|RainyDayNinja RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16|
As I understand it, you can't have both a familiar and a mount at the same time. Only one combat companion per player (this excludes any mundane pack animals and such).
Instead of being human, you could be an Aasimar and pick up the Scion of Humanity alternate racial trait, so you can still qualify for the Huntmaster feat. Spend your Favored Class Bonus on the special Aasimar oracle option to increase your level by 1/2 for calculating the benefit of one of your revelations (choose the bonded mount). Then at 3rd level, take the Celestial Servant feat to give it the Celestial template. By 4th level, you'll have an effective druid level of 7 for your mount, plus he'll have DR, SR, energy resistances and a smite evil. Mmm...
You describe their combat roles, but do you have anybody who focuses on out-of-combat skills? I've got a halfling ninja with a +26 in Bluff, and he's tons of fun to play. A Kitsune enchanter could do that too. Also, unless it's your ragechemist, I don't see any "Power Attack with a greatsword" damage monsters. That might be worth a try.
Well, I'm not seeing much gish in there, so you might go with a melee cleric or a magus or eldritch knight or something.
You have an addiction. Seek help.
The druid domains were released in the same book (Ultimate Magic) as the Separatist cleric archetype. Surely they thought of using them together. If they hadn't wanted them to work like that, they should have done what they did with inquisitions (again, in the very same book), and make them domain-like, but not actual domains.
So I see no reason why you can't do it.
The trouble is that scimitars are one-handed weapon, so they're not eligible for Pirhana Strike. If you want damage to scale up with level well, you either need:
-Spells, like with a magus
I've got a Dervish Dancing halfling ninja in PFS, and he's a lot of fun. He's bluff focused, so I picked up Improved Feint to get my sneak attacks off. It's a lot of fun, and I'm considering picking up Risky Striker at level 6 to get better damage (of course, I'd have to carry around potions of reduce person to use it against Medium opponents).
Mark Moreland wrote:
If my character defeats an entire army, how am I supposed to carry all that loot?
The barbarian looks good (of course it's hard to mess up a barbarian like that). You shouldn't worry about getting dominated and attacking your party for a while, and by then you can probably afford the ioun stone that protects against mental control from evil creatures.
On the ranger, for the love of God, take Precise Shot instead of Dodge! If you're going to do archery, you will only occasionally have chances to shoot at people who aren't in melee. That -4 penalty will eat you for breakfast. Other than that, he looks good.
Oh, and once you get some Prestige Points, the first thing you want to do is spend 2 PP on a wand of cure light wounds. Even if you play the barbarian, you can hand it to someone else to use on you, instead of demanding the other party members spend their money on healing you. If you play an archery character, consider spending the next 2 PP you get on a masterwork composite longbow, to get ahead of the game.
If you're just looking for the right combination of domains, check out the Separatist archetype in Ultimate Magic. That lets you pick a domain outside of your deity's portfolio, but with some penalties (treat your level, WIS, and CHA as 2 lower for that domain's powers, and not proficient with the favored weapon).
Saint Caleth wrote:
I played with someone who was so excited to use his adamantine greatsword, he chopped down a statue that was supposed to give us an important clue.
You're the one with a level 11 Wizard/Eldritch Knight with a bonded item. You tell me!
As far as I know, there are only 3 exceptions to the no-crafting rule:
1. Alchemists can craft mundane alchemical items and poisons.
A couple from last weekend:
The Cyphermage Dilemma:
The rogue had snuck through one of the cannon ports to get below deck, and while he coup-de-graced the sleeping sailors there, the other party members snuck up the side of the boat (except Kyra, who couldn't roll more than a 5 on her Climb check.
As the rogue did her thing below deck, the rest of the party fought two sailors plus Mumbuckle above deck. When Mumbuckle was brought low enough to surrender, he threw down his rapier.
"Please don't kill me!"
The cannon that the rogue had been loading went off, blowing a hole in the bottom of the ship, which immediately began to sink. As everyone above deck wondered what was happening, the rogue popped her head up through the hatch.
"Great news guys! I sank the ship!"
Day of the Demon:
After the first two fights, we all decided to spend the night in the stables to regain our daily stuff. My alchemist was the only one still sleeping when the rest heard someone crying below them. Having jammed the door to stop any intruders, they lowered a rope and climbed down from the window and found the girl. My alchemist stayed put, mumbling something about needing his beauty sleep. After a few minutes of roleplaying with the girl, I asked:
"Is the window broken out, or just open?"
Later he gave the girl a buoyant balloon to try to cheer her up. What a waste.
Sure, a GM can rule however he wants. But if you want to talk about that, take it to the Houserules/Homebrew forum. This is the Rules forum, where we talk about what the rules actually say, and the people who wrote the rules are the ultimate authority on that.
Seth Gipson wrote:
What if you roleplay him like Cliff from Cheers? He certainly acted like he was smart, even though he didn't really know anything.
Andrew Christian wrote:
I feel that with an atonement of the most expensive kind, changing Deities is quite alright.
I think that's reasonable too (to keep people from switching domains every morning when they prepare spells), but in the absence of any rules on it, I think changing deities should be considered out-of-bounds in PFS. So just make sure to click the FAQ.
Petty Alchemy wrote:
I dunno about that, it'd have to be a Bard that traded out Bardic Knowledge for some other feature.
I'm trained in all but 2 Knowledge skills (plus Linguistics) for a +7 in each. At level 2, bards only get an extra +1 to each from bardic knowledge, so even their trained Knowledge skills will probably be closer to +5 or 6.
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Maybe. But I wanted Weapon Specialization and all the extra feats to pump up my damage, not to rely on Favored Enemies. And I've still got a greatsword and 14 STR when I have to do melee, so even as a small character, I'll be able to do some decent combat maneuvers if I have to.
You've got a decent INT score, so you might consider the Lore Warden archetype instead. You don't get the tricky stuff that the Archer archetype gets later on, but you get more skill points and class skills, so you can do a lot with Knowledge skills or Linguistics. That's what I'm using for my archer who just got to level 2; he gets 8 skill points per level, and could probably out-knowledge a bard.
Andy Bailey wrote:
Aha! Google Maps found it as "The Sherrill Center and Kimmell Arena." Being a university on the weekend, can I assume parking is a free-for-all?
@Selena: You should check the stats in your "Class/Levels" box again. They don't quite match up with the pregen, and her given stats are after buffing anyway.
@PeteZero: If you want to play the barbarian, that's fine. But keep in mind that we already have two melee guys (a monk and a paladin), so it might get a little crowded on the front lines. Someone who can buff the party (like Lem the bard) might be more useful. But of course, it's your call.
Chris Mortika wrote:
I'm getting ready to run this one, and I was wondering about the CdG as well. If the PCs step around the corner, and find her standing with her blade to the throat of the hostage, isn't that a volatile enough situation to start initiative right away? I was imagining her using a standard action to start a CdG (the old "draw a single drop of blood from the hostages throat" move), then ready the next standard action to complete the CdG.
Paul Trani wrote:
Hey RainyDay. No worries about getting a ticket ahead of time. The door is good enough on Saturday, unless you plan on being there on Friday.
No, I won't be there until Saturday. But since the gaming apparently starts before the general convention, I wasn't sure if that would be an option.
I'm sorry RDN, but at this level, don't you have magic items you could sell for your own Restoration?
Now that you mention it, I suppose selling my Ring of Featherfall would get me just enough gold to afford it...
But hey, if the pregens sell their gear, that's essentially free, right? :-)
I'll just quote G. K. Chesterton, because he sums up my thoughts on Hermea quite well:
"The one objection to scientific marriage [i.e. selective breeding] which is worthy of final attention is simply that such a thing could only be imposed on unthinkable slaves and cowards. I do not know whether the scientific marriage-mongers are right (as they say) or wrong (as Mr. [H. G.] Wells says) in saying that medical supervision would produce strong and healthy men. I am only certain that if it did, the first act of the strong and healthy men would be to smash the medical supervision."
I would like to play with rainydayninja, lord knows I voted for his item enough times.
Thanks! Now, if only you'd voted for my monster that many times... :-P
I'd rather play Oxirane, the Thrice-Unslain (my level 8 dwarf Qinggong Monk of the Four Winds) in "The Red Harvest." I mentioned it before, but it bears repeating: He's still got a negative level from his last death, so I'd ask anyone adventuring with me to pitch in and help me pay for another restoration at the beginning. I would, of course, repay in whatever way I could once I get my gold at the end, if anyone else needed spellcasting services.
I don't have his character sheet with me, so I'll post the stats some time tonight after work.
Scott Betts wrote:
Oh, so you don't like it when people lump atheists together based on that one incredibly broad label? Well, guess what?
I don't like it either. That was my point.
There have been billions and billions of Christians throughout history. Many were great humanitarians. Some were mass-murdering Nazis. Likewise, there have been billions of atheists throughout history. Many were great humanitarians. Some were mass-murdering communists. And while many gamers have even founded charities, a few have snapped and committed suicide or gone on crime sprees because they got too involved in their character.
But it's the bad ones that always make the news. As G. K. Chesterton said of newspapers, "They cannot announce the happiness of mankind at all. They cannot describe all the forks that are not stolen, or all the marriages that are not judiciously dissolved. Hence the complex picture they give of life is of necessity fallacious; they can only represent what is unusual." If you go through life assuming all Christians think like the Westboro Baptist Church or Pat Robertson by default, you're going to end up with a very skewed and cynical view of the world.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
There comes a point where, if you're in someone's company and they blatantly do something you don't agree with, you have to do something if you want to disassociate yourself from it. Even if it's only one member of a much larger group.
This strikes me as a rather silly position. If, for example, the Southern Baptist Convention issued a press release denouncing what Pat Robertson said, would you know about it? I hear the same thing from people claiming that "All Muslims must support terrorism, because I've never heard any of them denouncing it." (Newsflash: They do, but the people who say that don't go out looking for it.)
Besides, if I went around denouncing and distancing myself from every stupid thing that some TV preacher said, I wouldn't have time for anything else. There's about 2 billion Christians in the world; why should I be held accountable for everything they say and believe?
Or maybe I'll take your tack and just assume that any atheists I meet from now on support mass murder, until I hear them specifically denounce Mao and Stalin.* Sound fair? On second thought, I think I'll assume people I meet are fair and reasonable until they themselves say or do something to suggest the contrary.