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

Dragonsong's page

1,591 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,591 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Forgot one: I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass...


While we have already hit Minsc and the Tick. I will add a mighty STERNN! From Hanover Fist in Heavy Metal


Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
I told them they could not use something I hadn't read yet and that a monk/sorcerer/arcane archer cannot use flurry of blows and imbue arrows at the same time to cast a whole bunch of spells in one round while only spending one spell slot. They overruled me and did it anyway.

Wasn't speaking about you directly.


Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:


There shall be no overruling the GM.

Depends on if the GM actually RTFM or made and ad-hoc ruling without considering what (the at times convoluted) rules actually say.

The stupidity is not magically removed when sitting behind the screen.


Here it is!


Xabulba wrote:
Hookers?

To combine you and TOZ.

Hookers near Cannery Row.


Hama wrote:

I just read this...not being from US, it doesn't really affect me, but i have many friends living in the states, so i know that it will affect them. Just so you know.

I couldn't find any good links, but googling the title will find a myriad of articles on the subject...

It also may effect you depending on where the website is hosted, as my guess is if this goes through any shut downs will be blanket rather than allowing a site to continue to be accessed outside of the US.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
We now ask the much more existential: "Good, Evil, Meh. Does anyone out there share my feelings?"

And yet in theory this more existential question should be more useful, should it not rather than trying to answer a relativistic question in terms of moral absolutes, even if the game does deal in moral absolutes.

At least I know which tribes and mystery cults within a tribe someone belongs to by their search for like minded individuals, [sarcasm]So I can then avoid them like the plague or morally deride them.[/sarcasm].


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
"The only way to play a gunslinger is with a 'wild west' flavor, and therefore the class has no place in any setting which lacks trains and factories."

Additionally Swords an Sorcery is the only REAL fantasy.


Chris Self wrote:

As several people have said, it sounds like your players want to play a completely different game than you do.

Have you considered introducing them to something like Mouse Guard?

+1 to this Mouse guard can be a lot of fun and may get at something they are expressing they want to play.

[Tangent Alert:] Reading this makes me think of Shaffar of the people (the cat who opens a room for you after speaking with animals) from the Ravenloft: Stone Prophet video game


Ask if you can ditch the cleric and go zen archer monk or sohei monk all the way or go for maneuver master

Become a serious flanking buddy at speed with the ninja.

Ask for an inquisitor level instead of cleric: enhanced judgment feat treats you as 3 levels higher(not to exceed character level) for your judgment ability to enhance attack damage or saves coupled with spells like wrath, divine favor etc to augment your damage.


I think that in a low levels game (1-5) Zen archer may be the way top go for access to point blank master at 3rd. Full attack flurry even in melee combat is kind of big in low level games. Also in a compressed battle area inside a building, etc which are harder to manipulate through alternative movements etc at low levels also favor the monk as the levels increase though and flying, dimension door, etc become more viable it may be less so.


Egoish wrote:

Ignoring the other benefits of being a paladin and focusing just specifically on the mechanic that makes it do huge damage we have the cavalier, admittedly weaker, less times per day but identical in damage added.

Rangers gets early feats with no pre reqs and favoured enemy, fighter gets its built in hit and damage additions, other classes get all the things they get but the fact is when you compare them to a paladin you say the paladin is better "at damage" yet a cavalier with an identical ability is sub par?

Colour me confused.

The ability to hit is included in DPR calcualtions the cavalier does not get that boost which means while he hits as hard he doesn't hit as often. which means lower damage over the whole of their attacks. The ranger and paladin do get to boost the ability to hit and now with instant enemy spell an EXPENSIVE WAND means a ranger can apply his best favored enemy bonus to whomever he wants and it is a boost to hit and damage. Coupled with more access to archery feats means more arrows in the air. The suck of the wand versus a straight casting is it is no longer a swift action to do.

I have no doubt a cavalier will do well but I am not sure its stepping away from the pack as you seem to be implying.


TOZ wrote:
Conversely, an unholy longsword is a Gygaxian way to weed out Good-aligned 1st level parties, no save allowed. >:)

As a neutral person I see this as a win win no raving psychos (well fewer stupid CN/CG) and fewer goody-goodies now i need an axiomatic and anarchic one and be all set.


TOZ wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Well of course the Holy Avenger is cursed! It kills any Evil-aligned 1HD creatures that pick it up! :)
Psshh It dosen't kill them. Just make them weak and ineffectual like a small baby. And even if it did kill them D.S.A.F.
Actually, it does. It gives one negative level, and when your negative levels equal your HD, you die. Doesn't matter that it goes away when you drop it, you're already dead. :)

Ahh I just thought it applied penalties my bad, still... DSAF


TOZ wrote:
Well of course the Holy Avenger is cursed! It kills any Evil-aligned 1HD creatures that pick it up! :)

Psshh It dosen't kill them. Just make them weak and ineffectual like a small baby. And even if it did kill them D.S.A.F.


Kthulhu wrote:
Russ Taylor wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

Um, they're still effective. They're not getting the full benefits of being brilliant energy weapons, but they still hit and damage other foes that you might face.

Nope. Brilliant energy weapons do nothing to constructs, undead, and other nonliving things. This property cannot be turned off.

That isn't what was stated, however. Ashiel stated that they are only effective against humanoids. There's a lot of monsters out there that are neither humanoid NOR constructs/undead.

And show me where it says that it can't be turned off.

d20pfsrd wrote:


Activation: Usually a character benefits from a magic weapon in the same way a character benefits from a mundane weapon—by attacking with it. If a weapon has a special ability that the user needs to activate, then the user usually needs to utter a command word (a standard action). A character can activate the special abilities of 50 pieces of ammunition at the same time, assuming each piece has identical abilities.
Quote:


Brilliant Energy

Aura Strong transmutation; CL 16th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, gaseous form, continual flame; Price +4 bonus.

Description
This property can only be applied to melee weapons, thrown weapons, and ammunition.

A brilliant energy weapon has its significant portion transformed into light, although this does not modify the item's weight. It always gives off light as a torch (20-foot radius). A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.) A brilliant energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects.

Quote:

Corrosive

Source: Advanced Player's Guide

Aura Moderate evocation; CL 10th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, acid arrow; Price +1 bonus.

Description
Upon command, a corrosive weapon becomes slick with acid that deals an extra 1d6 points of acid damage on a successful hit. The acid does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.

Corrosive Burst

Source: Advanced Player's Guide

Aura Moderate evocation; CL 12th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, acid arrow; Price +2 bonus.

Description
A corrosive burst weapon functions as a corrosive weapon that explodes with acid upon striking a successful critical hit. The acid does not harm the wielder. In addition to the extra acid damage from the corrosive ability, a corrosive burst weapon deals an extra 1d10 points of acid damage on a successful critical hit. If the weapon’s critical modifier is ×3, add an extra 2d10 points of acid damage instead, and if the modifier is ×4, add an extra 3d10 points.

Even if the corrosive ability is not active, the weapon still deals its extra acid damage on a successful critical hit.

As it does not have the "upon command" sentence which all other activation effects do it cannot be turned off. The fact that the Burst weapons gain their critical even whenthe base property is not active only serves to augment this reading which I do believe is also the RAI as you were so found of pointing out up-thread.

Be prepared to walk around with a brightly glowing weapon you can sheathe at all times (good luck sleeping in that bright light).

Yea not really ever worth it to me as a weapon upgrade, and i do think it should be a command activated ability but nope.


Tobias wrote:

Since you haven't said otherwise, the base assumption period is what your player should be dealing with. That means, "Advanced firearms may exist, but only as rare and wondrous items— the stuff of high-level treasure troves."

So unless you're in the habit of letting players arm themselves with artifacts and major magic items at tenth level, he probably has revolvers far too soon.

The base cost of 4000 gp does not an artifact make while you may feel it is not kosher to have such an item at 10th level and even enchanted its only 12,000 per gun now granted that is a sizable chunk of cash for that level. That does not mean that its beyond the pale if the game is going to be wrapping up at say 12th level and he just got them. Then in that games individual context it seems like high level treasure troves. It all depends on how folks at an individual table are defining "high level".

If they are common and they choose to use the "more common firearms" options the price drops significantly, enough that I would consider picking up amateur gunslinger/ EWP at 11 if I was at that table.

Edit: But even with that I will echo Cheapy: a blanket acceptance of any and all material by any publisher can have unforeseen consequences for your game as often that one book is not analyzed holistically with the others in the game line.


Battousai wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:
Games like 3:16, Annalise, or Becoming Heroes get at the things you are wanting with fewer of the "Gaming the system" issues something like PF would have. To see a prime example of this being out of control see Old World of Darkness flaws.
You think it would get out of control?

Yes you seem to underestimate the number of optomizers/ powergamers/minmaxers etc out there. I wish I shared your optimism. It's generally not great as at worst its free points and at best it's additional layers of bookkeeping for the GM to have to deal with and make sure to use. The second is generally what leads to the first.

This is why I suggested games that more explicitly make you have disadvantages villianous traits, etc and a mechanical reason to use them yourself rather than try and avoid those situations or hope the GM doesn't ask to see if any one has a phobia: ladybugs at the annual ladybug festival of the Village of Hom where the goddess manifested as a giant ladybug to save the town.


Morgen wrote:
Karse wrote:

Everyone else is Level 10 as well. The main problem probably is because the rest of the melee party members miss a lot due to the fact that they aren't hitting touch attacks and their 2nd attack from base attack almost always miss.

So even though a Barbarian, a Fighter, an Aegis, a Magus, a rogue can do a lot more damage they usually don't because they miss more or they always need to run and chase the enemy for a single attack each round while the gunslinger just stay in the same spot shooting full attack rounds.

Sounds to me like you'd hear the same complaints if you were playing just a regular archer. I'm honestly a bit surprised at the whole 2nd attack almost always misses thing. What kind of insane AC's is your GM throwing at you?

Bestiary says CR 10 make your own monster should be around 24, yea I can see a lot of second iterative attacks missing even if your bonus is stout. It's generally the major limiter in the DPR olympics threads is the miss chance.


Games like 3:16, Annalise, or Becoming Heroes get at the things you are wanting with fewer of the "Gaming the system" issues something like PF would have. To see a prime example of this being out of control see Old World of Darkness flaws.


Exterminator wrote:
If going Cleric and not wanting to be just a healer should I try the inquisitor class or choose destruction domain?

There is virtually no reason to be a heal-bot in PF especially with the after combat options of channel energy and such. But of you really concerned with that look into a battle oracle to get a strong base maneuver of your choice and some of its associated feats for free.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Necromancer wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Necromancer wrote:
Not all of them, just the ones I don't care about.

Oh well in that case carry on. Have you considered a career in politics? I think you might be well suited for it.

just having some fun ignore my ramblings if they become upsetting

Vague statements alone cannot replace ranks in Bluff. Politics remain outside my reach.
Hm... ooh I know Doom sayer! We have an opening since the last guy has been wrong four times now.

Umm Apostle Paul was wrong about the date too which he assumed would be within his lifetime, of course eventually he had to revise his statement to be well it could happen any old time really so be ready. Pessimal thinking assumes the world can get no better or worse than it is currently and therefore this must be the end times.


Zombieneighbours wrote:
Curaigh wrote:
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Does the bread magically make you full after 2 bites, does it give you the visions of the dead whose bones were used to make it? No, then call it bread dot give it a special name unless it is special.Is perhaps one of the best ones for aspiring writers.

Not sure I entirely agree.

If the bread has special social significance, or is a regional variation, different from the normal bread ...
Nash loafs, which are an unleaven bread, made for holy days, or sophan, a regional soda bread, with poppy seeds and sun dried tomatos, ...

I think your point is his point :) (my emphasis)

Different kind of special in this case. Not special magical, not special fantastitc. Just special in the same way freshly cooked naan is special, straight from the tandoori is special. *mouth waters*

While fresh naan is wonderful (I <3 Naan as well), maybe not special. But yes I would include communion wafers and other culturally significant bread in my list of special; BUT only in the context that the author is describing the cultural event that that bread is associated with. if you are having a flat-bread with a meal in the book I actually prefer to leave it that vague then I can fill in the details of is it Naan, or Pita, or Tortilla, etc. I would also be curious why you are writing about a meal until you bring in the plot or dialog breadcrumbs, and grumbling about making me hungry while I am reading.


Blackborn wrote:

I dream of the day when d20 sessions will be broadcast on television like sports. Commentators and everything.

Commentator 1: Looks like he's gonna Power Attack. He's gonna need a lot more than that, though.
<player rolls>
Commentator 2: What is it? I can't tell.
<snap to camera 3, revealing a natural 20>
Commentator 1: CRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

Umm PAX already does this through Penny Arcade TV, with a studio audience as the commentators.


Gorbacz wrote:

1. Alchemist

2. Inquisitor
3. Witch

Yeah, APG is a good book.

I will +1 my fellow toothy bag brother

but i have to admit cleric (which i have avoided like the plague since ending 2ed) does belong on the list for a lot of the reasons TOZ mentions.

I am thinking about the suggestion someone made on the boards earlier this week or end of last week about making the domain spells ditch a prepared spell and spontaneous cast rather than cure/cause spells but I am nutty like that, for my homebrew.


wraithstrike wrote:

I think he was asking for a scenario in which the ranger or paladin would be left out(not feeling useful).

If not then I would like to know of one.
Describing a "swat" scenario from your group would also help.

I was indeed. Particularly with the advent of extra smiting oath pally's and guide or instant favored enemy options for the ranger. I don't see not having enough "oomph" during the major opposition combats. If SWAT tactics are being employed then minor combats are likely not really even a speed bump and do not need the "heavy artillery" so to speak.


Ricardo Pennacchia wrote:

I came up with some suggestions that can raise the rogue's effectiveness:

Skillful (Ex): Starting at 2nd level, the rogue can select one skill to add ½ class level as an inherent bonus to all checks related to the chosen skill. For every 2 levels after the 2nd, he can select one additional skill to add this bonus.

Improved Finesse (Ex): Starting at 2nd level, when using weapons affected by the Weapon Finesse feat which he is proficient, a rogue adds ½ class level (rounded down) to weapon damage (if using Two-Weapon Fighting, the rogue adds ½ level to damage of primary weapon, and ¼ level to secondary weapon – the Double Slice feat raise the bonus to secondary weapon’s damage to ½ rogue level).

Additionally, i think it's a really good idea to grant full BAB to the rogue when sneak attacking.

Comments?

I think those are marvelous rogue talents and as they are class level rather than character level it incentive-izes staying in rogue rather than a dip for 2 levels.

one puts the rogue ahead of the other skill monkeys one puts them into a better position as melee combatants. i would have to look at the other rogue tricks to make sure that neither was more abusive than casting 9th level spells but they both seem like nice flat top +10's to things by 20 and not over powering.

I am not convinced of the full BAB at sneak attack. While i know it is a system in use already for another class i, personally, don't like it for monk so Im not sure if it would like it any better for rogues. But would enhance thier combat ability for sure


Crazy Tlabbar wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:
Crazy Tlabbar wrote:
I enjoy combat.

I dont think you answered the question he asked there.

Also how many checks have you failed applying poison?

None. See my picture? Read my post closer, especially the part where I say that my party are all Noble Drow.
PRD wrote:
Poison Use (Ex) Drow are skilled in the use of poison and never risk accidentally poisoning themselves. Drow favor an insidious toxin that causes its victims to lapse into unconsciousness—this poison allows drow to capture slaves with great ease.Drow Poison—injury; save Fort DC 13; frequency 1/minute for 2 minutes; initial effect unconsciousness for 1 minute; secondary effect unconsciousness for 2d4 hours; cure 1 save.

I knew you were drow I just missed that in the entry for nobles, thanks!


Crazy Tlabbar wrote:
I enjoy combat.

I dont think you answered the question he asked there.

Also how many checks have you failed applying poison?


Zombieneighbours wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:
Your second argument was effectively optimization and role-play are mutually exclusive AKA the Stormwind Fallacy.

Hate to tell you this but the stormwind Fallacy is a straw man.

While Optimisation and role-playing are not always mutually exclusive, they can be.

There are different power levels within the game. A character that is designed for a campaign about murder hobos, does not fit well into game about arch mages, and an arch mage does not fit well into a murder hobo game. While a degree of optimisation is possible in a murder hobo's game, optimisation beyond a certain point breaks verisimilitude in many game set ups. As such, optimisation (especially when given greater weight than concpet at character creation), can damage roleplaying.

Roleplaying is not simply "doing the talky bits" that would be 'acting' which is of cause an important roleplaying skill. Rather Roleplaying is a combination of system mastery, acting, concept formation, maintaining verisimilitude, and assumption of character(being able to make decisions as your character would, based upon their knowledge, experience, emotions, and disposition(not to mention species specific psychological traits).

Optimisation is an aspect of system mastery. It should be used to make a character fit to its concept and the setting/story. When it exceeds that role, you are roleplaying poorly.

No in fact it is a fallacy although some disagree to its being a logical fallacy or not. It is a false dichotomy. You did say that roleplay and optomization were not feasable with your post presenting as if "I have almost made the optimized decision in 30 years because I am the superior role player, and one should trump the other." You admitted that you cannot/would not do this and then tried to imply that other people could not would not either, which is trying to provide a dichotomy that one of the two must be chosen. As none of the criteria for roleplaying force you have to have the word rogue on your character sheet to engage in roguish behavior; and as system mastery is a goal then that appears to imply the ability to handle as many aspects of the system (which includes combat) efficiently and effectively on top of knowing what dice you roll on your turn.


I forgot one:Westender


wraithstrike wrote:

I am assuming by campaign you mean extended adventure, and not an campaign setting.

I start with a general idea of the problem being caused by villian X. I come up with a beginning(how they get involved), and an ending(how and where the game will end). I then start to work on the middle, but I don't set things in stone. That way the players have flexibility.

I do like this piece of advice.

For me I have an idea of a major plot confrontation I have been kicking around for a while. and a location i want to start at

I cheat I use a topographical map of North America because major cities (except Vegas) are built on resource/transit effective locales (St. Louis is built in the same location as the mound builder city of Kahokia). I can look at actual pictures and go I want Dwarves here Elfs here, approximately this many ancient dragons through out the continent,etc.

I can set up regions and say all fighters from the Florida, Georgia Carolina's based region must be from these archetypes, all the rogues from there will be these archetypes. The area of north arizona all casters are wordcasters, etc. the when a player goes I want to play X class with Y archetype i can go ohhh OK you are from Z go look at pictures of this geographic feature (the mesas of north arizona, the blue ridge, etc. to get a feel for what environment you are from).

I want the players to contribute to helping me flesh out the world the customs the biases etc of the regions. I co-opt them into becoming co-creators and make them vested on multiple levels. At least that is the hope.

It is the only way I can fathom making players interested in your setting as well as the story.


Kakitamike wrote:
And again, I'm not saying these two classes are universally unattractive, I just feel they are overshadowed in bigger parties. Most games i'm in/run tend to field 6-8 players.

In a game with a bunch of SWAT mindset oriented players (Shadowruns Fields of Fire FTW) The Ranger brings a ton to the party I am failing to see how it would be overshadowed other than the high end C-M Disparity issue.

Can you elaborate.


We did Grimtooth's Dungeon of Doom as an all rogue,well one rogue/cleric multiclass in 2ed it was fun, but it was a strict one off no plot elements whereas i think playing a thieves guild could be fun.

TinyCoffeGolem wrote:


Stealth parties would be fun. Sneak past the mobs and kill the BBEG before anyone knew what hit em.

You'll need a feral druid, a healing druid, three rogues. ;-)

Psssh Why rogues when I could have inquisitors bards and rangers instead.


Steven Tindall wrote:

I'm going back to playing with electricity now.

Why are people who play with electricity crazy?

Involuntary electroshock therapy!

Who said anything about INvoluntary electroshock treatment. Two words- Violet Wand*** Warning- NOT WORK SAFE**

A) my dad was electrician till he retired couple of years ago. Electricity paid for my school

B) violet wand = teh win.


Zombieneighbours wrote:


Ranger:
6 + Int modifier.
15 class skills
The ranger also has some class feature synergy with skills, they are incredibly focused on wilderness skills. Ofcause that can be switched to city focused, but it looses the synergy in the other direction

Umm read what favored enemy gives bonuses to it is in fact very urban focused if you take ohh lets say human as one. Your right about the intention the theme however, the play doesn't fit the theme.

Your second argument was effectively optimization and role-play are mutually exclusive AKA the Stormwind Fallacy.


Steven Tindall wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:

Yes i think that in some games this unexpected decisions leads to places you didn't plan to go can happen, it did for one of my characters.

That's usually when i know that the game and the character are really working as it takes you, as the audience, into places you weren't expecting.

So what happened? Is it as strange as my business tycoon druid?

Details if you please.

Playing a thi-kreen druid trapped on a different prime material plane (yes this game did go into epic levels) due to Orcus making a play to be come a god by cutting off access to the other planes and altering weather to try and starve people into worshiping him. All I wanted to do was go home to my family to get off this ball of rock.

By the end of the game I had taken over the desert area where a fallen comrades race was obliterated as a demonstration of power. and established a series of bedoiun style communities (moving means Orcus' forces had a harder time finding you. After planartravel was restablished I then brought my tribe of thri-kreen to a new world, capable of expanding our tribe without warfare back home. Due to the connections I made with the Drow (behind the backs of my goody goody allies) I conquered a reptilianoid jungle to provide additional resources, food etc in game. Yea a druid with an 8 yr lifespan who just wanted to see his wife and kids became the king of about 1/6 of a continent.


Zombieneighbours wrote:


The rogue shines the brightest of all characters outside of combat, with only the bard coming close to filling its boots. And it can still performs adequately in combat

But it doesn't: the new ranger archetypes, the numerous bard ones, the inquisitor, the new monk variants all trample on the "out of combat lead" and can perform better in combat. and the new bard mini dimension door spells make maneuvering the whole party easier. So while the game isn't all combat if the edge really isn't there anymore out of combat for the rogue and that person can bring more effective options in combat (or buffing the party to be more effective) as well then why bring the rogue?

I don't like it I think it stink that it goes that way, but it does.


Kensai Magus the spell strikes and maximizing damage rolls could push towards the one hit kill. Also is a "no armor" option.

You may also be able to combine it with the blade bound magus.


BS in Religious Studies I got halfway through a masters in religious studies and got tired of having the faculty tell me folks had no interest in new religious movements their use of academia styled rhetoric, reactions to hegemony and extant political power structures.

With an undergrad that draws heavily on philosophy, history, anthropology sociology, political science, literary criticism, Saussure's language theory, & Campbellian/ Elliadian Mono-myth theories; I tend to be "that guy" at the table. The one who wants to ask about subsistence strategies. Why in this environmental context the sun god should be evil. Why the cosmology presented is based off of the "Kurgan hypothesis" and thus indicates a preexisting culture who experiences domination by another culture and the blending that occurs.

I also have a fork lift certification.


Yes i think that in some games this unexpected decisions leads to places you didn't plan to go can happen, it did for one of my characters.

That's usually when i know that the game and the character are really working as it takes you, as the audience, into places you weren't expecting.


TOZ wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:

And yet one of the best selling authors of the 20th century says use the accessible language which seems to contradict #4 as vandalize and champagne will be discreet information packets readily absorbed by the reader. Ok, maybe not in the specific spoken lines of a character but when describing a scene why not?

Fiction Rule of Thumb.

Only funny because it's true.


Color spray and Sleep can be good for a starting wizard. You cast once at the beginning of combat and then mop up with coup de grace maneuvers and attacks on the helpless opponents along wiht the rest of the party. This allows you to not use all of your spells in one combat. Flasks of acid and other splash alchemical weapons and holy water are all useful for the early adventurer.


Blue Star wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

I have not read this entire thread, but when fighter(melee types) get really cool powers it is called out as anime, wuxia, and last but not least "over 9000". The issue is that what is extraordnariy, but not magic different for everyone, so Paizo just plays it safe.

My source for that opinion is all the ToB bashing I see, even after the rules are proven to be misread or easily fixed in the case of the silly ability that gets rid of status affects, but the editing is too wide open to be definite.

At the end of the day it is still called out as magic despite the book saying otherwise.

I never really understood this. My group whole-heartedly embraced the ToB. Xenophobia maybe?

I did but I had to fight tooth and nail to get others in my group to even look at it and I could have cared less if I did less damage per round than the straight fighter I loved being able to add some magic to my warrior but then again I love Earthdawn for that very reason every class uses some magic tricks to enhance what they do. And I felt that I had a few more options in my non combat bag as well which was welcome.


KaeYoss wrote:

Sounds good. HBO seems able to give mature fantasy the adaptation it deserves.

The first book being turned into a film rather than a season can totally work, since it was really short. We'll have to see about the rest of the stuff.

And for those complaining about the end: You were told not to read on....

I was actually wondering if they might take the arc the comic adaptation did and start with book 4 and the story of young Roland and Susan.

But wit Javier Bardem playing Roland, I am guessing not.


Kakitamike wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Ranger specifically: They can ignore prerequisites for combat style feats. That's a huge advantage over any fighter. Due to this, they make the single best Switch Hitter (bow and two-handed weapon) fighter in the game, par none.

I agree that when it comes to two weapon fighting, the ranger is given a little more freedom in stat planning, because they don't have the dex reqs to worry about, but how much of a benefit is that? The fighter will have to take the prereqs, giving him more abilities anyway, and a high dex would be a benefit in the first place, as it adds to a number of relevant abilities for their role.

The ranger gets nothing special for archery. They get some feats that a fighter would get anyway, minus any of the prereq feats that the fighter would be picking up anyway.

Actually statistically speaking the ranger will hit harder as a two weapon fighter as he will need less Dex this means fights are over faster as flat top bonuses multiply on crits. For example a two kukri ranger will hit harder than a similar fighter. And as many TWF's end up opting for weapon finesse and then needs an agile enchantment to add Dex to damage. You don't have this "feat/equipment" tax to keep your attack and damage modifiers high. You are also mitigating what value of accessing a feat 5-6 levels ahead of anyone else is. This means in most cases that character can reliably do his thing more often and earlier.

If you are worried about a favored enemy because the GM has given you no details (which is a red flag for me personally) go with FE: Human it applies to 3 of the base races Human, Half-elves, and half-orcs. It doesn't ever have to go up after 1st level if you don't want it to. You can add the bonuses to the ones at 5, 10 etc if you never end up fighting humans and their close kin. The other solid I have no idea what this game will be choices are animals and magical beasts. Or, as Quandary suggested go with the Guide archetype and ditch favored enemy and be able to apply favored terrain and pass without trace to the entire party which means the more players the better it is. A 2500 GP(? i may be wrong on the price) investment in boots lets you add a terrain you don't have.

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill here, but I could be wrong.

But yes a well reasoned OP, I hope we can convince you to change your position.


TarkXT wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
TarkXT wrote:

Funny thing is you can do everything the bard archer does with...wait for it...an evangelist cleric of Iomedae. :)

Except you trade out arcane strike for full spellcasting. XD

Pssh. Good Hope / Blessing of Fervor are 4th level spells for them. That pushes back the ability to quickly buff up much further than a bard.

Plus, an arcane duelist can do all of that...in heavy armor. Without spending feats. Where's your god now?!

My god's laughing actually. Because when the bard gets haste and good hope? That's when clerics get good hope and blessing of fervor.

gentlemen, gentlemen can't we have both of you along one casts one the other the other and my zen archer monk begins mowing down the enemy you may join in next round as we blacken the sky.


IceniQueen wrote:

Maybe DeathQuaker is like Orlando you know the movie.

I on the other hand lost my head when my King and husband decided I was a witch and had seduced him because he wanted a younger woman that he felt could give him a male heir instead of the heir I gave him that was one of England's greatest monarchs. Funny how her child while male dies at 17 and was so gullible others really controlled him.

My neck still hurts from the swing of the Frenchman's sword connecting to my lovely neck :P

I will give a big ol' +1 to the Orlando reference

*High Five*


TarkXT wrote:


Funny thing is you can do everything the bard archer does with...wait for it...an evangelist cleric of Iomedae. :)

Except you trade out arcane strike for full spellcasting. XD

Honestly though not to spoiler too much about CoT but I will give you one important piece of advice from a GM who is running it for two groups: prepare for lots and lots of cramped indoor combat.

I myself would go fighter with an archetype that isn't archery and pick up a few key archery feats with the bajillion I'll have. That way my bases and damage are covered. That's the one strenght of fighers that's easy to overlook; they can spread themselves out of oen form of comabt very easily.

I kind of love that evangelist can do that but I am a please put your chocolate in my peanut butter and then give me some kind of guy.

If the cramped quarters thing is true (havent played the AP)and the OP is hell-bent on an archer the the Zen archer may be way to go.

1 to 50 of 1,591 << 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.