|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
If anything, your character appears to be slightly on the weak side for a Level 13 optimizer.
Like I said, I didn't try to optimize. Our gunslinger probably actually does more DPR than me. I just get to essentially look scary and mean with my dervishing around enemies. If that was all my character was it'd be fine. The fact I'm a master summoner throws a kink into everything. I could solo fights. Whether or not any MS can do that is debatable but it's more that I can solo fights and still fight well myself. That I'm basically a synthesist with mass summoning potential is a bit broken to me, though.
Gregory Connolly wrote:
If you had lost your Ranger instead of your Wizard this post would be unnecessary.
This is likely true. I've never had the limelight on me to any degree and I kind of feel like the defacto leader to a great degree and that's uncomfortable. In talking to one other party member he was fine with it and said I should suck it up and use all the tools I have. Another player who regularly gives me s*+% said he's fine with it and just gives him s!!& because the character needs given s!*@. :D My problem is GM relations but I've not gotten any kind of negativity from the players.
Not dire, just tiger. But, yeah.
Fake Healer wrote:
You were building this PC over the course of his career and had to see earlier on that your dude was outclassing the rest of the group and start seeing how the GM was struggling with it. Why didn't you dial it back BEFORE it became a real issue?
Actually, no. There was an incredibly optimized evocation wizard that made me look like I was peeling potatoes during combat. I would do nifty, useful things but he was what basically finished fights. Other than the dimensional dervish line because I wanted a really cool trick, my leveling choices have been more "that's cool" and less "ooo this raises my DPR by 50!!" I really didn't try to optimize because of the template and summons. My MO on leveling choices have been "don't need it" more often than not. I've been holding back in several ways.
I sent my GM a text asking about getting rid of lycantrophy so we'll see how that goes. It really is the source of the brokenness. Summons are huge, yes, but that would normalize my PC compared to the rest stat wise.
To kind of clarify what I mean by pulling the group out of fires, my GM is fine with that. He's not okay with the fact that, as a summoner, I don't have to risk myself doing it. If I couldn't sit back and throw gobs of healing at a PC, for example, and had to navigate the thick of battle using acrobatics and so on to deliver a heal spell or whatever that'd be fine. He prefers there to be an inherent risk to such actions and my character avoids that entirely.
I have a level 13 natural lycanthrope (human, tiger) master summoner. My GM didn't realize the hybrid form a) made me large and b) let me retain usage of my gear. He was thinking the gear would absorb like any other polymorph effect except the lycanthrope version has an exception for hybrid form. To be clear, he's fine with him being large in isolation.
So, I'm this high physical stat and mental stat character (a synthesist, essentially) doing W+17ish damage per attack with dimensional dervish and a +4 adamantine waraxe, using scrolls like a boss with a +44 UMD, claws that are law and good for DR, and summons particularly suited for encounters as he has the summon good monster feat. Compared to the rest of the party he's OP.
I really do try to play him down by keeping summons to a bare minimum and stick to essentially his weapon attacks and items. I've roleplayed this as he treats summons as if they're the actual creatures themselves since they can technically feel pain, have alignments and knowledge, etc. so he doesn't "abuse" the ability to call them at will.
My GM doesn't like the power disparity since he has to either target me else I just destroy things while they're distracted with seemingly more armored PCs (he's got a 41 buffed AC with glammered armor so he looks like he's just wearing normal clothing). Thing is, he's heavily invested in the group. He only takes things from loot that the rest of the party can't use or use well and I try to have him take last from loot splits except for the few items basically made for summoners and always poll the group like "does anybody mind I take x?" He just seems to meld into all the cracks and can use them to great effect. I did get rid of an item that was "too broken" for the build: a set of gloves of the commanding conjurer.
If I just take him out of the group there's a power gap as there's no fighter type character and a potentially great loss in gear value in the group. True, he could just slough off all his gear and go about his way but that makes no sense for the character whatsoever. He's LG with a mission to fight evil, a Ragathiel wannabe in many ways. Even then, the group with his pile of gear is largely ineffectual due to a lack of UMD in the party and no other arcane caster or not being front liners themselves and selling it would not make up for the value they otherwise bring. So, that's not really an option. It'd feel good and be a great gesture but at the end of the day the return on investment would be minimal.
I guess what I'm looking for is a way to transition him out without being a detriment to the party as he really does help pull the group through the fire so I can't just eschew new gear we come across entirely. The replacement character I'd have would be a similar front liner type to not let that role go unfilled in the group but other builds wouldn't benefit from his gear as much. His feats are nonstandard to build guides and there are better options for a fresh character any way.
So, do I force my GM to just kill him through normal play or is there a switcharoo tactic I'm not seeing to bring in something more even keel for the group?
In the aboleths case, never use them RAW out of the bestiary. Give them class levels or advance their HD to represent their "real world" purpose. I see the bestiary aboleth as the lone, "young," not trained version of his kind unlike the other monsters which are already more or less good to go with their intended role. Aboleths are puppeteers and schemers. I've also never seen an aboleth in any Paizo materials not have class levels.
After this last beta weekend and getting into Cyrodil for a large part of the weekend I think I've changed my mind. This is the first game I could get excited about PvP. It's not just mindless slaughter for ranking on a ladder (though it is, just on a very elaborate ladder with "tangible" achievements). I got a feel of purpose to it, and given the entire game is geared toward that war mechanic, it made sense and felt very natural.
The deal with the story hints and backgrounds to things in modules and APs is that is one of those areas that are incumbent on the GM to weave into play and present to the players in ways that make sense. Modules and APs are not meant to be played as is out of the box. They can be but they come across flat for reasons.
Something I've found, too, with the archetype is that if you actively avoid made the multi-limbed monstrosity then you have evolution points out of your ears. Your only choice is to give it a lot of skilled evolutions, or resist/immunities, ability increases/etc, OR you can go large and eventually huge. Going the latter feels more broken because you have skills out the rear (my master summoner has a +44 UMD at level 12 from just aspect + normal build) or basically nothing can hurt you which perpetuates the view they're broken. Or you're a large creature with crazy looking ability scores. It's really a challenge to make the archetype feel like it fits in a 'regular' group.
I wouldn't advise dumping physical stats down to 7 or 5. Even when you're not merged, you still need to be able to carry your gear which includes consumables like potions and scrolls which can get heavy quickly. Handy Haversacks do have maximum limits and bags of holding are still very heavy for low strength characters. This is a gamble. Personally, my synthesists have kept str and dex at 10.
Dex has AC implications outside of your eidolon suit. That's the major balancing factor I see. You need an entire contingency around when you're not in your ediolon. This is probably one of the most handwaved things I see associated to the archetype. When people talk about it the assumption is you're in your suit. The fact of the matter is that cannot be assumed. You have to plan for when you're not, not if you're not, in your suit.
They like Golarion as a setting but from what I see they don't like giving options to players unless it's prepackaged in the books. So, they don't give players the custom options most of the characters you read about in the APs, tales books, etc. All you'll ever have in their games is just your class features and numbers.
I had a player once accidentally activate a portal to the plane of fire. Every few seconds I just rolled damage. On the third roll he wanted to go back. :D He barely made it out alive. I had him roll a reflex to see if he could escape before taking damage that round as I had already rolled it but hadn't announced. The party saw their comrade appear before them as a charred unconscious body.
I can't in skyrim equipped a cheese wheal in two hands and attempted to sunder my opponents weapon, but in PF I can. Sure the rules say (improvised weapon, sunder attempted), but a GM can go "the sword cuts your cheese in half" even though there is NO SUPPORT for that in RAW.
You haven't looked through mods enough, I see.
I hate "GM may I" interactions. Whenever I run into a situation where I'm told if I can come up with a cool background for it or I'm otherwise expected to tap into another person's head to justify something I want to do I just move on. It saves a lot of arguments and headaches and is not what I look for when I play Pathfinder.
Puppies are int 2, maybe 1. Int 7 may be a little slow but not what's classically regarded as retarded at all. They know what they're doing. I'd also not allow it if I were GMing. Said 'paladin' would stop being so in my campaign as no deity would grant them said abilities with that kind of outlook for no other reason than no deity wants their powers in the hands of a fool who can potentially wreak havoc in their name AND have their powers to do so.
If I were to allow it, it would probably come in the form of a skill check that you couldn't take 10/20 on. Probably a DC 25 know(arcana) or some such that you had to make every round. Or, simply treat it as a standard action every round you wanted to not hit your friends to concentrate and not do the skill check.
Note: I did say this often has practical problems, as demonstrated there...but he still seems to be a Paladin right up to the end. Just not a very bright one.
So this kind of thought exercise is how we cull the "too stupid for their own good" kind of paladin? Cool. Makes me question why their god gave them powers in the first place, though. It also makes me question how they got to level 15.
I'm unsure to pitch this one to you or Jason. Here goes...
Given all the alignment threads on the boards, what's your take on how that system is perceived?
Would you rewrite it or simply add additional details to better define the sandbox of what each alignment represents?
I mean, after all the materials Paizo has put out about alignments I think I have at least an okay grasp on what you guys mean for a given alignment, but I'm SURE there are others that think differently than me and have read the same material.
Uh...how is walking in and conquering the place himself not 'right of conquest'?
Uh...because good doesn't kill just because they don't like you. Good respects life.
And any LE authority is pretty definitively hurting innocents or, well, they'd be LN instead. Plus, most Paladins aren't gonna consider a LE authority 'legitimate'.
Tell that to all the paladins in Cheliax. There are lots. It's even a center for the Iomedean faith. Furthermore, no one said they themselves were harming innocents. All evil takes is harming and oppressing. Your victims don't have to be innocent. Like I said, if they were merely being paid off, they wouldn't be guilty of the crimes themselves. Even so, there are a ton of LE towns in Golarion and no where will you find an official source having paladins lose their s**# just merely passing through one.
Now, there are certainly Paladins (probably most of them) who wouldn't do this sort of thing for all kinds of reasons...but simply being a Paladin does nothing to make you not do this.
Yes, it does.
The book seems somewhat ambiguous about morality in Golarion. What's to stop a 15th level Paladin from rolling into some small LE town and killing all the corrupt local officials, effectively forcing his morality on them through force?
His code. He must respect legitimate authority. Whether it was through inheritance or conquest, they are the leaders in that community. He doesn't have to like it but he has to respect it. Also, good doesn't kill just because you don't approve of something. If an innocent was threatened the paladin can protect them. If it's just taking money to not notice illicit activities then the paladin can't do squat.
James Jacobs wrote:
The resolutions of the maps in the PDFs are as high as the resolution gets. To do higher resolution ones would require us to have ordered the map at that resolution, which isn't really viable for us for file size management and other reasons.
I'm sure there are other considerations like cost. However, please, don't discount the digital distribution channel. I started my career in printing and digital was often an after thought or something that came later. There are amazing ways to couple the two worlds that aren't that expensive with what you get in return and often are their own revenue streams.
Kain Darkwind wrote:
Ok, but saying "Sometimes people aren't on the same page" is not a legitimate argument.
Sure it is. Proper context is crucial to any debate. If someone can highlight that opponents are using different contexts then the debate is moot. I'll point out many political debates where nothing of real substance is worked through but is merely a barrage of accusation, riposte, and retort that looks good. Election periods in the US are notorious for these kinds of debates. The debates that stay on point and actually try to get something done are likely to come from organized forums like a congressional subcommittee.
The context here is a spell that easily says you very likely can get wish consistently far lower than you could cast it yourself and for far cheaper in a way that gains you further free castings. Some guidelines on the scope of what that spell was meant to be used for would be very beneficial. It's not a new rule. It's a clarification on how the current rules work. Thus, an FAQ and not errata.
If you've already answered this just ignore it.
What's your take on the situation when a follower of a mythic characters dies when that follower has chosen the character as their deity to received spells and the like?
Does that mythic character have any claim on the soul itself? If so, what sort of implications does this have, if any, on the mythic character as souls are often a currency of sorts for the outer planes? Where would they go?
To explore this scenario would you have to reveal aspects about the nature of souls as they're tied to deities that you're not ready to reveal?
I understand GMs always can do what they want in their own worlds but I'm always curious to see how your vision looks for such things.
Certainly. Nothing stops someone wanting to make a simulacrum of an efreet expecting access to wish either. The only thing stopping it is the GM. The thing differentiating the two is that planar binding prescribes many ways a bound creature can potentially escape or have other ramifications. Simulacrum has no such provisions and even the higher binding spells don't modify how the process works at all except for the HD of the outsider you bind. Simulacrum is simply "do this, get this" with no buts or clauses. Thus, when comparing the two, it deserves a set of guidelines for various scenarios.
It is a very reasonable stance to not touch it as a GM given the distinct lack of those same features of planar binding. To say the mind boggles is a bit of a stretch and leads me to think you're not looking at all the variables.
Planar binding is a dangerous game. It falls into a spectrum of a) you just got the spell and are low enough level that using it should give you pause or b) you're high enough level for planar binding to have almost guaranteed success but you probably also have access to scrolls of wish or can cast wish yourself.
I've toyed with having sorcerers cast all their spells like spell-like abilities. This is always seemed to fit better with the flavor of the sorcerer. I never understood why they needed rest or had to perform the other components if their power was, in fact, innate to their blood or force of persona. It'd also make them markedly different from wizards rather than just "spontaneous and no spell book." It'd require SPAs to work a little special for them in that they just get a number of SPA slots they can then fill at the moment of casting and allowing metamagic to work with SPAs for that class.