Tilquinith's page

I have heard rumors that some are taking this thread to mean "shut up" if you have a dissenting voice about the rules. Nothing is further than the truth. What Mike (and others) are saying is that while you have the right to object to the RAW and to discuss how things could be different, you DO NOT have the right to ignore them, do what you want, and then essentially brag about in the forums. As players, we do not have the power to follow the rules we like and ignore the ones we don't. If you think something is wrong, start a thread, explain why, and this is important, what you think can be done to correct it. There have been many rule changes that resulted from discussions in the forums. The word "cheating" has a very serious connotation, but what else would you call it? Either you are following the rules or you aren't. Package it however you want, but in the end, it just boils down to that question.

Before you peg me some kind of jack-booted enforcer for the PFS gestapo, I happen to agree with arguments to change some of the rules. After-all, I am a player too and would like things "my way." However, until such changes occur, we are all bound by the rules of the society. Some will say it is a harsh stance, but either play by the rules or play something else.

EDIT--One more thing, despite what anyone may have told *you*, the Venture Officers, Mike Brock, and Mark Moreland are always receptive to email if you feel an issue is more appropriate for private discussion.

There are some characters, who aren't much interested in "talky" faction missions. That's okay, the Society is a big tent, and grim loners who spend every waking hour poring over traps and ancient maps have their place, too.

There are some players who feel that faction missions are nice, but the don't matter as much if you're getting your arms chewed off by ghouls, and wouldn't an extra point in Strength or Constitution have been a nice idea? They're playing the game they want to play it, and that's okay, too.

I want to start off by saying I really just prefer playing the game to GMing...I've tried to take my stupid useless encyclopedic knowledge and the unconscious ability to absorb information, rules, and the like and use it as springboard to run games, and it's worked REALLY WELL, but every now and then I want to stop thinking about a whole world and play a character, but, ugh, there's some serious frustration issues.

You see, the group I'm in, our GM is great. He comes up with good stories, can control a table really well, and interjects some decent combat (although he is heavy handed with NPCs and used to Deus Ex us before I started complaining a lot about not being challenged). He also knows the rules very well, but not perfectly, and unfortunately I know it quite more thoroughly than he does.

We're all friends, meet regularly, and have a great time when we do, but man alive do I get bloody frustrated when I hit a wall with him on rules.

For example, the other day, he was unaware that in PF you can sneak attack golems. I didn't mean to push on it, but we were fighting a big one, and I was playing a rogue, and blast it, I sure as heck wouldn't have ever played a rogue if I couldn't sneak attack the stuff you can in PF that you couldn't before.

It's just one example. Trust me, I could go into a few dozens. I'll just say this; I know the rules a heck of a lot better than most people, because I'm mesmerized by the complexity of the system, and really just enjoy reading it. I'm one of those people who just reads something once and it sticks to the back of my head forever to pull out at an obscure time.

Unfortunately I keep automatically correcting people's rules problems before I can stop myself...you know, you just spit it out before you realize it and then go "oops, sorry, nevermind...well, yeah...I mean, technically you CAN draw multiple hits that way as you moved through several squares, and he has combat reflexes...but...you know what nevermind."

When I don't, I'm sitting there miserable because it's just...not right. I wonder if anyone else out there knows what I mean. Anyone the annoying kid when they were in school that corrected the teacher with a smug face? Yeah...nobody likes that guy. But sometimes that guy wants to break the habit, and it's pretty hard when it's automatically ingrained in you.

Especially because I know most people in games hate that guy. It's also pretty hard to immerse yourself in the game and just ENJOY it like you used to when you ARE that guy.

I've tried playing other systems of which I don't know but it's usually a couple days before I know the whole thing inside out, and find little rules exploits, and how I long for the days when I first tried RPGs and had fun with a character. For some reason I have this innate need to make the best version of whatever idea I come up with, and that leads to a thorough read of the books involved, and, well, it's not like before I realize my character is sub-optimal, I modify it, and change everything. I just don't want to -do- that anymore.

I don't want to break into a rolls vs. roles debate...I want to know how you exit the realm of rolls and leave it behind, before their black tentacles pull you back into the dark realm and leave you staring at character concepts asking "A dwarven wizard? What were you thinking?" yet again. How do you personally just let immersion hit and say to hell if the GM is fudging the rolls or doesn't know the book as well as you do.

I mean it's not like a video game where you have a set challenge level; most GMs, especially ours, adjust to party strengths, so logically "optimizing" seems pretty useless when you think about it. But yet I persist.

Has anyone crossed the line?

How did you leave it behind?

The intention behind the rule is obvious in my opinion: You can make attacks of opportunity with your bow, but you only threaten the area you used to threaten with your unarmed strikes (i.e. everything right next to you).

Since you can only make AoOs into your threatened area, it means that if someone does something within your unarmed threat area, you get to shoot him. Say, someone walks right past you - you get to put an arrow into him.

Being able to make ranged AoOs into a huge area would be over the top, but this isn't that bad, either: zen archers are no normal monks, they train mostly in archery, not in unarmed combat. Their training (both the class abilities and their usual feat selection) reflects that. You get to AoOs with the weapon you use all the time, not some backup.

Fitting for a zen archer, since he's still a monk of sorts, and they want to become one with everything, so zen archers will want to become one with their bow, and use it as an extension of their body. A fighter just becomes very good at shooting through training and prowess.

Who knows, you might even discover a way to have an even bigger blast at the table.

Would that be empowered, or enlarged? Or are you talking about researching new spells?

;)

So lately we've seen a lot of discussions and calls to offenders about min-maxing, optimizing, roleplaying, ruining the game, org play and beer. The beer doesn't really have anything to do with the rest directly, but still.

And so as someone who would probably be judged as an "offender" (as would the group I play with) simply by looking at our sheets...I am throwing my opinions in the ring.

The crux of my opinion...play the game as you will. It.Is.A.Game.

The corrollary to my opinion...have fun and aim to help other have fun too...no matter how you build your character.

Do you want to be a jack-of-all-trades/master of nothing who rolls out with 12s and 14s and is successful half the time and needs to be rescued from near-death by the hero the other half? Awesome, have a blast playing the would-be superstar who juuuust can't quite get there...honestly, it's a good, well-rounded schtick.

Do you want to be a One-Trick-Pony Nackle, due to the fact that you are playing a crazy-@$$ gnome who really thinks he's a pony who can only do one trick and who's best stats are Cha and Int, but took levels in Fighter? You have fun with that...seriously, as long as I'm not playing in the world's hardest death-rally, I would love to be at a table with you.

Do you want to be a min-max, flying, bomb-dropping, 25 rage-per-day barbarian who wields 4 keen falchions, has 18 attacks a round and has more HP than a geek has action figures?? Awesome, I will let you wade into battle before me and have fun RPing in the background if I'm not as strong as you. Again, have a blast with it.

Do you want to be a skill-monkey bardic rogue who picks locks while playing a drum with your third hand and inspiring the masses of virginal lasses while diplomacizing the king and giving us a lecture on all the knowledges of the world...while performing acrobatic feats? Awesome once more...be in my party...sounds like fun.

In all seriousness...I really think we need to knock off the "optimzation sucks" threads. Jason S (who just happens to share my first name and last initial, as well as at least some of this opinion it seems) put it well when he said this is really more about "the player" not "the character". My group tends to play cracked-out characters. We enjoy building characters that are "uber"...sometimes on their own...sometimes because the three of us specifically who play often meld together in a wicked synergy. People have complained that we are too powerful...and then I laugh like the Emperor and force-lightning them.

And yes, we have characters that could probably finish certain year zero mods solo...with only one leg and arm. But we also know how to play nice with others...we paid attention in Kindergarten you know.

For instance...we have three barbarians that can carve through enemies like 'butta', but when we're at a con with less-optimized characters, we'll hold back as long as we're not going to get killed doing so. We have spent entire mods before without swinging a weapon and instead grappling and cornering enemies so a weak ninja and a weaker neg-energy cleric could do their thing happily. And you know what? We all had fun.

Because all the players made it fun. Optimized characters fraternized with newbie heroes who had no idea how to build a character...and the Earth didn't implode and the table didn't run away sad or angry.

Why? Because of the players...not the characters.

So, here's is my plea to the smart masses out there...end the hate on character builds! Instead, support free-thinking creation of your own hero or heroine and support the idea that players make the game fun no matter what character they bring to the table!

And if you are still reading to this point...thanks, that was long. :)

"Holy Can of Worms Batman!"

I was reading through this thread and the other locked thread and something hit me.

Some are saying if you cast magic fang on your unarmed strike you must say which unarmed strike: fist, foot, head.

This is a can of worms from hell!

That means I can have magic fang +1 on my: right hand, left hand, right elbow, left elbow, right shoulder, left shoulder, forehead, right foot, left foot, right knee, left knee, etc.

Someone can go body part crazy. In just the above list a human has 11+ unarmed strikes at his disposal.

If I get multi-weapon fighting can I make attacks with all 11+ unarmed strikes like a monster with 4 claws can make 4 claw attacks?

Uhmmmm. no! Though breaking it into specific unarmed strikes opens the door for such arguments.

KISS guys. Let's keep it simple. Just call it one unarmed strike and not open said can of worms.

I had just heard about this issue and decided I will throw my two cents at it.

I am against the idea that a monk must split his flurry attacks amongst different weapons.

Here is why:

1. You cannot compare a fighter with two weapon fighting to a monk with flurry. They are apples and oranges? (What you say?)
A monk does not have the same hit points of a fighter.
A monk's weapon selection is a lot smaller.
A monk’s armor and shield selection is zero.
Fighter’s do not have to take TWF.
A fighter can get weapon specialization, greater weapon focus, etc.
A fighter has a high BAB all the time. A monk cannot take improved critical until 11th level!
Monks won’t be using kukris.
Monks are not fighters they are monks.
Monks need a lot more ability scores. Fighter needs dex and str for a good TWF. Monk will need dex, str and wis(need AC from something).

2. Years of precedence.
This is the first time I have heard of requiring a monk to use at least two weapons when flurrying. Though unarmed can be two weapons but must be different body parts.

3. The way it reads to me

When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

Well it says any combination.

If you have a combination lock and you have 5 numbers from 0 to 9 you can set those 5 to any combination. It can be 1 1 1 1 1 or 1 2 3 4 5 or 1 8 1 8 1 or any combination.
A monk can be standing there holding a kama and a sai and flurry on you. He could just kick you with all or throw in a kama slash or a sai stab. Or he could just slice and dice is way through you with his kama.

4. It is what monks do. They flurry on you!
Give them their special ado. Don’t gimp them.

It just depends on what he imagines for the character.

TWF is good and fun. 2h fighting is fine as well. Both are equally viable. Ranged rogues, on the other hand, are not viable and are very depressing unless the person making the rogue is a very advanced player who knows the rules for sniping and what to do to get there in and out. There's a lot of cool options in the APG for rogues and he should probably flip through them.

A quick stream of consciousness guideline off of the top of my head:
. +1 to hit for a rogue is always the most valuable option. In this vein, a +5 short sword is better than a +1 holy flaming shocking short sword. Whiffing attacks sucks and you want to hit as much as humanly possible because that will always do more damage as a rogue than hitting sparsely but solidly
. Buy thieves tools. A lot of people know that a rogue without thieves tools takes a -2 on disable device checks. Not a lot of people catch that a rogue without thieves tools takes a -10 to pick locks.
. Rogue talents do not come easy. Every rogue talent should fit into your idea of the character, but also should be effects you cannot get anywhere else. Avoid skill bonuses for rogue talents. In example, effects you cannot get anywhere else: trapspotter, opportunist or slow reactions.
. . Bleeding attack is not a good rogue talent. 1 bleed at level 1 will never happen because monsters die in one hit. 5 bleed at level 10 is meaningful but ignorable. 10 bleed at level 20 is pathetic. Avoid bleeding attack.
. . Dispelling attack is wonderful if your GM likes bosses to pre-buff bonuses. The problem is that it requires you plan a great deal ahead-- almost 6 levels ahead-- to get it, and that the two pre-reqs to get into it are essentially trading up to two unique "cannot get anywhere else"-esque abilities for about 1125gp (the cost of one 0-level wand and one 1st-level wand) and the privilege to provoke while using them (you do not normally provoke when using a wand, but you provoke when you use SLA's). If you know your GM loves wizards, this is solid. If you start taking the pre-reqs and your GM stops throwing wizards at the party, you now have light 3/day. Be careful.
. Max out perception, acrobatics and disable device. I would normally just let you realize this, much like I would let someone playing a wizard realize they should probably take spells. I have played in groups where the rogue had no ranks in acrobatics and the wizard did not have any spells. Put ranks in these skills!
. Use magic device is one of the most useful skills for a rogue. Do not skimp on this skill until you can make the DCs reliably, and then stop. UMD DCs do not generally go past 33 for rogues, unless they start casting from scrolls.
. . Do not cast from scrolls, it is extremely difficult and your chances of mishapping are way too high to afford to cast. Mishaps are not good: you will not be amused when, for instance, you try to cast water breathing and instead be blessed with air breathing at the cost of an expensive scroll. When the corpse of your fighter is levitating and you're holding a blank raise dead scroll and your GM is smiling, you will feel bad. Do not cast from scrolls.
. Flank, flank, flank, flank. Communication is key for flanking; talk to the people at the table.
. Chain shirt > Mithral chain shirt > Celestial chainmail. Celestial chainmail has a max Dex of +8 and lets you fly once per day. In addition to that, it costs less than a +5 mithral chain shirt and gives the same armor bonus. (+5 mithral chain shirt = +5+4 = 9. Celestial chainmail = +3+6 = 9) The only downside is that you get a -2 ACP, and that is absolutely fine.
. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet
. Get used to being the "guy who walks in first" and make sure your party knows that you can very easily abandon this position the moment they feel like making fun of you for "needing healing again" or for "not seeing that trap"
. Brush up on disable device rules. One full-round to do a lock, two minutes to take 20 on a lock, 2d4 rounds for a trap.
. . Disable device is also code for "enable device" and can be used to be a complete jerk. Planning a getaway? 1d4 rounds and 4 rounds later and all of the guards' saddles fall off at the slightest tug and their battle wagon's wheel breaks off once it turns over once.
. Knowledges are useful. If you can get knowledges from traits, do it. A rogue with knowledge planes or knowledge nature is unexpected and helpful. A rogue with +1 to acrobatics is not as impressive as the rogue who can identify demons and their special abilities for the party.
. It is not at all expensive to carry around strange and useful weaponry. For instance, in addition to their main weaponry, a level 12 rogue should have:
- a +1 alchemical silver light mace* for bludgeoning, silver
- a cold-iron dagger
- a wooden stake
- an adamantine weapon
* alchemical silver's -1 to damage only applies to slashing and piercing weapons for some reason. Be the cool kid and let everyone know this rules loophole.
. . Holy water, alchemist's fire, a thunderstone, smokesticks, sunrods... all of these things are in your kit. See: Have a plan to kill everyone you meet. Edited: Have a plan to kill everyone and everything you could possibly ever meet.
. . . A wand of align weapon at level 10 will make outsiders very, very sad, and it will not cost you as much as buying a holy weapon or adding holy to your current weapon
. . . . When your GM accuses you of metagaming, point to your knowledge: religion/planes/nature/arcana and smile.
. For a rogue, 1d4+2 damage is not bad, especially because in the right conditions, you can make that 1d4+2+10d6 and 2 strength damage. The problem is that you want to always have the right conditions and much of the time will not. Much like the challenge in playing a fighter means you want to do as many full attacks as possible or a wizard wants to never take AoOs for casting spells, the challenge in playing a rogue is always ensuring that you have the correct conditions to sneak attack.

If the party's fighter starts making fun of the rogue for not keeping up with melee damage then I would encourage the rogue to put points in bluff and make the fighter believe that of course he removed all the traps and it's safe to go now. Adventures aren't all just a series of battles.

Style is not purposefully trying to kill the friendly party members with traps.

Style is disarming the trap, making it by over 10 and then re-arming the magic mouth so that instead of triggering the trap it sings the fighter a song about how much he sucks.

The moment the rogue in the party lies to me and tries to kill me is the moment my fighter starts trying to kill him. :P

Brayden Green wrote:

I think a lot of you are operating under the misconception that Pathfinder is something to be *conquered,* rather than experienced.

Thank you for this. I feel like this message gets lost in the mix of it all. If could have a signature on every post, this would be it.

People play this game for different reasons. I don't think any one of us should be telling other people which aspect of a game they are meant to enjoy.

some drink from the font of knowledge while others mearly gargle.

Some pee into it.