|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Just an update:
The Druid has decided to instead become a Void Wizard. (Glad I asked "Why druid?") I'll still need to walk her through some spellcasting tips to get her on a strong footing.
The Bard has taken the tips from the buffer guide to heart and will be a phenomenal buffer. Also, she opted for the Duettist archetype, so she has a performing familiar now.
The Witch is now a Lore Shaman, oddly enough. Too bad about the loss of the potential of sharing spellbook/familiar spells, but very happy to have a full Divine caster on board.
The Swashbuckler is going for the Inspired Blade archetype, allowing her to dominate with a rapier.
The Synthesist... Not really sure what he's up to. I'll discuss his character with him closer to when my campaign starts.
That's another thing I was considering, like letting them keep a single path ability as a token piece of awesomeness after completing a Mythic one-shot/arc.
Or I could use it like your GM and simply hand out the ability without ever going into full Mythic rules.
I really like the sound of this; might be the best I can offer my players. Would 1 tier be plenty to feel mythic? Or how many tiers wound you recommend for a "Mythic one-shot"?
I'm an accountant in the middle of tax season. I, uh, probably don't need another part time job. Haha, thankfully this campaign likely won't start until... May? Still, Mythic is seeming like a lot of work that may not necessarily enhance the game. Between Heroic Progression, Magic Schools, and generally giving access to 3rd party material that's useful to their character concepts, I think the party will seem mythic enough.
More or less what I was afraid of. The CR system falling apart (more so than it already does) resulting in excessive preparation time for designing challenging encounters and copious amounts of fudging and on-the-fly template adding just to keep combat somewhat interesting. The party is optimized (I'm helping them optimize; whoops) and I have 5 players so I'm probably already going to have to do CR+5 or more for a challenging fight.
I did mention to my players they'd eventually be mythic, but hopefully they'll understand. Or perhaps they'll forget if I never bring it up again. Haha.
It really could be fun, but I'm wondering if I'm prepared to do all the extra work for designing encounters. Maybe if my players can manage their kingdom without too much hand-holding from me, I could manage.
I was intending to just straight run mythic, but I have so many systems I'm trying for the first time (Downtime, Kingdom Building, Magic Schools, Heroic Progression mitigating the Christmas Tree Effect... Probably more.) that Mythic seems like one more thing I have to take into account for everything.
Not to mention this Q&A with James Jacobs intimidated me:
After hearing that and considering my workload and considering the campaign (It's sandbox kingdom building; explore the world kind of thing. I don't want everything to be a mythic undertaking) I just thought I should give up on it.
OR find a solution like I've mentioned in previous posts. Or potentially just move mythic out to later levels so I can get a feel for what my characters can accomplish without Mythic and prepare myself for what they can do with it. (I was thinking of introducing it around level 4 to 6, maybe I should wait until they're inclined to leave the continent? Plane of existence?)
So that's where I'm at with mythic:
1) GM toggle control it.
Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
If you let them choose when to use it it's just fine. Toggling it on for special battles is a bit metagamey. But giving them mythic abilities they can use very occasionally at their discretion is fine.
That's interesting... It'd require me to draft up specific rules/limitations in that case. I was of course thinking the opposite; it'd be under GM control. Something like:
As Sting glows blow when orcs are near, PCs go mythic when mythic bad guys are near.
Some benevolent/capricious/malicious/bored/whatever deity (or other powerful being) guides the fate of the PCs by granting them power whenever the deity feels like it. It eventually becomes a plot point to find the source of the mythic power, and something happens. (Benevolent deity? Maybe there's some path to permanently gaining mythic power. Malevolent deity pulling the strings? Defeat it and... something happens.)
I've been considering implementing Mythic rules into my upcoming kingdom building sandbox campaign, but I'm also somewhat concerned about my players steamrolling the non-mythic aspects of my campaign.
So I'm considering Mythic only being active when I say it is. They might be mythic for 1 combat, 1 day, or 1 month, depending upon the nature of the challenge they face. What say you? Would this be a good house-rule? Or would this be a headache if you were one of my players?
I've got my list of recommendations, hopefully she'll like one of them. I can still show her other archetypes/schools if she has another concept that these don't cover.
Wizard Conjurer Teleportation
Exploiter Wizard is certainly an interesting archetype, and one made better since I'd allow players to take Extra Exploit with this archetype. (I guess there's some uncertainty about this?) I'll see if she likes the exploits.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
If you're starting from first level, there's time to learn. Grease and Pit, Sleep and Charm Person and Mage Armor, Burning Hands if you're a blaster... the first and second level spells are pretty much a set of solved problems. I agree that conjurer and evocation-admixture blaster are the two good ways to go here, with the latter probably being easier for a relative newbie.
We'll be starting at level 3. Which is still pretty low, but high enough to ignore things like Sleep. I'm hoping she'll go Conjurer, to fully enjoy the subtleties of "God" wizard-ness. You don't have to deal the finishing blow to be invaluable to the party's success.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:
That was an interesting read! I've used Liquid Ice for Ray of Frost, but I never took the time to read much more into Alchemical Reagents. There's cool stuff for an Evoker like Urea.
Make sure she understands the need to familiarize herself with the spell lists and descriptions - hopefully, she is excited to do this. This takes some time. Especially when it comes to casting times (i.e. summon monster), allowed targets, and which ones need savings throws vs. a ranged attack. A couple guides here in the advice forum give a decent rundown of useful spells.
She has seen wizards in action for several years, so hopefully it won't all be foreign concepts. We'll assist when necessary. Oh, and maybe have another player control monsters she summons. I think I have a player who keeps Summon Monster details on flashcards or excel or something for the most popular summons, so he could run them.
Also, make sure you (or whoever is the GM) is good about handing out scrolls and spell books so there's some stuff for her to copy. I've found this is easy to forget if you don't have a resident whiny wizard in the group.
I was intending to include spellbooks as loot before she chose wizard (There's a witch in the group) but now I'm definitely going to make sure there's a few wizard enemies in the sandbox campaign I'm building.
2) most ladies I've played with play because its time to spend with someone they care for OR they want an identity to relate to or play out.
It's probably sexist to categorize women that accurately! Leastways it pans out for my group. The wizard player actually falls in the 1st category, while the other two ladies in my group fall in the 2nd category. She loves spending time with us, but hasn't been especially invested in Pathfinder. Although I think she's willing to put in a little extra effort, hence picking wizard this time.
3) wizard isn't hard to learn just hard to master.
Good point. I'll try to give tips on good memorizations and combat tactics (Don't use too many spells, don't use too few, and what spells are appropriate for which situations)
4) I am I the personal belief that a wizard transitions better into prestige classes.
I'd agree; Wizards class features are less vital for them to function, while an Oracle, Arcanist, Witch, and others lose a lot more since so many powerful abilities key off of class level.
My player hasn't created a character sheet for my campaign yet, so still plenty can change; I've also considered recommending an Arcanist instead, since it's simpler to run/more forgiving to players new to spellcasting. But still looking at wizard first and foremost since she seems to want the challenge.
I'm helping a friend make her first Wizard. She normally plays Rangers and Fighters, but wanted to challenge herself more than usual. I was thinking of recommending a Conjurer and go with traditional good stuff like Grease, Create Pit, and later on, summons, walls and so forth? Or maybe go Evoker Admixture if she wants to blast...
Is there anything new going on with the Wizard? I haven't created a Wizard since Ultimate Combat came out and was wondering if any new archetypes or spells have challenged the traditional wizard model.
Having been on the receiving end of a Kitsune Fey Sorcerer in my Rise of the Runelords campaign, I can relate to your GMs desire to create an enemy that isn't instantly killed by you.
It's hard to know who to blame; enchanter sorcerers are a one trick pony, but its one hell of a trick that the GM must always keep in mind. "Is this an encounter I'm content for the Sorcerer to steamroll through?" is a consideration, and hopefully the answer is usually yes, but other times no.
Sometimes the question is "Is this an entire story arch I'm content for the Sorcerer to steamroll through?" and when the answer to that is no, that's when things get rough. You can diversify your spell list, but I'm sure you've sunk a bunch of feats and class features to being good at what you do: enchanting.
Ultimately, I don't think enchanters are good for a long-term level 1 to 20 homebrew campaign. I'm sure your GM wants you to have fun as well as everyone else at the table, but most GMs can't handle both with your build. Very often, either you will enjoy the encounter, or the rest of the party will. It puts your GM in a very difficult position. There's a rare few who might masterfully handle it, but I'd wager most cannot. I'd consider asking your GM if you could roll up another character that's more suitable to your campaign.
Otherwise, take the advise of others: increase your spell versatility to contribute to combat in other ways; buffs, battlefield control or summons might be preferable if only your enchantment DCs are competitive.
Magda Luckbender wrote:
Thanks for the fix! Glad this guide was pointed out.
I would get the Druid to reroll as a Shaman.
It's certainly another good possibility. Most players don't have a character sheet yet, so less of a reroll than create her character to begin with. :)
There's a prestige class for a wizard who wants a little druidic magic - the Magaambyan Arcanist. I'd take that and call it a day.
I considered this, but I have a sneaking suspicion my player is not choosing druid because she's enamored with the spell list. (I'm not sure she knows the difference between the two, other than one is more nature-themed) Still, this may yet fill the concept she's after.
Just a Guess wrote:
Something I was looking at was Druid with Animal/Feather domain and just take Boon Companion. Seems like a strong and even somewhat flavorful option for the druid with her Roc companion.
If the druid just wanted an animal companion, maybe going as a wizard instead and picking the familiar (be sure to check out the familiar archetypes). A wood school wizard might otherwise be "druid"-y enough. Maybe checking out witch instead (still gets a familiar and has a lot more "nature" feel to it)
A familiar with an archetype may fit the bill; I'll have to ask. As for a Witch, considering we have another Witch in the party who also happens to be her brother in game and that she'd prefer to be mechanically different... She probably wouldn't go for it.
Joynt Jezebel wrote:
That's nice of you to say! I guess I've just been shaped by being in a group where we have an even-split of optimizers and non-optimizers. Players with system mastery shined. To help balance things out, rather than restrict/restrain anyone, we work together during character creation. Non-optimizers explain the concept of the character they'd like to play, optimizers look into it and list some of the strongest mechanical options to accomplish their concept.
Similar to how I just researched the support bard. Well, this time the forums researched the support bard for me and explained how it can be viable. Now I'll let the player know about possible builds to choose from and awesome feats like Master Performer that will enhance her concept.
Now to find out what my druid player wants. (Or is it a wizard player?) When I find that out, I'll advise accordingly.
Yeah, those feats are awesome. They apply to ALL performances? From the way that bard buffing guide mentioned them, it sounded like it only applied to one (Pick Inspire Courage), which would honestly still be worth it, but all is better.
I was intending to use Magic School system for my game, so I think I could use some sort of performing art school to fulfill the reputation requirement.
I had the exact same thought, I'll be sure to ask her "why druid?", and advise accordingly. (Will it be easier to modify a druid or a wizard to suit what she has in mind?)
Well the druid is a little odd in that she's opting for the animal companion, despite the focus on casting. So I'm concerned she won't have enough spell slots or any other class abilities to use her standard actions on.
Most bards I've seen have had some kind of combat ability; bruisers with 18 Str 2 handing a falcata, or archery or something. But I guess pure support is an option. I'm not sure how much better she'll be at buffing by forgoing melee, so that's what makes me nervous.
Java Man wrote:
Some off the cuff ideas, no pretense of balance to them. Allow a couple more class skills and/or skill points in place of weapon proficencies. The wild whisperer in ACG might be good for the druid.
I was certainly considering that Archetype for her, since it would give her something for having a high Int score. Not a lot, but something.
Some additional points:
It's something of a Kingmaker campaign of my design, and it'll eventually use Mythic rules.
The Bard and the Druid don't seem interested in contributing to combat with traditional weapons. The Bard would like to be exceptional at buffing, and I'm thinking maybe a blasty ability would be good for the Druid. An Int-based ability, preferably. I want to find something for them that'd allow them to consistently contribute something to combat.
For the Bard, Inspire Courage, maybe a single buff spell, then what? For the Druid, cast a spell or two, then what? Do they wait for combat to end? I'd still like for them to have something to do. Like maybe an Arcanist exploit blast ability.
I'm starting a homebrew sandbox campaign and a number of my players have some cool concepts for characters that sound like they'd be weak mechanically.
The druid wants to be very intelligent, reads a lot of books, and is fascinated with ruins. Or runes? Maybe both. She has no interest in being a frontliner/using wildshape, etc and would like to cast from the back row.
Is something of a pacifist hippy performing artist. She's an Aasimar (with wings) that goes on tour from city to city and draws large crowds. She'd rather not dirty her hands with something as crude as a weapon and mostly perform and buff.
The Swashbuckler & The Witch:
These two I'm less worried about, their classes will be optimized as you'd normally expect. Still, maybe I'll treat them to something else; I think the Swashbuckler wants to be stealthy and Witch wants to be a magic item crafter
The Oracle 1/Paladin 2/Synthesist X - Charisma for everything:
I'm, uh, least worried about how his mechanics will pan out. Still, he's a good friend and been very helpful in designing my homebrew campaign, so I wouldn't mind giving him some goodies.
Primarily, I'd like to design archetypes for the Druid and the Bard to more easily enable their concepts. The party is big enough that it's okay for them to be weaker, but as a GM wanting to see everyone filling their role as they imagined, I'd like to help. They don't have an optimizing bone in their bodies, but they do enjoy the benefits of a good build. (They've asked me to help optimize their characters in the past)
Beyond that, I'm totally feeling generous with my players and wouldn't mind tossing out freebies; hopefully freebies that won't dramatically individually warp their combat abilities, but I'm not too afraid of that either. Things like extra skill points, stealthy abilities, improved crafting and more.
Honestly, as a GM, it's easier to handle dex builds in my campaigns than 20 Str Two-Handed greataxe wielding power attacking raging barbarians.
So I'd rather not discourage alternative ways to contribute to combat, and since dex builds are popular in my group, why not? They won't deal half as much damage as the barbarian even with Deadly Agility and the like, but they can do something.
(And as was established in another thread, Pathfinder favors offense over defense)
Actually, this feat is more balanced than Deadly Agility in the sense that dumping Str has a consequence. And you're paying a feat for the OPs feat so it isn't more damage for free. And it's half dex instead of full dex.
Let's compare a Rapier with Deadly Agility vs Weapon Finesse (OP's rework)
So the OP's feat is actually rather weak and forces your character to not dump Str as hard as all other Dex to damage feats (Dervish Dance, Slashing Grace, Deadly Agility)
I give everyone Weapon Finesse for free (and Agile Maneuvers) and allow classes that get Weapon Finesse as a class feature (Swashbuckler, Rogue Talent, etc) to replace that with a Dex to damage feat (Slashing Grace, Dervish Dance, a homebrew feat)
I'm also currently playtesting this homebrew feat for my next campaign.
Benefit: When wielding a melee weapon in one hand that you adds your Dex to your attack roll, if your other hand is empty, you may add your Dex to damage instead of Str
While there is no early entry into the prestige class anymore by the rules, there is a way to lessen the pain of being a mystic theurge; if you use the Magic School system from Inner Sea Magic.
Check out Magic Guilds:
As guild students increase in fame, they gain the following rewards.
Eclectic Training (5 Fame): Guilds often require members to master and train in different subjects. When your Fame score in a guild reaches 5, choose one spellcasting class you have at least 1 level in—you increase your effective caster level in that class (including the number of spells you know and can cast per day) by +1, to a maximum caster level equal to your total Hit Dice. Single-classed spellcasters should still pick a class to which this bonus applies, since this bonus is retroactive.
Senior Guild Member (20 Fame): You have become a senior member of the guild. Select a category of magic item (such as magic armor, magic weapon, rod, or staff) that has an association with your guild (if no association seems appropriate, select wondrous item). Using guild contacts, you can gain a 10% bonus on the amount of money you make selling these items.
Esoteric Training (35 Fame): The bonus to caster level you gain from Eclectic Training increases to +3 (but is still limited by your total Hit Dice). You may select a second spellcasting class to gain a +1 bonus to effective caster level.
Guildmaster (50 Fame): You become one of the masters of your guild, and no longer need to pay tuition—every time you would normally pay tuition, you instead earn that amount of gold as your salary.
With Eclectic training, you'll only be two levels behind instead of the usual 3 with one class, and with Esoteric Training, you'll be equal level and 2 level behinds with the other casting class.
With SLA entry gone, that's the only Paizo system I've seen that can make the Mystic Theurge up to par with other casting classes.
One possibility would be an Eldritch Guardian fighter; you could take a Tiny flying familiar with the Mauler archetype. Then it can at will switch between Tiny and Medium sizes. It'd be okay at combat, since it has your BAB, a +6 to Str in combat form and a scaling Str score. Might still be weaker than a Hunter's mount, though.
A White Haired Witch/Brawler gestalt would be pretty cool, though. Perfect saves. Feral Combat Training and murder things at a distance with your hair for days. (Hair is damage is based on unarmed strike damage, you can use your hair as unarmed strikes for style feats, etc.)
A handful of things measure your Con score instead of your Con bonus (How long you can hold your breath, how many negative hit points it takes for you to die for good.)
Carrying capacity is measured with score, not modifier...
Also, you'll want to have the score written so when you boost an ability score you'll know when to increase the modifier (Did it increase from even to odd, and thus no change in modifier? Or did it change from odd to even and increase the modifier by 1?)
I'm going back and forth on that, but I think keeping the secret doesn't matter. The party's 9th level and the wizard has the teleport spell, so they're going to compare notes shortly after the encounters are over.
Yeah, if there's no specific purpose to the secret, which the whole party will become aware within a matter of minutes after a teleport, then I see no reason to split to separate tables.
Do you think your players would enjoy alternating taking the role of bad guys? Do your trust your players skill and judgment to properly execute such a scenario? (You and your players may not use the same tactics and it's harder to pull punches or fudge rolls when you don't have full control)
Important question: Do you want the split party to be unaware of what's going on with the other half of the party? (Team 1 unaware what happened to Team 2) It didn't seem that way, but sometimes it's fun for the split party members to only have knowledge of what's happening where they're at.
If secret information doesn't matter, you may want to consider having Team 2 GM/run the bad guys that are fighting Team 1 and vice versa. Then no one will be bored.
Otherwise, you may want to find a way to have a guest GM run the adventure concurrently at a separate table.
Most characters that are ever built by point buy have 12 to 14 con, just because it's an important stat, but not the stat that makes your character shine, it's just necessary to stay alive. 13 Con, or 14 at level 4 is about as good as you can expect. D12 HD + Con 14 is a respectable amount of HP
Now, there's a solid case for Toughness and Con 16 (although I would stick with the Human FCB no matter what.) However, in Pathfinder, when given the choice between being harder to kill vs more combat options/killing power, I usually choose the latter.
High dex opens up new options like archery and reach (combat reflexes) And the initiative, reflex, and AC boost are subtle ways of increasing your HP. (Reflex so you take half damage, AC so you take no damage, initiative so you kill them before they kill you.)
And instead of toughness, I'd sooner start climbing feat trees, save feats for rage powers and so on.
But again, 20 str 14 dex (at level 4) and 16 con is an exceptional barbarian as well. And a Barbarian with Toughness is certainly less likely to die from damage. It's all personal preference.
Like Charon, my suggestion would be:
20 Str (after racial) 16 dex 13 con
Some would argue you should put your ability increases all in Str, but I think it would be a reasonable idea to put your level 4 increase in Con to make it an even 14.
Weapon Focus is nice, but I wouldn't specialize too soon. I'd carry a greataxe, a lucerne hammer, and a longbow with an appropriate str rating. While you don't need to invest any feats in archery or anything, there will always be times when you come across flying enemies. And even if you have a +5 greataxe, it won't do you any good against them.
Other than that, sounds like you have a solid plan for rage powers, and Charon has mentioned possibilities if interested in a reach build. I might pop in later to comment more; have to go to work!
Oh, another more immediate band-aid to your problem would be to punish not showing up in small way:
Rather than permanently falling behind, (Less loot/exp) just create some sort of "worn out" template for players who didn't come last time.
Like, all casters show up with half of their spells (rounded down) expended at each level. I.e.
6 1st level spells - expend 3
And then apply the same to limited uses per day abilities or whatever. Maybe if you're especially deep in a dungeon, round up instead of round down.
I'm not sure I'd bother with fatigue or HP loss or whatever, especially if there's a Cleric whose spells and channeling have been reduced by this "worn out" template.
This is a rough one. I don't think there's a perfect solution to your problem, but here are possible courses of action:
Whittle down the size of your group - Consider having a cap of 6 players at any one time? Keep players who are committed to the group and/or players who are good at making the game more enjoyable for each person at the table.
Constantly communicate with players - Make a facebook group; whatever. Do your absolute best to find a date without conflicts
Reward good behavior - This is difficult, especially in AP's, but it is preferable to punishing bad behavior. Whether it's more experience, loot, or some other blessing of the GM, find some way to illustrate it pays to show up.
Make your game as enjoyable as possible - Haha, if only it were as easy to read this instruction and execute. All I'm saying is that if you read your material, do a good job narrating, running combat, running NPCs, and keep a friendly group of players which you communicate with throughout the month... It's more likely to build commitment; an "Oh my God, I don't want to miss this, it's the highlight of my week" kind of attitude.
It's basically all different forms of organization and management. It reminds me of how back in the day being a WoW raid leader could actually be listed on a resume. Because organizing a team of 40 people to perform a common goal with separate roles was quite a feat.
If only employers counted my gaming as useful experience...
Bought and sold virtual items for virtual wealth until I was an infamous tycoon, learned principals of optimization by playing competitive speed runs on Kingdom of Loathing, GMed for Pathfinder...
Really, Mr. Christopherson, these are legitimate skills! I'm qualified to be your CFO. *cough cough*
Whenever my mom talks about leading groups of people in present or past bible studies, I can’t help but think “That sounds like a situation that’s come up in my Pathfinder groups.” After experiencing this enough times, I decided to briefly interview my mom with the goal of finding useful parallels between successfully leading a bible study and being a successful GM.
Question: What are your primary goals as a women’s discussion leader in Bible Study Fellowship?
A discussion leader is a facilitator of the group and the number one goal is Balanced Sharing; getting everyone to participate. Some women are shy. I call on them for easy questions to hopefully get them comfortable with sharing with the group. Some women are overly talkative and feel the need to answer every question. Instead of scolding these women, I try to encourage them and redirect them. “You’ve done several bible studies and your experience shows; however, for some of these women, it’s their first year, so I’d like to give them a chance to share too. I want you to be a resource I can call on when no one else has the answer.” Essentially, get that women on your team and help them see the goal of the group. (Balanced Sharing) Encourage and love them, no matter how obnoxious they can get.
Here’s a few things I keep in mind:
Question: What responsibilities do you have as a discussion leader outside of discussion time?
I call the women every week to check what’s going on in their lives, if God taught them anything that week and so forth. This is the toughest part of my job, but it’s important to communicate with the women.
Also, every week we have a leaders meeting, probably about 20 minutes each week where we go over what’s going on in our groups each week, like what’s been working, what hasn’t been working. You’re leading a group of human beings; there’s bound to be differences in opinion. So during our leaders meetings we run through hypothetical situations and discuss possible methods to resolve them.
Finally, once a year we have a workshop. We go on a weekend retreat, fellowship and learn how to better lead our groups.
Oh, and most importantly of all, we pray on our knees.*
*I finally let on I was interviewing her for the sake of Pathfinder and thought this was important for you to know.
Unsurprisingly, at least to me, there are tons of parallels on being a good discussion leader and being a good GM. Managing people, no matter the reason, deals with the same issue: You're dealing with people. Some are easy to work with, others not as much.
Here's some lessons I've taken away:
1. Balanced Sharing - This seems an eternal struggle in one of my groups, where we have dominating players and shy or simply less talkative players. The GM should single out the shy ones to get them more involved; have an NPC interact with them specifically, delegate some task to them like tracking initiative.
2. Communicate with players - In BSF, this takes the form of a weekly phone call. In Pathfinder, it's sometime easy to skip this step, but I think it's an important one for the long term health of a gaming group. It doesn't have to be weekly even, but you really want to keep a pulse on how players are individually feeling about the campaigns. Is it fun? What makes it not fun? What would you like to do in the future?
3. Training - In our group, everyone has been/will be a GM at some point, so I think it could really be fun to put together a workshop once a year, every 6 months or whatever and try out new strategies/ways to play to shake things up. One idea I want to try out is a scenario where we take turns GMing a single session; shifting control of the bad guys and NPCs. But the bad guy has a stated objective "I'm going to destroy this city with my hoard of undead" and each GM works within that framework.
What do you think? Does the bible study model have something to offer to GMs learning the ropes?
Sandal Fury wrote:
Wizard. Villain. There's really not much more to explain.
Haha, that's about what I expected from a tiny familiar mounting me. The rules don't forbid it... But might break all verisimilitude. I'll check with my GM if I try using this idea.
Sort of hoping that it'll be just me and my familiar, no additional mounts and animal companions, but I suppose it isn't a terrible idea. Still, that's a lot of bodies to control. Maybe if it was a 1 player campaign, haha.
So I'm considering something like a Fox, which has 9 Str and will get a +4 str increase from going Tiny to Medium, (No bonus going Small to Medium, +6 Str if going Diminutive to Medium) the additional +2 from Battle Form, and +1 (and increasing) from the Str bonus replacing the Int bonus.
Other options might be Compsognathus (8 str) King Crab (7 str) or perhaps something with flying (Seems like the strongest have 6 str?)
Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
Hope you're right about the Mount thing. Not sure why mounted combat rules have always been so opaque to me. I'll have to take some time to do some reading this weekend.
In non-mounted news, there's nothing stopping the mauler archetype from being applied to an Improved Familiar.
Sadly, Improved Familiar, per the feat, lose the ability to speak with animals of its kind, and thus cannot take the Mauler Archetype. I there are 3 archetypes improved familiars still qualify for, but there you have it. =/
That... sounds a little more awkward than first intended.
Anyway, I'm wanting to build an Eldritch Guardian fighter which comes with a familiar, and I'd like my familiar to take the Mauler Archetype. This means:
My familiar can switch between Tiny (Most Likely) and Medium sized whenever he wishes.
My familiar has every combat feat I have.
So I thought I'd play a Small character, hopefully with the possibility of him riding me and me riding him. However, I still don't have a firm grasp on mounted combat rules and what might matter to making this work properly. Other ideas:
Mounted Combat feats:
I can gain mounted combat feats to ride my familiar into battle! Also, my familiar happens to gain every mounted combat feat I take.
Feral Combat Training:
I thought it would be neat if I took Feral Combat Training and I gained a natural attack that matches my familiar (Bite or Claw?) then my familiar and I can both get Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical... Oh and of course we could both use the same Combat Style Feats, using our natural attack in place of the unarmed strike.
Whether I fight side by side, or if I mount my familiar, there are some interesting combat teamwork feats we could share.
So, my questions:
1. Would something like Evolved Familiar (Mount) be worth getting? I never quite understood what that evolution does for you.
2. What allies would you beg to have on your side to enable this I mount/he mounts strategy? A wizard? An alchemist with infusions? I imagine there's some interesting polymorphing options out there.
3. If this were a gestalt campaign, what classes would complement this strategy?
4. Other thoughts on how to make this idea better?
Eeeeaaaaaurrrgghhh!! I'm. So. Startled.
*le sigh* Yeah, I spotted that last night and it made me sad. I had been scheming to try one of those, but it never came up. And now it's illegal. I suppose I don't play in pathfinder society or whatever, so I can do whatever homebrew I want. Still, playing by the rules when possible is preferable.
[half-sarcasm]How else are you going to brag about cool builds on these forums? Bragging about how much your GM loves you and gives you whatever you want isn't as shiny as bragging about your system mastery.[/half-sarcasm]
I'm really enjoying the possibilities for this idea; I think he'll make his debut in the very 1st session, giving the PCs free potions. He'll later be captured by the organization and then rescued by the PCs. (among several other captured NPCs)
Did the organization capture this kind old cleric because he was a citizen of Storybrooke? Or was it because they knew he was aiming to become a lich, among other things? That in and of itself could add an interesting layer to the true nature of the organization.
After the cleric is rescued, he will be an NPC in the kingdom the PCs are building. Then I can execute the subplot where he attempts to recruit the PCs to get the pieces he needs to complete his phylactery.
At least this is how I imagine this all playing out. Seems fun!
As far as this particular thread goes, the first idea that comes to mind is that one or more of the supporting NPC cast is actually an agent for the Organization. The PCs are being nurtured by the secret police to identify rebels for ... disposal.
I'm definitely considering multiple ways the organization may have infiltrated "the supporting NPC cast." Heck, they've potentially infiltrated the PC cast with the human Swashbuckler. (Although I believe she will switch allegiances) But other seemingly average citizens of Storybrooke and Almas may be secret agents of the organization.