Diabhol's page

Prerequisites: Dexterity 15, Weapon Finesse, Acrobatics 5 ranks,
proficient with a finesse-able martial weapon.

Why Acrobatics 5? Why can't I play the concept I want to play from Level 1?

• +2 CON belt

I'm a big fan of Constitution. Can't ever have enough of it.

So I'm thinking of making a Wizard/Monk hybrid. Will he suck balls?

Probably.

You could always try the Kundala from the Book of Erotic Fantasy.

So im building a character for a campaign centered around outsiders (chaos)

Trying to decide if I should go TWF ranger or Fighter. Rangers get a lot of the feats for free, without needing the redic. dex mod, allowing them to focus heavy on str. At the same time, fighters get so many feats.

I'd say go Ranger and use a double-weapon. Then you can TWF or 2HF whenever you want. Ignoring the Dex requirements is huge; it means you can go Strength primary, Con secondary and worry about everything else last.

So, there's lich riding a zombie wyvern and we've discovered he's immune to metal weapons via some spell.

My Ranger, having a decent Athletics score and a ring of Free Action, leaps onto the zombie wyvern, grapples the lich and moves him 5 feet off his flying mount...where they fall about 50 feet to the ground and the threat is ended.

Of course, we've no idea where his phylactery is, so he'll be back eventually. Still, it was a pretty awesome maneuver and the last time anyone in the party pulled a stunt like that, it was the animal companion doing it. :)

Definitely not going down the mounted chain. My only concern with Cestus is how low the dmg is on it. Going all paladin seems to be a significant blow to the dmg I want to be able to do, I guess smite will close that up a bit, I think I'm gonna go with the Pally 2/Monk 8 build. Should I consider any Archetypes or stick with the base classes?

The dice size isn't that big of a deal; your real damage is coming from Strength and Power Attack no matter what weapon you use.

I still wouldn't recommend multi-classing. :)

That said, if you like Monk, I'd recommend either Tetori (if you wanna wrestle), Weapon Master or Martial Artist archetypes.

So to get an effective scout, we probably need darkvision right? Whats the cheapest option for that?

Can't beat the free cost of being a Half-Orc. :)

I agree that sticking to one of the other is going to be the best option, but would it be possible to build an effective unarmed striking paladin? If so, how would you spend your feats? Id assume Human would be the best bet??

Definitely Human. And you got two options: either Improved Unarmed Strike and a one of the Style Feat trees from Unarmed Combat OR you could just use a Cestus as your weapon and get it enchanted like a regular weapon. The first option works best if you don't plan on being mounted, 'cause you need the feats.

high stats I kind of wanna play some form of monk (maybe even with a dip of pally) but from all I have seen here on forums, they aren't very good.

Ah, nonsense. A Paladin would add serious power to the group and I'd definitely recommend it since nobody else in the party is full BAB.

Alternatively, people who say Monks suck are flat-out wrong. Treantmonk's Guide proved that pretty effectively. Monks, played correctly can kick a good amount of ass.

That said, pick one and go full-classed with it. Multiclassing will just weaken the build.

I've always wondered if anyone ever tried to build a character with two paragon classes (like half-elf and human) and then went directly into a prestige class. Always felt that'd be kind of interesting. :)

A Fighter using the "Dazzling Display" feat is able to lay down a pretty severe mass debuff through the use of a Charisma-based skill and a appropriately flavored show of dashing swordsmanship.

1. I'm pretty thoroughly unimpressed by Dazzling Display.

2. A feat ain't a class. :)

How would you convert the class defense bonus from 3.5 to pathfinder? Would you keep it as written, tacked onto the PF system? What complications could this variant system create?

This is how we do it:

"Class Based Defense Revision
We will be using a variant of the Class Based Defense Rules. The changes are as follows:

"Defense is no longer based on total character level. Rather one's Defense AC Bonus is derived from the actual levels of class that provides the AC bonus as per chart 4.1 in Unearthed Arcana (adjusted for Pathfinder below). If a character is multiclassed he takes the value of his first class and then adds +1 per additional class defense category possessed. In addition, Class Based Defense no longer provides full bonuses against Touch Based attacks; instead Class Defense provides half of its value against Touch attacks.

Again, Dawnflower Dervish Bard is the answer. It's a Dex/Cha class that fights with only one hand. You still want some con, int, and wis, and str probably shouldn't be too low, but you're mostly riding dex and cha. It's perfect for the dashing swordsman. You even get Prestidigitation to keep your sword all sparkly and shiny.

Honestly, I don't agree. A Dervish Bard is a Bard, not a swashbuckler. It has too much other stuff going on and, honestly, why would I want a 3/4 BAB class? :)

If Aroden was murdered, who benefits? Who had the means and the opportunity?

Asmodeus seems to be the biggest benefactor from Aroden's death and he's got plenty of means, motive, and opportunity.

I thought I would give him a level of Fighter and then Rogue (Rake) all the way up to Duelist, but I'm not so sure anymore.

Any thought and advice will be much appreciated and digested :-).

Cheers

{Rant} Sadly, no one in the history of d20 seems capable of constructing a swashbuckling class or PrC that uses Charisma in any meaningful way. I will *never* understand this oversight, but it straight up murders 90% of all dashing swordspeople concepts. {/rant}

That said, my recommendation would be Weapon Master Fighter into Duelist as quickly as possible. Grab the requirements for Dervish Dance, Weapon Specialization, and the Crane Style feats.

Heck, you could probably just grant the numeric bonuses of the Vow of Poverty as well, though the removes options and does little for dedicated casters.

This seems like the easiest and most obvious option to me.

One of my fellow players claims that the D&D 3.5/Pathfinder ruleset simply does not work without spellcasters and magic. I think this is just silly. If one made an entire setting specifically designed without out it, new classes, new monsters, and the equivalent of most magic items (technology maybe), I think it could work.

What does the community think?

I think that's called Iron Heroes and it's something I've always wanted to play. :)

Seems far easier than going through every PF/3.5 book and finding the spell-less versions of every class.

(That said, is there a version of the Bard without spellcasting in any d20 book or supplement anywhere? I'd love to see it.)

No gnomes, halflings or dwarves. I just don't like short races, apparently.

I tend to be play the taciturn pragmatist.

"What's the easiest way out of this situation?"

"Shoot the hostage."

Step 1: High primary stat, high Con, decent Will save.

Step 2: Neutral something.

Step 3: Human, 'cause I'm a feat junkie.

Step 4: Whatever. :)

Step 5: Front liner or artillery.

Unless I'm playing the Big Damn Hero, wherein Step 2 is "something Good."

My best crits have been with my crossbow-wielding ranger. Most recently, he took out one of his best Favored Enemies (Aberrations) with a shot worth 100+ points of damage at level 15.

Several levels earlier (around 10th or so, I think), it was 80-something points of damage to the iron golem-generating "orb."

Ranged criticals are somehow extra satisfying and I don't know why.

So I am the GM of a campaign my party ran into a Succubus, now before any discussions or me introducing story hooks one of my players instantly shouts "I wanna have relations with her"

Nothing evil about it. It's a horrible waste of resources, but if the party is ok with that, it's fine.

Nothing about sex is inherently good, evil, chaotic or lawful. Incidentally, the Book of Erotic Fantasy has an *excellent* write-up on how the various alignments view sex and romance.

I've seen the rules for racial hit points (which I really digged) but what were these? What were some of the big changes from the beta? Where could certain interest parties go looking for the Beta rules? I've always been fairly curious.

Overhand Chop and Backswing are now features for the Two-Handed Fighter Archetype in the APG.

Nobody likes Hamatulatsu, eh? :)

Monk, weapon adept?

Fighter weapon Master?
Magus staff fighter?
Something I am not thinking of?

Say at around level 7 or so, that way the build has time to take a little shape.

TWF Ranger would be an excellent choice. You can dump Dex, get high Strength (followed by a high Con) and two-handed Power Attack anytime you can get a full attack.

A Weapon Adept or Martial Artist Monk would be good choices, too.

Ok, assuming a 6th level Monk already has Improved Grapple and Deflect Arrows, what's left?

Catch Off-Guard, Scorpion Style, Gorgon's Fist and Throw Anything all suck. Improved Bull Rush, Improved Disarm, Improved Trip aren't the focus of this character, so they don't seem like great choices. Combat Reflexes and Mobility don't fit the character's combat style and Dodge doesn't really seem worth a feat.

Hamatulatsu seems to be the best choice, though it's only slightly better than a cestus when you crit.

Am I missing something?

That got me thinking, does anyone else still use the beta rules?

Just the Racial Option for extra Hit Points.

I really miss having Overhand Chop and Backswing as Feats, though. :(

I would've suggested a Paladin, personally.

Low: 1-10

Mid: 11-15

High: 16+

Of course, I'm mainly thinking in terms of melee characters where you're in low levels until you get that third iterative attack.

So. If you allow non-paizo stuff; what specifically have you allowed in your games that you really liked?

In this case I'm counting 3.5 materials as viable 3PP.

Anything specific you like having in your games that you let your players have access to?

Pretty much all 3.5 stuff we allow in our game. Fighters, in particular, benefit greatly from PHB2 feats. I think Short Haft is a feat that *really* needs to be recreated in Pathfinder. My Ranger is currently rocking the Zen Archery feat from Complete Warrior and has his Wis pumped over 20.

Since it's a Greyhawk game, we use Greyhawk regional feats from Dragon Magazine.

I certainly have. Salesmen, Waiter, Medical professional, and now I work in Computer Technology as a member of the military.

Try stating me up with one class I dare ya.

Expert. Done.

Rogue, if you insist on a PC class...

;)

Personally, dipping is lost on me, but that's usually because the features I like tend not to appear in the first 1 or 2 levels of a class.

Diabhol wrote:

Definitely go with the 18 Strength build.

Why not go Orc Double Axe? That way you can go two-handed anytime you can't get a full attack and still do some decent damage.

That is a great, great suggestion... but the build you speak of intends to rely on critcal effects like Stagger or Stun, and axes have woefully low crit ranges.

In which case I'd suggest not relying on crits and just relying on straight damage. :)

Definitely go with the 18 Strength build.

Why not go Orc Double Axe? That way you can go two-handed anytime you can't get a full attack and still do some decent damage.

I have concepts or classes that I want to try, inspired by various sources.

My PFS character is a Chelaxian monk. All the monk talk on these boards made me want to try one. :)

My home-game (PF+3.5) character is a very "I follow the green faith" kind of switch-hitter Ranger.

My last (PF+3.5) character was a two-handed polearm fighter, who was the bastard son of a King.

I like trying new concepts and don't like repeating myself if I feel like I got a good stretch as a given PC. I don't plan on playing a Monk or Ranger after these characters are done and it'll be some time before I try playing a Fighter again.

Next on the list to try? Bard, Cleric, and Wizard, mainly. Possibly Barbarian, *maybe* Rogue if I want to try a character going for the Pain Taster PRC.

For your standard human-centric fantasy Kingdom, I'd say (in no particular order)

Bard: These class features reflect the inspiration of groups, coupled with the varied learning that a noble would be provided. The Bard is a character born of high standing and trained to rule when he comes of age.

Cavalier: Your standard courtly knight, trained in tactics and war. The Cavalier is the type of character that leads an army to take the throne and either grows into the role of King or loses it upon his death (natural or otherwise).

Monk: A Monk as King is practically impossible to assassinate and will have a high enough Wisdom to do the job well. He won't inspire anyone personally, but the country will run like a clock. He'll need someone (preferably multiple someones) to advise him with either a commoner background or a high degree of empathy and he'll frequently make the right choices.

Alignment:

Lawful Good and Neutral Good are the alignments best suited to rule a country; those are, after all, how we all want our own societies to be. Good laws written by good people and enforced by good people.

Lawful Neutral would be ok, but it focuses too much on order. It does, however, give a flexibility to deal with evil that good alignments don't often have. A King who, first and foremost, promised the safety of his subjects could pull off this alignment.

Chaotic Good could work, maybe? It'd have to be a small Kingdom that operated in some kind of benevolent, minarchist way. The King controls the military, his immediate vassals (if he has any) run the police and courts (with the King being the final appeal), and the citizenry basically just sort of living their lives. "Don't Be An Unreasonable A*+!%@~" would be the law of the land. This kingdom would likely be a breakaway society from the LN kingdom mentioned above.

DISCUSS!

As a semi-mobile machine gun platform.

Unless koa-toa monks are involved; then I gotta draw the Sword of Plot and Cleave those b$&~*es to death.

Notable houserules that grant extra awesomeness:
* copious 3.5 material (including Zen Archery feat)
* allowing repeating crossbows + manyshot to work together
* full access to the druid's animal companion list (can you say T-Rex with Cleave, Great Cleave & Cleaving Finish?)

What keeps us from running roughshod over the game:
* We're playing through Night Below
* GM's an evil psychotic that pulls no punches

It's like D&D-as-Vietnam, only our cause is just... :)

Diabhol wrote:

The black raven wrote:

So, who do your characters worship ? Why ?

My present character, a Neutral monk, is torn between Asmodeus (an overly oppressive dick) and Calistria (stereotypical psychob@+%@). Both of them like to have a good time, but they take it to extremes.

Playing a Martial Artist monk?

Yeah, I couldn't resist the siren song of Weapon Specialization. :)

I am still leaning for that Scimitar, but with reworking, would the curve blade be better even with less damage modifier?

Scimitar + Dervish Dance will make you less MAD, so that'd be my suggestion. Sadly, if you're dumping Strength, you can't get Power Attack (and no Piranha Strike with Dervish Dance), but I assume you'll have another source of extra damage?

The PCs all come from the same (small) village.[/list]

This was used to great effect in a 3.5 game my DM ran, where all the characters were from the same village, many were childhood friends, and they all took the Unearthed Arcana Flaw "Shaky". The joke was that it was something in the water that affected their hand-eye coordination. :)

Honestly, the players should all either build towards the style of game you're looking to run or they should build with each other in mind and then you cater to all of them at once.

But the only time to cater to a specific player's build is when he's the only one who listened when you told the group what sort of game it was going to be. :)

any suggestions? I may just suck it up and go straight unarmed fighter

Straight Unarmed Fighter sounds like a good plan. Just get some Cesti, get 'em Masterwork, then make 'em magic.

Or brass knuckles. Whatever. :)

So, who do your characters worship ? Why ?

My present character, a Neutral monk, is torn between Asmodeus (an overly oppressive dick) and Calistria (stereotypical psychob#@&!). Both of them like to have a good time, but they take it to extremes.

In general, I'm very pleased with Pathfinder and how it handles certain aspects of the game. The fusion of ceratin skills is reasonable, the core classes are interesseting but yet, there's still one think that already freaked me out when playing D&D and it slowly starts freaking me out while playing Pathfinder as well, and that is: the lack of "magic".

Iron Heroes.

Problem solved. :)

If you want to be able to disable magical traps (and I would say just ask the wizard to kindly cast dispel magic instead), go bardchaeologist. You'll be worse off at the manoeuvres, and it will take you awhile to pull off the Whip Mastery line, but you'll have spells and better trap-busting abilities than a rogue.

I gotta agree.

Or, as the kids say, "+1"

It depends on what you want to focus on. Fighter will be able to use the whip much better, but bard will have far more variety.

Oh, I agree; I recommend Fighters for everything. :)

But the OP said he wanted to be a skillmonkey, too. *shrug*

Just a thought if you did want to go straight Archaeologist:

I think this is probably the best bet, honestly. Single-class Bard that focuses on Strength and Charisma.

Weapon Spec tree doesn't work unless you are going Weapon Adept archetype, since the feats require levels of fighter. unless you are going for monastic legacy feat, then it might work.

are archs allowed in PFS?

Ah, but that's why he's a Martial Artist. From Ultimate Combat:

Martial Arts Master (Ex): At 4th level, a martial artist
may use his monk level to qualify for feats with a fighter
level prerequisite when those feats are applied to unarmed
strikes or weapons with the monk special quality. This
ability replaces slow fall.

And archetypes are allowed in PFS, as far as I can tell. Rondelero Duelist, Dawnflower Dervish and Aldori Swordsman are all allowed.

Putting together a Human Martial Artist Monk for PFS; the idea of getting the whole Weapon Specialization tree sounded too good to pass up for a 3/4 BAB class. Anyway, should look like this:

Str: 18
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 09
Wis: 14
Cha: 07

Acrobatics: 1
Perception: 1
Stealth: 1
Use Magic Device: 1

[Traits]
Soul Drinker (add HD of last slain enemy as temp HP 1/day)
Dangerously Curious (+1 to UMD & makes it a class skill)

[Feats]
Human: Toughness
1st Lvl: Stunning Pin
Monk 1: Improved Grapple

Was thinking about possibly going Cornugon Stun (and using a Temple Sword) instead of Toughness, but having only ten HP at 1st level scares the crap outta me. :)

Anyone got thoughts or suggestions?

Just wondering; what do you think comprises the perfect party? How many, what classes, I guess what races, though I tend to think of race as relatively unimportant. For the purpose of discussion, assume 7th level all around, and a "standard" PF set of assumptions - neither low magic nor epic fantasy, just a straight-up, out-of-the box game.

Minimum?

Fighter
Witch
Bard
Ranger

You've got two front-liners, two healers, and some pretty decent arcane casting. If you expect traps, give the Ranger an archetype that gives trapfinding. They should be able to handle pretty much anything, especially if you have everyone max Stealth (and get the Highlander trait if they don't have it as a class skill).

Add a Cleric, Wizard, or both and the opposition is hamburger.

I thought of going (20 point based):

Half-elf fighter

STR 18
DEX 16
CON 12
INT 10
WIS 12
CHA 7

I know some would tell me to dump my int but I want to be a bit cleverer than a dumb brute (though a bit unskilled with words, to say the least :D).

So regular fighter would give me some +2 AC in full plate, maybe more if I get a STR/DEX belt.

Regular Fighter is the way to go if you plan to wear armor for your concept.

That said, swap the Dex and Con; you're a front-liner (I assume) and you'll get plenty of AC from armor. Meanwhile, you need HP. Favored Class bonus should go to HP as well.

So, how does your Ranger do significant damage, when Favoured Enemy doesn't apply? I'm mostly interested in archery rangers, although TWF Rangers are interesting too (I guess the TWF tree and maybe Power Attack). Otherwise, how do they keep up with Rogue, Fighter, smiting Paladin, etc?

Ranged: Rapid Shot, Manyshot, and Deadly Aim. If you don't have these feats, you are not an Archer.

Melee: Power Attack and Cleave.

Also, the 3rd level spell: Instant Enemy :)

Since we use 3.5 feats in my current game, my Ranger also has: Improved Rapid Shot (screw the -2!), Improved Favored Enemy (+3 damage), and Favored Power Attack (really sick with a 2-handed weapon).