessions more tedious.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Reksew_Trebla wrote:
Dastis wrote:
Hmmm. Who values freedom more than life? Who values life more than freedom?
If you die, you lose everything by default, INCLUDING YOUR FREEDOM. This makes valuing life over freedom as the CLEAR correct choice.

There's plenty of people who have made the decision that dying free is better than living a slave.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So what, are these half dozen extra encounters just pathetically weak trash clearing events? Because otherwise I don't understand how the non-casters are getting through without dying with the casters just straight up not participating in case something more troublesome comes along. HP is a limited resource, too.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Not having either Fort or Will sucks but is something you can fix, not having either of them is a huge hole to climb out of. I'd be saying the same thing about the Swashbuckler's crappy defenses if the topic was about that class.

The Rogue doesn't get the jewels because they're rigged with an Alarm spell that he has no way of even detecting because it's not considered a trap. You'd want an Investigator for that.

The Barbarian can take as much charisma as she damn well pleases because Superstition makes her will save incredible, and since the Barb has plenty of arguments for building for Intimidate she might as well grab Diplomacy as well. I've certainly built Barbarians that could serve as a party face.

Okay, so you've proven that the Paladin has excellent saves. I think you're kind of missing the point of playing a Rogue if you think all of them should be Paladins, though.

Oh, for sure. I've always maintained that the Paladin and Barbarian are in an entirely acceptable position, balanced against the gold standard of the Bard in terms of overall power and utility; the BBEG will throw fits when he finds out the Barbarian AM SMASHED the dominate person right off of his favorite minion.

Unfortunately the Wizard/Druid/Cleric are still leagues ahead of the Paladin and Barbarian, but that's because the 9th level casters are too strong, not that the Paladin and Barbarian are too weak.

Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Thunderlord wrote:
Wouldn't gender bent Nathan Drake be Lara Croft. That someone is a paizo author who's name you'll see at the bottom of the archetype. Archaeologist is cool but I also recommend the Dawnflower Dervish archetype for more melee viability.
See i would have considered that if it wasn't for one tiny not sure how well the faith of saranrae would be with having a thief/assassin in their fold even if they do serve the greater good.

The Cult of the Dawnflower is a largely TN organization of highly militant "worship Sarenrae or perish" types. The iconic Slayer was raised and trained by them, and he left the organization because the last orders he received were too evil.

You obviously don't have to go full "are you entirely sure you worship a Good deity" with your character, but I'm bringing up the Cult just as an example that Sarenrae's worshipers do employ underhanded tactics.

dysartes wrote:
Omnius wrote:
Gallant Armor wrote:
Also if the BBEG knows about the all powerful wizard who is single handedly beating all of his enemies, they will assuredly use mindwipe, spellcrash, night terrors or other effects to make the wizard less viable.
That is fully and freely admitting that one member of the party is SO OVERPOWERED that you have to look to them personally and declare rocks fall, you specifically die, you are no longer allowed to play. And that's TERRIBLE GMing, and a sign that the game is TERRIBLY balanced.

Firstly, Omnius, you really need to take a breath - when you've resorted to RANDOM caps LOCK to try to make a point, you've conceded defeat already.

Secondly, maintaining verisimilitude within the game world is not abusive GMing. Given the scenario posited by Gallant Armor above, an intelligent BBEG absolutely should be figuring out ways to target those he (or she) views as the biggest threat. If the few minions who get away are talking about the powerful wizard, that's who he'd be looking to target - and if they were talking about a might Fighter, a cunning Rogue, or a saintly Cleric as the biggest problem, I'd expect them to be the target instead.

The Fighter or Rogue are never going to be as much of a problem for the BBEG as the Wizard or Cleric, is the point.

As much as I personally adore the kineticist I'm not sure I'd hand a level 12 one to a new-ish player. The kineticist has a LOT going on in the build game that can make it daunting to put together if you don't know what you're doing.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slim Jim wrote:
Slyme wrote:
Sounds an awful lot like some people in here have no idea how to play a rogue...I know, its hard.

It's not that hard. The real problem is the inclination of the player to treat the class (indeed, any class) just as a DPR mechanism (and basically stop at that point) rather than as an encounter-solving total-package. I'd be a rich man if I had a nickel for every rogue concept I saw that was strength-optimized but didn't contain levels in a rage class to augment.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many players simply refuse to talk to NPCs, or avoid extraneous fights versus lootless monsters by looking for paths around them or just throwing them some food. Rogues tend to be good at coming up with these solutions, provided they're not cha 7 humans played by int 7 humans.

~ ~ ~

Greystone wrote:
The only reason will saves was brought up is comments like 'rogue is super, totally awesome because evasion!!!'

Wow. Is that what it actually looked like to you when I wrote (verbatim quote post in its entirety): "Getting straight up killed by AoE damage is still actually a thing in this game, and it happens more often than you'd think. So, core vanilla rogue remains a better choice than a lot of things out there. in a post right after one about ninjas (who don't get evasion)?


Rogues don't have any reason to boost charisma, and doing so can be a detriment because it eats into point buy that can be used for the wisdom and constitution you so desperately need to not die. Why would I ever pick a Rogue for my party face when I could take a Bard, or a Mesmerist, or an Inquisitor, or... You get the idea.

It's honestly hilarious that you bemoan players who see classes as a "DPR Mechanism", because basically the only thing the Rogue has is high DPR in ideal, theoretical circumstances. The Rogue's utility is abysmal compared to any of the good classes, from the Barbarian upwards.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
I thought the answer was so obviously "yes" that Paizo released a revised summoner in pathfinder unchained.

To be fair, just because Paizo thinks something is overpowered doesn't mean it is (remember that they swung the nerf bat on the Barbarian with Unchained, too). In this particular case I agree with their decision, though.

Childeric, The Shatterer wrote:

A lot of people on these forums will tell you all about how to dip (or not) to gain (or prevent the loss of) that extra .0001% more power/effectiveness from your character.

What I'll tell you instead is that it depends on if your character concept can be accomplished with a single class (or archetype) or not.
Many, many concepts can be accomplished with a single class, picking a specific archetype and judicious feat/skill selection. However, some just cannot be accomplished without multi-classing.
For example I wanted to use vortex spells with my Magus spell-strikes and the only way I could find to make that happen was to dip a level of Oracle (wind).
Whether that was because the combo I wanted doesn't exist in a Magus only build, or that my search-fu is just sub-par is another matter.

A bit tangential but your example doesn't work because you can only Spellstrike with spells from the Magus spell list. The general idea that dipping can be useful to evoke a character concept that is otherwise impossible is sound, though.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've had the most fun with the Occultist and Kineticist, I think.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

A fantasy world that is just sad, pretentious elves and nothing else.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jhaeman wrote:
Someday people are going to cite threads like this as proof that Pathfinder got too complicated for its own good :)

Eh, the complication and huge list of options is what many of us like about Pathfinder. If we wanted a simplistic system we'd be playing 5E.

I understand why they made the butchering axe not work with orc weapon familiarity, but I don't think they thought that through very much because all that managed to do was make it a more attractive option for humans and half-elves than for orcs.

KingOfAnything wrote:
Secret Wizard wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Secret Wizard wrote:
Oh, is there any new armor types, btw?
anything that shakes up the medium armor max dex/AC ratio?
The Nimble armor modification costs 1000gp (1500 to add to magic armor) increases max Dex by 2, improves ACP by 1, and reduces the armor bonus by 1 (unless you have a feat).

This is bad for the same reason Armor Training is bad. You'd have to put it on Full Plate to get genuine value that isn't better done with a lighter suit of armor, and then you're playing with 16 dexterity which is not enough for a dexterity build and too much for a strength build.

Rysky wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Flutter armor! made of scarves Look pretty and baddass and gain a boost to AC when you move.

This is going to be really nice for people using Spheres of Might for hyper-mobile play. Not sure how useful it'd really be for baseline Pathfinder though.

Rysky wrote:
Improvisational Healer is cool, and great if you put ranks in heal even with access to magical healing.
I'm probably gonna be as disappointed in this as I was in the Healer's Handbook, but... details? Does it actually help with anything you can't do with just a CLW Wand?
It does a couple of things, but the main thing I saw was boosting potions with your Heal skill. So magic and mundane working together for a greater outcome.

Hmm, that's a pretty interesting idea. I'll have to see the full text myself but it might be worth considering.

Even if it isn't, there's a lot of cool stuff in this book for me to be excited about. Ruffian's Riff is something that I have waited for for a very long time.

Rysky wrote:
Flutter armor! made of scarves Look pretty and baddass and gain a boost to AC when you move.

This is going to be really nice for people using Spheres of Might for hyper-mobile play. Not sure how useful it'd really be for baseline Pathfinder though.

Rysky wrote:
Improvisational Healer is cool, and great if you put ranks in heal even with access to magical healing.

I'm probably gonna be as disappointed in this as I was in the Healer's Handbook, but... details? Does it actually help with anything you can't do with just a CLW Wand?

...Maybe? The one you get at BAB +6.

Weirdo wrote:
Note Focused Shot takes a standard action, so it only works if you don't full attack.

Furthermore it doesn't work with anything that triggers on an attack action such as Vital Strike. It's a neat idea but unfortunately does not cut it unless you expect the campaign to end before you get your first iterative.

The Mithral Chain Shirt is 44x more expensive than studded leather, I'm not going to be too torn up about it being better.

Lucas Yew wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.

I am proud to be a backer for the book! :)

Anyway, last time I checked DDS' forums, I was shocked to see someone who wanted out-of-combat abilities booted out of Spheres of Might, which is exactly the opposite of what I'd like to happen to martials. Wonder why did that person think like that...

They're a secret wizard, obviously, who feels their party role of "all of the party roles" is threatened.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.

First off, I'm super excited for the new Slayer archetype, it's great to see something that is both very strong and very flavorful. I'm curious to know if the writer played Horde in Warcraft 3, haha.

On a more topical note, I'd like to know if there is anything that allows you to use charisma for atypical purposes other than the already mentioned Witch archetype?

LuniasM wrote:
Personally I don't see Fatigued (-2 STR/DEX) as a big deal - it's a very minor debuff to accuracy, damage, AC, and Reflex for a turn. Plus the sphere includes a method of bypassing the penalty and there are no restrictions on curing the effect either.

Any penalty to hit is pretty bad; just think of how amazing the +1 to hit from Inspire is. It can be a fairly significant penalty to damage for a STR user if it brings your ability modifier to an odd number, too.

The martial focus mechanic sucks pretty badly, though that's a known and agreed upon factor since it's getting changed. Maybe what they will do with it makes fatigue a desperation move you take when you really need an exertion, sort of like a kineticist nova'ing and blowing a bunch of burn.

The more I look at the Berserking Sphere the more I don't like it... Fatigued is an awful penalty, especially for the 2-handed STR characters that would normally be drawn to this sphere.

I'd like to see the exertion mechanic replaced entirely, to be honest, and replaced with something else. I'd recommend rewarding the Berserker for getting hit; tanked AC compensated for with large amounts of DR and temp HP is already one of the Cool Things Barbarians do, expanding on that further than the Berserking Sphere already does could make it feel a lot more fun.

A good guideline is that if a save is absolutely devastating to the party for you to fail, it is probably a will save.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Type out your character sheets by hand in Notepad or no balls

Grovestrider wrote:
Wraithguard wrote:

I was thinking of a Knack for the Scholar that allowed you to add Int modifier to AC and CMD, a sort of Cunning Defender, but limit it to the Scholar's level (like the Kensai Magus) or a level requirement to push off level dipping for it.

Too powerful?

I believe the Dev's have been discussing the prospect of making an Equipment talent that allows you to add your Practioner Ability Modifier (PAB) to AC and CMD; Which I completely support BTW.

So do I think it is too powerful? Not in the slightest.

This ability needs to be worded so that casters cannot steal it; should Swashbucklers be getting charisma to AC? Absolutely. Should Sorcerers? Absolutely not. I wouldn't be bothered if having 6th or 9th level casting (or the equivalent of spells for SoP) barred you from using the talent entirely.

Oh damn, I am absolutely making a tough b+~+~ orc who wades into melee with a shotgun.

Lady-J wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

If switching clerics to charisma casting, then just move their channels per day down to 1+charisma like the oracle gets.

i wouldn't say that that is necessary they have an archetype that makes them cha based without changing their channels per day

I mean sure, but instead it only channels to harm and takes a -2 penalty to saves vs. mind-affecting effects which is much, much worse.

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Barbarian: F+&#-murder train of anger. Almost exclusively melee DPR without specific archetypes. Can spend rounds of her combat buff for extraordinary utility abilities.

Bard: The OG buff bot, but remember: you're buffing yourself as well, so you can easily stand side by side with the other melee DPR classes. Not as good of a pure mage as you'd think.

Cleric: Can do literally anything, except be fun at parties. Have a real life dagger prepared for when people assume that you're just their healer.

Druid: A Cleric if instead of being tied to a god clerics turned into dinosaurs.

Fighter: A martial class that offers endless possibilities but has exactly one possibility. Can be made functional with a sufficiently large number of splat books.

Monk: weaboo fightan man. The go to class if you want to punch people, but with the same caveat as the Fighter.

Paladin: The class for people who want to be completely invulnerable to any and all GM horse s~%*. As compensation, it gives the GM Paladin-specific horse s#+* to ping you with.

Ranger: Fighter with some Druid spells. Far more functional out of the box, a very good beginner's class.

Rogue: The class for people who have way more confidence in the usefulness of skills than they should. Unchained version is 100% required and makes you a secondary DPR that can debuff enemies.

Sorcerer: A Wizard for people who'd rather be sexy than overpowered.

Wizard: For people who relish the irony of being the most overpowered class in the game without doing a single point of damage. Can make the Fighter feel very good about himself.

Alchemist: Can either be a melee DPR machine with mutagen or a ranged DPR machine with bombs. Yes you have both, but no you cannot build for both.

Cavalier: It's a Fighter with a horse and a lance. Alternatively it's a hobbit with a dog and a bow, which is actually far more terrifying.

Gunslinger: For when you want the smug satisfaction of completely breaking the bestiary and are willing to trade out doing anything else of interest for it.

Inquisitor: A Cleric who trades out being overpowered and gets to be fun at parties. I hope you like melee DPR because that's what you're doing.

Magus: A Fighter that gets to use spells to instantly explode an enemy a few times a day.

Oracle: A Cleric who is the MOST fun at parties. Arguably gets the most in terms of not-spells stuff for the 9th level spellcasters.

Summoner: You know what a Summoner is. I don't have to explain what a summoner is

Vigilante: A Fighter that gets class features. There's also this weird "dual identity" thing, but nobody really cares about that.

Witch: There are two types of witches: the type that either instantly wins the encounter with a single Hex or spends the whole combat with her thumb up her butt, and the type that is a Wizard that won't stop f~&#ing laughing.

Antipaladin: The exact opposite of the Paladin in every way, including quality. Possibly the worst spell list in the game.

Ninja: Used to be a better Rogue. Then Unchained came around and made the Rogue not suck, and now the Ninja is just a s!!!ty Teisatsu Vigilante.

Samurai: A weaboo fightan cavalier. I hope you like katanas because you are using a katana.

Arcanist: A wizard that is slightly easier for a beginner to play.

Bloodrager: A Barbarian that gets a little spell casting instead of rage powers. Weighing the second worst spell list in the game against the best class feature given to any full BAB class, and it comes out just about even. Thanks, Paizo.

Brawler: A Monk who signed up for punches, not weaboo fightan. Is better when you know what feats you can pick up with martial flexibility, but not by as much as you'd think.

Hunter: For people who would rather play their animal companion than their character.

Investigator: The true skill god. The rogue's wife says the investigator's name in bed, and sometimes, the rogue does too.

Shaman: For when you want access to the biggest variety of spells of any class. Fair and Balanced(TM).

Skald: A bard, except he's super mad. He's so mad that he doesn't play nice with any of the classes that usually love to have a bard in the party. Barbarians especially hate him, and this just makes the skald even madder.

Slayer: A Ranger without all of the naturey bits. If you've ever thought of showing a new player the Fighter, give them a Slayer instead.

Swashbuckler: The Fighter, except he cut off one of his hands. Not actually required to be dexterity-based.

Warpriest: An Inquisitor who's even better at smashing faces but went back to cleric-levels of being fun at parties.

Kineticist: The game's premier switch-hitter, being very powerful in melee while giving up hardly any of her ranged prowess. The trade off is that you have to kill yourself. Not as much of a weakness as you'd think.

Medium: Jack of all trades, master of none. For when you want to fulfill every possible party role, but not all at once (that would be a Cleric or a Druid).

Mesmerist: For that a~~%#*+ in your group that declares a roll for seduction at every man, woman, or ghoul he encounters. I don't actually know anything about this class

Occultist: The blingcaster. He casts with his bling. Again, very good in melee combat.

Psychic: Literally just a Wizard again. How did they get away with this

Spiritualist: For when you wanted to play a Hunter but your animal companion is f$*#ing dead.

I hope this helped

Cyrad wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Charisma is the weakest of the three mental stats in terms of sheer gameplay value; swapping any of the Int or Wis-based classes to Cha would be a minor nerf, so there's no need to worry there.

As I said before, it depends on the class. For an arcanist or cleric, that's a significant buff because it makes them less MAD. And as some of the strongest classes in the game, these are classes that definitely don't need a buff.

Every class is designed around the ability scores they rely on. It's a bad idea to change the ability scores without considering the impact it has on a class.

The Arcanist and Cleric are a good point I didn't consider; making them charisma-based would certainly have an impact on their overall power level. I would say those classes are the exception rather than the rule, however. An Inquisitor like the OP is asking about gets very little from pumping charisma over wisdom, especially since a face-oriented Inquisitor can just take the conversion inquisition.

An interesting idea thematically to be sure; one thing I will say though, is that in terms of first party Pathfinder there is essentially just one way to build a gunslinger. Four DPR machines that contribute basically nothing else makes for very dull and clunky combats in my experience.

Spheres of Might might be worth a look; I've played with it before with great success, you can get a lot more build variety out of your martial characters with it. Something worth considering at least.

Charisma is the weakest of the three mental stats in terms of sheer gameplay value; swapping any of the Int or Wis-based classes to Cha would be a minor nerf, so there's no need to worry there.

1 to 50 of 3,998 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.