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

Black_Lantern's page

987 posts (1,633 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 987 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

If you don't care about the fluff or soul gems then the imp is definitely the mechanically stronger choice by miles.

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.

The players were aware of an assassin following them and decided to split up individually and go into the middle of the night one by one, so I'd say they were being incredibly stupid and deserve to die.

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.
After all, health is really only relevant in combat at high level play since casters have many items and spells to buy them time to heal themselves and the rest of the party. Though, martials are definitely more consist, which makes having 1-3 in a party of 4-6 useful. The martial characters ensure that the casters can do their s#*% so that the martials can do their s~@$ better, it's simple. The only real way to stretch a caster's resources at higher levels is to make them participate in five or more combats a day, consistently, which means most of your days just consistent of combat.
I've started to appreciate mid level play more as I've participated in DND and Pathfinder games, simply because it feels like the sweet spot of balance between martials and casters that leads to less conversations about power discrepancies and more fun conversations about the game.

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:
Black_Lantern wrote:
level 5 cleric ... a high-CR, 18 HD creature under his controls such as the Ice Linnorm?

Why did you give him a corpse?

If he killed the CR 18 in his party, then let him. If you dropped a corpse on him, it is the GM's fault.

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.

What about a skeleton ice linnorm?

Val'bryn2 wrote:

Actually, the hypothetical linnorm would have about 126 hp. 18 racial hd, +10 for being a colossal zombie, multiplied by 4.5 for average HP, which should technically be 5 as it is for PFS, still makes it 126.

Which also means a BAB of 21, and similarly heightened saves.

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.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

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.

CommandoDude wrote:

Any melee character should have a Keen weapon. You increase your chances for crits from 1/20->1/10->1/5->1/4

1/4 chance to crit is pretty powerful, but even going from 20 to 20-19 is huge - especially on x4 weapons or with crit feats (and you save yourself from having to spend a feat on Improved Critical!)

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.

Divine Hunter Paladin is definitely the way to go.

"An awakened animal can't serve as an animal companion, familiar, or special mount." It will not gain the benefits of being an animal companion and neither will you. You may treat it as what an awakened animal would be from the bestiary/MM.

It really depends on your DM and other players on how viable a character is. You should probably go quadruped for your medium eidolon if you're convinced on making a suboptimal, medium eidolon.

Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Ughbash wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
You shouldn't allow the item at all. Unlimited healing isn't in the game for a reason.
Ok, I'll bite... what is the reason?

Because it eliminates the role of a healer and the scarcity of healthy that ultimately is what forces PCs to rest.

Let me put it this way: In 3.5 there was "cure minor wounds" which was a cleric orison that cured 1 hp. This was removed in Pathfinder because orisons and cantrips have unlimited uses now.
Infinite healing was removed for a reason as it makes everything else less useful. Why would you EVER brew a potion of cure light wounds if you could just have a cleric/druid/oracle/inquisitor heal you up to full after combat anyway?
Considering that healing should be done out of combat anyway infinite healing makes all other forms of healing obsolete. Basically you move into modern game design where each encounter is not designed around depleting resources but instead to kill the party.

With infinite healing there is no reason to have anything lower than an epic encounter since the PCs are effectively invincible so long as they do not flat out die.

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.

Bodhizen wrote:

If you take a look at his build, there huge are problems. I'm looking at the level 20 build, and first off, his 14/14/14/7/17/7 (20 point buy) is invalid. Assuming that as a human, he put his +2 into Wisdom, he only spent 14. If he put his +2 into any one of his physical traits, he'd end up with 17 out of 20 spent.

Redacted Paragraph:Secondly, he can't take both the Qinggong Monk and Zen Archer archetypes together, as they both replace Diamond Body, Still Mind and Tongue of the Sun and Moon.

Thirdly, his feats are all screwed up. As a level 20 qinggong/zen archer (if it were even valid) human monk, he should have 23 feats, not 21 as listed, and... Stunning Fist is not a special attack and is therefore not a valid selection for Ability Focus.

Redacted Paragraph:In his gear, he'd have to have Bracers of Armour +8, not a Vest of Armour +8 (unless it was custom allowed by his GM), he's got a Headband of Inspired Wisdom +6 and a Headband of Vast Intelligence +2 (he cannot wear both, so this must be a custom item), a Ring of Protection +5 (and counterspells; not sure where he got this secondary ability added in) Ring of Evasion (and counterspells; same as before, unless it's custom), and unless the Vest of Armour +8 is allowed by his GM, the Greater Bracers of Archery wouldn't be valid.

His skills and attributes are off, too. His Wisdom only reaches to 32 (not +38), his Fly would only be at +9 (not +17), Heal is +16 (not +17), Perception is +40 (not +41), Sense Motive is +16 (not +17) - he's got all these unaccounted for luck bonuses... And with his +5 hit points every level (choosing skill points so that those line up properly), he's averaging 5.65 hit points per level on a d8 roll. This armour class only reaches to 52 (not 53) with ki, 48 without. That, and his ki pool only goes up to 32, not 33. Plus, no darkvision.

Redacted Paragraph:He only picked 5 of his 11 ki powers so far as I can tell; Ki Arrow, High Jump (bringing his jump to +59, not +71), Perfect Self,...

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.

For the company to stay afloat they must publish more content, which is sometimes splat book material.

Chris Self wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
Kobolds get easier to play when you accept the fact that you personally, as the character, should probably never expect to deal real damage with a melee attack, unless there's magic involved.

I pretty strongly disagree. A crit range of 14-20 plus 6d6 sneak attack damage seems like a whole lot of melee damage to me, particularly when I can do that 4-7 times in a round.

At low levels, yes, you are right, the stat penalties on kobolds make them pretty bad in melee. But in higher levels, those stat penalties matter very little, in my experience.

A crit range of 14-20 isn't possible.

Cuup wrote:
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.

There are many instances where you could modify swift actions so you can trade down for them and just make a clause in overpowered swift actions that doesn't allow them to be performed multiple times a round. Maybe you might think that's too much work for your campaigns though. -shrug-

It seems to me that instead of modifying the rules for flanking you should introduce rogue talents that alleviate the problem.

Are you looking for poison that's actually functional in combat or are just interesting? It's quite a feat to have either one of those properties for poison, let alone both.

Mirror Mephit.

Use magic device is an excellent thing for rogues to have.

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.
It's not fair to player A if he doesn't have high enough stats to make a tripping fighter like Player B does just because he can't afford to spread his stats to strength, dex, etc.

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:

Ok, what is with everyone saying the witch could be done with an Archetype? The Witch is NOTHING like the wizard, sorcerer, or the oracle. Sure it cast spells, but it's spells are drawn from a familiar, not some stupid book (like wizards). Additionally, the patrons are pretty cool and flavorful. Oh, and the hexes are actually pretty cool. They are things that none of the arcane spell casters can really replicate in the way the witch does.


4+int mod skills
Ability to drop detect lies on a dime
Monster lore which is pretty much bardic knowledge, but just for the most useful knowledges....
get a bonus to things like sense motive.
bane ability on demand
and judgments (which are just cool and flavorful).

As for the Magus, JUST SHUT IT. The people suggesting that just multi classing fighter-wizard really don't know what they are talking about... Sure, EK becomes viable... eventually... But he tends to stay fallen behind the Magus for a while. Additionally, no other Gish builds can ACTUALLY dual-weild a spell and sword, of which is actually a popular trope...

Honestly, I hate when a GM says they are limiting classes to CRB only... All that means is that the GM is too non-proficient to understand the other classes, is too close minded and dislikes a class purely over petty things (like disliking the Ninja class because "its too asian" when you can simply rename is Assassin, Sulk, or anything else), Or the GM has poor system knowledge and believes the other classes are "too OP"... (which is funny because most of the powerhouse classes came from the CRP i.e. Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, Barbarian, and Paladin)...

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.

Serves no purpose as a class in pathfinder when the paths, modules, and character creation are focused around making good characters. There's the problem that antipaladins are weaker than their counter part as well.

Alchemists are thematically cool, great switch-hitters, moderately versatile, and are an excellent addition to any party; however, half of the time people build them to deal ridiculous amounts of SA or bomb damage that leads others to dislike the class.

The Mounts should be more adaptable to the terrain their in and should be stronger. These classes could be Fighter/Paladin archetypes.

The pathfinder touch attack mechanics are striped directly from 3.5, and therefore are broken; this leads to an interesting situation where you have to find ways to increase touch ac or negate one of the gunslinger's main mechanics without causing the caster in the party to fail hitting the opponents the majority of the time with rays. There defenses might be too high.

The class feels strong enough mechanically, but looks pathetic when compared to a war oracle.

Feels like the spiritual successor to the duskblade, but feels moderately gimmicky if it attempts to keep up dealing the damage other characters are doing in combat.

The class is an attempt to fix the mechanics of a rogue, but still relying drastically on the mentality of the creation of the rogue, which is terrible.

Oracles are excellent because they're like favored souls, but done right.

This class is very polarizing in the community, primarily because the class is easily abused, has access to powerful spells earlier than it should, slows down combat, and feels like the spiritual successor of the Codzilla druid.

They are thematically cool, but really serve no purpose as being an actual class, they could of been an oracle, wizard, and/or sorcerer archetype. They lack versatility of other spell casters and their abilities can feel useless really fast in some encounters.

mimimi wrote:
Black_Lantern wrote:
Falcar wrote:

Full Orc fighter/ranger/paladin on a mount with spirited charge, weapon spec, and power attack against the favored enemy of an evil undead while Smiting 1D8+2 WS+6 PA +9 (1.5 STR) +2 FE +4 Smite =31 X 3 =93 and it ignored all DR. This also has very high chance to hit with a 7 BAB weapon focus, charge, favored enemy and smite (if positive charisma) giving a 12+ charisma bonus. That's about all I have right now, I'm sure there are others that hurt more but this is a strange character that can really hurt.

Or swap out fighter for paladin 6 ranger 1 to get
8+2+12+9+6 (37 X3 =117) (33.5 X3 =100 damage on average)

I think you're confused, he said no stats, so the exercise is pointless for martial classes to participate in.

Edit: I don't even know how one casts spells or qualifies for feats without items or stats.

we all know you can do point buy to get max a stat for damage, so they can still compete, but in reality, would you dump a stat to get something to +5?

I'm sorry, but the exercise makes no sense without incorporating stats and isn't fair without buffs and items.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Is there any feat that's spawned more threads than Eldritch Heritage?

Prone Shooter.

Falcar wrote:

Full Orc fighter/ranger/paladin on a mount with spirited charge, weapon spec, and power attack against the favored enemy of an evil undead while Smiting 1D8+2 WS+6 PA +9 (1.5 STR) +2 FE +4 Smite =31 X 3 =93 and it ignored all DR. This also has very high chance to hit with a 7 BAB weapon focus, charge, favored enemy and smite (if positive charisma) giving a 12+ charisma bonus. That's about all I have right now, I'm sure there are others that hurt more but this is a strange character that can really hurt.

Or swap out fighter for paladin 6 ranger 1 to get
8+2+12+9+6 (37 X3 =117) (33.5 X3 =100 damage on average)

I think you're confused, he said no stats, so the exercise is pointless for martial classes to participate in.

Edit: I don't even know how one casts spells or qualifies for feats without items or stats.

Power Attack man, martial characters do so much damage. Leadership, it's just too much work to deal with it. Fey Foundling, an incredibly viable feat with no real drawbacks or requirements.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who says an experienced rogue doesn't have the ability to look for multiple openings while they're attacking? I don't understand this from a mechanical or realistic stand point. Do you want the rogue to be an NPC class, or are you convinced that they actually have something to offer that spellcasters can't already do?

memorax wrote:
I get that some traits are more powerful than others. Yet Trapfinder makes taking a Rogue while not obsolete just not needed in q gaming group anymore. All that is left is sneak attack damage and some Rogue Talents. Not saying rogue Talents are useless. Except some are good, some bad, some too situational. A regular bard with this trait truly becomes the Jack of all trades.

The rogue was never needed in a gaming group, casters fill its role easily.

I've always had the mindset that poorly made up caster nerfs aren't the way to address power discrepancy between the classes; rather, it's best to encourage casters to cast spells that don't end encounters and allow for their martial party members to participate in combat; however, if casters fail to recognize the queues you give them then you distribute gear that suites the martial classes more so than the caster classes. Perhaps I'm mistaken though, there might be some easy house rules that fix power discrepancy between the classes without shafting the full caster classes.

Eptaceros wrote:

I don't think i'd choose bard because the concept of playing music and whatever seems entirely against the character personality/design i'd have in mind. The character would think that sort of business is for dandies and whatnot. Unless there's an archetype of a bard that doesn't 'perform' but then if there is, what's the point?

The human idea is a good point. I was thinking of something like an aasimar or possibly tiefling, but like you said, logically they would have a harder time blending into crowds/social settings.

You don't have to have a bard that plays music, instead your bard could bard could whistle, rap, hum, or even do a jig to use his abilities.

How does one determine alignment shifts or measure the moral severity of an action with an objective alignment system? How's D&D alignment objective in practice when everything within the system is subjected to a GM's discretion?

Do actions that cause alignment shifts affect the alignment caused by the helm of opposite alignment or the character's original alignment?

My recommendation is that you slightly increase the difficulty and see how it goes. Usually the first couple of combats can be used to evaluate the party's strength.

trollbill wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Can you define glass cannon?
If you can't survive a full round of your own attacks, you are a glass cannon.

Sometimes, but there are some builds that are sturdy and can deal massive damage.

Who else is going to be in your party?

Things that grant more class skills should grant something else in your campaigns.

The difficulty of a pathfinder campaign is entirely dependent on the DM; however, I would say that in most campaigns you can get away with suboptimal builds.

I think that you're spending too much time worrying about the language and not the feeling of isolation. If you want to develop a sense of isolation you should focus on creating different customs and cultures. If you're still really worried about them learning a new language then make a language progression chart and as they're exposed to the language make them roll linguistics checks to see how much they've learned.

Summoner, Wizard, or Druid.

master_marshmallow wrote:
One things for sure, Will is the most overrated save, y'all could probably get away with dumping WIS completely.

It really depends on the GM.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The creatures of the night are far more frightening than some bandits.

1 to 50 of 987 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, 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.