|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Yeah, yeah, I forgot to put RPG in front of the fantasy in my first line, that invalidates my whole argument.Sieg hail, mein grammar fuhrer.
Authorities in fantasy universes need adventurers. Because, as a rule, they are straight up better than regular soldiers.
When an orc band attacks a village, if the king doesn't send the army the village dies, because an orc band will destroy a villages police/militia. So if adventurers appear and say "You seem to have a orc/drow/hobgoblin problem. We are adventurers that will take care of it for you for X amount of cash!" the mayor is likely to sing allellujah and pay extra. Better than being killed together with his village.
When a dragon shows on the country side, armies die. Ten thousand arrows from ten thousand soldiers tickle Smaug. The very few people with enough power to take on a dragon usually have better stuff to do, are to afraid of trying to do it alone, or just don't care about your kingdom. So when a roaming bunch of adventurers shows up wanting to fght your dragon or, better yet, already famous for killing dragons, you promise them as much money as they want. If they die you don't lose anything. If they win, you would have to be a special kind of stupid to refuse paying or send assassins against people that can kill dragons.
And if they are calling adventurers for something, like in published material, it is usually something where normal resources have already failed, so they are calling in the specialists. And it doesn't matter what sort of problem you think you have, you pay the specialist rates. If you call the best law firm available for a shut case, you still pay the price for the best law firm. If you hire a five star chef for a night and ask him to make a grilled cheese, you still pay the cost of five star chef. If you hire a team of high risk mercenaries to kill dire rats, you still pay the cost of a team of high risk mercenaries.
And any politician that tries to make disappear the group of well trained, well equiped and well prepared adventurers that just did something his usual teams of assassins and soldiers couldn't, well... He deserves what happens when said group of well trained, well equiped and well prepared adventurers comes after his head.
Treating adventurers as vigilantes or outlaws only gets you outlaws that can break castle walls, kill armies, control the elements, summon the forces of hell, turn nobles into tadpoles, raise armies of the dead and other really unpleasant things. Better pay them to do 'adventuring' where the good and neutral ones can kill the more evil ones, than turn them all against you. Some long forgotten king must have realized that it's best to divide and conquer, than to unite and lose.
You destroy him. Chunky salsa flies everywhere. For a moment you see a translucent form of him and then it too is hit by the afterimage of your strike. An observing cleric or wizard can tell you that not only you killed him but somehow managed to kill his soul. For a quick moment you see Pharasma standing by your side looking flabbergasted, her mouth hanging open and her arms waving in a 'what the hell' motion. The she turns at you with a scowl and a glare and dissappears. Alternatively you see Zon-Khuton looking impressed. He turns and offers two thumbs up and what passes for a smile and then dissapears. If you are quick enough to raise an empty hand before he dissapears, he gives you a high five and then dissapears.
But seriously, I draw the line at bluff abuse. I had a PC cast glibness and walk into a demon fortress IN HELL and declare that he was their new boss. -40 on the bluff check and he still made it. Entire encounter was almost ruined (luckily he didn't have the rumormonger ability. He picked it up later). He tried to basically use it to get out of every encounter with a sentient creature, including tricking a dragon out of his hoard.
That is an awesome thing to do. Why would you be against a player being imaginative and resourceful?With that kind of Bluff check the player should be able to do stuff like Loki, who made a bunch of giants believe a 7 foot tall bearded male barbarian in an ill fitting dress was the goddess of beauty, Anansi, who convinced one of his enemies to stand still while he tied him to a pole because he wanted to measure how big he was, and Hermes, who convinced his brother to trade an awesome magic item for a musical instrument he cobbled together from garbage he found around the beach.
This is a rules question in the rules question forum.
The Core Rulebook wrote:
If you use Bluff to fool someone, with a successful check you convince your opponent that what you are saying is true.
If his Bluff beat your sense motive you belive him. If he says it's night you'll believe in that while staring at the sun. If he says he is god you'll bow down and worship, because you believe that. That is RAW.Anything about he being a known liar or believing that he believes it and may be crazy or not rolling bluff because the player can't make a convincing pitch despite the rules saying his character can, are house rules and have no use in this kind of thread.
Le Petite Mort wrote:
Okay, maybe the example I gave was more distracting than clarifying. To rephrase my question more explicitly, are characters railroaded into believing everything said to them at face value if they fail a given Sense Motive check?
Le Petite Mort wrote:
Gullible people are not aware that they're gullible. Gullible people in fact believe themselves to be really good at detecting lies. It's what makes them gullible.In your example Thoggs response could be "Ha knew you wren't half devil, that ain't even a thing. Who would have sex with devils anyway?"
I just have to ask: Is there a class, feat line or group of veils based on the Akashic Records? Something similar to the akashic class from Arcana Evolved capable of touching the akashic records to get memories of events and skill boosts and other stuff. Possibly a mix of psionic and veilweaver, maybe as a Cryptic archetype? Having that book name and not using that tasty concept seems like a waste.
You can use command words to turn brilliant energy (or any other weapon ability) on and off. So your hands work normally when you want but when combat begins you can say "This hand of mine glows with an awesome power! Its burning grip tells me to defeat you! SHINING FINGER!"
Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:
Bah, his story is boring, cliche, and full of plot holes. What isn't purple prose is succint to the point of confusion. His characters are flat and uninteresting, his descriptions are meandering and lifeless and his action scenes are laughable and his attempt at moralization is forced, simplistic and confusing. His story is not cool.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
I might have come out wrong. I just wanted to point out that he can do it with normal human abilities, imagine what someone who had PC stats could do with it. Not arguing with him,more using him as an example.Heck, if you can consider a hard rubber ball filled with water as a water ballon, a barbarian with more arms strenght than the best baseball players could probably throw it with enough strenght to cave a persons skull or rib cage. A hard rubber ball, likea dodge ball, filled with water, would probably hit like it was mde of steel and weight way less. Throwing water ballons could be a viable style.
When disscussing what weapon styles are feasible in the context of the game, I think it's good to remember the attributes the characters can have.
Off the top of my head, there was a character in Negima that fought with his hands in his pockets, 'unsheating' his hand, punching, and 'sheating' it again so quick the enemy doesn't even how he got hit. Another idea would be long kimono style sleeves. Or maybe a fighting style where you hold yourself at military rest or at ease stance, with your hands behind your back.
So, we can agree that there is a single build with a single archetype, pretty much fixed Rage Power and Feat selections, with minmaxed cha to the toilet, and with only three possible races, that can outshine the BR?
Only one single cookie-cutter build can compete with the BR. And that shows the BR doesn't obsolete the Barbarian how again?
Well yeah, if you can't see how 1d8+1d6(energy) is better than 1d6, than there is no way I can explain it better.
And what happened to
Eh. Their spell list isn't strong on utility. Maybe post a build? I'll modify it just enough to be an Invulnerable Rager Barbarian and we can do a side-by-side comparison and see which does better.
"Modify it just a little" These words, I don't think they mean what you think they mean :)
And the defensive advantages of the build are not to be overstated. If bothhit each other three times for average damage, rounding up, the Bloodrager takes 110 pts of damage (actually 122 due to Witch Hunter, but that's situational) and has 50 HP left (actually 38), while the Barbarian takes 139 after DR and has 55 HP left. Now, that's still slightly in the Bloodrager's favor (unless we count Witch Hunter)...but not a lot, and then there are the vastly better saves.
Don't forget to account for my Spirit Slam, 6 damage not negated by DR or energy resistance, and for the AoO you eat for getting in reach to trade blows with me. I only get the one but I do get it. Also CAGM would increase your normal DPR, but it does squat against, say, reach users that can five foot step before attacking making it so you don't even threaten with you AoOs. Even with CAGM, this Bloodrager would whup your Barbarian in a one on one match.
The Barbarian build still outperforms that Bloodrager even if he were to grab, say, Beast Totem and Superstition. The Bloodrager lacks the Rage Powers to grab as many of the good ones as the Barbarian can.
I'm sorry, but who are you outperforming? You got better saves, but only 2/3 of the DPR, (actually a little less since you keep excluding my Spirit Slam) my other defenses are slightly better (20% miss chance and fast healing 3, versus 2 more AC and DR6/-), and I got better utility, (Fly, Glitterdust, Intimidate and Spellcraft versus Acrobatics and Survival) and more money left over after the big six. You would only outperform with CAGM.Also, sure you can get a couple of casters and a prep round to grab Enlarge Person and Haste, but then I get a couple of casters and a prep round toget Haste, Moment of Greatness, and my own Brow Gasher on me. The BR is straight up better than the Barbarian at getting buffed.
I'll try to make the "All Rage Powers" Bloodrager build again monday see if I can do it a little better.
I was going to make a poorly maximised build trying to get as many rage powes as possible but by Undone suggestion I'm going to just make a DPR build.
20ptb, no traits, 12th level
Half-Orc Abyssal Spelleater Primalist Bloodrager 12
Str24 Dex10 Con15 Int10 Wis10 Cha18
FCB: 6 extra rounds of bloodrage, +6 HP
01 Power Attack, Claws
Normal: Greataxe +22/+17/+12 1d12+11 x3
Spells per day:
Edit: Forgot to put the CMB and CMD.
I'll do it, tomorrow morning, must sleep first.
And some are. A couple of elemental resistances for two rage powes? Yes, please.
Take away DR and uncanny dodge. There, the Barbarian is straight up better at tanking.
Forget Primalist, just the bloodrager bloodlines are enough to upset the barbarian. Besides CAGM, Pounce, Superstition and Spell Sunde what can compare to:
And yeah, they're 'only' while raging, but a mid-level bloodrager can rage every round of every battle just like a barbarian can.
And let's not forget they also get extra feats. Free Power Attack if you can wait to get it at sixth level, free Improved Manuers, free Iron Will and free Improved Initiative are all on the menu.
And at 11th level he can free action cast a self buff when he begins a rage, altering the duration to as long as raging. Choices include Shield(because the AC penalty from Rage is so unfair), Protection from Alignment, Enlarge Person, Bulls Strenght(who needs belts?) and Mirror Image(who needs armor?).
Ok, putting it all together we get something like this:
Human MoMS Monk2/Brawler 18, 20ptb
str18 dex14 con14 int10 wis10 cha10 OR
01 (MoMS) Power Attack; bonus: Pummeling Style; Bonus Combat Expertise
What do you guys think?
To be fair... SR is awful for player characters. It'll hurt you more often than it'll help you.
Until 14th level you just have to do the same as a Superstitious Barbarian and delay to get your buffs before raging. Between 14th and 16th you have more of a problem but you have enough wealth to buy some utility items and had 14 levels to prepare. At 16th level you gain Form of the Dragon, giving you access to fly, swim, burrow, darkvision and resitance to any element you might need.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Here's a nifty "spells are for the weak" blodrager build: Untouchable Primalist Bloodrager with the Arcane bloodline, trade Arcane Bloodage at fourth for Superstition and Witch Hunter, Trade Caster Scourge at twelve for Spellsunder and Eater of Magic. Use your bonus feat for Disruptive, Improved Initiatie, Iron Will, Spellbreaker and Combat Reflexes, in whichever order you want. Watch as anything with casting cries as your stupid high saves and spell resistance and ability to reroll failed saves make you as close as immune to magic as the game allows, while breaking enemy spells and having extra damage against casters and being always hasted. Might change Eater of Magic for Ghost Rager if you consider the bonus to touch AC is better than rerolling saves or if you can get rerolls from somewhere else.
Bard definetly, but I'm not sure about Archaeologist. He did
Spoiler:Also Ronan is an obvious Fighter. He wears full plate, he has a crappy Will save...
use a Fascinate Bardic Performance on Ronan.
Combat Reflexes, Combat Expertise, Power Attack and Dodge should be the first four feats for a Brawler focusng on Martial Flexibility, with one or more picks of Extra Martial Training and Weapon Focus with a favored weapon or two, probably Unarmed Strike, and Critical Focus at 9. Since they gain Improved Unarmed Strike from class this allows them to pick nearly any combat feat chain possible.
Also, Endurance is not a combat feat, so you can't take it with Martial Flexibility. If you want to use combos like that you would have to spend a feat on Endurance. Diehard isn't a combat feat either so you can't grab it when necessary even if you take Endurance.
Like PFS has any semblance with RAW, RAI or balanced...
My knee jerk reaction is why would anyone play a barbarian instead of an untouchable primalist bloodrager, except maybe for the Invulnerable Rager archetype. You lose Trap Sense for Spell Resistance, and trade ten rage powers for ten rage powers +the first level bloodline power +five feats. They've Rogued the Barbarian. Seriously.
Combination Strike: [teamwork feat]
Benefit: After a sucessful attack against an enemy you can spend a use of this feat as a swift action at the end of your turn to call a combination attack against that enemy. You then can choose to give a +1 circumstance bonus to attack or a +2 circumstance bonus to damage to any allies that have this feat and attack the same enemy before the beginning of your next turn.
Special: You can buy this feat multiple times, each time you gain +3 uses of this feat. If you have an Initiator level you gain an exta use of this feat and gain +4 uses instead of +3 for buying it multiple times. If you grant this feat to allies, using the Cavaliers Tactician ability or something similar, you and the allies you grant this feat share the number of uses you have left, if you grant this feat to two allies and all three of you use Combination attck on the same round you spend all the uses of Combination Attack you have.
After watching the new RWBY episode I wanted a feat that allowed a party of martials to do cool combos. So I made this. What do you guys think? Too clunky? Any ways that I can word it better? Too powerful? Should I put more prerequisites? Constructive criticism welcomed.
Lord Mhoram wrote:
I like this idea. Let me combine this with some things from my random ideas folder:
Trained By a Master: BAB+11, At least +1 armor, shield or weapon enhancement bonus bought as inherent bonus.
[b]New Rogue Talent[b]
Whew. I just hammered this out in one sitting. What do you guys think? Worth calculating the table and finishing up the feats?
Man, if only they had a period of time before releasing a hardcover book of rules where they could showcase some of the more problematic or anticipated rules and then have the player base run all the mathemathical testing and rule stressing and even some wordproofing for free, pointing out defects before they hit print. Some sort of playtest where they could listen to the players feedback... Like Dreamscarred Press does! Would be much better than just showing a samll part of the book and then just ignoring any feedback they disagree with. Imagine, if the Swashbuckler had been properly playtested they could have something different than the hot mess which is Charmed Life.
And Kobold Press managed it too.
The feat broke him so hard, it broke his blue screen. That there is some weapons grade brain breaker.
Or if you're a ranger, fighter or slayer, you can get the Shield Master feat, and just have a +5 shield , or klar in this case, and have that apply to both your AC and your attack/damage. If you're going for Thunder and Fang it's better with Ranger and Slayer, since you can skip the prereqs for Shield Master since Improved Shield Bash is redundant once you have Thunder and Fang.
Funny enough I already have one of each in my character fold (and a shaman, bloodrager, brawler and swashbuckler), This sunday when I finally get back to the group, can I use one of them instead of the paladin?
K177Y C47 wrote:
I think the slayer caught him mid sentence.That's what you get for divulging his secr
Mark Seifter wrote:
See there is the problem: You are confusing what the player can do, the players narrative power, with what the class can do, with the narrative power of the class. The player can decide to be an insufferable git and murderhobo the important NPCs or ignore the quests. But the casting classes have an ability to affect the story that the martial ones just don't have. The sorcerer is better at making the party arrive somewhere, but the fighter is not in any way better at killing a NPC they should work with. In fact if the player wants to kill a NPC the caster is probably better, because the martial can only hit it with weapons or maybe poison him, while the caster can teleport him to a volcano, call lighting on his head, turn him into a statue shatter the statue and use the pieces as a work of modern art, dominate him into picking a fight with a martial, make him drown on land, or a dozen other things. The martial can only kill someone, the caster can do it in ways people won't even know what happened to him for years.
Book of Collective Influence 2: New archetypes for all classes, new specialties, enlightenments and other options for every class and maybe even more new classes?
Ignore the combobreakers!
Start with Grollubs suggestion, then use this:
I wish that you will transfom my body to it's dwarven form, exactlry as it was before I was mortally wounded in the day XX of YY month and year ZZZZ, while keeping my mind, memories, knowledge and experience as they are right now, without altering them.
Both. Regular mosquitoes don't have levels, and you would need a solid cloud of mosquitoes to even make a swarm. Also, if the mosquitoes were intelligent enough to make sneak attacks, they wouldn't want to kill you, they can harvest way more blood by keeping you alive. They would protect you as long as you allowed them to drink from you.
So you are saying a mantis shrimp with sneak attack would be worse?
Imagine that on your eye, your genitalia, or dead center on a superficial artery.
Ecaterina Ducaird wrote:
What consolation? The rat just covered his wounded vulnerables with stomach acid and half digested food. He'll probably get some new disease in his vulnerables from that. At this point I'm just feeling sorry for the poor ogre :)