There are already like five classes/archetypes that invalidate the rogue, two more are just nails on the coffin. And the monk never got validated on the first place, so it can't even be invalidated.
In a game like that, in my experience, the players knowing beforehand allows them to reach an agreement. The merchant player optimizes for party face, allowing the rest of the group to more freely optimize for combat. Any attempt of the DM to punish me for my 7 cha and 7 int was directed back to the merchant. "Why you talking to me, man? I be the bodyguard, you be wanting tha talk with de bossman." Also, merchants can be very inspiring "come on guys kill them quick and you get bonus pay" (bard using oratory for his performances), alternatively the merchant may know a thing or three about locks and traps, either because of a shady past, or because he needs to use them on his own shop (rogue built for trapfinding and skill monkeying).A bulid optimized for skills is still an optimized build.
Also I've found the feat tree is good as is. If you want a maneuvering palading you take the archetype. These feats aren't something you make a build around, they're more like for when you have a build with an open feat at third level or when you finish your build and don't really have any feats you need. Instead of getting Weapon Focus or Cleave or someting just to fill the blank, getting Martial Training, even if only the first one, adds a whole bunch of options. One of the best things for a feat to IMO.
Bill Dunn wrote:
Bull.J K Rowling wrote seven books in ten years. One book a year except for a three year hiatus.
Brandon Sanderson did his initial Mistborn trilogy in three years.
Jim Butcher, one of my favorite authors, writes at least one book a year for Dresden Files and had enough time to write the Codex Alera, also with one book a year, That is two books a year for six years and he aims to do it again when he starts his steampunk series.
Robert A Heinlein, one of the grandfathers of science fiction, wpublished, according to Wikipedia, 20 novels between 1947 and 1973. 20 novels in 26 years. And 5 more between 1980 and 1987.
Terry Pratchet, since he started Discworld in 1983, has written 40 Discworld books, two trilogies, 4 stand alone novels and more background material for Discworld than I care to count. He was diagnozed with Alzheimers in 2007 and he still publishes more material every year than GRRM bothers to write.
I could bring in more examples if you want.
The point is that taking more than two or three years between books in a series is NOT the norm. The only ones I can think that do that and havent faded into obscurity are GRRM and Patrick Rothfuss.
You don't know how to uild a barbarian. "NOT optimized for damage because I also added some survivability". BS, you did neither.Let me show you how it is done:
HIT DICE. 9d12+27(favored class bonus applied)
Comparing: he still has more HP, his armor is almost as good while in rage, he has DR 1 and he has +4 in saves against almost everything. Barbarian wins defense hands down.
And if you really want, I can up this build to level 12, show what a real damage dealer can do. Hint: he kills the enemy on their own turns.
Wow, christ on a cracker, that is a lot of overreaction.
And Civil War Captain America and One More Day Spiderman...Can we just reboot the whole universe back to before Avengers Dissassemble?
When you do the guide to more apeiron staves, you need to include a staff that summons a construct chimp, with the possibility to spend charges to summon construct gorillas instead. Maybe augment them with cold iron skin. It's cosmic law, you must do this pun, it's to good to let it go to waste.
[Looks through Cheapys list of tinker and artificer classes] Someone who cranks out magic itens? LOLNOPE. Someone who can temporaly enhance itens? Sure. Someone with special abilities when dealing with buildings, constructs, traps, certain materials, or something engineery like that? Would be good. Someone who can deploy turrets, drones or even robots? Yes. Someone capable of making one use inventions that mimic magic but aren't exctly magic, somewhat like the alchemist extracts? Definetly. Someone that can make a clockwork/staempunk suit of ironman armor? Hell yeah. But just crafting itens? Boring.
HAHA, no. If you just have the muscle but don't have the charisma or the skill, people just laugh at your wanna-be thug attittude.A good example of charisma as intimidation is the Joker. In most incarnations he is a skinny guy. Even in the movies he isn't skinny but he isn't in shape either, but he is still one of the scariest guys in the planet.
Sell you on ninja? Well ffinding a buyer shouldn't be hard, I know a guy that knows a guy that knows a guy. The harder part will be stuffing you inside the ninja. Maybe if I just put you on top of the ninja it counts? He would have to carry you arund, but ninjas are strong. Now to find a ninja...
Ninja Trick can be taken multiple times. There also isn't an "extra trick" sort of feat to my knowledge. I wouldn't want most rogue talents myself. Some aren't even a bonus.
Ninjas can get rogue talents too, if they really want it. There is one or two that might be good.Ninjas get an often overlooked trick: Pressure points. One point of str or dex damage with each sneak attack. Every full attack a ninja does gives a -1 to attacks and damage or to ac. Given enough attacks, and TWF is immensely better when you have at will invisibility, the ninja may nerf someone into a weak clumsy baby, to be killed at leisure. That is Kenshiro levels of acupunture there.
Invisible blade is a master trick. By that point, a rogue can just use a greater invisibility scroll. 28 rounds, minimum, with no swift action required.
Yeah, it only requires a move and a standard plus 700g for 7rounds. Much better.Remember that unless your wizard is making scrolls for you the scroll spell's caster level is always the minimum level required to cast the spell for the character who scribed the scroll. And Greater Invisibility is rounds per level.
The point is, in-game experiences are meaningless in the context of a forum. They can be misremembered, misinterpreted, too different from the normal game because of houserules and optional rues noone else uses and worst of all, they cannont be proven. One could say fighters suck because they've seen a commoner do more damage in a round with a spoon than a fighter did with his +5 sword, and it would have as much weight or proofability as any in-game experience yanyone else has to offer.Also just because you pissed me off and I wound up venting my bile it doesn't mean I don't have an argument. Only that your inability to listen to others arguments has passed my tolerance.
Dude, last time you brought one of your "actual game experiences", you wound up revealing your fighter was "awesome", because he killed 12, or maybe it was 8, or 10, or 6, commoner kobolds, who you got by surprise and just stood there trying to fight you in melee, or maybe run, past a trap, except there were no traps, except maybe, you don't really remember, and they were probably unarmed and had int0. But you don't really remember, it might have happened in one of the half dozen ways you told, or been a fever dream. You managed to amass such credibility there. Now tell us about how the fish that escaped was thiiiiiis big.And even if any of it is true, it only shows your benchmark for awesome is set pretty low. Killing a dozen kobolds in melee is a chore not a combat, even at first level. Unless you're a caster with 1/2BAB.
And I bet you were outdamaging the casters alright, thats easy when the casters probably are doing battlefield control or buffing or any of the dozen other things they can do that totally ignore HP. A fighter that can outdamage a caster is in the same ballpark as being able to outdamage a non smiting paladin. That is the one thing he is supposed to do, you can do it by accident if the group is not good at optimizing r you're the only martial in the group. Do you also feel awesome for making a bard that can sing or a cleric that prays to a god?
Yeah, I just couldn't get past that arbitrary division.Onto the real question: Retreat is a viable strategy. If the enemy is capable of running down the party, that is when a tank shines, staying behind to cover the retreat of the rest of the party.
From a narrativist/roleplayer point it's awesome and very heroic. From a gamist rollplayer point is only logical that the guy with more chance of surviving stays behind to buy time while the ohers finish the mission or ready a counterattack.
I've done it myself, when I was playing a barbarian. Our group was almost out of resources after a couple of tough fights so we decided to camp for the night, but we were attacked by a vampire samurai in the middle of the night. Our fault really, for staying inside the ghost town. The vampire had minions and managed to dominate the fighter before our sorcerer started throwing Protection from Evil on everybody. Had to grapple the fighter while he got his does of Protection. We managed to take down the minions but the vampire was still at full power. So we decided to run and come back in the morning to burn his coffin with him inside. But of course the vampire wouldn't just let us go, so I stayed there to hold him off while the party ran for the hills, the sorcerer gave me used his last fly scroll on me so when everybody else was far enough away I culd take to the sky. The vampire still flew ater me in mist form until the spell ended. Luckily it was finally almost dawn and the vampire had to retreat before the sunrise. To this day, one of the most awesome moments for that barbarian. And that barbarian had lots of awesome moments.
Stefan Hill wrote:
In which case the bard runs rings around the rogue and makes him cry, the ranger takes the group to a wilderness sidequest so he can take his turn shaming the rogue and the alchemist decides to be a sneaky vivisectionist assassin and shows the rogue what a real alpha strke is like and how to make poisons awesome.
352-They keep following me! I went into all kinds of dungeons, dragon lairs and even the abyss and I can't shake them! HELP ME!!!
If you're going to be pedantic about that 'you', that all the mounted combat feats also have, then no mounted combat feat works. Nor lances for that matter. So you're breaking the whole mounted combat, just to stop a single possible build that, while working in RAW, nobody would actually allow or use.We're not aguing that you should allow this build, we're arguing you shouldn't break a section of the rules just to stop a build noone has asked to play.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
It's not evil. But it's not good either. Neutral leaning good, I would say.Not evil is not the same as good.
Don't worry, this is a common mistake.
Your Ideal Paladin is actually Lawful Evil. Seriously, 'I protect the sancticity of all life... except the people that don't obey me, those guys I will kill' and 'the rights of individual orcs are separate from the crimes of other orcs but the crimes of a few villagers will mark the whole town as treasonus and I will murder anyone that tries to escape'. Real paladins would be chasing after that guy.What an actual paladin in that situation should do is protect drwon and orc civilians, i.e. children, women, anyone that doesn't enter combat agaisnt the party. If the villagers want to genocide all the orcs/drows he would use diplomacy and make them remember they're supposed to be better than this and [insert name of god here] is watching them.
Scrap the thing. A paldin should not only fall for taking part in any of that he should start seeking Atonement for not actively fighting agaisnt the plan.
Tell the leaders that if they won't pay you won't fight for them. The paladin should want to protect the innocent people and remain behind, tell the group to stay with him, that you have a plan, and give them a scroll of message for the caster to use. Withdraw the mercenary forces, far enough that it seems to leave the city unguarded, but close enough that they can rush in and save the day. Have the invading army attack the juicy unguarded target. The players send the message and have to organize the towns defenses and keep the enemy army at bay while the mercenary forces rush in. At the of the day the enemy forces fall prensed with an army at their back and walls in front of them, the mercs get double their money, and the party gets sung as heroes for staying behind to protect the town and holding back an army while the cavalry arrives.
Even more, if the player really wants the weapon becuase of story driven reasons and background he should see a sunder as a freaking boon. The roleplay and questlines you can milk out of that...Finding the legendary blacksmith that can fix the sword, the rare and powerful materials needed, you can roleplay your distaste at having to use a backup weapon, the sadness from losing your heirloom, the hope at having the weapon restored, the pride when you become king, a position you earned, with a weapon you worked to remake...
I'm not sure you know what strawman means...
Dude enough with the straw. Are you building an army of scarecrows or something?NOBODY IS SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD SUNDER ALL THE EQUIPMENT OF THE PARTY!!!
They're saying that a sunder once in a while is okay and that players shouldn't get all stupid and angry just because it happened once.
And you do know the sword from the stone does get broken and Arthur has to go on a quest to get a new sword from the lady of the lake right? Using Arthur as an argument against sundering is just plain silly.
The Saltmarsh 6 wrote:
No I've read about half of the thread the other half was of no interest to as it's gone off at a tangent and i was giving my opinion on the question in the op (which is what the thread is about)
The thread is about a whiny guy throwing false accusations against the whole board after he posted a crappy build in a thread about mechanics and a consensus was reached that his build was mechanically crappy.Now he says we are obsessed with DPR and shouldn't criticize his build because he has fun with it and the rest of us don't understand fun and don't play rpgs in the right way.
We're trying to say that if he has fun then go ahead, noone is stopping him. But don't go into a thread about monk mechanics saying it's a mechanically good monk build when know it isn't.
I call the power of trope: take the third option. (No links because I'm not evil)
Yes... Yes it is FAR too much of a stretch that someone can train themselves to be a superhuman... Or just have that strong a will to live. Yes it is. Those are not magical explanations. Will to live and training cannot account for such feats. Otherwise, people could do so in reality, and they cannot.
Ah, I see the root problem. You are fixated in a notion that a game containing flying fire-breathing inteligent giant lizards has anything more than a passing verisimillitude to reality.Also, read some comic books. Watch some cartoons. People just being so badass it's a superpower or training so hard they can do superhuman feats is a common trope. Just because you can't remember anything from the top of you head doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I see that you think a highly trained soldier in real life has good odds to survive such events... That is false. The amount of force involved can't be shrugged of by going to the gym and eating your wheaties, and the fact that you think it can loses you all credibility entirely IMO.
The fact that you can compare military training to 'going to the gym and eating your wheaties' means you never had any credibility to begin with.And yes, a green beret will probably die if he falls 80 feet. Since, as stated on the article I keep pointing out, most people in the real world has a 10 or 11 in con, 12 or 13 if they're astonishingly tough and healthy, and would rarely have more than 3 levels the average hp of a green beret(fighter 3) would be 23. So yes, an average of 28 damage from that fall will kill most humans in reality. Except for freaky accidents when God roll really low on the damage die.
Published adventures are a part of the system too and should reflect that.
It should, I can agree with that. Does it actually do it? I dunno, never needed to run one.
I take my paladin cues from Michael from the Dresden Files.
Cheese is anything that goes with lots o' whine.Ba! Dum! Tish!!!
Thank you, we'll be here all week.
This part jumped at me. Have to reply.It's another misconception, one that a lot of people seem to have, but a level 6 anything is not a just a local thug. 90% of the people in a setting are 1st level with NPC classes, usually commoners. Another 9% of the world has PC classes, but only goes to 4th, 5th level tops.
People with more than 5 levels are the 1%, movers and shakers. A sixth level rogue is supposed to be the local crime boss or at least an elite liutenant or enforcer.
A rogue around tenth level should be one of the best around, leader of his own powerful and far reaching guild. People with more than 10 levels are stupid powerful, and there should be only a handfull of them in a large kingdom or empire.
People at 14 levels or above are capable of destroyng kingdoms and defeating armies by themselves, there should be less than 50 of them in the whole world, including the PCs if they reach that far.
Rogar Valertis wrote:
It doesn't have to be about power. Can't he just want to be a half-orc that admires dwarfs and spared no effort to join their elite fighter? Can't he want to be a tiefling so heroic in among the resistance that the halflings decide to share their techniques? No race has a monopoly in any theme.Worse than any rollplayer or minmaxer are people so staunch in thinking that role and roll are incompatible that they dismiss opportunities for roleplaying to stop possible minmaxing.
I for one would like to thank (almost) everyone in this thread for helping me avoid a landmine. Instead of buying ME3 I saved the money and bought Witcher 2 and Orochi Warriors 3.
Your inability to comprehend humor is astounding.
From a Forbes article:
Nothing more needs, or even can, be said.