Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Nicos's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 8,425 posts (10,950 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 18 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 8,425 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I would say no cause it could be a lot of thing, I will give more details when I go home. And got it, you really do not like to go to place you know nothing about, will not happen again :P


Well, back to the armor master fighter then. Can I keep (lemmy's) bravery instead of the ability the archetype gives?


LazarX wrote:
None of those abilities address anything beyond ground movement. Not even swimming is covered.

In what part of armor training is this?


JonGarrett wrote:
Honestly, I think that's my biggest gripe - it feels like a lot of decisions made are based on what the dev team like and don't like. Someone is fond of spellcasters, so Paragon Surge stays broken for a good long time. Martials, on the other hand, shouldn't be as powerful - anything that makes them too strong gets zonked straight off.

I feel the same with classes. Obviously the designer of the bard really liked the concept so he give the bard tons of useful class features. The poor bard and (CRB) monk on the other hand seems like nobody cared about them, nobody really wanted to work on them.

I imagine freelancers working in bard archetypes and all the fun they have. Having tons of class features they can replace by other useful features, allowing them to create really diverse new concepts, everyone loves bards. The poor guy that have to work with rogues on the other hand is not so lucky, how many good arcehtype were rejected casue the result would be too good?.


Scavion wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I will be ok with a couple of more skills and a minor boost to saves.

To be completely honest. I don't think 4 skill points per level is fair to the Fighter. I think they should get 6 per level as well as the Cavalier. The Ranger gets 6 + an Animal Companion, Spellcasting and 5 bonus feats.

But only if everyones cool with that. As for saves, Lemmy's Bravery houserule is fine by me.

So, 6 skills per level?


master_marshmallow wrote:
So, about that Fencing Grace feat....

It was bad and it is even worst that they just just not errata it but instead they release another feat in a softcover...what more is there to talk about it?


Scavion wrote:


But only if everyones cool with that. As for saves, Lemmy's Bravery houserule is fine by me.

What houserule is that?


Whisperknives wrote:

So the effect of more feats than a fighter, less restrictions than a monk, better hit die than a monk, more skills than a fighter, and then some other bonuses thrown in on the side.

(Assuming all is true)

So?


I will be ok with a couple of more skills and a minor boost to saves.


Lemmy wrote:
Oh, yeah... Bloodrager, Investigator and Slayer are great!

Not sure. Everyttime I see the salyer I think that I coudl have houseruled a spell-less ranger and have basically the same class. The lack of new mechanics and the "let mix everything with everything" philosophy of the book makes me be rather "meh" about it.


Nicos wrote:
I can see myself playing an inquisitor.

But certainly not a single classed one. What were the houserule for fighters?


I can see myself playing an inquisitor.


I would not take superstitious myself. Without hte non core rage powers and feats (raging vitality for example) that patch the barbarian other defenses superstitious is more like a trap.


Zark wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:


Is there anyone out there who just likes Pathfinder as it is, with what they've done so far?
No, I don't, and sadly I think the quality is deteriorating, at least when it comes to rule books. I also see deteriorating in trust as an issue...

This was a reasonable and well constructed post.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
I think the feat chains are neat, and a fair way to get to more powerful feats.

I could understand everythign else in your post but not this. I have played and DMed in games when the rogue is useful, when low level wizard struggles to survive and etc

I suppose it depends on what you call feat chains. It is a real chain then fine, but it is a chain filled with silly prerequisites then no, because I have never seen someone say something like "damn man, having to take combat expertise a feat I never ever plan to use in order to later take improved trip is makign the game much more fun for me!"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Kretzer wrote:


The problem is average results on dice is that not only does no one actually roll average all the time...dice don't roll average all the time unless you spend lots of money to get precision dice made.

Forget average then. What about the bard having more skill points than the rogue? or all the buff spells the bard can cast that requires no roll from his part?


Thormind wrote:
Nicos wrote:

To the Op.

To do fair comparisions you have to post your rogue in here. All te numbers, Hps, Ac, CMD, to hit and damage and very importantly his saves.

After that people in here can answer you with numbers.

So far, I have only see one rogue buidl that is superior, the other are mediocre at best.

At lvl 13 with same gear and base stats:

Rogue:
AC: 29
CMD: 30
HP: 103
To hit (with haste): 20/20/18/15/13
Dmg: 1d6+5 (+5d6 sneak) per attack

Slayer (same gear):
AC: 29
CMD: 37
HP: 128
*To hit (with haste): 27/27/25/22/20/14
*Dmg: 1d6+10 (+4d6+12 sneak) per attack
*studied target bonus included

It's not just a small difference... If the rogue was already affective the slayer is ... overkill (any rock fan? :-)

Well, i'm not sure how those numbers will make the rogue outdamaging any full BAB.

Lets use a fighter for comparision. Without takign the weapon focus/specialization feats we have

+13 (BAB) + 3 (weapon) + 5 (WT + gloves of dueling) +8 str -4 PA +1 haste +1 cracked pale green prism =

with damage: +12 (str)+ 12(PA) + 5 WT +3 weapon

for a total of (asuming furious focus)

+31/+26/+21/+16 (2d4+32 15-20/x2)

Wich, I would say is more than the damage output than the rogue. And the fighter also bypass DR much easier and suffer way less for moving more than 4 ft.

The AC with a reasonable investment would be something like: + 13 (armor) +2 dex + 1 def +1 nat +1 luc k +1 the other ioun stone whose name I do not remember = 29

Now, take into account that the fighter's (and barbarians, paladins and others) numbers can be higher.


Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Thormind wrote:
Nicos wrote:

To the Op.

To do fair comparisions you have to post your rogue in here. All te numbers, Hps, Ac, CMD, to hit and damage and very importantly his saves.

After that people in here can answer you with numbers.

So far, I have only see one rogue buidl that is superior, the other are mediocre at best.

At lvl 13 with same gear and base stats:

Rogue:
AC: 29
CMD: 30
HP: 103
To hit (with haste): 20/20/18/15/13
Dmg: 1d6+5 (+5d6 sneak) per attack

Slayer (same gear):
AC: 29
CMD: 37
HP: 128
*To hit (with haste): 27/27/25/22/20/14
*Dmg: 1d6+10 (+4d6+12 sneak) per attack
*studied target bonus included

It's not just a small difference... If the rogue was already affective the slayer is ... overkill (any rock fan? :-)

Gear? Feats? Where are the modifiers coming from?

I ask the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To the Op.

To do fair comparisions you have to post your rogue in here. All te numbers, Hps, Ac, CMD, to hit and damage and very importantly his saves.

After that people in here can answer you with numbers.

So far, I have only see one rogue buidl that is superior, the other are mediocre at best.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Beating A Dead Horse wrote:
New classes, same old arguement

Same old rogue corpse rotting in the middle of the game.


Gauntlet

Benefit: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets.


Rynjin wrote:
Do they still count as an Unarmed Strike?

I...sppose what book and FAQ are you reading.


Rynjin wrote:

Because it only works while you're punching.

Adamantine gauntlets.


Barathos wrote:
In my games, Dervish Dance gives dex to damage for any one-handed finesse weapon. It works pretty well. There's less people exclusively using scimitars, which is good.

Same experience here.

A really easy and effective houserule.


Squiggit wrote:

Regardless of whether you think it's better, as good, or not as good.. I think it's easy to agree that the class is kinda way too similar to the base Barbarian.

I do agree.

I feel the same with the slayer too. THe same old class features over again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you (generic you) do not want des to damage + TWF then you disallow dex to damage + TWF as with dervish dance. Not sure how much more complicated it can be.


Aparently with a primalist you can end with the same number of rage powers as a standard barbarian plus spellcasting. Do Primalist make the barbarian obsolete?


Primalist can not take extra rage power right?


Imbicatus wrote:
The fear is allowing dex to damage with two weapon fighting, clearly.

Is that is the fear why the solution have noting to do with it?


D3my wrote:
(which doesn't say that it stacks with the deadly range talent, so RAW is it doesn't)

I'm sorry but that is totally against the definition of RAW. Is the rule is not written then it is not RAW.


NOt sure how the girl can look peacefull without her jaw :P


The rage pwoer stuff was a bad idea though, I do not liek how the ACG start giving every class teh stuff from the other classes.


I doubt it. But, feel free to prove me wrong n your build thread :)


I'm not sure. The sheer amount of rage powers is point for barbarians. Besides the barbarian are considerably less MAD, and that matters for things like raging vitality, and you need raging vitality. I have been buliding bloodrages and I do not think they are superior.


Yes, Spellcraft.


With a +2 from flanking


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

THe Ecclesitheurge situation is particularlly bad. We have an entire page of the book that is, to say the less, of really low value.

As with other things in the book (like dex to damage with rapiers), I think the right thing to do is to release pdf with the missing/correct information to fix this problems, at least until there is 2nd printing.


3rd. It is in the campaing info.


Tels wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I consider that their consideration about what is bad desing is bad.
Why are you even playing this game then?

Well, if you ask I don't play the dozens of worthless archetypes the game have. I play the ones I consider to be good or a least decents.

If you tell me that to have 10 awful rogues archetypes is "good" because powercreep or whatever I will have to say Hell no


I consider that their consideration about what is bad desing is bad.


Scavion wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:


As a note: Dirty Trick Master is PFS illegal. Whirlwind Attack cannot be used to do more than one maneuver in a turn unless you're a Dirty Fighter, which is also banned in PFS. It sounds like most of the problems people are having are due to not following the rules...
? You can perform a maneuver in the place of a weapon attack.

Not dirty trick...not sure if thatis what she meant.


DM Crustypeanut wrote:

Besides the Dire Half-Dragon Bugs so common in ToEE, I absolutely loved ToEE. Couldn't really play it without Co8 though, but man did I enjoy it.

My BIGGEST preference from ToEE over NWN, NWN2, and the various BG's is the turnbased system over the real-time system. I cannot stress enough how much better turn based is for this kind of game. I couldn't get through NWN or NWN2 due to the crappy controls, but I did beat ToEE, despite NWN and NWN2 having arguably better storylines.

Just imagine:

Rise of the Runelords PC. Or hell, I'll take ANY of the APs as a PC game!

I feel the opposite. The turn mechanics of ToEE made the game really boring for me.

EDIT: I do agree about the controls in the NWN games.


Well, I would like 4 skill points per level for paladins ;)


That is a good point half brick.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
From a design standpoint, the Lore Warden is a bad archetype because it swaps defensive abilities for offensive abilities.

No. From a design standpoint the Lore warden is a great archetype because it add a valuable, cool, themathic AND balanced option to the game.

From a design standoint is bad to trade mediocre abilities for mediocre abilities and make a mediocre class into a mediocre archetype, as have happened so many times with rogue archetypes.


Half Brick In a Sock wrote:


Nicos:
Yes.
Primalist doesn't remove any Bloodrager abilities (just modifies Bloodlines) so it is compatible with all the other archetypes (as none of them removes Bloodlines).

But there are others that modify for example bloodline feats.

Not sure if bloodline feats have to be taken as a separated ability.


Can bloodconduit be combined with primalist?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry Ross. I can understand that sometimes mistakes happens. Perhaps someone in the editing process make a mistake. It would not make me happy but it is understandable.

On the other hand if I have an archetype with a really important missing part just because page count then what I have is an useless archetype.

I'm looking at the eccleSitheurge. This cleric archetype (the only cleric archetype in the book that I'm aware right now) lose his armor and shield procifiency and if he ever use an armor he lose acces to blessing of the faithful ability. But that ability is just not there.

So, the only cleric archetype in the book is non-functional. Basically the entire page 91 of the book is useless as it is.

I definitely would have prefered a functional full archetype over the picture of the dwarf cleric no matter how nice that image is.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Because Paizo did the Swashbuckler wrong on many accounts and this is one of them

Well, I'm sorry to say it but yes. This was mentioned repeatedly mentioned in the playtest but they did not listened.

So we have anther stand still DPR machine+ added tricks. Nothing more to say about it.


It is not the first time different things get the same name (snap shot, sniper archetypes, hard to fool, etc) and it will not b the last time.

Nothing to do about it.

1 to 50 of 8,425 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.