RhesusPieces's page

Nicos wrote:

Rynjin wrote:

You assume that the problem lies with perceived power creep. That is not the case. Core only, Barbarians/Rangers are still overall more effective than Fighters. They lose out, again, on 1-2 to-hit/damage and gain so much more in return.

I disagree. i doubt that if you make the builds there will be as you say.

I already made an archer Ranger in comparison to someone else' archer Fighter. He was behind something like 2 to-hit and damage, up by 4 on each when facing his main Favored Enemy (up by 2 against a secondary, and equal on a tertiary, in that case), and had roughly the same values in the same skills (plus more) with almost no investment in skills (10 Int, but he did have Skill Focus: Perception). Roughly the same AC (mine may have been a bit higher) and HP.

RhesusPieces wrote:

Ok, he steps and I damage him. Then, a burns a spell to teleport away. This seems like a pretty good start to the fight and a decent contribution to the party.

That NPC Wizard is now 500 feet away, and likely has a nice selection of long range spells to attack you with. As an NPC, he has no qualms about blowing his wad on this one battle. You've damaged him a bit, but now he's in position to return the favor (or worse).

Ok, and there are casters in my party that can attack him as well. I still damaged him and forced him to spend a spell and action fleeing. You aren't pointing out a weakness in my build, but rather a feature of powerful mages. You could make the same point regardless of my fighter's build. Plus, it's not as if every caster is going to be able to cast dimension door as a swift action or otherwise. The build is cool. It just seems like you want to pick nits to be a grouch.

RhesusPieces wrote:

Well sure, he's not invincible. No character is, but I have a clear path to victory. Charge attack in the first round. When it's the caster's turn, he'll likely 5ft step away first since he doesn't know I have this ability. I get my AoO for about 35 damge, and the caster's spell likely fizzles. Maybe the caster gets in a quickened spell now, but don't they still need to pass the concentration check? Plus, if the spell is a ray, I deflect it. Also, my saves aren't bad. You better hope you take me down with that one shot because then I full attack and it's nighty-night.

You only have to make a concentration check if damaged while casting, which will not happen if you don't get the AoO. Escape spells are good choices for quickening, such as dimension door. Hopefully you will be able to engage him again next round, although the range of DD makes that iffy.

Ok, he steps and I damage him. Then, a burns a spell to teleport away. This seems like a pretty good start to the fight and a decent contribution to the party.

RhesusPieces wrote:

I love my fighter. I'm a caster's worst nightmare with step-and-strike + spellbreaker + Ray Shield.

You might want to watch out.

Cast a Quickened Spell wrote:

You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.

Well sure, he's not invincible. No character is, but I have a clear path to victory. Charge attack in the first round. When it's the caster's turn, he'll likely 5ft step away first since he doesn't know I have this ability. I get my AoO for about 35 damge, and the caster's spell likely fizzles. Maybe the caster gets in a quickened spell now, but I deflect it if it's a ray and saves aren't bad. You better hope you take me down with that one shot because then I full attack and it's nighty-night.

I love my fighter. I'm a caster's worst nightmare with step-and-strike + spellbreaker + Ray Shield. Step-and-strike also gives me a decent trick to aid in battlefield control. The class's armor training perks greatly enhance the utility of full plate since you aren't stuck at +1 dex.

My fighter's AC is typically around 40 (level 13), yet he still does plenty of dpr. The monk can out damage me against low AC monsters, and our ranged ranger does more damage situationally, but I'm the more consistent source of damage. I would have fun with more perks, but I don't feel like I need them or that I'm being shorted in any way.

Furthermore, is it really that inconceivable considering a similarly leveled rogue can do six sneak attacks with 12 str damage per round?

Advanced Firearms are a game-breaking disaster waiting to happen, especially if they are not commonly used amongst the whole group as well as the baddies.

So in response to your question, yes, I think you will break the game.

I am legitimately worried about this, and I realize I may need to abandon this plan and focus on developing just one revolver. Could you elaborate a little? Gunslinger is a full BAB class, so they're supposed to do a lot of damage. How much damage is too much damage? With my current trajectory, I'd be averaging 30 points of damage per hit with 6 potential attacks per round by level 12. How does this damage compare to a maxed out barbarian or fighter? Melee characters can do more damage per hit, but they target full AC and are unlikely to use TWF.

If someone gets into close quarters combat with you, you're going to get slaughtered by opportunity attacks.

I think you need to take a hard look at Dodge -> Mobility -> Deft Shootist fairly early on. Then slid in Point Blank, Precise, Rapid, etc. Also look at the Pistolero archtype, which will be very helpful to the build and concept.

I indeed am using the Pistolero archetype. It's perfect for what I do. Your observation about attacks of opportunity is a good one. However, deft shootist would only protect me when reloading or shooting. Drawing and holstering would still provoke. In my experience, enemies with combat reflexes are relatively rare, and if I'm in the middle of a ton of melee characters, I'm doing something very wrong. I just can't live with burning three feats early on when I'm starved for them to begin with.

It also helps that our group is, in all honesty, a bit too large. Everyone can't make every session, but we can have as many as 8 PC's. This makes it a lot easier for me to just post up behind our melee guys and unload. (For context, we've played one session so far and we earned just enough xp to level up, so I'm at level 2 now)

We just began a new home-brewed adventure path, and my GM gave me permission to build a gunslinger with a revolver. I want to build a two revolver gunslinger reminiscent of Roland from the Dark Tower books (I know, tropey trope trope. At least I'm not building an angsty adolescent vampire, right?).

Anyway, my concept of a 'true' gunslinger is one in which his fluid mechanics make him a continuous source of damage output, and once I've depleted my initial ammunition, I want to execute the following progression.

Round 1) Full-round attack with both guns. Ammunition depleted. Holster right gun as a free action.
Round 2) Rapid reload and full attack with left gun. Draw right gun as free action.
Round 3) Holster left gun as free action. Rapid reload and full attack with right gun.
Round 4) Draw left gun. Full attack with both guns. Holster right gun to complete the cycle.

This way I have a full attack every round with at least one gun, and I'll have a full attack with both guns every third round. I know this involves a liberal amount of free actions, but if you go through the actions it's entirely plausible.

The problematic part is holstering as a free action. I don't think quick draw allows you to also holster as a free action. I know I can buy weapon cords and then holster as a swift action, but the visualization of a gunslinger dropping his revolver and letting it flop around between his legs...just no. I could also buy a wand of Unseen Servant, and let the arcane caster in the group cast it on me. Then I could drop a gun, and the unseen servant could catch it and place it in the holster for me. It would work mechanically, but again, I hate the flavor of it. As far as I can tell, I just need to lobby for creating a quick holster feat so the progression would be something like this:

Level 1) Point blank shot and Deadly Aim (human)
Level 3) TWF
Level 4) Precise shot
Level 5) Rapid Reload
Level 7) Improved TWF
Level 8) Quick Draw
Level 9) Quick Holster

Ideas? Suggestions? Will I break the game?

We just began a new home-brewed adventure path, and my GM gave me permission to build a gunslinger with a revolver. I want to build a two revolver gunslinger reminiscent of Roland from the Dark Tower books (I know, tropey trope trope. At least I'm not building an angsty adolescent vampire, right?).

Anyway, my concept of a 'true' gunslinger is one in which his fluid mechanics make him a continuous source of damage output, and once I've depleted my initial ammunition, I want to execute the following progression.

Round 1) Full-round attack with both guns. Ammunition depleted. Holster right gun as a free action.
Round 2) Rapid reload and full attack with left gun. Draw right gun as free action.
Round 3) Holster left gun as free action. Rapid reload and full attack with right gun.
Round 4) Draw left gun. Full attack with both guns. Holster right gun to complete the cycle.

This way I have a full attack every round with at least one gun, and I'll have a full attack with both guns every third round. I know this involves a liberal amount of free actions, but if you go through the actions it's entirely plausible.

The problematic part is holstering as a free action. I don't think quick draw allows you to also holster as a free action. I know I can buy weapon cords and then holster as a swift action, but the visualization of a gunslinger dropping his revolver and letting it flop around between his legs...just no. I could also buy a wand of Unseen Servant, and let the arcane caster in the group cast it on me. Then I could drop a gun, and the unseen servant could catch it and place it in the holster for me. It would work mechanically, but again, I hate the flavor of it. As far as I can tell, I just need to lobby for creating a quick holster feat so the progression would be something like this:

Level 1) Point blank shot and Deadly Aim (human)
Level 3) TWF
Level 4) Precise shot
Level 5) Rapid Reload
Level 7) Improved TWF
Level 8) Quick Draw
Level 9) Quick Holster

Ideas?

RhesusPieces wrote:

I dropped my few cents worth in a different thread yesterday, but one quick thing to add. In address to the problem that monks can only do enough damage by sacrificing AC, the snake style feat does a great job ameliorating this deficiency. A monk should have decent wisdom. Put a skill rank in sense motive each level, and you should routinely have an AC on par with most other classes.

snake style is once per round. and if you intend to negate an attack every round, you might as well take crane style instead.

If you continue up the tree, snake fang looks both fun and flavorful.

I dropped my few cents worth in a different thread yesterday, but one quick thing to add. In address to the problem that monks can only do enough damage by sacrificing AC, the snake style feat does a great job ameliorating this deficiency. A monk should have decent wisdom. Put a skill rank in sense motive each level, and you should routinely have an AC on par with most other classes.

Wraithstrike, you are correct that I haven't read all the monk threads, so I probably shouldn't have blindly waded into this discussion. I was perusing the threads for a completely different reason, and this caught my eye because my buddy that plays a monk gets bummed when he hears people talk about what a stupid/underpowered class it it. I couldn't resist jumping in because, as someone sitting at the table, I know that he's a valuable member of our party.

I don't have time right now to build a level 5 and 13 character to put through your simulation, but I maintain that a monk is often extremely useful. Monk is one of the only classes that doesn't have a negating counterpart. Fighters tend to be weak to mind-affecting spells and touch attacks. Spellcasters are food for a fighter with step up and strike plus shatterspell (like my dwarf). There really isn't an enemy type that can completely circumvent a monk like that. They're always in the fight, and they always have a way to do damage.

I don't see the bypassing DR issue, but that could be because I'm relatively new, and haven't played a character past level 9 yet. I figured that the unarmed attacks counting as magical would do a lot for this. Plus, you can put enchantments on your monk weapons, and then facultatively choose which to use as part of flurry of blows. I do think folks on this thread downplay the value of the monk's movement abilities. Not just fast, but also able to jump high and use high acrobatics. Sometimes we get caught in a clogged area, and the monk (by virtue of his acrobatics) is the only one that can create flanking possibilities for our rogue by moving through threatened or occupied squares.

I do agree however, that since the monk is meant to be more versatile (and I still stand by this), they could benefit from some more skill ranks and perhaps get Tongue of the Sun and Moon at an earlier level.

Gignere wrote:

Define versatility. I don't see how a monk is versatile at all in game.

They run fast and they have good saves. That's what I usually see as the translation for "monk versatility".

My equally snarky reply to this whole idea of the monk being underpowered is that it sounds like everyone is saying, "Monk would be great if they did just as much damage as a fighter or barbarian." That's the tradeoff! That's the whole point! Those extra abilities come at a cost. If the monk did just as much damage, then it would be overpowered relative to more martial classes.

Also, it's not like the monk isn't doing a lot of damage. With weapon's finesse, their attack bonuses get pretty high (especially with flurry of blows). Our monk carries Kama's with electricity upgrades, and at level 8 he's making 4 attacks that each do 2d6 + strength + power attack damage. It's not quite as much damage as my dwarf fighter, but we have different roles.

So, if you are obsessed with doing tons of damage, stick to fighter or barbarian. Monk is for people that want to take a different approach.

RhesusPieces wrote:

I don't understand the need for this. The monk's unarmed strikes already scale with level. The damage die starts as a d6, and ends up at 2d10. Also, the monk's unarmed strikes count as magic weapons once they get a ki pool. I don't see the need for a change. I tend to disagree with the conventional wisdom that monk is an underpowered class. I think in general, folks spend too much time worrying about damage inflicted per round. The monk sacrifices offensive potency in that respect for more versatility and accessory abilities that are hard to quantify. There's a monk in my playing group that does plenty to justify his class's inclusion by taking approaches to enemies and encounters that aren't readily available to the rest of us.

Define versatility. I don't see how a monk is versatile at all in game.

4 skill points, no spell casting, super limited weapons. I disagree a monk is versatile, they are the definition of having few choices imo and players must use those few choices to do everything.

The monk excels in situations where the battlefield isn't a clear flat plane. He can burn a ki point to add 20 to acrobatics or add movement speed (which is already high based on level). That means, he can get to wherever he wants in an area that's clogged, has difficult terrain, or has three dimensional structure. Our monk uses his high jump ability to great effect whenever we have three dimensional structure.

The monk also has underrated defensive abilities. They get to add wisdom to AC, get extra dodge bonuses, they have high values in all three save types, plus evasion, plus natural resistance to diseases and poisons. They're effective against any enemy type, and are useful in all situations. That's how I see them as versatile.

I don't understand the need for this. The monk's unarmed strikes already scale with level. The damage die starts as a d6, and ends up at 2d10. Also, the monk's unarmed strikes count as magic weapons once they get a ki pool. I don't see the need for a change. I tend to disagree with the conventional wisdom that monk is an underpowered class. I think in general, folks spend too much time worrying about damage inflicted per round. The monk sacrifices offensive potency in that respect for more versatility and accessory abilities that are hard to quantify. There's a monk in my playing group that does plenty to justify his class's inclusion by taking approaches to enemies and encounters that aren't readily available to the rest of us.

I just created a drow sorcerer, and I was wondering about how the drow spells relate to my spells known. Does my character know these spells intuitively, and come in addition to the two I choose? Or are they simply extra options I can choose?

If your base attack bonus is high enough to permit two attacks as part of a full-round action, can you cast two spells provided they each have a casting time of one standard action?

For example, could I cast Haste on myself and party one round. Then the next round, cast true strike on myself, prepare ghoul touch, 5-foot step, and then land the touch?

Seriphim84, you are probably correct in terms of interpreting the rules as they're written, but I'm kind of warming to the idea of partial surprise rounds as described by Biggdawg. Ultimately, I want a streamlined way to get into combat while allowing rogues to have sneak opportunities. I don't like the idea of sneak denying an enemy dexterity, because I think it overpowers sniping. It also seems unwieldy and unrealistic to have characters try to sneak around the battlefield after normal initiative has begun.

With partial surprise, ranged rogues have an opportunity to get a sneak attack in, and melee rogues can put themselves in good flanking position without being hampered by having non-sneaky characters in the group. This feels balanced and easy to manage from a GM's perspective.

If the enemies are unaware of the rogues a surprise round occurs, with the rogues getting to act. Whenever some combatants are unaware of some other combatants there is a surprise round. In your example the enemies Perception check was enough to know the dwarf is there which triggers combat, but not high enough to know the rogues are there thus the rogues get a surprise round.

So, in this instance, the dwarf would be excluded from the surprise round? Even though he's aware of the enemies that were ambushed?

We've been trying to streamline how we use stealth. We were playing with each individual going stealthy, and then trying to get into position for sneak attacks. However, it bogs everything down, and seems to overpower one of our rogues who can basically shoot with sneak damage, and then go stealthy again with snipe over and over.

I guess I don't totally understand how a party goes about sneaking up on and ambushing/initiating surprise.

So let's say you have a mixed group with several very sneaky rogues (one with +28 stealth), but also a dwarven fighter that doesn't do stealth. Let's say we encounter enemies, and the rogues want to get a surprise round. If they go stealthy, they won't be detected, but the enemies are sure to recognize the dwarf. How is this resolved? I understand that a surprise round can occur when only some enemies are aware of my party, but what if all the enemies are only aware of part of my party?