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

Sebastian Hirsch's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,506 posts (1,856 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,506 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Glamered

Price +4,000 gp
Aura moderate illusion; CL 10th; Weight —

DESCRIPTION

A glamered weapon can be commanded to change its shape and appearance to assume the form of another object of similar size. The weapon retains all its properties (including weight) when so disguised but does not radiate magic. Only true seeing or similar magic reveals the true nature of a glamered weapon while it is disguised. After a glamered weapon is used to attack, this special ability is suppressed for 1 minute.

CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

Craft Magic Arms and Armor, disguise self, magic aura; Cost +2,000 gp

You can use a regular crowbar, and once you can afford that get a real weapon. I would not try to keep the improved weapon thing after a certain level. Once you fight certain creatures something like this just seems quaint... also get a backup alchemical silver and cold iron crowbar^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

While the addition to Bonekeep was good, only BK1 is an exclusive. Season 2 EX was Midnight Mauler, 3-EX The Cyphermage Dilemma, 4-EX The Day of the Demon, 5-EX Bonekeep 1.

It might seem like nothing, but it is a difference. I have chronicles for 3-EX not 4-15.

Also, is there going to be a BK4? I know originally there was, but I haven't heard anything about it. I thought they were stopping at 3...

EDIT: Sorry, after reading my post, it sounds very negative. I really like the sheet, I'm just throwing that stuff out there to help it maybe improve. A sheet like that is something I've needed for a long time. :)

:P You sounded like " How dare he!!!!111!111 this cures AIDS and only 3 kinds of cancer... ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Nice one, it is already printed and in my PFS folder^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Richard Webb wrote:

Guy with no Pants is bad form .. both GM and Player.. unless your online, then it might be okay.

:)

Not wearing proper pants (shorts, or baggy workout clothes are acceptable) seem mandatory.

But while we are in this area, I assume everybody feels the same about strong body odor, disruptive cell phone calls and people eating noxious things at the table (resulting in something like gorgon's breath).

Oh and remember a hungry GM is quite dangerous, it is wiser to pacify the wild creature with snacks^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ElterAgo wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
ElterAgo wrote:


I have no problems with a new player at the table. We nearly all enjoy showing off our cool hobby to someone new. Not a problem at all.

I'm talking about guys that intentionally/knowingly build PC's that just aren't very useful.
Some examples I've seen:
Rogue 2/paladin 2/oracle 2/alchemist 1. Highest ability is a 14. No 2 feats...

Some of those are kind or painful, how do the other players react, when someone brings their "special" characters to the table? Has this already resulted in deaths or failed scenarios?
** spoiler omitted **...

Your heart is obviously in the right place, we should all be considerate and welcoming to players with "special" characters. Obviously there is a line, and once you know what you are doing, it becomes tough to justify and support this behavior.

This hits particularly close to home, since my brother tends to built rather cheesy powerful characters, but really tends to make it difficult for others during actual play. His characters concepts keep getting weirder..

Oh well, I can bear quite a lot as long as people are good company, even if it hurts every optimzing bone in my body... kinda like when my grandmother speaks english.... her accent is pretty painful^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
David Bowles wrote:

Sure: She just hit level seven. I don't have an electronic version, so manual it is.

She's a lorewarden/rogue elf that uses weapon finesse to finesse an elven curve blade. I think the fundamental problem is that I deviated from the mathematically superior STR stat. And, of course, rogues.

Rogue 3/Lorewarden 4

ST 14
DEX 20
CON 12
INT 15
WIS 10
CHA 10

Feat list:

Toughness
Weapon Finesse
Combat Expertise
Power Attack
Furious Focus
Improved Feint
Blind Fighting
Breadth of Experience
Vital Strike

The build also has acrobatics maxed and some boots of elvenkind for maximum acrobatics positioning. I'm gonna try to UMD a wand of lead blades to maximize the effectiveness of the curve blade and vital strike. The idea is to be a mobile fighter and provide skill support. I plan to eventually build into felling smash, since this PC provides a fairly good opportunity to use that feat.

I tried to recreate a rough version of your character with Hero Lab:

Rough version:

Davids Char
Elf fighter (lore warden) 4/rogue 3 (Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Pathfinder Society Field Guide)
NG Medium humanoid (elf)
Init +5; Senses low-light vision; Perception +10
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 22, touch 15, flat-footed 17 (+7 armor, +5 Dex)
hp 56 (7 HD; 3d8+4d10+14)
Fort +6, Ref +9, Will +3; +2 vs. enchantments
Defensive Abilities evasion, trap sense +1; Immune sleep
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 agile elven curve blade +12/+7 (1d10+6/18-20)
Special Attacks sneak attack +2d6
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 20, Con 12, Int 15, Wis 10, Cha 10
Base Atk +6; CMB +10; CMD 25
Feats Blind-fight, Breadth Of Experience[APG], Combat Expertise, Furious Focus[APG], Improved Feint, Power Attack, Toughness, Vital Strike, Weapon Finesse
Traits armor expert, indomitable faith
Skills Acrobatics +15, Knowledge (arcana) +12, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +11, Knowledge (engineering) +10, Knowledge (geography) +8, Knowledge (history) +10, Knowledge (local) +9, Knowledge (nature) +12, Knowledge (nobility) +9, Knowledge (planes) +12, Knowledge (religion) +11, Linguistics +7, Perception +10, Ride +9, Stealth +9, Use Magic Device +10; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception, +2 Spellcraft to identify magic item properties
Languages Common, Elven, Hallit
SQ elven magic, rogue talent (combat trick), trapfinding +1
Other Gear +1 mithral breastplate, +1 agile elven curve blade, belt of incredible dexterity +2, 150 gp
--------------------
Tracked Resources
--------------------
. . -none-
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Armor Expert -1 Armor check penalty.
Blind-Fight Re-roll misses because of concealment, other benefits.
Combat Expertise +/-2 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Elven Magic +2 to spellcraft checks to determine the properties of a magic item.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Improved Feint You can make a Bluff check to feint in combat as a move action.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Power Attack -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Sneak Attack +2d6 Attacks deal extra dam if flank foe or if foe is flat-footed.
Trap Sense +1 (Ex) +1 bonus on reflex saves and AC against traps.
Trapfinding +1 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Vital Strike Standard action: x2 weapon damage dice.

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.

Some general thoughts:

Improved feint is a trap option for this build, it allows you a chance to be able to do sneak attack damage, but those 2d6 really do not warrant it.
Most of the time you are better of moving or trying to get a full attack, especially with a high crit weapon (since vital strike does not work well with crits) and the possible option of haste.
Furious Focus, while being far better feat, only works if you only get one attack, which should not always be the case, depending on group composition.

My suggestions would be the following:

Retrain levels/take a level in the slayer class, this gives you BAB and :

Studied Target (Ex): wrote:

A slayer can study an opponent he

can see as a move action. The slayer then gains a +1 bonus
on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival
checks attempted against that opponent, and a +1 bonus on
weapon attack and damage rolls against it. The DCs of slayer
class abilities against that opponent increase by 1. A slayer
can only maintain these bonuses against one opponent
at a time; these bonuses remain in effect until either the
opponent is dead or the slayer studies a new target.
If a slayer deals sneak attack damage to a target, he can
study that target as an immediate action, allowing him
to apply his studied target bonuses against that target
(including to the normal weapon damage roll).

At 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels, the bonuses on weapon
attack and damage rolls, as well as the bonus to slayer ability
DCs against a studied, target increase by 1. In addition,
at each such interval, the slayer is able to maintain these
bonuses against an additional studied target at the same
time. The slayer may discard this connection to a studied
target as a free action, allow ing him to study another
target in its place.

Since you already have sneak attack, you can benefit from studied target as an immediate action.(Studied target also gives a bonus to your knowledge rolls against ..the target).

Once you get to level 2 you get can get a bonus ranger combat style feat, if you were to remake the character completely something like this would allow you to pick up power attack without 13 Strength.

Alternatively and in addition to the slayer suggestion (at least one level) take a levels as Kensai magus, this gives you access to :

- Arcane pool: increase the enhancement bonus of your weapon by 1 (which as you know can get expensive in PFS)
-Spellcasting: You are likely not able to use this in combat, since your armor choice is limited by the Kensai archetype, but it has plenty of uses out of combat.
-Improved will save
-Weapon Focus
-Canny Defense (2 levels = +2 AC)
And if you take more levels spellstrike (try to cast a touch spell before combat), access to magus arcana becomes an option.

With at least 1 level of magus, you will be able to activate the following wands, without having to rely on UMD: shield, vanish, enlarge person (decent for vital strikers), long arm... and many others. And UMD becomes a class skill.

If I were to remake the character, it would end like this:

My kind of Monster:

Davids Char
Elf magus (kensai) 2/slayer 5 (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide 53, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 55, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Magic 9)
NG Medium humanoid (elf)
Init +5; Senses low-light vision; Perception +10
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 24, touch 17, flat-footed 17 (+7 armor, +5 Dex, +2 dodge)
hp 58 (7 HD; 2d8+5d10+14)
Fort +8, Ref +9, Will +5; +2 vs. enchantments
Defensive Abilities canny defense; Immune sleep
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 agile elven curve blade +13/+8 (1d10+6/18-20)
Special Attacks arcane pool (+1, 3 points), sneak attack +1d6, spell combat, spellstrike, studied target +2 (2nd, move action)
Magus (Kensai) Spells Prepared (CL 2nd; concentration +4)
. . 1st—shield, vanish[APG] (DC 13)
. . 0 (at will)—dancing lights, detect magic, prestidigitation
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 12, Dex 20, Con 13, Int 15, Wis 11, Cha 10
Base Atk +6; CMB +7; CMD 24
Feats Breadth Of Experience[APG], Combat Expertise, Deific Obedience, Power Attack, Toughness, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (elven curve blade)
Traits armor expert, indomitable faith
Skills Acrobatics +15, Knowledge (arcana) +12, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +11, Knowledge (engineering) +7, Knowledge (geography) +8, Knowledge (history) +7, Knowledge (local) +9, Knowledge (nature) +9, Knowledge (nobility) +4, Knowledge (planes) +11, Knowledge (religion) +7, Linguistics +4, Perception +10, Ride +9, Stealth +9, Use Magic Device +10; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception, +2 Spellcraft to identify magic item properties
Languages Common, Elven, Hallit
SQ chosen weapon, combat style (two-handed weapon), elven magic, slayer talents (combat trick, ranger combat style), track +2
Other Gear +1 mithral breastplate, +1 agile elven curve blade, belt of incredible dexterity +2, 150 gp
--------------------
Tracked Resources
--------------------
Arcane Pool +1 (3/day) (Su) - 0/3
Studied Target +2 (move action, 2 at a time) (Ex) - 0/2
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Arcane Pool +1 (3/day) (Su) Infuse own power into a held weapon, granting enhancement bonus or selected item powers.
Armor Expert -1 Armor check penalty.
Canny Defense +2 (Ex) +INT bonus to AC (max Kensai level).
Chosen Weapon (Elven curve blade) Kensai abilities only function when wielding a weapon of this type.
Combat Expertise +/-2 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Deific Obedience Purify yourself daily to prove devotion to a deity and gain benefits.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Elven Magic +2 to spellcraft checks to determine the properties of a magic item.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Power Attack -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Sneak Attack +1d6 Attacks deal extra dam if flank foe or if foe is flat-footed.
Spell Combat (Ex) Use a weapon with one hand at -2 and cast a spell with the other.
Spellstrike (Su) Deliver touch spells as part of a melee attack.
Studied Target +2 (move action, 2 at a time) (Ex) Study foe as a Move action, gain +2 to att/dam & some skills vs. them.
Track +2 Add the listed bonus to survival checks made to track.

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.

Obviously lead blades is still a good choice for users of an elven curve blade.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

4-11 The Dissapeared; I tend to recommend it a lot, but you don't have to play a lot of of maps and combat will not drag very long.... unless your group screws up.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Half Orc Bard

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Take a look at brawler with the mutagen archetype, if you really want to double down on the mental/strong aspect.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Just a Mort wrote:
My druid has double digit charisma. Can I get a table too?

Are hunters welcome too? We can do amazing tricks with our furry friends.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dhjika wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
andreww wrote:
Not in Core only it isn't.
Yeah, but there are no Kitsunes, either. But there sure are still pounce kitties.

Big Cats get pounce at 7th correct? and they get large at the same time and have to squeeze in 5ft corridors - which means if any movement is squeezing they can't charge and thus can't pounce (any movement restriction prevents charge -and no narrow frame in Core).

I have not found the pounce kitties as you express them to be that much of an issue in Normal - the highest armor ACs have all been non-pouncers but there were ways to add pounce-like outside of Core I suppose. the problem is with higher than level Oracle pets and they were all dinos before they fell off the Additional Resources or Rocs.

Reduce person/animal helps and both are available in core, just like mithral barding and additional traits. I don't think the problem is quite as bad as David has come to think, but the tactic is still perfectly viable (the loss of dragon style not withstanding).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There is a sanctioned adventure that gives players access to the keen longbow and mnemoric vestments, I think that one will be very very popular in core campaigns, since the vestments are pretty much the only way to increase spell access (aside from staffs) since pages of spell knowledge and alternative favored class options are not available.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
David Bowles wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Lorathorn wrote:
What's the story on kitsune barbarians?
** spoiler omitted **
That is indeed annoying, but tricked out animal companions are essentially the same thing, but don't even have the decency to be PCs. They are a) unhittable and b) have natural attacks with a large attack bonus. Granted, a raging barb probably has a better will save, but that's what suppress charms and compulsions is for, isn't it?

Yeah, but you have to see, that pet owners really do not have that many options, increasing AC is really the only viable one (and many pet classes get to cast barkskin). My current normal campaign cat just to amateur swashbuckler... I do not intend to lose another one to a ghost.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Congrats Mark, a really neat idea and the description does match the powers very well. If anything I would have wanted more, a more interesting (enchanted) base weapon, or more uses per day. As written, this item can be amazing once per day, but is more likely to be just a plain +1 sword most of the time.

Good luck in the next round.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Congrats Anthony.

I didn't see your item during voting, but it is a very very niche item, especially considering the bane effect. This items really needs an NPC attached to it, otherwise I really can't see a player willing to invest unless the campaign is very much centered on underwater encounters.

Good luck in the next round.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Congrats for advancing to the Top 32.

The item is interesting, but as other have pointed out, the lava bit does require some details and GM control, especially once it is used inside a dungeon (but soften earth and stone has the same problem).

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Congrats for reaching the Top 32.

I found myself voting for this item a couple of times, but I feel, that it could have used something else (maybe I watched to much Dragonball in my youth) as it ended up only a very small number of characters could make full use of this item. The impact ability is nice, but doesn't seem to work quite as well on this particular base weapon.

Good luck in the next round.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Congrats for making the Top 32, I didn't see this item during voting, but it is certainly a novel idea.

I am not sure how balanced the item is, and a clever party could always abuse it. I kinda like the fact that the kobold in front of the dragon could spell its doom. So yeah maybe the item could use a couple of disclaimers, but the novel idea really saves it.

Silver Crusade Star Voter 2015

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Nice tightly desinged item, and just cheap enough that players could actually buy it (after all it is rather specialized).

Good Luck in the next round.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
White haired witch / other class , grappling focused, obviously not useless without the core gimmick, but it tends to limit their choices in combat.

They are still a full arcane caster.

Quote:
You could refrain from castinghaste, but your party members might not appreciate that.

The point is not to nerf yourself for the sake of power or usefulness, but to nerf yourself for the sake of not dominating or disrupting the table. If the party doesn't appreciate you not casting haste then you are doing it wrong.

Quote:
It really is not an issue of not being able to use your power option, rather that not using then sometimes feels like you are shortchanging your team. Sorry but this area is dominated by feelings, expectations and endorphin.

What you are trying to accomplish is not to never use your power option(s) but rather to not use it all the time. I have a double-barrel pistol gunslinger that can easily dominate a table (even though he only uses one pistol). It is not infrequent for me to hold back by only firing one barrel at a time. Still effective, but not devastating. There have been more than a few occasions when the party has turned to me and screamed "KILL IT! KILL IT NOW!" and I then cut loose with everything I've got. You could still argue I was dominating the table at that point, but most people would prefer that to a TPK.

Now, as to one of your other points, I agree it is better to build your character with the idea of not dominating the table in the first place as you are more likely to enjoy it, but you can still do that with builds that are normally considered broken. An archer doesn't have to use all of their feats on archery feats. A Slumber Hex witch doesn't have to focus all their feats and hexes on increasing the chance of Slumber Hex working.

Versatility is not only a frequently useful option in PFS, it is also usually a fun one.

What I am trying to point out is that focusing on "bad form" builds can...

Regarding archers, I can really recommend tangleshot arrows (or shuriken) since they can decrease attacks , saves, and AC so at least once other party member will be able to benefit from that.

If your party has animal companions or other characters with scent, they will appreciate pheromone arrows. Alchemy manual and ranged character toolbox have other similar options.

I guess, the best idea might be to carefuly build an effective character that can carry the team when necessary (like when the team has been rolling single digits for 3 turns), but does have options to hold back/play to support others. And to recognize which options can be unreasonably disruptive.
Though with season 6 I can understand, that some people feel the need to be well prepared (actually season 4 and 5 scenarios have been pretty damn rough sometimes).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ElterAgo wrote:


I have no problems with a new player at the table. We nearly all enjoy showing off our cool hobby to someone new. Not a problem at all.

I'm talking about guys that intentionally/knowingly build PC's that just aren't very useful.
Some examples I've seen:
Rogue 2/paladin 2/oracle 2/alchemist 1. Highest ability is a 14. No 2 feats...

Some of those are kind or painful, how do the other players react, when someone brings their "special" characters to the table? Has this already resulted in deaths or failed scenarios?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
David Bowles wrote:
I don't know. I really like the concept, but there is always someone better and knowledge at the table, someone better at perception, and someone better at damage, even though the character is passable at all of those things. This PC has been at the table with a lot of pet classes, too. Probably skewing my view.

Care to post the build? We might be able to help. Oh and level really is an issue here, in about 1/3 of the scenarios my AC really does not deal damage, DR is a bit tricky.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
gnoams wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

I agree, but your example is a bit confusing to me, obviously there is a baseline for competence, and frankly if the dwarven fighter doesn't have a better AC and damage (than the numbers you mentioned) by the point, that the other char can get levels in horizon walker, something is wrong.

Even with CORE, or alternatively just avoiding the cheesy builds, a a player with sufficient system mastery can get quite impressive results. Combining a paladin with wand of shield allows them to have a high AC and deal plenty of damage with a two handed weapon, simple "hacks" like that help a lot. You don't actually have to use the horizon hunter cheese.

It was an actually happened example, not a hypothetical to best support what I was saying one, so maybe didn't work right. Basically due to the vast amount of customization in the game, it is easy for two people to make two similar characters, but one just does everything better than the other. Call it optimization, systems mastery, or designing a character based on RP choices vs rules strength or whatever. When it comes down to those two players playing together, one of them is going to feel overshadowed/ inadequate compared to the other.

So when one player spends all their money on a magical pony and the other on +5 boots of ass kicking. one one-shots all the encounters and the other cant beat anything in a fight, do we tell them both they're playing the game wrong?

Some games are balanced by the designers, especially in video games where you get minimal choice so that even a badly built wizard can blast fireballs and do OK. But in pathfinder we are given the options of making a wizard who can instantly end encounters with save or die effects, or a wizard that can't even cast a single spell. While we assume players aren't so terrible at character creation as to make a 7 int wizard, there is a huge range of power in the choices available. So we're forcing the players to balance the game themselves.

After a number of years playing to hobby I have come to the understanding, that one size really doesn't fit all. One of my players has a rather different opinion that me when it comes to difficulty. I argue that the players should face a challenge that is set ahead of time, they might use unusual tactics that invalidate part of it, but lowering or increasing the difficulty mid adventure. ( I like to call this the Dark Souls approach). He thinks, that players having fun, and feeling successful is the prime target and this is worth sacrificing adventure integrity for. Players think of a tactic that does't work based on the fact that the e.g. the castle does not have a moat, or the dragon would be to smart, to eat the horde of poisoned cows that suddenly appeared in front of his cave.

While those two approaches are (or at least seem) diametricly opposed we still mangage to play together and GM for each other.

I would argue, that the situation when players with a different level of proficiency is pretty similar, as long as people manage to find at least some level of common ground. For instance I find it very appealing, to built characters with a certain concept (or I am just trying to copy an existing character from other areas), but since those concepts are usually not very optimal for PFS, it requires a certain amount of powergaming to produce a character that is at decent to good.
However I am willing to facilitate other peoples concept only to a point, the character has to be at least viable without the support of another character. Not asking for great, but while most VCs will send the first 4 Pathfinders they happen to meet to a mission, even they would not send a syphilitic leper.

And of course people have to face some of the realities of PFS, like buying consumables, getting the mandatory wand of CLW, and understanding that only you are responsible for your healing (decursing...).

If someone is unwilling and resistant to constructive critique, I am not that inclined to help, and if that means that I will heal the other guy when two party members lie dying...

Overpowered characters are much easier to deal with, they usually understand, why they are overpowered, and should be receptive to the feelings of the other players.
I realize that it might be intimidating for a new player so play with an optimized character, but when the sh°t hits the windmill, they will be happy for their presence.

And I would personally not tell anyone that they are playing the game wrong, unless that results in an adversarial situation with the GM, that is really not acceptable.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
David Bowles wrote:

Maybe I'm just very unlucky, but I've seen a lot of this recently as well:

"Not Good at Anything: Not sure why, but lately I've been seeing a lot of characters that try to do a little bit of everything so they really end up not contributing much of anything. Have a bow, but rarely hit or do much damage. Have a melee weapon, but can't really do much in melee combat. Have a few attack spells, but the DC's are so low they usually fail. Have a single die of sneak attack damage, but not enough to really bother working to set them up for it. Have a single channel or low level heal spell, but not enough to make a difference. Not as problematic as 4), but it still really doesn't help much. "

Sadly, my lorewarden/rogue falls into this category. Shoulda mind a mindchemist.

Well, I guess the question you could ask yourself is, are you happy with the character performance, and would you built him differently?

Some characters really only shine with sufficient support.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
David Bowles wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Really? No one sees forcing a friend and trusted companion to die for you because you're too lazy to do it yourself as an evil act? There is a mechanic for that...
I've never seen this enforced. That makes it a non-rule. Give the druid some temp neg levels or SOMETHING.
actually, it can make them an ex-Druid.
I see a lot of talky talky about this and never any doey doey. It's fine. I'll continue to hate druids and animal companions will continue to show up my PCs and everything will proceed as normal. Druid population alone makes me not want to touch Core Campaign with a 10-foot-pole.

What would happen if the animal owner would allow you to ride their animal companion, that is pretty much free pounce for you isn't it ?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
schattenstern wrote:
Another very hard build (even in an unusual way) is the Aasimar dual cursed Life Oracle of Pharasma: you get absurd ammounts of Channel dice, have an option to give dualrolls via Fateful channel, Rerolls via Misfortune, rerolls via Battlecry and the group likly will not care about HPdamage anymore. This build is in my case useless offensively but the only dying thing in my team since i played it are animal Companions. And i think the failed saves for the relevant spells in all encounters from lv 5 to 8.1 are under 10. When you roll two dice, if you fail miserably you get misfortuned and if you fail you get a reroll via battlecry nearly all saves are possible to beat.

I can attest to the power of this tactic, my pet and I am benefiting greatly from those re rolls ^^ and I checked, my level 5 hunter used only a single charge from his wand of CLW (of course until recently it was one of my spells known, but at my level I really can't justify the action cost).

In my limited experience playing with that character build in the group, damage isn't really all that scary, and the only thing that can stop a party with this party sized healing potion is outright killing players or hitting them with nasty effects. Of course I can live with failing will saves three times in a row... against a level 17 demon....^^ (Hint - we survived even that one^^)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
outshyn wrote:
John Francis wrote:
It remains to be seen how many of our local GMs will sign up to GM Core tables.

John,

I'm one of your GMs. I would be interested in running Core games. However, my attraction to running Core games is that they would target new players. I have zero interest in running Core games so that all the expert players we know can get a replay. I'll let somebody else tackle that aspect.

I honestly considered creating a poster stand with a poster-sized display for our FLGS that said, "Interested in role playing games but intimidated by the pile of rule books needed to play? Come try 'Core Pathfinder' with a single rule book and simple pre-generated characters. Learn the ropes!" However, I realized that doing that might be an unspoken commitment by me to then provide those new players with a long-term, ongoing Core campaign, and I'm not prepared to do that. I just want to run something cool for newbs and then be done with it.

So no posters.

But I'll watch to see what management comes up with, and jump in if I can.

I have had good results with 1 experienced player per newbie, it is pretty much like a big brother system. Of course you need the right kind of player for that job, ideally someone who is willing to play "support" to let the new guys shine.

From my very limited experience, I would personally choose Night Marsh of Kalkamedes or the Dissapeared for this kind of project.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:
talbanus wrote:
Undone wrote:
talbanus wrote:
If 6 people want to play normal mode and the GM doesn't want to run it, you know what? Sounds like one of the 6 needs to prep the scenario in normal mode and run it for his/her 5 friends (rather than expect someone to spend 4+ hours PLUS prep time to do something they don't enjoy).

So if they have fewer players and one can't even step up to GM because there's not enough players left collectively to run they're just SoL.

Which is the attitude the 4 and 5 star GMs seem to have toward this. "Screw the people who are hurt I've been helped!" Few of them seem to exhibit much concern about PFS.

Well, people that are 4 or 5 star GM's ... those stars SHOW they have put a lot of time into this campaign. I am pretty sure they're not just 'takers'. XD

P.S.: except TOZ. That guy is such a selfish douche! ;-)

Yeah, but TriOmegaZero's a pretty cool guy :P

You are both of course correct, but that Steven Schopmeyer fellow is the one you really need to watch, I think he is plotting to make alternative personalities mandatory ^^ and the voices in my head are not fit for public display (immagine Pinky from Pinky and the Brain and you have a disturbing insight).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
talbanus wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
talbanus wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Pahlok wrote:
I don't think this really stops optimization at all.
Nothing will. So this obviously isn't intended to.
Nothing will stop it, but greater system/class balance could make it less troublesome (as far as organized play, where the GM cant adjust things on the fly nearly as much). This would require greater playtesting and/or restrictions to materials, though. I call this beautiful dream, Pathfinder 2.0. /ducks

Pathfinder 2 will come at some point, for the time being Pathfinder Unchained will be a nice way to test some ideas, and obviously PF2 will need the mother of all playtest.

I hope that it receives the mother of all play-tests. That's not a panacea, but it would be nice if such happened and it helped initial release class (and other) balance. It's one of the things I thought that other product did well in their initial release of their 4th edition (that and the aggro mechanic -- didn't like too much else about it .. but I digress).

Anyhoodle, yes, I too, want us to 'all get along'. And I agree, some people are going to behave badly. However, agreeing the behavior will happen, and allowing it or lowering the behavior bar, I can't agree with. Calling them 'complicated' ... I think that's a disservice. We can't all be super social butterfly carebear ... but we should at least realize that what we're doing here is about THE GROUP having fun. It is, at MOST, 1/4th about you (you, the GM running an iconic, and 2 other players). This is a social game. You need to not behave in an anti-social fashion. If you do, you should be invited to leave. /endrant

Well playtests have become better, apparently in the innitial playstest for PF people already complained about high level monster survieabiltiy and a bunch of other things. The mythic playtest left me quite satly too, but with the occult playtest they seem to be getting better (their communication skills seem to improve, and I have faith in some new designers). The problem with PF2 will be that unless it is far better, many people will not switch right away, and wait for the first splatbook or two. Everquest and Lineage (mmos) hade the same problem, and it is the reason that we will not see WOW2.

I am however quite happy with the Pathfinder Unchained approach and hope that some of their rules will become mandatory for PFS, if they improve the game.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Undone wrote:
talbanus wrote:
If 6 people want to play normal mode and the GM doesn't want to run it, you know what? Sounds like one of the 6 needs to prep the scenario in normal mode and run it for his/her 5 friends (rather than expect someone to spend 4+ hours PLUS prep time to do something they don't enjoy).

So if they have fewer players and one can't even step up to GM because there's not enough players left collectively to run they're just SoL.

Which is the attitude the 4 and 5 star GMs seem to have toward this. "Screw the people who are hurt I've been helped!" Few of them seem to exhibit much concern about PFS.

To give them the benefit of the doubt, I think they consider to benefits for the PFS as a whole rather than the possible downsides for individual players - which is frankly the only was to run such a big campaign.

Ideally this should increase the number of players, and thus giving everyone more chances to play, I guess we will see how it turns out. I would not be surprised if the rule against using a CORE character in a non-core game were to be changed pretty soon, since that makes it harder to schedule high level scenarios. (chances are that with characters switching to the normal campaign, even less people will have characters at the higher levels).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I second slave masters mirror and scars of the third crusade.
The Dissipated however is more mission impossible than RP, but that is certainly a valid approach.
By way of bloodcove is a pretty nice sandbow, perfect for players who like to find creative solutions.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kinevon wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Actually, and that is not relevant for the OPs question, what happens when a bow has the adaptive enhancemement (which does not actually increase the enhancement bonus) before you turn it into a named item?

1) It is no longer eligible for being made into an Oathbow, since you cannot modify (without having the modification on a chronicle) a named magic item.

2) Adaptive, unfortunately, is not available for CORE characters without it being offered on a chronicle.

Thank you, I am considering that combo for a normal mode character.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
talbanus wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Pahlok wrote:
I don't think this really stops optimization at all.
Nothing will. So this obviously isn't intended to.
Nothing will stop it, but greater system/class balance could make it less troublesome (as far as organized play, where the GM cant adjust things on the fly nearly as much). This would require greater playtesting and/or restrictions to materials, though. I call this beautiful dream, Pathfinder 2.0. /ducks

Pathfinder 2 will come at some point, for the time being Pathfinder Unchained will be a nice way to test some ideas, and obviously PF2 will need the mother of all playtest.

talbanus wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
talbanus wrote:


What? Isn't this the equivalent of someone that's accused of a crime, responding with, "Oh, you thought that was breaking the law? Let me show you what breaking the law looks like!"? Instead of getting your back up about a perceived attack on your play style, how about we encourage self-examination and self-awareness? Maybe a thought of, "Why are they reacting to what I'm doing or saying in that way?"

The "breaking the law example" doesn't work for me. It's more like having a slider between enjoying role playing a character and enjoying the tactical approach, and building effective characters. Obviously players find themselves on all parts of that spectrum.

There is a world of difference between your neighbor knocking on your door and asking you to turn down the music please, and him complain about it, making claims of higher authority and threatening you with the police

One of those results in me getting my headphones, the other one results me making an effort to annoy him (Germany has quiet hours, but outside of those the limits are rather lax, and in theory I could blast music (up to a limit) all day long except in those hours. I would take the time to rig a timer and everything to ensure maximum service). Is that an immature response, oh absolutely, but in the case of powergaming and destroying scenarios, we have an issue where players are already condemned of the act, so they might feel empowered to actually do it.

And I actually started a thread about self awareness amongst other areas
feel free to participate.

talbanus wrote:

o, you're inferring that most of the people that knowingly make extremely powerful characters and use them to steam-roll season 0 to 3 encounters are actually already practicing some form of restraint? And that if we threaten to 'take away their toys', then they go out of their way to make

...

It is human nature, an accepting that something like this happens is the first step to disarm the situation. And let's not forget that it is all about them, they spend resouces (time, money) to get to those PFS events with the intent to have fun. Once their fun jeopardizes the fun of the other participants, we have a problem, but if a player doesn't have fun, he will not come back.

This may not be a problem for your area, but many lodges would rather keep a complicated player around, rather than lose him.

In other words, can't we all just stop antagonizing other for their preferred style of play, level of system mastery, interest in role playing their character and all the other things that divide us?

I doubt that things will end up even half as bad as some people have feared, I just wanted to add that some expectations of player behavior aren't realistic.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:

* I have seen, with my own eyes, a half-dozen examples of a new player coming to the local game-day table with a solid, Core-only PC, who watched as a couple of other players with an enormous number of resources and system mastery left the new player's PC in the dust. Core Mode levels that playing field and encourages those players to come back the next week.

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

The sentiment of leveling the playing field is a noble one, but since the classes in the CRB aren't exactly balanced, especially considering the challenges PFS tend to throw at the party... well I still think that self censorship is the way to go rather than limiting material.

Sure, but I'm not really talking about the relative strength of legal core builds. Heck, the new player can build a powerful barbarian just as easily as you or I. I'm talking about the new PC needing a move action to draw her wand, while the rest of the table uses spring-loaded wrist sheaths. (Want you character to do that? there's a copy of "Adventurer's Armory" you can buy.) I'm talking about the player building an Eldritch Knight, in the same party as a Kensai Magus. I'm talking about a new player being restricted from improving her character by her limited resources.

The writ sheat thing and wands actually bothers me, I can carry a bandolier and craw thrown weapons as I use them, but I can't manage to draw a wand in combination with a move action (like I can draw a weapon). I am tempted to start arguing that I draw the wand as an improvised weapon, but I digress.

Certain newer options are just better at what they do, if someone wants to go into melee and attack with a weapon magus is the way to go, if the just wants to use rays and high level spells eldritch knight is decent (and the higher HD is welcome too).

There are plenty of examples where new options are just a more interesting sidegrade rather than an upgrade, the arcanist is a decent example, since it allows players to make a choice when learning spells, without being stuck with them.

Sometimes I think that the exeption for sharing resources with your usual group should be used for any new player up to a certain character level. But even without such a rule, the ability to ask other players, filter the material online and find the character that your want to create really helps... and frankly spending 10 $ on the ACG is a really good investment. Until that time, the ACG pregens are very good.
Limiting the resources the player feels forced to familiarize himself with is a good idea, but that can be done by good advice.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jilly Jam wrote:

Thank you both for your quick and helpful replies. After contacting the GM they are amending their previous comments and I'll now be making my character with a 20 point buy in and the full 150 gold.

Hope you both have a wonderful evening.

Feel free to ask again if you have any questions, and remember that PFS replaces some class abilities (crafting) and certain things are not allowed.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Artemis_Dreamer wrote:

5) Not Good at Anything: Not sure why, but lately I've been seeing a lot of characters that try to do a little bit of everything so they really end up not contributing much of anything. Have a bow, but rarely hit or do much damage. Have a melee weapon, but can't really do much in melee combat. Have a few attack spells, but the DC's are so low they usually fail. Have a single die of sneak attack damage, but not enough to really bother working to set them up for it. Have a single channel or low level heal spell, but not enough to make a difference. Not as problematic as 4), but it still really doesn't help much.

---

Sorry, I couldn't get the above to quote properly.

I just wanted to comment on this: it's bad form, yes, but it can also mean that the person who made the character is a newer player / a player with low rules mastery. Maybe it could be helpful to players of these kind of characters if you were to give them advice? They're not actively trying to ruin your PFS experience and are playing as best they can.

I personally built a terrible first character, but with the helpful advice of local players, I now have two reasonably effective ones (the first has since been retired from play on account of being unviable).

It's bad form to have a useless character, but may I politely suggest helping those kind of people rather than complaining about them online?

Sorry.

I think we can all benefit from another set of eyes, either through the advice forum or by asking other players to take a look at our character.

Sometimes the fix is as easy as using your wand of mage armor on the level 7 monk with only +1 bracers or armor, or hand your reserve boy to another character, or explaining the existence of thrown weapons to fighters...

When playing with a fresh character, I usually try to give them some toys like alchemists fire, wands, scrolls, a reach weapon... pretty much anything that allows the level 1 char to participate in suptier 4-5.

Complaining about someone who does not know any better, is a waste of time, and frankly really not productive. I have come to extort the virtues of holy weapon balms to some of the other characters in my regular group, and it seemed to have worked in at least one case.

And frankly in PFS your actively have to train people to buy expendables.

Of course if a player doesn't want to learn or should know better and decides to play a 9 INT wizard, that is grounds for at least a moderate amount of public flogging ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Forty2 wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Forty2 wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Forty2 wrote:

All right, I'm hearing a lot of "Masterwork -> Oath Bow in one go."

Nah, you can go from Masterwork (Str +2) -> +1 -> +2 -> Oathbow.
But what will it cost if I go that route? If memory serves, only the first upgrade to an Arcane Bond gets the pseudo-Crafting discount in PFS (which I assume carries over to Core).
You're misremembering. You get the crafting ability with your bonded item always. See the FAQ on it.
Oh that is beautiful. I am so glad that I was proven wrong. As for waiting on +1 until Level 5... I'll just keep Magic Weapon on my list of prepped spells :) (Not the greatest solution, but I'll take it.)

The difference between a masterwork bow and a +1 bow is 1 point of damage, so just get a scroll or two. Oh and since this is core weapon blanches are't available, but simply only buy cold iron arrows, the cost increase is tiny, and even when you can't identify a creature...

Also blunt arrows are no longer an option, so you might look for a way to deal nonlethal damage.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Caio Schmidt wrote:

This is awesome! Even as an experienced PFS player, I'm looking forward to going back to basics. Less cheese = bigger challenges = more fun!

And it will be good to see an influx of new players joining.

Please stop being positive and using the word cheese, the combination makes it a terrible trigger for a number of people, even if the majority of them will gladly agree that a certain tactic is ripe for a fondue.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
talbanus wrote:


What? Isn't this the equivalent of someone that's accused of a crime, responding with, "Oh, you thought that was breaking the law? Let me show you what breaking the law looks like!"? Instead of getting your back up about a perceived attack on your play style, how about we encourage self-examination and self-awareness? Maybe a thought of, "Why are they reacting to what I'm doing or saying in that way?"

The "breaking the law example" doesn't work for me. It's more like having a slider between enjoying role playing a character and enjoying the tactical approach, and building effective characters. Obviously players find themselves on all parts of that spectrum.

There is a world of difference between your neighbor knocking on your door and asking you to turn down the music please, and him complain about it, making claims of higher authority and threatening you with the police

One of those results in me getting my headphones, the other one results me making an effort to annoy him (Germany has quiet hours, but outside of those the limits are rather lax, and in theory I could blast music (up to a limit) all day long except in those hours. I would take the time to rig a timer and everything to ensure maximum service). Is that an immature response, oh absolutely, but in the case of powergaming and destroying scenarios, we have an issue where players are already condemned of the act, so they might feel empowered to actually do it.

And I actually started a thread about self awareness amongst other areas
feel free to participate.

talbanus wrote:

o, you're inferring that most of the people that knowingly make extremely powerful characters and use them to steam-roll season 0 to 3 encounters are actually already practicing some form of restraint? And that if we threaten to 'take away their toys', then they go out of their way to make something even more broken?! So, we should just not threaten toy restriction, because, then, they'll show us what broken really looks like? Wow. Power gamer terrorism -- apparently it's a real thing now?

Aren't season 1-3 scenarios already a bit easy, my experience with them is actually nonexistant, but I heard that the very rarely posed a challenge to even marginally well built characters and experienced players.

This may shock you, but I would argue, that most players don't actually build those powerful characters to steamroll adventures, there are other reasons for that.
Some just enjoy the mental challenge associated with creating those characters, others really don't want to die and take every available option to decrease those chances, and sometimes killing the enemy fast is the best way to increase survive-ability.

The "taking your toys" example is an immature reaction, but when you feel accusation of power creep aimed at something you enjoy it is hard not to get defensive, after all it feels like a personal critique.
When someone tells me "what you do is terrible, and the way you do it damages the experience of everyone around you" that is a pretty tall order, not that anyone actually said that just yet.
We are on the internet, and while it has advantages, discussions like this rarely work the way they would in real life.

I am really not keen about discussing your terrorist suggestion, since nothing useful can come from it. Its like edition wars, pretty nasty in places and ultimately a waste of time.

So let me just say that those who enjoy building powerful characters and feel forced into, or want to participate in core, will not suddenly change the way they build and play their characters.
However, people should as always try not to antagonize them with "so happy to play core, so all those munchkins can't ruin it with those terrible [insert class I really like] ", that is just basic.

Oh and I have plenty of ideas for characters that do not require non-core sources and are effective enough to be fun for me. ^^

talbanus wrote:

Build =/= tactics. Tactics are making sure you get the rogue a flank, make sure you're in the proper location to maximize the benefit of your channels, etc. However, I do agree with what I think your intended point was - that certain powerful builds will still exist in core (damage machine archers, conjurer's with enhanced summoning, etc). I encourage authors of future scenarios to more often use things that balance out such icons (windwall or gust of wind (forget which), giving baddies a way to dismiss or minimize the impact of summoned creatures, etc).

It is not quite as easy to separate build from tactics, since some tactics only really become effective with the right built. And some tactics are night impossible without rather specialized builds, quite a number of combat maneuvers are a pretty lackluster option without at least some investments.

Some classes just work right out of the box, give a paladin or a barbarian a large blunt object and the class works as intended. Of course if you decide to give the paladin two weapon fighting, you can gain additional benefit from that smite..
There is an appreciable difference between decent and great.

Other classes like monks and rogues really do need a good amount of system mastery, just look at treantmonks guides. Like telling a monk player, that investing to heavily into Dexterity and eschewing the use of weapons or explaining to the rogue that two weapon fighting will not double his sneak attacks, or explaing to the wizard that 7 CON is a bad idea even if that novel character did it.

This kind of discussion is always quite subjective, some argue that their level 7 dwarven paladin with 3 different weapon focus feats is a decent baseline (or just the old iconics), others feel that the system mastery of the new iconics is a good starting point.

And of course the system mastery of the GM is a big issue.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:

* I have seen, with my own eyes, a half-dozen examples of a new player coming to the local game-day table with a solid, Core-only PC, who watched as a couple of other players with an enormous number of resources and system mastery left the new player's PC in the dust. Core Mode levels that playing field and encourages those players to come back the next week.

I don't doubt it, I have made that experience, but it motivated me to "up my game", of course I am not your typical new player. I started PFS with an pretty large amount of system mastery.

The sentiment of leveling the playing field is a noble one, but since the classes in the CRB aren't exactly balanced, especially considering the challenges PFS tend to throw at the party... well I still think that self censorship is the way to go rather than limiting material.

I guess at this point we just have to wait and see, I am very curious about the chronicle sheets in the next months.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
andreww wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
The Fox wrote:
I am 99% confident that Bestiaries 2-4 are off limits for all such effects. This will apply to GMs, too, for NPCs that use those spells. I don't have a link, but Mike said earlier that GMs can only use books outside of CORE for elements that appear within the scenario they are running. It seems only fair play that players face that same restriction.
This would prevent the use of anti magic Bandersnatches since they nest in Bestiary no 3 ^^

It would prevent PC's from creating them with Simulacrum, I dont believe GM's are similarly limited especially as they have to access non core material used in the actual scenario.

Also Mike specified only Bestiary 1 for PC use of spells like Planar Binding and Elemental Body and class abilities like Wildshape. It's earlier in the thread, somewhere in the first 5 or 6 pages I believe.

Well the Bandersnatch is a bit of a straw man argument, but the Bestiary 1 does have plenty of nasty choices.

EDIT: Of course core mode does prevent the combination of blood money and simulacrum, which should discourage players.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
redward wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
redward wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
redward wrote:
But if we get supreme pizza every week, and some people really want cheese pizza, I'd have to be a real jerk to ask the pizzeria to not offer cheese pizza just to ensure I get the pizza I want.

If you get 5 supreme pizzas every week, and then you announce that you're going to start ordering 2 cheese pizzas every week, I don't think it's an unreasonable concern (let alone jerkish) to think you might only be ordering 3 supremes from now on, rather than assuming you'll be ordering 7 total pizzas.

Especially if your venue is only ordering 1 pizza each week because you can barely scrape up the money for it.

That's why you ask what people want before you put in the order. Or to put the terrible metaphor aside, you schedule based on demand.

If your venue only has one table per week, I would assume you would determine Core or Original Recipe by:

  • What your GMs are willing to run
  • What the majority of players want to play
Roughly in that order. If one lonely player gets left out, that sucks, but why should everyone else have to suffer just to maintain the status quo for one person? Or two? Or three*?

*Because you know, once you've got 4 people on the same page, the solution should be pretty obvious.

This only works if the number of available GMs is large enough. If only one is ever willing and able to GM that logic won't work.

That said, I think that scenario is pretty rare, in my usual PFS group at least 4 people GM regularly, so most of us know the pains of sitting at the receiving end of a crit.

I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for players who are unwilling to GM. If they're intimidated by the multitude of rules I hear there's a new option that significantly lowers that bar.

Actually the amount of rules in the CRB, and PFS guide is still pretty massive compared to other RPGs, I think we should motivate people to GM, but forcing the issue obviously isn't an option.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dafydd wrote:
wellsmv wrote:
oathbow isnt in core rulebook...

What is this thing called an Oathbow described on page 474 of the CRB, pictured on 475 then?

As for the creation, yes, half price and can be done in stages. Note, it does need to be made from a Composite Longbow (STR +2) and can not be made from a +1 STR rating bow.

Price is
Arcane bond - Free - MWK Composite Longbow (+2 STR)
First Upgrade - 1k gold - +1 Composite Longbow (+2 STR)
Second Upgrade - 3k gold - +2 Composite Longbow (+2 STR)
Third Upgrade - 8.5k gold - Oathbow

That is what you would be paying, not how much you need in FAME limit.

Damn forgot that the FAQ was a thing:

PFS FAQ wrote:

Can I Upgrade a Named Magic Item?

Named magic items—including specific armor and specific weapons—are not upgradeable. Non-magic specific armor and specific weapons may be upgraded normally. Magic armor and weapons may be upgraded to named versions if they are the same basic material and shape as, and meet but do not exceed the enhancement bonuses of the named versions. Wondrous items whose names include a +X value (such as bracers of armor, headband of vast intelligence, amulet of might fists, etc.) may also be upgraded following the rules for upgrading magical items on page 19 of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play.

Upgraded versions of named magic items may appear on Chronicle sheets.

Intelligent magic items are not available for purchase unless they appear on a Chronicle sheet or are provided as part of a class or archetype (such as the black blade magus archetype)

Actually, and that is not relevant for the OPs question, what happens when a bow has the adaptive enhancemement (which does not actually increase the enhancement bonus) before you turn it into a named item?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
wellsmv wrote:
oathbow isnt in core rulebook...

It is on page 474, I guess you were confused since it was reprinted.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Funny I just checked the arcane bond description in the CRB and it is silent on the issue of strength rating (which is relevant, since it would increase the price substantially). Of course if that was not an option you could always replace your current bow with a new one.

1. Should be possible, you pay half price for the upgrade, but I think you need enough prestige to actually afford the sale price.

2. I think you would have to pay 12500 (since you don't have to provide the masterwork (2) bow, but add 100 to bring your bow the proper strength rating. And no usually you can't upgrade named items at all, they have to be created in one go.
4. No the final bow will have the +2 strength rating.

Also this thread really belongs into the advice part the forum.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Pregnerated characters come in three flavors level 1, 4 and 7.
They are sometimes regarded by only being half as good as a decent self made character (I would argue 75-95 & depending on the iconic), so your character will be able to participate.
Note that the newer iconics based on the classes from the advanced class guide are better, and can stand on common group with "real" characters.

If your have a character idea, the advice part of these boards is a great place to ask for help, just mention that it has to be a character for PFS, someone will be aware of the relevant rules and limitations.

Good luck and welcome to PFS.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
trollbill wrote:
I would like to state that I do not think that any legal build in PFS should be considered bad form, only certain forms of behavior. If one looks at why most of the listed builds above are considered bad form, it is because they can easily slow down combat, totally dominate encounters, or otherwise suck up much of the fun from everyone else. But in they end, it's not the build that is doing this. It is how the player uses the build that does this. All some builds do is make it easier. But if you have someone who plays in a style that sucks up much of the fun from everyone else, then discouraging the build won't solve the problem. You need to discourage the player's behavior.
Yes, but I would like to warn people away from some builds, since they might end up only being able to use their dominating option.
What build can only use their dominating option?

I am tempted to just say archers, but I have some examples:

White haired witch / other class , grappling focused, obviously not useless without the core gimmick, but it tends to limit their choices in combat.

Summoners: You either send your monster in the battle or you don't. You could refrain from casting haste, but your party members might not appreciate that. Better to build your eidolon differently from the start. Just look at the hunter pregen, that wolf is a team player (trip+archery just isn't a great combination, but you can be clever and plan around it).

It really is not an issue of not being able to use your power option, rather that not using then sometimes feels like you are shortchanging your team. Sorry but this area is dominated by feelings, expectations and endorphin.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

The only thing I would add is:

I will be amazing one I reach level X

I haven't seen this as much in PFS yet, but it is a common mistake when optimizing characters.

I think that's a common mistake because people carry it over from MMOs - where the first few levels are easy and go much faster even with medicore builds, so you spend most of your time playing once the character has come into his own.

If you are doing a PFS build which will be weak for the first level only - you can play something easy for the first level, and then rebuild him entirely for level 2.

Or if the character will take longer - that sounds like a prime use of AP/GM credit. I'm going through an AP right now - and that's my plan with the credit. I'm going to build a PFS drunken master I've been playing around with who has a dumped strength (needing an 18 Con for Swift Drinker makes him too MAD for strength) and with the AP credit I'll be able to start play with an Agile AoMF. I would NOT want to play the first couple levels doing 1d6-2 damage.

I think GM credit allows for some pretty wild builds, but I don't really like it as a justification. Of course AP credit is fair game.

From my point of view, I like to use obscure combinations to avoid taking other easier choices (e.g taking the following combination, just because I want to use opportune parry without using a rapier. Kata Monk 1 / Paladin 2 / Brawler 2). Other players might do the same, like using multiclassing to make a white haired witch useful - just taking straight witch levels doesn't work.

Jiggy wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
I think that's a common mistake because people carry it over from MMOs
Really? I thought it came from people seeing the concept-defining fighting styles that are locked behind feat chains/level prereqs/prestige classes and wanting to actually use them.

I have this silly idea, that players usually have a mental image of their character, and how he "work", how he would react to different RP situations ..etc. That is partly why I argue with, the "players should not plan their characters to level 20, they should organicly built it, based on their experiences and out that skill point into profession sailor....." crowd.

Sorry about that tangent, but the point I am trying to make, is that a lot of those awesome builds, really don't scale well... pretty much the opposite of barbarians, they start very strong...

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
redward wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
redward wrote:
But if we get supreme pizza every week, and some people really want cheese pizza, I'd have to be a real jerk to ask the pizzeria to not offer cheese pizza just to ensure I get the pizza I want.

If you get 5 supreme pizzas every week, and then you announce that you're going to start ordering 2 cheese pizzas every week, I don't think it's an unreasonable concern (let alone jerkish) to think you might only be ordering 3 supremes from now on, rather than assuming you'll be ordering 7 total pizzas.

Especially if your venue is only ordering 1 pizza each week because you can barely scrape up the money for it.

That's why you ask what people want before you put in the order. Or to put the terrible metaphor aside, you schedule based on demand.

If your venue only has one table per week, I would assume you would determine Core or Original Recipe by:

  • What your GMs are willing to run
  • What the majority of players want to play
Roughly in that order. If one lonely player gets left out, that sucks, but why should everyone else have to suffer just to maintain the status quo for one person? Or two? Or three*?

*Because you know, once you've got 4 people on the same page, the solution should be pretty obvious.

This only works if the number of available GMs is large enough. If only one is ever willing and able to GM that logic won't work.

That said, I think that scenario is pretty rare, in my usual PFS group at least 4 people GM regularly, so most of us know the pains of sitting at the receiving end of a crit.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
No one is asking to not offer cheese pizza. We just want to make sure they make enough supremes even though cheese is the new flavor.
But we aren't ordering takeout, we're baking the pizza ourselves. So it is up to each apartment to hash toppings out with their roommates.

I don't tend to mention this, but I cook .. at lot. So when I invite 20 of my closest friends (happens about once per month^^) and offer pizza, or sushi as the main course, there is a limit. In the pizza example my oven has space for 3 pizzas at the time, that is a rather hard limit.

Sushi is only really limited by my prep time, but if some kind proves to be in higher demand...

What I am trying to say using food based metaphors is that, some people are aware of the limited resources involved: gaming events per week, number of tables, number of GMs and number of players. Each and every one has the potential to fall below a a critical threshold.

Or in other words, if none of my friends are available(or a critical number don't eat carbs that week) neither sushi nor pizza is happening.

1 to 50 of 1,506 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.