|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
It is not. Armor bonus cost half of the other.
A couple of months ago I designed a CR 16 (or so) encoutner for a party of 4 13th level characters.
While the enemies have respectable offense, the whole point of their tactic was to defend the boss using multiple tactics (specially teleporting minions).
The players hated that encounter.
Enemy logic can get supremely complex (overall, not usually for a single enemy). To simplify all enemy logic down to "any intelligent enemy would.." is a disrespect to DM tactics everywhere.
That's fine in my book, everyting is better than wasting time the endless arguments about crafting stuff (just for example)
On a sidenote, this is one of the reasons I don't allow magic item creation feats when I GM. Either no one can craft so you have to adventure for your items, or everyone can craft but they still have to adventure for the components to craft their items.
Yes, because the only point of Pathfinder is to optimize. Clearly a Role-Playing Game should not have any actual roleplaying.
If it is for roleplaying and having a having a more rounded character, then I prefer to not waste a skill in craft and use it for something more character defining like bluff or sense motive.
Sleep is a 1-round spell.
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Not sure about that. THe DPR of the SnB will be lower but perhaps enough to kill lower CR enemies in the same amount of time, the higher DPR of the THF could be a waste.
Something to be considered is that high AC work better agaisnt multiple not that strong hits.
Sure, a CR +4 melee focused baeast with two primary natural attacks will probably hit the shield user the same way than the non shield user. But agaisnt multiple lower CR the difference in AC can signify a huge difference in the damage received.
Comparisons at level 20 are so pointless for multiple reasons. Seecially in this case, and specially in 1 vs 1, it is just magic item vs magic item.
FOr example the THF can have a +1 brilliant greatsword as a back up weapon (since he is not spending his money in a shield) so goodbye to the godlike AC of the SnB.
Comparisions around 5th to 13th levels are more meaningful.
Atarlost is right. The only way to benefit from a buckler and THF is the thuderstriker fighter archetype.
It is probably because when SM IX was written there was no appropriated neutral evil monster available.
And fo the last question, the best choice is whatever choice that make the fight at hand easier to win. Most NE would not worry about that.
Whip+slashing grace+ hamatulutsu strike, the rest is flavor
I don't see how could you do it with a whip?, with a whip you would need whip mastery.
By the way, hamatula doesn't require the weapon to be used in melee. Trhow a chained harpoon. Your DM will probably say no however.
Like 12 years ago we were kicked out of a house because one of the players was stealing some starfruit/carambola from a tree of the house next to the one we were playing.
It is funny when remembered, but at the time the host had problem with his mom and the neighbors.
Coming back to CE, the situation is obnoxious but it would be something if at least no other feat is ever released with CE as prerequisite (unless said feat have actually something to do with fighting defensively).
EDIT: And if Dazing monsters for 1 round shuts down an entire encounter, the Wizard isn't doing it alone.
You probably want to reread some rules before continuing.
In general, I think it would be nice if the books do not present not balanced options as reasonably equals. If an options is supposed to be bad or good just under a very restricted set of circumstances then the books should say it, IMHO.
A good portion of system mastery is to avoid the bad options, wich for a new player (or someone that just do not want to read that much) can be a pain.
Charisma is great. It just sadly doesn't work well for melee characters. Cha to AC, saves, initiative, yada yada is all great when you have an offensive ability to grow off of it. I don't know of a consistent way to get Charisma to hit/damage in Pathfinder. Smite gets you part of the way there.
When you are adding cha to so many thing you can happily allow yourself to buy a big strength.
Personally, I think the whole treatment paizo gave to dex to damage was bad. It seems like they didn't wanted to release it so they just release whatever thing to fill space.
Just allowing dervish dance to work with any finneseable weapon would have been easier and better.
Magda Luckbender wrote:
Houserule that you still take into account any penalty to damage from low str, reduce the number of feats to have dex to damage to weapon finesse and some sort of improved weapon finesse problem solved
Tcho Tcho wrote:
After looking at this thread a couple of months ago I decided to make CE obsolete in my games. The next one to GM agreed and now it seems to be gone forever. I really can't see a reason to 1 require a feet that penalizes my trip action to take improved trip, 2 discourage tactical fighting and 3 nerf the martials. It works really good for all of us. Thanks guys !
So this thread actually helped someone? good to know.
I donn't see this at all. Frankly, while CE is not the worse thing ever it is also true that in most cases using it is not particularly smart either.
Since having fun is the goal and combat expertise can be such a fun killer...no, probably not hate but extreme dislakement don't seem inappropriate.
Yeah, Master Summoner is just OP. Worse than being OP is that it can very easily bog down a game by flooding the field with monsters. You may want to consider retroactively banning the Master Summoner and letting the player rebuild as a regular summoner.
Agreed, things just will grow worse and worse with the levels.
The rules of the game, as written, say that all that is required to get a flanking bonus is that an ally threatens the target from the opposite side.
Weird...I remember the word "melee attacks" are written in the rules.
That is true...weird ability.
There is a point where sorcerer have enough spells to cover most of things.
But, I do agree that caster should be way more restricted. Prohibited schools should be a thing. Conjuration should not give so many variate options and etc.
Also, high level skills and non magical options should be awesome, I'm not fan of cutting mountains into half or jumping so high your reach the moon, but high level skills and non magical options are way to mundane as they are.