Nerfherder's page

Is this part of the story? Is this the game you want to run? Sounds like a player driven sandbox style game. If so, you should as a DM expect all sorts of shenanigans from your players.

However if there is an overarching story you are trying to tell and you are letting the players highjack your game, try to get them back on track. Otherwise your game is doomed. I know there's a lot of players who want to play "rockstar" characters and monopolize game time and the GM's time, but its unfair to the other players at the table. Putting a good cohesive gaming group makes for a good cohesive PC party.

OK thx for the help guys we have been basically what you had explained however I failed to build all the character decks first and was shuffling those cards in as well. Also I will be using sleeves, does anyone else do so?

Some of my players have noted discrepancies in the card backs of later adventures decks.

Sorry if this has been asked before but I did a search and couldn't find a definitive answer. We just started playing the card game and through the first 3 or so play throughs I couldn't find how I am to add cards from other adventure decks to the base set. For example I have the Rise of the Runelords boxed set, and I want to add adventure decks 1-3; do I just add the cards to the base "B" set and shuffle everything together, or do I take cards out of the base set and replace with higher level adventure cards?

Thanks for the input guys as always enlightening. Unfortunately I think I was sandbagged by my player and as it turned out his actions might have ended up turning the encounter from going good to a TPK. As it stands I capitulated and allowed him to summon monster, they still ended up losing 2 characters but in the end saved the day!

"Once thrown, a bead of force functions LIKE a resilient sphere spell (Reflex DC 16 negates)" emphasis mine. Again it doesn't specifically state that it functions as the spell, albeit I will concede that there may have been some editing problems, but without a FAQ update I cannot confirm this. However I still cannot get around the fact that RAI seems to indicate that the Spell Resilient Sphere reads more as a defensive spell and the item Bead of Force reads as an offensive item (it does damage, it is thrown like a ranged weapon) I can't feel that the encapsulating effect of the item is not meant for capturing enemies and therefore it wouldn't makes sense that the item would allow means for egress and the like.

The player in question used and offensive item to simulate the spell as written. The item specifically states nothing can get into or out of the sphere. Unfortunately in a rules heavy game like PF words are very important and that is how I make DM adjudications, based on wording interpretation. Was I being unfair?

So had this come up last session...

Party had finally made it to the BBEG fight. This gist of which is a powerful demon arrives to destroy the party, unless they can destroy an evil artifact first. The wizard in the party decided on his turn that he would climb on the platform with the artifact, impact a Bead of Force at his feet and voluntarily encapsulate himself, thus putting him and the artifact in a Resilient Sphere and buying him time to destroy the artifact. Simple right? Well part of his plan was to summon Lantern Archons to help him destroy the artifact. Well I looked at the item and the spell and ruled that he cannot summon creatures into the sphere with him. The basis for my decision was the line in the description of Bead of Force; "Nothing can pass through the sphere, inside or out, ". Although the item simulates a Resilient Sphere spell, there are some glaring differences to the actual spell effect. Such as it is target-able by Dispel magic, cannot be damaged by any means short of Disintegrate, Rod of Cancellation et al. Also I looked at main purpose of the item which seems more in effect to capture enemies. It would stand to reason that an item that is used to capture someone shouldn't also allow them to get out by teleport, DD, Plane Shift etc. Also even though I cannot find any actual reference to summoned creatures being teleported under Conjuration Summoning, there is a mention of summoned creatures under teleport sub-school, although there is no specific mention that Summoned Creatures are teleported it stands to reason they must get to where they are going somehow. Regardless, the way I read Bead of Force is other than the few specific ways to either destroy or get around this specific version of Resilient Sphere that it creates, nothing can get in or out via any means.

In the end I capitulated as the encounter was quickly falling apart, however I was wondering if I was wrong or right in ruling that nothing should have been able to get in or out? What are your thoughts?

Yep found it in the SRD site apparently the answer is buried in the "Ask JJ a question" thread. Thx

Besides Cavalier and Paladin are there any other classes or archetypes/ Prestige classes that provide the Mount class ability?

I know this is gonna come up soon in my game. Can I get some thoughts on how these 2 feats interact in game and possible why (rules wise)

Please deactivate my Pathfinder Player Companion,and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game subscriptions.

Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.

Exactly, its not any different than someone 5 footing before attacking you have now committed to the full attack, OR you can 5 foot make one attack but why would you? Once you have committed to firing those 2 or more arrows with your first attack you have committed to the full attack sorry no Mulligan

I disagree. Any skill that has negative result of a failed roll should be rolled stress situation or not. I know in 4th ed there is something like this for certain skills like perception I think its called passive roll, if you want to take dice rolling out of your game go right ahead, I'll keep rolling dem bones it makes for a more exciting game.

To the OP by the RAW any amount of concealment is required to stealth, I know the temptation is to say that a minimum of total concealment is required to stealth such as invisibility, however I have a hard time not believing that a rogue sneaking in dim or no light with a 20% miss chance doesn't have a chance to move around a stealth on someone. However the one sneak attack via stealth rule still applies a-la sniping. But however your example is a Blur spell and as such isn't an environmental type of concealment, it would be like using Hide in Plain sight to hide in ones own shadow so no go sorry.

Replace CR with druid level so SR is your druid level+5 as for how smite works its...companion's Cha bonus to hit and HD for damage...nothing more

Taking 10

When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn't help.

Knowledge (Int; Trained Only).....Try Again

No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.

From SRD Edited for brevity..

So as you can see for skills that can only fail once you cannot take 10.

Professor Moriarty ... evil genius and gunslinger?

I was thinking more of Taxi Driver...."...are you looking at me?"

Back in 3.5 there was a special Magic Armor property that affected max dexterity bonus but it does not (yet) exist in Pathfinder that I am aware of.- Gauss

Nimbleness, yes it was basically like doubling your mithril bonus for a +1 enhancement. Also for you dex types there is Angelic armour but after 26 dex you might have to start investing in Bracers of Armour or Robes that give an Armour bonus

Once you have used Manyshot feat you have committed to the full attack option..sorry I am thinking this is why they make you double the FIRST shot as opposed to second or any, once you have committed to the feat you have committed fully

Design encounters with the monsters in mind. A shark out of water albeit is pretty scary and could hurt you but it still a fish out of water.

You know your players, you know their weaknesses, play on them as the DM. Hell most players weaknesses are common human weaknesses, that enemies can use to their advantage, so the story would probably not be compromised by your players calling foul on your use of "DM" knowledge. Villains always look for every advantage they can get, don't worry because your players are doing the same thing. Creating encounters that are bland and featureless becomes very boring very fast, your game will just become a video game like Gauntlet, waves of monster pour out and your players just kill them mechanically and collect exp and loot rinse and repeat.

There's so many tools in the game to screw players over here Ill throw out a few...

10th level Vampire fighter with an +2 Unholy/Viscous Greatsword, hell he slam attacks with his first attack since its the highest BaB then unloads 2D6+4D6 (irreducible)+ 1.5 STR damage attack. Nice and the sword is useless to any good party members...

Hey there's this pretty useful spell called CREATE PIT your players are using it you should too....

Lure players into cramped tunnels then attack them with monsters with burrow or that can braciate, nothing scarier than a party lured into a huge tunnel warren with so many twists and turns they don't know wich way is up then pounce on 'em with a family of 6 green dragons.

Have the party move into a large stone room, then lock doors and bum rush them from below with about 10 wraiths, hell flood the room too while your at it.

Having trouble deciphering how to calculate "level adjustment" for Advanced and Monstrous races. On page 219 in the box titled "Challenging advanced and monstrous races". The second sentence reads "The basic guildline for accomplishing this is to treat a group of characters with advanced and monstrous races as a level or more higher for a number of levels base on their RPs spent, using the following chart."

This seems to be assuming that ALL players are playing advanced or monstrous races. But what about a party where everyone is playing a base race but one person wants to play say a half Ogre? How do you calculate this person's level adjustment? I am assuming the chart can be used for one character as easily as it can be used for a full party but it really doesn't say so. I don't think it would be fair to all the players who are playing base races to be on an "even keel" levelwise with the player playing the Half Ogre. In 3.5 we used level adjustments to add non HD levels to a player whos character was more powerful than a base race. Where is this fairness?

I have a fellow group member who is taking this PrC. Bear in mind this PrC fits with our campaign and befits this players character. My question is about the level 5 ability Undeath Initiate (Ex).

The player in question believes that he can become both a Lich and Vampire simultaneously applying both templates. I notice that the last sentence in this ability's description states.."This makes transformation into a lich AND and vampire among the most appealing options for an agent of the grave seeking undeath." emphases mine. On the surface it seems that that is what this ability allows, but the mechanics of placing both these templates on one person seem hard to make happen. My question is:

1. Is this how this ability is supposed to work?

2. If yes then HOW! lol

Thx...

They are now behind cover and roll to stealth, assuming that the enemy doesn't see them. On their next turn they jump out and attack again, do they roll stealth a second time before they attack? or are the enemies considered flat footed still because they were unaware?

This is covered under stealth, as sniping. Stealth rolls are always made as opposed rolls to perception. Also you can only stealth if you have cover (relative to the observer) or some form of concealment. Sniping is the exception to the first part about cover relative to the observer however you stealth check suffers a -20 penalty during the opposed roll. So given your scenario, in the surprise round all opponents that do not act are automatically denied their dex. During the following full round characters that have acted can have a chance to observe snipers before they attack, if they see em they are not denied their dex for the attack.

Can this also work with spring attack? if they hid behind a wall? Basically, do you roll 2 stealth checks (1 to become stealthed and the second to maintain stealth before the attack) or just roll 1?

No because as soon as the SA attacker breaks cover he is seen. But if there is some form of concealment like a dark room and an opponent that cannot see in the dark, you can argue that the SA attacker moves stealthily up to the opponent strikes them moves off stealthy, but you do not need the cover to make stealth checks as you already have concealment.

The second question is, the Witch in the group is using the hex Fly, most of the fights take place in an area where she can hover 30 feet above the ground safe from most all enemies at this point in the game. She may also be using the fly spell to lift up the sorcerer every once in a while. my first question is Do they have to make any type of concentration check while flying? i've mostly been making them take "Vigorous motion" DCs just to make things somewhat fair for being in a near to completely safe spot.

Not as a rule. Flying is like any other type of movement, you can move your move equivalent then use a standard action. Where vigorous motion comes into play is if they are on a flying mount and double moving and casting spells.

My other question was, If a player is flying with a spell like this, are they given any AC penalties or denied a dex bonus?

You are not FF while flying, everyone gets their dex, dragons, people, sprites, etc...

Oh and final question, Does it make any logical sense for a monk to grapple a Gray Ooze and not take any damage? lol, i let him get away with it on hilarity value alone but i was just wondering if it sounded right to you guys.

I would say make him do a DC 20 reflex save or take 1D6 acid damge every round he is grappling.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/oozes/ooze-gray

The gauntlet has no damage of its own.

Incorrect.

There is a clearly listed damage quote of 1d2 /1d3 which just happens to be the damage someone with a bare fist would do. Where are you reading that Gauntlets allow you to do any amount of unarmed damage?

It's pretty clear that gauntlets are listed as an unarmed weapon with which everyone is proficient with that allows you to do 1d2/1d3 lethal damage with. Again I ask you where are you reading that it says you can do ANY amount of unarmed damage? If this was the case under damage it would say something to the effect of "does your unarmed damage"

You seem to be pretty pro Monk, given your posts in this thread, I have nothing against it I like playing them myself, but the spirit of monk unarmed strikes is that are done with any body part not just your fists. The amulet's cost (X2.5 times) is given that you can flurry and more importantly the object cannot be sundered. Broken condition does not factor in with rings and amulets and I would argue that these items are easily hidden/ hard to strike, the only place I have every heard of DMs targeting rings and amulets is in the RPGA in 3.5, its a low move and a weak argument. Gauntlets can be sundered, they are weapons, giving them ANY amount of unarmed damage is tantamount to an end runaround the Amulet of Mighty Fists. Bad form sir!

that there is fighting words

From a game balance prospective I like this. However in a home campaign you can justify however you want. I know I let my monks prestige or feat into giving their monk strikes magical weapon qualities. It is a lil BS that the amulets are soooo expensive but that is the cost you have for having weapons that cannot be sundered/ disarmed

No, sadly the devs nerfed the Brass Knuckles...

Thank gawd!

Ok here's the scenario: A fighter using gauntlets and a Robes of the Monk wondrous item. What is the unarmed strike damage when using the gauntlets 1D3 or 1D8?

Please explain your answer...

Thx!

This is why i hate the removal of the Exp component to magical item creation. It cheapens magic items, a small well funded nation can easily outfit their entire army with +1 Breastplates and +1 longswords.

Sure your toon took a feat to make magic items, thats a cost you took. Why shouldn't you charge other players? Well then you get into the whole argument about what all the PCs bring to the table, what is their contribution to the party's success, and that is an argument you do not want at your gaming table. If you are playing Kingmaker you should have burgeoning economy, not sure how you GM is running it, but maybe he should just let you sell magic items to market, and hand wave an amount of gold you bring in to the nations coffers or your own pocket.

Again taking the exp component out of magic item creation was a bad move and only cheapens magic items gp value IMH How is a +1 longsword worth 2315 gold and a MW longsword only costs 315?

Well obviously the bane of all melees will be positioning. You're hooped against flyers. Max HP will help with your staying power but don't underestimate the FC bonus HP. Also you are gonna need AC AC AC and eventually some kind of concealment miss chance to help with your staying power.

Other than that not sure if power attack fits the DW dagger motif. PA scales better with 2 handers, and high % crit weapons, You'd be better off with things like Combat Expertise, Dodge, Mobility. Remember you are going to be in the dirt face to face with the enemy you NEED staying power.

Bane abuse kills players? You don't say.

I take issue with both poison use and throw-away items. I find it absurd that anyone can base themselves off the premise that they are effectively throwing away several thousand gold in an encounter.

/agreed...

this sound likes a DM revenge TPK......hope your players weren't pissed I know mine would be.

Even if you don't have the prof, you treat it as light armor you're not proficient in.

I was looking for proof that this was incorrect but yes thx for backing up what I knew was the correct interpretation. Mithral Breastplate = light armour for evasion.

Not sure I agree with the whole pally using sneak attack sounds kinda twinky, but alot of PF seems twinky to me : /

LazarX wrote:

Mithral breastplates are medium armor in form despite the weight, so no go on evasion with them.

This is incorrect.

Proof....?

Any GMs out there have no probs with a Palidin using sneak attack? If so give me your reason (other than its in the rules) A Palidan player has a certain amount of roleplaying restriction as such I have having a hard time seeing someone who should act Honourable using viltal strikes (throat punch, gouging groins etc)?

Erick Wujick once said in his postscript to Amber Diceless Roleplaying System that if you truly mastered playing Amber, you'd finish by throwing away his rules.

I have never seen a game that caused more arguments and screaming matches than Amber, thx for bringing back the nightmare of listening to three people argue for 10 hours in the car all the way from Gen-Con...

I think you'll need to revisit the shield spell -- what you have currently simply isn't worth using for most spell casters.

I would suggest that the spell use caster level as CMB with Int mod to modify it with a +4 bonus for the 'shield' at the end. That's the most common method for spells that have CMB effects to work.

Yup sounds fair, although my philosophy on casters is they shouldn't be worrying about AC as they shouldn't be getting into dangerous situations like melee. The parry for a full class wizard is more like a hail Mary parry with a staff kinda thing, they shouldn't be good at parrying.

I guess the point I am trying to make with this house rule is I want shields not to be some spot to dump AC into. One hand can account for up to +9(+11 with Tower shield) to AC for a fighter. I know AC doesn't really scale well at higher levels, but atm I am finding the Improved Shield Bash feat a little broken in my game. Adding this new element to the game takes AC from the SB player but gives back to everyone and IMO smooths out some of the power curve.

Missile attacks and Parrying:

Only creatures with a Shield (Large, Small or Tower) may parry missile attacks but not ranged touch attacks. Large rocks or device propelled missiles of course cannot be parried. A Shield spell or Ring of Force shield counts as a shield for parrying missile attacks.

Incorporeal attacks:

Incorporeal attacks cannot be parried unless with a force effect such as Shield Spell or Ring of Force Shield or simular effect.

Deflecting: 3 times per day this shield may deflect any ray attack with a successful parry. Ray attacks are deflected harmlessly away on any successful parry but on a natural "20" for parry the Ray is reflected back on the caster!

Moderate Abjuration: CL 8th; Craft Magical Arms and Armour, Protection from Arrows; Price +1 Bonus

Here is a start to my own Parry house rule, lemme know what you think. I know this adds another roll to the game and may bog down combat and may eventually lead to its doom but I am going to twist my players arms into at least trying it for a bit. I think it balances out Improved Shield Bash feat, relegating the shield to more of a weapon which happens to be a good piece of equipment for turning attacks aside.

**************************************************************************

Parry:

Any creature may parry one melee attack per round as an Immediate action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. In order to parry a creature must not be flat-footed and must have a readied weapon or shield that they are proficient with. After a creature is successfully hit but before damage dice are rolled the defending player may declare a parry, with the DC equal to the total to hit roll that hit. Calculating your parry bonus is basically the same as calculating C.M.B., that is Base to hit plus strength modifier plus size modifier. Also shield bonuses to AC no longer apply to AC they now apply thier perspective bonus to the parry roll. Thus a large steel shield would add +2 to the parry roll or a tower shield +4. Any other bonuses that add or modify a defending creatures CMB modify this roll, so feats such as Defensive combat training will add a bonus equal to the full HD of the defender to the parry roll. A successful parry negates the hit (as a miss).

Rule of 1's:

Or course since this roll involves some danger the rule of a natural "1" is an auto failure to the parry regardless of bonuses. As well an attack roll of natural "20" can only be parried by a parry roll of natural "20". This is the only case where a nat "20" does not hit.

Feats:

Improved Parry:
Pre-requisites: Combat Expertise

You are more adept at parrying. You can choose to take a -1 penelty to attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 Parry bonus to parry rolls . When your base attack bonus reaches +4 and every +4 thereafter, the penelty increases by -1 and the parry bonus increases by +2. You can only choose to use this feat when you declare that are making an attack or full attack action with a melee weapon or shield equipped. The effect of this feat last until your next turn.

Defensive Reflexes:

You may make a number of additional parrys per round equal to your dexterity bonus. This feat also qualifies for any other feat or Prestige class that requires Combat Reflexes as a pre-requisite.

Or course any feat or ability that adds a shield bonus, such as Two-Weapon Defense or Shield focus adds to your parry roll.

Unarmed attacks and Parry:

Creatures that use natural attacks or slam attacks can still parry but must have a natural armour class bonus of at least +5. This represents size, toughness, horns, or natural armour plating that can be used to parry incoming attacks. Players with Improved unarmed attack feat or using spiked gauntlets, cestii etc. although you are unarmed attacks are lethal and you are considered armed you cannot parry effectively without injury. Only when a Monk reaches level 4 and gains his ki pool can he parry attacks with his bare hands (or any other class that gains a ki pool or similar mechanic).

Shield Spells:

Mages can effectively parry with a Shield spell as if they are proficient and gain the effective shield bonus (+4) to parry rolls.

Total Defense:

In addition to the bonuses granted by Total Defense action you can make one parry attempt against all successful incoming attacks for the round. Parrying still takes up your immediate action.

Parry while grappled:

While 2 opponents are grappled they may make parry attempts agaisnt each other with only light weapons, or bucklers and light shields. Grapplers may also parry with bare hands, the exception to the rule above as this represents the close quarters fighting that allows defenders to grab wrists, or deflect arms as opposed to parrying the actual weapon.

Magic Items:

Weapon Defending property, adds the transferred portion to AC to parry attempts as well.

Thanks for the input guys.

I've decided to let the player in question stack his shield die damage with spikes and bashing ability. Its in the game, I don't necessarily agree with it but there you go.

But to the point of S/B being superior to 2 WF I am still not convinced this is not the case. Taking a historical view and applying it in game terms. A Main Gauche duelist will have to "double up" his feats with Rapier and Dagger (Main Gauche)much like the Sword and Board player in order to gain the same benefits. Now I understand that most 2WF will in all likely hood use the same weapon but I am iterating that a historical style of effective fighting (Main Gauche) has the same game mechanic weakness that Sword and Board has in that the feats requirements is much greater.

Now I am willing to accede that a Duel Wielding Falcata fighter will probably out DPR a Sword and Board player but what about all the other styles out there like Main Gauche or Axe and Spear or Sword and Hammer etc. I am still stuck on the idea that the feat Improved Shield Bash has a distinct advantage in that you can basically take a defensive item and make a rather effective weapon out of it without any deleterious affects. I have never had a player in any group I have played in go this route (Sword and Board) it seems most players want to be Drizzt, but this route seem very effective almost too effective...

I am thinking of using a parry mechanic a'la Kevin Siembieda's Palladium System and doing away with Shield bonus to AC all together. Does anyone have a link or know of one that is already in use (house rule)?

I tried slipping this past our DM and it basically got about as far as Levitate at will and he denied...lol

Since we are talking shields and dual wielding, I wanted to run this past you guys. I started a Kingmaker game recently and one of the players is doing the TWF & sword and board thing. I am letting him use a heavy steel shield in his main hand and a short sword in is off hand so he is only doing the -2/-2 penalty. I works for my game fine my question is by RAW is it cool?

Strangely enough I have been reading the forums today alot about this issue lol. And yes what I have found is the game is basically silent on the issue and assumes that players are using a shield in their OH and sword in main but there is nothing saying they cannot main hand a shield and say OH a hand axe or dagger. I allow Over Sized Two weapon fighting in my Kingmaker campaign it is from The Complete Warrior, it kinda eliminates the need for this chicanery.

Your missing the point.

Yes I get it Swords and Shields are 2 different weapons and if you want to have all those feats applied to both hands it requires a doubling of feats.

Did you come here to get guidance from veterans who know what they are talking about, or did you just come here to tell us we're all wrong? You imply your new to PF from 3.5, so open those earholes and listen good son :P.

I am...are you? My OP has 2 parts. In one I address an issue wherein a player can triple die bump his weapon damage. In the second part I iterate my concern that a melee fighter using a shield as a weapon can also gain all the defensive benefits with the cost of one feat. These 2 items IMO makes Sword and Board the most viable melee class option. Shield Bash plus spikes makes that Shield both a weapon and a defensive device, something that NO other melee build can do.

I have more of a problem with the second part than I do the first part. I have 2 melee classes in my current campaign one sword and board and one is a 2 Hand wielder. Even thou I allow the 2H build player to take a Goliath and allowed him to monkey grip a Goliath great hammer his toon has dropped below 0 hp on 4 separate occasions whereas the Sword and Board player leaves most fights almost unscratched. SO far I haven't seen any major difference in damage output for either player, they are about the same.

IMO Shields should not be relegated to "just another weapon" that just happens to provide defense. I remember a great article in Dragon years ago from Len Lakofka wherein he created a simple system where fighters used their shields to parry attacks. Isn't that basically what they are for?

Shield Bash feat pound for pound the best single combat feat, it seems clear the focus for melee class builds is Sword and Board

Also, remember the guy dual wielding bastard swords, longswords, short swords or whatever gets off much lighter with Weapon Training, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Specialisation.

All those feats can be applied to Shields in PF. I'm still not convinced.

Even DW Falcatas will have a hard time competing with Shield bashing with OH, when it comes to damage output, I just can't get my head around 2D6 base weap damage on a off hand. I understand PF is high powered gaming but this trend really relegates most melee classes to the SB template leaving any other template ie: 2Weapon and 2H weapon fighting just for colour. Remember the 2 weapon / 2H weapon fighter isn't getting that AC boost...

+2 Heavy Shield +5 Enhancement +1 Shield Focus +1 Greater Shield focus

+9 to AC is a far cry from that +1 shield bonus you are getting from 2 Weapon Defense, or that +4 Shield bonus from Shield of Swings which nerfs your damage output.

Also to address the -4/-4 penalty so far it hasn't had much of an affect on combat for this particular player has had no problem hitting. When you look at the buffs and combat advantages you can get out there such as flanking the penalty kinda evaporates. Besides my point is even duel wielding Bastard Swords which is -4/-4 still doesn't yield the Off hand damage of using a heavy shield that stacks Spikes and magic Bashing ability.

It really still seems to me that PF is trying to steer melee builds towards Sword and Board exclusively. Any other build is a gimp of your character.

Nerfherder wrote:

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Just a quick note, to get 2d6 as a medium creature he is using Heavy shield/bashing/and shield spikes. This is giving him a -4 to his main hand and offhand attacks. A heavy shield even mithral is still a one handed weapon, so make sure he is taking that -4 even with TWF feats. If he goes to a light shield the damage drops to 1d8 (w/bashing and spikes) and the normal TWF penalties apply.

I believe Shield Mastery eliminate all penelties however the fighter needs to be level 11 to take it.

I much like many other DMs our there do allow alot of 3.5 material and Oversized two weapon fighting can be a viable lower level option to drop that penelty from -4/-4 to -2/-2. Be that as it may I am still having a hard time getting my head around being able to do 2D6 Off hand damage, even in 3.5 a fighter with Exotic Weap Prof Bastard Sword duel wielding does only 1D10 Off hand. Remember Monkey Gripping Bastard Swords was FAQed hence my house ruling that players cannot stack weapon Die bumps.

As for having to use alot of feats to make this work, a human fighter gets a feat at every level and 2 and first I don't see how this would be a prob. It just seems to me that PF is pushing Sword and Board as the most viable option for fighters over ALL other builds.

Mithral studded leather? that's a new one on me too.

3.5 Races of the Wild has every possible main stream mithral armour listed and mithral Studded leather is not there.

I'm gonna call house rule on that one

As our fledgling group delves deeper into the PF game my players have started to find the "best" paths or min/max paths for their respective characters. I have a fighter in my group atm that it creating a TWF Shield bash build. As I am an old DnDer I take alot of preconceptions from 3.5 and unconsciously apply them to my PF game.

When my player showed me Improved Shield Bash I thought it was a typo. Improved Shield Bash is far better than Improved Two Weapon Defense, so much so its seems PF wants to push fighters into Sword and Board build exclusively. But what my player showed me next just blew me away. Shield spikes coupled with Shield Bashing magical ability. At only a +1 cost to his shield he can now triple die bump his shield damage!

I'm sorry but doing 2D6 with your Off hand whilst still retaining shield bonus seems untterly broken and I told him he could'nt do it, even thou now I see it is a legal build. IMO this has effectively eliminated TWF as a viable min/max and has relegated it to a colour build. I would hazard to say that Sword and Board far out weighs Two Handed fighting as a min/max build for ANY fighter.

Am I reading this right? Alot of the archived threads I've read seem to back this up, but there also seems to be alot of gripping over Improved Shield bash and Shield Mastery. But the Shield spike + Shield Bashing ability stack just puts it over the edge for me. I have always told my players that they cannot "bump" their weapon damage dice more than once. The only exception being Large build, permanent Enlarge person etc. This player at level 7 has an insane AC 26 ish and can deal full attack damage in the 40-60 damage range, currently because he hasn't taken power attack but his potential to do damage is unprecedented and easily game breaking.

In my game the mechanical stuff..stats, feats classes plus dice rolls for combat spells, tactical movement are the owning player's responsibility. As DM I handle the role playing side of the intelligent cohorts, animals pets etc as npcs, I also police "stupid" decisions that players might make with their charges.

If you are using old 3.5 material Races of the Wild has a martial prestige class; Champion of Corellon Larethian. At level 2 of the class you gain Elegant Strike which lets you use your Dex bonus to add to damage with melee. Albeit you have to be elf/half elf to take it, this is one of the only places I can see that you can go with a dex based fighter and take Weapon Finesse. It also has some nice dex based synergy abilities. Also if your DM will allow Book of Nine Swords you can make a nice dex based melee that can do bonus damage from maneuvers.

Yeah my campaign pretty much ran out the same way as yours. With some half hearted diplomacy attempts quickly degenerating into an arrest and then subsequent exile.

Its a tough event especially for characters that are mostly martial and not diplomatic. My players were completely within in their rights to enforce their own rules how they see fit but people any people even those who are uneducated and illiterate, such as people in feudal times will still see through the BS of bad rulership. I tried to warn my players that simply arresting Gregori without a blatant just cause would create more problems. They however thought I was trying to subvert their character's ability to rule, out of game. Perhaps I was wrong to try to warn them and just let the encounter play out for good or ill, my approach only lead to some unneeded arguing.

His hit points are in the 30s, not far below that of the fighter. This number is a lot higher when a halfling summoner standing in the back is constantly giving him his HP when he gets low, though.

His regular AC is 17, but is brought up to 21 with mage armor (which lasts for hours).

I hadn't thought much about his weak save (will saves), and I'll definitely try using spellcasters that target that in the runs to come.

Not sure what the summoner in your group is doing I know myself I generally stay very close to my Eidolin if not based, not only because she is NOT a nuker unless using wands but because of buffing spells and shared defense. Going after the summoner is a good tactic simply for the fact that for all intents and purposes they are like any other caster soft and squishy.

Out last fight we fought a CR 10 with our lvl 6 party so of course we were in for a good fight. The Boss's flight SR high AC and the relatively confined fighting space effectively negated any contribution I could make not to mention rolling a nat "1" on my UMD right off the bat.

Bottom line every class has its strengths and weaknesses you as GM have to figure them out and out fox your players