Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Grand Necromancer

gustavo iglesias's page

2,556 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 2,556 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I ban my homebrew material.

This one has me laughing hysterically for no particular reason.

There are lots of them. Ring of protección and cloak of resistance come to mind

captain yesterday wrote:

Antipaladins cant be LE

couldnt have been a Paizo person

Hence that's why it's a "variant".

I went to my copy to check, it was Jason Buhlman the one who colaborated with the AP, building several LE archetypes for evil characters of Asmodeus, including a Monk, a Cleric, and Antipaladin.

this is the archetype.

There's some LE antipaladin in Way of the Wicked evil campaign (which I think was designed by someone within paizo staff), which is totally playable

Tacticslion wrote:

That nunchaku actively alters the halfling barbarian's combat capability. That is why they are seeking it. If you deny them in the shop, but give it to them later on, what are you accomplishing?

I just asked the question, but I'll also answer it, to the degree I'm able.
- In some instances, the sense of accomplishment. Buying something in a shop can feel anticlimactic. For certain groups.
- In some cases, the ability of a GM to maintain control. Having ready access to character-building equipment can cause strain between player and GM (in the case of play-style clash), but is generally used to moderate challenges according to the GM's sense of "balance" and "proper" gameplay (for, what the GM believes to be, the maximum "fun" value).
- In some cases, it's the pettiness of maintaining control just to have power over something, or to try to force a moral or social lesson on players. This is the least-common case, but one that does exist.
- Some other reason that I can't think of. Please feel free to come up with them!

In my case, none of the above. I like unconventional chars myself, and I encourage them as a GM as well. I do understand that magic items are part of some of those builds (if it should be that way, is another topic). I'm not afraid of player power or player empowerment.

In my case, it's just to keep the thin veil of inmersion. We all use suspension of disbelief while playing the game, in a number of situations. "time pockets" when players take full rounds while the rest of the world is freezed, for example. That suspension of disbelief is stretched sometimes, and some people is more tolerant than others to it. Some are more tolerant in certain situations (ie: there's a thread somewhere about Hydras, and why you can cut their necks, but not a dragon's neck. I'm not bothered for that, it doesn't break my suspension of disbelief or destroy my inmersion.

However, the protean nature of the extra-dimensional magic mart does. It's impossible that the magic shop has 75% of each possible combination of magic weapons and magic abilities. Think for a moment: that's a +1 ooze bane nunchaku, +1 furious nunchaku, +2 nunkchaku, +1 corrosive nunchaku, +1 defending nunchaku, and so on. Then it's the same for Kamas, Shianghams, Sais, and the other bunch of monk weapons. Then for non monk weapons. In small size, for the halfling monk, and large size, for the characters with Titan Fighter or Titan Mauler. Then cold iron, silver and adamantine versions. And that's only for up to +2 weapons. You have +3 (which grow exponentially in combinations), and you have armors and shields as well. That's thousands of magic items, worth millions of gold, lying in the shop. The other option, is that the shop has just a few, maybe half a dozen, magic items, which are made of a protean ectoplasm, and take form when the PC projects its whim. "I want a +1 furious nunchaku", and the nunchaku appear. "no wait, I'd rather take a kama. I think. Make it Cold Iron. " and the nunchaku dissapear, and a cold iron kama appear.

That breaks the inmersion, at least for me. And it's unneeded, because there are a lot of ways for the player to get what he wants, without needing such break of inmersion. I encourage my players, as a GM, to take craft magic items feats. I encourage my fellow playes, as a PC, to take them as well, in a coordinated manner, so we cover most of our bases.

I DO use the 75% rule, for most consumables, staple adventurers items and low level standard weapons. Like potions of heroism, handy haversacks, adaptive compound bows, rings of protection, weapons, cloaks of resistance... I also use the rule for other magic items, in a case by case situation: The player ask "can I roll to see if there's magic item X in this town?", and more often than not, I let him. But not always, in any situation regardless of where they are, the settlement culture, the magic item searched, etc.

I also use the rule to see if there's an artisan that can craft magic items, if there's none described in the town. For example, you could roll to see if there's a paladin with brew potion, and if there's one, you can buy lvl 1 lesser restoration potions from him, or a druid with scribe scroll for some druid only spells, or a blacksmith who could make up to +2 weapons. If there's one, you can commission your items, no matter how rare, because all crafters can do all weapons. This way the halfling can get his +1 furious nunchaku, without needing to stretch the suspension of disbelief into either a wallmart with 6.000 combinations of weapons and several millions of gold pieces worth of material, or a protean ectoplasmmic metaweapon of shapeshifting nature.

137ben wrote:

The fact that you, gustavo iglesias, do not personally enjoy a given rule does not make it a 'bad rule', nor does it make it not RAW or RAI. It just means that that particular rule is bad for you.

And that's why house rules are a thing.

Corollary of that is that no rule can be bad, ever, in no circumstance. I disagree with such corollary (rules can be bad, even if I might be wrong with this one), and therefore I disagree with your premise.

Tacticslion wrote:
Getting what we need to keep playing?

But... does the halfing monk/barbarian really needs a +1 small furious nunchaku? Couldn't he play with, say, a +2 small nunchaku? Is the game going to stop if he doesn't have it? Or even better, does he needs the +1 small furious nunchaku right now, as if he were entitled to ask for instant gratification? Couldn't he spend some time looking for a magic item crafter, and then commision the item (which takes just 8 days or so to build), and witht the desirable side effect of not breaking the inmersion (of others with a different inmersion breaking point) with the fact that settlement marketplace become a blurry limbo of meta-items that become reality at players' whim, when they ask for it?

Tacticslion wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Repeteadly. Because I'm going to keep rolling 75% for +1 ooze bane nunchakus, just to mock the stupid system. And if I miss the 75% chance for +1 ooze bane nunchaku, I'll inmediatly ask for a huge +1 Ooze bane tonfa, ir maybe a tiny +1 ooze bane Longspear, from the old and famous Pixie Phalanx Of Gelatinous Cube Extermination. Just because it's free to ask, you spend no time or resources, and it's fun to laugh at it when RAW males 0 sense

This is a perfect example of why a GM should not use the rules: a player being a jerk to prove the point. That would be an incredibly un-fun session for me, as a fellow player, and as a GM.

On the other hand, if the party needed something specific, I'd push the system through its paces to see if we could get what we needed and stop.

This is similar to the fact that Wealth By Level is a guideline that is part of the rules. However someone taking a legal feat can instantly double the party's effective wealth (well, "instantly" meaning "over the course of one day for every 1,000 gp value").

That's a playstyle difference, and the primary source of the importance of Rule 0.

DO NOT USE the 75% rule, if it doesn't work for your game. I mean, it's written right there, guys.

The thing is, you find muy behavior above "being a jerk", because it ruins your game. I agree. I'd like to point, though, that probably that +1 ooze bane tiny sized longspear won't break anything mechanically (unlike WBL and Craft Woundreous Item). I'm not going to kill the BBEG with it, it's not going to slow down the game with complicated rules... The only thing that it breaks, is *your inmersion*. That's it. The game is no longer fun, because *you are no longer inmersed into the Fantasy World it is simulating*. No mechanical unbalance is needed for it, no rule is broken. Just tearing the little veil that splits "our world" from "their world"

So, I think we can agree that breaking inmersion is bad for the game, can we? You have said that the above example would make the game unfun for you, even if I don't use the huge nunchaku at all. We can also agree that different people might hace different "breaking points". For example, that I buy a tiny oozebane longspear in a site where it obviously shouldn't be one, breaks yours. That I buy a small sized ooze bane nunchaku for my halfling monk, because we suspect we are going to find some oozes later in the adventure, breaks some other guys inmersion *just as much*.

Because for some people, the break of inmersion doesn't come from the fact I'm trying to buy specific items that clearly shouldnt be in 75% of the settlements with apropiated wealth level with the purpose of laughing at the system. The break comes from the fact that the system is laughable to begin with, and using it RAW, without intervention of GM and/or use of common sense, destroy the game experience, regardless of the player really wanting that +1 ooze bane small nunchaku for his character or not

The fact that I should be able to find greyflame furious +1 meteor hammers in the middle of Osirion 75% of the time in appropiated sized settlements just because I decided to play a paladin/fighter(viking) with weapon focus "meteor hammers" is inmersion breaking by itself.

The rule is bad, because it doesn't take in account rarity of the item. A small sized furious nunchaku for the rare halflings barbarian/monk is so common as a +2 longsword, or as a +1 Orc Bane Dwarven Waraxe.

Starbuck_II wrote:

Likely that giant monk was an adventurer and hated oozes. He decided to attack the elves and died.

Repeteadly. Because I'm going to keep rolling 75% for +1 ooze bane nunchakus, just to mock the stupid system. And if I miss the 75% chance for +1 ooze bane nunchaku, I'll inmediatly ask for a huge +1 Ooze bane tonfa, ir maybe a tiny +1 ooze bane Longspear, from the old and famous Pixie Phalanx Of Gelatinous Cube Extermination. Just because it's free to ask, you spend no time or resources, and it's fun to laugh at it when RAW males 0 sense

Tacticslion wrote:

... where, in Mongolia, is a settlement with a value greater than a metropolis?

More than 25.000 people?

In ten different places, actually. Cities in mongolia

However, if you are less ambitious, you can buy viking longships in Mongolia in prosperous large towns, which is easier than Metropolis, probably. And has the extra fun of being viking.

Yes: none at all (towns are too small, as the base limit is 2k for large towns, and each of those is 4k+weapon cost.)

Which only means you'll have to go to Korvosa, Magnimar, Riddleport, and make my point still valid, and your counter argument a moot point.

Also, Base Value can be increased by settlements qualities, like Magically Attuned, Notorious or Prosperous.

gustavo iglesias wrote:
You can buy a +1 Dwarven Axe in a nation of islationist elves.

Yeah, it's probably been there for ages, ever since those dwarves that came through died.

Yep. They came in that invasion with those kung-fu storm giants that hated gelatinous cubes, because I rolled 75% or less for the huge +1 Ooze Bane Nunchaku too.

DominusMegadeus wrote:

Whether it is a problem or not is not the point of contention.

It is, in fact, RAW. That is what the rules say. That's all that's being said.

I agree that it's RAW. By RAW, the best way to deal with the fatigue produced by sleeping in armor, is choosing not to sleep. Ever. Common sense should apply, though.

I don't think there's a lot of common sense in "there's not a single paladin in the world who would brew potions to help people with their ailments, ever", and I don't think there's a lot of common sense in "there's a lvl 5 paladin with brew potion feat in every town, but only if I ask, and the local shop always have a wand with exactly the number of charges of lesser restoration that our group need, but no more, and that's true for any other spell as well".

The whole magic item stuff is a mess in the game. Buying, selling, and crafting rules, all of them are a mess.

Ashiel wrote:
Paladin potions are cheaper. By the rules that makes them more frequently available.

No, that's not true. By the rules, that makes them more desirable, which is different. Paladins have an aligment restriction, and little incentive to take Brew Potion, while Alchemists get it for free, so the number of available paladin potion makers is way lower than the rest of potion makers combined, by far.

Paladin made potions *exist*. That doesn't mean they are *common*

I think the underlying problem here is that the 75% stuff is absurd. That's the point. And it has nothing to do with magic items, or partially charged magic items. It is absurd for normal gear too.

The very idea that I can buy a war galley in Mongolia because I rolled 75% or less is absurd.

With the 75% rules, you can find a +2 longsword in some town in Varisia exactly with the same difficulty that you'll find a +1 furyborn Shang gou, a +1 chaotic outsider bane terbutje, a +1 spell storing ogre hook, a +1 mimetic sharpened sword scabbard or a +1 thawing hunga munga.

You could go to a thorpe in the middle of the North Pole, and ask for a +1 darkwood shield. You could buy stone plate armor in a sand desert. You can buy a +1 Dwarven Axe in a nation of islationist elves. Did you roll 75% or less? Then you buy it.

Darrell Impey UK wrote:
Hang on, under 4th Edition D&D rules you do add your dex mod to the damage of range weapons; the OP (or their GM) may have been getting their rules sets in a twist...

Not really. It depends on the power, and many classes have powers attached to Wisdom, or Charisma, or whatever. There's a Warlord variant that shoots bows using strength, for example.

It's true for basic attacks, and classes that use DEX as their main ability, like Ranger and Rogue, though

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
NikolaiJuno wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

First, there is no cheese on my part. Indeed I could say the cheese is trying to get one set of enchantments to apply to two different weapons.

And second you couldn't dual wield an enlarged klar because it doesn't have the double tag. Think of it as a pseudo-double weapon. And of course you explicitly can't dual wield a double weapon that is one handed. To dual wield a double weapon it has to be two handed for you.

Edit: I never nocticed, but you could dual wield a one handed double weapon of your own size. You would just have to use it two handed.

I still don't see why not. If they are in fact a Light Shield with Armor Spikes at the same time, why wouldn't you be able to TWF with them?
For the same reason you can't TWF with a Cestus and a dagger in the same hand.
And that reason is...?

Common sense.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:

Personally, I think there should never be a GMPC, in the sense that the GM should never be thinking of an NPC as the GM's PC. That doesn't say anything about whether there should be NPCs traveling with the party.

I fully agree with this, at 101%

If my group is short in players, I'd rather give them a free Leadership feat, or something like that.

I'm thinking now on the 3rd party The Way of the Wicked and the

Ogre that the group find in the jail and becomes a follower

Torger Miltenberger wrote:

Either I can try to target specific body parts or I can't. End. Full Stop.

Those are the only two options that are acceptable to me.

That's because you'd like the game to be a simulationist game, which isn't the focus of this game. This game is a gamist game, like previous versions of DnD, specially after 3.0

I remember I did that, back in 3.0 days, but with a villain. I used a fighter/mage drow, which showed the group the proper way to use buffs in combat (back when haste gave you an extra action, which you could use to cast spells). Then, after beating them for a while, he left, for plot reasons. It worked well as a glipmse of future as well, as that drow became a recurring villain in the campaing, and the liutenant of the BBEG.

Using a GMPC always makes me shiver, because I remember the old days (20something years ago) when we started to play, and we had a GM who played the game with uber-powerful GMPCs as well. It wasn't nice. I understand that Joe's proposal, which is for a couple of sessions at best, is very different, but I can't avoid to remember those days and shiver

Ian Bell wrote:
Half of 2d4 is efficient burst damage? Against a typical 19 hp shadow you'll have to do that 7 or 8 times to kill it, typically, and that's assuming that you don't miss the actually pretty decent touch AC of 15.

8 attacks means 2 rounds of actions from a 4 PC group. It's not ideal, oils/scrolls/spells are preferable, but it's way better than dying.

Roboman1723 wrote:
Oh my god, I learned under the worst GM and have had to relearn the game since him. How is damage calculated if not that then. Sorry for noobin it up.

Damage is Weapon damage die + STR, for melee weapons and throwing weapons, and also for composite bows. Regular bows don't add any ability (or BAB).

Base attack bonus is the bonus you use to attack, basicaly ;).

Torger Miltenberger wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:

I don't think that's possible. For a combat against Hydras that resemble the myth, heads must be "easy" to cut. In fact, no less than 7 times in the span of a normal combat. If heads are THAT easy to cut, then, say, dragons, would be extremely easy to kill.

I disagree with the idea that you need to make a regular rule that allow you to sever the head of every monster just to make the Hydra fight to look like it was in the myth. YMMV, of course

Keep in mind that the fight between Hercules and the Hydra was one dude soloing (arguably with the help of a torch bearing cohort) a single monster.

I don't think Hercules was so high level when he did that job, but that point aside, it's not relevant for the matter. The fight vs Hydra, if you want it to look like the myth, Hercules or not, involve people cutting 7+ heads in a short span of time (ie: a few combat rounds).

That gives us a couple of options.

a) we can make a fight where cutting heads is very difficult. Then it'll be a very long combat, or it will be resolved by some other method which doesn't follow the classic myth (like charm monster, or destroy the body with a fireball, etc)

b) we make a fight where you can cut 7+ heads in the expected time span of a regular Pathfinder encounter (ie: a few rounds). That means cutting a head HAS to be easy.

If you go with option b), to keep the fight resembling the myth, then we have 2 aditional options.

b1) the hydra itself has a rule to cut its heads, which is easy.

b2) cutting heads, in general, is easy.

With b2, every monster who can't survive the loss of a head will be easy pie.

Assuming b2) is undesirable, because we want our dragons to survive more than 1 round of called shots, that leaves us with 2 options: a), where you don't have a fight that looks like the myth, or b1), where the hydra has its own rules.

It's bassicaly the same idea that made most versions of DnD let PC to attack beholders' eyes, but not the eyes of any other monster.

Roboman1723 wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:

Attack bonus is to hit. It is unrelated to your damage bonus.

You do not add your Base Attack Bonus or Size Modifier to damage either.

Edit: You do add Dex to hit with a longbow, but there is no reason to think you would add 1.5x. Two handed melee weapons add 1.5x Str to damage, not to hit.

Is this site for real? You add your attack bonus on your attack roll to see if you hit. Your attack bonus is your damage.

Damage = Weapon dice + BAB + Ability mod

You must be trolling.

Torger Miltenberger wrote:

My preferred solution would be fix the system so that it can model what's being presented without breaking internal consistency (ie. in this case create and run a hit location system). I absolutely admit that this is more work than most DMs want to do and that's fine. I also admit that I'm still tinkering trying to find/make one I like.

I don't think that's possible. For a combat against Hydras that resemble the myth, heads must be "easy" to cut. In fact, no less than 7 times in the span of a normal combat. If heads are THAT easy to cut, then, say, dragons, would be extremely easy to kill.

I disagree with the idea that you need to make a regular rule that allow you to sever the head of every monster just to make the Hydra fight to look like it was in the myth. YMMV, of course

Actually, by default you can try to severe any neck from any monster, because it's a rpg, you can try what your want. Every other monster happen to have a secret rule which is an invisible aura of mental domination that forbids your to try. No save. Hydra is one of the few without that aura. Beholders in DnD had the same

Bioboygamer wrote:

Funnily enough, his previous GMPC (!) didn't have that problem when he snuck into a group of 50+ enemies and took out their leaders without being detected...

That's quite typical for GMPC.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rabbiteconomist wrote:

As a GM, suppose your players bought 10 LR potions from a Paladin (or better yet, made them herself) and want to sell them for 150 gp to a merchant. Would you or disallow, and how would you explain it in the world why the prices are they way they in the world? :)

This is a great point. If paladín potions are bought at 300gp, then they are sold at 150gp. A paladín PC with brew potion would craft potions for 25gp and sell them at 150gp. That's a great return of investment, your know

Aelryinth wrote:
I'd like to see the rule that says paladins have to sell for less when everyone else makes 6x the money for the same product.

it's in the magic creation rule, the part where it says it's caster level x spell level. They charge 50g and not 300 for the same reason that priest with no competition in a given town charge 300 and not 550. Because price is based in CL x spell level, not market

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If there were a marketing price, useful (potentially life saving) spells like lesser restoration would sell for more than 300gp, while useless spells would sell for more. A +1 orc bane sword near Bekkzen would be worth much more than a +1 [insert monster from Vudra], and do on.

There's no market in PF magicmart. There's a regulated price, which is bases in clases level and spell level

Btw I bate my new phone and its autocorrect

I'll buy a LR wand in a heart beat. But most GM would argue that potions are more common, because fewer paladines can qualify for craft wands.

"There's no paladín brewer un this town, but there's one in a nearby town" is perfectly valid answer. I'll través to that town if needed, that players hace to search for gear is ok

I can envision hosputaler paladins doing potions to help people the 300 dayw a year they aren't fighting something, or preparing supplies for future use, before the plague breaks and they are overwhelmed

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Lesser Restoration is on multiple class lists. Bless weapon is not. I don't see why Paladins wouldn't sell at the market price. Just because they can make them cheap doesn't mean they have to sell them that way.

If your are going into market price then bless weapon should be even mire expensive, as they are harder to find and lack of supply works in their favor. Every single maker of Bless Oil is also a maker of Lesser Restoration Potions, bit the oppositte isnt true . Also, high demand stuff (like potions of CLW ir Enlarge) should have higher price than potiins of [insert sucky lvl 1 spell here] so I think that's a weak excuse. PF magic marts dont follow market rules, they are socialist services with regulated price based on production costa, not Adam Smith's invisible hand.

and yet, you seem to think there's unlimited amounts of paladins selling lesser Restoration potions, and nobody else can sell them, which directly references infinite supply at price point X, which IS the invisible hand.

So, I find that counter argument pretty funny.


Weak strawman.

I haven't said that your should find paladin LRP available. "There aren't paladins with Brew Potion in this town" is a perfectly valid answer. Justo that it implies no Bless Weapon Oil as well. Alzó, an infinite supply of paladín potions isnt more dumb than an infinite suply of, say, druid potions or ranger scrolls. Yes, pathfibder rules to buy items are dumb. Regardless of class

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Lesser Restoration is on multiple class lists. Bless weapon is not. I don't see why Paladins wouldn't sell at the market price. Just because they can make them cheap doesn't mean they have to sell them that way.

So... Those holy bastions of good would overcharge for their work just because the customers have no choice but pay?

Truly the most paladinesque of behaviors!

For a spell that help people to recover from pain, suffering and disease, no less!

Aelryinth wrote:

Lesser Restoration is on multiple class lists. Bless weapon is not. I don't see why Paladins wouldn't sell at the market price. Just because they can make them cheap doesn't mean they have to sell them that way.

If your are going into market price then bless weapon should be even mire expensive, as they are harder to find and lack of supply works in their favor. Every single maker of Bless Oil is also a maker of Lesser Restoration Potions, bit the oppositte isnt true . Also, high demand stuff (like potions of CLW ir Enlarge) should have higher price than potiins of [insert sucky lvl 1 spell here] so I think that's a weak excuse. PF magic marts dont follow market rules, they are socialist services with regulated price based on production costa, not Adam Smith's invisible hand.

ryric wrote:
If paladins aren't making potions of lesser restoration then I hope they also aren't making oils of bless weapon. It makes no sense to declare that NPC paladins don't make magic consumables then turn around and make paladin exclusive spells available as consumables.


Shadows are terrible hard. Not only because they sre hard to damage (there are ways to overcome that), bit because they DRAIN strength. At that level, that's a really longlasting penalty. Also, if they take down a char, it's close to a tpk, as you will have one extra shadow and one less group member

I disagree with many people saying that summoners spell list isnt a problem. It is. Not because summoners are OP with it, but because they break the game at many points. Having lvl 4 spells at lvl 3 is a big deal in a gane where magic items are built based in lvl. Potions can be only lvl 3 for example. Summoners existance implies potions of dimensional door for everybody

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think people who dislike bizarre settings will always look at those AP with a different mood (and same goes with those who dislike conventional old DnD Fantasy). Prejudice is a very human nature.

On the other hand, I'm thankful to Lucas, because he added lasers and spaceships to his classic story of a black knight, an evil sorcerer emperor, magic, a kidnapped princess and humanoids with fur fighting alongside the last member of an order of monastic cavaliers who use sorcery and magic swords.

Yep, my fault.

Go to the DPR olympics thread and copy some builds. Multiarmed synthesists with multiple revolvers or something

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wildfire Heart wrote:
As a GM, it's not my fault if your character is useless, that's your job, and I try to make my games as realistic as possible

No. Your job (and every one else's job, for that matter) is to make sure you are all having fun. Everything else is optional.

I would add some other things, but somebody already hit the nail un the head with a blunt post, so I rest my case.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:

The relative number of posts in each AP subforum is pretty much a good indication of how popular each AP is.

It would, if every AP would had been delivered at the same time. It's quite normal than forums who have been around 5 years have a higher number of posts than those who are more recent, I think. Also, controversial APs will generate heated debate, and thus more posts, even if those posts come from relativeley few people arguing each other. It's a hint, but not as good as a list of sells (specially, a list of sells at the moment of release, for example)

magnuskn wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
I would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.
Then you are playing homebrewn rules. The two classes cannot co-exist with each other. Hell, Anti-Paladins actually can't coexist with anyone.

Thats not true, they can coexist with other people who follow their ideals. However, outside of the scope of an evil campaign, it's unlikely they can coexist with a "normal" group of heroic individuals, that's true. And for sure, not with a paladin

Ok, I think I've made my mind.

With the AP focusing heavy in giants, I think it'll be nice to change for a while, and make a less standard druid. By focusing in giantshaping, I'll be able to ignore staple feats like Wild Speech, Nature Spell, or Planar Wildshaping, which are useless for a giant.

I'll be focusing on troll form, mostly (my character is going to be a half-orc, that I'll reskin as a half-troll, at least by name. Later I'll be in troll form 24/7, probably). I'll fight with Shillelagh and Klar for aesthetic reasons. I like to imagine the character in my mind, and this will be the character look) for the first levels, until I can use natural weapons. This is what I'd look later only with more armor

Later, I'll focus in natural weapons, with the ussual stuff like Amulet of mighty Fist, Greater Magic Fang, Strong Jaws, etc. Once I'm able to rend, I'll take the feat, and maybe Improved Natural weapon. Compared to a "standard" Dire Tiger druid, I lose Pounce but gain Reach, and have 1 attack less (1 bite +2 claws +2 rakes, vs 1 bite +2 claws +1 Rend), and the Grab ability. I'll do less damage, but I'll be able to control the battlefield better, thanks to Reach, and my defense would be much higher, because trolls can have armor. A Dragonhide Full plate is damn cheap for what it gives, and you don't need any expensive enchantment to benefit from it. It should the first thing I buy once I get 3.300 gold coins.

I'll get Stegosaurus as pet. It'll be a support pet and an extra body to "tank", focused in helping people and defense. I'll give him some teamwork feats, like Outflank and Precise Strike. With Aid and Flanking tricks, he'll be a great help early, even when he's not a danger himself (it starts with Str 10...). Later, Outflank, a Menacing AoMF, and Trip, will help alot, and Improved natural weapon, Greater Magic Fang, Strong Jaws and Vital strike can help him to dish some damage, even if it's not going to be the equivalent of a pouncing beast. On the bright side, he'll have AC 22 at lvl 1 (with a leather barding), and will raise to very decent levels, with high Dex, huge natural armor, and some barding.

We play with 20 points, and the GM has asked politely not to tank abilities if possible, so this is going to be my first lvl:

STR 16 DEX 14 CON 14 INT 10 WIS 14 CHA 10.
AC 17 (Hide +4, Klar +1, Dex +2)
HP 10
Att +3 1d6+3 (club) or +4 1d6+4 (Shillelagh)
1st lvl feat Big Game Hunter
Planned progression: 3 Heavy armor, 5 Craft W.I., 7 Precise Strike 9 Outflank 11 Improved Natural Attack, or Power Attack 13 Rending Fury 15+ Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude, in some order.

Traits are going to be Fate's Favored and Dwarven Training (which looks like damn useful for this campaign), and I'll take Sacred Tattoos as well, like most Half-orc PC does, I suppose.

Items to hunt for (one of the big reasons to take Craft Woundreous Items), Jingasa of Fortunate Soldier, Several Ioun Stones (+1 AC, +1 Attack, 1st lvl Spell Storing plus a Wand of Shield), the standard gear (Shifter's headband of Wisdom, Belt of Strength, Cloak of protection, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Mighty fist (maybe giant bane, plus usual stuff like Frost, Fire, etc), Menacing amulet (for the Stegosaurus), Deliquescent Gloves, Rod of Extend Spell

Someone has any advice? Something obvious I'm missing? Any way to improve this basic idea?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
AsterITA wrote:

Anyway i already told him to reroll his character with a non-evil one, he will use him in another campaign.

In my experience, being of Evil alignment is not that much a problem. However, being interested in PvP, and actively planning to fight other player/s, is a problem. It's perfectly possible to play a character like Black Tunic Raistlin, and still being nice to the group. Marvel's Punisher code of conduct can be seen as a superhero themed Hellknight, and it's also playable. Focusing on screwing other players is unacceptable, regardless of alignnent. A Neutral ecoterrorist Druid who plans to screw the group when they do something against nature (like fighting a Dire Bear) is unnaceptable, evento if true Neutral. A LG paladin which plans to attack the party rogue if they do rogue stuff, is unnaceptable.

The key here is "don't be a jerk to the rest of players". Beyond alignment, that player plan was to be a jerk.

That said, CE antipaladins ARE jerks, that's their Code. I don't see how they can be played in most AP, unless your handwaive their nature. LE variants are much more interesting.

It would be interesting to know how well eeach AP did. Not real numbers like how much each one sold, but maybe a relative list, like a top 10 or something, which show us which ones are more popular and which ones aren't

Yep, Sacred tattoo and fate's favored is pretty much a staple.

I'm thinking about the pet. Stegosaurus can do a bit more damage than Ankylosaurus (specially when strong jaw is factored in), and has the same AC beyond lvl 7 (and better saves and slightly more HP). Trip is much worse than Dazed, but it's not a bad condition anyways. And higher Dex means Stegosaurus can take combat reflexes and actually get a return for the investment, reach, trip and a punishing hit. Ankylosaurus' stun win fights in the right moment, though.

Another option could be to take a more standard pouncing pet (like Allosaurus). That way it can make the damage I'm not doing, but at the cost of being more fragile itself. With Undersized Mounts, if you pay for permanency for Enlarge PErson (which Goliath druids can cast on their dinosaur companion), you can be a Huge giant mounting a Huge dinosaur, which is ... huge... :P. With 1 level of fighter Titan Mauler you could get a gargantuan Lance, and charge and do some damage.

To be honest, I normally hate the fact that druids have scimitar proficiency, I jsdt don't see why. But for a half orc (which gets falchion as racial weapon), it looks ok, I think. Scimitar+shield+reach sounds good, lots of defense and decent damage, although Vital Strike isnt very useful there. Combat reflexes and lunge sound great aditions for that build.

2 hand build is easy, because the half orc has falchion and great axe, but Reach weapons means your need to get it somehow, maybe a level or two of fighter, ranger or barbarian, to get an extra feat, giants as favored enemies, or rage (which also opens the feat for max damage in a vital strike).

Must have feats, whatever the build, natural spell (although much less useful for goliaths, because giants can speak), and planar wildshape. If dwarf, Steel Soul, but I think I'm 90% decided for half orc already. What else is a must have for Druids?

What about spells? Any suggestion? I think self buffs and pet buffs will eat most slots.

Gear: besides vestments of druid, and the standard buffs like cloak of prot, etc... What el se is good?

But Pathfinder isn't the real world, and should not try to emulate it. Pathfinder has levels because Con 12 Galadriel SHOULD be harder to kill than Random-Orc-Number-23 with Con 14.

Hi everybody!
After a long hiatus, I'm going to play in the brand new "Giantslayer" adventure path.

Reading the Player Guide, it gives me a good amount of hype. It suggests a lot of builds made to play *as* a giant, sort of. Titan Mauler, Titan Fighter, and this kind of stuff.

I read about Goliath Druid, and I really like the concept, and I feel it REAAAAALLY fits the player guide spirit. So that's what's going to be my character.

My first few concepts reduced the starting point to either half-orc or dwarf. Dwarf sounds extremely powerful in this AP, with so many racial traits against giants, and +CON and +WIS is as good as +STR from the half orc, probably. Half-orc has a great vibe for the goliath, though (easy to re-skin as a half troll, which probably will be you go-to form later on), and the favored class bonus is quite cute (+1/3 NA). Also, the Dwarf trained trait *sort* of help to reduce the gap with dwarves in the anti-giant department.

A few things I need to know for Goliath Druids.
They can only wildshape into dinosaurs, megafauna and giants. But Ptenarodons descrpition says they are not considered dinosaurs (they are pterosaurs). Are they considered dinosaurs for wildshape? If not, is there *any* option for a flying form for Goliath druids? If not, how do you overcome this?

Weapons or claws? I like characters that aren't glass cannons. I like survivality, and thus, I like AC. Druids in wildshape often are a bit of weak in the AC side. Goliath have some extra toughness over regular pouncing-dire-tiger-druids, at the cost of a lot of damage, though. Shillelagh + Shield seems to be a decent combo for a while, and gives you a nice bump in AC, which might help to keep the character in the "only hit with 15+" zone of confort. But later, you'll lose a ton of damage that way. Troll form gives you bite + 2 claws + Rend, which isn't bad, and more damaging than shillelagh + secondary bite, but still can't compete with pouncing by any means. Could Vital strike help to solve that? I'm trying to stay within theme, so I'm not going to be a conqueror ooze, but maybe Shillelagh + Large/huge sized club could be decent enough? I'm not trying to be the highest damage in the table, just not being a dead weight.

As a snapshot, at lvl 12, as Half Orc you could have:
+9 AC (+3 breastplate, made of ironwood or dragonscale) + 2 luck (jingasa + fate favored trait) +1 Insight (ioun stone) + 4 shield (+2 regular shield) + 4 natural armor (giant form) + 4 natural armor (favored bonus) +5 enhanced natural amor (barkskin) +2 deflection (ring) + 1 Dex -1 size, for something around 41 AC, which might be up to 43 with feats (shield focus, dodge if you want) and 45 vs giants (dwarven training trait from the campaign), which is enough to be hit only with 20s by CR11 Cloud Giants, which sounds about Ok. Specially because you'll have also Regeneration 5, damage resist, several resistances (planar wildshape into a fiendish ice troll, for example). Saving throws also are OK, except for reflex. You'll raise wisdom decently, and troll form gives you +4 CON, and both Will and Fortitude are good saves for you, plus you have +2 luck from orc tattoos and fate favored.

But the damage department might be more troublesome, though. By this level, a wand of Shillelagh probably won't be enough anymore (although I think it's quite viable until here). As a Large Troll, with Shillelagh, your damage would be +3d6 only, even with vital strike and devastating strike it won't be impressive.

The above lvl 12 dude would have something like:
15 starting stregth +2 racial +3 level ups + 4 enhancement + 6 size bonus, or str 30. With Shillelagh, it would have something like:
+9 BAB + 10 str + 1 enhancement + 1 competence (ioun stone), +21 to hit, for 6d6 + 10 (str) +1 (enhanchement) + 6 (devastating strike), or 6d6+17 for a vital strike, same round you move. Could use Power Attack for extra -4 to hit and +8 to damage, but it's not that good for 1h weapons.

Compared to pouncing allosaurs, that's sad. A full round would have 3 attacks, including the secondary bite, but that's not really impressive anyways. 2 claws + bite + Rend would do a bit more (depending on how much Greater Magic Fangs you spend, quite a lot more, especially with amulets of natural weapons with Holy, or Giant Bane or something like that), but then you lose like 4-5 AC, and you are no longer in the "hit with 20s" cattegory. I guess if you want to do damage, you should be using a dinosaur form instead of a giant form anyways. Maybe with a level of barbarian, so you can use furious Finish? It seems that pouncing allosaurs, and vital-striking tyrannosaurs are going to do a lot more damage.

Any suggestions?

PS: companion would be a Ankylosaur or Stegosaur, I think

1 to 50 of 2,556 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.