|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
A lorewarden is the best tank I've been able to make. Paladins can self heal, barbarians have hp and dr, but fighters are the only class with the tools to lock down at will teleportation.
You just need to shore up your will save and get a couple staple magic items to be good enough to survive against high level casters
I hate this mentality that Martians are defenseless at level 10+. One I built a fighter who other then weapons and armor, and the generic 6 magic items was able to solo a valor at 17. He doesn't need anyone to protect him in combat. Is he the pinnacle of DPR? No but I'm not narrow minded in my character building.
Now it would have been cool if I had something more to do in combat, like named strikes or attacks the combined maneuvers and conditions, because we was kinda Boeing with his, move hit, move hit, move hit, move hit, combat style.
If you can understand what autocorrect butchered, I'm typing on my phone
so ive been getting back into comics and super heroes. recently ive been reading Dr. Fate. for those of you who dont know who Dr. Fate is he is basically an artifact that has the consciousness of a being of order.
the artifact is a helmet, anyone who places the helmet on is basically taken over and enthralled into his service until he decides that his presence is unnecessary then releases you. in the process his power will destroy the weak and nonmagical, only a being capable of magic can truly contain his power and not die as a result eventually.
so i was thinking in my next home game, i would build Fate. it would be a helmet that has a high intelligence and Ego and once the helmet is placed on a NPC they would then be the vessel for my character, allowing a save vrs the possession from the artifact, no different then any other intelligent item.
im trying to get all aspects of playing this concept from the positives to negatives. if anyone has any observations of weaknesses and strengths i would love to hear them.
how the character works: humanoid places helmet on, saves vrs possession, then on a failed save my character stats override the target as if i were playing my level 5 character (or what ever), if the target isnt of 5th level and have access to arcane magic as a class feature the body withers and dies after one in game month requiring me to repeat the process or relinquish the vessel.
lawful neutral is the mandatory alignment for this concept. and im thinking a god wizard would fit this concept very well.
i understand thank you. lol that was the funniest "arrow to the knee" ive heard in a long time.
Because they are flying and out of reach
how do you guys figure a monk 12/ druid 8 cant also fly?
i would make his hand into a foot.
give his hand intelligence and an angry disposition. nothing worse then a hand that pimp slaps you on a regular.
turn it into stone, wood, iron, or ice
have it become infected with pure evil, have lines of venom begin traveling up his arm and towards his head. every time he commits a morally questionable act, or something against his faiths dogma,it pushes the venom one step closer to his head, turning into a demon, devil, or undead.
screw that just play a viking archetype fighter.
I prefer a 2 level dip into paladin. Keep your BAB up, charisma bonus to all saves, smite evil for a little boost against baddies, and lay on hands, which even at only 1d6 works great with the die hard chain of feats.
the only issue with a 2 level dip into pally is that you may as well just go 20 levels of pally because you have your RP restrictions over your fighter now.
first off , imo adults should be able to segregate in and out of character personalities. a person who is you best friend in real life should be able to play a selfish dick who hates your character and not let it effect the relationship out of game.
if this guy is sitting there being a dick out of character and using out of character threats "do this or im going to kill your character in his sleep!" thats not ok and he needs to be talked to. on the other hand if the character is making the threats "do this or ill kill you" that needs to handled in game and my result in a character death, thats the nature of Role-play if you dont like the idea of your character dying, then out of character try to set in game rules about PvP actions.
i personally don't see an issue with Role-Playing a dick or bad guy, as long as the player's personality isnt cause of the issue.
i made a sensei monk, who uses snake style and mantis style.
it kicked ass, very feat heavy build though, and since moms and sensei dont stack i had to dip 2 levels of lore warden to get 2 extra feats.
1 skill focus sense motive
he uses wisdom for attack, defense, and snake style. wisdom is his main stat for stunning fist, sense motive and ac. if you're playing a home game you need a guided AOMF, or if you're playing PFS then you need an agile AOMF.
hes not a massive damage dealer, but at 12th hes near unhitable and his stunning fists land very often. then you have the shenanigans of playing a sensei, handing out truestrike, barkskin, and restoration like candy.
wait why does he need a monastery? why cant he just be a self taught martial artist who is creating his own path? he back story doesnt have to be an episode of Kung-Fu unless that player wants it to be so.
in conclusion let him pick his background and let it be. dont force him to do anything he doesnt want to, and suspension of disbelief is part of the game.... you know dragons and sorcerers who fart fireballs and all that.
Point Blank Master + Snap Shot + Improved Snap Shot + Pin Down. 15 foot radius threatened area with a ranged weapon and anyone in that that area isn't moving without drawing an AoO.
go unarmed fighter archetype, add in improved grapple + hamatula strike to that character and you can pin people in that 15 foot threatened zone all day long.
in the context of D&D those islands would detect as magic.
but anyway, lets all agree that in most ways there is no comparison to real life for even a fighter. we should be willing to allow an option for players to have the ability to throw boulders the size of houses at dragons, i mean dragons arnt enough of a suspension of disbelief?
let them eat cake IMO.
in my opinion the fighter class and wizard classes should counter each other. fighter should be a pure mundane anti magic class, while wizzard should not have a high amount of physical damage options.
what really pissed me off is when they gave barbarians anti caster options like spell sunder and access to fighter only anti caster feats. those should be fighter only feats, period. if fighters were givent the ability to dispelling strike, spell sunder (at will) and have powerful anticasting feats (beyond just spellbreaker) then i would argue that fighters were a truly viable option for endgame. as it stands though barbarians are just so much better for taking down literally everything past level 9.
i would argue that there are many better options then full attacking, for martials. one of my favorite fighter characters used combat patrol and pindown + combat reflexes + reach weapon, he was netting 6+ attacks per round, then followed that up with whirlwind for another 6+ attacks.
it made pounce look silly.
Samuel Stone wrote:
until you realize it was a SA character who just pounced you for 100 hp at tenth level, a magus who slapped the teeth out of your mouth with an intensified shocking grasp, or any number of pouncing beasts, monstrous beasts, or <insert bestiary creature here> and you were taken out on turn one. monks have that issue unfortunately. all that amazing AC goes bye bye on surprise against an ambush.
but this is my point. as a gm you can still scare players with things other then treants and orges, natural attackers makes crane wingers cry.
you play really bad fighters then
a kamakazi charge to sunder the bow is a dick gm thing to do. and i would be pissed as a player. but a legit, snatch and grab i would not be mad at all... i would hunt that f~+@er down and gut him in the worst way.
awe thank you, i would much rather be referred to as a "modern gamer" then an antiquated 2ed RP only guy who cant stand eastern characters in my western games. AND yes I AM THAT GUY WHO WONT CHOOSE A TERRIBLE RACE JUST TO HAVE HALF ORC ON MY CHARACTER SHEET ill play a human and put half orc right next to it in parentheses
more like you have one less skill completely. my half orc can only get me 3 maxed out skills, instead of 4
One less feat
makes on massive difference ALL THE WAY TO 20.
So any character that spends one feat on pure flavorgo ahead and play the way you want to, but im going to lol at bad choices just for "flavor" and im not even a super crazy optmizer
or, how about spending a feat on weapon proficiency with Falchion - a great weapon.
i can get that with my tengue, my human, and even my flipin half elf which is much much much better then half orc
you're officially that guy.
thank you /kisses
eldritch knight: Trapper Ranger 1/Wizard 5 (teleportation)/EK10/AA4 is the most powerful character you can play.
my opinion is based not only on DPR, buy versatility and depth of function. an EK archer cant deal as much physical damage as a pouncing debuffer barbarian, but he can cast 9th level spells and still deal about 150 dpr @20 for targets with super high magical defenses. he can also be the party trap smith with disable device and trapfinding as class features, then dex as his main physical stat gives him good use out of a ring of evasion.
having the ability to shoot someone with an antimagic field then deal 120-150 dpr on that target is very, very powerful.
*clerics can fill multiple roles adequately and still cast 9th level support spells, and my god the summons they have on there list make them such a crazy base class.
*debuffer barbarians are the only physical class that can negate magical defenses to get to the target, anti magic field? sundered! prismatic wall? sundered! illusionary terrain? sundered! then run, pounce, kill.
*hex crafter magus applies 8 debuffs to the target at once, then shocking grasps the face off the target next round, or if you quicken cast it the same round. applying cursed (-4 to saves) then sickened and shaken (-4 more to saves) lets your party caster serve a save or suck spell at a near 95% success rate. not to mention entangled, fatigued, and stunned, for your melee teammates to beat the living hell out of it.
*paladin completely self sufficient. can heal to full hp with on lay-on hands, deal nearly enough damage to ko a target in one combat round with smite evil, and has an ac thats comparable to a fighter turtle.
my issue with, and my issue wit all alignment based choices..., is that true neutral characters get shafted with sacred weapon.
"In addition, if the warpriest is
where is the "if your character worships a neutral god and has a true neutral alignment then you get these choices"?
i think you should give True Neutral (NN)characters something to boot weapon properties, otherwise ill play my NN warpriest of Gozreh and pout the entire time.
i think grey flame, Mimetic, Glorious, life surging, or spell stealing would be good choices for this type of alignment.
im not impressed witht he bloodrager spell list at all. i think it should be polymorph effects at lower then standard levels, similar to a summoners lower spell level choices, and damaging spells able to be applied on a faster then standerd cast time.
i would love for the blood rager to be able to cast a spell and charge, not stacking with pounce. this would m,ake a unique casting mechanic and would be a prevention of pounce abuse, or atleast an alternative.
undead , dragon form, and elemental form should be blood line spells, of the corrisponding levels (1/1 2/2/ 3/3 4/4) and those spells should then deminish the value of the bloodline in question.
while monsterous physique should be a standard 1/1 for all bloodlines.
thats how i would change the bloodrager to make it more of a powerful spell caster.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
i keep hearing these wierd statements from people... i know a CRB rogue doesnt have many choices for boosting to hit, but a rogue can get pretty close to a fighter's bonus to hit assuming hes flanking. a multi class dip is needed for solo tactics for it to truely shine, but i mean i would lose out on +2d6 damage for a +4 to hit while flanking and not needing opposed positioning for flanking.
lets see if i can rebuild my to hit rogue...
7 rogue/ 3 inquisitor
i mean a fighter wont have much more then that, and if positioning is your main issue "well you cant alwayse get into a flank..." then you have feats Gang Up which allow you to get into the fray first,apply SA, then allow your slower melee buddies to catch up on their turn.
or if you dont like that, prestige into horizon walker instead of inquisitor, you lose out on +2 to hit(and a ton of other really cool bonus features), but you gain DD, which allows for Dimentional agility chain for full attack flanks when you want them.
and this isnt even a minmaxed damage dealer, im placing importance on non combat, functions as well as survivability, and retaining WBL for the sake of including necessary to life magic and mundane items.
in conclusion i think that a well built rogue can function just right in a good group. the 3/4 bab , imo, is more of a way to prevent access to feats, but you make up for that lack of BAB in situational bonuses to attack.
i made a guy very similar to this. i used a level dip into unbreakable fighter, and took tenacious survivor my gm had a pain in the ass time killing him, then my cleric just channeled positive and quicken cast a healing spell and i was back in the fight. with the massive bonuses you gain from superstitious he saved on just about every save or die spell leaving the only effective way to kill him HP damage. and we all know how IR's handle HP damage mitigation.
Also thesidekick, nothing in the rules say you die. By arbitrarily applied physics yes you might die, by RAW you do not.
actually i believe suffocation rules would apply.
Also thesidekick, nothing in the rules say you die. By arbitrarily applied physics yes you might die, by RAW you do not.
i don't know if i would consider theoretical spacial anomaly and singularities ... arbitrary.
until you get folded by reality 100 times and turned into an accordion man. because that's how 4th dimensions work.
honestly that mentality sounds like "i dont like that this is broken so i change it and pout about it". but by RAW, and physics, the target would die
i would say a trapspringer, or bring in a melee beat face.
i would suggest a barbarian, they are easy to play.
if she likes elves she could run an elven double blade TWF fighter they are pretty fun and girly, i mean elvish...
a ninja could be fun for her, stealthy and only slightly complex. she would need to manage her ki pool but other then that i think she would have fun with it.
oo have her play a version of that elf from LOTR, legolas or something...twf and archery switch hitter, she would have fun with that
if i ever GM'd for a group who started throwing a temper tantrum after i sundered an item, stole an item, etc... i would LOL and kick that immature asshat off my table.
but back to the issue at hand: as a gm when i sunder or destroy an item i usually increase the loot at the end of the adventure to let them get that item back, unless i think the item was over powering my campaign in which case i would give a similar but different item to replace the one lost.
tetori, dimensional agility, abundant step (qinggong) and a colossal red dragon...
so we get surprise attacked by a colossal red dragon. my tetori saves against both frightful presence and the breath weapon as it strafes by us.
the dragon didnt stand a chance.
needless to say the GM was so pissed he got up from the table and started watching TV. when he cooled down i asked him what was wrong he said " YOU GUYS ARE ONLY LEVEL 15 YOU SHOULDNT HAVE WON THAT FIGHT!! you screwed up all my plans". he is a gm who doesnt like fudging things and we killed the red dragon who was supposed to be the main antagonist, after our first encounter lol.
my tetori disagrees with you. my dwarven monk is the lynch pin of my group, he doesnt do much damage but when hes grappling dragons, and earth elementals, and you name it... im having a blast playing my guy.
damage doesn't mean squat to me while im playing my support characters. when i play my barbarian, fighter, or magus i want to see those massive DPR numbers. when i play my buffer control characters i want to know that everyone is more effective in combat. when i play my support characters i want to know that they are accomplishing a task OTHER then hitting hard, like taking casters, BBEGs and nasty things that will make my fighter tank QQ himself to sleep, out of the fight.
the fighter is worthless with massive negative levels, paralysis, or god knows what else, the casters are worthless when they get pin cushioned by the enemy archer in the back of all those mobs, or the enemy cleric silences my casters and make the fight 10x harder then it should have been. all of that is avoided by my monk moving through the battle field and applying pressure to those targets.
that is what monks excel at.
im a big fan of eldritch knight archers. you would need to be able to cast 3rd level spells to qualify, but its worth the pay off with the versatility you bring to the table.
i personally like:
you can play a rogue, the artillery, and the god wizard. dont let anyone tell you that the low levels are bad for an EK, because you are a full fledged wizard with a bow which gives you tons of flexibility in how you can approach a situation.
high dpr isn't as powerful as being able to control the battlefield.
i think my EK archer was hands down the most powerful character I've ever played.
the only thing that makes a Role-player good IMO is a player who can keep things in game and not get mad out of game about those things.
you do not need to speak in a funny voice, act in a way that is silly, or do you need to play something "new" or "different".
role-playing is simply the ability to take on the mentality of the character you're playing and make decisions based on how that character acts, even if it goes against your true nature.
when i play, i make the most mechanically sound character i want to play, then build a persona around it based on how i think that character should act. once i decide on a persona i use movies, books, tv shows, or real life to emulate a personality that reflects that character.
its similar to saying, i want to play a chaotic neutral rogue, who is kind of a loner and uses kukuris. that is a very similar character to Riddick. so i would use that as a basis for my role-playing choices.
anyone in this thread remember Jayne from Firefly?
Jayne was a chaotic evil character, but he was one of the most likable characters in that show from a viewers perspective. he was stand offish and tried to take power at every opportunity. he didnt kill people in there sleep, he wasnt a psycho path, nor was he excessively disloyal. you can "evil" and be borderline neutral without being a heartless mass murderer.
i like to think that evil just means sociopathic, you're capable of killing without remorse, but 99% of the time you wont.
you dont nerf him, you play his weaknesses more.
ranged characters are very very weak. obscuring mist is a first level spell that will take him out of the fight for a few rounds. ray of enfeeblement will also hurt his dps by making his composite bow less effective. create pit will hurt him due to fighters having a low reflex and force him to climb out and keep fighting wasting a round or 2 of his dps. they have MANY ways to stop a ranged character from owning everything with arrows, and doing so wont ruin his fun. it will force him to start countering the things that he never knew were a bane to his archer.
in conclusion just play smart as a gm and you can , when you find it appropriate, stop his dps and force him to spend time countering your counter measures. so dont think "hes to powerful for my npcs", think about how your npcs would fight a group like this.
the only character that i have seen that i thought "holy crap thats broken", was a scarred witch doctor half orc.
compared to that class archetype, a summoner was a mild annoyance.
summoners are very powerful for beginning GMs, and PFS GMs (they cant really change the mod to making it more challenging). i mean they have more then a few ways of dealing with the power of the edilon.
i dont know, i like them and i think they are a little over hyped, but powerful.
i just wanted to clarify something for you, optimization is not the same as minmaxing or munchkining, or any other stupid term people use to label players who play powerful characters.
optimization is taking a concept and making it function as good as possible within that concept.
so what this means is if you ever took ,for instance, a rogue and said "how can i make him the best liar ever" then picked feats for that character concept, then you did in fact optimize that character. now if you mean you never optimized for damage then thats not hard at all to do.
here is what i would play out of the 2 choices you have listed
focus on archery feats and power attack
all i have to say is this, logic needs to be applied to ALL aspects of the game equally.
that means if a lizard can fly and breath fire, then its ok with me if the barbarian can jump 150 feet in the air and sunder spells with his sword. the concept of "you cant do that because its not realistic" is the most bull s+ mentality to have in D&D.
this is a true story:
my group and i changed GM's. the new gm sent a adult red dragon after our party as a "hi im your new gm, let me throw my power in your face". the archer was able to hurt it, the 2 handed fighter was able to hurt it, but when it came time for my monk to try and deal damage, the gm said "the dragon doesn't even flinch".
now the 2 handed fighter hit for about 50 point in 2 hits, the ranger (3.5) hit with his bow once for about 30 points, and i dealt over 75 in 3 hits... something is wrong here i thought.
after the game i talk to the gm about it, he tells me that "it isn't realistic that you can punch a dragon and hurt it, its to big. that why i don't like monks, they shouldn't be in the game because if they only use there fists they shouldn't be able to deal damage against most creatures."
now if your gm says "i want you to role play learning that language, i have no issue about that, its minor. now if a gm told me i couldn't multiclass because "i didn't show any interest prior to that path" then i would get up from that gm's table.