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

Craig Mercer's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 140 posts (2,105 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Pathfinder Society characters. 5 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So what is the Tier 1 scenario this season?
And is it offered at GenCon?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thanks.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am familiar with Pathfinder, and have gamed with it several years.
I do own (in Hardbound and PDF) many of the books.
But I am new to PFS itself (just starting to try an online game of it on these boards).
It was just that looking over the GenCon listing of games, I did not see many 1st level tier games at all. (If that is the correct way to say it). And so I was wondering if there is any at GenCon and I missed seeing them, or if all the games were higher level.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I hope this is in the right forum...
I'm interested in trying Pathfinder Society at GenCon, but have never attended or played PFS.
So I would be starting with 1st level characters.
But most of the games I see listed are higher level.
Are there starting games that are run, or would I have to play pregens for anything I was interested in?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You might try playing the free modules, "We Be Goblins" and "We Be Goblins Too" first, before Runelords.
Both can introduce the Pathfinder goblins to the party, and show what heart-warming ('cause cold hearts don't taste good) little monsters they really are.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Understood, James and Mike.
But since it was done once before, I felt like asking if it could be done again. I understand that it takes time and lots of effort to do such, and the effort is no different between print or web-based.
It's just that sometimes print page numbers can cut out worthy material (as in the Lady's Light) that can see the light of day as a Web Enhancement.
I understand that that is not always the case, and not everything cut is worthy of the additional effort to bring it to light.
But I hope there is no harm in asking, even if the answer is no.

And Mike's short description of the encounters should be enough that I could insert them if I wanted to. Thank for the bits of ideas, Mike.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If it could be arranged (as has been done before in the past), can we get these cut encounters of Mike Shel's in an on-line document?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Besides using their own guards and traps, the magic shop may make an agreement with the Theives' Guild. Paying a "fee" to the local Thieves’ Guild pays off well.
You pay a reasonable set fee, the Guild makes money that it doesn't have to "work" for, and "questionable" magic items can be bought or sold without notice.
No Guild thieves rob you.
And the Thieves’ Guild then has to make sure no one else robs the store, lest its own reputation suffer. So they set people to watch the place, which also help tip them off to wealthy adventurers that show up too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If you really want a place to put dinos in Varesia, I would recomend the Rift of Niltak.
Very foggy valley, basicly unexplored, and the few that do manage to come back from explorations are all insane.
A few volcanic vents to make it nice and steamy warm (and dangerous to get into and out of), swamps and warm lakes, dinos and snakemen and lizard tribes and whatever 'Land of the Lost' stuff you want to put in.

And then you can just do horrible things to his character if he decides to go there. Because everyone who went in never came back out, or came out insane (which is why you have snakemen and lizard tribes to perform the sanity bending worship of 'elder gods' to cause insanity or death).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I have to agree with others that if you have the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition, run that.
It is one of the better PAs, set up for Pathfinder (the earliest PA are for 3.5 and need translating into pathfinder), and there are plenty of player produced ideas, hints, and extras to go with it.

Rise of the Runelords also is basic Fantasy; fights against goblins (fun little buggers), giants, dragons, and evil wizards; saving good folk from evil; travel to far off dungeons; etc.

And Rise of the Runelords does have a fairly easy to follow plotline for the most part. While not being a railroad adventure (since there are many ways to deal with how to go about things), it does follow a fairly straight plot, with the bad guys manking moves that the players will have to deal with. And there is still plenty of places where the players can take time out and do their own things (and a GM can insert his own adventures in). The area around Sandpoint has a fair amount of adventuring possiblities in it, and Sandpoint itself has a lot of detail for players to interact with.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would guess it has to do with Wizard flexibility vs Sorcerer flexibility.
The Sorcerer will only ever know those 9 particular cantrips, and learn no others. Those 9 are it for his entire career.
The Wizard will have 4 a day to use, but can change which cantrips he has every day (or every time he memorized new spells).
So while not having a daily spread as large as the Sorcerer, the Wizard has more flexibility to choose which cantrips he might need.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Wiggz wrote:

Simplest fix in the world, and common-sensical as well...

Track ammo.
Ammo is basically free and weighs nothing, it's no more a concern than spell components in a pouch.

I just want to say this about ammo. If you track ammo, you will find that it isn't like spell components, it does creat problems.

Someone had pointed out that their player Ranger archer was killing everything. Broken down, he had 3 attacks (12th level), Rapidshot, Manyshot, and Haste cast on him. 6 attacks a round. I pointed out that with a standard quiver, that was 3 rounds of full attacks. Even with an Efficient Quiver, that was only 10 rounds. And then he would have to stop and pull out a bundle of 50+ more arrows to reload. How many bundles of arrows did he bring? And in a long grind, where you don't just hop back to town for more arrows (or you do, and the bad guys get to reset because you invaded and left), you have to carry all your arrows with you. Including those cold iron and silver arrows (that you want to only use against DR foes.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Craig Mercer wrote:

It might be there to help those people who keep complaining about a lack of skill points with their Fighter.

Fast learner requires Int 13, so Int can't be the dump stat.
It gives them the HP they always take for favored class.
So instead of having 2 skill points (1 for Int 7 and 1 for Human), they have 5 skill points (3 for Int 13, 1 for Human and one for Fast learner).
Or they could take Toughness and put the favored class point into skills for the same result and take a 12 Int instead of a 13.

They seem more inclined to take the HP from Toughness and the HP from Favored class, given the choice.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It might be there to help those people who keep complaining about a lack of skill points with their Fighter.
Fast learner requires Int 13, so Int can't be the dump stat.
It gives them the HP they always take for favored class.
So instead of having 2 skill points (1 for Int 7 and 1 for Human), they have 5 skill points (3 for Int 13, 1 for Human and one for Fast learner).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

As both a player and a GM, I've seen it ruled that it can not exit the door at all, which means it's reach does not extend beyond the door either.
Which makes a wonderful hint to the players that it is trapped, as it takes a bite at one of the characters outside the door, and they see the fangs stopped just inches away from their face by a sparking barrier.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Reecy wrote:


It does not affect Flanking Feinting or any other Effect that would create the Flat Footed effect. You can be sneak attacked and forced Flat Footed...

Flanking does NOT cause flat-footedness! It gives a bonus to hit and allows for Sneak Attack damage.

Feint does NOT cause flat-footedness! It removes a target's Dex bonus (if any), which is one of the conditions needed to use Sneak Attack.
Neither of these conditions forces flat-footedness.

Going through all the rules for Invisibility, you find that it does the same thing as Stealth, with a bonus to Stealth.
And since Uncanny Dodge means that the character does not lose their Dex bonus to Invisibility, then the character does not lose their Dex bonus to the lesser effect of plain Stealth.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Quote:
Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had total concealment.
Quote:
Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Stealth checks when not moving (even though opponents can’t see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual or auditory clues).

So both Stealth and invisibility give you total concealment. Invisible characters get a bonus on Stealth rolls.

If invisibility does not work against Uncanny Dodge, then Stealth (which is the same mechanic as invisibility) does not work on Uncanny Dodge.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Take a look at what invisiblity does.
It adds a huge bonus to your stealth roll.
If having a huge bonus to your stealth roll does not allow for dex loss due to Uncanny Dodge, how does having no extra bonus to your stealth roll suddenly give you the ability to inflict the same dex loss to Uncanny Dodge?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
spectrevk wrote:
As it is, I may just have to give them a side adventure in underbridge. They have some hints as to where the cultists are hiding (sawdust on the boots of the assassins...) but in a city the size of Magnimar it's not nearly good enough.

The sawdust might be a good clue, better than you expect.

All the sawmills in Magnimar are located in the same place on the river. They have to be, because they need the river to carry the logs to them.
And, in Medieval towns, similar types of shops did cluster together like that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Seth Gates 143 wrote:
Thanks. Also my players bring up a good point. The spell creates a shell around the person, so the rp bit doesn't go very well with the rules. Any suggestions on how to solve this?

There is nothing to solve.

Mage Armor is still armor (although via a spell instead of being regular armor).
Wearing 2 chain shirts doesn't increase your armor class above wearing 1 chain shirt.
Wearing 2 +1 mithral chain shirts does not increase your armor class above wearing 1 +1 mithral chain shirt.
Armor bonuses do not stack.

If they press hard on the rp option, just point out that the Mage Armor is trying to occupy the same exact place as the paladin's armor, and fails to materialize.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Some are, some aren't.
Take a closer look at some animal companions, they start out smaller than their wild counterparts but then get to their regular size.
And Wolf start out Med (size of a wild wolf) but goes to large (dire wolf size).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MrSin wrote:


Imo, the merit is what people on the same level of optimization and system mastery should be able to do. I can do a lot with a barbarian but they are hard to screw up. I've seen bad wizards, but that doesn't make the wizard a bad class. I can do a lot with any class, but I rarely see myself doing something special with the fighter myself. He doesn't do anything someone else can't. He doesn't have an amazing maneuver or technique that lets him be someone special. When I play a barbarian I jump on rage powers because they're interesting and cool and on occasion do more than more numbers! I actually want to take extra rage power. When I play a rogue I want to take extra rogue talent... but rogue talents are pretty meh. When I look at fighter I don't see someone special. I see something I could do with a barbarian or a ranger. It might be different if feats were different.

And then I always say, "If you think the barbarian/ranger/paladin is better, why don't you play that?"

And they always answer "Because the barbarian/ranger/paladin doesn't fit my character concept."

So these classes are only better if your concept matches the concept they are built around.
In every other case, you have to go with a fighter.
So people are complaining that characters with set niches or restrictions are better than generalists, and why can't the generalist have all the neat stuff that the niche character has? Maybe the niche character gets more because he's in a niche?
Once again, how do you build a class that has to model everything?
Answer that, and maybe you would get something for the fighter.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MrSin wrote:


Craig Mercer wrote:
Maybe the Fighter just suffers from a lack of imagination in his uses?

Lets not insult everyone. Fluff can be anything, but mechanics are hard coded. Imagination will apply to everyone. Imagination is not a fighter class feature. Its a player class feature if anything isn't it?

I have to expand on this point.

Who is the Fighter?

Every other Martial Class has their background built into the class.
This does limit where they come from, and what they are doing there.
Fighter? They don't have a set background, because they are every fighting type that does not have a special class.
And with no set background, no archtype to compare to, how do you set what are class features?

How do you hard code mechanics for something that is so mutable?
It is easy to hard code what a Barbarian should have, or a Ranger, or a Paladin, or a Gunslinger (or the rest).
How do you hard code for something that doesn't have a solid background, but has to be able to cover all archtypes?

And that's why the Fighter looks so bland and basic, because he has to be to cover all the possibilities.
And if you aren't playing the game to optimize your destructive capabilities in combat only (and if you are, your character's performance out of combat should not matter), you can find a way to get a few extra skill points, and use your abundance of feats to build something that can do things out of combat.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MrSin wrote:
Craig Mercer wrote:
Yes, let's ignore the one thing that Fighters have over all the other classes; namely a feat every level.

Feats are less valuable than class features. Feats do not replicate class features, or at least not usually or not very well. This is one of the big arguments I remember from 3.5. No amount of feats is going to give you free casting per day or an animal companion or such. Fighters bonus feats are also from a select list.

I'm not sure if using feats to shore up what you probably should've had in the first place is the best. I hate feat taxes myself.

As I pointed out before, the fighter's bonus feats are the ones he has to use for combat, leaving all the normal feats to be used for other things. And that every other class has to use those normal feats for combat feats.

Your other question is more interesting. (I'll come back to it more down the post.)
Just what should the Fighter have as a class ability? What can you give the Fighter, that doesn't rob some other class of it's place?

MrSin wrote:


Craig Mercer wrote:
And speaking of skill points, why no large outcry about Clerics only getting 2 skill points a level? Or Sorcerers getting only 2 skill points a level?
I'm actually not big on this myself. I'd rather they get 4+ skillpoints. Its hard to complain about full casting though. Full casting is powerful in its own right.

But they only have 2 points. Their primary stat isn't Int (like the Wizard), so that does limit what they can do. And the Sorcerer's very limited spell list means that they can't have all those utility spells like the Wizard, they have to have an effective spell list.

I do sort agree with having a few more skill points, which is why the cry of "Fighter's don't have enough skill points" bugs me. Either several classes are behind on skill points, or no one is.

To Be Continued...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lemmy wrote:

There are way too many situations where the Fighter class simply doesn't do anything for your character. This includes basically any situation where killing stuff with your sword is not a viable answer.

And IMHO, Fighters re not all that good at fighting, either, unless all your enemies are Ogre-with-class-levels type of enemy.

Fighters are basically a Warrior with somewhat higher numbers and, maybe, a second combat style.

Yes, let's ignore the one thing that Fighters have over all the other classes; namely a feat every level.

What can you do with all those extra feats?
Well, if you're like some people, you plow them back into a second combat style and then complain that fighters can't do anything out of combat.

Or maybe, just maybe, you invest in some skill focus and some overall skill boosters to get the most out of your small allotment of skill points.

And speaking of skill points, why no large outcry about Clerics only getting 2 skill points a level? Or Sorcerers getting only 2 skill points a level?

Or Rangers and Rogues also sucking on Will saves?

Maybe the Fighter just suffers from a lack of imagination in his uses?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Alchemist, one of their discoveries allows them to make their infusions into potions.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You can attack your swarm (fine and diminutive) with a weapon, you can attack your swarm with a ray.
But the swarm takes no damage from those attacks, since they only affect 1 target and not the swarm!

Bestiary wrote:

A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.

A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.

So the swarm is immune to weapon damage, including elemental effects added to the weapon, and torches, and rays, etc.

You can attack it with those. It just is immune to their effects.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually, given his views, I think pointing him toward Rangers would be better.
Not as many skills, but still a good number.
Traits can give you some skills as class skills (like Disable device, if you don't pick a trapper Ranger).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matthias_DM wrote:

What was a Barbarian Created For? Killing things and being tough.

Is he the best?

NO. He's a glass Cannon that gets Mindcontrolled and aimed at his own party.

Every poor Will save class is a glass cannon that gets mind Controlled and aimed at his own party.

The only reason that those Mind Controlers don't do the same thing to Rogues is that Rogues are the last choice for trying to cause damage, they aren't worth Mind Controlling.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matthias_DM wrote:

Let's be honest, Potions of true strike aren't exactly expensive at 50gp a pop.

Let me just point out that potions of True Strike are non-existent (unless you have an Alchemist friend to make them for you). Personal spells can not be made into potions. And since he was looking at PFS, I don't think that is a possibility.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Piccolo wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

Something like the rogue should be able to optimize for combat. They can't. They can't even be decent at it.

Rogue talents: Finesse Rogue, Weapon Training, Combat Trick. That's just for starters, and right off the top of my head. Have you read the Rogue out completely?

Let's see, take a Rogue talent that is really a feat (which the fighter doesn't need because he's pumping Str), take a Rogue Talent that is a feat (that the fighter takes as a matter of course), and take a Rogue talent that gives a combat feat (which the fighter gets as a matter of course every other level).

So I can get feats that the fighter (and any other martial class) gets anyway. Which doesn't get me any closer to being good at combat, since they all have them too. But they are still full BAB and the Rogue is still 3/4 BAB. Doesn't help with the core problem at all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The info is in the back of the Bestiary, appendix 1.
There is a chart with what the averages should be by CR.

And I'm sorry you've been disappointed by this thread. But this is information I wish I knew before I started playing a Rogue.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Take a look at what the BBEG has, and change things up a bit.
You start getting BBEG's that have Energy Resistance up, or Displacement, or Stoneskin. That helps cut down on the magical attacks, and allows the BBEG to survive.
Even if they are speedbump fights, those early easy fights do use resources. And if they pull the teleport away and come back later, the BBEG doesn't have to be ignorant of the fact that they were there. Restock areas where they will be with more (and different) minions so they can't get to the BBEG fresh. Move the BBEG somewhere else (behind them), and let him sneak up on the party instead.
Don't use the set flee at X hit points exactly, but be flexable. If the BBEG is supposed to flee to somewhere else at X hit points, have him leave when it looks like they will get close to that. He wasn't intending to stay, so don't force him to.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Some more advice...
1) Read the section that you will be playing through ahead of time, so you know what is supposed to happen, and what is supposed to be around each corner. That way you aren't suprised by twists, and can imporvise better when the players do something that wasn't thought of.
2) Be prepared. Get the monster stats for the game ready, and calculated. Look up whatevr spells or abilities they have so you know exactly what they can do, and how often. Check out the feats they have, and how that changes to hit bonuses and damage.
3) Check out the messageboard here for the Rise of the Runelords, and see what other GMs have done. People have added encounters, made great handouts and maps of some places, and have given advice about how to handle several problems already. Use their wisdom. And don't forget to ask if you have questions. These people can come up with all sorts of inventive plots and ideas.
4) Modify things to have fun. Sometimes, you might change something just to have more fun. Say, an extra goblin that's is going to fall in that barrel of rain water or set himself on fire (just for the players to laugh at). There are a lot of places where some down time is had, and you can add little adventures or subplots (or continue subplots) in these gaps. Sandpoint is full of interesting people, make sure you use them.

Extra: Rise of the Runelords is made for 4 player, and you have 3. This means you can add an NPC in if you wish (to cover something that the players don't have). Just make a plain straight forward character for the NPC, and keep it in the background.
Level characters up when it is time to level up. If they don't have enough Exp, either get them some more, or just give it to them. (Or better yet, don't worry about Exp, and just give them the level when the adventure says they should have the level).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Play a Druid.
Not the northern Europian type, but the Mawangi shaman type. Don't take an animal companion (as nice as they are), take a domain that fits (storm?).
Summon and wildshape will be your main contributions, with magic to buff yourself and others.
The ability to wildshape to a sea creature will always be helpful (who needs to worry about drownding when you can be a shark?).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@Wally the Wizard: The problem you haven't looked at is that the Fighter isn't supposed to be the Ranger. They have two different styles of play.
The Fighter doesn't need all the skills the Ranger needs. (And let's not forget that the Ranger has to spend a feat to get the Fighter's heavy armor training). That alone acounts for the difference in skills.
But the Fighter has enough feats to boost his few skills up to the point where they are usable (look at the skills Climb and Swim to see that you only need so much to be good enough).

In short, if you want to play a Ranger, play the Ranger, don't try to make the Fighter a Ranger. But if you want to play a Fighter with a few skills, there are ways to do it.

@RadiantSophia: Yes, those Feats don't give real skill levels. You are going to have to spend one skill point to get your class skill bonus. But after that? What is the difference between having a 7 Climb because you spent 4 skill points in a class skill and having a 7 Climb because you spent 1 skill point in a class skill and took a Skill Focus Feat? Nothing, as far as I can tell.

And the question is still out there; Would it kill you to play a non-optimized Fighter to get a few skills? As people have pointed out way back in the beginning of the thread, a Human Fighter build to use Combat Expertise has an Int of 13, and if he doesn't take that hit point but a skill point, he has 5 skill points a level to play with. True, it isn't optimal, but it does solve the problem of having skill points doesn't it?

Edit: RadiantSophia: Yes, but to hear most people speak of it, Fighters are using their Favored Class Bonus for hit points, because they never count those Favored Class Bonuses as skill points.
Somehow taking skill points instead of hit points in non-optimal.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Kyrt-ryder, I thought you "gave up" this whole discussion. Nice to see you back.

Yes, +3 to a skill equals those 3 skill points, as does the +2 to two skills. You wanted higher skill number, correct? And you have to admit that the Fighter has more feats than anyone else, which means out of everyone else they can afford to spend a few in these feats. And we are talking about skills that you don't need to max out (even if you feel the need to do so). 1 skill point, and a skill focus, and you have something.

But, once again, I notice a problem that is never really spoken about.
It is the fact that everyone wants their Fighter to be totally aimed at combat, but then complains that they have nothing to do outside of the one thing they chose to concentrate on.
And yet, suggesting that they might not build optimally for combat but more for roleplaying gets shot down as "hurting the Fighter's combat abilities".
So if a Fighter were to start with a Str less than 18, he's automatically worthless. And we have to sack the stats that help with roleplay and skills, and then complain that there aren't enough skills for us to do anything.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Once again, the Fighter gets more 'feats' than anyone else.
How about spending those feats on Skill Focuses or Awareness and Athletics?
How about using Traits to get a start on background skills?
Yes, the poor Fighter is sooooo downtrodden. But it isn't his lack of skills that makes him less interesting and fun to play. Its the fact that people design him to be less interesting by focusing only on his combat, and that is what makes him less interesting to play.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I can see now that kyrt-ryder does not understand trade-offs.
You want "flexibility"? Play a Barbarian or Ranger.
You want killing ability (DPR), play a Fighter.

You want "flexibility" and DPR? You want the Supernaught? The character who can solo every mission? Try another game.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Yes, Heavy Armor that the Fighter gets for free, the good choice of which costs WAY more than light armors (which is a big deal at levels 1-3), and whose special material versions cost WAY more than light armors (which I tend to find relevant at all levels), and whose Adamantine version doesn't even stack with Armor Mastery if you get that far.

I won't say Armor Training isn't an advantage, it is, but I just don't see all that much value to it.

Yes, I always sneer at the 3 more AC than you have. And the smaller armor check penalty and better dex permited than your armor permits (because of armor training). Those things are really small, aren't they?

And then I see I have almost twice as many feats than you have.

Yes, I am sure a poor, poor fighter.

Once again, why don't you just play the by-far superior Barbarian, and leave that poor, poor fighter in the dust?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@kyrt-ryder: And all those bonus feats won't give you options?
That miserable +2 to hit and +4 damage that no one else gets (and the weapon training too), doesn't help?

You want flexability? Play the Barbarian then, or the Ranger, and go to town! (Oh wait, they both have to spend a feat to get heavy armor training that the Fighter gets for free!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

*Chokes* you think the Fighter is supreme in combat compared to Barbarians?

You and I must be playing entirely different games Craig. In the Pathfinder I'm familiar with, Paladins vs Evil > Barbarians > Paladins vs Nonevil = Rangers > Fighters

And in the Pathfinder that I'm familiar with, those extra bonus Feats keep the fighter just ahead of the barbarian. And rangers only get in the door when they get their Favored Enemy.

And let's not forget all those feats that are marked Fighter Only.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Hold the phone.

You WANT the Barbarian and Ranger to be better than the Fighter?

Ok, I think we're done here. We've reached a point beyond which I don't feel further discussion can change anything.

Better at doing skills, yes.

Better at actually fighting in combat, no.

The Fighter is supreme in combat. Neither the Ranger or the Barbarian can come close except in certain circumstances.

I am saying the same thing back to you (but you seemed to have missed it because I didn't say it to your face).

So here it is: You want the Fighter, who is better in combat, to also be better in skills than the Ranger and Barbarian? Ok, I think we're done here. We've reached a point beyond which I don't feel further discussion can change anything.

Edit: I agree with what Dakota_Strider said above. +1


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Craig Mercer wrote:
That is still a far cry from justifying having extra skill points for 13 more levels. Which is what you are trying to do, actually.

I hope you aren't trying to levy this accusation against everyone looking for increased skill points for the Fighter (and a few other classes.)

Personally speaking, I DO want to put those skill points into, say, Jump, every level, 1-20. I choose skills for the purpose of maxing them. The only skills I don't max are those I might dabble in during a dip in a class that grants more skill points per level.

Your style of play means you want to max those skills, even though you don't need to.

Other styles of play mean those 13 skill points are going somewhere else for that other player.

I keep pointing out how all this extra skill stuff is just making the skill people less useful (just the same way that a properly built Ranger makes a Rogue useless to have in the party).

Really, the only way to satify you seems to be carve out some skills for each class, and those classes get those skills each level. No other skills are allowed, just the ones you have. Because you claim the Fighters all need Climb and Swim or they will die, I guess all those other people who don't max out those skills are incorrect in their gaming.

And, as I pointed out, and you ignored, it is possible to build a Fighter with some good skills, if you don't min/max yourself to be a killing machine. You might actually be a character, and not a pile of stats then too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

My point, is that the Rogue and the Fighter are BOTH the 'mundane awesome guys' and climbing is one of those things the 'mundane awesome guys' should be good at.

See, here's the problem.

Fighter aren't 'mundane awesome guys" who are "known to be second-story men or climbers." That's Rogues and Rangers and Barbarians. Yes, I fighter can climb. But I would suppose that a Rogue or a Ranger or a Barbarian would be better than him.
Swimming? You know there is a reason light armor or no armor is favored on ships. And you want to swim in full plate? Really?

"Awesome mundane Fighter's" are the guys I see scrambling to the rooftops or climbing a rocky cliff, and being one step behind those Rogues, Rangers and Barbarians. You can do that with a 10. Heck, you can do it with less, you just have to roll. Even the example of chainmail guy with a 2 climb has a 60% chance of climbing up.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Craig Mercer wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

And to be honest... the idea that a Fighter should be dependent on a rogue to handle a simple environmental challenge is asinine, and it makes that fighter especially vulnerable to having his rope cut out from under him.

Read the rules, please! If it is a simple enviromental challenge, then the fighter should be able to climb up without any problem, and without maximizing his climb. A fighter not maximized for combat (17 str instead of 18) and set up to be intellegent (combat exp. Int 13) has plenty of skills to start, and starts with a climb of 7. By 4th level, he's got his 18 str, and a climb of 11. Not bad for someone who should only be climbing on climbable cliffs (DC 10). And still better than the second story Rogue, who might have an 8.

The point is, after a certain point, you no longer need to put points in your climb, or your swim. You are good enough to function in those enviroments, as rare as they are.

At 1st level, that's an effective climb of 2, assuming chainmail.

At 4th level, that's an effective climb of 6, assuming masterwork full plate.
Same for swim. Assuming you're maxing those skills through that level.

Except you forgot your Armor Training at 3rd level. And maybe (if you want to be good) a skill focus or Athletic Feat too.

And all you've really pointed out is that you have to put a few more skill points in (and no matter what you claim, you aren't going to be good at these skills even if you had extra skill points).
So it takes 3 more levels to get you to an auto 10 check. Oh wait, you get yet another Armor Training then. So on that last level, you don't have to spend the skill points to get a 10.
That is still a far cry from justifying having extra skill points for 13 more levels. Which is what you are trying to do, actually.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

A typical city wall, or a nearly smooth cliff face (I've seen some in real life, they exist) is DC 30 climb.

If the surface is slippery (such as if its raining) the DC shoots up by 5 (to 35 in the above example)

Climbing at 1/2 your speed (rather than 1/4) increases the DC by 5 (from 30 to 35, or from 35 to 40)

If you fall while climbing a wall, the DC to catch yourself is the DC of the climbing surface +20.

I'm reading potential climb DC's all the way up to 60. I can see no good reason to stop investing in Climb at any level.

And what the heck are you doing trying to climb the city wall by yourself?

Why hasn't your arcanist spider-climbed up and thrown you down a rope? Or levetated you?
Yes, I know the climbs can go way up. The question becomes "Why are you the only one who has to solve this problem? Why doesn't your party help out?"

And you know, it doesn't matter how good you are when you fall from that DC 60 surface, you aren't going to save yourself with your climb, no matter how good you think you are.

Oh, and just for giggles:

kyrt-ryder wrote:
And to be honest... the idea that a Fighter should be dependent on a rogue to handle a simple environmental challenge is asinine,

You are way over your so-called "simple enviromental challenge" here.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:

And to be honest... the idea that a Fighter should be dependent on a rogue to handle a simple environmental challenge is asinine, and it makes that fighter especially vulnerable to having his rope cut out from under him.

Read the rules, please! If it is a simple enviromental challenge, then the fighter should be able to climb up without any problem, and without maximizing his climb. A fighter not maximized for combat (17 str instead of 18) and set up to be intellegent (combat exp. Int 13) has plenty of skills to start, and starts with a climb of 7. By 4th level, he's got his 18 str, and a climb of 11. Not bad for someone who should only be climbing on climbable cliffs (DC 10). And still better than the second story Rogue, who might have an 8.

The point is, after a certain point, you no longer need to put points in your climb, or your swim. You are good enough to function in those enviroments, as rare as they are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:


Fights on ships in the sea where you have to go into the water to prevent the ship from being sunk.

Fights on the side of a cliff, while being assailed by Giant Eagles and the archers on their backs?

So on the basis of two encounters that are not the most common (unless your campaign is in one of those enviroments), you claim the Fighter needs these skills maximized.

Unfortunately for your logic, that means EVERY class needs those skills optimised!

Climbing: You can hold on to what you are climbing at the basic climb DC you were climbing at. Which means climging on that rope is only a DC 5, and clinging on a climbable cliff face is only a DC 10 (any more than that, and people will wonder why you are there in the first place, aren't your skill people supposed to set ropes for you? Isn't this a group adventure and not a solo adventure?).

Swiming: DC 10 in calm water, DC 15 in rough water, any more and you aren't fighting either.

And, by the way, on a cliff face you really can't perform decent combat. Your arcanist should be putting fly or the like on you so you can fight without restrictions. If he isn't, he's the one wasting party resources!
And the same goes for that water fight; if your party isn't doing something to help you in the water, (water breathing, freedom of action), they are wasting your potential to fight.

You know, that is why you have a party, and not a solo adventurer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Darkon wrote:
I feel that EVERYONE should be getting one or two more skill points per level if they are playing a PC class, Fighters with their meager 2 skill points per level, or even 4 if you are human and spending your favored class bonus on skills still need 2 more to cover the skills that the fighter should have (Climb, Intimidate, Perception, Ride, Swim, Survival) without touching the background and craft skills, which a character should have regardless of class.

Even though both climb and swim only need a certain level to do basic climbing and not drown, you claim you need enough to be better than the Rogue (because you should have a better Str). Really? Once a Fighter can climb a knotted rope, (DC 5), what more climbing does he need? Isn't it one of the Rogue's (or Ranger's) job to scale the cliff and set a rope for you?

Oh, and lets' horn in on the Ranger, who should be the survival guy, and make the vanilla Fighter just as good.

And speaking of Rangers:

Darkon wrote:


Ranger: Fighters but with one or two more knowledge skills, and 4 more skill points per level, it seems about right to me.

So you think that Rangers have enough skill points, but totally ignore the fact that you claim fighters need as many as Rangers normally get? I call BS!

Looking at this, I find that people are complaining because they can't make a Fighter who has the optimized stats to fight and still have a bunch of skills. It's called making a choice, best at fighting, or good at skills (and still better at fighting than most of the other classes).
Your 6 skills that you list I find that two only need a few levels in, one you are just picking up for no good reason to make it a Fighter skill (want a high survival, play a Ranger), and 3 that you could almost make a case for (except my Dwarven Fighter refuses to take ride, he says he'd rather eat the animal).

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.