Lazurin Arborlon's page

If the Paladin is a gods mighty and valiant right hand clutching a flaming sword of justice, the Inqusitor is that same gods sneaky left gently sliding a cold shiv between the ribs.

Dot...in case the day ever comes that my home game dissolves...

Your GM is creating a house rule. It may be best to ask what the reasoning is behind 84 skill points, there may be a plan or experiment behind it.

You might also want to know if there will be skill points gained in your campaign for levelling? That might influence your decision.

this....find out if he thinks this is the actual rule or if he is just doing his own thing. He may be confused., but maybe he has his own ideas and you just have to go with it if you want to play his game.

We are having pretty good luck at roll 20 with a dedicated group that is all new to VTT. It seems to be the most intuitive for newbies. There might be better out there that we will move on too once we get proficient at playing this way, but for right now it seems ideally suited to our needs.

There are two ways to handle things like this in character and out. In you make it clear stealing / B&E on party members is an act of treason and party justice will be handed out.

Out of character take the dude aside...not in front of everyone, share a snack or a beer if you are of age and explain that this kind of stuff drags down everyone else's fun. You want to rob folks blind for sure....just other folks.

I prefer ooc first as it is the best way to make a harmonius party for years to come....but sometimes In character is the only way with some people.

Really tough to carry the load without outshining in the best of situations...in yours it may be impossible. I think your best bet might be summoner and just not use the other summons beyond your eidolon for anything but out of combat situations. At that point your really only taking two actions....in a three man party that is hardly abusive. It lets you build a tank for an eidolon that can take up the front line and absorb blows and your character can alternate between buffing party members so they can have their moment to shine and using a bow to chip in damage, bonus if you can grab some wands to heal with.

Place me in the more skill points camp. 3/4 bab and d8 hp means at least 4 skill points, unless you are int based. You can't give a 3/4 bab the same skill point disadvantage as a fighter.

Very excited to play the telekinetic. I think this one is the most flexible and has the most creative possibilities. Melee and missle combat, ranged manipulation, flight, making shields plus all the fun of using TK as creatively as you can...not a one trick pony,

I can see water as Ice being fun too...come on, who doesn't wanna be iceman ?

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

I dislike people who have lists of people they dislike.

Cannot agree more strongly, this thread and the contributions to it make me very, very sad. People are to be handled on a case by case basis...interest based descimination isn't more noble than skin color,or gender or any other irrational reason to hate on people.

I dislike people who post in threads just to let us all know how above it all they are.

You're taking this way too seriously.

Yeah...that is totally what I was doing...way to go pointing it out internet tough guy...

I dislike people who have lists of people they dislike.

Cannot agree more strongly, this thread and the contributions to it make me very, very sad. People are to be handled on a case by case basis...interest based descimination isn't more noble than skin color,or gender or any other irrational reason to hate on people.

If any DM makes a caster track 0 GP spell components the only thing he's effectively doing is making anyone playing a caster take the eschew materials (or something that accomplishes the same).

Tracking Bat poop and bits of string isn't a fun time. Earlier versions can attest to that.

not only that but all the power component alternate rules give a much more carrot way to encourage component tracking if it is a thing you want in your game....no stick needed.

Kthulhu wrote:

Rynjin wrote:

If you can't think of a way around said trap, then don't use that trap. It is a poorly designed trap if there's no way around it.

Depending on your perspective, wouldn't that make it a BETTER designed trap?

Not from a game design perspective, no.

From an in-universe perspective, yes, but the game would be awfully boring if traps were impassable.

Not only that, but as a GM you need to bear in mind that the trap setter needed to have a way past it yes? That is what disable device is, you find the catch or keyhole or whatever that allowed the person who set the trap to bypass it. Unless the one setting the trap to use the first example could fly then you are allowing the roll to figure out and accomplish how they set up there ability to no trigger. It is mighty stupid to set a trap that you will set off everything you walk by.

If you have truely set up a trap you want to make everyone figure out as a puzzle that is a fine approach In certain situations....but I would still say you should then allow a check to use disable device as a knowledge skill and provide insight that a rogue character would have over others. This way you can give that one character a hint on how to solve the puzzle because he is an expert at these things.

It shouldn't be how do you disarm this trap? It should be, yes this can't be disarmed conventionally...but you do know that this is how to go about circumvention.

To my knowledge there is little in the way of specifics. How we handle it is a wizard can refill it now and then from the pouches of fallen enemy casters and local flora and fauna. As long as he pays it a little lip service now and then he is good to go for anything in the standard pouch. He of course has to obtain the expensive stuff on a case by case like gems and foci etc...

Walk.

I disagree.....

run...

I made one up for our crew, I cant post it due to being at work and actually I dont have it in hand since it resides at my DM's house. But it is a stylized almost tribal black vulture on a field of tattered crimson.

If the Evil Dead franchise is any indication you need to find a way to split into many tiny, ill tempered versions of youself and attack without provocation. Bonus points if you wield household items and fight dirty.

That is one of the things that is cool about the synthesist/summoner and makes me not toss it out for it's issues. Your character can be anything from Finn wearing a Jake suit to Ironman to Venom. It is only limited by your creativity.

I vote a soft no. There are some odd circumstances here that make me say that he shouldnt fall but a RP laden warning from his diety of sort might be in order.

1) He didnt speak the language, so talking doesnt really = parlay. Maybe a sense motive might have helped here and should have been offered. Certainly could have been an exchange of taunts and threats for all he knew.

2) He isn't a standard pally correct? The focus is far more on the good than the lawful. So this thing attacks with no provocation and is a public menace. assuming I do understand we are negotiating do I think it should be negotiated with? What if we let it be and it wanders off to attack some children?

3) your party seems to be keen on entering into treaties with agressive, violent and often evil creatures the moment this paladin isnt present. It might be time to question if it is actually an act of good to constantly let monsters off the hook for their actions.

4) The timing of it all is happening a lot faster than people are giving credit. He burst into the clearing and attacked this took mere seconds. No actions took place in between for him other than he was running through the woods chasing the thing that hurt him and his friends. Just because the player was subject to all the exposition...the character wasnt. It wasn't like they got out a table and started signing a peace accord here. Situation are misconstrued.

That is my two CP. He gets a talking to in the form of a vivid dream or holy vision to make sure he doesnt stray from the path and understands that hasty agression is not the way of his order....but striping him of his powers is just a bridge to far for something that is merely a misunderstanding.

My level 9 Bard loves his wand of Magic Missle (CL 7 I think I don't have his sheet handy at the moment). Generally, he won't out damage the party's Fighter or Druid, but he can use the wand while singing and dancing. Sometimes massive piles of damage are not the responsibility of the wizard (or bard) or the wizard does not want blow throuAndals his best spells and the relatively small, but reliable, damage from Magic Missile is just bonus.

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

This right here is pretty spot on...it is a really nice realiable wand for when you dont want to waste precous spell slots and want to contribute something reliable to the damage totals.

I wouldnt be preparing it or rushing to add it my list or anything but there is value in it not missing/ being saved against etc.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

... while Inquisitors lack an equivalent synergy bonus (though the Teamwork Feats would help a bit, I guess).

Not sure I entirely agree. Some of those teamwork feats can get pretty scary if a bunch of people have them. It annoys me that I can't often get someone to be willing to take them with me.

One keen Falcata and a certain feat spread amongst the melee folk in the party come to mind.

Really digging my current inquisitor pirate captain. He seems to always be able to contribute which is nice. Social situation? I am decent face.
Combat, I am pretty strong melee against single targets and have a handful of good debuffs for masses. I didnt put heals on my spell list because we have cleric but I can still use wands in a pinch. I can skill monkey on a hanfull of important areas like proffession sailor and knowledge dungeoneering. I can track and assist with survival. It really is a versatile class. I wouldnt say I am the best at anything....but I am good at a whole lot of stuff and those are the kind of characters I like the most.

As my group just entered to market for a vtt and will need a solution in mere months I am eager to hear more on when Paizo might have a solution for us.

I dont dislike them but I see why people do...
1) easy to make super optimized even by accident.
2) rules are sufficiently complicated the innocent people cheat by accident and not so innocent people can easily hide that they are cheating on purpose
3) many short cuts to destroy acction economy.
4) access to a hanful of good spells earlier than most.
5) dont like pokemon in my D&D's
6) synthesist is pretty easily broken at early levels on stats alone
7) uncontrolled creativity can lead to conflicts with setting IE: why cant I be a giant steampunk robot in your primitive barbarian campaign!?

And that list took seconds to craft from someone who wouldnt mind playing one someday.

We had one in party who was masterfully played. No changes to rules. He was a Druid who rode around on his Boar. He was played as a nice blend of comic relief and seriousness sort of like a less obnoxious kender. Always curious and very loyal, but often a little misquided. He actually was pretty formidable as he focused heavily on being able to cast from Pig-gy back. So you had a Tank-tastic melee pig flank buddy with a little lizard man perched on his back throwing out buffs, crowd control spells etc...

I have often considered revisiting that players concept with a Kobold sorcerer taking Sylvan to pick up the animal companion. I dont know if I would ride as often as he did as my HP pool is lower but it would still be fun...maybe have a dinosaur buddy.

In terms of tailoring/ catering to a younger audience? Not to pry but I think we need to know how young is young? I mean are we talking cartoons and stuffed animals or Twilight books and social media?

No you are correct, you need rapid shot....I am just not a proponent of an all eggs in one basket approach. Bombs are a finite resource and a solid back up plan is a good idea unless you do the 15 min. Adventuring day....rapid shot implies you aren't looking to pace yourself....and alchy fire and acid flasks don't level with you like a good bow does.

Google Hero Kids Rpg...it is pretty damn polished and I know people who are running it for their kids and loving it.

I made a sample build I was thinking of using. It could use some refinement. Not sure this was the place to post it, if not I apologize. I stole heavily from you're guide :)

1st level: Alchemist: Race is Tiefling. Mad bomber role with Grenadier archetype. Martial weapon proficiency (A) is Longbow. Feat is Point blank shot. Traits are Accelerated drinker and Reactionary. I will take +1 to Intelligence at level 4 and 8.
2nd level: Bard: Arcane duelist archetype. Arcane strike (B).
3rd level: Alchemist: Discovery is Frost bomb. Feat is Rapid shot.
5th level: Alchemist: Discovery is Explosive missile. Feat is Extra discovery Tumor familiar.
7th level: Alchemist: Discovery is Infusion. Feat is Improved familiar.
9th level: Alchemist: Discovery is Fast bombs. Feat is Extra discovery Blind bomb.
11th level: Alchemist: Discovery is Sticky bomb. Feat is Manyshot.

Extracts
1st Level: Reduce person and Targeted bomb admixture.
2nd Level: Alchemical allocation, Barkskin, Invisibility, Touch inject and Vomit swarm.
3rd Level: Fly.
4th Level: Echolocation, Freedom of movement.

Bard spells
Orisons: Detect magic, Light, Mage hand and Message.
1st Level: Cure light wounds and Unseen servant.

The only thing I see is if your taking point blank and rapid I would try to squeeze Precise in there somewhere. It isn't needed for the bombs, but if your going that far you might as well make the bow useful...

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

really great read sir, I had seen an earlier draft but it is much better now that it is complete. I was wondering what you thought of the utility of using the Grenadier ability to apply alchemy to crossbow bolts. The reason I ask is a badly want to make a decent crossbow character and I think this might be a cool way to do it...bolts with tanglefoot bags and sonic damage, bombs to throw, maybe work in the rogue bits and later on a familiar...

Sadly, crossbows are what's known as "water balloon" weapons, which are 'weapons that are mechanically inferior due to real life equivalence', so you're going to be better off with a longbow for your archery needs. Alchemical Weapon to throw alchemical items onto bolts is all kinds of awesome, but there's even more alchemical arrows that would give you a one two punch on that. It really does suck, the valley between crossbows and longbows (for the feat you took to get Rapid Reload, you could get MWP Longbow), but you could make an acceptable crossbower with these, even if specialty bolts do suck in comparison to arrows.

Yeah, I know it is kind of polishing a turd, but I really want to try and make a not terrible crossbow build and it seemed like a novel approach. I will have to see how the party shakes out and see if I can get away with it.

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Just placing a dot for after work perusal.

Just a tip, since the GITP guide is dead (since the damn forum is), use this link since the other link won't lead you anywhere. I do hope you enjoy it.

really great read sir, I had seen an earlier draft but it is much better now that it is complete. I was wondering what you thought of the utility of using the Grenadier ability to apply alchemy to crossbow bolts. The reason I ask is a badly want to make a decent crossbow character and I think this might be a cool way to do it...bolts with tanglefoot bags and sonic damage, bombs to throw, maybe work in the rogue bits and later on a familiar...

Just placing a dot for after work perusal.

Lao Haeris wrote:

Takhisis wrote:

There is also the Scion of Humanity Aasimiar Lunar Oracle, which, IMO, can get quite cheesy(Like, almost to 3.5e levels of absurdity). The character gets Charisma to AC, Reflex and initiative. He/she also gets an animal companion that levels up FASTER then that of a druid(aasimiar favored class bonus), and access to the entire cleric/oracle spell list AND the entire wizard/sorcerer spell list via the spell paragon surge.''

1) I have a few questions to understand this build. What is the reason you choose scion of humanity? It looks nice on paper, but any particular reason?

2) I understand that through ''Prophetic armor'' Lunar's oracle revelation, you get your CHA to reflex rolls and AC. But the initiative? You take Noble Scion feat or is there another way?`

Scion of Humanity allows you to take human only feats. Racial Heritage (Half Elf) is a human only feat that you need before you can make use of Paragon Surge.

Yes Noble Scion of War is giving Charisma to Initiative.

Going back to paragon surge, are you interpreting the addition of the spell as permanent? It seems to me you would lose access to the spell you acquired once the duration of surge is up...so you are constantly casting two spells to get one from another list. Forgive me if this is laid out somewhere and i am asking a dumb question....but I don't see how temp access grants a permanent effect.

thejeff wrote:

Honestly, that's not something that the mechanics support very well.
It can be done through roleplay, with someone not interested in adventure, but rising to the occasion when forced - or playing well below optimum tactically. That's probably the best approach. Leave it all to RP and let the player ramp up his effectiveness as he chooses.

Mechanically, it's hard to make a build that represents someone not yet capable without making them permanently incapable. The Str8 Con8 fighter is never going to be effective. There's no way for him to grow into the role.

One possibility would be to take one of the concepts that doesn't come into it's own until the mid levels. Or to take required abilities/feats for such concept in a less effective order.

The simplest possibility might just be to start that character a couple levels lower than the group and then let him catch up.

I guess I'm thinking less the Str8 Con8 Fighter, and more the low-con Mage made iconic by Raistlin, or the Cleric that's scared of spiders (and is played that way even if it means avoiding getting too close to them in combat), or the Paladin that's played so uptight and righteous that they cause (with the agreement of the players) in-character arguments about doing the right thing, and refuses to kill someone that really, really has to die in order for the group to succeed because they're unarmed. The classic one - the fighter who uses a weapon that does d8 damage when there was a d10 alternative, but the player simply can't envisage that character using anything other than their chosen weapon.

Not so much someone that isn't suitable for their role, but someone that has a use within the party, but at times is going to be a burden because they're not used to this sort of life. The thief that's a great thief, but so offensive that they upset half the NPCs you interact with. People whose concept can fit the party's requirements, but also cause issues. In terms of optimization, think the Sorceress that...

I guess I dont run into this that often..nobody at our table does this kind of analysis on anothers character short of "hey maybe you should get a missle weapon" or something like that. I realize though that in a situation like to boards where people are soliciting advise things can get more contentious. Guess I have been fairly sheltered from this sort of thing in my 24 odd years of gaming. Probably why I dont always see what the fuss is about.

Matt Thomason wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Personally, I make sure to help players who are less optimization-minded to optimize within their concept, and require more mechanics oriented players to come up with backstory and personality for their characters.

This is admittedly easier to do as a GM when you are one of the better optimizers in the group...but it works for me. Where your character started from (rules or mechanics) seems to mean less, in my experience, than where they end up, and with the ideas above I'm usually able to even the elements out to some degree.

So that's what I do.

Out of interest, how would you approach the player whose concept is "Someone that isn't really cut out (at least not yet) to be an adventurer"? ;)

The biggest problem I run into on the boards is when you get someone like that attempting to fit into a group that expects each character to pull their weight in-game.

Honestly, that's not something that the mechanics support very well.

It can be done through roleplay, with someone not interested in adventure, but rising to the occasion when forced - or playing well below optimum tactically. That's probably the best approach. Leave it all to RP and let the player ramp up his effectiveness as he chooses.

Mechanically, it's hard to make a build that represents someone not yet capable without making them permanently incapable. The Str8 Con8 fighter is never going to be effective. There's no way for him to grow into the role.

One possibility would be to take one of the concepts that doesn't come into it's own until the mid levels. Or to take required abilities/feats for such concept in a less effective order.

The simplest possibility might just be to start that character a couple levels lower than the group and then let him catch up.

I think that you have hit something on the head here..I have long felt the most tactful way of playing the bumbler is to RP him as unintentionally successful. He accidentally stabs the left orc when trying to use his shield to block the one on the right, He cuts the red wire when he meant to cut blue, but it was the right one anyway, he intended to cast fireball and got grease instead just as the giant stepped into the room and slipped on the floor. It is the diplomatic way to be your concept without maiming your party.

Your DM is starting Skulls and Shackles and he has hand built a to scale full size ship that is also modular so you can remove the different decks and run encounters inside.

Same DM has built full size castles...churches, suspension bridges etc....So much fun.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Personally, I make sure to help players who are less optimization-minded to optimize within their concept, and require more mechanics oriented players to come up with backstory and personality for their characters.

This is admittedly easier to do as a GM when you are one of the better optimizers in the group...but it works for me. Where your character started from (rules or mechanics) seems to mean less, in my experience, than where they end up, and with the ideas above I'm usually able to even the elements out to some degree.

So that's what I do.

Out of interest, how would you approach the player whose concept is "Someone that isn't really cut out (at least not yet) to be an adventurer"? ;)

The biggest problem I run into on the boards is when you get someone like that attempting to fit into a group that expects each character to pull their weight in-game.

Personally when I DM'ed after I offered my advice, If they indicated they didnt want or need it that was the end of the discusion. I think if you are intentionally making someone who isnt competent for one reason or another you are taking it upon yourself to deal with the issues that arrise with that. If you build a 8 strength, 8 con fighter and you do not live all that long or simply never hit anything it does not fall upon the DM to cater to you by tailoring encounters. Gaming with a group is a social contract. Deliberately sandbagging and then bemoaning your lot in life isnt any more noble than deliberately building a murder hobo who derails plots and refuses to be a team player.

Aranna wrote:

So scientific vs artistic seems to be a relabeling of optimizer vs role player? ~sigh~ Relabeling something doesn't change it.

This. It still tries to put a division between the two, and doesn't handle the case of the "very scientific, very artistic" player. That's why you need sliding scales for each, rather than opposite ends of a single scale. Some people may value one at the expense of the other, but some may value both a lot, and others may value both only a little.

Aranna wrote:

So the question can we reconcile the two in the same group? Yes, I do it all the time. BUT it takes a group of people who want to work past their differences to enjoy the game in order to do it. Sadly the GM is powerless to invoke such cooperation by edict. It helps a LOT if the players start out as friends outside the game, but it isn't mandatory; I have found myself part of a couple pick up groups with just such an evolved attitude toward inclusion. Perhaps the most important part is to NOT think about what I want from the game, and instead think about what I can bring to the game.

I can envisage that. It's like the difference between person A wanting to sit down and watch TV, and person B wanting to sit down and watch a particular TV show. If you get a room full of person A's, everything is going to go better than a room full of person B's squabbling over the remote.

Some of us are person B's by nature. We either have to find it within ourselves to become person As, or to ensure any person Bs we hang out with want to watch the same show :)

I dont know I think he tried very hard to not make it a label but a descriptor of aproach. Maybe sensitivities being what they are right now there is no good way to make people happy. I felt like it was a sliding scale not a "your are type a, you are type b." thing. For example I would say I am pretty 50/50. I have ideas in my head of the person I would be happy pretending to be for a year before I ever even get started on numbers. But that doesnt change the fact I want that person to be good at one form of combat, and have at least one secondary function that contributes to the party...trap finder, crafter, social butterfly, smarty pants...whatever.

Personally, I make sure to help players who are less optimization-minded to optimize within their concept, and require more mechanics oriented players to come up with backstory and personality for their characters.

This is admittedly easier to do as a GM when you are one of the better optimizers in the group...but it works for me. Where your character started from (rules or mechanics) seems to mean less, in my experience, than where they end up, and with the ideas above I'm usually able to even the elements out to some degree.

So that's what I do.

Our GM is defintely there to give a hand up to those who are less rules versed among our groupe as well. He helps them shape the Banzai tree as it were so that they get the look and feel they want while everything is still healthy and operates as intended.

In our group it seems like we all build to concept rather than put together builds and slap a concept onto it all after. so there will be campaigns when some are naturally a little more stoutly built just by happen stance. Since we are all adults it is always fine...nobody is getting upset that somebodies chocolate to peanut butter ratio isn't the same as theirs.

I would say I have found that anytime you refer to your style of doing something in a positive light and another's style in a negative light you would be best served to go back and read your post before hitting send. Take a quick review of your tone, your verbiage such and make sure you are saying what you really mean. When you call your way normal or traditional you are assuming that you are the standard by which others are judged and therefore implying others are "doing it wrong". The I am normal menatality may seem harmless but it is unfair to others, and intentionally or not can make you seem like your are picking a fight. If the thread you made enflamed peoples feeling sometimes it is going to get shutdown..even if you didnt mean to do so.

There are hordes of people here who approach the game from a very strong RP perspective, It is great if you want to make threads that engage those people in thought provoking discussion...heck I look forward to contributing, but it quickly comes of as condescending and exlusionary to tell folk they are not doing it the way it was intended to be done just because they like to make strong characters or enjoy engaging in the theory crafting that comes with a rules set as elaborate as many generations of folk from TSR through to Paizo have been kind enough to provide us.

Food for thought brother...we are all gamers here, sometimes it isnt what you said, but how you said it.

If we was stealing money from other players in monopoly would you let him continue to play?

BigDTBone wrote:

Dude, you better be the most prepped lore-anal continuity-expert GM in the history of table top gaming.

LOL.

Never thought about how much I appreciate the side tracking conversations at the table, if only to prep what is gonna happen next, before you said that.

If role playing games have taught me anything, it's the ability to talk and listen while thinking about something else at the same time.

Well I did notice one thing..he noted they play once a month for around 4 hours...maybe he feels so rushed and so put out because of how infrequently they meet and how short the sessions are. You really would have to hustle and buckle down to get anything done.

If you meet a little more often and for a little more time it might not feel like you have take such a surgical approach.

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Mega Matt wrote:

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Mega Matt wrote:

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Gnome with pyromaniac alternate racial trait. Go tatoooed sorcerer and take your focus in evocation....take feats like dazing spell and spell penetration....take improved familiar at 7th level and get him some wands to UMD for added blasts goodness....viola.

Haha, this is actually kind of interesting. Been researching it since I read this.

It is pretty darn fun...alternately you can back off the blasting a tiny bit and take the Fey Sylvan bloodline and pick up an animal companion to fight for you on the front lines while you blast from the back....need to take boon companion at third though.

I have a question for you, Lazurin. the Feat Improved Familiar says; "This feat allows you to acquire a powerful familiar, but only when you could normally acquire a new familiar.". Since you get the familiar at level 1 does that still fulfill the "Ability to acquire a new familiar" Prerequisite?

The wording gets me occasionally on some of these descriptions.

It just refers to the fact that a) you need to be a class that can get one. And B) if you dismiss your first one, you have to wait a week to get a new one.

This build idea really intrigues me. Seems like a blast. Looking over the improved familiar table, any particularly notable companions? I'm assuming it needs hands in order to use a magical device? lol

Yeah...hands are the key. I think the pseudo dragon best fits the flavor of things....but the Mephits work, as does the imp, and a few others. I really encourage using something that flies for its own safety.

Until you get to the level where you can get this up and running I recommend the Compy or the Green Sting scorpion as they give you initiative bonuses...also cool side effect of tattooed sorc. Is you can store them as tattoos on your body...

More power to ya...but as a full grown adult if anyone thought they could tell me when I am allowed to go pee or that I need to be excused from anything but paid employment...they can pound a whole metric f*ck ton of sand.

Mega Matt wrote:

...the Feat Improved Familiar says; "This feat allows you to acquire a powerful familiar, but only when you could normally acquire a new familiar.". Since you get the familiar at level 1 does that still fulfill the "Ability to acquire a new familiar" Prerequisite?

See the table here

Each type of familiar has a level requirement for you to gain it. You can "normally acquire a new familiar" when you meet the level requirement for that type of familiar.

As I understand the way it is written, your initial familiar can't be an improved familiar. That may be faulty interpretation on my part, however.

it could be your initial if you never took one at first level...but odds are you aren't going to do that.

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Mega Matt wrote:

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Gnome with pyromaniac alternate racial trait. Go tatoooed sorcerer and take your focus in evocation....take feats like dazing spell and spell penetration....take improved familiar at 7th level and get him some wands to UMD for added blasts goodness....viola.

Haha, this is actually kind of interesting. Been researching it since I read this.

It is pretty darn fun...alternately you can back off the blasting a tiny bit and take the Fey Sylvan bloodline and pick up an animal companion to fight for you on the front lines while you blast from the back....need to take boon companion at third though.

I have a question for you, Lazurin. the Feat Improved Familiar says; "This feat allows you to acquire a powerful familiar, but only when you could normally acquire a new familiar.". Since you get the familiar at level 1 does that still fulfill the "Ability to acquire a new familiar" Prerequisite?

The wording gets me occasionally on some of these descriptions.

It just refers to the fact that a) you need to be a class that can get one. And B) if you dismiss your first one, you have to wait a week to get a new one.

Lazurin Arborlon wrote:

Gnome with pyromaniac alternate racial trait. Go tatoooed sorcerer and take your focus in evocation....take feats like dazing spell and spell penetration....take improved familiar at 7th level and get him some wands to UMD for added blasts goodness....viola.

Haha, this is actually kind of interesting. Been researching it since I read this.

It is pretty darn fun...alternately you can back off the blasting a tiny bit and take the Fey Sylvan bloodline and pick up an animal companion to fight for you on the front lines while you blast from the back....need to take boon companion at third though.

Gnome with pyromaniac alternate racial trait. Go tatoooed sorcerer and take your focus in evocation....take feats like dazing spell and spell penetration....take improved familiar at 7th level and get him some wands to UMD for added blasts goodness....viola.

andreww wrote:

Claxon wrote:

andreww wrote:

A well built corssblooded sorcerer or Wizard dipping into crossblooded can reach damage levels which do end encounters out of the gate. It isn't as effective as the Dazing/Control version but it can be made to work.

True, but I was only giving consideration to Wizards themselves. And it's really only sorcerers who take crossblooded to double dip on the damage bonus bloodlines that can truly rack-up the damage for their spells. And while it can be a encounter ender, you still admit it's not as strong a using control.

If you want to go down the damage route as a wizard you need the crossblooded dip. Your damage will be very subpar without it. +2 damage/dice is simply a huge boost when you are adding 30-50 static damage on your main nuke spells.

I just hate the fact that it's necessary to do that as a wizard. The only way to deal viable damage means you must dip specifically into cross-blooded sorcerer or you are ineffective compared to what you could have been doing.

It makes me want to ban cross-blooded sorcerers from my home games. Or at least restrict it to applying only to those spells cast using sorcerer spell slots. That sounds like the way to go actually. New house rule!

You seem to ban a lot of stuff...just curious at what point does banning things because they are the only way to make a build effective make no builds effective?

Not an issue in our games, we see maybe one unique race every couple of campaigns, which last about a year. Even if they were more common though who cares? I have never understood get your chocolate out of my peanut butter posts, and I hope I never do.