|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
The nature of feat chains and specialization will always make it so that planning out characters is the best choice to make a mechanically strong character. If you want to put in the effort you could adapt a system that doesn't have a lot of features and feats with prerequisites and reveal different options the character can choose as the game progresses, but that's quite a lot of effort to quell such a minor role playing offense.
There are many character personalities that are unwilling to advance down specific paths which are presented in the campaign because "it's not their schtick." Sometimes a player's unwillingness to diverge from their character's predetermined path is a reflection of the DM's inability to entice the player into choosing something different, which means the DM is at fault as well.
The shadowdancer prestige class requires you to have a few weak feats and then offers you a lot of redundant and/or weak features while granting no good source of increased damage. The only thing that makes the prestige class worthwhile is the hide in plain sight feature, but that's hardly worth the loss in bab, level progression in another class, and three feat taxes. You're better off playing a caster or a ninja if you want to do things deceptively.
Yes you need to make a concentration check; however, it seems silly to punish a player even more who's already gimping himself by choosing to juggle.
You might want to invest in a +5 sleight of hand item gloves that have storing or are treated like a bag of holding, just so you can access to your wands, scrolls, wine, juggling objects, etc.
Mystic theurge is a weak prestige class because you sacrifice spell progression for the sake of gaining extra spell slots, which in many cases is redundant due the spell overlap in pathfinder. Something somewhat analogous would be a fighter with feats with bows and swords; sure he'd be more versatile, but there's a reason why most people don't invest feats into both melee and ranged feat trees, because it's spreading your resources to gain versatility, but makes you lose potency. There's a big power difference between a character that can cast 9th level spells and a character that can cast 7th lvl spells from the arcane and divine spell lists.
I didn't really need the translation, but I was more so speaking on the behalf of the pathfinder forums.
There are very few people on the pathfinder forums that know how to code, let alone understand perl pseudo code. If you're going to post pseudo code you should probably orient it to look more like C.
Doomed Hero wrote:
Assuming that all spells with fluff descriptions using components like projectiles can be intercepted by martial characters simply by using a readied action what stops someone with the spell magic missile from critically intercepting the spell? If we do start treating more spells like projectiles what stops a monk from just using deflect arrows liberally and redirecting fireballs? You're making it seem like the bursting the bead is what causes the fireball to go off, not the caster choosing for the fireball to go off. If you think as such what stops someone from farming fireball spells as fireball beads by using a monk and a wizard?
A flask of holy water is a pint(bless water) and weighs 1 lb(equipment). If you use a dust of dryness filled with holy water it can hold up to 100 gallons, or 800 pints of the liquid, which is 1600d4 worth of damage assuming your DM allows it; however, the rules seem to be unclear how holy water works in vast quantities, nor does it really clarify what happens when you drop a splash based weapon onto someone instead of making an attack with it; dust of dryness says that it absorbs water, which might not include holy water; your DM may question where the 800 pints of holy water came from, let alone the 4000 lbs of silver used to make it; and many DMs may find it ridiculous that you're spending 20850 gp on a 1600d4 attack.
Even if your DM doesn't allow for such shenanigans in your game having an unseen servant or familiar with a bag of holding drop a few of them on top of an outsider still does a good amount of damage and can make or break a fight.
Summons grant flanking, deal damage, take damage, absorb an opponent's actions, activate traps, and have their own skills and spells that can aid in other situations. While some spells might be more powerful than summons in certain situations it's safer to summon creatures in most situations then it is to cast other spells, especially if your party likes to engage in melee.
Talk to him about how "artificially increasing SR, HP, and AC to compensate for your party's stats is going to cause a TPK." If you DM continues to create TPK encounters then ask him to step down as a DM and to be a player instead; since, many people aren't meant to DM and many players lack a DM's perspective on roleplaying games.
Ask for their maximum hp, saves, and ACs then figure out what they're best at when it comes to combat by looking at their spells and class features; if they're best at handling multiple targets then throw more creatures that are weaker at them, if they handle a smaller group of targets then throw that at them more. Calculate the CR for all of the encounters that have gotten out of hand and see if they were a lot higher then you expected. Ultimately you need to look at each of your monsters and think how each of your players would be able to handle them.
A spellcaster at higher level doesn't have 15 minute days, ever. You have access to so many spell slots which allow you to address situations that most casters are better in most regards than a martial character. You just need to put a small amount of effort into magical resource management and think how much effort to I have to exert to get through this encounter with positive HP.
The way your race is built right now is more powerful than the merfolk or the human; therefore, you should revise it. Reduce the stat bonuses, its land movement speed, and remove the bonus feat. There's also the option of playing a undine, even though their outsider type make their overall RP build suffer and makes them an inferior race. Though, if you don't care about that then they're a perfectly fine race to play.
James Risner wrote:
That's why it's a hypothetical question. I'm wondering how I should handle a character going around grave digging for strong skeleton corpses.
Magda Luckbender wrote:
At first, I was asking if there was any rules that I didn't know about, but now I want to know what would be fair for me to give a necromancer while not being too overpowered. Telling me that there are roleplaying repercussions doesn't help me balance his options and it assumes that every campaign setting will look at necromancers in the same light. I really want this necromancer character to work for him, but I'm not quite sure what I should initially allow him to raise in terms of HD.
You'd also add the charisma modifier to it's health as well since it's an undead. Oh, its BAB would be 13 instead of 21.
What type of corpses do you think would be reasonable for me to have him able to raise? I was thinking his CL roughly equal to their HD.
Hypothetically there's a level 5 cleric with desecrate, animate dead, and the feat undead master. This causes the character to have a 36 HD animate dead pool. What stops the character, beyond me saying no, from raising a high-CR, 18 HD creature under his controls such as the Ice Linnorm? What does a skeleton Ice Linnorm lose from a regular Ice Linnorm? I know he won't find high CR HD things, but I'm still concerned this will become a problem in the future.
The person either doesn't give a s$+# if he deals alright damage, feels that to play a rogue his class must be a rogue, and/or doesn't understand the flanking mechanics. I honestly don't see anything wrong with giving him advice to play a ranged "rogue" or suggesting for him to go melee, but the odds are that he won't follow them.
Running diagonally is terribly inefficient in pathfinder/3.5, you lose 10.3" every two squares that you move. What we really should do is keep a running tally of the total squares they've moved diagonally and multiple it by 2^(1/2) to determine how many squares they can actually move. Or you could just say every square is the same and be done with it, I don't know.
Distant Scholar wrote:
"Still use" XP? You make it sound like getting rid of XP is a logical, natural extension of roleplaying, and that if one "still use[s]" it, one is an immature RPGer. I don't particularly like the implications in that statement.
He isn't implying the experience system is outdated, but that he doesn't use experience. I've never really seen a great use for experience in home brew campaigns.
I haven't been playing with XP for a while in my real life campaign; it really doesn't serve a purpose beyond giving players an idea of when they're going to level up and sometimes creates level discrepancies. We've just resorted to leveling up after X number of sessions, which saves time doing math and dealing with some players having more experience than other players.
It depends on the melee character, the crit range, the crit multiplier, and the type of campaign. A 20 x2 weapon isn't typically worthwhile to get keen on, granted, most players don't use weapons with low crit ranges and/or multipliers. You could also have a campaign on an elemental plane where a lot of monsters are immune to critical damage.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
I've never seen a party rest for the night because they've taken too much damage. It's usually because the caster has ran out of spells, they want to wait until morning to do something, or they have something afflicting them beyond HP loss.
You can take Qinggong Monk and Zen Archer together, look into the FAQ. "A qinggong monk can select a ki power (see below) for which she qualifies in place of the following monk class abilities" His skills are insignificant to defeating the monsters itself and therefore most of this scrutiny is pointless. There's a reason why he hasn't picked most of his powers, because he either didn't replace the features or felt it was unnecessary for the build itself.
Chris Self wrote:
A crit range of 14-20 isn't possible.
Good ideas, guys. I did think of the feint route, but it feels so constricting. A full-round action just to get a sneak attack in is preventing me from doing literally anything else. Disarming, while less consistent in success, could benefit my entire party, while giving me (long-term) better action economy. Not to mention that I absolutely love the idea of sneaking onto the Governor’s estate disguised as a gardener, and when it’s time for action, no need to get my weapon, I already have this spade! I also considered rolling Bard, and that’s still a possibility. However, the campaign we’re playing in has been extremely social, and Rumormongerer will probably be very helpful. I do agree that my disarm rolls will be subpar, though. Are there any items/builds that would help level that roll out?
Rumormongerer is a fluff ability that can be simulated with diplomacy, a bard can do everything your character wants to do as a rogue and he'll be better at it. There's a mundane item that makes disarming a pointless technique. I'm not saying that disarming rogue isn't cool, there's just no mechanically sound reason why your character wouldn't be a bard other than to put rogue at the top of your character sheet.
Point buy and here's why:
1)Large attribute discrepancies can make the player who got shafted feel not as useful because attributes influence nearly every aspect of the game. A player with a thirty point buy and a ten point buy can be a huge difference in their ability to contribute to the party. I've seen it happen time and time again where the high-roller(normally myself) has significantly more skills, abilities, and access to feats due to how I rolled than a couple other players solely because my stats were better.
2)Rolling isn't as random and organic as people claim it to be. Every DM I've met will let you reroll if you get terrible rolls, most of them will allow you to place them where ever you'd like. This is hardly random, or organic character generation.
3)People that intend to optimize will always put their lowest points in the stat that means the least to their character, regardless if they use an array, roll stats, or use point buy.
4)I want the players to feel as if they have the same ability to pull off certain builds as anyone else in the group.
The eidolon stat block you provided would be considered pathetic in most groups, there are builds at first level that can do double that amount of damage per round and still aren't considered overpowered. I'm not talking about optimized builds, I'm talking about builds that are considered to be normal. It's not the eidolon that's overpowered, it's that the majority of the party is exceptionally below the curve. If you honestly feel like the party balance is being threatened then sit down with the group and allocate attribute bonuses to those that you think need it the most to keep up with the summoner, you can just increase the CR a little bit if necessary as well.
K177Y C47 wrote:
Because usually having 6+int skills in pathfinder when spells exists is redundant, people put too much value on skills because they're used to them and enjoy them mechanically, but the vast majority of encounters don't require you to have an absurd amount of skills points. Detect lies and sense motive are overlapping class abilities that don't make up the power level gap between 6th and 9th level spells. Bane ability has nothing on save or die spells and the utility that a cleric brings to a table. It's not that the cleric does the inquisitors job, it's that he can be flavored as an inquisitor and be more versatile.