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

Pomkin's page

98 posts. Alias of jpomzz.


1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Mechanical Pear wrote:
I could be totally wrong, but I believe it deals zero damage. Which means, you could coup de grace over and over and wrack up and blah blah blah, it's banned in PFS. But, that's just what I think I remember reading. It'd make a good houserule, though, that the draining doesn't do any extra damage, on top of the crit.

That doesn't make much sense to me. I feel like if it does no damage on the crit, it would be explicit that the critical hit does no damage, not that "the creature is unharmed", that is vague. Why would they ban if from society if it was that lame?

I think it needs to be FAQ'd.

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

In the wyroot description it says "When a weapon constructed of wyroot confirms a critical hit, it absorbs some of the life force of the creature struck. The struck creature is unharmed...."

Does this mean that the critical hit does no damage, or that draining the life force doesn't cause any damage?

One of my players is trying to claim the former, while I'm convinced it's the latter.

Ciaran Barnes wrote:

Just a few things I noticed.

Improved Eldritch Blast: level 10 seems a strange place for this to enter, and a little strange for a spell attack. I would scrap it and make something new.

Imbue Item: magic item creation doesn't cost XP anymore.

Greater Eldritch Blast: tossing out some extra hp damage as a capstone doesn't make me go "oooh!" At level 20 I would you should stepping on the threshhold of immortality, or legend at least. An ability that sets him above those who are less. An ability that elevates all abilites. If you want to keep the blast though, you could turn it into a swift action, so that he has to use some other ability as his standard.

I think I'm gonna scrap Imp Eldritch blast and Imbue item, just don't know what to replace them with.

The warlock's capstones are by bloodline, take a look

wizard, druid, cleric, sorcerer

All of those classes have the ability to completely derail your campaign and trivialize all your encounters/quests.

That's before you even factor in combat.

Any know where I can find some? I use to download them from pathfinder database but they don't host them anymore.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yikes, this thread got really out of hand, I was just looking for mechanical ways to have the monk and fighter do stuff out of combat. I ended up killing them off and now they're playing a ranger and barbarian respectively, they are having much more fun now.

As a side note, my group never gets into issues with roll play vs role play, they usually role play their stats, but if they say something clever or something similar I'll give them a relevant bonus.

XaycAnflY wrote:
On the v2 table, it only says 9 as the max. And im WAAAAAAY less concerned about those other "locks" when i was playing a warlock i hated those guys, and all the crap rules they came out with were just band-aids for a broken class. Thats why i hated Wizards, just churning out content to sell and having to constantly put more content out to "fix" it

What are you even talking about? I'm looking at the chart on the link I posted and it still goes to twelve.

Lol did you read the material?

And I'm definitely concerned with balance if this is going to be a good conversion, "those other locks" matter because most people who played warlock in 3.5 were either glaivelocks or clawlocks.

Edit: I think I figured it out. I'll let the infernal warlock combine eldritch spear and eldritch chain, or maybe let eldritch chain hit more people.

Baron Ulfhamr wrote:
I need a god for a (former) paladin who is Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral, pro-humanity/civilization/expansion, and intolerant of "evil" races such as orcs. The god can be from Paizo or TSR/WotC sources for my purposes, although one with strong equivalency in both systems might be interesting. The gods needs to be the type whose church would endorse witch hunts, inquisitions, and crusades- all the infamous Lawful "Good" stuff.

If I was you I'd use the god emperor of mankind from warhammer, and just use zarus as a template.

XaycAnflY wrote:
Idk about the taking invocations out and putting in bonus feats. In terms of buffing the EB you could bump the damage die up to d8s at some point. Either way im going to start play-testing the first version of it tomorrow.

What are you talking about? I didn't pull out any extra invocations.

And bumping the damage up to d8's would only make the glaivelock and the clawlock stronger, the blastlock would be in the same position he is in now., just with a little bit higher extra damage.

XaycAnflY wrote:
Id say instead of feats do bonus essences, most are feat-equivalent anyway do to them simply altering an ability you already have... Or maybe create some sculpt feats? Metablast feats lol i gptta read the new stuff though

Wouldn't that be overkill on all the invocations?

The feat extra invocation does exist, and pathfinder characters get buckets of feats, so the warlock could grab some more invocations if he felt starved even after the extra 6.

I really think I need to buff eldritch blast somehow, at 10th level the average damage is just 17.5 + charisma modifier bonus I added in.

It needs more oomph for blastlocks, glaivelocks and clawlocks are fine but blastlocks really suffer on the damage front.

aboniks wrote:
Pomkin wrote:

They are very quiet, and always defer to the other players whenever I try to get them to engage.

Maybe give them something they can't step away from, then. Something that would put the other members of the party at risk of [really bad thing] if they found out about it. Set up a situation only those two players can RP a solution, and get them to figure it out together.

If they're backing away from the RP or making decisions in front of the group, it may be easier for them to do it in secret, passing-notes style.

We have a very quiet player in current group as well, and the DM has got some sort of note-passing-dice-rolling subplot brewing these that puts a smile on that players face while the rest of us are RP'ing with the NPC's.

It doesn't need to be about having conversations with NPC's either, if that's where they are hanging up. Just find a way to immerse them in the thought process of the characters themselves.

If you can find a way to help them enjoy the time spent around the table, it doesn't really matter if you can justify it with game mechanics or not.

These two don't sound like their classes are actually the issue.

Well, they have a lot of fun during combat, and whenever they pass a skill check they enjoy it. The fighter in particular loves to pass swim checks, but at this point in the game swimming is not a challenge.

I tried doing a note passing thing, but they clearly did not enjoy it.

Touc wrote:

What exactly are they feeling useless about?

Suggest you don't make all your roleplaying and out of combat scenarios about skill checks. Otherwise players are there simply to make the dice move.

Have NPCs interact with them, flirt, ask their opinion. Make them chat their way through a situation. RPGs are supposed to be a social gathering. Have a drunk mercenary challenge the monk to punch through a block of stone, and if he does the merc will buy him a drink. Some friendly NPC fun when not chopping heads off monsters.

Also consider some metagaming challenges such as riddles and puzzles in game. These are tricky because they draw upon player intuition and not necessarily the mind of the character. The Dungeon Magazine Challenge of Champions are great examples if you can get your hands on them.

They are very quiet, and always defer to the other players whenever I try to get them to engage.

I will try puzzles, but those two are very very bad at riddles.

Mojorat wrote:

If the fighter and the monk are feeling useless, it is likely a playstyle issue. Sometimes this is a case of poorly designed characters, or poorly designed encounters.

You can make a fighter with 16 str 12 dex 14 con 13 int 12 wis 8 cha use some of your plethora of feats, for skill focus or extra traits to get claws skills. You can finish an AP with him no problem.

In the case of the monk, they are a system mastery class. If you understand the game mechanically and have a good idea of tactics you can manage with one through a whole game. They have a good skill selection and are probly the best martial class int he game when it comes to interacting with their enviroment (ie if it exists they can climb it swim in it jump over it dodge it avoid it)

However, alot of players try to make the monk do things the class wasnt designed to do, or misconstrue things and not realize for all intents and purses strength is the monks primary stat.

However, short of seeing the characters i cant give better advice than this.

The fighter is focused totally around power attacking, and the monk similarly is focused all around combat.

It's hard for me to find ways for these totally combat focused characters to do well outside combat.

They're not even that good at combat.

Makarion wrote:

I may be fighting a losing battle here, but what is left for the rogue if the fighter has a base of 6+int? Even at the current state of the game a rogue can barely hold his own, and mainly outside of combat.

Just encourage the player of the fighter to reroll with a higher int and and to invest a trait or two into their skills. They have the feats to pick up "extra traits" as well if they so choose.

I'm not too worried about the rogue, the player who plays him has a very firm grasp of the system, and traps are extremely common, it keeps him very happy.

I've got a group with a druid, a magus, a fighter, a monk, and a rogue.

The monk and fighter are complaining about feeling totally useless for anything out of combat, but I don't know how to rectify this for them.

What could I do for them that the other classes couldn't do better?

Hmm, I'm looking around, and eldritch blast seems pretty weak.

Should I shift around the eldritch blast improvements, or make the damage scale better?

I'm not gonna allow iterative attacks, because that's the point of the glaivelock, but eldritch blast really seems crappy at higher levels.

XaycAnflY wrote:
Woops, i didnt realize you already put those in.... It was late lol. Ok...... Id say that creating new invocations is still a necessity, it is pretty difficult to build a Warlock around a creative theme. Again i can beast that portion (as i was going to anyway). I will share my best idea i had for it when i was outlining the conversion. I was going to combine fiendish resilience with the fiendish flamewreath alternative feature (players handbook II) and make it a choice between the two and breaking it up into rounds (like Rage)

If you can make some balanced invocations, I'll toss them into the document I'm making.

Here's an updated version of the warlock, I added bonus feats and fixed the skills a little. ng

Edit: Damn, the formatting got all messed up when I converted it to docx

XaycAnflY wrote:
Keep disguise too, people don't like Warlocks and it is necessary if only from a rp stand point. And for invocations they didn't appear in alot of books and i will name them. Complete arcane. Complete Mage. And Cityscape.... Yep... That is it and their are only three or four in Cityscape. Also a true "conversion" needs new invocations, the limited choice was the most difficult thing (other than the limited number that you get, but ill get to that) their needs to be more, i will definitely contribute to this end. On top of the relatively limited choice, you ONLY get 12 invocations, and everyone who hears me say that is like "ONLY 12? They are at will spell-like abilities." but it really is a problem, every time you are choosing a new invocation you have to look at it like "this is ¹/¹² of my core power" this must be resolved. Here is what i suggest; the Eldritch Blast shapes a separate class feature (my highest recommendation) or add bonus feats from a warlock bonus feat list (this would also make taking feats easier because you dont have to look for stuff in so many different books). For the first option, it helps you have more invocations while having it limited. And you could still take them normally, but it not be taking away from your power. Of course you could always increase the number of invocations...

I guess I could keep disguise, but I don't think I want to make new invocations. I don't think I'd be able to make balanced invocations, but allowing the warlock to use dragonfire adept invocations would probably be a good idea.

I'm already giving the class 6 free invocations, on top of the 12, so I think it is fair. I had thought of giving them 20 and the bonus 6, but there just aren't enough invocations out there to justify that, every warlock made would essentially be the same if they had that many to pick.

I had debated giving them bonus feats, but honestly, the class gets a lot of nifty features, I don't know how I could fit them in without the class being overpowered. What level's would I even put them in, and if I did, how would I handle them? Generic bonus feats, or pact specific?

Edit: I forgot to post the link to the index of invocations.
I'll have them all in a pdf or something here soon if anyone wants it.

Calybos1 wrote:

Which "warlock" are you converting? A 3.x class, the Warcraft character class, the ones from Bewitched, or a generic fantasy-novel warlock archetype?

Also: the class skills list is... optimistic. A single class, with magic powers, that also gets to count Perception, Diplomacy and Intimidate, Spellcraft, UMD, and... Acrobatics as class skills? plus Stealth? plus Disable Device? Reads more like a wish list of "gee, woudn't it be great if a single class had ALL my favorite skills ever?"

I also note that this means the Aberrant pact is the only that actually grants a new class skill that was otherwise unavailable to the warlock.

It is the 3.5 warlock, he uses invocations and eldritch blast.

On the subject of skills, I'll admit, I just copy and pasted that from another conversion here. I'll put more time into it, but the original class had a pretty beefy skill set. I'm mostly going to remove redundant skills and some rogue skills, like stealth and disable device. UMD is staying, because a lot of the class features revolve around it.

As a side note, I'm also working on finding all the 3.5 invocations for the warlock, and putting them in one document nice and organized. I'll have that up later.

I know it's been done before, but here's my shot at converting the warlock to pathfinder. ng

I tried to keep it as close to the original class, while still giving it some customization options.

I'm planning on adding more pacts later.

Opinions? Does it seem unbalanced?

Check out the swordstaff in that supplement. It's pretty sweet, you can either use it as a reach weapon or regular, you just need to use a swift action to switch.

Super genius games released a book with the swordstaff in it. I think it's .50$ at the moment.

Edit: Here it is

Alchemist. It's so zaney and it's got fun in most situations. I hear a rogue is fine too.

They should just come up with an alternate class option for magus to be a full BAB caster. Lower the spells, and cut out the bonus feats and few class features.

Edit: Spell strike would probably have to go.

Do the leadership idea, and have the resulting spellcaster cohort be the manifestation of the spellcasting prowess taken from you by the artifact? Make it some wonkey race or something.

Actually, you're worse than an expert. He's got more skill points, BAB, and health.

Edit: I'd pick up a level in DM puncher.

I think Psionics unleashed is great. I bought the dead trees version and love it. They're basically spellcasters, but with less annoying paperwork and they can't wreck the game as easily.

Paragon surge really helps sorcerer compete with wizard

Kerobelis wrote:

Yes, that's why they're lower tiered.

Your puns tickle me.

EntrerisShadow wrote:

I know I'm just reiterating what a lot of people said, but I think it is a bit fruitless because, since this is a game built around a group, no one class is going to outshine the others all the time.

It's about bringing the right tool for the job. If I need something sawed and you bring a hammer, it's going to be a splintered mess. If I need a hammer and you bring a saw, it's going to take a LOT of reps to get that nail in.

Even the tiers that try to correct this by splitting it up (Usually into Combat, Utility, and Social Interactions) forget that even in THAT regard there are further divisions. The aspects of Combat, for instance, are Control, Damage Per Round, Buffs, Debuffs, and you could even include Healing. And each one can be just as important depending on the circumstance.

I take it you've never been in a group where the cleric/wizard/druid did everything like a jerk and made everyone else bored.

ImperatorK wrote:
Furious Kender wrote:
The tier system also tends to be slanted toward level 20, which isn't where most play occurs.

Again, not really.

@ Pomkin
You do realize that it's the same link I posted?

Sorry I rolled a 1 on my thread reading.

The tier list has almost nothing to do with combat. It's problem solving.

In all seriousness, this is a good guide.

It's basically how much each class can effect the plot.

Cleric Or Druidzilla

Now it stands for

Cleric Oracle Druidzilla

TheSideKick wrote:
one of my favorite PFS characters is a 2 handed magus with a great sword. arcane pool off sets the power attack penatly and 7d6 + (stuff) at 3rd level is very sweet, 9d6 + (stuff) maxamized at 5th lol.

You can't spellstrike though

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Barry the Chopper.

That's clever. Does it have a blood seal?

so you can't get spell storing on a blackblade? that's pretty lame.

One is drink and one is eat.

Batman wizard is still top of the pile. But not by as much.

I'd assume you look at the CR of the race you made, and give it that many HD of it's creature type, and the rules for that are in the bestiary.

gbonehead wrote:
Pomkin wrote:

I want time lords. And construct monsters. And moar lovecraftian themed enemies.

Finally, I want the wolf in sheeps clothing and all the cool deceptive enemies from older editions of d&d.

Wish granted. For even more wolfy goodness, check out Misfit Monsters Redeemed, which also covers the executioner’s hood, the trapper, and the lurker above.

I can't believe I never found that! Now I just need to hunt for the floor monster, ceiling monster, wall monsters, door monster, and the worm that hides in doors monster(it burrows into your head when you go to listen to the door).

bah. I assumed because it could see the tome would work..

I want time lords. And construct monsters. And moar lovecraftian themed enemies.

Finally, I want the wolf in sheeps clothing and all the cool deceptive enemies from older editions of d&d.

Like have it read one of those tomes? Or put a headband on it?

It bypasses damage reduction cold iron, which is a very common damage reduction

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
Mystic_Snowfang wrote:


This is a cool concept. What was your inspiration?

The Chakat

In fact, it's a Chakat with the serial numbers filed off.

Weren't those a race from the FATAL rpg or am I mistaken?

Mithral: Mithral is a very rare silvery, glistening metal that is lighter than steel but just as hard. When worked like steel, it becomes a wonderful material from which to create armor, and is occasionally used for other items as well. Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor's check penalty to all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving. Spell failure chances for armors and shields made from mithral are decreased by 10%, maximum Dexterity bonuses are increased by 2, and armor check penalties are decreased by 3 (to a minimum of 0).

An item made from mithral weighs half as much as the same item made from other metals. In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weapon's size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed). Items not primarily of metal are not meaningfully affected by being partially made of mithral. (A longsword can be a mithral weapon, while a quarterstaff cannot.) Mithral weapons count as silver for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

Souphin wrote:
Pomkin wrote:
they're trying to divorce alignment from the game mechanics
I hope this is not the case, I am posting this in response to some features in the race guide (which just came out) that run on the mechanics of an alignment system.

I'm pretty sure channel evil refers to creatures that have good as an intrinsic part of their being i.e. good outsiders

I always thought mithral was titanium. It's stronger than steel and half the weight. In the same vein(heh) I treat adamantine as depleted uranium.

For spells like pellet blast, it's only two dice. Total.

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.