|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
The feat broke him so hard, it broke his blue screen. That there is some weapons grade brain breaker.
K177Y C47 wrote:
I think the slayer caught him mid sentence.That's what you get for divulging his secr
Ignore the combobreakers!
Wow! You got everything so wrong, I'm not sure you even read the Core rulebook.
Ok, Wizard and Sorcerer can suck at early levels if you completely suck at selecting spells, but that is not fault of the class or GM it's yours for being dumb. Sleep and Color Spray and whatever you want for flavor. Done.
Rogue can't kill anything in a sinlge attack after level 3, maybe 4, except some very optimized builds.
You know who can be just as good as the rogue at freeing the group from a jail cell? The Ranger. Forget favored enemy, favored terain: urban makes you better at being stealthy than the rogue could ever hope to be. And even without favored enemy they still have a wolf to do some extra damage, get some feats earlier than the fighter, and has some really nice spells (lead blades, longstrider, etc.)
Hardly anyithng can kill a paladin. Fullstop. Not just evil, neutral, lawful, chaotic and even good would have a hard time killing this guy. Also even when not fighting evil he has divine bnd to make his weapon better than what the fighter could buy, and he has spells. Anyone that thinks a fighter is the best in that door scenrio of yours has never seem a pally with Deadly Juggernaut, Weapon of Awe and Righteous Vigor going.
Wizards are going to fear charging quivering palms as soon as monks learn to fly. Quivering Palm and Stunning Fist are worthless against melee enemies because the save is just too low. Thta SR is actually a bad class feature since it stops the monk from receiving beneficial buffs. The monk also has abilities like slow fall (worse than a first level spell) and Tongue of the Sun and Moon (worse than a second level spell). He does have some good archetypes tough.
Fighters are very good at DPR noone against that. But they're not so good that a paladin, barbarian or ranger, even with all their resources spent, couldn't do the exact same thing. And if there is a single goblin shaman in that endless horde, the fighter would be the worst to have in that place, since he has the worst chance of resisting mindcontrol.
Druids are not as good at spells as a wizard but that is still better than not being a level 9 spellcaster. Also don't forget the animal companion. You know who else can stand in a doorway and kill thousands of goblins? A buffed up tiger.
Bard sucks at everything except singing? In 3.5 maybe, but not in PF anymore. PF bard outrogues the rogue. He is as good at skills and he has spells to back it up. The rogue has a little more damage but not enough to kill enemies before they sound an alarm, unless the enemies are very low level, in which case even the wizard could probably kill then in a single round.
Barbarians only run out of rage in the early levels. At high levels he has more rage rounds than he knows what to do with. And even without rage the barbarian is only a little worse at DPR than the fighter. Not a significant enough difference to really make the fighter shine.
I believe the super serum gave him the ability to telekinetically control round mettalic objects. I've noticed how in some comics/cartoons he can do shield stunts with trashcan lids and hubcaps when someone takes his shield away.
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.
They always said I had an explosive temperament. Toss a bomb
Telessar Talimah wrote:
Paladin. Bottom damage dealer. Against demons.Flagged for trolling.
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.
And it's been five times you failed to show what else the fighter can do. Six now.
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.
Apparently, Anzyr won the thread. Right there. [/thread]
...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.
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'.
The Crusader wrote:
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:
All examples from actual societies. See? General guidelines, instead of rigid systems.
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.
And why do YOU presume the silent masses are okay with the nerf? They might agree with 'nerf was needed but not that much' or 'it was balanced'. I find it supremely arrogant of any side to just assume that the silent majority is on their side. What, you have some special superpower to know that without need of them saying anything? Are you Professor X?A small minority, very few people, liked the nerf. The large majority of people willing to share their thoughts on the subject agree, it was way too much of an overnerf.
Broken Zenith wrote:
Is each level of sneak attack worth an extra feat?:
No. As Unearthed Arcana shows, 9d6 sneak attack is worth only three feats. Furthermore, your math is wrong in two ways. Your "Smack Attack" does an average of 1.75 damage where Weapon Specialization does +2 damage all the time. weapon Specialization is straight up better. When you say: "Smack Attack deals an average of .75 more damage than Weapon Specialization." you mean .25 less. Also even if it were a straight equivalent to one feat, The fighter gains 11 bonus feats to the rogues 10 dice of sneak attack. Fighter wins, by eight feats.
Broken Zenith wrote:
Is a point of BAB and 4 health worth 24 skill points?:
Disingeuous question. A more fair question would be: Are 5BAB and 20 HP worth 120 skill points? And you are forgetting to add a couple of things to either side, the rogues better skill list on one side, and the extra iterative attack gained by BAB and the fighter being able to get several good feats earlier than the rogue, those with BAB prerequisites. The answer? The BAB and its attendand extra attack are worth more than the 120 skill points. Take all of the skills usable in combat, and none of them is worth 5 BAB, much less an extra attack. The extra HP and and the early feats are just icing on the cake.
Broken Zenith wrote:
Are the Rogue's miscellaneous features equal to the Fighter's miscellaneous features?:
Your tie is broken by the features you forgot to mention: Master Strike (only works once a day against a single target, has acrappy DC and goes against Fort which is th best save of anyone on melee against the rogue) versus Armor Mastery and Weapon Mastery (DR 5/- and autto confirm criticals and higher damage multiplier and immune to disarm) The tie breaks heavily on the fighter side.
The fighter not only wins, he trounces the rogue like a noob and then teabags the corpse. All you've managed to prove is that the rogue deserves a tier 5 to be created just for him.
Cure Light Wounds. With instant and repeatable cure miracles I would become a saint. Get the church to give me a confortable life style and just heal people like six hours a day. Make some trips around the world, meet world leaders, shame them into doing whatever I guess is the right thing to do. Doesn't cure diseases, sadly, but at will 1d8+1 is enough to full heal any injury.
Here's a couple of ideas for feats:
And this here? Telling someone else how they should roleplay their own characters is just as bad as the guy that tells people to always use the same build because it has the best DPR or that you should change your build so it's more min-maxed.Thespians can suck the fun out of a game just as much as munchkins.
Yeah, down with the thespian tyranny!
As a self confessed murderhobo, let me tell you, your definition is wrong. Murderhoboing is going around city to city, dungeon to dungeon, murdering monsters and taking loot. Nothing more, nothing less. The barbarian does it to test himself against monster, the paladin because his god tld him to, the wizard in the advance of magic, the rogue n search of riches, the bard to become famous. Sometimes you're in a quest to save the world, sometimes you do it because killing monsters is fun.What you describe is a roleplayers first attempt at being an evil party, before someone keys them in on the fact that you can do evil masterminds or sympathetic villains.
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?
[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.