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

DrDeth's page

3,973 posts. 18 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,973 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

GâtFromKI wrote:


Ok, so let's say you're level 3, nobody has a magic weapon, and you encounter a shadow.

Round 1:
* you have initiative, because you're a wizard and you always have initiative. You cast magic missile for 7 damages.
* the shadow is very confuse, because it's the very first time it takes damages.
Round 2:
* you use your pearl of power to get your magice missile back.
* the shadow asks itself what to do.
Round 3:
* you cast magic missile again for 7 damages.

The shadow dies, having only 19 hp and you have done 21.

Or, the battle goes.
R1 Cast Magic weapon. the fighter misses (50% miss) and takes 3 str damage.
R2 The fighter hits, half damage is 10 pt, and takes 4 str damge.
R3. The fighter misses, and takes 3 str damage.
r4 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
r.5 the fighter hits, but does only 5 pts, and takes 4 str damg
r.6 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
R7 The fighter misses, and takes 3 str damage.
R8 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
R9 the fighter misses due to poor str and takes 4 str damage, and is now a shadow.

But actually the best version is
R1- cast magic weapon
r2-3. cast magic missile


FuelDrop wrote:
I've had characters use toughness. Just saying.

So do I.


Fruian Thistlefoot wrote:

What Dr Deth is trying to say is 2 things.

1: Clerics are infinitely better then oracles.
2: There will be A LOT of status problems for the cleric to fix this campaign and if this oracle doesn't take those spells your group is going to be hurting. But with an Oracle he is dedicated to having those spells the entire campaign. A cleric can fix his spell list every day and remove what you have and not hurt his class any.

Now what Lastoth wrote about healing in combat is correct. Healing in combat is very terrible action economy. Shield other is good from levels 4-8. Later you will want the "tank" (bad term) to have mitigation of other sorts. Like Stone skin, Mirror Image, displacement, ect ect. to negate hits all together.

DRdeth is speaking from a power level aspect. Clerics, Druids, and Wizards are on the top of the food chain.

1. If you have only ONE Full caster, then yes- a Cleric is hwaaaay better than a Oracle. With a larger party, having two specialized oracles or a Cleric and a oracle, then it's different.

2. True. And it's kinda hard for the oracle to cover all the bases and still have useful day-to-day spells. Why would you take a Cure Blindness spell on such a limited list?

3. Terrible... unless your friend is going down if you don't. And with two feats you can Channel as a Move action, which is fabu. Gets back Action economy. Our Life oracle is amazing.


Lastoth wrote:
At no point is casting a healing spell more valuable than stopping one or several monsters from attacking. At no point is any heal spell going to make up for the melee damage a mirror image will prevent. If you haven't tried it, don't knock it.

1. True, but healing is 100%, while stopping requires a To Hit or a Save or Dr or ER or SR or a Miss chance or a combo of several of them.

2. You can only cast mirror image on yourself, and of course True Sight blows thru it. Mind you, it's a fantastic spell, but usually cast Round 1 or before.

3. I have. I have been in groups where healing was by Wand after battle. This caused only one death, but that's because the DM always had the foe switch after someone went down. But fairly often someone went down and spent rounds playing games on their device instead of their character. And, we blew thru cash for wands like a drunken sailor.


Larkos wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Is the rest of the party Evil?
Well he said "Keep in mind that this is an 'evil campaign' and my character is LE." I kinda assumed that this meant the whole party was evil as well.

I know, but then there was something about changing and plot twist and forsaking, so i was unsure.


Yep, few DM's think to just ask OOC. It's perfectly OK to do so, and in fact it's generally a Good Thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jay the Madman wrote:


Of course a magic Missile is situational. All spells are situational.

Wizard:"We need to get out of this deep hole, what spell should I use? Magic Missile!"
GM: No effect
Wizard: "Fireball! That is my go-to spell"
GM: Still no effect
Wizard: "ooo I know. Haste! That spell is perhaps the most useful spell available"
GM: ugh

Yeah, well that's one thing about the Optimizers here on these boards.

Toughness isn't the VERY VERY best feat evar, so it's useless. The rogue niche can be filled by other classes, so the class is worthless. The crossbow isn't quite as good as the Longbow for dedicated archers, so it's there as a trap. Or maybe just there because SKR hates crossbows or some other silly reasoning.

Everything must be the very very best in ALL situations and the way THEY play or it's worthless crud, and a TRAP! by the devs.


Is the rest of the party Evil?


Here's the problem. D&D is a Game, and in order to have Fun, you must Play. Sitting around waiting to be rescued is not playing and thus not Fun. Nor do I have much fun playing a temp.

Splitting the group is the same- half the play-time, double the work for the DM.

Just ask the players. Do they want to sit out and wait to be rescued- or just have their PC dead or even NPCed from now on, assuming they could be rescued.

My suggestion is to have the two captured do new PC's. Then if the new group wants to rescue the prisoners (which they should) then after they do so, they can put the other PC into "back up status".

But other than the fact they are PC's- why doesn't the BBEG just kill them? Honestly that's what'd be done. No rich ransom, too much risk keeping them- dead.


Lastoth wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Yes, he can know them. But will he? The advantage of a Cleric is that tomorrow he can cure Blindness, etc. Lesser Restoration is a must do, but the others? And if he's stuck in melee how does he heal others unless he has Channel?

He wouldn't, healing in combat is terrible at every level for clerics. We've moved away from it because almost anything is better than wasting action economy on those spells. We've had numerous campaigns that have been a lot better since moving out of the "this guy is our healer" mentality.

Keep in mind his combination of shield other (to share damage with them) and his swift self healing *IS* good action economy, and far more healing than we usually get, so he's a big bonus.

Ah, so you play Rocket tag. In most games, where encounters last 6+ rounds, like the way the devs play and my groups play, in combat healing is a Must. Nevermind.


ZanThrax wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
ZanThrax wrote:
I'd suggest going with the Admixturer option, if only because the Lore Seeker campaign trait is a very nice trait for any caster that focuses on a single spell - like a Blockbuster Wizard does.
If you focus on any one spell or even school in RotRL you'll be sorry.
I've only played about a book and a half of Runelords, but I can't think of any reason to play a Universalist Wizard. Ever. I can't think of any way for an enemy to be immune to Evocation in general either.

Well, sure you take a School Specialization, but burning a couple feats on Spell focus, and then more on one single spell is a entirely different kettle of fish.

So, yeah, being a Evoker is fine. Being and Invoker that has spent all his feats on being good at one and only one spell? Not so much.

There is one series of encounters in the Runeforge....


TriOmegaZero wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
But that ignoring the images thing is a very useful benefit.
But that's not what he said, was it?

No, and I did not imply that he did. It's just another benefit of MM that many don;t seem to mention. MI is such a great spell, that any way to get around it is super.


Lastoth wrote:

I'm not aware of which spells oracles lack. I looked for the major ones (remove curse/disease and restoration) and found them all to be present. I felt the oracle would be exceptional in that role since he's not blowing his spells on control/healing being melee focused.

Yes, he can know them. But will he? The advantage of a Cleric is that tomorrow he can cure Blindness, etc. Lesser Restoration is a must do, but the others? And if he's stuck in melee how does he heal others unless he has Channel?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Balgin wrote:
It's also great for thinning out mirror images.
This keeps coming up like a whack-a-mole. Mirror images require you to roll an attack roll to have any effect on them. Magic Missile does not have an attack roll and ignores the images.

But that ignoring the images thing is a very useful benefit.


ZanThrax wrote:
I'd suggest going with the Admixturer option, if only because the Lore Seeker campaign trait is a very nice trait for any caster that focuses on a single spell - like a Blockbuster Wizard does.

If you focus on any one spell or even school in RotRL you'll be sorry.


Avh wrote:


Silent image, Grease and Ear piercing scream does the same job much better (staying with 1st level spells).

.

Silent Image does nothing to stop a fleeing wounded foe. Grease might- or might not. But in any case, he's still alive. Ear Piercing scream is a Close spell.


Imbicatus wrote:
DrDeth wrote:

Well, either you think you're gonna make it to level 20 or not. If you do think so, then multiclassing means you don't get the capstone, which in some classes is pretty sweet.

The capstone is a myth. Even if you make it to 20th level, an ability that is only there for less than 5% of your career is not as useful as an increase you can get from multiclassing that will be there for 70% of your career.

Then why do so many Builds go out to 20? And there is gaming past 20th. Besides there is this thing called Roleplaying.

Not to mention, like I said, many benefits of multiclassing are lost after a few levels.


Wizard is a great class to have in RotRL, but I suggest going straight. Things like Tport are necessary fairly early, and multiclassing will hurt.

You will NEED a full Utility and battlefield control arcanist. Now, if one of the two undecideds is gonna do a Sorc and the other a bard, well, fine. But if they both go martial, you're hosed.

TEAMwork is critical in RotRL. I also suggest a healer, which the Oracle of Battle isn;t very good at. Not necessarily for cure spells (it depends on your play style, we really need in combat healing, other folks play Rocket tag and it's not so necessary then) but the various Restoration/condition spells, etc.

I suggest for the two "undecideds" is Hospitaler Paladin*, and Bard. I note a lack of skills & healing in your current party.

* great for newbs, almost unkillable, and can Channel like mad.


Well, either you think you're gonna make it to level 20 or not. If you do think so, then multiclassing means you don't get the capstone, which in some classes is pretty sweet.

It's also usually a bad idea for spellcasters.

Sometimes you can take a level of a class and think the abilities of that multiclass are great, then realize 4 levels later they have fallen behind so much are nigh worthless.


Russ Taylor wrote:
DrDeth wrote:

Coulson & Fitz are absurdly pretty? May is OK if you like that type, and I don't think Skye is anywhere near as HAWT!!! as they are making her out to be.

So, wrong again.

That sort of comment sort of goes to the lopsided standards of appearance propagated by American media. Watch BBC for a while, particularly the ones not aimed at US audiences. And enjoy your heavily processed people on US TV :)

I do, and in fact I own several full sets on DVD. I don't find Coulson or Fitz to be absurdly pretty.

I am watching Foyles War right now, in fact. DCS Foyle is about as handsome as Coulson, Sam as good looking as Simmons, and Andrew is definitely a handsome fellow, about as good as Ward.


notabot wrote:


Wait, BBEG lasts 4 rounds? What tables are you playing at ;)

My combats, even epic ones, are over in 3 at the most. 5d4+5 isn't enough at level 9 to affect the outcome unless we get into one of those the enemy is at 1-15 HP, somebody finish it before he runs away or pops another "kill the entire party" effect.

If you are wanting do damage as a sorcerer you don't even want to consider using level 1 slots, combats dont' last long enough to bother with those. Level one spells? Sure, why not, but you meta magic those suckers so they can actually do something.

Sure, some people play "rocket tag" but I held a poll, and nigh every Dev who posts here added his opinion- normally combats last 5 rounds or more.

It's easy to give the PC's 25 pts and every PF source for builds, then match that against AP's designed fro 15 and only a couple of the rule books. If you allow the PC's that much of a power boost, sure, going against std Ap encounters, they are gonna be over fast.

I find MM to be useful for a 'finish off" or a fire twice with a rod of quicken.


andreww wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Yeah, I know. But what they assume is super optimized just for that one spell builds vs a out of the book AP boss, most of whom will then fail very often. of course, if your DM allows such optimized builds, then it's only right to boost the monsters a bit too.
I don't think that "have a decent caster stat and take greater spell focus" really counts as being super optimised. In fact they seem to be part of the standard CRB assumption. Even if we are using 15 point buy it isn't unusual or difficult to start with a post racial 18 casting stat. Two very basic feats and you are at a level where it is very common for equal CR monsters to fail their saves. It is almost as if the system is designed to ensure that spells actually work on a fairly regular basis. Who would have thought such a thing might be possible.

Well, here's the problem- "take greater spell focus" two feats to give you a +2 to ONE school. Sleep runs out of power very early and Color spray a level later. So BAMM!, all your feats and you are rather dangerous for a few levels against certain types of foes, and now you are pretty darn useless against (for example) undead.

So, it looks nice on paper, but no one ever really does it except to prove that low level wizards are powerful. It's not even really theorycrafting. It's simple building to prove a point.

And yes, 'equal" CR, but BBEG are often 2 CR higher.


Russ Taylor wrote:

I'm actually more annoyed by absurdly pretty casting (male and female) than an overly homogeneous primary cast, but both interfere with my enjoyment of story. Overly pretty casting tends to come at the extent of acting chops, too, hence Skye and Ward and the whole they-can't-act-out-of-a-paper-bag issue. Those issues run epidemic in American television.

Scripts have definitely improve the past few weeks.

Coulson & Fitz are absurdly pretty? May is OK if you like that type, and I don't think Skye is anywhere near as HAWT!!! as they are making her out to be.

So, wrong again.


notabot wrote:

I kind of laugh at the people who think that sleep is effective in this game. At level 1 you can face creatures that are already laughing at it. The guys even at level 1 that are problematic can have 5 HD, even at level 1. CR3 monsters and NPCs can have 5 HD quite easily. Another thing that sucks about sleep is its a full round cast and half the time even against mooks you waste a portion of it. Got a 2HD(which is CR1/2) and 3 HD (which is CR1) tolal encounter 2? Guess what, you sleep one of them, you still have to worry about it waking up (damage or being woken up). Still somewhat effective but nothing earth shattering. CR 2 encounters are pretty much the expected normal non trivial fight at level 1, which is when sleep is supposed to be most effective. At level 4, which i hear so often being used in sleep discussions, sleep is completely useless as even the minion level monsters have enough HD that you will be lucky to get even one.

As for color spray, it allows a save and requires you to be in squish range of the enemy. Not a good combination in my experience, especially at low levels. Some builds this works for, but quite often it doesn't. Against that CR3 boss? Its a save or stun for 1 round. Might as well just be flinging daze at it.

Yeah, I know. But what they assume is super optimized just for that one spell builds vs a out of the book AP boss, most of whom will then fail very often. of course, if your DM allows such optimized builds, then it's only right to boost the monsters a bit too.


Ilja wrote:


Of the new classes, the only ones I felt could easily have been made archetypes while retaining their flavor is ninja (archetype of rogue) and samurai (archetype of cavalier).

They are archetypes. just ones that are different enuf to need stated out.

Per James Jacobs: "Ninja is an alternate rogue. Technically, it's an archetype but one that does a lot more than, say, the pirate or scout does."


LN(g).


Lord Fyre wrote:

Speculation: is Antoine Triplett going to replace Grant Ward as the team's muscle?

It would help with the "whiteness" of the core cast.

!/3 are minorities. Asian.


To bring in realism, since it's pure pig iron, toppling it like that would likely shatter it, and note that the spell simple sez that toppling like that can crush those underneath, not act as a bridge. Iron, not steel.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
atheral wrote:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

Impossible. He's not smart enough to be a single agent, let alone a tripe one.


chaoseffect wrote:
Yeah I see your point about Pseudodragon, but Ratling. Now that's an awesome familiar I never see being discussed.

You must be Chaotic Evil, so few will take this.


PF or even D&D is not a PvP game. So, I can't understand why you want to do this in the first place.


Tinkergoth wrote:


These make less sense to me. I've been playing with these guys for years, and never noticed a smell of smoke clinging to my furniture. Right after they have a cigarette, yes I can smell tobacco, but it fades within 15 minutes. They don't reek, or smell in general. In fact the only time my place has ever reeked of smoke was when I first moved in, and the guy there before me was a chain smoker who ignored the no smoking indoors clause in the lease.

No, it's just super easy to become acclimated to the reek. Just the amount of smokers you seem to be normally around has likely de-sensitized you to the smell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ParagonDireRaccoon wrote:
In 1E there was an adventure module where players started out without a class, and the actions they took throughout the adventure determined what their class was. If I remember there was a checklist, the the DM kept track of actions for each PC. I may work on something like that for PF this summer, it recapture a lot of what I think of as essential to the AD&D experience- focus on roleplaying and character personality rather than build, hopefully some of the sense of wonder at...

All good points until here.

Boy did that suck. I ended up with a cleric who had a Wis of 9, and unable to cast spells. Of course, I just never played him again.


Tinkergoth wrote:

I don't understand the whole no smokers thing. I mean I don't smoke (I rarely used to, but haven't at all for a few years now), nor do most of my friends, but a few of the guys do and it honestly has no bearing whatsoever on their ability to join in on the gaming groups. Hell, they're some of my favourite people to play with.

It's not like they're lighting up in the house or anything, we just take a break every now and then for them to wander outside for a smoke, and I go with them for conversation and to stretch my legs...

Smokers stink.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We have too many players for the PF groups, not enuf for the 3.5 game, but we attract mature roleplayers.

No smokers. Must shower. No cheating.

I ran into a guy on the train who had a bag that said "Bag of Holding" so we started talking and I invited him.


Ok, guys enuf with the hijack about cartoon quality, please.


Marthkus wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Really? I see lots of Dual-Cursed Heavens Oracles with Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master/Wayang Spellhunter Persistent Color Sprays. Stuns for rounds and rounds and rounds. Odds of passing save get extremely slim with Misfortune added on top of Persistent.
Cool, cause I've never seen that particular one-trick pony build in play before.

No one has. In fact it's illegal.


Anzyr wrote:
I imagine that's the system mastery divide. And if the spellcaster is doing more then the martials at those levels like they should, it speeds up combat immensely I've found.

"system mastery divide" what do you mean? Do you mean that people with more "system mastery" have more or less rounds per encounter?


Anzyr wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
At least 4, and probably as many as 9-10 times (I might be underselling this slightly, but I'm trying to be conservative). Which works out to 3-5 encounters.
4 times works out to barely one encounter.

4 is the barest minimum and will usually work out to 1.5-2 encounters. 9-10 however will work out to 3-5 encounters.

It's quite possible that your encounters only last 2 rounds. However, my poll, which included feedback from nigh every Dev who posts here, indicates the most games have encounters that run at least 5-6 rounds, sometimes longer.

However, if you do have only 2 round encounters this does explain some of your opinions about spellcasters. The biggest limit on spellcasters being the number of spells they have, and if that limit is gone, then spellcasters get FAR more powerful.

Mind you, a solid minority did say they have 2-3 round encounters, so you're not alone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Manimal wrote:
Hey, bbt, if I came up to a group and asked them if they could help me flesh out a concept for my latest "toon," then proceeded to make it clear that I was talking about a PC, and a member of that group said, "Gee, I was going to help you until you used the term 'toon,'" how should I interpret their reaction?

I'd explain that our group, being mature, experienced roleplayers, do not play with "toons". Nor "murderhoboes".


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Perhaps I define "murderhobo" differently. I see the murderhobo as a guy who doesn't look after his lodgings and makes his living killing things.

The murderhobo's not necessarily evil—he might even be a paladin—but he is basically a vagrant with a shotgun. In a good party, he's a well-meaning vagrant with a shotgun.

These characters are especially common in "chill roleplaying" adventures like dungeon crawls.

I see it as a hyperbolic term. Obviously, you're not a "murderer", but "murderhobo" sounds funnier than "honorablecombathobo".

That term is "adventurer' and has been around for ages. No need to get people riled up with a new term with insulting & derogation terms loaded with negative connotations.


K177Y C47 wrote:
DrDeth wrote:

Sure, a wizard, esp a Battlefield control wizard is very powerful- but not until you get to level 7 or 9. Even so a BC wizard isn't showy, he lets others be the star.

At lower levels, it is surprising to see a PC consistently one shot a BBEG.

Evil Eye: Don't care if you pass or not. You are still getting the penalty

Misfortune: With a lowered Will save, lets have some fun

Quickened Ill Omen: Pretty much same thing as Misfortune.

Slumber: If either ill Omen or Misfortune stick (whih the likely are), then Slumber becomes Devastating. This gets especially more so if you cast any other will save de-buff prior to really lay on the hurt.

A Battlefield control wizard has none of these.


K177Y C47 wrote:


1) Glitterdust has no HD limit...

3) Slumber Hex has no HD limit.. and when combined with the evil 3 (Misfortune, Cackle, Evil Eye), it pretty much will hurt. Oh, and if you REALLY want to be funny, use a lesser rod of quickening on Ill Omen before popping off the hex and the BBEG is pretty much dead...

Yes, but you get a save every round and you can still act freely. You can withdraw have your mooks cover for you and cast spells still.

3. Yes, but it has a 30' range and all it costs is one mooks standard action to wake the BBEG up. Then he's immune.


Anzyr wrote:
At least 4, and probably as many as 9-10 times (I might be underselling this slightly, but I'm trying to be conservative). Which works out to 3-5 encounters.

4 times works out to barely one encounter.


Scavion wrote:
DrDeth wrote:

Sure, a wizard, esp a Battlefield control wizard is very powerful- but not until you get to level 7 or 9. Even so a BC wizard isn't showy, he lets others be the star.

At lower levels, it is surprising to see a PC consistently one shot a BBEG.

Scythe, Greataxe, Falchion crits say otherwise. Glitterdust says otherwise. Color Spray says otherwise. Sleep says otherwise.

How low level are we talking here because all of those threats are definitely boss killers 1-4th level. Crits stay scary till about 9th level. Glitterdust is a devastating debuff that turns a hard encounter into a mop up.

Slumber Hex consistently makes boss fights a coin toss into a 1 round kill.

Bah, BBEG fails TWO will saves in a row? Not likely. GD is nice for a round.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
As a player of a summoner, I sideline the table-time and spotlight hogging by giving out my summoned monsters to my allies to control. So everyone gets a minion to control on their turn (thus everyone gets to share equal time and do the fun of rolling for minions).

I'd really hate doing that.


Sure, a wizard, esp a Battlefield control wizard is very powerful- but not until you get to level 7 or 9. Even so a BC wizard isn't showy, he lets others be the star.

At lower levels, it is surprising to see a PC consistently one shot a BBEG.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The hate isn't due to being OP, so that's a side issue and compared to Wizards Summoners might not be that OP.

The hate is mostly due to being a HUGE spotlight & table-time hog and being super complicated and the build being wrong every freaken time.

The fact they are also quite powerful just makes those two things even worse, true.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Why so much murderhobo hate? I've always seen it as a good term for the "classic" style of PC. I obviously wouldn't use it for games where "murderhobo" PCs weren't present, since it wouldn't make sense there, but otherwise...

I have been playing since )D&D days, as "classic' as they come, and no, unless you were playing with 14yo, people didn;t play "murderhobos". They went on quests, killed monsters who were endangering the innocents, and generally were Good Guys.

Even when we ran the odd all Evil game, our plan was to do some great far reaching evil, not kill a few villagers and steal their chickens.


thejeff wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:

Skills suck?

I can make a 1 in 4 roll. I've made harder rolls (like needing a 19-20 to hit on a d20).

I was going over the table of thief skill progression recently. I do love it, and I was finding some ways it was superior to 3.5/pf.

Just look at it.
http://cybertrout.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/thief-skills1.jpg

Look at that climb walls and how quick pick pocket goes up. Find/remove traps takes a while, but it increased quickly.

The difference is with a lot of the thief skills, it's a one shot deal.

In a fight, you'll make a bunch of attack rolls, you'll miss some of them and hit others.
Miss your hide or move silently rolls and you're probably spotted.

Again, I'm not really trying to bash thieves here. I'm saying a 10% chance to Hide in Shadows sucks. I'm saying a 30% chance to pick pockets sucks. Because you can't rely on them.

Sure, they get better quickly, but you're talking about stealing 1000s of gp at 1st level when you're failing most rolls most of the time. There being easy opportunities to swipe that much gold didn't exist in the games I played.

The class had a couple other things going for it. Remember, skills added racial and Stat bonuses, and they stacked.

Next a design feature of the class was that it would be a level or two ahead of the pack at low/mid and then high/mid levels. That is a HUGE boost.

Nor did you need to steal all that stuff, since you got eps for adventuring, etc.

1 to 50 of 3,973 << 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.