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

Crypteck's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 63 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Nevermind, I see you listed my debt as paid. Very glad that is behind us.

I'll be online tonight, not sure if I'll have bandwidth to spare for voip though.

Also, let me know when the dept I was given is paid off so I can buy equipment again.

For clarification: personally I agree with the idea of selling magic items at full price. I usually do it in my games if for no other reason than to save me the trouble of mathing out prices every time a player wants to sell something. However, having done that in my own games I just wanted to make sure you were aware of just how much of an increase in player wealth that is. Because it's not just loot that you have to worry about but also selling old equipment. Basically it makes upgrading weapons and armor enchantment bonuses VERY easy, and will actually enable me to get my full-plate enchanted BEFORE I go all out on a Mithral set... that'll be fun.

Wow... I think I might actually be able to pull off a full-ac concept from start to finish. I've been told by Fatespinner (who recently made it to paizo's top 36 list) that beyond level 10-12 AC basically doesn't even matter anymore because bonuses can get so high. It'll be awesome if I can -finally- prove my Max-AC theory out with this character.

Are you sure that's entirely advisable, Watcher? Mundane items would be one thing, but allowing us to sell magical items at full value sounds like one of those rules that has the potential to get out of hand very rapidly. Not that I'm about to complain, since my character is the most item dependent of the party, and selling magical items at full value can only result in more gold all around.

Other than that, I'll be online for tonight's game.

Like I said, I totally see the sense in how we're doing it. And you're right, if I had taken the table for wealth by level into account I should have known I wouldn't have much trouble with this. I dunno, I guess for some reason I didn't make the obvious connection between that table and applying it to a "growing" character.

I think I will want to keep it, but the problem is paying for it. Every time a situation like this has come up in a game I'm involved in the item has always been rewarded to one player and not chalked up to any other totals; the concept of having to buy party loot has, until now, been completely foreign to me.

For example, a party loots a corpse with a +2 longsword that the fighter keeps. That longsword is just given to the fighter, who uses it freely until he either pays to improve it's enchantments, or sells it off in favor of something else. At which point the proceeds would go to the party fund. But that's assuming central party funds, where all the gold is in a single pool and everyone gets a share of that. Quick and easy for in-person tabletop, less effective in a virtual setting. We have been doing rather the opposite of that, where we get player loot and then the party fund isn't used for items except in their crafting (apparently). And I totally see the sense in it too, at least when it comes up to "fare shares of the wealth".

Basically all I'm worried about is being able to meet my primary goal of mithral full-plate before level 10, which is going to be around 9k gold, give or take. Having to drop another 8k on the shield, however useful it will prove to be, may mean I don't have a magical weapon until after level 10. Which I don't mind, except damage reduction might be a tiny bit more annoying, but I can live with it.

So I guess it really comes down to whether or not you guys are okay with loaning it to me until I can either pay for it or sell it. Either way, I -do- want to use it. It would open more freedom with my two weapon fighting and shield bash options. It would mean I can tool around with my single waraxe and either 2-hand it for charges or high AC targets, or else TWF with axe/shield+free bull rush, or even pull my second axe out for more d10's of damage.

Also, I'm picking up Power Attack this level so I can get Shield Smash at level 6. And are we doing favored class bonuses in this game?

Game on tonight?

Should I add that amount to my total wealth or is that my new total?
Not dead yet.

Excuse me, I was wondering if there were any opening in this game? I'm already familiar with the Way of the Wicked AP, having just run a Ninja through the first few sessions under another GM. But some decisions were made by the GM regarding races available to players that I didn't agree with, and the party make-up was pretty awful so I had to withdraw.

So... does your party have need for a Ninja of Asmodeus? XD

Don't apologize, I don't really care about who is right and who is wrong in this case; there's no point in portioning blame. Besides, it's my lack of HP more than my AC that I worry about.

I just want to make it clear, I've been trying my damndest to make this concept work, but without a designated tank to flank with, or the addition of dark vision to allow me to use my stealth skill with any effectiveness, playing a ninja or rogue concept is just wasting the player slot. For what it's worth, I like the AP. I'd be willing to play in it again if there was a proper party build. Like I said before, I would recreate my ninja as the front line fighter no one else seems willing to create, but I'm already doing that in the Monday game, and besides I don't imagine you'd be willing to let me remake my ninja now that we've progressed this far with the AP.

I'm not trying to make you feel bad, I'm trying to make you understand why I have been playing a concept for four sessions and haven't enjoyed him once, despite the fact that I love the concept.

The first two sessions ALL I EVER DID was fight defensively with the addition of combat expertise, which I only picked up because I wanted improved feint. And out of 10 swings, I landed 2. Two hits out of ten, and those two hits were lucky rolls, meanwhile all the people I was in melee with needed was ONE lucky roll and I would have dropped (just like I did during the beginning of the last encounter). No offence, but I didn't make a ninja just so I can occupy a square and delay long enough to get a lucky roll while hoping the enemies around me don't get a lucky roll first.

So basically my choices were either stand there with a high ac and never hit anything, or die.

Light armor is not that big of a deal is you have the dex. I do not have much dex, a point I've been trying to hammer in since the very first session. And yes, classes with light armor can survive in the front line if they've built for it. But like you said, the AP called for more social than combat, it called for normal human races rather than tieflings and androids. I'm one of the only players who built their character after the suggestions of the AP guidelines.

So why do I feel like I'm the only one suffering because of his choices made during character creation?

Light armor is not that big of a deal is you have the dex. I do not have much dex, a point I've been trying to hammer in since the very first session. And yes, classes with light armor can survive in the front line if they've built for it. But like you said, the AP called for more social than combat, it called for normal human races rather than tieflings and androids. I'm one of the only players who built their character after the suggestions of the AP guidelines.

So why do I feel like I'm the only one suffering because of his choices?

You say you've been trying to get me on board like there's something wrong with the way my character has been playing. He wears light armor and his dex is not his strongest stat by a long shot, and yet everyone keeps insisting that he's a front line fighter, the kind of character who can stand there and keep squares secure from enemy advance, when he CAN'T. The problem isn't my Ninja, the problem is that we don't have a real tank.

If they are Warforged or something like them, then it would have been named Warforged or something other than Android.

And the idea that the technology, either magical or mechanical, for creating androids is more advanced than firearms is absurd. In Eberron they had Warforged, but they also had guns that didn't explode in your face every time you fire them. In fact Eberron firearms rules are quite fair, I don't understand why they aren't being implemented. The developed technology in Eberron is easy to stand by because it's consistent. You can't call a setting incapable of pumping out reusable firearms when it can pump out live robots. Just because there are rules for Androids doesn't mean you should let them into your party. It's the same concept as letting players make Minotaur or Lich characters.

So yeah, until such time as playing a normal character (y'know, the style of character the AP called for in the first place by the AP!) is no longer underpowered, or until the party can survive an encounter without the GM fudging rolls, I'll be withdrawing.

I disagree that androids are custom races. Android is a custom race, even if the rules used to create it are "by the book", Android isn't part of the standard pregenerated races, it is therefore a custom race. And apparently a human with darkvision is more unlikely than an android (specifically an android, not some type of magical golem with it's own will like the Warforged; a walking talking robot). I feel like you're only allowing one player to customize their race. Saying I picked human and I'm stuck with that is pretty unfair considering I didn't understand how the custom races rules worked, and in the end the overall difference of two racial points could be easily overlooked, especially with a gap of 4 points separating your highs from your lows.

I'ma be clear about this. I do not agree with the addition of an android, and you're only allowing it because there aren't rules directly against it. This is a fantasy setting, not sci-fi, dungeons and dragons, not Dragon Star. And these feelings aren't new, I've been trying to dance around them since I heard we were going to be adding a half-vampire to the party.

However, I have very little power to overturn what I consider an unfair call. I think I may withdraw. These sessions have only ever been frustrating to me. I'm not enjoying my character either because he's needed as a front line fighter or because stealthing in pitch blackness is impossible, and I'm not very interested in playing another fighter.

I have a question. Since we're allowing players to make their own custom races, and since of those players the only one taking advantage of the mechanics is to create a cyborg, can I add Dark Vision to my base human race? It's only the difference of two points, bringing human up to 11 from 9, bringing me up to par with the rest of the group.

Confirming attendance.

My vote goes towards a Wand of cure damage. Much the cheapest way to keep the players in health without using daily spells or abilities.

The 3+ composite longbow was not taken by Hagdin, he picked one one his own up I think three sessions ago.

Sunday is fine for me

I think we might try to meet for play during the weekend before xmas. The 22nd or 23rd. Either are good for me at any time. Christmas week is gonna be insane for me though. I have about 9834918765 different places to visit and people to see.

I imagine Kovu as a very superstitious person. He'll try to hold on to the shiv for personal use. Maybe later even have it reforged as a masterwork shiv and enchanted or something, assuming everyone's okay with that

Kovu did take the Shiv (improvised dagger) but you told us that the shiv wouldn't count as an improvised weapon, that it has the stats as a normal dagger.

Word. I'm in. I may be a bit lake and/or slightly occupied while in VoIP.

I haven't been paying attention to the thread, sorry. Do we have our next date set? I don't want to miss it.

We on tonight?

Thanks for the warning. I like the way the trait ties in with the Servant of Asmodeus concept. Though he has no problem killing people, Kovu would rather use legitimate means to establish control. And since he is more concerned with achieving a good standing with the Arch-Devil, being prepared to deal with Demons kinda reinforces the concept. It's a shame I can't use the Celestial equivalent, but if we're gonna be picking up free extra abilities that might stack with it or something, I can understand your concern.

Basically, since I can't burgeon actual mechanical ability I'll take it to underline the character's overall objective.

Character Icon:

2nd of January works for me.

As for the character's history, I'll keep it short and sweet. He was a gift given to the temple of Asmodeus by his parents to be trained and used towards any purpose the church deemed worthy. On the day the temple was sacked he was stolen away by an Assassin of Asmodeus who taught him how to live in the shadows. Since then this Assassin father-figure has been found and executed publicly. Shortly thereafter my character found himself in jail for murder.

Traits: I'ma keep Demon Hunter and Child of the Temple. They both fit what little story I do have to support the character.

Anything else?

Confirming attendance.

Wow. I think misfire rules are incredibly unfair, imposing a stacking penalty with a risk based on standard attack roles, so I'm not gonna bother. The entire class looks like a lesson in compromising the abilities of a class just to get it to pass critical scrutiny.

Instead I've decided to change Haugan into Hagdin the Dwarf. It'd explain his racial hatred for Goblins, and his stubborn nature, and also give him Dark Vision, which might be useful for a lead tank. All I will need to do is regenerate his stats, and remove my Weapon Focus feat.

I'm sorry about that. It was very rude of me to miscount you. Hope ya'll are enjoying a good thanksgiving.

Ah, maybe that's where I got the impression. In fact, I recall the conversation now and as usual I was mistaken.

Watcher, so you don't want to add a fourth player to this campaign? Because if I'm not mistaken (again), we only have a party of 3 right now. Or am I not counting someone?

Thanks Gauss. I was under the impression that Gunslingers were banned, but I don't see anything about them at all. Was my initial assumption correct, or are Gunslingers allowed?

I wasn't around for the initial building stage, so I never got the chance to see all the build rules in one place. It was 20 point-buy if I remember correctly, but was there any other rules I need to know about? I may have been told once when I was building Haugan, but if I was I can't find any record of it.

My biggest issue is making progress when it's time to progress. It's like we've been fumbling through all the dungeons, and the only time everyone can agree he had an overall success was when we were on the smallest battle map we've yet been on. I think that once we've managed to flesh out our party and are comfortable moving around the map as a group (instead of as a bunch of individuals, though we haven't been doing that poorly in this respect) progress will go much more smoothly.

Also, since Jman has withdrawn I have invited a person I met this week to join us. They appear to have D&D experience, and I've seen them construct very basic concepts using Pathfinder rules, so they may possibly be making an appearance.

Regarding tonight's game, with the possibility of a three person party I'll go ahead and keep Haugan around. Part of the reason I was retiring him was because his only real purpose in a group is to keep enemy attention on himself, a role that I foresaw being minimized as our summoner levels up and as we gain NPC cohorts. However, with the group a person short, and leveling up not yet an option, he still has use as a tank. And I think if we are to have any chance of clearing this dungeon without casualties, his defensive focus and moderate HP will be more useful than the Dwarven Urgrosh Ranger or Archer Ranger I was going to replace him with.

For whatever reason I can't edit that post. The last bit came out wrong. I -should- do this anyway. Haugan isn't set up for any kind of future build, and in a few levels isn't going to be able to preform in combat against even appropriately challenging encounters. The shield bash and armor spikes combo is amusing, but lacks offensive ability. I need to reroll the character for more than his contentious nature.

Regardless of how you wanted him into the party, he's still going to show up in combat, and probably have something to do. Which is good. He has 4 arms, natural armor, and fast healing. It would be wasteful to let him in the party, but not involve him in combat. However, if all you're going to do is have him hang around behind the party while we explore, just let him leave. Same with the rest of the prisoners. Having a line of Goblins underfoot is not any way to explore a Dungeon. But clearly you're intent on doing just that. I was unable to talk you out of it, so I'm not going to impede you. Not that I could have since you've already announced that you're taking prisoners rather than letting them flee.

Haugan has no intention of putting up with Goblins in the party, regardless of why they're there. Since he will have nothing to do with the party once a Goblin is brought into it, I have to retire him. If I try to force the subject he'll eventually just walk out of the party himself. Rather than leave the group a person short in the middle of a game, I'm replacing him now. It's the best solution I can come up with, and unless you intend to let the Goblin leave, it's the course I'll be taking.

Well, since nothing I do will stop the NPC from joining the party, I'm retiring Haugan. With this many warm bodies in the party a designated tank is no longer necessary. I'll ask Watcher if he will let me reroll my character at this point. If not I'll be withdrawing.

I did have an objection when we did this with Tsuto, and because this is basically a repeat of that entire incident I will make it simple. Getting stuck asking "what to do" with an NPC is the problem. Taking captives isn't an option not matter how many times you suggest it. Beating, then questioning, then killing is no more an option than taking captives. If killing Goblins is morally ambiguous, then letting them live only if they have information to give us must be evil. How is the life of the Goblin with information to give us any more valuable than the Goblin that tried to fling molten glass at us? And if we're just going to kill them anyway, isn't it cruel to force them to divulge under the pretense that they're saving their lives? If you save one, you have a moral obligation to save them all.

I do not believe it is so unreasonable that a NG fighter is unwilling to overlook his own nearsightedness enough to let a Goblin into the party. Lets be clear here, being a racist in D&D is nothing like being a racist in real life. Goblins have been making a bad name for themselves long before my character was born. Maybe these specific Goblins aren't deserving of Haugan's hate, but you cannot call him wrong when Goblins steal and murder all across the map every single day.

My objection is twofold. First, the saving of a Goblin that had already suffered two Coup's without anyone objecting. It was only after someone took an OOC joke too seriously that time was rewound and the Goblin was brought back to life. That's crap. NPCs die. Get over it. If critical information went with him, too bad. Rewinding time like that to revive someone is Metagaming. I wouldn't expect you to do that for another player, so doing it to a Goblin pissed me off quite badly. The Coup's were declared, and rolled without challenge. Only after they were done did anyone declare opposition. And then time got rewound. That's my primary objection.

My second objection comes from a proverb told to me the first time I tried to run a game. "Do not build glass castles to float in the sky unless you want players to throw rocks through the windows." That means if we miss information, we miss information. It isn't the end of the world, nor does it change our original objective. I have no problem getting information, but for f+~%s sake, our characters have the information they need. Anything else is strictly more icing on the cake. Going out of our way, holding up the game AGAIN, just to learn something we had probably already guessed, would have guessed, or didn't need to guess in the first place. We have a surplus of information, and have done practically nothing about it. Goblins, Bugbears, Demons, mutants and whatever else is attacking the town, and your characters are more interested in saving a single Goblin who, by all the rules, ought to be very, VERY dead.

And again, I'm not interested in being drawn into an argument of alignments.

As for my character, he's a stubborn bigot. I can't imagine a situation in which he would be willing to fight with a Goblin at his side.

f~%+ed up the code, no time to fix it, see ya'll tonight.

Game still on tonight? I'll be there, even if I'm a little late.

If I am indeed late, go ahead and start without me. Same as before, I'll maintain formation at the front behind erastor and work mainly to intercept and pin enemy movements. [url=]Here[url] are all of Haugan's stats. Just keep him alive long enough for me to show up.

For the record, my ninja will have social skills and knowledges in abundance. His main skill focuses are going to be Bluff, diplomacy, sense motive and knowledge plains, religion, and Nobility. The character himself is set on enforcing the law of Asmodeus.

Coincidentally, what skill would forging documents fall under?

The idea behind the Demon Hunter was to represent training he received to combat Demons, the natural enemy of Devils. I figured that since Asmodeus is a Devil, as a devout follower I should be prepared to defend myself against his natural enemies.

However, I do not mistake you for the kind of man to mistake the distinction, and I'll take you on your word if it comes to that. Can you suggest one in it's place, or else allow it's antithesis? Bonuses apply vs Good Outsiders, or Celestial creatures like Angels or something? I want something that focuses on the Planes, since I'm actually bothering to take a rank in it untrained.

Oh, that might be an issue. Can I put ranks into untrained Knowledge?

Other than that, how do you feel about the character having been donated to the temple of Asmodeus as an infant, before Darians took the city? As the Temple was being sacked a single Assassin took him in and raised him as per the history.

Link to Kovu's finished character sheet.

Breakdown: Kovu was raised by an assassin of Asmodeus after being chased from their temple when Kovu was a baby. He trained Kovu in the ways of assassination and manslaughter, filling his head with the idea of eventual revenge against those who thought their presence purged from the city. Immediately prior to the start of the game, his assassin master was found, captured, and executed. Suddenly finding himself in control of his own future Kovu sought out to finish the work his now dead master started.

Turns out Kovu was woefully unprepared. He did manage to kill someone, but was immediately caught and imprisoned afterwards.

Stats: 16, 14, 14, 14, 10, 14,
Alignment: LE
HP: 11 (Favored class bonus)
AC: 12
Saves: +2, +4, +0
Melee: +3
Ranged: +2
Feats: Combat Expertise, Improved Feint
Abilities: Use Poison, sneak attack +1d6
Traits: Murderer (Crime) Child of the Temple (Faith) Demon Hunter (Religion)

Want to see if there is anything that can be done about Demon Hunter. Would prefer the exact same, except aimed at Celestial creatures instead of Demons. Not a big deal if not, I can still see the Asmodian Ninja taking up skills to hate on demons with.

Um. Well. Mostly I want to be able to make use of the Strangler Feat at level 1.

Strangler (Combat)
Throttling the life out of enemies is second nature to you.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, sneak attack +1d6, Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully maintain a grapple and choose to deal damage, you can spend a swift action to deal your sneak attack damage to the creature you are grappling.

I have the Dex and Sneak Attack covered, and wouldn't mind devoting a feat to Imp Grapple. It's just the idea that Unarmed Strikes isn't a proficiency, but rather a feat, that is holding me back. As it is, I'll have a PDF copy of my character sheet available presently. Do you have an Email I can send it to, or can I attach the file to a PM?

I'm building my character sheet on myth-weavers just to start with. I'll redo the character in PDF format and attach the file once the creation process is over. As for why a Ninja is in the city, I personally think they would be no more unusual than a rogue or a monk. If that isn't good enough for the campaign I'll drum something up.

More important than that is the concept I want to build. I was going to do a ranged sneak attack ninja, but I've decided I want to try a grapple ninja instead. The problem is Improved Unarmed Strike. I was hoping there might be some other way to get unarmed proficiency, maybe a trait or something instead of being forced to waste a feat on it.

Anyhow, here's what I have so far.

Okay, in that case, I think I want to do a Ninja concept that focuses on ranged sneak attack (at level 2 anyway). The idea of trying to make the "black knight" concept out of a ninja intrigues me. I'll have it up in a bit.

Hey, thanks for the invite. I regret that I may not be available, depending on when the game starts. Turns out I'm going to Six Flags Magic Mountain a week into December, and then moving into a room I've been offered in Phoenix. Once I'm in Phoenix I have NO IDEA what my schedule is going to look like, and I would hate to have to renege on my commitments and leave you guys a player short.

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.