|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
It would also be great if you can think of a couple of NPCS your PCs already know. Like a friend, family, master, apprentice, lover, enemy, whatever, it would help to flesh out your PCs and to give me ideas for future plots.
I have to go out at the moment but there would be a town guard, a church of some good deity, a troop of guys patroling the forest, there are witches living here and there in the wilderness, there is a keep populated by goblins (somewhat allied with the PC's town).
The way I was thinking is to NPC them out of combat but the players control them in combat. I just prefer to avoid recruitment :/
The area is basically, a big town, a small town that is under the control of the big one, another small town that is basically independent, and the rest is forests, moutains, caves.
The pool of NPCs can patch our little dilemma, you can use then in your quest.
Dirty DMPCS! I can hear you, but it woudl not be, it woudl be more like cohorts.
About the kingmaker-like stuff. What role woudl you want?, as I said you can start from a simple soldier, militia captain, temple leader or the temporal ruler of the town, etc, your choise.
I also thought about doing a kingmaker-like campaing, but you both seems to not be interested in being leaders of any sort. normally with only two Pcs I would create a pool of NPCs so you can choose from them and use them as back up.
That is hardly a fighter issue. You can have bad build with every class.
That is like what everyone is capable of doing, and several calsses can do it better since besides a couple of more skill points the rogues have zero advantage in the skill deparment.
Dennis Deadsky wrote:
With attributes like those you could easily play an exotic concept that requires high stats, like altering reality with your mind.
That pretty much only requires one stat
IMHO, that feat selection is bad all around. Vital strikw with a gladius is useless. Point blank shot and far shot to trwo spears is basically worthless.
Romans did not used full plates so the best thing, IMHO, is to go slayer for the ealier entry to shield master.
Will everyone be just core? because corebarbarian are not impresives at all.
Just let the guy play his fighter, if he is happy there is no problemif he is not he can bring another pc/multiclass/retraining.
I disagree. Fighter should be generic, there shoudl not be a profesion imposed on them. Soldier, general, martial artist, bounty hunter whatever, that shoudl be options, let the fighter have skills and let him use them as he see fit.
Note that eldritch heritage impose a -2 character level so you will have a weaker compaion.
Most rogues work better with a couple os levels in something else, But I'm still not getting what happened, what FAQ screwed the archetype?
I ban the summoner spel list because is silly and the eidolon because it can be problematic and because I never bothered with learning all the stuffs. What is exactly your idea with the summoner?
On a side note, deadly dealer by its won does not seems good, the witch stuff seems good however.
OTOH, many DM's come here and post that their Rogue is breaking their game- and yes, the rogue has a nice "sweet spot" at about 5th level.
To tell the whole truth a lot of those are misunderstanding on the rules, like a rogue flanking with a ranged weapon.
Two good saves is a good idea, but I would prefer new and improved talents that vastly improve rogues defenses. Paizo do not even need errata anything for that.
This month I finished the entire BGII from the nth time, I think this time was the easier one, I had 3 pure damage dealers plus the fighter/druid who also do good damge. 4 damage dealers plus whirlwing attack and enemies just die fast.
Anyways, I would let open the posibility of using the lkilled monsters as ingredients for magic items in case you have good ideas for them.
If you do not need more information then I will be just waiting for your PCs.