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

Grey Lensman's page

1,965 posts (1,974 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,965 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

zapbib wrote:
I join the Q-Q-Qism by agreeing with everyone's disappointment, but i think what paizo wants to dodge here are TWF-Dex to damage builds. Paizo just needs to make the feat to Dex-to-Dmg able to light weapons but not let them TWF, or give the damage just to the main attacks and not the off-hand. i don't know, maybe is my thing, but i really hate the fact that Slashing Grace is meant to be a Swashbuckler's feat (even though kensai can make it work) then why not make it a class ability? feats are meant to be open for any class, and i don't think of a single Swashbuckler build atm that don't get Slashing grace or Fencing grace.

And I will join the endless litany of repeating that they didn't even stop TWF-dex since sawtooth saber are a thing. Really the only more powerful option they stopped is TWF kukri, every other light weapons combinations seems weaker or equal.

And with all that, the iconic one dagger in a hand, a sword in the other (or wakisashi and katana) is still a really useless build.

I think a large part of that is the plethora of 'improve how you fight with this single weapon feats', making two weapon combat with anything other than a matched set of the same weapon an impossible hill to climb. First you have the incredibly high investment of two weapon combat, then you need to double up any weapon based feats on top of it. It's probably easier to build an effective character using two bastard swords than one who uses a sword and dagger combo.

TOZ wrote:
Gambit wrote:
Which is funny, because in 5E this isnt even a feat, just a natural property attached to some weapons.
As it should be.

What? Using a martial weapon in the manner it was designed for? Sacrilege I tell you!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think it has been stated that Aang died young due to the distress of being frozen for 100 years.

I'm planning on playing a Daring Champion Cavalier in an upcoming game and I was wondering if anyone knows of a 3PP order that has a decent swashbuckler feel to it.

Cyrad wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
The whole point of the swashbuckler is a class that allows many tactical decisions for melee combat.
I'm not entirely sure that's true, but if you want it to be, I don't think Saves are the place to put that tactical decision making. Too high-stakes to gamble with. Anyone with actual good tactical instincts will always use the Save-Booster on Saves they're at all worried about rather than doing anything else, since failing a Save is so potentially awful.

That's what makes Charmed Life perfect as a reactionary ability. Saving against effects are definitely the sort of thing that captures the imagination of a character that uses cunning, luck, and wit to defy the odds. That's much more fun than a passive bonus, which I argue is more important.

I believe the class is all about tactical melee combat, because the entire class's kit involves damage bonuses and deeds, a class feature designed to enable active tactical maneuvers and decisions.

One should not have to choose between doing cool things or risking being taken out of combat entirely based on not having awesome save dice. And, as has been mentioned before, poison saves are never really once per turn, but are forced in bunches. Charmed life as is ends up being pretty useless in that situation.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Grey Lensman wrote:

I might consider adding a feat for an additional Charmed Life benefit. After all, Extra Hex, Extra Rage Power, and several other similar items already exist for other classes.

Yeah, that's a viable choice. Though a few more options might be good if planning on doing that.

That might also make a two level dip in Swashbuckler too good, since the bonuses aren't actually level based. You might want to put some sort of level-based limitation on them if going that route (ie: go with "add your Swashbuckler level up to a maximum of your Charisma modifier" instead of just "add your Charisma modifier").

Or perhaps no more benefits are allowed than 1/2 swashbuckler level?

I like that one too. I might consider adding a feat for an additional Charmed Life benefit. After all, Extra Hex, Extra Rage Power, and several other similar items already exist for other classes.

Set wrote:
Shadowborn wrote:
Looks like they're bringing in another super-powered villain next season, namely the Absorbing Man.
Cool. He's got great powers. People who turn into metal, wood, bone, stone, gas, liquid, energy, etc. have always been some of my favorites. Such a great and versatile powerset! Also nicely visually dynamic, for on-screen appearances.

I'm always going to think of his Oops! moment in Avengers EMH where he absorbed Mjolnir. It seemed like a good idea at the time, until he was shown that he doesn't control the hammer, Thor does....

Lord Snow wrote:
If the writers embrace their immunity-from-cancellation, it's possible that some good episodes could come out of that, as they could throw formula to the wind and do something shocking, like bury their lead, the massive sucking void of personality that is Coulson, who they have to tell us is so terribly cool and we must love at least three times an episode, in case viewers begin to wonder why he's so 'popular' (in the way that Hannah Montana was popular, because Disney said she was over and over and over), when he actually hasn't ever been cool (or even mildly interesting or witty), on-screen.
I don't know, dude. I started watching the show because of Coulson, without any prior knowledge about him from the comics or anything like that. He's kinda neat. I like that he is understated, that he is a fan of vintage and superheroes, and that he just seems so... nice. While still being an action hero. I'm all for that.

Coulson only exists in the comics because of the movies. He didn't make it in until after he died during The Avengers.

I started watching because of Coulson as well. He was the only main character anyone knew before tuning in, after all.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:


Daring Champion is more attractive than Swashbuckler or Cavalier to me.

Them getting precise strike deed is the problem. I'm crossing my fingers that this deed will be errata'd off their list.

I still think the problem is with the Swashbuckler rather than the Daring Champion.

Jaelithe wrote:

Better to have such equipment on the chance that deploying it becomes necessary, than to simply say, "No, it sends the wrong message." Simple possession doesn't do so. (As a matter of fact, just the opposite.) Inappropriate use, however, does.

Having the stuff in storage and pulling it out periodically to maintain it and make certain your personnel can employ it with proficiency is simply prudent. Should it ever be used in response to what's clearly understood as civil disobedience? Of course not. But don't tell me that it mightn't come in extremely handy in certain appropriate instances.

If civilian authorities demonstrate, however, that they can't employ restraint and common sense in utilizing materiel at their disposal, it should be confiscated or never distributed in the first place.

I agree with this. Whipping out the heavy equipment and unleashing the SWAT teams for raids on a crime kingpin's lair, or dealing with hostage situations is something I understand and can get behind. Using that same stuff to check for underage drinking at the local bar or to break up someone's weekly poker game should result in a whole lot of people no longer having badges.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

In a democracy the population is supposed to be in control, not under it.

A sword and dagger using swashbuckler or swashbuckler-style archetype is what I want to see.

Suichimo wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:
Suichimo wrote:
No idea why, considering we now have three 3/4 BAB FULL 9th level casters. If all 9th level casters were 1/2 BAB, I don't think I would mind this nearly as much.

4 actually, but they are all divine casters. The 1/2 BAB divide for 9 level spellcasting only hits the arcane casters as a result of backwards compatibility. Once the Cleric and Druid exist in that fashion, Oracles and Shamans pretty much have to as well or they won't see the light of day in many gaming groups.

The full BAB restriction is kind of important seeing as how non-spellcasters are so easily eclipsed by high level magic anyways. Once a full BAB class with more than 4 level spellcasting shows up, well, I don't really want to think of that.

I completely forgot that Druids got 3/4.

The crazy thing is, 3.5 had both a 3/4 BAB Sorceror and 1/2 BAB Cleric in Unearthed Arcana, the Battle Sorceror and the Cloistered Cleric.

Both of those could be interesting archetypes, but I'd be hesitant to put either as the base chassis for a class.

Suichimo wrote:
No idea why, considering we now have three 3/4 BAB FULL 9th level casters. If all 9th level casters were 1/2 BAB, I don't think I would mind this nearly as much.

4 actually, but they are all divine casters. The 1/2 BAB divide for 9 level spellcasting only hits the arcane casters as a result of backwards compatibility. Once the Cleric and Druid exist in that fashion, Oracles and Shamans pretty much have to as well or they won't see the light of day in many gaming groups.

The full BAB restriction is kind of important seeing as how non-spellcasters are so easily eclipsed by high level magic anyways. Once a full BAB class with more than 4 level spellcasting shows up, well, I don't really want to think of that.

Rynjin wrote:

Firstly, never said Warpriest was an unneeded concept. It had the potential to be what everyone wanted.

Second, Arcanist, Hunter, sure. Unnecessary, pretty much unwanted.

Swashbuckler though? That was, hands down, the MOST REQUESTED CLASS pre-ACG announcement.

The Swashbuckler class as requested wasn't unnecessary. The thing we were given was, though.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My knee-jerk reaction is that the swashbuckler was done better by a cavalier archetype in the same book.

You know things are bad when people would rather have the National Guard enforcing things under martial law than the local police.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally I think the best special effect in Captain America was when he punched Schmidt and the Hugo Weaving face slipped slightly off giving the faint reveal of what was underneath. Big explody special effects can be cool, but it's the small ones that don't look special that I consider to be the pinnacle of the art.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slaunyeh wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I meant Lady in the nobility sense, not in the more universal female sense.
I guess that's a subtlety of the English language that eludes me then, Lady sounds pretty female to me. And that's what makes it funny.

It's always female, but can denote a noble title rather than just pointing out what parts someone has.

Freehold DM wrote:
To paraphrase a movie I hate, I don't think that word means what you think it means.

I think I'm supposed to demand your gamer credentials after this. ;P

Craig Bonham 141 wrote:
Trust? I don't trust any company. Companies (with very few exceptions) exist for one singular reason, to make a profit. Any ethics they exhibit usually exist only due to limitations of law.

I wouldn't even count the limitations of the law as part of corporate ethics. If something illegal saves 10 million, but results in a fine of 1 million, they are still 9 million ahead and will likely do the same thing again. The fine merely becomes another expense.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Still not as bad as Cartoon Network.....

The thing with trust is that it can take years to build up, but only moments to destroy. The people I know might be able to regain their lost trust, but probably not in the short timeframe by which corporate results are measured.

Set wrote:
And the few that do pop up tend to be villains. June Covington, Superia, Moonstone. Or their intelligence gets downplayed. Emma Frost used to be smart enough to build psionic machines that swapped people's minds. That was decades ago. Now? Not so much.

Would that be back when Emma was a villain? which kind of proves the point

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I expect that if I take a dump stat that every now and then it's going to bite me. I don't expect it to be the primary target in almost every encounter, or an albatross across the neck of the entire party for an entire campaign.

Pay attention to minor names (including place names) from historical, fantasy, and sci-fi novels you read. While most people remember the names of major characters, most won't be able to remember characters and places that only get mentioned once in the book.

It really only needs 3 simple fixes.

One, bloodline spells become available once the spell level is reached instead of the one after.

Two, bloodline powers come from a pool of abilities that the player can pick and choose from similar to oracle revelations.

Third, an addendum that states these powers can't ever be taken by a wizard and any future feats or magic items that would do so are to be ignored as obvious editing errors.

DungeonmasterCal wrote:
What are MAD and SAD classes?

Multiple Attribute Dependent or Single Attribute Dependent.

DungeonmasterCal wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I personally can't stand having stats below 10 on my characters. So while it might be optimal to drop my warrior's Cha and Int to 7, I will never do it. Other people will. So our cookie cutters will be different.
While there's a certain romance to having PCs have average or less than average numbers in some abilities and having them overcome these drawbacks to become heroes, I prefer my heroes to be on the "superhero" side of things. Like TOZ, I don't like stats below ten.

I've known too many GM's who if they saw a tendency for a person to play super characters with an Achilles heel would ruthlessly exploit it whenever they could. Often for weeks of real time on end without any breaks to play to the character's strong points.

Hama wrote:

I've been looking over the PCs from several of my previous campaigns that I ran, and all of them had one thing in common. Very very similar ability scores.

While, yes, point buy is there to mitigate injustice and make PCs relatively similar in ability, it gives them a sort of uniformity which is beginning to annoy me.

I am seriously considering of going back to the old system of roll 4d6, drop the lowest, 6 times than distribute as desired. Re-rolling all of them if the combined bonus of all the stats is +3 or less.

I am not cruel enough to go for roll 3d6, or even words, roll 3d6 in order.

Any thoughts?

What I started doing is a random d6 roll and then boosting the corresponding stat by 1d3 (or 1, if the stat is either the highest or a dump stat) for any characters in games I run.

I missed seeing things like the stronger wizard, smarter priest, and characters with bonuses in stats that would otherwise be low. We haven't gone back to the full rolling since we don't want to have the equivalent of a 15 point buy character in the same group as a 35+ point buy character due to wildly different dice rolls.

Last I knew Harmony Gold was little more than a guy in an office that existed to ensure no one could make anything off of Macross but them.

I was referring to such things as final training including sneaking out and killing someone while returning uncaught, as well as the notion that being exceptional in any way as something reserved for the elite more than the warrior part. Sparta was a hellish place when you start looking at it.

MagusJanus wrote:
What about using one or more of the new iconics from Advanced Class Guide for the cover?

We could have the Swashbuckling iconic channeling Julie d'Aubigny.

If Athens would be evil, how much worse would Sparta be?

Would ANY of the Greek city states be anything other than evil?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalshane wrote:
(Of course, the fact that the Earth Bender guy whose name I can't recall was able to take out Zuko is a little surprising.)

Not really, sadly. I don't think Zuko has ever won a single fight that was actually important against a quality opponent.

GentleGiant wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Haven't seen someone blood-eagle'd since reading Slaine. There is never enough ritual torture involving separating the ribs from the spine in this blog.
In that case, and without giving away too many spoilers, I can recommend the show Vikings on History Channel. ;-)

Disney needs to cast Kathryn Winnick as Ms. Marvel Capt. Marvel NOW.

And on a game related note - the Skald looks badass. I was originally kinda 'meh' on both the Skald and the Bloodrager, but now I want to play one of each and soon.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quark Blast wrote:
Feats look like they've been mostly fixed in 5th edition. While the Feats system from 3.x looked like a good idea at first glance it rapidly (and naturally by the rules) devolved into a Min-Max feast, because to "roll up" a less than optimal build meant your PC was superfluous to the rest of the party by 6th level or so.

The deliberate inclusion of 'trap options' probably exacerbated this.

Corvino wrote:

I just reread the Skald part of the ACG playtest, and as Arachnofiend says - they can hand out greater beast totem to the whole party. Stick them in a party with a 2 or more martials, a combat pet and summons and it'll be brutal.

Step 1: Skald gives the entire party pounce in round 1 as a swift action.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit.

Step 2 is to wince painfully at the poor monsters that just got turned Into a paste finer than that pink slime from the news a few years ago....

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Generic Dungeon Master wrote:
I used to think I was a really great DM, like 38 years ago, then the internet came along and proved me wrong

According to teh interwebz you are either the Greatest of All Time or a complete loser.

Chuck Wright wrote:

So there you go. Subraces of Tiefling in 3E Faerun.

(Thanks, Jeraa!)

Hmm. Even without that, earlier editions had...



Putting two things you have already done together doesn't sound like swiping from someone else, especially if they follow the cambion/alu-fiend route of making the subrace more dependent on the specific type of fiend rather than the plane of origin.

Some things certainly look interesting, I'll give it that.

They look like they are willing to kill a few sacred cows but not the point of wanting to slaughter the entire herd merely for being there.

Slaunyeh wrote:
From a business perspective, it makes sense. If you spend a million dollars to earn two million dollars, that's basically free money right? Why mess with that? But what if you could instead spend that one million dollars to earn ten million dollars? Wouldn't it be financially irresponsible to not pick the second option?

Personally, I would take half of the 2 million dollar profit and invest it towards the potential 10 million dollar profit, and hopefully come out an additional million ahead. The lower paying investment seemed stable, and such things can help during lean times if they happen. But then, I'm not a business exec.

Sissyl wrote:
Honestly, expecting several millions of users in a monthly payment MMO is not a reasonable threshold any more. And if you don't do that, you won't have luscious graphics, and recruitment suffers as a result. It is a sad situation, but it is difficult to say what would change it. There SHOULD be a market for smaller MMOs. City of X was a unique one, and it was pulled too lightly.

It's that last part that bugged me. Apparently it is no longer enough to be making money, the product must be making a whole lot of money. (IIRC CoH was still turning a profit, but only a modest one)

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

Never really got that into it. Never understood why are people gushing about it either.

To be honest, though, I generally grow bored of an MMO in about two to three months.

Comic book geekdom was a huge part of it. That's what pulled me in. The lack of the standard MMO's 'great equipment chase', especially the lack of the standard 'play full time or always be second rate' so prevalent in other games kept me there.

<crosses arms in X>

I still miss it.

Tels wrote:
This is not me making this up, in the episode 'Dirty Works' I believe it was, it's even mentioned that Air Nomad Avatars have always had issue with Earth Bending because the mind set needed to earth bend has always been contrary to air nomad teachings.

The typical thing is the Avatar having trouble with the opposite element to what they were born into. Aang had trouble with earthbending, Roku had trouble with Waterbending, and I believe Kuruk had trouble firebending. Korra having trouble with air instead of fire is a bit of an anomaly, but makes sense considering what she is like.

Petty Alchemy wrote:

I think I'd actually prefer good Will to good Fort to further differentiate the class. I guess they were leery of giving it the Paladin problem though (2 good saves and Divine Grace make for a pretty much unassailable character) since they have Charmed Life.

The Swashbuckler will probably play fine in 15 minute day with high PB however, which I've played a fair share of.

I am currently playing a SGG Fusilier, which has good reflex and will saves (with feats and traits spent to shore up fort) and am doing quite well with it. But covering one weak area is much easier than covering up two of them, especially when the weak area (fort saves) is already slightly boosted to be in effect a moderate save rather than a poor one.

I believe several of the founding fathers were deists, so that can't have been responsible for his ostracism from them. But he had been involved in the French Revolution as well, taking him out of the American public eye, and when he reappeared, not only was Agrarian Justice out, but so was his blistering attack on Washington (it's a big no-no to go against a guy they were willing to make a king, at least if you want to stay in good graces with the public).

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Yes, I know Paine was anti-slavery, to his eternal credit. I'm just not sure he qualifies as "rabid[ly] Abolitionist." Unless you radically alter the meaning of "rabid."

He was credited for a while with writing the very first abolitionist article, African Slavery in America. While scholars no longer think he was the writer of that anonymous piece, they still believe that his anti-slavery stance is largely responsible for his marginalization after the American Revolution. While not radical by the standards of later years, it certainly was at the time.

1 to 50 of 1,965 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.