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

David Bowles's page

FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,801 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 6 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,801 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade *

Casting is overrated.

Silver Crusade *

It's still very nice to just have it.

Silver Crusade *

Obviously, humans have an advantage in a feat-intensive build. But darkvision is SOOOO good.

Silver Crusade *

Darkvision is the single most undercosted ability in the ARG. The power races all have darkvision. Not a shock.

Silver Crusade *

"Invalidate" is a very subjective term, however. NPCs don't a priori know that they can't hit the tower shield specialist, etc. There is a huge gulf between NPC knowledge and GM knowledge, so this invalidate clause should rarely come up.

Silver Crusade *

wraithstrike wrote:
I would allow the GM to adjust enemy tactics. From what I have been told if the books say the BBEG will start off doing ____ then the GM must use ____.

Yup, that's the way it works.

Silver Crusade *

As a GM, I don't let animal companions do anything "safely", ie I don't allow "tactics cat". But this also sucks out the NPCs' AOO's, so it usually ends up backfiring for the NPCs, not the pet owners. Most pets can suck up the attacks trivially.

Most encounters in PFS just can't handle the extra hps and attacks that animal companions provide. Assuming the actual PC can also do something other than buff the animal.

Unless my table has seven people, or there are 3+ pets at the table, I have pets and owners roll separate initiative, because I feel that the init stat block under the pet is not there for looks.

Silver Crusade *

ShakaUVM wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I'm a bit confused by the spell list. How are persistent magic jars going into 5th level slots?
Spell Perfection.

Oh, that's a brutal feat! Thanks, I wasn't thinking of that one.

Silver Crusade *

Vrog Skyreaver wrote:
year of the return to 2nd edition, so that newer gamers can learn the horror that was thac0.

Back when rogues had the same attack bonus progression that arcane casters have now. /headdesk

Silver Crusade *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mattastrophic wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I see this as a VERY slippery slope. Would I be able to turn away druids for example? I see them as session wrecking. See the problem?

I understand your point. The problem here is that the campaign does not want to trust its GMs out of a fear of a few GMs misusing that trust. We don't have this privilege out of a proven fear that some will wreck it for all.

-Matt

Yeah, I very much enjoy the de-powered status GMs of PFS. From both sides of the screen. I've enough GM abuse in all games systems, not just Pathfinder, to be skeptical of any deviation in this. This is why I even roll my dice in front of players.

"out of a fear of a few GMs "

Or more than a few.....

Silver Crusade *

Mattastrophic wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
After a couple of unpleasant games -- not the fault of anybody at the table -- I'm now promising to give up my seat at a 7-player table. And I won't GM them. I can't make them fun enough for people.

That reminds me of what would make for a wonderful rule change: an expansion of the explicit "rights of the GM" to run tables he or she is comfortable with. Things like being explicitly allowed to hard-cap a Season 0-3 module at four players, or the ability to turn away a Summoner4 from a table full of level 1 PCs.

That way, the GM doesn't have to deal with the problem of "public games" infringing on his comfort level, or his ability to run a good session. It would be nice to be able to GM something for a public audience knowing that the GM is empowered to shield the game from session-wrecking pitfalls.

In other words, what talbanus said.

-Matt

I see this as a VERY slippery slope. Would I be able to turn away druids for example? I see them as session wrecking. See the problem? This is an end-around to the conclusions of the "Not at MY table!" thread.

Silver Crusade *

Thanks. I knew it didn't look quite right.

Silver Crusade *

Let's hope not one of these:

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121008123028/starcraft/images/2/23/Vik ingColossus_SC2_Art1.jpg

Silver Crusade *

Don't. Split. The. Party.

Silver Crusade *

BigNorseWolf wrote:

its still off the menu for worshipers of good gods. (neutral ones are fine though)

I think a necromancer could still worship a good god. There is no alignment opposition conflict with an arcane caster. Probably just not a good god adamantly opposed to undead. Although I'm fine being a neutral good guy worshiping a neutral god.

Silver Crusade *

BigNorseWolf wrote:
You hijack EVERY thread to your hatred of druids. Its like the girlscouts on the questions wall of conspiracy.

Well, they kinda come out of the walls and I can't get away from them.

There are dozens of threads left unhijacked, btw. However, in any discussion of summoners, class balance, or pets I feel the druid is worth bringing up.

Silver Crusade *

Most groups seem pretty happy my cleric dropping blessing of fervor and then providing moral support. And heals, I guess.

My magus is also more of an enhancer. He's always got haste and now he's got greater trip. At the cost of intensified shenanigans.

Silver Crusade *

It's not a hijack when its a direct comparison that helps us understand the topic at hand. I didn't just start in with druid power levels, I referenced the druid as a legal class to demonstrate why I don't think the master summoner is too powerful. It was pointed out that the master summoner is more one-dimensional than the druid. While I disagree with this being sufficient basis to ban it, I at least understand the logic chain.

The topic was about "why are these banned?" I expanded by asking "why is master summoner banned while druid is legal?" I understand why synthesist is banned.

Also, looking back, *the druid class was mentioned in the original post*.

Silver Crusade *

" But simply casting an evil descriptor spell is not an evil act in and of itself."

From the same link. This is the word from Mr. Brock, which applies directly to PFS. As far as I'm concerned, this is the end of the hand-wringing over this.

Obviously, in home brew, anything goes, so there is no point in discussing that.

Silver Crusade *

Well my human cleric of Torag at least seems unaffected. And my neutral good necromancer is going to proceed with animation of good targets as scheduled.

Silver Crusade

LazarX wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
Does anyone else find the combination of 9-level spell caster, spontaneous summons, wild shape, and 2nd PC in the form of animal companion to be very overpowered? Particularly for PFS games?
I've yet to see 9th level spellcasting by players be an issue in PFS games, considering standard scenario play caps at 12th level.

They do get access to 6th level spells, while 6-level casters are stuck at 4th level spells. That's what I'm referring to.

Silver Crusade

pauljathome wrote:

Druids are definitely a very powerful class. Up to about level 8 or so they're probably a contender for the most powerful class (only a contender, its very arguable).

But beyond that, while still staying very powerful, they pretty clearly start to lose ground to the other full spell casters. Wizards and sorcerers still pretty much rule, especially if twinked out.

I know that the OP absolutely loathes animal companions and I think that is slanting his opinion. Especially now that oracles, sorcerors, etc can all get companions these days.

One place where they DO excel is in how easy it is to build a good druid. Obviously system mastery is still rewarded but it is pretty hard to build a druid who isn't quite decent.

That's why I asked for additional input. It doesn't seem like druids give up enough to get the animal companion, which is like a 2nd PC. They lose no spell casting and have a very good class feature in wild shape. Summoners can't even use some of their class features while the eidolon is active.

Silver Crusade *

Chris Mortika wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:


Characters using spells with the evil descriptor should consider themselves to be committing minor acts of evil.

"Champions of Purity", yes? (The same book that supposedly outlaws my human paladin of Torag.) From a page that isn't in the PFS Additional Resources, yes?

Thank you, Orfamy. I had been concerned that there might have been something in the Core Rulebook that I was missing.

How are human paladins of Torag outlawed?

Silver Crusade *

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
I agree with David: in PFS, a rules-as-written campaign, the use of [Evil] descriptor spells is not an alignment issue, per campaign guidelines. In any other campaign, the GM can make whatever rules she likes.

It is an evil act. Sean K Reynolds was quoted above.

That IS a problem for a few corner cases, say, a mystic theurge wizard of a good god who might be tempted to cast infernal healing or a paladin with use magic device.

But no problem at all for a neutral good necromancer, thanks to PFS magic.

Silver Crusade *

The rules frankly have very little meaning outside a RAW-based campaign like PFS. There does not appear to be a PFS penalty for casting [evil] descriptor spells, so the whole point seems moot.

Silver Crusade *

So animating a giant vermin is equal to murder and cannibalism? I'm really not understanding this. How is animating it worse than killing it in the first place?

Silver Crusade *

LazarX wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
1. Things can change - that's part of the fun. In the original Star Trek, "Klingon" meant "Bad Guy" - then Star Trek: The Next Generation said, "guess what? There's a Klingon on the bridge of the Enterprise - his name's Worf, he's 5th-in-command, and he's kind of the show's Falstaff."
Actually he serves more as something to be beaten on to establish how strong the Alien of the Week is if he's strength oriented. Worf may be a nice guy and all, but Klingons in general, even those who are nominally allies, are generally Jerkasses In Uniform.

The Worf Effect!

Silver Crusade *

I always ask "Is that your final answer?" for blast placement. That's all I feel I should do as a GM.

Silver Crusade *

LazarX wrote:
David Bowles wrote:

No, I've looked closely at the magical rainbow animal companion progression table. Combined with the outrageous stat increases most companions get at level 4 or 7, they are as powerful as I feared. I don't think anyone has been cheating or making mistakes; animal companions just mulch PFS that well. Animal companions even get access to feats that eidolons can't take because animal companions have the magical rainbow feat list from which they can take feats.

I haven't looked at summon nature's ally closely. In 3.X , I thought that the nature's ally table was better. They both get elementals, I think.

I don't know what feats your druid's animal companion might be possibly taking. I'm pretty sure however that my Eidolon will tear it to shreds and I'm not even that "leet" at running a summoner.

My eidolon can duplicate the things that make your Dire Tiger so hideously powerful at offense. And then I start piling things on top of THAT.

At least the eidolon has to PAY to get large and get all the stats. Animals just get it for free.

Silver Crusade *

The giants aren't bad. But having non-templated animals is a little gimpy, I'll give you that.

Silver Crusade *

I still think that truly accidental nukeage is a perfectly legal hazard in PFS. This does not violate any of the above rules as there is no intent.

Silver Crusade *

No, I've looked closely at the magical rainbow animal companion progression table. Combined with the outrageous stat increases most companions get at level 4 or 7, they are as powerful as I feared. I don't think anyone has been cheating or making mistakes; animal companions just mulch PFS that well. Animal companions even get access to feats that eidolons can't take because animal companions have the magical rainbow feat list from which they can take feats.

I haven't looked at summon nature's ally closely. In 3.X , I thought that the nature's ally table was better. They both get elementals, I think.

Silver Crusade *

Ezren is a dumpster fire in his own right, though.

Silver Crusade *

BigNorseWolf wrote:
The druid runs out of spells if they summon spam. The master summoner does it all day.

Actually, at higher levels, I think the druid can do it more than the summoner.

Silver Crusade *

If no one punches you in the face, a 1 round summons puts as many critters out as a standard action summons. If that's the reasoning, that's a bit weak. It's weak because people claim the druid spell list is lacking. The logical thing to do would be to dump those mediocre spells into summoned critters. If I ever played a druid, that's what I'd do.

Silver Crusade *

Not my summoner. 14 WIS 14 INT

Silver Crusade *

I'm more talking about the master summoner than the synthesist. I understand quite clearly the problems with the synthesist. I don't understand banning the master summoner but letting the druid run around unnerfed, since the druid was always more powerful than the master summoner anyway.

Also, I've seen more scenarios broken by druids who *weren't even trying to be broken* than any other class who wasn't trying.

Silver Crusade *

That's why my summoner plans to spend a lot of time invisible.

"Except that a eidolon can eat a Companion for breakfast without even needing a toothpick afterwards."

Except that I've seen animal companions that an eidolon couldn't even hit.

Silver Crusade *

RainyDayNinja wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
There is also the issue that magic weapons also penetrate precious few DR critters anymore. Weapon type, alignment and material DRs are all more common. If this were 3.X, I would prioritize magic weapons a lot more.
On the other hand, I had a near-TPK in a recent game because the BBEG was incorporeal, and only one PC had a magic weapon (luckily it was the archer paladin). They didn't even have Spellcraft to identify the oils of magic weapon they found in the scenario.

That's why you buy them so you know for sure what you have.

Silver Crusade *

I fail to see how animating a giant centipede or something like that is any kind of alignment infraction, but whatever.

Silver Crusade *

There is also the issue that magic weapons also penetrate precious few DR critters anymore. Weapon type, alignment and material DRs are all more common. If this were 3.X, I would prioritize magic weapons a lot more.

Silver Crusade

Forrestfire wrote:
Yes, druids are considered to be one of the best classes in the game, in the realm of "overpowered" along with all the other full casters.

Other full casters do run out of steam eventually, whereas the companions has endless melee attacks.

Silver Crusade *

2K gp is a lot at level 3. I can think of a lot of other things the money could have been spent on. I've had multiple characters not get a magic weapon until level 5,6,7. Oils of magic weapon, and even better, bless weapon, work just fine. Remember that the PCs usually have far more actions than the NPCs.

Silver Crusade *

PFS gives us an out by allowing such actions, and home brews don't have distinct rules, so what's the real argument here?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does anyone else find the combination of 9-level spell caster, spontaneous summons, wild shape, and 2nd PC in the form of animal companion to be very overpowered? Particularly for PFS games?

Silver Crusade *

You don't need a magic weapon at level 3 when a 50 gp oil of magic weapon will do. Or a 25 gp scroll if you have it on your list.

Silver Crusade *

Again, most good targets for animate dead aren't even sentient to begin with.

Silver Crusade *

Those discussions get ignored elsewhere, but I was mostly playing devil's advocate. I STILL can't see banning the master summoner with the more-powerful druid still in the game. But I never planned on playing a master summoner, it's just the logic of the whole thing.

Silver Crusade *

"And unlike the druid.. they didn't have to "restrict" themselves to an animal shape."

Fixed that for you. Yeah, I'm bitter about druids.

Silver Crusade *

This is why I've given up comparing anything to the druid. Note that the druid can summon just as many creatures as the master summoner AND have their animal companion still be full-powered. A druid can literally fill a combat board. Still a legal class.

Druids break tables without even trying hard, since the CR systems doesn't take into account druids getting two PCs for one table seat.

1 to 50 of 1,801 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.