|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
It makes a lot of sense. Gary too the Kickstarter funds, stuck them in his pocket, pretended to go on a "fungus field trip", and now has no g&+@@*n intention of every doing any work in the RPG field again (after this debacle, I doubt if he could find employment in the field at any rate).
If this is indeed the case, then all the backers need to get together and file a class action lawsuit against him. I bet just the threat of it would cause him to get off his butt and finish his work.
This is one of the few campaigns in which a Cavalier is actually almost always going to be at full power. Plus they are natural kings. ;)
Then a Druid with an animal companion, you would have 3 combatants, 2 animal companions, a skill monkey/sage/trapfinder, a full caster, and a 2/3 "caster". Not too shabby of a party.
Personally, if I ever play in a Kingmaker campaign, I am playing a Warlord from Path of War.
In PFS I guess the closest thing to Iron Man one could get would be a Syththecist Summoner.
For Thor, class wise I guess I could either see Bloodrager or Warpriest working. I would actually think about going Dwarf and trying to get my hands on a Dwarven Thrower as soon as possible.
I don't think Hulk would be possible using PFS rules. If someone wanted to play him in my campaign I would basically have him use two separate character sheets, in normal human form, he would have levels in Alchemist, and in Hulk form he would be a Barbarian and I would port over the 3.5 Frenzied Berserker prestige class for him.
Knick: From the standpoint of which AP needs a revision in the form of a hardback, I agree with you, Second Darkness would probably top that list. However if going from a business standpoint, and which AP would make them the most money, I think Curse is the clear winner there. It is highly regarded as one of the most loved APs, constantly making most peoples top 5 AP list (if not number 1), and would probably have the highest number of sales (definitely higher than Second Darkness IMO). Add in the fact it is mostly unavailable and out of print is another point in its favor.
From a personal standpoint, I would absolutely buy a Curse hardback, whereas I would probably pass on a SD one.
If you are ok with utilizing something from 3.5, the Hammer of Moradin prestige class, maybe slightly refluffed, might be something that interests you.
For Iron Man, without a doubt, go with an Aegis
For Aasimar you could always go with the Angel Blooded variant.
Edit: Crap, just relooked and saw the letters "PFS", my bad.
This whole thing really doesn't make any sense. This company already released a highly praised full adventure path, and now they pull a vanishing act halfway through another one. I dont get why Gary just wont come on here and say "hey guys, heres whats up"? Doesn't he understand that people will accept delays as long as communication is maintained?
Agreed with rainzax on the layout. It has a similar layout as spells do in 1E/2E AD&D, and back then we didn't know any differently, then when 3E came out and laid out all it's spells in alphabetical order it was like a godsend. We still play some 2E, and flipping the book open to search for a spell during play is still a pain.
Dragonlance is romantical mid-fantasy about the epic struggles vs good and evil. It is about shining knights, and tinkering gnomes, and seafaring minotaur, and handsy kender, and death knights (one in particular). It is about wizard orders, and tests, and having faith, and hope when all seems lost. And yes, it is about dragons. It also becomes easier to slay said dragons when you are wielding artifacts specifically designed to mess them up (i.e. dealing permanent points of Con damage with each successful hit).
There are only a few novels that are basically required reading for Dragonlance, and those are the original Chronicles trilogy and then the Twins/Legends trilogy, anything past those can be fun but is ultimately superfluous (and those 6 books are arguably the best it ever gets in the setting anyway).
Ranger will be really good for this campaign. For 1st level favored enemy hints, I would suggest either goblinoid or undead.
Party wise, I would suggest a Wizard (or Arcanist), and a Cleric (or Oracle) is always nice to have.
And remember, if no one else takes a character with trapfinding, you have the option of taking the Trapper archetype, if you are so inclined.
GreyWolfLord (and group): Dont take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive. ;)
As for the topic at hand, without a doubt, Curse of the Crimson Throne.
I currently own 4 APs, Runelords hardcover, Kingmaker, Carrion Crown, and Skull and Shackles. Put out a Curse compilation and that number becomes 5.
Memo, a ranger can take ranged combat style for his archery feats, and then use a greatsword/greataxe with power attack plus any other melee feats he wants picked up from level gains, and be good at both. By level 6 it will be a moot point though, as he can select Point Blank Master as his combat style feat and always fire in melee without provoking AoOs.
Actually, the closest Occult Adventures class that mechanically resembles the Pact Magic Occultist is the Medium (and the Spiritualist somewhat), not the class that shares its namesake.
That said, I'm not sure a name change would be a horrible idea, if only so the class and system can maintain its own identity, otherwise I can see potential confusion on the horizon. But a new name would need to be as close to equally fitting and compelling as "Occultist". Though I wouldnt want it changed if it would result in a "gamey" name, like Warblade, Battlemind, Soulborn, etc (I hate those).
Any update on this project?
Edit: In defense of my previous suggestion of "Ultimate Pact Magic", I dont view the world "ultimate" as necessarily pertaining to mean "final", but rather to mean something more akin to "definitive", as in this book would be THE definitive book to have for Pact Magic, much how Ultimate Psionics is the the definitive book for psionics, and any further releases will be built upon that foundation. It sets the baseline for the entire system, and people are drawn to books that appear all encompassing, where they get the most bang for their buck. Plus, again, following Paizos naming scheme cant be called a bad marketing decision.
Anyway, mini rant over, looking forward to hearing whats in store.
If you want, you can also use the one from Path of War, the Tome of Battle system update to Pathfinder by Dreamscarred Press.
On topic, I allow the 3PP stuff that I actually have, which consists of Dreamscarred (Ultimate Psionics and Path of War), Pact Magic Unbound, and Deep Magic.
I have experienced DMs like this before, and "boring" is probably the best word to describe the game. Personally, I need to be at least somewhat challenged to have fun.
I am both blessed and cursed though, because my first DM (who is also one of my best friends) is literally the best DM I've ever seen/played with. He has a fully fleshed out homebrew world lovingly crafted through both design and gameplay over the last dozen years, writes all his own adventures and campaigns, is an evocative storyteller/roleplayer, and maintains a strong grasp of the rules.
The only problem with all that is, I dont live anywhere near him anymore (only 2 of the 5 of our original main group still lives in the same town, him and one of the other players, the rest are spread across 3 other states). So I game at the FLGS with GMs who are good and solid, and run pretty enjoyable campaigns, but if Im being completely honest, just dont hold a candle to my buddy.
For your situation, if he is a new DM, I would kindly ask him if he would like some pointers, especially regarding the flow of the game.
I can understand that Iron Gods doesn't appeal to everyone, and I'm not totally against "traditional" modules (I'm looking forward to Hell's Rebels), but much like Wrath of the Righteous, this AP seems a bit too cookie-cutter to appeal to me or my players.
If Wrath didnt have the Mythic rules intertwined into it, and I could run a normal campaign using it as is, then it would be up there with Runelords, Curse, and Kingmaker on my list of all time favorites.
Cant wait for Giantslayer, and this is actually gonna be one of our players first AP he is going to buy and run, specifically because he loved the theme so much.
Sarasota and Dark Side will miss you Scott. We didn't know each other well, but I always knew you as "the Pathfinder Society guy", and I spoke with you on your last night in the store where you told me about your interview and telling Paizo to just find a good Necromancer after you worked yourself into the grave. Good luck in Seattle, sir.
TWF is super feat intensive, if you want to save those feats I would recommend grabbing a greatsword and going two-hander, take Power Attack and Improved Initiative at level 1, which is much easier than trying to squeeze Imp Init into a feat heavy fighting style. And don't forget to take a +2 Init trait.
The Psychic feels kinda generic and ultimately unneeded with Dreamscarred out there (not to mention the Wizard and Sorcerer).
The Medium encroaches too heavily on the wonderful work of Pact Magic done by Radiance House, definitely some toe stepping there.
The Occultist seems pretty neat and flavorful, but I would prefer it had a different name so as to not clash with the product mentioned above.
I agree that the Spiritualist could easily be a Summoner alternate class, but it works fine as is.
I really like both the Mesmerist and the Kineticist, the Burn feature definitely needs some tweaking though.
The first feat is a bit overpowered considering it requires nothing (not even BAB) and offers an offensive and defensive benefit...
Using 2 handed fighting as the baseline, show me (with math) how this feat is overpowered.
Though I have been pondering adding 13 Dex and BAB +1 to the first feat, and BAB +3 to the second.
Sounds fair. Very exploitable with a Bladed Boot, natural attacks or unarmed strikes though.
I changed the wording to prevent natural attacks or unarmed strikes from being used with it.
That new book that just came have a class for this.
I'm looking to make this a viable style for anyone, not just members of the Swashbuckler class.
Lets face it, two handed fighting rules the roost in Pathfinder. I was always a fan of the different weapon style proficiencies back in 2E, so here is my attempt to make single weapon style viable in PF.
Single Weapon Style
Improved Single Weapon Style
So a 1st level human fighter with an 18 Str using a longsword that had all 3 of these feats would do 1d10+6 damage, or 1d10+9 when using power attack. This is vs a 1st level fighter using a greatsword with just power attack who is doing 2d6+9, our single weapon fighter has a +2 AC over the greatsword fighter, but is still doing less damage per swing and spent 2 feats to do so.