|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Eh, by the same token the issues with the regular barbarian were pretty minor imo. The fighter needed it a lot more.IMO even the gunslinger, cleric or the sorcerer could have been there (the latter two more for a facelift than anything else).
The UBarb is workable with a few minor fixes - or at least a feat that lets them enter stance as a swift action when starting a rage - but I just don't see why it was necessary or wanted enough to merit the space in the book.
I can definitely agree with the last one. For me, something like Strange Aeons should not be played with very high PB. Wrath of the Righteous, on the other hand...
Hmm, what point buy would people here recommend for each path - or at least those you played?
Eh, if the divine casters who get spells from her break her tenets and thus earn her ire, they fall. IF they haven´t, she is at best undecided.
Anyway, another vote for Shelyn. Her obedience gives awesome extras to a bard and does not require something very strange or hard to do. I have to say, though, Caiden Caylean isn´t half bad - especially if you are in places (or use the unchained rules) where poisons become a serious issue.
BTW if we are talking about Steadfast Personality, let´s not forget the Irrepressible trait. For the cost of one faith trait, it straight up says you can use charisma instead of wisdom for will saves vs charms and compulsions, without the caveat from Steadfast Personality about taking the penalties from a low wisdom if you have them.
You definitely want Combat Reflexes at 3rd. It's kinda a must-have for builds utilizing Opportune Parry and Riposte.
Wait, are we still talking about a Daring Champion build? I think the archetype does not grant Opportune Parry and Riposte, at least that it lost them in an errata.
Bane Wraith wrote:
Perfectly summonable by a Callistrian character. There is also a CN knockoff in case you don´t want to stock up on negative level protection before making out.The incest angle is somewhat less prevalent, I will grant you that. Somewhat.
Anyway, I think a mythic character can get the ability to grant spells, but just how this would fly with them being devoted to Shelyn I am not sure. Maybe you could become a minor saint or have a splinter cult that is close enough that Shelly doesn´t mind.
Eh, fighters also tend to full attack most of the time, but a lot of people like them, at least in theory.
I actually prefer daring champions as swashbuckler replacements. The order and challenge work fairly well for honorable (and prideful) master fencers. A pity that you only get your precise strike at level 4.
Hmm, ascetic style lets harrow warden monks do that as well. Archetypes that get weapon training should be able to pull that trick too.
BTW I wish unchained monks could use more of the old monk archetypes, especially harrow warden. Slapping people so hard they turn into ducks was one of my favourite things to do with supernatural martial arts since Exalted.
A halfling slayer, ranger or cavalier could be fun, especially for the extra size difference issue.
I am a bit worried about the sorcerer losing a bit of oomph due to going dragon disciple, but if s/he does not multiclass further it can be okay. It's not like you don't have any other casters in the party.
Is there a way to reduce the penalties for fighting defensively with the unchained monk other than crane style? I was considering a scaled fist using osyluth guile, but that -4 to attack is a pain in the neck. I was hoping to be able to use this combination with a different combat style without losing too much accuracy in the process.
I know there are traits that boost AC from fighting defensively and that reduce the penalty from combat expertise, and the 7th level ability of the Aldori Swordlord fighter.
Hmm, do you have anything against prestige classes? The Chevalier is essentially designed for that. In 3 levels, you become immune to fear, cannot ever overdrink (immunity to poison) and get some other goodies to boot.
You are supposed to be good, but if you want to be a Caiden Caylean expy, that goes with the territory.
Simpler is simpler. Better is better. These are different things, unless all you care for is simplicity. Personally, I find it to be one of the appealing points of a good build, but it is not the biggest factor.
The UMonk is better in almost every way than the core monk. The save is a sore sticking point for me, but almost everything else is better if you want your monk to actually be good at what the class so to say advertises.
Hi, a suggestion for the traits section: for scaled fists, the irrepressible trait (Cha mod instead of Wis mod on saves vs charm and compulsion effects) strikes me as very solid. You get a big part of the bonuses of the Steadfast Personality feat for the cost of a trait, and you do not suffer a penalty for a low wisdom score.
I think you can definitely speak to the DM to give you a racial bonus similar to the one dwarves get, which increases damage with blasts of the element that matches your ancestry.
Granted, HP are always nice for a kineticist, but dwarf geokineticist can definitely get some mileage out of their favored class bonus.
Well, it also depends on how the characters were built, how they rolled stats if it was with rolled stats, etc.
Inquisitors are no slouches in a fight, especially after they get bane, but when they get their smite mojo on, paladins are just nasty - and if they want more direct damage, they can get extra power via the weapon bond at around the same time bane comes up. On the defense, they have awesome saves, LoH + mercy and their auras can end up being a lifesaver in certain fights. Both classes can be very valuable to the party, imo, just in a slightly different roles.
Abadar is the deity of trade. Ergo, paladins can offer their services in exchange for something. Nothing says they can't offer good terms, just that they should ensure an exchange of services. In fact, most adventurers get some reward for their good deeds, so that is not necessarily a big issue. In fact, some services are built straight into the paladin code, so doing them is your job (for which you are, I expect, rewarded by the temple), such as protecting travelers.
Pass by a farm which had been attacked by orks? Well, you can rest there. In return, you heal the wounds of the hosts and help rebuild the barn. Sure, the "terms" are quite beneficial for the farmer family. But you get something, they get something, and you follow Abadar´s decrees. All are happy.
As for charitable causes, Abadarians don´t ignore those, they invest in them or pay for services. They also do all they can to ensure their investments bear fruit. Sure, that doesn't cover all possible causes, but Golarion is sort of pantheistic, so there are other cults that specialize in the other areas. In the meantime, Abadarians care that the community has a functional economy, that the guilds do their job right and that the labor market is fair, with everyone getting what they should. Again, the paladin can give money to any cause s/he finds justified, but since Abadar is about trade, s/he should get something back. It could be an agreement that the orphans are sent to learn a trade (and the paladin arranges they find it). Yes, the orphans get something out of that, too. But the important part is that society will benefit, and the goals of the Abadarite church will be furthered.
Sure, it is a bit weird for a paladin to sometimes have to pass what s/he thinks is right through the decrees of the faith, but then again Iroran or Shelynite paladins have their quirks as well. Frankly, the one that I find weirdest is the Torag code. "Against my people's enemy I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except to extract information. I will defeat them and scatter theirs families." Yeah, sure, this must be done in a way that does not dishonor you or Torag, but... I can see this leading to some situations that are a lot more unpaladinlike.
Anyway, back to the OP and the differences in flavor. Compared to an inquisitor, imo a paladin of Abadar is a lot more straightforward and prepared for action. An inquisitor may investigate a civil group for traces of a Rovagug cult or infiltrate a guild to see if it is trying to check its ledgers for traces they are trying to take over the market. The paladin leads patrols to clear the bandits gathered by a Rovagug preacher so the good people can pass through the roads unmolested and goes to the guild for an official inspection with a court order in her hand.
Basically, to me the inquisitor is the church spy and the paladin is the church sheriff. They both work towards the same end, but with different methods.
What if I played to the strong suit of gnomes and went heavens mystery route? Is the heavens mystery any good?
Unless you expect to be facing a lot of undead, say in the Carrion Crown AP, I would say it is fairly good. Many of the abilities are cool and effective, and it adds some versatility to the cleric/oracle spell list.
As for blasting, hmm, I wonder if it is worth it picking the flame curse shaman hex for a flame oracle via spirit guide. Making an enemy vulnerable to flame can be pretty fun. However, this means that you need a standard action to set up your blast. A pity there was no such revelation in the flame mystery itself, that would be just nasty for anything not immune :) .
Hm, now I read the silver nocking point, it definitely looks good, although I think it works best for the earlier parts of the AP. Jade Regent has a lot of travelling, and some of it in pretty unpleasant environments - if your DM remembers the rules for environmental challenges, you can expect to deal with those penalties a fair bit. I think it was mostly in book 2 and 3, but there may be some later. Also, this item turns wind wall and its variants into just significant penalties, rather than an auto-lose for you.
Would it be cheap, knowing what you already know, to save for a bane (evil outsiders) or holy enchantment on your weapon?
How set are you on the inspired blade? While the extra feat is good, losing the option to regain panache when defeating an enemy can be big. It might also be an option to use the Daring Champion cavalier archetype, it does not get all swashbuckler goodies but it does have most of the non-mounted cavalier ones.
I want to see happenings in Taldor. I have a thing for decadent, almost harmless empires proving not so harmless to the new kids on the block.
Sadly, it does not share a border with Cheliax, that would have been an easy conflict. However, there is room enough for a heavily intrigue-based adventures, a volatile border with Qadira, a slightly less openly so with Galt, and all the fun you might have with invaders over the eastern mountains. Even the oh so nice Andoran may decide that it can spread its virtues over parts of its parent state.
Fighters: the version from the 3.5 PFCS (4+int skill points, more skills,1 less feat) is the default one. They start with combat stamina and bravery gives 1 to saves vs fear, DC to intimidate and combat stamina per 2 levels.
Swashbucklers: Charmed life does not take an action.
Kineticists: full BAB with kinetic blasts, kinetic buffer starts full each day.
Alec Keeler wrote:
I was actually really pleased that it's in there. One of my players wanted to play a Paladin, but was having a hard time deciding which deity to worship. She liked some of what Shelyn was about, but wasn't sure about her as a whole.
I think Shelyn works okay for a paladin, particularly in a campaign where not every enemy is fanatic and irredeemable - if I remember her code correctly, she is about protection and mercy. It is certainly a somewhat softer around the edges deity for a paladin, but if can work great for a more courtly paladin. In this campaign, they could draw on her story with ZK as an example of standing against evil and in protection of what is good and pure (and of offering redemption where possible).
Sure, she probably won´t have the skills to spare to be a good singer or painter - unless you use the background skills rule to give the party a few extra skill points for such "hobbies". I am a big fan of this rule anyway, especially for low-skill characters (fighters, paladins, clerics etc).
Anyway, I agree with some of the reasons why there is a ZK altar there. My first reason is that it is done to propitiate him, so he does not torment the patients there further. You can say that as sufferers from mental traumas and insanity they are sort of within his purview, and as I see it Zon-Kuthon is a rather jealous deity, who may become displeased if those who are sort of "his" do not give him the necessary respect.
((Sorry if this is the wrong forum, I expect that variant rules can also be discussed here))
I have been thinking of using the grouped skill variant rule for a future campaign, but I have not seen much comment about it. Has anyone tried it out and how does it work with the Paizo APs?
I have also thought about using the background skills rule, either giving everyone one free background specialty or giving 2 to the 2+ and 4+ skill point classes and 1 to those with 6+ and 8+.
Has anyone tried using the combined skill group & specialties rules from Unchained? I think they reduce the difference in skill points significantly. My main worry is how it impacts skills that must be maxed to be efficient at all, i.e. trapfinding early on.
OTOH, when 2+ and 4+ skill classes start trained in 2 whole skill groups and get the same amount of specialties as everyone else, any character is able to contribute in at least some skill situations.
I am generally ok with power attack on swashbucklers, but for halflings it can be a pain in the posterior getting enough strength.
However, what about risky striker? Halfling swashbucklers should have quite high AC from their high dexterity and class features alone, and that is before you consider the crane style feat chain. Trading some of that for damage when you need to is imo definitely a good option. Yes, the extra damage only applies against creatures that are 2+ size categories larger than you... but that is quite a few creatures.
Considering humans and elves can interbreed without any magical assistance and half-elves breed true, it should not be a problem biologically. As DualJay mentioned, the rest is mostly cultural issues, so it should be okay. I remember reading that some sects do not approve of marriage, though. IIRC the first major villain in Kingmaker had a father who was exiled from the Green Faith for marrying someone.
Eh, it and the brawler archetype (there is a figher archetype called brawler) are okayish imo, but I think it depends on two things:
- does the DM allow you to take advanced weapon training (from the weapon master's handbook) for the groups they sort of have weapon training in?
Both of these things can make a big difference for fighters. Without them, they are...eh, not that great - they have little to do outside of a fight, and are not that much better than anyone else in a fight.
I imagine this exchange at the home of Bovus, master lactomancer:"Master, good news! I was able to purchase the straw for the winter at almost half the price!"
"Stupid apprentice! I need straw worth 45 gold crowns for the cows to produce enough milk for the entire winter. Go back and get some more!"
To be honest, the need for magical gear has been a big issue for a while. You are right, monks definitely have this problem - the system presumes they have certain items, theme be damned. You have to fluff it somehow.
One thing that can help in this case are the automated bonus progression rules from unchained, essentially your characters gets bonus X (and sometimes Y) at level Z, an instead they only get half the normal gold for other magic items as they automatically get the big bonuses. This can definitely work for monks, imo, but the question is how well it gels with other characters. If you do not want that, then yes, the esoteric magus and the meditant psychic warrior are great. I am particularly partial to the PsyWar.
As for alignment, in my games I remove it for anyone who is not tied to a divine or similar power source. As I see it, neutral or chaotic alignment does not preclude enlightenment or even self-discipline.
Usually, I like to either go big or go home on DR, so I am quite cool with the superstitious barbarian. Both features it trades are good substitutions imo.
By the way, speaking of thematic archetypes for this path, I think it is hard to beat the mooncursed barbarian. Granted, it may get you run out of town or worse in some places... Welcome to Ustalav!
The main problem is imo that not having access to weapons while you rage until leve 5 can be a bit of a problem.
Performance Combat is of course one of the top things to go after if you're using your wrestling character a true performer. I think the problem is the feats aren't applicable often unless the GM is really specifically writing the game around your character. So many people won't take them, which saddens me.
I think it depends a lot on where the campaign takes place, too. In a mostly urban one like Curse of the Crimson Throne, Council of Thieves or Hell´s Rebels, you can easily confirm with the DM that there is a crowd for many of the fights, so you could stretch the performance rules to apply as well. In a dungeon crawler or exploration-based one, though... not so much. Unless you can somehow get your combat exploits to count as bardic music - then we are talking! Sadly, I think the exemplar brawler loses a little too much for what it gets. The variant bard multiclassing may be a better idea. Check with your DM if you can get a custom perform skill approved.