I was actually just checking to see if there was a thread like this before making one of my own as id love to see what other people use for their character's :-D Fantastic work on that portrait!
I do not have an artistic bone in my body but i do enjoy trying to put a picture to my concepts, Luckily the internet has heromachine for folks like me. Here is a character id really like to play if i can ever find a new group, A street thug inspired barbarian who uses a greatclub.
hopefully that hyperlink works....
Some form of Middle Earth and Hyboria blend in an e6 type setting with rare and dangerous magic for good measure, along with plenty of bustling metropolis' filled to the brim with various races for the "Mos Eisely effect".
I much prefer low level games to high level, i'm happy as a clam to be going in and taking the fight to the group of orcs who have been harrying caravans travelling the king's highway etc, once it gets past about eighth level i start to lose interest.
The ideal campaign for me in this setting would be something episodic akin to shows like Hercules: the legendary journeys, or farscape, where while there is an overarching plot that advances, there would also be "monster of the week" sessions for a change of pace.
Matt Thomason wrote:
Me as well, ill make the best out of the concept im playing sure. But that concept could be a fighter / barbarian who uses a greatclub, a rogue who fights einhander with a short sword, or any other concept you would never find on a "guide".
the only problem i have with the "hardcore" optimizers is those who stick to the same builds because they are mathematically "the best", and even then they aren't playing wrong just in a game that personally im not interested in playing.
If in a game that is accepted and encouraged cool go for it! Nor do i mind if in another game where you optimize a less then stellar concept say personally i like clubs so have optimized fighters around using a club / greatclub. The only time it is a problem is when you come with pun-pun when we all agreed to play a low op game. It's like back in the day when you made a gentleman's agreement not to use BFG in doom (or farsight in perfect dark if you are younger), there was always "that guy" who used it anyway :-/
Mythic +10 Artifact Toaster wrote:
lol nope, believe me we all had to take a break due to laughing so hard. Too go out like that after such a good showing was absurd XD
I was playing my half orc barbarian one campaign while in a dungeon, it recently started so i think we were around level 2? maybe 1 it has been a while. Anywho, after scouring this dungeon we find ourselves in a labyrinth getting stalked, glimpses of a large beast out of the corner of our eyes etc. After building up the tension as we see the exit we get ambushed from behind by a minotaur!
The rest of the party runs while i charge the creature, getting a crit with my great axe while not killing it severely wounding it, and evading its counter attack while killing it with my second blow! stunning our DM and the rest of the party and i got myself a fancy masterwork greataxe for the feat :-D
Next major combat during the confusion i got caught in a falling rock trap instantly killing the character -.-
Full BAB, and d10 hd. Flurry counts as twf for prereqs, but it only usable with weapons which can be used in a flurry, say a monk can gain Two weapon defense, but can use it only when unarmed, wielding a temple sword, quarterstaff, etc.
Also at 6th level he can move 15 feet during his 5 foot step, 30 feet at level 12, and 45 feet at level 18.
Vivianne Laflamme wrote:
It was merely Using hyperbole to show my point, but since it bothers you i shall change it.
I do think it is mostly people trying to be helpful, but yes i can see it being rather annoying when you come with a VERY specific concept "Hey I want to make a Dwarf rogue who uses a double bladed sword" and the responses are "You should make a make a Half-Elf Ranger with his floating +2 in Dex, and the Ancestral Arms Alternate Race Trait, Oh and dip two level's in Alchemist to grow a Vestigial arm to hold a shield!" (Exaggerating of course.)
I like the alignment system, but what i do not like are alignment restrictions. I could very easily see the Lawful Good barbarian, whose "rage" is an extra surge of strength that he can summon from within himself when the chips are truly down like is so common in books, movies, etc. Or a True Neutral paladin of balance who fights for it as hard as any religious zealot. Or a Chaotic Evil monk who is out to simply gain ultimate power and riches so he can ultimately fulfill any desire he has.
dont get me wrong i am no expert, but has the shortbow ever shown any historical significance aside from its use in horse archery compared to the sling?
from everything i have read it seems medieval warfare has gone from sling to crossbow (with the English opting for the immense training given to the longbow. that makes it out to be an exotic weapon to me
I love Half orcs and play them 90% of the time.
I love playing fighters and rogues.
I think the orc double axe is an awesome weapon if designed differently (the image in 3.5 i agree is just ridiculous, but i tend to think of it more along the likes of Wei Yan or Zhang Fei new weapon from dynasty warriors)
I like True20 much more as a system >.>
Not to put words in anyone's mouth but i dont think thats what folk are asking for, they simply would like a broader range of more effective options.
As an example i have played a half orc fighter who specialized in the great club and had a lot of fun! while lower DPR then the standard axe or great sword I still felt like i could contribute just fine and even had some unique options only i could do ( three mountains and brutal strike in 3.5, Bludgeoner which came in handy when we switched to PF)
While when i tried to do a sniping crossbow character i just felt irrelevant at high levels while i still had to spend more feats just to feel i could contribute a tiny bit, while i have never tried to make a sling specialist i assume they go through the same deal.
I have always liked slings as the ranged option for my fighters, easy to conceal, alot easier to carry then a bow especially for someone who doesnt anticipate using ranged weaponry, Sling and a few bullets can all fit in a single pouch! decent ranged increment, decent damage type, just a good option for the melee specialist in my opinion.
If interested in slings this guy has a few videos on them that are pretty informative on there general effectiveness and use in the olden days.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I dont aprticularly see that as a bad thing thought, your playing a renowned orc slayer who signs on to a adventuring party who doesnt happen to be fighting orcs, that is the risk of playing such a specialized class. Which yes if there was no way to recover from it yeah it would be bad, but it has so much potential for you to evolve how you character learns how to fight these goblinoid foes culminating with him tkaing them as his fifth level favored enemy.
Until then its hardly like your useless with a fantastic skill list, 6 skill points a level, wild empathy, etc.
i actually agree, why i always took humans as my favored enemy at level one if nothing else sprung out to me for the character, it would always be effective, and can always be rationalized as anyone who has grown up in arduous times most likely has come into conflict with humans at one point or another
What i never particularly liked is the ranger who takes favored enemy: undead, even though his backstory never has him coming intoo conflict with one before in his life, but even then i have never been one to tell anyone else how to play there character so the point is moot.
Favored Enemy is one thing i never quite got asking the DM for advice with, even when i played rangers. Way i always thought about it, the favored enemy should be worked into the characters backstory, not the backstory worked around what favored enemy is most useful?
just how i have alwaya viewed it.
yep, in fact one of the most memorable clerics i ever played with worshipped himself. his holy symbol was a painting of his face on his shield, and to get his spells he looked in a mirror every morning and talked about how awesome he was, hilarious.
EDIT: as has been said whether it is or isnt allwoed ultimately falls to the GM of course
so basically just use falchion, scimitar, or longbow? im sorry thats boring as hell.
Crossbows should be the king of single target nova damage, giving them a unique fighting style that plays to there strength's, at least when being the crossbowman fighter. Something as simple as dropping the whole readied attack deal and just let them be able to add dexterity mod X how many iterive attacks they would have at that level with whenever they make a single attack like using the vital strike action for example, would give them a niche of being more reliable but still doing less damage overall and less versatile then the bows.
EDIT: not to mention the whole speed advantage comes from shooting a large stationary hay target 10 feet away, when you have something moving 75, or even 25 feet away the speed advantage is not great due to the crossbow being MUCH easier to aim (which is the reason it is easier to train soldiers on), so i consider that anecdote false
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I just want to say when i first read "fighter spells" i hated it, i play a fighter to be the mundane hero, but when you put it like this i love it brother! I would love to see some kind of system that does that, as long as there within the realm of possibility like that idea.
Purple Duck Games wrote:
thats it, i could have sworn i saw them on a sidebar at d20pfsrd so assumed they were PF, but 3.x works fine for me, thanks a million man, i was starting to think if i was crazy and imagined it!
Sorry if this isnt the proper place to post this but i remember a while ago seeing on the sidebar a set of books for under used weapons based classes and cant for the life of me remember what they were, i remember there was a club one, a spear one and a crossbow one.
I've been trying to remember what these were called for the past two days as i wanted to look up the club one but cant for the life of me remember! It would be massively appreciated if anyone remembers what they were called could be so kind as to post, this has really been bugging me.
Thanks in advance!
P.S. I believe they were PRC's but might be remembering wrong and they may have been base
im not trying to stir the pot here simply clarifying, from what i read this player built a caster focused cleric with a high INT for RP purposes but with an 18 in wisdom, so he kind of dumped the physical side to be a more powerful spellcaster right? Then the gm said he was using spells in creative ways helping the party like with the animate rope trick for example?
which honestly that seems him playing to his stats, but one encounter of him trying to melee something makes him a bad player? it might have been a bad choice for sure but mistakes are made in the heat of the moment, and he might have been doing the only thing he figured he could to help the party in that specific instance, Now thats how i read it at first if its not i apologize.
But if that is how it happened you sound like your being a tad harsh with the guy, im sure we have all made less then perfect choices in our gaming career
also it would not be any different then a group who only has a cleric with negative channeling, simply he would be able to gain a benefit from his burst damage, he can still use wands of CLW and above for free AFAIK.
but i would hope he does take selective channel as a feat
Am i the only who read Pendagast comment as a joke? 0.o
anyway nothing new to add, my biggest gripe is the whole full attack vs move dichotomy as well, honestly for me i liked star wars saga editions way of handling extra attacks the most out of the d20 systems ive played.
Personally i feel that if thats the style that works for you and the rest of your group takes no problem with it more power to ya! thats all that matters. My problem is just i get sick of seeing int / cha 7 human falchion two hand archetype fighters, scimitar wielding shocking grasp magi, dual heavy shield rangers, ETC. but hey, i aint gonna tell anyone there having badwrongfun simply because its not my playstyle.
just to make sure ask input on how others would rule this, say a fighter with a great axe comes across a group of skeletons with dr / bludgeoning, so he decides to use the non sharpened side of his great axe (assuming it has one as in our games there is no such thing as a double bitted battle axe -.- ) to deal say 1d10 bludgeoning damage since its two handed. kosher? also if so catch off guard would drop the -4 non proficient penalty yes?
i assume that is all correct im just making sure, Now here comes what i cant figure out and can go either way with, do weapon focus, specialization, things like weapon training still affect that weapon? i could see opinions for either.
also weapon enchantment, is the entire weapon under the enchantment? or simply the sharp bit? would he still get the enchantment bonus and what not when using it in such a way?
howdy guys, ive been thinking about the monk class and how he can be conceived as being sub par at his general role in the game, and by that i mean how he hardly even has a defined role. is he supposed to be a front line combatant? scout? etc. I've just been thinking of possible things to give the class to give it more "oomph" and would love to hear some thoughts on them and see what others think? Mind you these are very quick and dirty and might be too much.
First off just break down and give them full BAB and a d10 hit die, i dont see why they dont, clearly with flurry they are supposed to. i just dont see how the fighter is tougher and has more health then the guy who wears no armor and is based on men who break concrete blocks with there face.
give them 6 skill points a level, they are also meant to be good scouts it seems with the fast movement and skirmishing properties, they'd be right at home sneaking in with a ranger or a rogue and teaming with one of them to be a secondary scout / infiltrator.
which comes to my other change i would add, allowing them to make multiple attacks on a standard action. now there are two ways i can see doing this, first is they just can do a standard full attack not a flurry but with the flurry penalty of -2 to the attack roll so a level 20 monk would be able to do a "+18 / +13 / +8 / +3" as a standard action, or the other way taking it off the mobile fighter be able to full attack and sacrifice the first hit to make more so the same level 20 monk would attack like this "+15 / +10 / +5". Honestly i think i prefer the first as it would come into play at 6th level as opposed to 11th, and even at 11th it seems of dubious value. That would only be allowed with monk weapons that can be flurried with obviously. it would let them take more advantage of there battlefield mobility IMO
and last but not least, another idea i was playing with would allow them to use there unarmed strike damage -5 as the damage die for monk weapons or the base die, whichever is higher. so that a level 10 monk using a quarter staff would deal 1D8 as opposed to 1D6, and at level 2- that same quarterstaff would deal 2D6. this would give weapon using monks some damage progression yet still keep the unarmed strike as the most damaging option for those who want to focus on that.
Again these are simply quick and dirty and can be interchanged freely. just some ideas i have rolling around my head and was curious what others would think about them, thank you for reading i look forward on hearing the communities opinions
i would say yes, but thats just me. at that point it would have to be specifically called out as the right fist and at that point if twf'ing with unarmed would have only his primary attacks affected by bane. (or if for some reason wanted his secondary to be the bane attacks)
isnt the amulet of mighty fists the solution to that problem? you physically cant just enchant your body so you use the amulet to enchant all your unarmed strikes at once, it doesnt matter if you kick them or headbutt them its what the amulet is for, at least thats why i assumed it cost so much?
like if you have spiked gauntlets sure your making a punch but its not unarmed since your striking them with the cold iron spikes embedded in your leather glove and not with your actual knuckle. Im no rules lawyer by any means and just find your point interesting, ive NEVER heard anyone else claim they were one single attack. im not calling you wrong by any means keep in mind if thats how it works for your group more power to you.
dual wielding short swords and having a boot blade equipped, same problem comes up as being able to multi weapon fight.
EDIT: for the sake of argument lets drop unarmed attacks and use real weapons. a fighter equipped with two short swords, boot blade, barbazu beard, and a boulder helmet. he has full TWF line at level 20, how many attacks does he get?
he would get 7 which can be used with any mix of the above weapons correct? why would it be any different then being able to hit with two punches, a kick, a head butt, and a knee?
The drunken devil has never been one to fear mortal men, the worthier the opponent the better :-p but regardless of who wins lets hope we put on one HELL of a show brother!
I'm Shyne obviously and I'm just glad all you B rating favorites are on the other side of the list from me so you can burn each other out.
thats not something i would expect from the one who dominated his first fight completely XD this is jag Btw if ryan who made felix is on this board i wish you the best of luck in our fight!