|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Not in D&D.
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Thieves had skills in slots like wizards had spells. They fought on the cleric chart, ie, second best.
So, a level one skill slot might be "pick locks". This would allow the Original Thief to simply do so. Period. No rolls needed, and over and over. Other characters had to break down the door or use a spell. Disarm simple trap.
Higher skills slots might be "Pick magical locks". Disarm complex trap. Even higher might be disarm magical trap- I think that was a 3rd level ability.
Now sure, the DM could ask the player to play it out or even say "This trap is so fiendishly complicated I will require a roll".
But it made opening routine doors and disarming simple traps very quick and easy.
Quark Blast wrote:
The goblin would lose his Dex bonus and you'd get extra damage.
Yes, the shield bonus remains, since you still have to hit him where his shield aint.
You might as well say the Goblin should lose his armor bonus as there are places not covered by his armor and you'd hit there.
You got that wrong - wands and potions between, SPELLS are during - because they actually scale with level and can do a hefty chunk if you get high enough ones, like Heal. Wands are just potions you don't have to pull out multiple times. They still suck and do minimum level + modifiers. Staffs...well, that's a different story.
And a devoted channeler can really heal massively. Twice a round.
Quark Blast wrote:
Well, if the goblin didnt see you, you were "invisible" thus sneak attack.
So you're the guy responsible for all the underpowered rogues out there? =)
Naw, that's Paizo, pre Unchained. ;-)
The Thief was pretty powerful and very very necessary, esp in those days of diabolical Gygaxian traps. They were't just "make a reflex safe and take 5d6 damage". You could be Tported naked, or trapping in a pit with a Gelatinous Cube or lose life levels, etc.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Some of the things are still golden, others are best consigned to history.
Anything can be used as a pejorative by those not in the group- "New school gamer" "raised on video games", "powergamer" "roleplayer". etc.
My Dad played with us sometimes. He was a WWII veteran who saw quite a bit of combat. Combat Infantry badge.
When a early DM complained about the joking and wanted us to be serious, my father explained that when things were the worst, when death was just around the corner, they were cracking the most jokes- usually very dark humor.
Jessica Price wrote:
Because that's the OP, Jessica: "Quick survey... who here has a girl in their group... and is she treated with the respect she unquestionably deserves!! ;))"
So, if I answer the OP by saying yes, as I did- am I "congratulating themselves for being enlightened enough to have women in their groups" or just answering the OP's question?
The OP is not a "discussion of how to make gaming tables welcoming to women" it is a question- by a female note- as to who "has a girl in their group". She asked a reasonable polling question, and many of us are simply answering it.
This doesnt make us sexist or presumptuous or speaking for the other sex. It means simply we respect the Op and are answering her query.
We have had members of the Distaff in my games since 1974*. Yes, not as common as males, but it's by no means at all rare or uncommon to see females in table-top roleplaying games.
* Just look at my Manual of Aurania, which in 1977 recognized the contributions of two of our female players.
In my Wednesday game, we have one- in my Saturday game the females outnumber the males.
We have always treated them with the same respect the males members get- joshing, a little teasing, camaraderie, friendship.
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
Hah. Oddly I had a PC who could boost the party thru oratory and I gave part of that speech a couple of time!
Yes, more or less.
And they are. But DM's can assign a +2 bonus or -2 as they see fit.
DM:" so how do you convince the Queen?"
So, you're not penalizing those players who arent personally good at diplomacy, but still have a high score, just like you're not making the barbarian chin himself to make his strength roll. But cool roleplaying gets a bonus.
To me, the way I DM, it's the "rules" are more guidelines, and made up monsters and cool, unique loot are common. Gygaxian traps are there, too.
Manual of Aurania.
Except that you get fun things like a Fighter with a Int of 15, a Sorc with a STR of 15, a monk with a 14 CHA, and so forth.
I just rolled 4D6 drop one, re-roll ones (my fave)
But think of all you can do with that!
Why bring it up then? When you set up a hypothetical then attack it, that is a strawman. You didnt know that?
In fact I have never seen the "Stormwind fallacy" properly used, except as a attack on others.
Except no one here stated anything at all like what Lemmy accused "angry elitist grognards " of doing. Thus, there is no fallacy. No one here claimed "All good roleplayed characters are not min/maxed, and all min/maxed characters are poorly roleplayed."
The Stormwind fallacy is not a fallacy as it is mostly used to set up a strawman. No one here fell into "the Stormwind Fallacy".
Is that clear enough to resolve your error on how the Stormwind Fallacy is abused?
I really wish people would read things before they contribute their opinions on them. The Stormwind fallacy is in fact a fallacy. It is a specific example of the False Dilemma Fallacy. Which anyone who has read it would already know
It's not a fallacy as that not how it was used here. People didnt say things like "Well - optimized characters cant be roleplayed". That's a strawman, which is a type of argumentation/debate fallacy. The example given was a Strawman, no one actually brought forth a False Dilemma aka Stormwind.
In fact the "Stormwind Fallacy" as a version of the False Dilemma is rarely fallen into, what is much more often used is a accusation that the poster being replied to has used the Stormwind fallacy, when in fact they haven't.
Thus, as far as i am concerned the so called "Stormwind fallacy" aint. It's simply a way of putting up a Strawman and used to belittle another poster.
Much like "I really wish people would read things before they contribute their opinions on them." isnt actually a belief that the poster didnt read, it's simply a personal attack.
Smarnil le couard wrote:
And the City of Greyhawk itself was run by the Directing Oligarchy, aka the guilds.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
But the Plebes did elect the Plebian assembly and most of the Officials. The Plebian Assembly and the Tribunes had a lot of power in the late Republic.
Lemmy Z wrote:
1. You state this like it's true as opposed to your opinion.
2.You state this like it's true as opposed to your opinion.
3. You state this like it's true as opposed to your opinion.
You opinion is as valid as anyone else's but it's still your opinion.
Lemmy Z wrote:
You have a unusual definition of "cookie cutter". To me, it's have a PC who has little or no unique abilities and where everything is packed to optimize. The Christmas tree is decorated the same, the same feats as every other two handed fighter (for example) and so forth.
DM Beckett wrote:
You dont need a 18 or 20 to start. So, you can build a fine character without a really high stat.
I have played a lot of Clerics, Monks, and Paladins without dumping and they contributed just fine.
Lemmy Z wrote:
I am grognard as they come, but I look upon a character as a character, not a set of stats. I dont like, for example- the 3.5 and PF system of buying any or all magic items and thus selling off nearly all the loot to decorate your Christmas tree of magic items.
And Stormwind isnt a "fallacy." Just because someone calls it that , doesnt make it so. At best it's a observation.
10 pt buy can be a challenge, sure- but then its not the games fault that a particular combo doesnt do well when you are at half points.
So, if your DM gives you a 10pt maybe you dont run that combo. Wait for a 20 pt campaign.
I mean if your DM gives you a 0 point build, maybe you do dump.... that DM.....
No, but those are YOUR terms. Not unreasonable, but you will have to explain them every time, like Humpty Dumpty.
Shouldn't a mage be disarming traps? I mean that's what Summon Monster I is for in the later levels.
How does that disarm a trap on the locked door? or on a chest? Or a teleport trap?
I mean sure if the trap is a pit trap in a corridor and the ranger spotted it, sure, send in the pony.
If you are making your Inquisitor fill both the tank and skill monkey riches, then sure, he's gonna need a lot of good stats.
Make your wizard a gish who will fill both the warrior and spellslinger roles and you know what...?
Clerics who have to fulfill tank and divine spellcaster/healer roles have to have good stats in many abilities.
Filling any two niches- need five decent abilities, in general.
So I have a question, what do anti-stat dumpers feel about NPCs with dump stats? Given your average NPC has a 15 point buy...you get where Im going.
"Creatures with NPC class levels have stats in the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8), while creatures with character class levels have the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8);"
Yes, NPCs have one eight, sometimes a nine also. A tiny bit of dumping there. Peasants are different from adventurers.
Stealth, Disable Device, Acrobatics? Are you trying to take the niche of the rogue?
Wis you only need enough to be able to cast spells, so a 13 gets you to 3rd level, and my build gives you enough wis to cast every spell a Inquisitor can get.
My Build has a str of 18.
Everyone needs Bonuses to Con. a 12 int is fine.
Wizards need decent Con & Dex, too, at least as much as a Inquisitor.
OK, so the rude, ugly boor with bad breath and poor speech can say whatever the players wants him to say. He is still a rude, ugly boor with bad breath and poor speech and he's not gonna "help".
The guy with the 6 str isnt gonna help the guy with 18 strenght - if that's what the DM rules. The DM can assign a + or - 2 penalty at whim, based upon circumstances. It's in the rules.
I dont see how that is ironic or hypocritical, the DM can't metagame. He is the Dm.
Inquisitor and other skill based classes are my favorites and I never dump for extra points.
Inquisitor doesnt need much dex. Nor Wis. Nor Int. 12s are fine and then a little more in Wis as you level.
20 pt buy