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

Seer's page

12 posts. Alias of Siren's Mask.


RSS


The Barbarian gets only one less rage power than a fighter gets bonus feats( 10 vs. 11). The viking, which is an archetype not a prestige class, can potentially get 3 feats and 8 rage power or 11 bonus feats so that is a plus. I'm just not sure he stacks up to either the Barbarians mighty rage (+8 str, con, +6 will) or the fighters weapon training. I'm really looking to see if its worth it? Am i missing something? or is the viking just a weaker less skillful barbarian?

I am curious because while i love archetypes, their have been a lot of them that sound flavor full but lack in game use. Many can be justified because they fill a specific niche, or give access to a different ability while remaining somewhat on par with the normal class in numbers. A sad point is that many that lose to much, i find don't see the light of day at my groups table. I find more people taking a ninja or fighter over the pirate and just calling it that. I am hoping this is not the case with the Viking... cause its a Viking.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So let me first start of by saying that I love the People of the North player companion.It is full of flavor and delivers on crunch. Those who haven't bought it should.

My issue is with the Viking archetype. At first I was very excited about this archetype, thinking that the fighter got some loving. I then started looking at the numbers and comparing it to a normal Barbarian and base line fighter,and it looks to me to be a poor mans Barbarian, am I missing something?

Its a fighter who gets a very cool intimidate ability instead of bravery( big plus here). He looses armor training in favor of shield defense (+1 ac when using a shield 4th, 7th, 11th, 15th) and trades weapon training 1,2,3,4 for rage at - 3 level, and can replace fighter bonus feats with rage powers after level 6. He looses heavy armor prof, tower shield prof.

The only main fighter abilities he keeps are weapon master and armor mastery.

It does not state that he gets Mighty or greater rage.

The barbarian still gets fast movement and a better skill selection.
I guess trap sense and fearsome are a push, same with uncanny dodge and DR vs. shield defense. They are equal in armor weapon prof. Indomitable will and tireless rage are comparable to armor and weapon mastery.

access to rage and rage power are amazing but at a lover level and with the sacrifice to weapon and armor training, is it worth it? Compared to a barbarian by level 20 he looses 20hp and 40 skill points. Am I missing something? Why would someone not just play a barbarian?


Alchemical bonding alloys that allow for the transmutation of one material to another, even if superficial. How about dipping of weapons(including some natural) into vats of alloys. Or alchemical implants both biological and prosthetic, can't you see the orc with the adamantium tusks(check out my overlord grill.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

1)Different crafting techniques for armor that are none magical, i.e Elven breastplate(normal breastplate, 10% lighter, only -5ft movement speed in heavy and medium armor, -1 to ac), Dwarven(double weight, movement speed halved, -1 max dex bonus, +1 ac, + 1 dr/adamantium). I think a few "style" templates like this added to existing armor would curb the need for newer armors and provide a cool flare for item customization.

2) Pikes(not to be confused with pole-arms) for foot soldiers, like the Sarissa(13-21ft), Swiss pike(10-25ft)and many others that allowed for "stack"-able unit formations that made well organized armies deadly.

3) New materials to craft things from, like mythical Asgardian metal "uru", Plato's Orichalcum, Amazonium- Wonder woman's bracelet or even simple Damascus steel.


Happler wrote:

Not even looking at the acrobatic for a moment. I am curious on those weapons (looks like a great one to use on PC's).

Did they go off of CMD checks to drag characters up?

No he was using them as an attack roll, then an opposed STR check to start pulling. It's his first time running in pathfinder, he has been using 3.5 for a long time. It did 1d4 points of damage.


I understand the monk and ninja ability's later on, my concern is not just for those classes, but say a rogue, ranger or barb or really any class. There should be an application for acrobatics that covers bounding off walls. I cannot even name all the action movies that have a hero or even a low level thief bounding up walls, fences, alleyways, and back flips off walls. This kind of action should not be equated with swimming up a waterfall or climbing mount Everest with no gear. So no rules anywhere? maybe I'm remembering something from 3.5?


Jak the Looney Alchemist wrote:
Calculate distance height. Calculate height of nearest barbarian/fighter/paladin/character with a STR over 12 bent over at waist. Stand on character. Cut rope. Look at dm and wonder about 80DC standing jump.

This +1

As for the Rule I thought it was covered by spider step feat, but I was just remembering it wrong. It really seems there should be a rule in the game for springing or jumping off something. It's not quite climb, and yet not nearly as hard as the acrobatic check makes it, I see kids at the school i work at jump between bars and easy get 6-7 feet high.


So is there no rule for jumping say 5ft across without a running start (dc 10), with a vertical height of 2ft (dc 16), multiple times in a quick succession like parkour or any action movie nowadays has?


I am typically a DM, but for once I am playing a pc in a friends campaign. A situation occurred that set off my DM rules senses and am looking to make sure I am not "misinterpreting" a situation.

The situation is that a group of lv 1 pc's are in a 5ft foot wide alleyway, that is 20ft high and very long. a typical overgrown city back ally. They are attacked from behind and from the roofs of the 20ft high buildings. Combat begins and the enemies on the roof start throwing/swinging grappling hook like weapons down from the roof and hooking Pc's up. The DM ruled that after an attack hit, the hook was snagged into the pc, there was an opposed strength check (they had a additional +4 from height and two people pulling) to see if they could hoist you up the side of the wall. Once this happened they then puled the pc up 10ft a round.

One of the players got hooked and was being dragged up, she was already out of spells from fighting 12+ minions and didn't have a slashing weapon to cut the rope, so was quickly on her way to being surrounded and beaten to death onto of the building.

Now my question comes from what one of the other players did. she playing a ninja with a very high Dex, attempted to make a acrobatics check to spring board up the wall like parkour, and then attack the rope to save the suspending hooked character who was 10ft off the ground. She rolled well and got a 24 total. What happened next was an disagreement over acrobatics rules, as we could fine no ruling for this kind of check the DM ruled that it was a standing high jump, so 10ft x 4=40 then x2 for not having a running start, so an 80 dc. While I know this is RAW by definition of they type of jump the DM ruled it as, but I thought I remember a rule for this kind of check somewhere, possibly in a feat. I just think an 80 dc is a bit extreme for a 5ft wide multiple bounding jump that is only 10ft high. Now I know a climb check would have been easier, but the walls of the buildings in this rundown city are all stucco and apparently incredibly smooth and have no crumbling parts.

Any idea where this rule might be? A possible different way of interpreting the situation, or how you would have ruled it?

Thank you for your time.


Castilliano wrote:


I'd advise keeping the same Summoner/Eidolon mechanics as usual, just signifying a really strong link to this dragon. Since the dragon won't be leaving play, the mechanics of death/resummoning get messy, but you could have the PC able to "raise" the dragon at half h.p. (like resummoned Eidolons) if it falls. Also have the PC able to summon dragon-themed aid in the interim. (Swap Monster Summoning list for same CR dragon/reptilians/elementals tied to dragon energy types/outsiders tied to dragon gods)
Or swap those spell-like summons for spells that resuscitate the dragon (not buff), such as: CLW/CMW/CSW/CCW/Br. of Life/Heal/Restoration(no $), 8th?, 9th?, True Resurrection (no $) (dragon only). The cures could be the 1d10 Eidolon version.
Or swap those spell-like summons for the ability for the dragon to wear its own equipment/armor.

I like this concept, change type to dragon, keep most of other stuff the same, change summoning list to focus on dragon/reptilians/elementals. swap out summon ability for dragon boon. Thank you very much.

Dragonborn3 and ShadowcatX,thank you for imforming me about The Book of Drakes, I shall have to look into it.


cp wrote:

WAYYYY too overpowered.

Not summoned is an advantage. Able to be healed normally is an advantage... and what is the fluff justification for dragon evolutions?

I understand that it not being a summoned creature has many advantages over being summoned, such as no banishment,always having a guard and so on. I also understand that having a disposable eidolon, one that can essentially be killed and brought back a few times with in one combat/ dungeon craw is equal if not more powerful. combine that with feats such as augmented summoning can create a viable nightmare in a battle. If the eidolon is a real creature he has to be more careful with it.

With regards to the evolutions, I was not clear before... he would be selecting from the quadruped eidolon base form, same states and starting evolutions. He would have to pay for claws, wings, immunity and such just as other summoners do, his list would be much more restricted, like no tentacles and such. His type would be dragon instead of outsider : 1d12 Hd, sleep and paralysis immunity the like. Not spell resistance, blindsence and other true dragon ability's.


So I Have been running a campaign (25pt epic, slow progress), and my player are level six now. The group was composed of 4 (lion druid, undead scourge pally, anger inquisitor, blade-bound Magus)and the pally in my group will be moving soon, much to my dismay. An old player who hasn't played in about 8 months asked if they could join back with the group(they're a good player). They came too me with a request about the summoner: a dragon tamer/bonded. This idea that would work in this particular world so i didn't have and issue with it fluff wise, until he asked if we could tweak the class. I have been know to do this with other classes, though I try to have them as balanced as possible(even a little under if the idea is a bit much, more for fluff).

His idea in thought: create a summoner that wasn't a summoner to fill void created by poor dragon shaman/ non-flying/dragon riding cavalier and less summoning oriented summoner.

The idea mechanically: make a summoner with an eidolon that has full hit dice/ Bab progression with summoner and uses the base type of dragon instead of outsider.

summoner loses : all summon monster(sp), Life link, Maker's call, Transposition, Aspect, Life bond, Greater aspect, Gate , Twin eidolon

-keeps:Bond senses, shield ally, Greater shield ally and merge forms still function respectively

Eidolon becomes an actual dragon(not summoned), can be killed normally, can be healed normally, must be resurrected if killed. cannot be banished, still gains evolutions, must be spend evo points to augment eidolon in a Draconian like fashion.

Please let me know what you think. Is it too over powered/underpowered? Should I add some ability to summoner? Should I keep normal evolution point progression/ increase it/ decrease it? My biggest concerns are: first it weakens the summoner in respect that if his eidolon/ dragon dies he doesn't have use of summon eidolon spell or any summon monster(sp), and can retrieve his eidolon until it is resurrected. Secondly, a fully leveled full HD eidolon would be a monster.

Thank you for your time.


©2002–2014 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.