Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Nar'shinddah Sugimar

VM mercenario's page

1,236 posts (1,243 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 1,236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

7 people marked this as a favorite.

If you've read the Dresden Files series, the Knights of the Cross are perfect representations of paladins. Michael specially is what every roleplayer should aspire when playing a paladin.

Aelryinth wrote:

And hopefully the PC's will agree!


You asked a question I answered. No need to get your fellings all hurt just because you don't know what players would actually want. A difficult fight is better that a dead party. Always.

Aelryinth wrote:

A better example is:

What would your PC's prefer to have sent against them? NPC 1 or NPC 2?

Kindly also note that Crane WIng's other problem, other then its nigh invulnerability, is that it was improbable, and it was boring. PC 2 gets fights over with know, like a caster. He's also squishy, and if the enemy is smart, can be crushed.

PC 1 gets fights over with...after...a...long...boring...amount...of die rolling, which gets the DM frustrated, bores the other people at the table, and starts handwaving the fight once a 'lock' is achieved.


Number one. Obviously. A long and frustanting fight is loads better than a TPK. Always.

thorin001 wrote:

Why are people saying that fighting defensively with Crane Style only gives a -1 to hit? Crane style reduces the penalty from -4 to -2.

Fighting defensively: -4 to hit, +2 to AC

Fighting defensively w/ 3 ranks in acrobatics: -4 to hit, +3 to AC

Fighting defensively w/ Crane Style: -2 to hit, +3 to AC

Fighting defensively w/ Crane Style and 3 ranks in acrobatics: -2 to hit, +4 to AC

Crane Riposte used to diminish the penalty by another one. Not sure what it does now,never downloaded the errata.

Gauss wrote:

Lemmy, perhaps you should re-read the old version of the feat tree. It does in fact raise the bonus you gain from Fighting Defensively by +1 in addition to reducing the attack penalty. Thus, you go from almost never using Fighting Defensively to almost always using it.

The reason you do not see anyone claiming Combat Expertise is OP is because it is a -1:+1 exchange. Fighting Defensively becomes a -1:+4 exchange due to the Crane style tree.

Crane Wing does none of those things. Literary, none.

Crane Style is the feat that gives the bonus and most of the reduction on the penalty, and it wasn't errataed and noone ever complained about it or decided to make a build around it. Combat Expertise was never claimed to be OP because it's usually described as crap. Being loads better than Combat Expertise is not being OP, is being decent and not-crap. And even IF it was too good, it is no excuse for nerfbombing Crane Wing.

In the movies? Spiderman, the X-men and Fantastic Four are not with the Marvel studios, so there is no way for them to cameo on Avengers. Also, until Marvel makes a movie/tv series with a character they don't exist in the movie-verse. Ghost Rider, the Punisher and Daredevil have gone back to Marvel studios but until they get their own new movies they don't exist.

In the comic books they often do interact when there is an alien invasion or something like that. Events that affect all superteams have become nearly annual things and frankly kind of annoying, since people that only read Spiderman or only the Xmen have to buy an extra load of comics to know what is going on. In story the reason why they don't keep bumping into each other all the time is because theyre all dealing with something moe or less at the same time. While Electro robs a bank and Spiderman has to beat him up, Ironman is in China facing an alien dragon, Captain America is fighting a new Hydra secret weapon, Thor and Doctor Strange are stopping two different demonic invasions, the Fantastic Four are shutting down another of Doctor Dooms plans and the Xmen are fighting off the third wave of Sentinel robots of the week. Keep in mind that in the comic verse there is around 5 to 10 supervilains for every hero, not counting common criminals, there is enough work for everybody.

Kirth Gersen wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

That's the fault of the job, not the salary.

That's a fault of the class, not the stat generation.

To clarify, it's the same rule set (emplying company, by analogy) that's making these inconsistencies; it's just pretending not to by sliding the blame to a different department. The hiring manager makes a big show about the exactly equal salary offers, but then HR turns around and lays a bunch of perks on one candidate or witholds them from another. But the hiring manager and the HR department are both following the company's orders. It still means that the two candidates are not being treated fairly, despite all the pretty talk about everything being even-steven.

If wizards were somewhat weaker than martials at higher levels, by the way, I'd be OK with them getting a stat-buy system that favors them. But they're not. By a long shot.

Granted, I totally agree that stat inconsistencies are the very least of the problems there, but still, that doesn't mean we should congratulate ourselves on exacerbating them unnecessarily, even if by such a small degree.

Except that in your analogy rolling stats would mean that there's is a chance, small as it may be, that Bob is earning a 100,000 a year while I'm earning 10,000 a year and that chance is based on pure luck. There is no way at all, that that is fair. There is a chance that I'm getting the 100,000 and he is getting 10,000? Sure. There is also a chance that we're both getting 70,000 or 50,000 or 100,000. In any way it's the fault of the job(class) and not of the base salary(point buy). Having a random salary chosen when I enter the job just exarcebates he chance that Bob is going to become even richr than me.

And if we both have the same base salary and Bob gets all the benefits, but Bob spends money like water (is a pooor optiizer) and I'm smart with my savings and investments (better optimizer) I might end up richer than him. But no matter what financial genius I might be if he has those bonus and a base salary two times higher than me there is nothing I can do to bridge the gap.

Or in game terms:

Arachnofiend wrote:
With point buy you always know exactly what you're getting into. You know how much further behind you're going to be next to that caster and you know what you need to do to not get completely overshadowed. There's no compensating for rolling modest/low stats and then having your Wizard roll an effective buy of 30.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
666bender wrote:

last night our barbarian died.

he has saves in the statospher, and DR but the huge gian with improve vital strike made some holes in him.
sadly for the barby, he got hit on a vicious critical - and fell to begetive hit points.
the healer healed but the save was 50% worth amount of heal.
than he droppoed and as the rage ended.... he auto died.
is he normally great? yes. does he have weak spot? ofc, especially when we buff.

Any crit that can do that to a raging barbarian would have done worse to a fighter. Remember that the barbarian has more HP than the fighter, something between 4 (1st level) to at least 120 (at 20 th level). A fighter in the same position would've died before the healer could even launch his spell.

The barbarians weakness is that he lasts a round more than the fighter would before dying. I'm okay with that.

Can I post just the build and you do the judging?
If yes I'll post some builds tomorrow.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

They always said I had an explosive temperament. Toss a bomb
Undead? Well if you can't helium, can't curium, might as well barium
He will try to frighten us, but we must do like noble gases and not react.
If anyone asks "Are you sure" Like a proton, I'm positive.
You think this is hard? To me it's pretty basic.
Acid what you did there.
Don't worry, I can always find a solution.
An alchemist never dies, he justs stops reacting.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Have every skill in the game as a class skill, take 10 on all of them, do every knowledge check untrained, still be a great face.

You got it backwards. Those are all things the bard can do, but the rogue can't.

Nathanael Love wrote:

36d6 damage every round


No rogue can do that. None.

Because no foe is flatfooted every round and you have no sure way to make flanking happen. And sometimes you have to move, or the enemy has fortification, or uncanny dodge.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Telessar Talimah wrote:

Lazar we did the same BI with 2the rogues at level 15-16. We handed the group of high level demons their heads through teamwork. The main damagers were in order (zen archer, ninja, magus, Scout) the bottom damagers were summoner barbarian and paladin.

The magus was a shadowdancer as was the scout. 2.25 rogues


Paladin. Bottom damage dealer. Against demons.

Flagged for trolling.

ExposedWires wrote:

The whole debate is pretty interesting, but I think the value of rogues (and monks if you'll let me roll them in) is that they have a niche. This niche is not open combat and it's pretty clear that they weren't ever meant for that.

I'm currently playing in an urban gang war campaign. (In Sharn. We're doing an eberron conversion.) We're playing criminals with hearts of gold (Sorta but not really. At least we're better than the other gangs.) who deal in fencing and smuggling and thievery and gambling. We have to deal with the law all the time and subterfuge and misdirection are absolutely key. As such, our party has 2 rogues, a monk, and an alchemist. I'm playing one of the rogues and I'm a sap adept underhanded rumormonger who uses improvised weapons exclusively. The other rogue fights unarmed. This is all critical because it means our party never wears visible armor or carries any weapons. We can get into parties, clubs, police stations and generally never be suspicious. Even when we do get into serious altercations, we can all talk our ways out. The monk even contributes to our ruses with monstrous sense motive rolls to read body language. Together we keep everything close to the chest. If we ever slip up, the alchemist just burns it all to the ground. It's working for us.

We can also outrun or easily hide from things that are serious threats (of which there are many) and I honestly can't see too many other classes working out as well. We're up against huge organizations so individual combats aren't about defeating our enemies so much as surviving and then hiding bodies or making it look like somebody else killed them or even faking our own deaths. Maybe some cheeky spellcasters would fit into our party, but anybody who relied on ranged would be boned in these tight streets and anybody in heavy armor is just bait for the griffin rider guardsmen.

I think in this situation, rogues are perfect. They're gonna suck in open honest combat, but here they are kings.

Already did this a couple of pages ago, but okay.

Classes that can do that kind of campaign beter than the rogue (and monk):
Ranger with urban favored terrain.
Note that I man they can do it better. Not just as well. Straight up, laugh at the poor rogue, better.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
K177Y C47 wrote:
1) Half his feats are COMBAT ONLY feats. I mean, that SCREAMS "OPTIMIZE ME FOR COMBAT!" Additionally, the fighter's biggest advantage is the ability to get certain feats faster than other classes because he can move through the feat chain faster (due to his obnoxious number of feats). The thing is, if the fighter keeps stopping along the way to take Skill Focus (Basketweaving) or whatever (assuming he is not actully taking SF to get Eldritch Heritage (Abyssal) to get the mad Str Buff.) then he is actually going to be no better than the ranger when it comes to feats. This will make the fighter player quite sad when his guy is barely better (if not worse) than the Ranger/Paladin/Barbarian AT THE ONE DAMN THING HE IS SUPPPOSED TO BE GOOD AT.

Uh, Fighters aren't meant to beat Barbarians, Paladins, or Rangers when they are benefiting from their spike damage. Fighters are meant to be the martial that is always good in a fight. Put the Paladin up against a non-smite target, and his biggest damage spike will be taken away (though he's still good). Put a Ranger up against a non-favored enemy and he has the same issue as the Paladin. Barbarians eventually do run out of rage, or may be fatigued.

Fighters, conversely, still get their feats and weapon training against any enemy, all day long. The fighter's only limited use ability is his HP and that's what healers are for.

Granted, yes, Barbarians effectively have limitless Rage because most parties stop pushing forward long before the Barbarian runs out (at least at middle levels and later). Paladins are also arguably the best tanks in the game. But none of that means the Fighter isn't a good fighter. He's not supposed to be the best, he's supposed to be consistent.

If a Fighter gets hit with a Ray of Exhaustion, or Waves of Fatigue, or didn't get enough sleep and is fatigued/exhausted; he fights on.
If the Fighter is up against elementals or hordes of evil enemies, each a valid target for smite; he fights on.
If the Fighter is up...

Except being 'consistent' and 'able to go all day long' is worth crap in a team game. After the casters have spent their spells and the barbarian and bard spend their rounds, and the monk spent their ki, and the pally is out of lay on hands/smites, the fighter and the rogue have three options:

1- Keep going alone and die against any level appropriate encounter.
2- Drag the party with them so they can all die while the fighter uses the enemy distraction to kill the enemies and feel good about his bad carrer choice at the cost of everybody else.
3- Rest with the team.
Well there is a fourth... Go alone and face ridiculously weak opponents and be coddled by the DM so the player can feel special.

fictionfan wrote:

Heres a nice rouge biased test. Imagine you want to steal something from a Noble's mannor house a crown or something. The house has dogs guards and possibly traps which class would you want for this mission. You are level 5.

There are that's a non-combat test that does not come up that often if some other class can do it better then a Rogues aren't just sub-pare they flat out suck.

Bard. All of the skills of the rogue plus invisibility, plus detect magic to find any magic traps. Better at disguising himself and conning his way in.

Monk focused in dex and wis. Zen archer especially. Better at detecting traps (high wis) capable o jumping from the ground to the top of the wall and rom there to the second or third floor window.
Ranger. Can tame the dogs, sneak just as well as he rogue (better if he takes urban as his terrain) better at finding traps (higher wis and fav terrain urban)
Wizard that planned for the assault and thus came with the right prepared spells. Fly, detect magic, detect secret doors, invisibility, disguise self, pilfering hand. Also has a lot of skill points.
Alchemist. Not as high on skills but has extracts. Lower Stealth by 3 for not being class, increase by twenty with invisibility. Perception, umd, sleight of hand and disable device skills are the same as the rogue, but he can get extracts to increase perception bt +2 and gain low light vision, negate the dogs scent, gain a +2 competence bonus on Disable Device, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth checks, +5 perception.

So, two can do it better (Ranger and Alchemist) and three just as well, and the Alchemist is the only one that can sneak past the dogs instead of having to find another way in.

1. Do you know the name of the new Stallone movie? It's like the Expendables but from the villains point of view.
2. What are these manilla folders on your desk?
3. Why would you play a class named the load?

Dear following poster,
The answers to your next three questions are as follows:

1. I did it 45 minutes ago.
2. Colonel Mustard in the library with the pipe.
3. If you find who knows the answer to that, kill him. Kill him dead.

Techniques :)
Martinez(eagle): Initiative, Perception and Appraise seems really good, but should still compete with Lannish and Aldori for best Technique
Vectorius(bull): Each round ignore a number of squares of difficult terrain equal to the bonus, Handle Animal & Ride allows for five foot steps where others can't and is good for a mobility character.
Joran(wasp): Number of additional Attacks of Opportunity per round, Sleight of Hand & Stealth for possible low dex build or builds that don't want to take Combat reflexes, and the sills make it useful for rogueish builds
Raphael(bear): the bonus times half his level (minimun 1) as temporary HP that is lost first, Survival, Knowledge(nature) based on the idea that HP is an abstract representing your stamina spent defending, blocking and dodging attacks

Debilitating Strikes are harder to do because it has to be an effect that last between three and ten rounds, so it can't be used to daze, confuse, sttager, stun or do a free maneuver.

Ciaran Barnes wrote:


I totally wanted to leave this open to unaramed attacks. If you're holding your weapon and have a free hand, you could even delcare the weapon your off-hand and use the class features to punch. Well lets have a talk about weapons. My understanding is that "weapons" includes manufactered weapons and unarmed attacks - the stuff that appears on the weapons list. Legally speaking, does "weapons" include touch attacks and natural attacks?

VM mercenario:
I have no plans to add more styles. I struggled enough with the five I have! They have changed many times in the last two years, but I will spare you the details. As you can see, I mentioned that these are the five most popular styles. I hoped that would allow for more in the future, without me doing the work. :)

very good... As with many things, I will have to take time to consider this, as it would require, I think, alteration of more than one class feature.

Is that an invitation? Cause I think I can think up some three or four more possible styles. Give me a day or two to suss out the appropriate skills and I'll come back with them. Would it be okay to have some overlap on the style skills?

Verynice class, I like it. Do you intend to have more fighting styles? Cause right now the bravo can get all five styles during his carrer. He is not choosing which styles he wants, but in what order he wants to get them. Couple more techniques would open up the possible builds.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TheSideKick wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:

Not really. A Fighter can hit stuff better more consistently. Other classes can still hit stuff, and often better.

If you take archetypes out of the equation there isn't anything a Fighter can do that another class can't.

one dimensional thinking...

Caedwyr wrote:

What actual goals/effects can the fighter produce/do that other classes can't?

many many things. more then just "i hit harder", things like... wait ive had this same debate 5 times now...

i dont care anymore, i feel like im in a monk thread all over again!! same points over and over, no one willing to see that they are being to harsh and that the fighter has value outside of "i hit things hard.

And it's been five times you failed to show what else the fighter can do. Six now.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
OgreBattle wrote:
Simple question, what do you see as the Fighter's niche that the Ranger is unable to imitate?

Being super extra boring, having no base flavor, no out of combat utility, not having any important, exciting or really useful class features, being incapable of solving problems without resorting to violence, having to spend all their money and regular feats to ape what other classes get for free.

Am I missing any thing?
Ah yes, doing a little more DPR than an unbuffed, no favored enemy ranger, but not so much more as to really matter.

The way I did I made it an armor bonus and a separate insight bonus totouch ac. Armor bonus doesn't stack you only get the best one, and you still have the line in weapon and armor proficiencies about losing the ac bonus and fast movement if he uses armor. Also armor bonus doesn't enter into touch AC so I think it's better to have a separate bonus than make a distinction for the monk.

About the styles, my group cancelled play today so I have lots of RPG energy to spend on homebrewing stuff. Glad you liked.

Quivering palm actally works the same way. Even in the old monk version you could activate it in the same round.

Last post.
Ki Power.
This is absolutely awesome.
6 spell like abilities, up to sixth level.
One 1st level, one 2nd or 3rd, one 4th and three of 5th or 6th. The ki cost to use them is pretty expensive so they can't be abused. And there are lots of sells that can be refluffed as just being that badass instad o being pseudo magic.
My favorite idea would be Transformation at 13th level. It's equal to belt of phisical perfection +4 and a +4 amulet of natural armor for 13 rounds. That is two items from the christmas tree you could sell and it gives a 'Im going super sayan' vibe.
If you like the reliance of the magic items there's also Greater Heroism.
Oh and there's always Antimagic Field.

Can someone contact Ashiel and see if he could convert this ability to get psionic powers for a psionic archetype. I would love to have a psionic version of this monk.

Final Verdict: 4/5.
Good attack, great defenses, some self healing, good movement options, can expand out of combat with pseudo casting, or use it to get new combat options, can self buff. No wasted or useless abilities. Solid tier three in my opinion. Full of flavor. Still lack some polishing, but I love it. When I start making my own hombrew PF system, this is the monk it will have.

Bonus feats, Evasion, Still Mind, Purity of Body and Diamond Body are all good. I love the change to Fast movement.

Ki pool has some nice changes, I like you put Tongue of Sun and Moon here where it belongs, but it has a couple of weird things: At 10th level the monks unarmeddamageis considered lawful, but the monk can be chaotic. That is weird. Make it so at tenth level he bypasses any alignment based DR. Much more elegant and simple. Tiyng a pseudo lurry of blows to Ki points is bad. The monk would run dry of ki attacking and never using it for the other stuff. If you plan on giving Flurry of Blows back, with my idea or some other, just take the ki using option off, it would be redundant.

High Jump, Feather Step and Improved Feather Step are all very nice, although I would like some wording on improved to the effect of using acrobacy checks to run jumping from rooftop to rooftop; to walk, and even stand, on peoples heads without hurting them; or to run on the top of tree branches, clotheslines and other materials that should hold them just as well as water.

I really like Debilitating Strike. Giving a Dirty Trick rider to unarmed damage is pretty cool conceptually (go for the leg) and the bonus to CMB for the damage is pretty helpfull.

Wholeness of Body is pretty good and flavorfull. I love your version of Abundant Step and Diamond Soul. I love that the best way to hit a monk with a spell is by tricking him into lowering his SR and failing his save on purpose.

Timeless Body, Boundless Body, Empty Body and Perect Self are all good.
Counter Strike has this weird line "but his mystical arts make him even capable of disrupting mighty magics" but counter strike has nothing to do with magic. Maybe he couldincrease the DC to cast defensively inside his threatened area so he can take attacks of opportunity on casters.

Quivering Palm is missing the lines about eing able to setup a quivering palm and only making the enemie die hours or days later. Why/ I thought that was pretty cool and flavorful, myself. You could even use it a few rounds later so the enemy can walk around before dieing, like in Kill Bill.

Style of soft force: This style focuses on grapples, throws and on using an opponents strenght against him. At second level as part of a full-attack action, the monk can make one additional combat maneuver, regardless of whether the maneuver normally replaces a melee attack or requires a standard action, though all combat maneuver checks suffer a –2 penalty when using a flurry.
At 8th level, the monk may attempt a second additional combat maneuver, however this maneuver has an additional –3 penalty on combat maneuver checks. At 15th level, the monk master may attempt a third additional combat maneuver, this maneuver has an additional –5 penalty on combat maneuver checks.
At 2nd level the monk is considered one sie larger for the purpose of which opponents he can use maneuvers against., so for example, a medium monk can try to trip a huge foe. At 8th he is considered two sizes larger. At 15th he is considered 3 sizes larger.
At 11th level the monk can spend a ki point to make two combat maneuvers as a standard action, as long as neither maneuver requires the maneuver master to move. He may perform two identical maneuvers against two adjacent enemies, or he may perform two different combat maneuvers against the same target.

An idea would be to have a few archetypes that enhance certain styles. The tetori and flowing monk would use and enhance the soft force style, while other archetype enhances the open palm style by trading Fast movement and Feather Step for increased accuracy or early Debilitating Strikes or some ability to keep enemies from moving away, or getting past them, maybe free Combat reflexes. Another archetype could enhance Cclosed fist style by giving some bonus for every 10 feet you move or if you're using Feather Step, or maybe gie the improved version of Stnning fist from the normal monk or allowing Perfect strike to work with unarmed focused blow and giving an improvement like the zen archer does.

If you like this style idea and plan to use them just give me the word and I'll see hat I can do on those four archetypes.

Style of the closed fist: This style focuses on using momentum to make powerful single attacks. Starting at 2nd level, a monk can make a foused blow as a standard action. When doing so, a monk gains the benefits of the Vital Strike feat when attacking with unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. He can make a Focused blow at the end of a charge or as part of a Spring Attack. The monk is treated as having the Vital Strike feat for the purpose of feat prerequisites.
At 8th level a closed fist monk unarmed damage incresas to 1d10. At 15 level it increases to 2d6. This increases applies to all unarmed damage not just when using focused blow.
At 8th level, the monk has the Improved Vital Strike feat when using focused blow. The monk is treated as having the Improved Vital Strike feat for the purpose of feat prerequisites. At 15th level, the monk has the Greater Vital Strike feat when using focused blow. The monk is treated as having the Greater Vital Strike feat for the purpose of feat prerequisites.
At 11th level the closed fist monk can spend a ki point to make a bull rush attempt against one target in place of a melee attack. If successful, the target takes damage equal to the monks Strength modifier and is moved back as normal. The monk does not need to move with the target if successful. This does not provoke an attack of opportunity. If an obstacle prevents the completion of the opponent’s move, the opponent and the obstacle each take 1d6 points of damage, and the opponent is knocked prone in the space adjacent to the obstacle.

Continue next post.

Here is an idea for open palms and closed fists:

Fighting style: (Ex) At second level the monk can choose one of three fighting styles. Once made this choice is permanent.
Style of the open palm: This style revolves around using rapid strikes to take overwhelm defenses and take down an enemy. Starting at 2nd level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so, a monk has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability. The monk is treated as having the Two Weapon Fighting and Double Slice feats for the purpose of feat prerequisites.
A monk applies her full Strength bonus to her damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry. A brawler with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of flurry of blows, nor can she make natural attacks in addition to her flurry of blows attacks.
At 8th level, the monk has the Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feat when using flurry of blows. The monk is treated as having the Improved Two Weapon Fighting feat for the purpose of feat prerequisites. At 15th level, the monk has the Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feat when using flurry of blows. The monk is treated as having the Greater Two Weapon Fighting feat for the purpose of feat prerequisites.
At 11th level when making an attack as a standard action the open palm monk can spend a Ki point to make a second attack at his highest BAB. Both attacks take a -2 penalty. This must be declared befored the first attack is rolled.

Continue next post.

Unarmed Strike I think is good. The +6 damage is less than you would get from increasing the unarmed damage die like the normal monk, but the +6 attack makes up for not being able to permanently enhance their unarmed strikes like magic weapons. Here is an idea: A more mistyc archetype culd trade this bonus to attack and damage for the ability to spend money and gain magical ehacements to his body like a magic weapon.

Is the link on the first page the current one? It doesn't have flurry of blows or increased unarmed damage die. Although, Unarmed strike does give a good damage bonus.

"Armored in Life" says:
This Armor Bonus is an insight bonus that applies against all touch attacks,
Does this apply on normal attacks too? From what I can find, insight bonus, like deflection bonus and divine bonus, apply to all AC, even against touch attacks and while flatfooted. Also you keep calling it Armor bonus, which is confusing, since armor bonus is the type gained from armor. It can't be an insight bonus and an armor bonus at the same time. Maybe you mean AC bonus?
Here's what I think would be a better writing for the ability:

Armored in Life (Ex): A Monk has a special armor bonus to AC whenever he is not using armor or shields that he is not proficient in. This armor bonus has a value of +4 at first level, and this bonus increases by 1 for every 4 levels the monk possess. He also gains the same amount as an insight bonus against touch attacks. If the Monk wears an item that grants enhancement bonuses to armor or special armor qualities, such as enchanted clothing or armor bracers, he gains the enhancement bonus to AC and the armor special qualities even if he normally wouldn't.

Now he can benefit from bracers of armor and enchanted clothing but light armor does nothing, even if he gains proficiency somehow.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Before pondering the existence of god, you should ponder the existence of paragraphs and proper capitalization of letters. I can't read what you're trying to say. It's making my eyes bleed.

Is it just me or is Shin acting more and more like a cartoon? I mean like when Family Guy or South Park want to be very offensive by making a super racist african american guy that sees everything as racism, kind of cartoon.
Shin, dude, chill. Take a deep breath, walk away rom the thread until you're calm again. Being the stereotype you're trying to fight is the definition of a pointless battle.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pomkin wrote:

Yikes, this thread got really out of hand, I was just looking for mechanical ways to have the monk and fighter do stuff out of combat. I ended up killing them off and now they're playing a ranger and barbarian respectively, they are having much more fun now.

As a side note, my group never gets into issues with roll play vs role play, they usually role play their stats, but if they say something clever or something similar I'll give them a relevant bonus.

Let's see...

Anzyr wrote:

Hey now! My advice was pretty good. Fighters and Monks are ill-suited to out of combat (Fighters doubly so) and they should probably pick different classes if they want to be less useless out of combat.

Simple. Accurate. Problem-solving.

Apparently, Anzyr won the thread. Right there. [/thread]

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:

Well, this movie looks to be so much fail already...

It's not a racism thing, it's just poor casting choices ALL around.

Ben Grimm is a 100 lb guy (soaking wet)?

Siblings that go against the genetic norms (supposedly it's because they are adopted siblings...which is only against the entirety of comic canon for the FF since the beginning).

And...for those comparing gender switches...Dr. Doom...supposedly is going to be female.

If they can't even get the casting right...I have a huge feeling this script will make the 90's unreleased version seem like Shakespeare in comparison...not to mention the previous FF films to seem like genius cinematography in relation.

As for adding the token minority...if they really wanted to include racial diversity on the team...they should have made Ben Grimm African American, or Reed Richards...OR...simply make BOTH Sue and Johnny African American. At least have something make more sense than saying...we have a black and white brother and sister from the same family.

That's not called racism to have your thoughts go????

Rather it's called...with so many other options available...why in the world do this casting this way?

Mixed. Families.

What planet are you from where mixed families are harder to believe than superpowers?

And in what kind of bizarro dimension do you live where you can imagine a Hollywood blockbluster being able to present a mixed family without making a big mess about it and wasting a third of a movie on a subplot to explain a change that isn't even important or necessary to the story? Is the sky orange over there? Is the moon made of actual cheese? Whch kind? How are you even acessing the internet of a different dimension?

You're looking for bards and cavaliers. Bards make everyone around them better at everything, and cavaliers can lend their teamwork feat to allies so everybody doesn't need to buy the same feats. All casters can do a good job of buffing their meatshield friends, but the martials don't have many good options for protecting their friends.
If third party is allowed, Rite Publishings Secrets of Tactical Archtypes 1 & 2 are pretty good at giving nearly all the F classes some team boosting ability. Rogue Genius Games Warmaster is a full BAB class entirely based on making the party work together, without the mount baggage of the cavalier. The upcoming Path of War from Dreamscarred Press has at least one disciline entirely focused on helping the party and giving them extra moves and bonuses.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Cheapy wrote:

The designers hate TWF users (or, generalized to martials).

I certainly hope that anyone with the ability to think can easily see why this is an utterly ridiculous claim. This first requires some ulterior motive on the part of the designers, which is just laughable. "I hate TWF so much I'm going to add it to the game, and just SCREW THEM OVER! YEA! THAT'LL TEACH THEM! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

...Hi, you must be new to these forums and/or the PF system! Here's a secret: Monks suck, Rogues are near useless, Fighters can't have nice things. Every time a good change happens to one of these classes it gets nerfhammered so hard it breaks the feat standing next to it.

Cheapy wrote:
At one point a few hundred posts back, they said they weren't comparing to fighter or rogue.

And that is a good thing. You should balance against the barbarian and the paladin, against the bard, the inquisitor and the alchemist. You want to compare to the well designed classes, not with the bottom of the pile.

If Rogue is your measure stick you end up with the same problem the Investigator got in the playtest, and go from 'good class' to 'will never be able to meaningfully contribute in combat'.

tzar1990 wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Here we go again...
Sorry, is this type of upgrade a pretty common thread on the forums? I'm fairly new, so if there's a well-executed version of this out there, I'd love if you could link me to it :)

Pretty common is an understatement. There are loads of threads like these on the homebrew/suggestions forum (where this should be by the way) and even more on General Discussion. Well executed is harder. Problem is everybody has their own idea of how much and what exactly to give each class. Closest thing to consensus is that 7th level plus should already be legendary/wuxia/mythologic and 15th plus should be mythic/epic. My opinion? Casters are making demipanes and fulfilling wishes sofighters should be able to leap tall buildings and break castle walls, at the very least.

Also, something else most people eventually notice is that the full BAB classes aren't the only ones that the need the boost. Monks and Rogues can do with some love too.

Review on ideas tomorrow when I'm not conked out with imnsonia. Do you want ideas too or just reviews?

Heavy, tell them what I think.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Crusader wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
The Crusader wrote:

And what's the penalty for acting against your alignment? Most people would argue that you shouldn't suffer an alignment change for just a few, or only one, opposing act. But, wouldn't it be the most alarmingly chaotic thing a lawful person could do, to take a single act completely opposed to your entire world view? If you engaged in random, bizarre behavior frequently, it would simply be how you defined your code, your sense of order. Borderline lawful. But, just once...

And how lawful... or how frequently lawful does a chaotic character have to be before he faces the potential of an alignment shift? Can he ever? Isn't he always doing as he pleases... the essence of Chaos? If he can't shift, what is the point of the opposing alignments? Are you only lawful until you "fall"?

Chaos isn't randomness or bizarre behavior, and perfect unvarying order is pathological (see OCPD, not to be confused with OCD).

A character ceases to be lawful when his actions demonstrate he is at least as comfortable with flexibility (change) as order. He ceases to be chaotic when his actions demonstrate he is at least as comfortable with order (structure) as with flexibility. For example, I am a lawful person but have become less lawful over time due to association with chaotic people (who I cannot force to follow my rigid plans) and consciously training myself to improvise more. Increased lawfulness is a common byproduct of age - people sometimes become set in their ways or slip into familiar routines as they grow older.

Bhaene wrote:
Chaotic people (as others have posted) see these rules as guidelines. Thus chaos can have codes of honor, laws, traditions, etc...

This, to me, reads like Chaos = (Lawful + Options).

For example: Kaoss crosses the street everyday when he leaves his house. He uses the crosswalk every time. He never doesn't use the crosswalk. But, as long as he puts his fingers in his ears and shouts, "I'm only doing this because...

The problem you seem to have is that you think alignment is based on actions. It's not, it's about motives. It's not what you do, but why you do it.

Evil can do good actions if they want, usually as cover so people don't get suspicious, or to cut down an evil rival.
Good can do some evil stuff like killing enemies usually when they hae no other options or the options have much worse consequnces. (paladins are another matter, but theyre supposed to be extreme in their alingnment)
Lawful can break laws that go against their personal code.
Chaotic can follow laws, when they make sense to him or when he elieves he will be punished for breaking them.

Chaotic societies usually have laws like:
The Right of Hospitality: As long as your host is good toyou you have to be a good guest to him. And vice versa. If the other wrongs you, you have the right to call everybody to kick his ass. Cause if we let him be a bad guest to you then he will come o my house and I don't want that.
Weregild: You kill someone, you have to pay the family a sack of money in compensation, if you don't they can come and kill you to settle the score. If you kill hem you're badass and nobody will care enough to keep it going. If both families start a blood feud, noone cares as long as it doesn't spill. If it pills on non-family, the rest ofthe community gathers togheter and kicks both families in the ass.
Stealing: If you're caught stealing you give it back plus some compensation, we willl work the mount at the time. If the guy you stole from wants he can try to kill you. If you kill him, youkeep his stuf, if he kills you, you're dead.

All examples from actual societies. See? General guidelines, instead of rigid systems.

Aranna wrote:
WWWW wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Your answer also covers mine the higher level manifested power is better than the handful of level 1 spells. I know you are thinking there must be SOME spell that isn't as good as a higher level manifestation... but I am fairly certain you can always find a better use via a higher level effect.

Blood money? that does strength damage and last time I checked that was a dump stat for wizards.

Just casting Gate one time via blood money will cost you 20 points of strength damage. Most wizards would be done for the rest of the fight lacking even the strength to move their tongue to command the thing they just summoned.

Seriously, this is a question; what are the things psionic classes have that are more powerful then the various heavy hitters their equivalent magical classes bring to the table? You know, stuff like blood money, simulacrum, planar binding, etc. I am asking you this question.

And I am telling you I am not a system master you would have to ask someone who was a system master, I am sure you would get an answer. But the spells you list Blood Money, Simulacrum, and Planar Binding seem balanced so I can't tell why you think they are overpowered?

The 'system masters', as you say, have already responded. The answer is nothing. There is nothng a psion can do that a wizard can't out do. Psionics is much more balanced than vancian casting.

You keep arguing as if you had system mastery and could prove psionics is OP, when you admit you don't have the mastery and can't think of ways it's OP, while the people that do have the mastery are telling you it's not OP...

We fell for it, didn't we? It's a troll. Stop feeding it people. Stop arguing with the troll.

Marthkus wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

When the wizard is crafting, he crafts for the WHOLE party not just himself.

Because like what gear does a wizard want or need? +6 int item, blessed book, Cloak of Resistance +5. AC items are a waste of time on characters without high-dex or heavy armor.

You know what wizard minions do? Support the WHOLE party.

The amount of spot-light being taken up is being over estimated.

Yes, but imagine how much faster crafting would go and how many more minions you'd have supporting the party if you had another Wizard (also another 2 free spells per level!) instead of a Fighter!

And what if crafting and minion hording doesn't float your boat?

FUN is an important element. Not everyone likes playing support characters.

If you don't like playing a support character, why would you play a fighter?

Prince of Knives wrote:
Ilja wrote:
Actually, I don't think you can raise yourself after three days time. But that's about it, yeah.
...Is there a way for clerics to cast Contingency? 'Cause if so I've got a solution for ya.

Maybe use a Lesser Planar Ally? Can a Hound Archon or Lantern Archon cast a scroll or use a wand?

You know you're going to die, so call a planar ally with the instruction of in three days casting the scroll you've already crafted to bring you back.
If necessary we can bump Jesus to level 11 so he can cast Planar Ally and call a Couatl with it's +18 in UMD.

Athaleon wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
How many times has your DM stolen the wizards spellbook, or sundered his spell pouch?

IME, stealing spellbooks (or weapons) might happen once... maybe twice in a campaign. It gets old really fast...

Still, I'd say every Wizard should keep a copy of his spellbook somewhere safe, just like every martial class should carry a spare weapon or two...

Oh, I agree. Doing it often is a dick move by the DM. The thing is, the fighter just pulls out another weapon, and fights down -1 until someone casts Make Whole. The wizard is hosed.

Still the point stands. The wizard is even more equipment dependent than a martial class.

His equipment is far cheaper, unless he's going out of his way to learn a huge number of spells or his spellbook keeps getting destroyed.

But sure, let's say no prep time and no equipment of any stripe. The Wizard is hosed, so use Paragon Surge Sorcerer or Oracle instead.

No equipment at all, naked to their birthday suit, makes the fighter more hosed than the wizard. The fighter AC is only 10+dex mod and unless he was already focused on unarmed strike his attack and damage all plummet down. The wizard still has whatever spells he prepared in the morning and can now do more damage with his blast spells and has better AC than the fighter simply by virtue of Mage Armor. This is another point to demonstrate that in corner situations the wizard is better than the fighter.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
aegrisomnia wrote:
Honestly, against the Judeo-Christian God, saying one has unlimited power and actually having it are two very different things. All we see are a few miracles that 20th level Wizard could duplicate (there's even a thread on this).

Well, that's sort of moving the goalposts. What you're saying amounts to "if this deity isn't as strong as he's described as being by those who believe in him, then..." The miracles that are described are pretty clearly not meant to imply any limits in power.

Pathfinder developers' resistance to giving stat blocks to the deities is tantamount to their saying this: no matter how strong your wizard becomes, the only way to win is with the power of plot. What that means, to me, is that there is no way for a wizard of any level to beat Iomedae in a fair fight, no matter what your caster's phenomenal cosmic powers. I get that this might seem unfair, but them's the breaks as I see it.

You're the one moving the golaposts, dude. He explicitly said old school deities referring to the mithological deities, i.e. Zeus, Loki, Shiva, etc. You're the one ho brought Iomedae in to change the goalposts.

I love how the fighter has a lot more money for hirelings than the wizard because buying spells is just SO expensive. I mean it's not like the fighter has to buy magic armor and at least one magic weapon and either of those is like 3 or 4 times more expensive than having all the spells from corebook.
It's not like the wizard, needing less equipmnt and crafting most of his own equipment at half price, would have several thousands mre gp than the fighter to spend on hirelings. No siree. Nope. Only fighters gain wealth by level, don't you know?

gustavo iglesias wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

I'm using 'magical' in the terms of 'not natural and unbound by reality or physics'.

You're using 'magical' in the sense of 'it detects as magical', which is an extremely limited, game-definition view of what is magical

Well, yes, as we are talking about Pathfinder, I use the pathfinder definition of magic.

Supernatural effects are magical, but not 'spellcaster magical'. There's tons of extraordinary effects that are magical, and physically impossible, but simply transcend 'PF Magical Energy' that they don't detect as such.

I know a lot of people from diverse religions who would cringe at your statement that God's miracles are, in fact, magic.

You want to tick off religious people? Build a ninth level cleric and show them that it can do every single one of Jesus miracles. And then some more. In a span of a couple of minutes. And all again the next day.

A 9th level cleric is better at miracles than Jesus. And people want Aragorn to be level 20th...

Kirth Gersen wrote:
Orthos wrote:
That and it still leads to the same old system of "A martial character needs a mage to buff him or make a magic item for him before he can compete".

Not if PC's personal "mojo" (our theoretical new currency) could be spent on the PC and/or on his/her items by the player. We cut out the middleman, in other words.

Sigfried can spend a bunch on impenetrable skin, and use the remainder for his cloak, sword, etc. Arthur can spend all his on his sword and scabbard, if he wants to -- the stuff just gets handed to him from out of a lake, without him having to hit up Merlin to craft the stuff for him.

That is an idea I've toyed with off and on again for sometime but never made into acual rules. I blame my lazyness.

The idea is that instead of getting money and valuables for every encounter the PCs get 'wealth' which can be either 'treasure' or 'mojo' (I dodn't have a good word for it, your mojo idea is the best so far), depending on what the encounter is and what the player wants.

Treasure is actual money and goods, and can be used to buy itens in shops, pay for costs of living, hire helpers and craft stuff.
Mojo is virtual money and can be used to find itens (instead of random itens you pay for the item and then find the item you want in the next loot pile), evolve weapons and armor (making weapons and armor that grow with the user), buy itens at extra price so they're not actual itens but you just getting more powerfull (avoiding the christmas tree effect and making for a possible vow of poverty character).

That way when you kill a bandit and take his stuff, you gain treasure, when you kill a wandering pack of direwolfs, instead of finding a bag of coins in their stomachs you gain mojo. When the group does a contract or something the DM can decrase the money offered and then give some mojo for the difference. It allows one player to get most of his Wealth by Level as treasure and end up richer than a small nation and covered in magic itens, while another has an ancient weapon that grows in power together with himself and no other itens, it's all his internal badassery.

Now if only I could get this mess as rules text...

Delay evasion to either third or fifth level, give no trace and it's increases one level later so you don't get them at the same time as trap sense, allow the rogue to select ninja tricks instead of talents, allow Ki to be based on either int or cha chosen when you gain the ability, allow it to be called guile or panache for player that don't want a 'mystical' or 'eastern' feel.
The rogue will be able to better participate in combat, be better at some skills than the bard, especially stealth, but he still doesn't get the versatility the bard gets frm spells.

When non core is allowed you have improvements for the bard and classes like the inquisitor and the alchemist while the rogue get's crappier and crappier talents. If that were the case I would reccomend changing and improving some of the crappier rogue talents. And if you have the advanced class guide playtest, maybe allow the investigator talents Item Lore, Percetive Tracking and Effortless Aid (using Ki instead of Inspiration) and the slayer talents Foil Scrutiny and Slowing Strike.
It is a great boost of power for the rogue, which brings him to be almost on par with bards and inquisitors.
To really be on par with the other skill classes I would also give him the investigstors Inspiration ability and allow the other investigator talents that deal with inspiration.

Edit: Even on a low magic itens/ no magic mart campaign, he is not going to be mechanically superior to anyone, except the monk, but you need at least one archetype and several feats from splatbooks to make a mechanically sound monk anyway. The only class that is relly going to feel bad for not getting stuff outside core is the barbarian, but that only means he is as good as a fighter instead of being awesomesauce.

1 This is in the wrong forum. This should be in the homebrew/suggestions forum.
2 Some good ideas, but with a few horrfically broken things mixed in. Mobile Assault most notably. That should be more in line with Rapid Attack. Lose the highest attack for a single move action that can only be used tomove and only come only around level 9 to 11. And wounding strike is just no. NO.
3 redesigning the feat and skill systems is much easier than redesigning the action system, even because the skill and feat system are based on the action system.

Lormyr wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
I'm willing to defend Paizo, the decision they made, and the very large silent majority who compelled them to act
Just one question: If the majority is silent, how can we be sure they are the majority?

Better question, how can anyone be sure about which side the majority supports? Claiming to have the tacit support of the silent majority is disingenuous. It's impossible to know what a silent portion of the group supports. It is, after all, silent.

1 to 50 of 1,236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.