Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Stronfeur Uherer

Trogdar's page

1,189 posts (1,192 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,189 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

christos gurd wrote:
Instead of substituting an attack, id rather have them get early access to the critical feats and have vital strike count as a critical hit for the purposes of it. it lends itself to something more than just higher damage. or you could bypass the critical feats and just let them inflict many of the conditions from the antipaladin's cruelties.

+1 I think that would lend itself to an awesome debuffing fighter style instead of the usual DPR rat race.


JoeJ wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:

I just want martials to be able to screw with tye world as much as casters can. If your wizard can tear space and time asunder with an errant thought, i should be able to make the air shiver and the mountains quake by drawing my sword. If your wizard can rip the soul out of a demigod just for funzies, i should be able to cleave a damn mountain with the same effort.

So far the wizard's getting their phenominal cosmic power, so where is the fighter's?

I wouldn't call somebody who could do those things a fighter; they're just a different flavor of wizard.

To me, an epic martial would be somebody who can do only a tiny fraction of the damage that a t-rex can dish out, but manages to beat it anyway. Not somebody who can dive off a 500 foot cliff, hit the ground, and walk away, but rather somebody who can dive off the cliff, shoot an arrow with a rope attached into a crack in the rock, and swing to safety. Somebody who can shoot an incoming arrow out of the sky on a reaction. Somebody who doesn't think twice about having a sword fight while balancing on a tightrope. I want a martial who doesn't have superhuman strength or toughness, or quasi-magical powers, but who can beat enemies who do using nothing but an epic level of skill. Put another way, an epic martial isn't the Hulk, it's Captain America, or Green Arrow, or Batman.

If the fighter should be batman, then I would say that your going to have to throw some GM fiat powers onto their chassis so beating the superman equivalent makes some sort of sense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That is definitely a valid concern, which I think tying the bonuses to bravery solves by spreading those penalty reductions over 20 levels.


Secane wrote:
Trogdar wrote:

remove penalties that come from combat feats up to your bravery bonus.

That will cover the attack bonus without tying the fighter down to a weapon group.

So something like, power attacks don't cause a high level fighter to suffer the minus to attack?

Yes. Basically, a high level fighter will be running around with a whole series of bonuses without suffering any penalties whatsoever. They would then be the king of feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ham-fisted is the barbarian MO, to be fair.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

remove penalties that come from combat feats up to your bravery bonus.

That will cover the attack bonus without tying the fighter down to a weapon group.


On the monk front, just change the ki movement thingy to a swift action and base the additional movement off the monks enhanced move speed. It isn't identical to pounce, but I think that's a good thing.


Here is a thought for "rebalancing" wizards.

Occult Training(Ex): At first level, and every level thereafter, the wizard may choose two spell schools(or two plus the specialized school if the wizard is a specialist, ) from which he may learn spells. Each time this choice is made, the wizard gains access to a higher spell level of the school chosen, up to level 9. A specialist wizard may choose to learn a spell level of a barred school, but must spend two of his school choices to access that spell level.

I'm not sure if the wording is crystal clear, but the intent is to push wizards(and other full casters) to either focus their attention on a handful of schools of magic, or have access to all of them up to a lower level. If your choose the second route, you would have to heighten spells to use your higher level slots.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:

@Odraude - I think we're getting lost in examples here. The core issue is this:

As the game progresses, you face bigger and badder foes. As a result, this is inescapable: You need sufficient X to overcome the increasing challenges.

In theory, X could be anything: levels, magic, gear, whatever. But the reason you're able to defeat now what you couldn't defeat before is because you've now acquired enough X.

Now if this is going to be a game where you can choose how you approach (such as by choosing a class), then for the game to be as fun as it can be, the following also needs to be true: Every class needs access to X.

X could still be anything, just as long as it's the same X. If continuing to advance requires sufficient poodles, then every class needs access to poodles. Or from the other direction, if the only thing you want every class to have access to is rhubarbs, then rhubarbs had better be capable of letting you advance.

Whatever you pick for one, you need to pick the same for the other.

Currently, Pathfinder fails in this regard: the only thing that everyone has access to is levels, but the thing you have to have in order to advance is magic.

The fighter MUST acquire magic in some form in order to keep playing, no matter what else he has. The wizard (or other PC with magic) can keep playing with relatively little regard for what other (nonmagical) things he lacks.

This is a flaw in the system: there's a mismatch between what you need and what you can access.

For Pathfinder to improve, it needs to align the two: either change what lets you advance from "magic" to "levels" (letting everyone gain tools to keep playing the game, as a function of level, independent of other factors); or else take the thing that's required to advance (magic) and make it more evenly accessible.

Either path is fine, as long as where we end up is that what's required to keep playing the game is readily and evenly accessible to everyone.

+1 totally on point Jiggy!


If you want a vampire, then you may want to consider the undead anatomy 2 polymorph spell and restrict the form to vampire only. It will grant some of the benefits of being a vampire without getting out of hand.

Im not a huge fan of cursed items to be honest. Well, that's not entirely true, they can be interesting plot points, but I wouldn't say that a magic crafter should be forced to craft cursed items.


JoeJ wrote:
Lemmy wrote:

Indeed. Even in PF mechanics, they are completely different. One is a skill check, the other is a grapple attempt.

Can Batman, without using any gear or trick, grapple a T-Rex? Can he survive jumping from the moon or being immersed in lava? Is he as powerful as a Pit Fiend?

Batman isn't anywhere near 20th level. I'd be surprised if he reached the double digits.

IMO, he's a 6~8th level character who rolled 4~6 18s for his attributes, is using an extremely broken gestalt (or homebrew) class and has wealth way over the expected for his level.

But he's in an adventuring party with a guy who can tear mountains apart with his bare hands and shrug off nuclear weapons, a woman who can defeat the freakin' god of war in melee, and a guy with a magic ring-of-whatever-I-want. It must be really boring to be Batman, since he obviously can't contribute anything.

While your right in that batman seems to play in the big kid pool with no issue, it does not invalidate the fact that batman cannot, in fact, fall from orbit or take a lava bath or wrestle an eight tonne animal into submission. I would have to argue, then, that batman is not a level twenty character because those qualities are true of twentieth level characters.


I think the only way to approach it is through the polymorph rules. If the effects are limited to one shape, then I could see the cost being consistent with the crafting rules for custom items. It won't be as awesome as the spell, but will give some of the special abilities that the player covets without having to sell their soul.


The problem is that I can't imagine anyone taking wings of the gargoyle to use. Its effects are not proportional to the cost. Its the same price as a +6 weapon. The effects that it grants aren't even that hard to get and it prevents you from increasing your saves, which matter far more at the levels that this kind of item become feasible to pay for.

In effect, its cost makes it vender loot.


You could take the teleportation subschool and change your race choice to something that has an appropriate sla?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So your saying that normal people will actively hinder a god wizard? I would do whatever the hell a guy asked if he could summon a devil in 6 seconds... might just be me.


Your caster level is improved by two points, up to your hit die. So when you take it, it does not have to have the full effect immediately,


See if you can use the racial to drop into Eldritch knight at level three and then pick up arcane archer levels afterward. This route leads to fewer caster levels, but does seem to suit your character.

That will net you the most prestige class for your hd. Also, take the magical knack trait to boost your caster level.

If you do go the sorcerer route, you would certainly benefit from paladin levels, but keep in mind that it codifies your alignment, which can either be great or terrible depending on the player/gm dynamic.

EDIT: Sorry, just to clarify, drop into eldritch knight at level three and then and then pick arcane archer levels at your convenience after that point(depending on when you would like to see those archery tricks come online.).


Yeah, if you intend to use a custom race that is fluffed as a fey race, then loosing some of the racial bonuses to acquire a third level illusion spell like ability would make sense.

It would allow your character to head into eldritch knight without having as many sorcerer levels up front, and make your character concept come alive a little earlier on.

Just an fyi, as you stated that your new to the game system, eldritch knight characters tend to work out better if you build them as casters first and melee second. This may simply have to do with the inherent advantages of being a near full caster though.


I wouldn't worry about optimizing him, he isn't going to be hitting much anyway. Just throw the vital strike chain on him and hope that he has enough base attack to land his shots.


Why on earth would you compare a near full wizard? If this is because of the noted concern about your character being targeted due to some GM's personal issues, then you may as well not bother with a build at all because you can't control how others are going to react to pretty much anything.

Just play the plain jane Oracle, its simpler.


I don't know if this helps, but I think that EK's make great use of polymorph spells because they have access to the best polymorph spells and the base attack bonus to benefit from them.

If I were to make an EK who focused on using polymorph for melee, I would focus my build toward casting and use my first round the way a straight wizard would and then polymorph into something vicious to help with clean up.

Heres a stat line for such a build

Half elf
str 14
dex 14
con 14
int 17
wis 10
cha 8

Note: You can largely focus on improving your intelligence as you level and rely on the regular magic items combined with polymorph spells to bring your strength very close to par for a full fighter type.

You won't be the king of dpr, but you will bring pretty close to the total package to most encounters.


You could skimp a little in the area of magic weapon and armor bonuses and use the long duration spells in the morning to make up for the deficiency.

I think that weapon and armor enhancement is probably the best place to save yourself cash to buy more casting gear.


Ninja'ed by the prince of ninjas :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I tend to evaluate things based on how mutable they are. A feat is far less mutable than a spell of any level, so it makes sense to me when someone suggests that a feat should grow to be as strong as a spell that accomplishes similar effects. I don't think it makes sense from level one, but it does if feats are representative of an organic progression in one area that you focus on.

To me, spells represent the easy way. You get results, but you are not really interested or focused in the way that someone who invests static class features is.

I'm not sure if that is clear, but that is how I see it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the point is that a second level spell isn't really a scarce resource at mid to high level. I also can't imagine a prepared caster running around without a few low level pearls of power.

I suppose the only thing to really ask yourself is how scarce of a resource do you think a spell slot is by comparison to a feat? I would just point out that of the two, only spell slots can be gained through money.


I would love to see feat design shift toward doing something unique and holistic rather than the current +-to x or y, or if it is a unique effect, bet on three prerequisite feats. It almost sours me on feats in there entirety.


Paladin makes a lot of sense. The base attack bump will really help if you plan to use that form of dragon option in the future.


I think an easy houserule is to just allow the stave to be recharged at any time during the adventure day. At least then you have the option of using unspent spells at night.


I don't know how people with any sort of basic understanding of arithmetic could possibly be making the arguments you are Khrysaor, but here we are.


Ki channel is cool.


Phoebus wrote:

You're basing your opinion on the basis of a movie, though. That's like me making my argument about levels based on what I see in the Pathfinder comic book.

But let's look at it from a different angle. Let's consider the Feats that Captain America exhibits in the canon:

Combat Expertise
- Improved Trip
Combat Reflexes
Defensive Combat Training
Dodge
- Mobility
-- Spring Attack
Fleet
Improved Initiative
Improved Unarmed Strike
Iron Will
Lightning Reflexes
Point-Blank Shot
- Far Shot
- Precise Shot
- Shot on the Run
Run
- Improved Shield Bash
-- Shield Slam
--- Shield Master
- Shield Focus
-- Greater Shield Focus
Throw Anything
Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization

... And that's just what's demonstrably shown and/or outright stated. It doesn't include Feats that could very reasonably be argued (e.g., Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization), or ones that are heavily implied by the character's depictions (e.g., Acrobatic, Lightning Redlexes). Heck, it doesn't even give him the benefit of maxing out trees that are signature items for his character.

And we haven't even gotten to his "I can hit multiple people with one throw of my shield" gimmick, or his "I can ricochet my shield off of a variety of surfaces before hitting someone with it" ability.

And, as a reminder, a 20th level Fighter has 21 total Feats. Captain America's demonstrated capabilities exceed that, and we're already robbing him.

I feel like this only highlights how limited feats are. Just to be capable of using a shield and throwing it requires an absolutely obscene amount of them for results that are really not that amazing.


DrDeth wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

Quick correction. Those are not Pro-martials. They are anti-martials that claim to like martials a lot but really mean they like low level play a lot. People who point out how weak martials are and how powerful casters can be are the pro-martials. Those people who don't like non-spellcasters to have anything they consider to be magical are literally the reason we real pro-martials can't have nice things.

I disagree. Especially I disagree with "how weak martials are and how powerful casters' since it's simply not true, at least in IRL tabletop play.

However, I agree with SKR in that really "Ex vs Su" has no real reason for being there anymore. We already have martials with Su ( the Paladin, barbarian & Monk), so I don't see the issue. But OTOH, what's wrong with having just one class (fighter) that doesn't have anything too far out of the ordinary?

"You also get rid of the idea that “martial characters don’t have magic, and therefore can’t do amazing things because they’re limited to what nonmagical people can do in the real world.” But Paladins can do those things, so can the Monk and barbarian. (There's even a few Su abilities for the Ranger). And of course the Ninja has Su stuff.

Just enhance and come up with more archetypes for those four martial classes that give "amazing things" above and beyond what "nonmagical people can do in the real world."

Leave the Fighter alone. Sure, better saves, more SkP would be nice next ed, and a Magic hunter archetype would be nice. But there should be ONE class that is tied to the mundane.

Agree to disagree. The mundane need not apply in any universe that is fundamentally tied to magic. Magic exists, therefore those species who evolve in an environment steeped in magic will, by necessity, have to harness or at least shut down magic.

I would be okay with the fighter being the equivalent of a blank though. (Blank being a term referencing anyone who's not only resistant to magic, but actively reduces the effects of the arcane substrate of the universe around him.)


swoosh wrote:

AMF does sort of bug me in the way that, a spell/effect explicitly favored to give casters a rough time, is almost as much of a pain in the ass for a martial character when all his items turn off.

Quote:
In other words: by getting rid of the fixation on whether or not an ability is magic, you can get rid of a (perhaps subconscious) design bias against giving martial classes magical abilities. If it doesn't matter if an ability is magic or not, it doesn't matter if the character class "is magic" or not.

This really sums it up perfectly though. Ultimately we're playing a high fantasy world where the characters, one way or another, leave the bounds of reality by level 6 or 7 at the latest. Continuing to try to constrain one class toward what doesn't feel too magical or unrealisitc at that stage just feels... odd. And in a way it even somehow makes the character feel less realistic when I can chop a dragon to pieces in a few seconds yet can't manage to do much else with that raw power.

Especially at higher levels, when that fighter is expected to be facing down archfiends and demigods and normal men literally cannot harm him, trying to maintain that standard of realism and down to earth mechanics doesn't seem to fit.

This. ^(-_-)^


I kind of like the idea of changing the amf spell such that it impacts spells and spell likes instead of everything that isn't ex. At that point you can basically make ex abilities identical to su abilities and the difference would be fluff basically.


Oh! Another thing that I thought was a good idea was giving the fighter an ability that made them better at retraining hit points and feats and such (from ultimate campaign). I believe Aelyrinth was the one who was talking about it in another thread...?


I would recommend taking out weapon training and replacing it with an ability that modifies feats like power attack.

I find the idea of fighters getting more and more specialized at one kind of combat as the absolute antithesis of the fighter as a concept though, so your mileage may vary on that front.


Meager Rolmug wrote:
Sooo...has something been done to officially fix weird words or not??? I don't see a FAQ on it. It is so unwieldy, complicated and overpowered(compared to what it replaces) i have voluntarily quit taking the archetype when i play bards(which is near always). This is quite unfortunate since the idea behind a sound striker is excellent. Why not just replace wordstrike and weird words with performances that buff your other attacks?? Something like a scaling bonus to the fort saves of sonic spells(replacing wordstrike) a second performance that adds scaling sonic damage to weapons and ammo the bard uses within 30'(replacing wordstrike). Confusion eliminated, rolls reduced, problems(all of them) solved!! Just decide the appropriate numbers.

I suggested something similar ages ago, but I don't think it was a popular idea.


For C. I vote for both :). I think that when you get your first sla it should be 1/day. 4 levels later, the shaman gets a second sla 1/day and the first becomes 3/day, after three the sla becomes unlimited. That way you end up with a couple unlimited, a 3/day and a 1/day higher level sla.

D. I think that the original chassis was 3/4, but luckily theres a handy dandy half dragon template that you acquire to catch up on to hit chance, or at least something like the shaman gets full bab with natural weapons granted from levels or something.

E. I am sort of tempted to suggest that instead of adding more die, the shaman instead gets to add his con modifier to damage. It is appropriate I think within the context of the dragons breath.

Additionally, you could add different ways to modify breath attacks into the class chassis. I am thinking along the lines of the chromatic dragons having secondary breath attacks like steam or stunning roars with reduced sonic damage.... that would be pretty awesome... "THUM!"


Granting the class some spell likes for each color type would be a great addition to the class in general actually. Very flavorful. If you keep it at 3/4 bab you might grant it the half dragon template over the class level progression. There is actually a lot of options if you think about dragons and dragon related features that already exist within the system.


If you used your score to cast when you emulate, wouldn't you fail to cast because you are using your score which isn't high enough?


I thought the problem with the dragon shaman was that the breath weapon was both too weak, in that it wasn't impressive to do unmodified fireball damage at level twenty, and too strong if you allowed metabreath feats to modify a breath attack multiple times because they only increased the recharge interval. If I were to do a conversion, I would alter that class feature. In fact, I would probably remove it all together and give the dragon shaman a polymorph spell like that functioned similarly to the summoner summon class feature.

I would also increase skills by two... I may think of more, but the above would certainly change.


Cheesing and power gaming is entirely subjective. In short, no, you're impressions of your gaming group would lead me to believe that your gaming group doesn't share your perspective.


Bleed damage makes sense for sure.


Lincoln Hills wrote:

I feel there's been far too many attempts to make the fighter the Master of Few (the base fighter's weapon groups, virtually all the archetypes, etc.) - when the barbarian, paladin and cavalier are all built around that concept. (The ranger, to my frustration, manages to be a jack of all trades and master of one.)

The jack of all trades, now, that's a category where the fighter should be to combat what the bard is to skills/spellcasting. I liked EntrerisShadow's way of expressing what a fighter should be - scary in all aspects of all weapons. Weapon Specialization and Weapon Training should probably go the way of the dodo in favor of general bonuses with all weapons - or at least huge sweeping categories such as "two-handed weapons," "ranged weapons," etc. (I like Armor Training very much as a jack-of-all-trades ability.)

+1

Though I prefer removing weapon training with an ability that modifies the penalties from feats like power attack. The fighter is all about being the best with feats, so let the fighter use feats like combat expertise without sacrificing his chance to hit (if that is the feat chosen to train up).


Paladins make decent face characters for sure, but I think the OP mentioned a general desire for skills and that is something paladins cannot accommodate.


Yeah, that was what I was trying to allude to when I was referring to changing the core skill assumptions at tier two. Basically, at this tier, casters get access to things like wish and simulacrum (or whatever broken ass spell you feel like naming) but as a direct consequence, all of the non characters can do things like charm people with diplomacy with high skill ranks and no one has two bad saves.


I think that the bard is the obvious choice, but Inquisitors are also totally capable of filling the role, especially when your stats look like that. With a 15 in int, the inquisitor would have as many skill points as a rogue and probably fight like a rogue four levels above his own.


I kind of agree with Pan to be honest. I feel as though the system could very easily become a gritty game as a core assumption by removing or altering a lot of the truly obnoxious spell options for casters and leaving most of the martial options as is.

You could then have a system of rules similar in style to mythic rules called "Ultimate Fantasy" or something that basically give back a lot of the power to casters, but as a consequence, makes high level skill use a part of the core assumptions and makes martial or non magic characters less reliant on magic items by giving some of those goodies as class features. Basically, you give casters in this paradigm the big ugly save or loose spells, but martials are getting better save progressions and uses of skills that emulate spells to a degree. Obviously less diverse, but just as strong in those specific areas.

Mythic rules Could be the supplement for the special cases. The first two tiers amount to different styles of play and mythic makes each character uniquely heroic, I'm thinking this might function like gestalt rules, where you have your standard class, but get to progress another class in addition to the base class. The mythic class would be beyond the scope of normal play in either of the two previous tiers.


I could be wrong, but I think that the best way to be a fighter is to be an eldritch knight, that is if umd is the metric for success that presses the fighters balance buttons. :)


Hey Lemmy,
I like the change you made to minor and major magic. Do you think that it would be reasonable to allow the major magic talent to be taken more than once, each time you can choose a spell one level higher, up to level six spells?

1 to 50 of 1,189 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.