Rogue has always come off as a better talker, ninja only "kills" rogue because players are so combat oriented that they forget about the RP part of RPG. Most of the time my players choose rogue over ninja because of flavor and rogues actually get a bit more when it comes to fast talking, lying, and actually doing rogueish things. The ninja, aside from disguise and bluff being class skills for them and i think they have 1 actual disguise ability, just stab things. The ninja can be easily reflavored from oriental to a magic using rogue so it works both ways. Ive had good ideas for characters some work better with rogue, some with ninja but i dont think im ever going to be outshined by the other.
Isnt that role filled by the inquisitor
Okay, so this release i have a lot of mixed feelings about more negative than positive. On the upside, i always like more ways to make my characters exactly the way i imagine them. So, archtypes, classes, races, all that usually makes me happy but i seem a bit nervous about this particular release. The reason is, redundancy. Here is why,
Warpriest: There are so many ways to fill this roll its not even funny. Melee oracle, melee cleric, all versions of paladins and all versions of inquisitors. We have a 4th level caster, a 6th level caster and a 9th level caster and a spontaneous version of each except the paladin. Every one of those can melee. And i think there are prestige classes/archtypes to further enhance those abilities.
Slayer: These two classes are so similar that they both have archtypes that overlap into each others rolls. On hit damage mods, tricks, ability to track, this would entirely be flavor which can be made with no reflavoring of existing parts of these two classes.
Hunter: Ranger was designed for this very roll as a hybrid between a druid and a fighter. So im guessing it will be a more nature version of the inquisitor. 6th level caster. But the thing is both of these classes already do their roles very well. Makes me wonder where the hunter will be in terms of mechanics compared to a melee or ranged/magic hybrid class with a nature themed since the druid can be a shapeshifting powerhouse, and the ranger can hit things.
Shaman: I love this concept honestly but it was pretty much already established that the druid can do a good job at it. Even has "shaman" archtypes. Outside of the druid we have the oracle (nature nystery is great, so is seer archtype), which fits shaman equally as well. Also we have the alchemist, which has several archtypes that i think stack that make your standard "i use herbs and potions" shamans. The witch approaches a different kind of shaman especially if you chose the orc archtype scarred witchdoctor.
So this is all speculation based on whats interpreted but we have all of these roles already in the game and actually fairly easy to figure out how to make. A 6 level nature caster would be a bit new but at the same time it still is a divine caster at the end of the day. So what we end up with are several incredibly redundant classes to add to the class list because paizo has an unhealthy aversion to multiclassing because all this will do are give these options front loaded into a premade class and further discourage multiclassing (even though i just explained ways to do this without multiclassing or even refluffing).
What we could use in terms of classes:
Thats all i got for now but based on my games and what i noticed was missing i think this list isnt bad for what the game needs as opposed to what was presented.
Rule #1 - Racial penalties to ability scores are banned. (this one seems self explanatory, it enables more freedom of choice, and I think just because someone wants to play lets say, a drow shouldn't mean that they can't also play a barbarian (hilarious by the way))
This is the only one i really agree with to some extent. Ive thought about saying all races get a +2 bonus to any stat of their choosing like humans or letting them choose 1 mental and 1 physical strength and 1 weakness of their choosing. The weakness is important if they get 2 stats i wouldnt do away with it. Basically it would make all those other racials much more important.
#3 - Any spells that detect alignment or that have the word wish in the title are banned, along with alignment penalties. (This is something I'm pretty adamant about, because the wish spell just leads to trouble, and as far as I'm concerned the alignment system is more of a rough guideline and not law. I also don't care that this hamstrings the paladin, since "shoot hole in plot" should not be a class feature, and people are not simply black and white, good or evil. as far as I'm concerned they can have some bonus ranks in sense motive and that's it.)
I ran across this link you might be interested in. This depends on the setting quite a bit but in general its a good idea. Basically it strips everyone of their alignment. Does away with some abilities but mostly alignment only spells work on everyone now. Like a paladin can smite anyone. But their code of conducts are now much more GM/player fiat and require a bit more coordination on their parts.http://alzrius.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/removing-alignment-from-pathfinder- part-one-classes/
#8 - If you roll a natural 20 on an attack roll it is automatically a confirmed crit, however any threat range below 20 still has to be confirmed. (this one again 4e influenced, but I feel like if you flat out roll a 20 you should be rewarded, and I can't tell you how many legit crits I got robbed of because I rolled something lame like a 2 to confirm, but this I feel still leaves room for balanced play for people who like to go crit fishing with their keen weapon of choice.)
i never thought this was an issue because some classes would benefit far more than others with this mostly because certain classes gain extra effects on criticals. Like rogues and ninjas.
#10 - Flails ignore shield bonus's to AC (Part of this is me and my thing with flails, but also because that's what their designed for.)
No. Its a ton of extra book keeping if you want to incorporate weapon vs armor rules but i think between feats and class abilities the game is designed with this in mind. A +2 at most vs armor they are weak against. Now i have thought about incorporating armor material as a factor mostly to show tech gaps if one civ has only bronze and another iron to have an advantage there. So maybe +1 or +2 for each step above or below their rating. Or to be really mean their armor is cut in half or touch ac.
But if you want to fiddle with advantage/disadvantage for certain weapon/armor types i think it could spice the game up a bit. Just be aware as with evolution of weapons you may find certain weapons overall superior but it would go 3 ways maybe. Piercing > Medium, Bashing > Plate, Slashing > light. Shields grant normal bonuses vs everything.
I personally would set it up like this instead
Anything i didnt mention i think is dont think would improve the game.
I was more asking what theyre driving at by it. They look more like they deal in spirits maybe? But the witch and oracle seem to have a mix of divination stuff and harming ghosts. Dimensional occultist im mot quite sure. I do like the seperatist idea
So I was wondering how does pathfinder define occult im a high magic world. What is the focus of the options....like occult mystery for oracle, occult witch patron redundant with spirit? Dimensional occultist and there may be others I cant think of. Are they spiritists or is there more to them and are any of them any good mechanically seems hard fore to define a focus for them.
Its not pvp. Even if its indirect that is still pvp and i shouldnt have to. If would be allowed to screw with my faction mission i should be allowed to spartan kick him off the nearest ledge
Its hard not to react with that kind of emotion, even the GM at the table was looking at him like WTF. Ive played with that player once before and he looks like he hates everyone else at the table ;\
So just got back from my game and im a little pissed right now. Two of us at the table were grand lodge for a tier 1 "The Icebound Outpost."
We made it all the way through the mission with relative ease, the andoran faction players found their mission in freeing the slaves and whatnot. Our last battle We found out that our faction mission as grand lodge to collect some information could not be completed without interrogating one of the baddies, so our last encounter came up and we destroyed one of them and took the other prisoner. He played dead so we disarmed him and my character shook him a bit to see if he was still alive being a chaotic neutral barbarian and all. Lifted him in one hand was a good time. The rogue shouts across the table we should probably interrogate him and I agreed so at this point everyone at the table pretty much knows what we need. Then me and the rogue take a poisoned shuriken to the back from an ambush. So i need to move and help deal with the ambush so i set the rat down next to another player who is playing a CN fighter. I move shoot my bow and fail miserably since i cant get close to the baddie since he is surrounded. Then the fighter instead of trying to do something productive turns around and coup de graces the rat. He knows that we need him for our faction mission and does it anyway and his excuse "im chaotic neutral" roughly translated "i am an a!%!#**" even the GM asked him for his alignment which was a blatantly evil act for killing a creature who has surrendered and is begging for his life. It was no mystery we needed him and he was no threat to us anymore.
My question is what can be done about a player who f%~*s over other peoples missions just to be an a!&&!*+ like that. And 2, hypothetically if i was the GM would i be within my rights to switch his alignment over from CN to CE for a single act like that. Which i think basically says pay 3k gold for atonement or have your character retired because im pretty pissed about this. It wasnt even failing our faction mission it was that one player intentionally screwed us out of our mission with the excuse "im chaotic neutral" and "pvp is illegal." Because in all honesty if that were a home game i would have killed his character on the spot for doing something like that. Since well, "im CN and im a barbarian."
I totally learned this the hard way ill admit. My first several games i bit off way more than i can chew attempting to span really epic or really long running games only to burn myself out of material by the third level.
I was inspired to write this based on a recent thread based on my interpretation of the game and how to run it. This is not a reinvention of the rules or actually altering the game mechanics but a reinterpretation of how to run the game making dice invisible and making the game world more immersive and reactive to PCs. This is a bit of a work in progress and im sure it can be built upon but this is what i have come up with so far.
Without Further delay im going to talk about attributes of the pcs and how they reflect in the game world.
Attributes & Dumping
High: Added carrying capacity, mechanical benefits speak for themselves/NPCs may comment on how strong they look perhaps extra attention from the opposite sex or go to them for a job first that strength is a favored attribute.
Low:Enforce carrying capacities/NPCs may comment or pass over a pc for a task because they look weak.
Mental Stats dont show as much but become obvious:
*a higher charisma with a lower intelligence or wisdom can counter this RP social aspects in most cases. Think dizzy blonde who can talk her way into or out of social scenarios.
*Note: writing all this in html code is a pain in the ass.
Optional Rule: Regarding the attributes in the game world, I have been toying with the idea of giving traits or bonus feats based on stat level to alleviate feat taxes and reflect the character some more.
My next thing i have began implementing is "let it ride" thank you to the guys who made burning wheel for this idea.
The idea behind this one is to avoid excessive rolling for each scene so with this alternate interpretation a single roll is required and it will persist until the conditions change enough to warrant a second roll or it the scene ends.
Examples in play:
First Impressions: Allow a single check for each character on a single social skill, either diplomacy, intimidate or bluff mandatory for each pc involved in the interaction before any words are said. This is a first impression and determines the npcs starting disposition towards the character whether hostile, neutral or friendly. They wont outright attack but gives everyone a general idea on how the rest of the conversation will go, throughout the conversation the disposition may change based on future rolls.
Eyes for trouble: Calling for perception checks in each room is troublesome especially since it can give away things that are meant to be hidden. With this interpretation have each character make a single perception check at the beginning of the dungeon, this will be their passive perception for the purposes of noticing things such as trap doors, dungeon traps or other passive information. Anything else would require more extended searches of rooms.
If a creature is unaware of of a pcs presence and has not drawn him weapon yet, then it is considered helpless as long as the player remains undetected. Just before his attack, he gets a single, free perception check to notice the incoming danger, if he succeeds he is considered flat footed instead of helpless and takes the attack as normal. If he fails this perception check, he is considered helpless and is vulnerable to coup de grace by the player allowing him to be killed outright. The creature must be vulnerable to death effects and have a discernible anatomy. Creatures immune to death effects, sneak attacks, precision damage or critical hits are not subject to this damage.
Thats all i have now, feedback for my methods? Constructive criticism only but from both the perspective of player and gm.
Da'ath gets it. Thank you i was worried i was being vastly misinterpreted for a while. Two notches below average is definitely going to make some npcs react differently and treating it as an in game handicap is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact i would reward players for getting through situations where their handicap is a particularly difficult obstacle. So its a bit of both and some basic knowledge in psychology with my intelligence comment how people generally like to associate with people on a similar intellectual level. Contrary to punishing them i think this adds another degree of immersion rather than punishment because the world actually reacts to the way their characters are perceived rather than waiting for you to trigger a dialogue with their speech on notecards. I wouldnt ever call a player special needs but if someone shows me an abnormally low stat i will warn them that it will be a potential handicap in game.
Which is only punishing those players from a power gamers perspective. Highly learned people like wizards might not want to talk to your "big stupid fighter" because he isnt their intellectual equal. On the other side high int and low charisma means he has no social skills and people generally would find him slightly annoying to talk to. I fail to see this as a true punishment. To a non power gamer I am highlightning their character because remember everything works in reverse too. High stats produce the opposite effect. All npcs should react to characters based on race class and attributes. It makes it much more entertaining.
We had a warforged barbarian who dumped his charisma, everyone found him unnerving all the time. They would avoid talking to him or try and make him go away when they were forced to but i homebrewed a trait to let him use str in place of cha for intimidate. He had no chance of ever making friends but he could intimidate everyone out of everything.
When i GM i have my players run their characters by me before the game and really just check to see if their sheet matches their character. So 7 in a stat wont really break the game but i have in the past made 8 the minimum. But the best way for characters with low stats is to make sure that it IS an issue for them in game. It adds to roleplaying and brings out the character flaws as well and if they did it just to min/max it can be seen as a punishment. For example take charisma, a character who dumped his down to 7 (or 5 post racials) makes a really compelling speech to sway the mind of a potential employer I would ask for a diplomacy check (DCs of these checks depend on how compelling the arguement or statement) now his dump charisma becomes a serious problem. I also dont allow metagaming on conversations so they cant just tell the other person in the group "Hey ask him this" while standing in front of them.
Alternative Solutions to dump stat players as a GM:
Strength: Enforce carrying capacities/NPCs may comment or pass over a pc for a task because they look weak.
Dexterity: Require them to make dex based checks that are auto successes for other players/Comments on how they have no coordination (they pay for this one with their reflex save anyway)
Constitution: Between their con score and HP, this one doesnt need further punishment/ NPCs may comment on them looking sickly or meek passing them up on jobs they dont think they will survive.
Mental Stats dont show as much but become obvious:
Intelligence: Not so bad mechanically their lack of skills will suffer, but be more inclined to make them roll to identify monsters or recall information. "Hey i dont remember what did NPC Jack say" me: "make me an int check". Set at an easy DC or so./NPCs may ridicule the player for being stupid. Intelligent NPCs may not care to speak to him. Overall not terribly bad on the RP side. Also consider making 7 int illiterate trait if you want to. He cant read or write.
Wisdom: Low will saves, perception checks and sense motive. also must make perception checks more frequently maybe leave something out of a description until he rolls./ He will likely come off as witless to other npcs unable to perceive their social ques. No common sense or a special needs character.
Charisma: Everyones favorite dump. Force diplomacy, bluff, and intimidate more frequently than for characters that do not dump. Do not allow metagame conversations./NPCs may react to this character with extreme disgust and generally find his presence annoying. Even if he says something great his personality (expression, tone of voice) might cause him to be ignored. He may have to roll diplomacy just to get people to talk to him for extended periods.
*a higher charisma with a lower intelligence or wisdom can counter this RP social aspects in most cases. Think dizzy blonde who can talk her way into or out of social scenarios.
I think with guidelines kind of like these ones it will allow characters with lower rolls but have them know that it will come up in the game at some point where low stats will be an issue. It could be fun to roleplay a character who is challenged in some way but generally it will encourage a more even distribution of stats.
Regardless of the cheating issue i think pc dice should always be rolled where they can be seen and only roll 1d20 at a time. Doesnt matter for the other dice like d6s but this way it helps bring the odds back in line. Rolling multiple dice might not even be intended to cheat but just speed things up while tempting lets you assign the dice in order of most probable success. It is important for everyone to understand the reason for the GM to hide dice rolls is not to fudge dice and i know the GM guide suggests to fudge if needed but dont do it. It is to make the modifier invisible to make it more difficult to judge how powerful a monster is. This is a bit more true on perception checks or anything that would deter a player from acting or encourage it depending on if you rolled high or low and then complaining.
I also ask for copies of PC sheets because it does help me design encounters based on their relative strength and also if i need to reference it for any invisible rolls during the game. Like a perception check for a stealthing monster that doesnt intend to attack. (normally i have them roll perception at the beginning of the scene and let that ride until the next seen as well).
Between these two things it should cut down on cheating without accusing anyone or confirm that no one is actually cheating but it would put minds at ease to see dice rolls. The character sheet also lets you check their rolls to make sure their math is correct but at my table if it looks reasonable i wont be bothered to question it.
Like one time i had a character who was playing a witch character at level 1 where my monsters failed all of their will saves regardless of my roll and when i checked his sheet needed to roll a 19 will save or higher to avoid being put to sleep. On checking the character the race had been rebuilt for racial features that would add to this save and a feat i would not have allowed but i still dont think he intended to cheat i think i was just unclear on what the character creation standards were for a very high fantasy game. So doing stuff like this and dont be afraid to ask to see their character sheets will either confirm cheating or put everyones mind at ease if they seem too lucky.
Summoner is suggested once in every build ever for some reason. So far reflavoring the dueling sword is a japanese style dueling katana makes for a really good low magic themed iaijutsu master. Mixing the monk and samurai class is just cool though i didnt think it could work. My reasons for the swordlord were that, it gives incentive not to where armor once you hit the prestige class swordlord. The dueling sword already looks like a katana and is about right in size and handling and the execution of the class with performance combat just kind of seems right. Only thing id ask for is incentive to strike first like the samurais iaijutsu ability and id be set. I am suprised to see that this isnt a samurai archtype to be honest.
For fun i was trying to make a character centered around the flavor of an iaijutsu master using ONLY pathfinder material. So i have been tossing a few ideas around but i am trying to build a character that does this. It doesnt have to actually be the samurai class just has to fit the flavor. Refluffing to a minor extent is okay, (no pretending your rapier is a katana). Anyway stipulations on the character:
Stuff ive looked at with potential
So anyways, this is just for fun since i was playing with a few friends who were playing eastern themed characters.
Was looking to do away with vancian magic entirely and use a spell point variant. So wanted some input with gameplay of both variants. So my two systems i am contemplating at the moment are Unearthed Arcana Spell Points, on the d20 srd or Super Genius Games, Houserule Handbook: Spell Points. Which one of these variants is more fun with the least amount of problems. I dont care personally if a player spams a specific spell.
1) Do either of these systems have balance issues for casters against non casters
2) Does it work well with pathfinder?
3) Do they balance against other casters? (So there is incentive to play either a wizard or sorcerer)
4) Do either of give longer or shorter work days than using the vancian system.
(Have seriously thought about letting wizards cast any spell they have prepared like a sorcerer. I hate vancian that much, its out dated and has the same flavor as a moldy lemon)
playing somethign that can heal but not dedicated would probably be a good idea. My party right now has a seer archtype oracle, life mystery. She is a half angel aasimar who is going down feat lines to get wings and everything. Oracle is actually alot of fun, basically just a sorcerer who uses divine magic instead. Any positive energy oriented oracle would work since all the cure spells you know automatically. Could be a fire oracle or something if you want to burn things it could be fun plenty of mysteries to choose from and very flavorful.
Paladins are also really fun when they give you devils, demons or undead to fight. You may also want to look into cleric with healing ability there is also the crusader archtype for them makes them more paladin like. Just avoid the healing and sun domains if you dont want to play a healbot imo.
If you want you can convince the witch to roll hedge witch :p
There is a dragon humanoid race already in the book that is fairly balanced. I wouldnt give fly or large to a PC race unless i had a really really good reason to except a centaur race or something but that has its own list of problems. If your player really wanted to just be a dragon the dragon disciple solves alot of those problems. If you are going for dragonborn type then look at the Dray from darksun 2e and the book with the dragon race already in there.
So i wanted to make a pathfinder society character and its been so long since ive played in it i decided to start over. And i cant find my old character anyway so im trying to fit a class and build over a personality i devised and ill fill in the logistical as needed. Still need a place of origin.
My character i imagine him to be a young magical prodigy. He has shown extreme magical talent from a young age making him a perfect candidate for an adventurer...He is however prone to vice and decadence. He tries to do what is right but more often than not finds himself doing whatever will benefit himself the most and even though he tries not to he has trouble resisting the temptation for using magic for selfish reasons. At times because of his superior intellect (real or imagined) he can have a bit of a god complex feeling he needs to meddle in things that are really not his to meddle in...He is not without redeeming qualities. He tries to be an overall good person and usually his work is for a good cause. He cannot turn down a plea for help if it is genuine and will do his best to help in any way he can.
So this is what i have so far for this nameless hero I have. I wanted someone who can be a hero but is prone to his own faults. So now im trying to come up with a good character class and in context background for him where someone like this mightve grown up and what profession he would be. I am thinking wizard or arcane sorcerer but it is beyond me as to what school I might be specializing in. Keeping in mind it IS organized play i want the character to reflect his personality so I can get in what sort of hero he is without having the home group to set it up over a long period of time.
So my brainstorm:
Alternatively the sorcerer fit his concept decently, the sage in particular would let me keep his intellect. SO anyways, any advice on this character? Also a good place of origin/faction that fits him.
Would anyone be interested in joining a campaign near the orlando area? We are using pathfinder rules for the planescape setting. We have two players and a GM, and we are still deciding on a suitable meeting time and date for all players involved. We are looking for players who enjoy a more roleplaying intensive group, and open to using homebrew/third party material in a game including the psionics material and spell point system.
More than anything we are looking to have fun.
You can contact me via E-mail (firstname.lastname@example.org), PM me or just leave a reply if you are interested.
Do have a question about content. The spell line Grave summoning has "Conjuration(Summoning) [Necromancy]" for its descriptor and one of the fog spells has "Conjuration(Creation) [Necromancy]" what does this mean in terms of mechanics. Does it benefit from both necromancy and conjuration feats and powers i mean pathfinder seems to shun dual school spells. Or was it for mostly fluff, which school does it actually belong to my guess is conjuration.
Diego Rossi wrote:
Ive seen this in more than 1 game and this is usually the reason why wizards womp all over your encounters. Also it was said here, wizard has alot of weaknesses as well, like getting your spell book or bonded object destroyed or lack of information. I mean there is nothing like being a wizard with all the wrong spells prepared. This is a GM issue, not a game mechanics or player issue. Personally if my GM came to me with wizard nerfs I would A)Laugh at him, B)Not play in his game/let him be GM, or C) Not play a wizard. I would go with option A every time on top of options either B or C. Also in my games a kind of buff to spontaneous casters, is i borred the 4e dnd rules about retraining and allow it on leveling up to change 1 feat or in spontaneous casters one spell or for some in game cost. Gives them a bit more trial and error for spell and feat selection.
You could always halt their experience until they finish the mod. I think the mod assumes level 3 by the time they leave? I wouldnt sweat it if they are a bit short by trial of the beast. Have they done everything in town? THe research on the WW, Harrowstone, and the prisoners? there is a nice chunk of experience there. Also in the optional events, like the fire, apprehending gibs, the dream and zombies. I think level 3 is close enough if you cant bump them enough experience, or do a short side quest to make up for the exp missing if you want.
My group is almost through with this module and i thought id give my 2 cents on what ive learned through running it and things i wish i could have done differently. They have not yet finished harrowstone dungeon but anyways
The actual prison of harrowstone is filled with haunts, which in my honest opinion are mechanically lame. They drag on forever without a cleric they are obnoxious and they feel more like a trap that you need a cleric to disarm instead of a rogue. What should have been done or what you need to do as a GM is have a blanket DC for fear effects kind of like in ravenloft 3.5 setting
Ravenloft Fear System:
Will save, dc=8+1/2 HD of trigger+charisma modifier of the cause or EL+8= Fear dc and failing the dc by 1-5 means you are shaken, by 6-10 means you are frightened and 11-15 means you are panicked, 16+ you make a horror check and are panicked and this effect lasted for 5d6 rounds)
Horror: For those of you that dont have access to the horror system, a horror check was also a will save (example: DC 15 was a scene of torture or terrible agony, DC 20 was a scene of evil, cruelty and madness like "dismembered bodies turned into marrionettes) and this dc is modified by certain conditions like environment or relationship to the victem. Horror was similar to madness with either a mild, moderate or severe horror effect that usually had long term effects on your character with the exception of the mild ones usually were temporary.
On the first floor of harrowstone, just focus on creepyness and the overall atmosphere. Describe the dungeon to the best of your ability, keep it dark and grim. Ask for perception checks occassionally, and on obvious success let them hear things. Talking, panicking, seeing shadow people and if necessary ask for [bold]Fear[/bold] checks unless they are doing a great job roleplaying them.
Second floor of harrowstone: here add a bit more let the haunts do more than just be creepy. Keep the combat encounters up here but i would also keep the same with the first floor's environment this should be their first real taste of what the haunts can do.
Dungeon level: Here is where you pull out all the stops because it is the most dangerous part of the dungeon. This is where the meat of it happens where they will actually be confronted with the five prisoners and find the badge. Here let the haunts do things that could seriously hurt them, give them visions of them burning alive and such.
*A note on haunts as written: i dont like them because they are stationary haunts that function too much like incorporeal traps. Let the haunts be more atmospheric for most of it, letting them be organic and fluid throughout the prison. Assign some of them to certain rooms but usually taking up the entire room that they occupy unless there is a reason not to do it. Remember most ghosts should not pose a direct threat just scare the pants off your party. The real threats should be the undead. If needed add a few more undead to the dungeon to make up for lost experience for what would have been the actual haunts. Oh and dont feel obligated to activate a haunt every time a party member enters a room or delay it a bit for the haunts you do use. That way you cant have someone be the meatbag who takes all the hits. Maybe they dont manifest until shortly after entering a room or if they linger there for too long.
Example of Haunts:
DM: "The dimly lit hallway is littered from the rubble leftover from the fire. You can see the fire from your torch reflected in the charred wood. Make me a perception check"
Player: *rolls perception* "34!"
DM: "You can hear whimpering from behind the door"
Player: "Im going to go check it out" *he opens the door*
DM: "Here in this room is the feint smell of burning flesh. Several branding irons are scattered on the floor and an empty brazier lies in the corner of the room"
Player 2: "Creepy, I pick up the branding iron"
DM: "Okay" *rolls behind the GM screen* "You see the iron glow red hot and take 8 points of fire damage and you drop the branding iron on the floor, it looks as if it had not been used in some time. You look at your hand and you see the mark of the prison, branded into your hand where you gripped the iron."
This is my example of how i would run it, maybe i would leave out the stench in the room but the way this scene is written in the module, the branding irons fly around the room and attack the pcs as animated object encounter. Which 1) at level 1 is a phenomenal pain in the ass, and 2) just isnt very scary.
Example 2, would be if a player walks into a room by himself the door slams shut behind him him as if the slamming portal haunt were active, and the room erupts in flames and he gets to live the fire in the prison for bit. Here would be a great time for a fear check.
Example 3, seeing the professor walking around as a zombie could possibly warrant a horror check.
Sorry double post cannot figure out how to delete that last one. I think this is the best option, and it would be kind of nice to know what is just outright banned. On another note, i strongly advise against retroactively banning options that were once allowed, as with the last update alot of players were a little upset about some of the options being banned, especially if they already had characters set up for them. So letting us know what is never available for play and maybe why on that account you dont need to say what chronicles a certain PrC or race would be awarded as a boon. I already think this provides too much incentive to go chronicle hunting just to unlock things and leaves people who cant actually attend conventions SOL.
They really should be able to unlock boons in local games, not just conventions or special events unless it is something more cosmetic, and i wouldnt be too bent out of shape on races since your race is mostly flavor. Also a short description on why said item is banned from PFS play when you do make these decisions might help put some minds at ease or help us understand some decisions that might not make sense to us or leave us to speculate. Like the recent changes to available archtypes, some were more understandable than others.
I think im definitely going to go towards the wizard side for this one. My original idea was to make the gravewalker witch because it seemed awesome then it got ban hammered. Think im going wizard but the witch hexes seemed to be pretty awesome for the debuff department and for necromancer flavor but to be honest im drooling over the Nercomancer's Athame.
I think this thread is going off track. The thread discussion was how to make a necromancer work not not "prepare for everyone to be a dick to you." I do feel that on players should respect each others character, paladins and clerics if they are bothered that much can either A) do an atonement at the end of the session, or b) find a different table to play at. I am perfectly comfortable with handling the rp aspects of my character with the party but i DO expect the GM to step in when a player starts to act immature, like smiting my undead creatures and tell him no he cannot do that. Because then I would feel that the rules are intentionally trying to screw me because they can hurt me but its against the rules for me to do anything against them. Either way it makes for a crap play environment that would likely lead to me leaving the table and then writing a legnthy letter to Mike i think his name is who organizes PFS. People do have to remember than PFS actually does condone the use of undead by a player it even states in the handbook that you can play a necromancer type if you want, orison loves them. This much hostility towards necromancers i wonder if diabolists or infernal binders get this much grief. Also if a synthesist can walk in town fused with his eidolon before he was banned as half snake half man and not have people freak out.
Anyways i was asking how the witch does on the caster side opposed to the minion side.
Don Walker wrote:
Wow, i hope i NEVER have you as a GM at my table. That is roughly equal to me dissolving their equipment while they sleep with acid. Would you not rule that pvp either? Or just whispering a death spell on them while they sleep? Or maybe just trapping their soul if they die so that character cannot be resurrected. Wait thats messing with their character too but if the someone tries to kill my undead, I would probably try to kill their character for it. In character aside this is called griefing. And as a gm myself yes i would rule this as a pvp action. This isnt just a mind controled creature this is a charactr's pet. It would be like killing a druid's companion.
1) thats obnoxious as a player to mess with anothers character even if you dont agree with the way its played.
2) thats irresponsible as a GM for letting other players mess with someone elses character.
Are people at a table really such a++$!%+s for this sort of behavior to be common...
I can deal with the rp conditions. That is fine, also is it true wizard is the best caster necro I really don't have interest in a minionmancer type. Well better than divine classes at spells that are not about creating or boosting undead? How is it compared to cleric, oracle or witch in terms of life and death spells and debuffs
Thinkin about going for one of the first two options. I want to focus more on debugging, damage and.death effects than undead summoning. If go wizard what are good forbidden schools. Also you left out undead sorcerer :p. But witch looks like hexes are good, but I have a hard time justifying plague witch and urgathao cleric for non evil. Oracle, sorcerer and wizard seem the easiest to play as neutral or good even
I have been trying to make a necromancer that i enjoy playing and found a spell, create soul gem. The spell is listed as legal for pathfinder society play, the item crafted contains the soul of said creature however there is another part of the book that is not mentioned in the additional resources online but does actually describe what you use these soul gems for and their primary use is they reduce component costs of spells, or can be used as offerings.
With this in mind my question is this: If i use create soul gem on a dying creature assuming my party is willing to tolerate me doing so, can i use its soul as a component in my spell particularly for animate dead, and create undead. It would not completely solve my problem of paying a component cost for a permenant spell that only lasts a single session but will mitigate it to 25gp per casting assuming i have soul gems available.
Oh wow i did not know that. Are the undead you can create that great? Or the more powerful versions of that spell are they powerful enough to be worth the component cost? Im more interested in the caster side of necro than army builder but i do like having at least 1 potent undead on the field if im playing a necro type. My backup option right now is a conjuration specialist wizard
im ever so close to creating a character and decided i really wanted to play a necromancer. They seemed fairly powerful in pathfinder (they sucked when i played 4e to the point of unplayable) and then i saw the recent bans. And also the major, major inconvenience of not being able to keep your undead from one session to the next and having to create new undead at the start of each session. So my question, are necromancers worth creating in PFS or are they so badly crippled that you are better off playing a different concept altogether. I was looking at necromancer specialist wizard, but death domain cleric, bones oracle, and witch are not out of the question. I think sorcerer also makes an effective one but, at 25gp per HD for zombies and skeletons, and 50gp per HD for anything else just to have them be destroyed automatically at the end of each session it seems impractical to ask me as a player to spend that much just to play my class. How big of a part are having undead minions of being a PF necro anyways...
Okay im broken indecisive about what class to commit to. So thought id do a poll see maybe i can get a bit of help deciding on what fits the best in pathfinder society and would be the most *fun* character to play. Right now i usually prefer playing arcane casters either pure casters or melee caster hybrids and typically lean more towards the dark arts as far as play style I.E, necromancers or diabolical summoners. So I could stay within my field of comfort or try something completely different for me either way i just wanted my character to fit well with the story and other player characters at the table for organized games. Right now i put a few character concepts together as what would be fun to play as follows they are:
Viking Warrior (Fighter or Barbarian): Survivor of an annhilated tribe of Linnorm defeated by another tribe. this viking seeks to redeem his people in the eyes of his tribal gods by proving himself worthy of Valhalla carrying the weight of his kin.
Fencing Duelist (Rogue or Fighter): This character disdains armor and knows his way around a rapier, or any similar weapon. Either from Brevoy or Absolom this guy is the son of a noble family who could afford to pay a fencing instructor to teach him the art of combat, he joined the pathfinder society out of a sense of duty and family prestige.
Nature Priest (Druid): Another class i dont really have much experience with; Either hailing from the elf lands or one of the more wild places in Galorian this character would be as an explorer and guide to the society helping them safely through areas that are still wild, ensuring they do not desecrate the natural landscape and slaying abominations to nature. Industrial growth and Undead.
Heroic Wizard: Here i can go a couple of ways this is usually my fallback class, I could go universalist wizard maybe that absolom specialty and be loosely based on a wizard like "Zed from Wizards first rule" or Merlin from countless others. Adventuring with the society for arcane lore and be a overall sort of good character.
Antihero Wizard: Other options im considering for this type are any of the specialist wizards, Infernal Binder/Genie Binder, could be kind of cool. Also necromancer i would not oppose playing I can usually fluff them up to not be evil, make them more like the death priests of ancient egypt or something. Also I would not be opposed to trying a Magus, they seem to make good adventurer types.
Witch: Yeah same reason as wizard, originally was making a gravewalker but then i found out they banned it. So i would go either Death, Spirit, Occult or Shadow witch focusing more on the darker aspects of magic and playing this one more mysterious working with darker or unknown forces for more noble ends.
NOT trying to circumvent the no evil characters rules i just think they would be fun classes to play. Anyways comments on what my first pathfinder society character should be? Im having trouble picking