|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Planning out a 20 level build is quite ambitious for a first time player, and its impressive that you've done enough research by yourself, considering you've never played the game before. I'll offer some feedback on what you have so far.
I think the unbreakable fighter dip is asking for trouble. Lets say you take a nasty hit and end up at -11 hit points. Because of the Diehard feat you're still on your feet and can act... and are still a threat. If another attack comes your way, your hit points will drop to a point that you will be dead. Not unconscious, but dead. You must have some kind of contingency plan to keep either remove yourself from danger or bring your hit points back up. Honestly, I'd prefer to go unconscious and have several rounds during which my allies can heal or stabilize me.
I would rethink your ability scores. Obviously, with a 15 point buy its hard to get your ability scores as high as you like, but three dump stats is asking for trouble too. With a strrength of 7, your speed will drop to 20 feet if you carry 24 pounds, you're taking a -2 penalty to damage rolls, and depending on the game and your party at low levels you might need to climb things, which is a strength based skill. Dexterity is an important skill for you, but you're sinking an awful lot of points into starting with a 19. Same with a constitution of 16. The HP are great, but I would consider buying a 14 instead. The intelligence is matter of personal preference I think, but considering you already get a lot of skill points it might be overkill with a 15 point buy. Considering the abysmal Will saving throw you're going to have, I would actually recommend getting a Wisdom of 12. The charisma of 5 is also a matter of personal preference I think, but judging by your party composition, you might need to use some charisma skill checks from time to time. But if your sorcerer gets a trait that makes Diplomacy a class skill, then I think that base will be reasonably covered. Use Magic Device is considered by some to be one of the most powerful skills, and that is Charisma based.
And I agree with ChaiGuy about talking to the GM about how tielfings are viewed in his world. Demon blood and charisma 5 kind of screams monster.
I have run a game that included a large melee warrior who had reach weapon. It was a lot of fun the player, and its good to see a player smile when he gets to kick some ass. But for me, the novelty wore thin as the combats became predicable. I don't mind customizing some combats to a character in order to show that the enemies can be smart too, but it became too much. Imagine if, as a player, every enemy you faced had reach.
On the other, I am perfectly fine with temporary size increases. The change of pace keeps it interesting.
Here's the 5 minute brainstorm of how I might do it:
Levels 2, 6, 10, 14, 18:
Levels 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17:
Levels 8, 12, 16:
Levels 19, 20:
I am familiar with Surprising Charge, and based on this suggestion and Cheapy's, I am going to replace the level 8 ability with a new one that gives the bravo a few ways to spend 2 points of elan.
Hit dice and BAB were fine before, I think. I would prefer a medium BAB warrior who seeks to exploit an enemy to gain attack bonuses that put him on par with a front line warrior.
Sneak Attack: you are harkening back to the age of Back Stab, I believe? Again, I prefer a warrior who tricks or gets the drop on someone and tears them to bits, rather that one with guaranteed damage. Thats what meat shields do. I really, really like the triggers for conventional Sneak Attack.
Scoundrel/Trapfinding: How about instead of these, make a half dozen or more "skill specialties". Trapfinder, Scout, Thug, Thief, Con Man, Magician, Diplomat, etc. that the rogue chooses at first level - just one. That dictates the two skills he gets +1/2 level to. Trap finding is included to honor tradition, but I see no need to force it on rogues who want a boost.
Nimble, I like. Fits thematically. Dodge, I would drop. You're now asking every rogue to max out Acrobatics. Besides, with Evasion and Rogue talents, 2nd level is awfully crowded.
Trap Sense I have always had mixed feelings about. Its thematic, but doesn't make much of a difference. Its a tiny bump. At this point, Nimble is almost doing the job of Trap Finding. In anything, Trap Sense should something like "Once per day per three level, roll twice pick the better result". Or, replace it with an increase to initiative. Also, after the onslaught of 2nd level abilities, 3rd is looking pretty light.
Just a few things I noticed.
Improved Eldritch Blast: level 10 seems a strange place for this to enter, and a little strange for a spell attack. I would scrap it and make something new.
Imbue Item: magic item creation doesn't cost XP anymore.
Greater Eldritch Blast: tossing out some extra hp damage as a capstone doesn't make me go "oooh!" At level 20 I would you should stepping on the threshhold of immortality, or legend at least. An ability that sets him above those who are less. An ability that elevates all abilites. If you want to keep the blast though, you could turn it into a swift action, so that he has to use some other ability as his standard.
Hi de ho.
-Additional AoOs per round are now part of Fighting Styles, and increases with the number of fighting styles know.
I really appreciate the MAD compliment, as making it a feature and not a bug, as you put it, was one of my original design goals. Thank you. I had to read the rest of paragraph one a few times but its solid criticism. Now please explain 10-DX.
free-handing: I will implement this tonight.
Kata doesn't tickle me. I'll mull over the name.
Love the Feint-Cleave. Will also work on that tonight.
Acrobatics bonuses/abilities was tied into an earlier draft and removed. Your suggestion though is one I have long seen as a potential sub for acrobatics. I want to avoid building skills into class features any more than I already have, but I will see what I can do.
On the 1-handed weapons/bravo weapons detail:
I can add Combat Reflexes to the list of bonus feats, but I am unsure about adding another mechanic to gain more. Some - such as the one I have played with for the last 4 years or so - GMs don't like to give them up.
Fighting Style used to to be called Stances, and was changed be less swashbuckler-centric. I am open to suggestion of other names though. The single-enemy language came in recently. I will happily drop that, as it has been a headache.
Engaging Feint yada yada. First draft. Expect lots of changes. I pondered the area feint, but didn't want to copy Dazzling Display. I still have an idea or two though. One would use an ability like moving through a threatened square, where each additional target give the bravo a -2. Except it Bluff to feint. Thank you for the input on the effect being based on the current fighting style. It all helps.
-Engaging Feint can work on any number of attacks. However, this is to encourage the enemy to attack the bravo. The free AoO only triggers when the enemy ignores him.
-I'm not particularly worried about burning through elan too fast for parry & riposte, as doing so will make the bravo will miss out on some other cool uses for his elan. However, due to previous suggestions by rainzex and yourself, Engaging Feint will be moving to 3rd level
-Dex to damage was part of the main class a mere week ago. A friend pointed out to me that I had quite a few class features that referenced specific ability scores, and that it was pulling the class in too many directions. I removed about half of them. Would getting rid of that feat fix the problem?
OKAY! Here's my first draft for the 7th level ability. Critique away...
Debilitating Feint (Ex): If the bravo is using a fighting style and deals deals damage with an attack of opportunity granted by Engaging Feint, the creature he dealt damage to must succeed on a saving throw (DC = 1/2 level + Charisma modifier) or be subject to a debilitating effect that lasts 1d4 rounds. The saving throw and effect differ, based on the fighting style he is using:
Aldori (fox): Will
Thanks for the input Cheapy. The language in Fighting Style has undergone a number of changes, and still needs work. I will have to separate that long sentence into perhaps three.
What would you recommend for the Imp Feint/Combat Expertise situation? I don't much care for CE, and have been of the opinion that someone can use a feat to get it if they choose. What do you think? In between v3 and v4 I included a way to ignore ability score prereqs for Bonus Feats, but it was cut.
Are ability scores always capitalized when referring to an ability modifier?
I will include a footnote for non-core feats.
Rainzex, your suggestion is like one that was included crudely in v1 and v2. This is all going into the notes. Thank you again.
"Rogue Talents" or whatnot were an early consideration. I decided against at the time as I did not feel up to the task or creating a enough of them provide variety. More recently I have created another mobile, lightly armorer homebrew class that has a bunch of them. I call it (somewhat unoriginally) the fighter-acrobat. Yes, its a mix of exactly the two things you think.
-It IS meant to be specifically single weapon, also to be specifically a single one-handed weapon. The feats came along late in the process and are not very important, I think. That particular feat is there for the historical duelist who did use a small shield. If it mucks things up too much I can just remove it.
-The parry was something I thought was thematically important to include, as I took two quarters of fencing in college. Your questions deals with something I had to think about for a while. It is meant to be used after the result of the attack roll has been announced. I will see about clarifying. Whenever possible I prefer to be brief, but clarity must come first.
-Grit vs Ki was something I went back and forth on. Ultimately it came down to have a place for charisma and intelligence, but not requiring either one. A bravo who decides to not boost charisma can still use armor and will still gain points to spend. A bravo who decides to not boost intelligence will still be able to use fighting styles. The ones who DO boost those gain a slight advantage.
*Spelling, grammar, and consistency are something I fret over (my dad has a masters in english literature and education, so.. thanks dad). Its hard to catch everything. Thank you.
-I will include language to disallow other multiplier increases. What are some specific other instances that would allow an increased multiplier. I'd like to include at least one, especially if it is from the core rules.
I will take all suggestions for Engaging Feint into consideration, and they have already stirred my imagination. I started on the chore of rebuilding/expanding/moving EF this morning but scrapped my work. I need some time to decide how to best proceed, such as what class feature to cut back or remove if that becomes necessary. I think 3rd level would be a better place than 7th to introduce the idea, but want to include a way for the bravo to willing provoke AoO wit in improved AC. For now I am brainstorming without altering the main document.
I get that, I think its kind of late as well. Mostly I needed a 7th level class feature as I had scrapped the previous two that filled the position. Its actually the last thing I came up with. The "timing" will be at the top of my list of considerations.
This is posted in my Dropbox, as didn't want to open an account for Google Docs. Hope it doesn't present any downloading problems.
Anyhow, this is a pet project I started two years ago, hence version 4. It incorporates feedback I received online from v3, and some from not-online. The short version is that the bravo is a different take on the swashbuckler archetype that does not require dexterity, but can still be used to make a movie swashbuckler. Also, it has a fancy layout.
Robert Carter 58 wrote:
The character is lawful. If a 10th level evil character is just sitting by the river, fishing, on vacation, with no armor and no weapons at hand- and the Paladin detects evil and kills him- that Paladin just committed a VERY chaotic act. He should have to atone.
A very evil act as well, I'd wager.
You need to step up to your job as referee in two ways. First of all, study up on the rules. Minimize your shortcomings before criticizing others. Second, and this doesn't have to wait until you master the rules, you need to own the job you have. The next time it happens, stop the player and "We're not going to do this right now. We can discuss it when we're finished." Continue as you were. If he does it again, tell him again. Keep doing it until he gets the idea. Personally I find discussing the game - non-specific to the campaign - pretty fun when not playing. If he can't trust you, at the very least he needs to respect the boundaries.
On the second point, yes, a spotlight hog is annoying, but again I have two suggestions. A players who is bothered by the spotlight hogging must learn to be more assertive. Not all players mind the spotlight being off of them though. As for you, from time to time, inform the player that he is not done doing something, and cannot be doing the new thing until he is. Alternately, when he gets involved in something you should ask the other players "What are you doing while he is busy?"
A little more confidence and assertiveness from everyone at the table will help out.
I have been in your player's shoes too. In one combat that was going very poorly for us, the DM announced something that happened to me, and I was worried I was going to be hampered by it. There was no attack role or save or anything. I was scared a TPK was on its way, so I started arguing pretty fervently with him. What I didn't know at the time was that the "effect" wasn't anything that penalized me in any way - he was simply demonstrating that a piece of equipment has a special ability, so I would know that it existed. He "broke" the rules for my benefit.
I had an idea for a non-standard combat. The caravan is attacked by bandits, but these bandits are unarmed, ragged, and desperate for food. Too desperate to graciously accept an offer of free food, even. The PCs have to (I assume) find a way to solve the problem without chopped/blasting the enemies to pieces. A good opportunity to utilize unarmed attacks, incapacitation, spells, skills, etc... or simply an opportunity for your PCs to butcher unarmed, starving people.
Having 2-5 henchmen could be fun. The PC saves the day while the henchmen play support and clean-up. "You guys keep the soldiers busy and get the prisoners out of here. I'm going after The Black Knight." None of them need to be great builds or even high level - they just need to be able to survive a hit from time to time. The image of Captain America and his WWII buddies keeps on popping into my head.
Think about the difference in price between buying drinks at a bar vs buying at the store. Assuming "maintenance" drinking while traveling and adventuring in areas where death is a good possibility, as opposed to "we're having a party" or "I have too much downtime" or "I miss my _______ " or "its been too long since I binged", I wouldn't charge the person more than a 2 or 3 s.p. per day. Alkies can lean to medicate in a fairly cost effective manner. Of course, if the character prefers to drink the high end stuff, then charge as much as he wants to pay.
Tengu Verymuch wrote:
Appreciated. Thank you. Having spent several years posting on gaming message boards like this one and on other kinds of message boards before that, I can offer the following nugget, which keeps me from pulling my hair out. While there is an emphasis on "over- optimization", roleplaying is very personal and there is less to discuss with strangers. Also, players who "over-roleplay" are less likely to spend a lot of time of message boards like this one.
Hope that they learn their lesson for next time? If you build your character for nothing but combat then thats what you'll be left with. If you're concerned with the numbers, use traits to add to your skill list and move some points around. Not enough skill points? Stop dumping intelligence. Of course you could always simply make a character you like role-playing. You don't need to be trained in diplomacy to talk to someone. The alternative of course is to make a shallow character and be stuck complaining about it.
OMG Rifts, the years I wasted when the guys I gamed with at the time decided apocalypse RPG was better than fantasy.
Anyhow, the reason I think "What does colorblind do?" is important is that is has been used to apply -1 RP to the build of the race. I don't think role-play opportunity is enough to essentially buy yourself an RP. The drawback for it is very situational, and entirely subject to wether or not the GM decides to make it a thing - more so than a mechanical drawback. Most of the time color-blindness will not severely impact the creature's life, especially when the creature has other, more developed senses. Color blindness can still be part of the race, but call it 0 RP and I think you haven't actually hindered it.
If you want to implement this, then I suggest the you use detail-laden part of the process the couple times through, and then simplify after that. Have your group role-play acquiring materials, finding or preparing a work area, and finally doing the work. Make them roll skill checks along the way as you see fit. As they do this more often, you should assume that the group has ironed out the details and what was once a DC 15 to 20 is now a DC 10 to 15 and no longer needs a check. Or rather, the fun part of this process has already been explored and the game is longer served by allowing for random chance to ruin such a mundane part of the game. Perhaps eacch PC ends up with a niche in the process.
This is correct. The weapons entries for crossbows specifically say they can be used one handed (with penalty), while the entries for rifle, shotgun, etc. do not. The specific rule trumps the general rule.
That being said, it makes sense thematically/cinematically (if not realistically) to fire a shotgun one handed and I see no reason why a house-rule friendly group couldn't implement something.
I played a rogue a few years back. In one combat, I hopped off my horse and landed in a flanking position next to an enemy who just attacked my ally. Dunno what got into me but I said out loud "I grab him, snake two fingers under his nose and say this is what your mother smelled like! And..." then the dice rolled and I basically turned his spleen into mashed potatoes with my dagger. Combat came to a stand still for about five minutes while everyone at the table regained their composure. My character's RP had them laughing quite a bit on a regular basis, so they had already been set up for a one-liner.
I'm going to sneak a question in on this one, basd on my latest reading of the Stealth (Hint: I haven't been keeping up on the Stealth eratta).
If a creature with sneak attack has successfully used stealth to hide, such that it's enemy is denied its dex bonus to AC, can that creature use the charge action to move out of hiding, attack the enemy, and still get sneak attack damage? That wasn't phrased as clearly as I hoped so I hope my intent is clear.
I assume the OP means that the party splits up and each PC uses Stealth to reach a predetermined destination on their own.
If I am correct, I would avoid drawing out a tactical map until it is necessary. If you are in a town, draw an overhead map roughly to scale and allow the players to maneuver their figurines through it. You decide how often they need to roll. If it is an area with a limited number of paths, such as a dungeon or cave system, then you'll handle it on a case by case basis.
The point is not to cause the party to fail when someone gets a bad roll. A better idea is to implement a consequence other than failure. Perhaps one PC has bad luck being Stealthy, and as a result, he arrives later than the others. The party has to decide to move ahead without him at the opportune time or to wait. If they move ahead, then maybe he misses the first combat in part or in whole. If they wait, they will have a tougher obstacle to face.