SigmaX0's page

Level 2: stats

Fixed that for you :)

Clerics were insane in 3.5. Just because they're not world-destroyers any longer, doesn't mean they're not useless. However, they are a support class. From my experience, even a Battle Oracle is going to be dishearteningly less accurate and powerful than your full BAB classes.

If I were to build one, I would do it primarily as a buffer and support caster, with decent damage potential, survivability and healing to back you up.

My friend did this combination with his Druid.

While Wild shaped. Into a stegasaurus. With Improved Natural Attack. And Strong Jaw.

There *was* a group of around 20 men escorting a rather important carriage.

... the horror..

Yeah, light shields allow use of that hand still, heavies do not.

Personally, I would have Str > Cha. I don't know if it's worth gimping Wis over Int, either. Power attack might not be used much outside of smites, and depending on how much kicking your DM is providing your ass with, you might want Extra LoH.

Aim for a Dex +2 item to get Imp TWF. Once you get shield master, that's additional free bull rushes.

Imp/Greater Bull rush can add some really nice synergy to this build too, allowing your allies free attacks.

Personally, i'd be heading down those routes at higher level (and taking AC boosting feats - dodge, shield spec) rather than the crit route, but those could be nice options too if you're using a scimitar.

SigmaX0 wrote:

Ah, I see what you're saying now. I don't fully agree with his stat layout either, and I agree with what you're saying. I would, however, still start with a 16 in Dex, initiative is just that important. Wisdom shouldn't be ignored to the extent of a 7, though,...

Buying a 16 is expensive. Really expensive if it's not your primary or even secondary stat. I would say buy up to 14. It's far more effective to spread some of those points around instead of min-maxing like a munchkin. If you desperately want a 16 DEX, be an Elf. It's one of the better (if not the best) Wizard classes anyway. +2 INT, +2 DEX, -2 CON. So your CON goes down from a 14 to a 12. You can live with that. You shouldn't be getting hit enough for that to be so crucial, anyway, and there are ways to get more hit points, especially temporary hit points. The Elf racials are also pretty good. If initiative is so much of a sacred thing to you, go with the scorpion familiar. There's a stackable +2. Or, like I said (I edited my previous post a little), just be a Diviner if you are so desperate for initiative that you'd go so far as to gimp a vital stat for merely 1 point of it.

Your tone is still quite hostile, i'm not trying to deride you, we're having a discussion. Chill.

In my mind, I was already an elf:)

I don't think that being a diviner is worth the sacrifice of having to prepare a divination spell every day, despite how incredibly awesome the ability is. Conjuration is my personal favourite, especially with the new teleportation specialisation.

The OP mentioned optimisation, hence the gimping of stats. I wouldn't really consider Wis a vital stat, at any rate. I don't think it should be gimped with no regard to the consequences - it is still a defensive stat. Str and Cha on the other hand, from a min/max standpoint are useless. I'm not saying that everyone should drop them in every game.

If you take an 18 and a 16, that's 27 points. -8 for two 7's leaves you with enough for a constitution over 10, a non-negative wisdom and a starting Int of 20 and Dex of 18, with a possible starting initiative of +12 and a non-gimped will save.

SigmaX0 wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

SigmaX0 wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

He seems to undervalue Wisdom and overvalue Dex (which, by the way, is a very valuable stat for a Wizard, but worth sacrificing Wis that much for an extra +1?).

Who needs a will save when you go first? :)

The only response I can give kindly is that you're using flawed logic.

Initiative does more for Wizards than any other class, in my opinion. At higher levels, you can change the face of the entire battlefield and protect yourself from harm in a single round.

Is it worth sacrificing that much Dex for an extra +1 Wis?

It's only 1 DEX bonus, and it's not an extra +1 WIS bonus. Treantmonk's 25 point buy spread shown above has a 7 WIS. Yeah, that's -2 Will.

For losing out on 1 DEX, you have a +1 WIS, versus a -2 WIS. Anyone with some sensibility about the game in general can see the obvious disparity. Having +1 WIS instead of -2 WIS is a huge leap, and having +3 DEX instead of +2 DEX is a ridiculously small leap especially when you aren't dependent primarily upon that stat. If any physical stat is important to a Wizard, it's CON. DEX is merely secondary, and it is absolutely not worth sacrificing so much WIS for merely 1 DEX bonus.

There are other ways to get initiative, and sacrificing core stats and a vital save is a poor way to go about getting merely +1 to it. Wisdom may not be a Wizard's primary stat, but it shouldn't be ignored. Especially how silly will you look when an effect with a save that you're supposed to be able to resist more easily instead incapacitates you with remarkable efficacy and ease. You'd be like a melee Fighter (non-finesse) with a 7 CON, or 7 DEX. It's silly.

Ah, I see what you're saying now. I don't fully agree with his stat layout either, and I agree with what you're saying. I would, however, still start with a 16 in Dex, initiative is just that important. Wisdom shouldn't be ignored to the extent of a 7, though, agreed. Stick the 7 in Strength.

SigmaX0 wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

He seems to undervalue Wisdom and overvalue Dex (which, by the way, is a very valuable stat for a Wizard, but worth sacrificing Wis that much for an extra +1?).

Who needs a will save when you go first? :)

The only response I can give kindly is that you're using flawed logic.

Initiative does more for Wizards than any other class, in my opinion. At higher levels, you can change the face of the entire battlefield and protect yourself from harm in a single round.

Is it worth sacrificing that much Dex for an extra +1 Wis?

He seems to undervalue Wisdom and overvalue Dex (which, by the way, is a very valuable stat for a Wizard, but worth sacrificing Wis that much for an extra +1?).

Who needs a will save when you go first? :)

I don't really see why a flat plane must necessarily be in a line. When the spell describes a flat vertical plane, I read that as it is a thin, vertical sheet that spreads 10feet and rises 10 feet.

If you take Wall of Fire as an example, it's effect is described as an:

'opaque sheet of flame up to 20 ft. long/level'

This I would argue must be a flat, continuous line.

Wall of Force however states:

'wall whose area is up to one 10-ft. square/level'

But does not stipulate that those squares must be placed in any particular formation. (Equally it doesn't explicitly state that they can be placed in any way the caster chooses)

Thanks for the comments.

RE Wall of Stone: It works better, however, it allows a reflex save, making it pretty worthless in this given scenario unfortunately.

RE Wall of Force: The description states a flat vertical plane. What I mean by a doughnut is:

112233
112233
44xx55
44xx55
667788
667788

Where the numbers represent the individual 10 foot panes of the spell, and the x's represent the area left unfilled.

'The caster can form the wall into a flat, vertical plane whose area is up to one 10-foot square per level. The wall must be continuous and unbroken when formed. If its surface is broken by any object or creature, the spell fails.'

Does this formation contradict those rules?

So, my Wizard has just gained access to the spell Hungry Pit - it's great. I cast it under a golem last meeting, and it rolled a 20 on its reflex save to pass. My DM ruled that as he passed, he would be shunted to the edge of the pit. It doesn't make a lot of sense if he passes the save, and ends up standing on thin air (unless you take it that he is hanging onto the edge of the pit, which opens up a whole different can of worms).

So first question, does anyone else employ this rule for pit spells and similar situations?

Second question, Assuming that the above situation is logical and we'll go ahead and use it, what happens if I were to encase the golem in a Wall of Force, and then cast hungry pit below it? Would the golem simply be unable to save, since he has nowhere to escape to?

Third question, could I even cast Hungry Pit 'through' the Wall of Force? Would I need to fly above it (assuming I made the wall a doughnut shape)to cast it on the encased area?

Fourth question, if I were to Intensify a Hungry Pit as per the epic feat (maximised and doubled) what would this do to the damage? My DM has suggested that the 10d6 falling damage would not be maximised and doubled. Do you agree? Would the rest of the ongoing 4d6 damage/round be maximised and doubled? (Halved on a successful save)

Fifth Question, if one were to plonk a wall of stone (or similar effect) flat on top of the pit, would the creatures within be unable to escape without first breaking through the wall?

@ Mike: I didn't realise there was a Pathfinder feat version. My DM specifically stated that it's the epic feat variety.

@ Sean: I like the way in which your (clearly twisted) brain works.

What spell is the Dex damage?

Necromancy is prohibited for me, so not the best option available. I'm Conjuration specialised, Necromancy/Abjuration prohibited.

Fire Arrows is a good, sneaky use of this spell. Less glory for me though. If i'm going to use this once per week, I at least want the world to know it was me who blew it up.

Intensify is maximised and doubled. (It's insanely good). I'm level 9.

Fireball, for example, would hit for 108 damage, and 54 on a successful save.

For whatever reason, my GM has recently gifted my Wizard a Rod of Intensify. It can only be used on level 1-6 spells, and only once per week.

Naturally, I want the most bang for my buck. Who can think of the most sneaky, horrible combination I can drum up with this bad boy?

I'm thinking a hungry pit could work nicely...

To be maximum nasty, i'd make either an Anti-Paladin (if you know they are going to be good), or a Wizard.

The Anti-Paladin will give you huge damage, great saves and toughness.

As a Wizard, you would be able to use planar binding spells etc to make sure you have lots of lackeys to protect you. Plus, they're the most versatile class, so you can tailor it to counter whatever they have, and use divination to keep an eye on what they're up to.

So is that the biggest DR one could achieve, or is there another form of stacking DR?

Could anybody help me to clarify what the largest DR a character can achieve is within the Pathfinder core rules? (plus APG)

As far as I can see, it would be an Invulnerable Rager taking the Improved DR rage power 3 times, for 13 DR at level 20 whilst raging, or do those 2 types of DR not stack?

I think if you're a conjuration specialist (a very good idea) then Augment Summoning is worth taking.

Other than some situational damage soaking at level 1, the summons come into their own around the 3rd level spell, the Leopard is my pick of the bunch, with Augment a tasty charge with 5 attacks at 20 Strength.

I'd never really looked at the Horizon Walker before, it looks very interesting indeed.

Thanks a lot for all of the suggestions!

Some more information:

Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Deadly Aim, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Improved Critical (Longbow), Bleeding Critical, Rapid Shot, Many Shot and Improved Precise Shot.

There's one more feat but I can't remember what it is, which is irritating me.

Skills wise, I have pumped ranks into Perception, Stealth, Climb, Acrobatics and Swim.

My favoured terrains are Urban and Forest.

Hunter's Tricks are Sic 'em, Tangling Shot and Chameleon Step.

The aim of the character is to achieve maximum ranged destruction combined with some stealth and mobility.

I've just picked up Camouflage, so HIPS is possible in Urban terrain, which is where most of the campaign is set. Picking up HIPS later will be of only moderate benefit.

In other words, this is an "Ask your DM" question until Paizo gives us a FAQ/Errata.

Seconded, please clarify this issue for us Paizo!

I'm currently playing an archer Ranger with the 'Skirmisher' variant from the APG. (This removes the ability to cast spells and instead provides some limited use utility moves)

I've enjoyed a period of ascendancy up to level 12, taking Favoured enemy Humanoid (human) to +6/+6 in a campaign where 90% of enemies are human. I'm looking now at the last 8 levels of Ranger, and it strikes me that other than some slow improvements to my animal companion (already very frail in combat, and without buffs largely useless against any real opposition) and effectively another +2 to my favoured enemy, (i'm unlikely to make much use of the level 20 bonus)there's not a lot to look forward to, especially as I won't get any of the high level spells (or any spells for that matter)

I'm wondering whether now would be a good time to cut loose the Ranger levels, and dip into another class. My stats are Str 20, Dex 22, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 10. I'm put off Paladin due to my low charisma, but I see it as an option along with the obvious Fighter. Any suggestions?

So, me and my friend were discussing this topic after I saw someone had mentioned in another thread that Brass Knuckles require the Ki Focus enchantment to be placed on them in order for the monk to use Stunning Fist and his other abilities through them.

His argument is that because Brass Knuckles are listed under the 'Unarmed' section of the equipment table, they fall under the Stunning Fist description of an unarmed attack.

My argument is that Brass Knuckles are weapons, shown by the fact that they can be enchanted as weapons, and that the 'Unarmed' equipment section is designed to demonstrate how much space those weapons take up in the wielder's hands, not the type of attack.

Is there any concrete ruling on this that anyone knows about, or is it a case of RAI?

In our first Pathfinder campaign, which we completed earlier this year, my Paladin went to negative hit points twice. Once was at level 14, when he received a full round of attacks from a Great Gold Wyrm, and died instantly.

The other was a barman at level 1 with a greataxe.*

It is certainly tricky at level 1, as like the OP said, one lucky hit can fell even a tough first level PC. However, I think that's part of the fun of it. You should be flimsy at level 1, because you're just another green adventurer. If you die, you're one of the ones that never made it.

*After he dropped me to negative HP, he ran away and dropped his weapon. I was healed to 1 HP, and tracked him down. Being a Paladin, I handed him his greataxe back, he won initiative, missed me, then I dashed his brains out on the wall.

I think it effectively just provides extra rounds of courage per day at a reduced bonus.

I highly recommend the APG Conjuration sub-school Teleportation.

Move action, move close to enemies.
Standard action, blast with colour spray.
Swift action, teleport back 30 feet.

1. Choose a toad
2. ????
3. Profit!

Rather than have each player make 2 characters, why not instead have the PCs chatting at a table in the bar with 4/5 NPCs. Spend time introducing the NPCs, fleshing them out, lure the PCs into a false sense of security: 'Oh, these are the core NPCs for the campaign', and then have them all killed in brutal ways.

Paladins are extremely tough, AC keeps up with the fighter for a good 10 levels, and by that time LoH really comes into it's own, with the Extra LoH feat you can keep yourself alive very nicely. I would recommend the Sword & Board paladin for plenty of smite attacks and a strong AC. Pick up Power attack and Double slice to shore up your damage vs non evil.

It's the *oldest* profession.

We play in a variety of homebrew settings. We had the idea of setting up a wiki for our latest campaign setting, which is quite handy.

Some of the pictures are fairly tounge in cheek, but you can see my DM's awesome cartography skills :)

http://iphazia.wikia.com/wiki/Iphazia_Wiki

My wizard's imp (when he reaches level 7) will be stronger than him. And I fully intend for him to wreak social havok whilst invisible. I think I might forget to mention his existence to the rest of the party...

If it was me, I would max Str, start with a 20 there. You need the accuracy/damage. A 17 in Wisdom will do nicely. Stick another 17 in Con. If you're taking Heavy armour prof, put the 13 in Dex, otherwise Int.

2H is a good idea, since you don't have the feats for anything else. If you're auto-confirming crits, I think falchion comes out on top mathematically. Certainly pick up Power attack ASAP. You may also want to consider lunge, combined with righteous might/enlarge, and perhaps combat reflexes if your dex is high. Personally I wouldn't bother with vital strike. Take Quicken spell too, since level 9 slots are only good for quickened righteous mights!

What sort of demons are you after again?

If you're after the 'tiefling' type, then a box of Games Workshop Ungors can be a godsend. These aren't the full-on goat-headed beastmen, but the more human-like runts of the herd. One box gives you all the horns and hooves you'll need.

Mix it up with the parts from a box of Empire Militia (the ones that used to be 'Mordheim' warbands), and you have lots of 'ruffians', with most common weapon choices and equipment.

You have to assemble them yourself, but converting the GW hard plastic is a doddle. Alternatively, find assembled units on eBay.

Thank you for the suggestions guys.

The demons are to represent a race which my DM has created. Twisted, horned humanoids, who attack with claws and bites.

I played a very similar build and it was very successful, very tough to kill. With smite, you're going to rule the roost vs evil as you would expect, and the extra attacks from your shield will come into play here. My advice would be to shore up your weak spots, HP and damage vs non evil.

So I think double slice is an excellent choice, and power attack is worth picking up too. Not worth using every round, but there will be times in fights with non evils when you'll need to pump out more damage.

I'd take Power attack at level 5, therefore. Alternatively, toughness if you roll poorly for HP. Take HP as your favoured class option. With high AC, HP and saves, as well as swift LoH, you're going to be a tough mother.

I wouldn't bother dipping ranger personally, unless you really care about playing a stupid character. The downside of this build is that it's MAD.

Post level 7, if you're able to add to Dex or increase it some other way, Improved two weapon fighting is worth picking up, which gives access to Two weapon rend later. I wouldn't bother with Greater TWF.

My group and I are searching for some fairly specific miniatures in bulk, any help or ideas about what to look for, or even better where to buy them would be greatly appreciated.

We're looking for:

-Approx 20 Painted well-armed and armoured, mostly melee soldiers.

-Approx 20 Painted ruffian/mercanary types.

-Approx 20 Painted Humanoid demon types, horned, preferably unarmed and black.

Really specific I know!

SigmaX0 wrote:

Austin Morgan wrote:

SigmaX0 wrote:

Is there no size limit on this? So you could simultaneously tie up two colossal dragons in one round? It seems like the rules need some clarification here.

Sure, grab them by their heads. Not so hard :)

But with your penalties and their size bonuses, it's highly unlikely.

Agreed, but still possible. Size does matter in this scenario. I can visualise a character grappling two Pixies quite easily, for example. But 2 Hill Giants? I find that a lot harder to swallow.

Hill Giants are CR7. Two of them are CR9. If a 9th level fighter were to grapple them (9th level because that would be a level-appropriate challenge):

Human Fighter:
STR 24 (18 (start) + 4 (belt) + 2 (leveling)
CMB +16 (9 BAB, 7 STR); CMD: 28 (10 base + 9 BAB + 7 STR +2 DEX)

Hill Giants:
CMB +15; CMD 24

Round 1:
Fighter: Approaches HG1, provoking due to HG1's reach. Might even provoke HG2 if the two giants are close together. Grapples HG1 using a standard action to initiate grapple. Must roll an 8 or higher since he can use both hands. Not bad. 65% chance of success.
HG1: Tries to escape, needing to roll a 13 or higher, for a 40% chance to succeed (60% chance the fighter hangs on).
Hg2: Pounds on fighter with his club, at reach, 10' away from the fighter.

Round 2:
Fighter: Assuming the fighter has retained hold (39% chance so far), he can use his move action to maintain his grapple, getting +5, so he only needs to roll a 3 or higher. 90% chance of success (35.1% cumulative so far). Assuming he succeeds, he can move HG1 closer to HG2, closing the distance to get within grapple range. This provokes because even though it's only 5', it is not a five-foot-free-move. Now he uses his standard action to grapple HG2. He cannot use both arms, so he takes a -4 penalty on this grapple check. He needs to roll a 12 or higher, a 45% chance to succeed. He's down to a 15.8% chance to have made it this far...

You're right of course, (I picked Hill giant off the top of my head incidentally, but great post anyway!)but my issue comes out of the fact that it is possible at all, however unlikely it might be. And as I mentioned above, I don't think it's what was intended for the feat.

SigmaX0 wrote:

Is there no size limit on this? So you could simultaneously tie up two colossal dragons in one round? It seems like the rules need some clarification here.

Sure, grab them by their heads. Not so hard :)

But with your penalties and their size bonuses, it's highly unlikely.

Agreed, but still possible. Size does matter in this scenario. I can visualise a character grappling two Pixies quite easily, for example. But 2 Hill Giants? I find that a lot harder to swallow.

What's really funny is when you use Greater Grapple to grapple two foes, and then you pin them, and then you tie them up (don't ask me how many hands that takes, or what alternate appendages you use to handle the rope).

Is there no size limit on this? So you could simultaneously tie up two colossal dragons in one round? It seems like the rules need some clarification here.

We came to a similar conclusion, that this wasn't disallowed by RAW. But given the description of the Greater Grapple feat, it doesn't seem like it was intended to allow grappling multiple opponents:

Greater Grapple (Combat)

Maintaining a grapple is second nature to you.

Prerequisites: Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6, Dex 13.

Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to grapple a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Grapple. Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.

Normal: Maintaining a grapple is a standard action.

No mention of it here, you would think it would be included as an option in the bracketed section, and in the Normal: section ie 'You can only grapple one opponent.'

RAW, this is allowed. However, if a humanoid does it, he'll be taking a -4 penalty because he doesn't have both hands free; grappled creatures cannot perform actions that require two hands to perform.

I can't work out how this is allowed RAW. Can you show me a reference? I can only see this being allowed RAI at best.

One of my group is attempting to use Greater grapple to maintain a grapple on one creature with a move action, and initiate a new grapple simultaneously with another creature with his standard action, thus grappling 2 creatures at once.

Is this possible?

2. Hold Person
I feel this spell is overpowered because it allows a 3rd level cleric to set up a coup de grace of a humanoid regardless of AC or total HP. Sure there is a save every round, but if the caster times the spell for when an ally is already in melee, the victim is going to need to roll a 20 to survive.

Hold person is useful, but it's one creature, and they get a save. Colour spray could achieve a similar effect, but in a 15ft cone. I don't rate hold person as highly.

Also, no wall spells? If you don't like the encounter the DM has presented, why not put some of the enemies in the 'naughty room' you just created?

SigmaXO wrote:

It's not slavery. You don't barter with slaves. At worst, it's servitude.

Semantically correct, but kinda misses the point. Call is slavery, call it enforced servitude or call it your wacky Aunt Gertrude, people don't like it when it happens to them.

I view the spell like a job offer. You're just forced to attend the interview. If someone did that to me, and offered me a very low salary, I wouldn't track them down through space/time and murder their family. A simple 'no thanks' would suffice. If you pass the charisma check, you've convinced them it's a good idea, not twisted their arm into doing something they don't want to do.

It's slavery, pure and simple. Most rational and powerful beings would want justice, revenge or both. There's a reason one rarely sees a -good- character do this sort of thing in fiction, and a reason the bad guys are so often dead at the end of such stories.

It's not slavery. You don't barter with slaves. At worst, it's servitude.

hmmmm, needs more cow bell.

The range on that thing is terrible though.

I'm currently building an archer fighter, the concept is thus:

A middle-aged war veteran, who's been on the front lines of an ongoing war for many years. He's calm and methodical, and a crack shot. Not particularly well educated or rich back home, but well versed in combat, and the kind of guy you want on your side when s**t goes down. Here's what I have so far:

(Notes: it's 25 point buy, Azurian is a sub-type of human granting 3hp and +2 perception (and perception is a class skill)

Name: Beorn

Race: Azurian

Class: Fighter 3

Str: 16 (+3)
Dex: 18 (+4)
Con: 12 (+1)
Int: 9 (-1)
Wis: 12 (+1)
Cha: 12 (+1)

BAB +3

Initiative +6 (+4 Dex, +2 Trait)

Attacks:
Standard
+10 (+3 BAB, +4 Dex, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Point Blank Shot, +1 Masterwork)

Rapid Shot
+8/+8

1d8 + 4, 1d8 +4 (+3 str. +1 Point Blank Shot)

Rapid Shot w/ Deadly Aim
+7/+7

1d8 + 6, 1d8 +6

CMB: +6 (+3 HD, +3 str)

Defences
AC: 19 (10, +4 dex, +4 Armour, +1 Shield)
Touch AC: 14 (10, +4 dex,)
Flat Footed AC: 14 (10, +4 Armour)
CMD: 20 (10, +3 BAB, +4 dex, +3 str)

Saves:
Fort: +4 (+3 base, +1 con)
Ref: +5 (+1 base, +4 dex)
Will: +3 (+1 base, +1 wis, +1 trait)

HP: 19+ 2d10

Speed: 30ft

Feats:
Point Blank Shot (Human)
Rapid Shot (1st)
Precise Shot (Fighter Bonus 1)
Weapon Focus (Fighter Bonus 2)
Deadly Aim (2nd)

Background Traits:
Indomitable Faith
Reactionary

Racial Features:
+3 hp
+2 Perception, and Perception is a class skill
Bonus Feat
Bonus Skill

Special Abilities:
Armour Training 1
Bravery +1

Skills:
Intimidate +7 (+3 Ranks, +3 Misc, +1 Cha)
Perception +9 (+3 Ranks, +3 Misc, +1 Wis, +2 Race)

Languages:
Stellan

Any thoughts/improvements?

Furthermore, i'm thinking of multiclassing to something else at some point, possibly ranger, because the idea of 20 levels of fighter bores me. How could I work this into the concept? Should I be a ranger from level 1 instead? Do I have any other decent multiclassing options for an archer?

Our group has this come up quite often, as our characters are often engaging in banter with each other. We're open to using social skills on each other, and the DM usually just asks the PC in question to take into account the result once the dice have been rolled. So, if you're having an argument with another player in character, you can attempt to change the mindset of the other player by augmenting your point with a diplomacy roll. If you roll well, the other player should be more receptive to your points in their role playing. If you roll a good bluff, you should act like you believe what they're telling you. We don't play it like you have to completely change the way you act, but more of a subtle influence.

Paladin. Smite is might. Right?

... and don't forget Profession (Farmer) ! He was raised on Aerilon, after all !

Haha! I got the impression he was never too enamoured with the agricultural lifestyle :)

The character is already in place, i'm a wizard, sky high intelligence, as much Cha as I can afford, and skill ranks in bluff/diplomacy. I'll be employing the subtle use of illusions and charms to get my way effectively.

It's interesting, because I have him pegged as LN, becoming LG in later seasons. His own mind is in turmoil, but he is quick to recognise the importance of government (at least, when he is elected.

Blake: option b), slap something akin to his personality onto a powerful wizard :)

The race i'm playing in our current mythos has telepathy, and i'll be taking the improved familiar feat for an imp consular for some dual conversational fun.

I'm most concerned with capturing the essence of Gaius, a complete b*stard, but inherently likeable.

I'm trying to play a character like Gaius Baltar. (from the new Battlestar Galactica, for those unfortunates who haven't seen it yet)

I'm finding the concept really difficult to pull off, any fans of the show/Gaius have some advice about portraying his personality?