|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Why WOULDN'T I pick a class for fluff reasons?
Well the simple fact that your character defines itself and not the character classes that they take. Your class defines some of the abilities of the character but little to none of what it is fluff wise.
If the idea you have is to be a knight with a code of ethics, the game could care less if you took levels of cavalier, rogue or even wizard. Mechanically cavalier certainly could encourage some of the concepts given the pre-existing orders but it does nothing to denote any kind of knighthood status. The game has no Knighthood feat with the prerequisite of Cavalier 1 that anyone in the world must have to be considered a Knight for example.
Your choice in character class of course can (and should!) support the creation of the type of character you wish to play but the system your describing aligns more with older editions of a different game where a Wizard was Wizard and didn't have the ability to be customized as they could be in Pathfinder through skills, feats, traits, archetypes, prestige classes, multiclassing and so forth. Given how far a character's mechanics can be customized there isn't any reason to assume if one doesn't use one particular ability somehow they are entitled to something else.
You're right that these types of things aren't like a video game, but you're actually implying that somehow a class decision is fleshing out your PC when it isn't in reality.
From your list mechanically Cavaliers, Samurai, Paladins, and several others support #1. #2 is simply being a proactive player and could be done innumerable ways using class abilities, feats, mundane equipment and the basic rules of the game. Tactician, any type of spellcasting, bardic songs, aid another checks, creative use of ropes, etc. #3 is just the annoying habit of people to rank things based upon random metrics and doesn't really have anything to do with anything. #4 likewise has nothing at all to do with anything. Writing Cavalier on a character sheet does nothing to compared to being proactive and instigating the roleplaying yourself.
Insain Dragoon has a good suggestion of something that does mechanically what you want.
I can't say that it absolutely can't be done well but it seems completely unnecessarily.
There are already so many options for the PC's to have followers, so many NPC's that could be played, guards hired, monsters charmed/bribed/converted/summoned and so forth that many of the reasons a GMPC might be there are entirely pointless.
I could see a mentor type or leader type being involved situationally. Leading a particular battle or encouraging the PC's. A trainer type being used to lead some kind of scene with the PC's really being the focus.
To run an extra PC because the group is small is a good use. Simply change the nature of the encounters and let the party make their own ends meet.
Eventually some other game will come along and draw people out of the PF pool as well, that's probably where you're splitting of the fan base is most likely to happen. Look at 5th edition D&D, it's got people playing it that haven't played D&D for quite some time playing it these days. Paizo's lunch can be eaten by a competitor just like anyone else's and they don't have Hasbro and Magic the Gathering to prop them up. I don't see it happening but it isn't impossible.
Beyond that there is something also to be said about the fact that the people at Paizo have been playing this game longer then any of us arguably. Creative people being paid to be creative. It seems unlikely that at some point enough people aren't going to want a fresh canvas to express their ideas for a game upon.
Just throwing in my pair of pennies, a 2.0 would not see me or any of my group spending money on it. We've decided that Pathfinder is the system we'll "retire" on after years of edition upgrades and thousands of dollars spent collectively on books. We'll stick with PF as long as it stays in its current form; it's unlikely, no matter how good a PF2e might be, that we'd switch to it.
Yeah but if you've already made that decision it could be implied that you and your group won't be spending any more money on anything more really anyway? You've spent your like $700ish dollars, own all the hard covers and are effectively out of the market place as a consumer. You also won't be buying any competitor's product as well given what you've said.
You've got more then enough material to last the next 20+ years of regular role-playing game meet ups and are probably the least likely group to buy the more and more esoteric books that likely to come out in the future for the current rules of the game.
How about not splitting the fan base?
I'm not sure about how exactly Paizo's fan base would be split by them eventually coming out with a new core rulebook. Not like they would keep releasing product for the old edition and unlike video games it isn't like someone switched off a server and your books and dice stop working. The only real issue to a person from a new edition standpoint is in terms of the Pathfinder Society and if anything that's what needs a huge rework to start.
A /lot/ of role-playing games go through edition changes, not just D&D. Traveler, Shadowrun, BESM, GURPS, Earthdawn, Vampire: The Masquerade, and that list goes on and on for quite a while. They happen for a variety of reasons but they happen, some times they're huge changes and other times the tweaks are smaller and harder to see.
There are some issues that are still legacy from the Oldest RPG in the World. People are right that anything new "edition" would need to be at least somewhat visibly the current edition, as the whole reason this exists is said oldest RPG didn't do that for one of their editions and actually did what all the people who worry about these kinds of things worry about happening so it isn't like there isn't president for some people to at least have an opinion on the matter. It does force some of us to chime up so things aren't ruined for the types of games we want to play though.
Casters should be more damage dealing or whatever then people wielding sticks and rocks, they should also probably pay a heavier cost for that ability though. Casters get too survivable is likely the real problem mechanically. Also I dislike cinematic combat, I watch films for that stuff and even there I'm getting pretty sick of it there. Seriously why does a 2003 Korean film have a better fight scene in it then the Avengers squeal?
I don't want Naruto the RPG, that isn't epic. I want armies marching and rules for kingdom building. The risk of wounds getting infected and characters dying. Magic being this dangerous thing, risky to use but powerful. Artifacts that always have a big down side. I want to /play/ in that game. All of which is the total opposite of a lot of other people want.
Blargh. Anyway disagreeing with people on the internet, blah blah blah.
I wouldn't focus on this so much really. Cavalier works just fine on foot from my experiences with the class. It's an animal companion and a small bonus when charging on it that you wouldn't be using all the time.
Core abilities have little to nothing to do with being mounted. Almost all the order abilities, the challenges, tactician, etc all work just fine.
Dragon Disciple was better in 3.5 D&D actually. More focused. It was effectively a trap for sorcerers to go into but you could make very interesting and powerful characters with it quite easily.
Now it's still effectively a trap but a less punishing one for everyone else at the table who has to tote around the low BAB melee guy whose way behind on spell levels.
I'll second Onyxlion's suggestion of going from Dragon Blooded Bloodrager into Dragon Disciple.
Well I certainly hope that the next edition of pathfinder isn't called Pathfinder 2.0. That's a horrible name!
I could hope for Advanced Pathfinder or something similar but that'd be too derivative really.
Seriously I can't personally think of any reason to not eventually make a newer game. Newer ideas, plenty of lessons learned and eventually there will be a content end point. How many Bestiaries can you make before sales choke? I literally have no idea.
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
So smooth! Especially if you kept the charts for your character on hand. Ability checks were so good, with no ridiculous dcs to worry about (hello 3.5-pf str checks). Urgh at the modifiers & excessive addition of recent years, way to make rolling tiresome.
Indeed. 2nd edition AD&D had a really good character sheet for that. Just list it all right there where you need it. DM gives you a bonus/penalty based on the situation and there you go.
All character sheets should come in green and white in my opinion too. :)
I didn't mind the declining AC myself either Snorb. Or just the era when AC's usually stayed in a kind of set range usually determined by just armor alone.
Ahh, the wonderful days of charts and ability checks. Honestly I wish I could visit there a lot more often. I enjoy the limitations that were set up. It wasn't 100% bullet proof or anything just like any other game of course but still a lot of fun.
Really we could stand to go for more charts and things. Useful ones though. Wouldn't mind drawing back in ability score prerequisites too..
What do you expect people to do, roll dice to randomly select everything?
It's a game. You're always are supposed to come up with some kind of plan or strategy for the future if you want to do well at a game. That's true for every game from the playground to professional leagues. Even games that seem to be entirely random have large amounts of strategy to them.
Even more specifically Role-playing games in general are games where the reward for playing it (beyond obvious social rewards) is that your character gets more powerful in some manner. The plan for the character starts at first level just by picking a class in Pathfinder.
So there are going to be very few players in this game who aren't going to know what to do after they take their first level of wizard or fighter. They've already made up their minds by making that first choice about a lot of things that need to be thought about for the future.
If you want people to keep gear it needs to be useful to them, not just cool or interesting.
I've got an elven caster cleric (Divine Strategist) of Shelyn. Like 8 Strength, 16 Dex, 18 Wisdom, 8 Charisma and so forth. The idea is to then slide into Pathfinder Savant because I like the prestige class and want to play it.
Issue is I've been wracking my head trying to come up with good Esoteric Magic choices for Cleric. I found a few other threads but they were all wizard focused and also a bit dated.
I know summoner haste is a key one to nab. I want Ill Omen and Good Hope too just because...well awesome. What else though? I can actually get a total of 6 here and am curious if anyone has ideas.
You can take a hit or two and move your flank so you should be fine. I was roaming about with an AC of 13 as a sorcerer for a long time. You get to a point where it just doesn't matter what your AC is if you don't max it out as hard as you can so it isn't worth the time to bother with.
You should of course have other defenses set up as the others have been suggesting. My protection of choice was mirror image.
Flight of Dragons was a beautiful movie, with James Gregory, Harry Morgan,John Ritter, and James Earl Jones. Seeing that movie sparked my creativity for many years to come after that and it got me into roleplaying. I wish I had it again, but I don't believe it was ever rereleased in DVD format.
Actually it's been on DVD since 2009. I agree it was a fun film. Interesting premise and enjoyale to watch. I had it recorded off of TV on VHS growing up.
Amazon has the DVD on sale for like $12.
Traditionally a lot of the issues with large animals comes form getting them in and out of places to actually be used. Dungeons with 5' doorways and corridors, stairs/ladders and so forth. It's mostly a logistical problem. A medium sized mount or one that can fly tends to solve some of those issues.
Now an Eidolon doesn't deal with a lot of those problems. It's intelligent and you can summon it into places easily enough if not in combat or pressed for time. That allows it to be less stressed by those logistics.
A themed unicorn mount Eidolon should work just fine. Remember however not to focus on it completely, your summoner is a large part of the build. You can easily turn a lot of problems into solutions. A small summoner on a medium mount with a few mounted combat feats is just as scary as most other things on a mount. They can wear armor, they have d8 hit dice. It's entirely possible to build the summoner to be the combat monster and let the eidolon be the support like that especially with the right traits and feats.
You don't even need to do small if you can just be patient.
Alignment is a useful tool in helping to understand how another character wants to act. Not how they always do but how they'd like to or how they see themselves. Useful to add that little bit of nudge outside of your own head if you like to get a bit more into role-playing or so forth.
We've never had a Pathfinder or AD&D game without it that I can remember. It has lead to interesting situations of ethical conflict between certain groups.
Just wanted to make sure everyone had a heads up on this as I often miss out on cool stuff myself.
Tomorrow is Turkey Day! Starting at 11am US Central Time on November 27th the Mystery Science Theater 3000 Turkey Day marathon will be starting on Youtube found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p56igk63es
It should be good for hours of football alternative entertainment this year! If you haven't watched MST3k before you are missing out. It even includes some new stuff so it should be quite a lot of fun.
As an added bonus they're streaming Manos: The Hands of Fat on a loop until the new marathon starts up! Torgo-ahoy!
Judge things when appropriate and just allow a knockout blow here and there if it seems reasonable.
If you're looking to capture people alive there are alternative methods to dealing damage as well. Various spells, combat maneuvers, demanding surrender, binding lethal wounds, etc.
I'm curious how this is coming up as an issue for you and your group at all really.
You can use the Arcane Bond once per day to cast any known bard spell known following all the usual restrictions of casting that spell. You still need to provide material components, spend the right amount of casting time and so forth.
As a completely different part of their ability, Arcane Duelists may use the hand holding his bonded weapon for somatic components. In fact they'll want it that way because they'd need to succeed at a concentration check to cast spells without it.
Movement and size are pretty easy to resolve. Right in the combat chapter which is usually a better resource then debate threads.
Moving Through a Square wrote:
Very Small Creature: A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.
Normally something needs to be three size categories larger/smaller but the smallest groups have a special exception I've italicized. So yes a tiny creature can enter and occupy the same space as a medium creature, so long as the medium creature isn't some kind of 5' cube creature taking up all the room in that square.
Flanking requires another enemy/opponent so No, you can't flank with yourself unless you're using some kind of feat/spell/special ability that allows it.
Flanking is normally considered to be center of square to center of square, if the line segment between those two points is through opposite borders of the opponent's square. Where the tiny creature is specifically is pushing things into undefined territory. To me it makes the most sense to center things so no, flanking wouldn't happen as the condition wouldn't be met. Your GM may decide differently.
Not really no. What I want is to have an enjoyable time with my friends and have interesting adventures. That tends not to happen when everyone is just as powerful or weak as everyone else. I don't expect people brandishing two feet of steel to be as powerful as people who've trained all their lives to injure the laws of physics a few times a day though to be fair.
A lot of these "how do we fix X" threads around here always seem like they'd be "how do we make X less fun."
What I do care about is people using stupid incorporeal alpha strikes in adventure paths. It's lazy!
Yeah, opening doors while in combat is a bit wonky. Just part of how it's a game mechanically is all.
You could ready an action to 5' step to the door and open it if a space comes open. Of course I'm not sure if you're aware if the door is stuck/locked/etc but that's usually the best way to go about it given what you've got going on there.
How are Advanced Players Guide classes already to him? Did they play every day?
I don't really know what Kurzog has for resources so I'll just toss out random stuff.
Anti-magic field + Masterfully crafted pit trap + advanced gelatinous cube? Really anti-magic + anything from the sound of the party. That plus a couple of brutes would probably trash them.
Spell Immunity should come into play as he should know their usual spell list. Really any major defensive buffs. Don't count out potions/alchemical items either. Tanglefoot bags and so on.
Spell Turning probably a good idea. Tough minors equipped with Ring(s) of Counterspells? Golems?
You can get pretty narrow focused since he literally knows what they do after all.