|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
The real trouble with grasping the two together is that martial adventurers defy the very concept of natural selection.
They survive the same way many parasites do, by latching onto something that can keep them alive.
Heck there are plenty of people who deny evolution that comprehend the Martial Caster Disparity.
A martial character has one of three approaches here [without extending into weird supernatural stuff.]
A: Generalist who is equally awesome with all weapons and has no favored weapons.
B: Ranged Specialist
C: Melee Specialist with some reasonable means of reaching flying opponents [a flying mount, sky dancing, Jump Good, whatever.]
C2: Going into the supernatural stuff, something that can force a flier to come to you is a good alternative for a Melee Specialist
EDIT For Clarity: less-favored weapon is a fine alternative for a Melee Specialist at low levels, but by level 9 that's no longer appropriate In My Opinion.
@Glord - Why should CR10 monsters be "easy fodder" for level 9 PCs? I mean, CR10 would be APL+1, which is supposed to be "Challenging"
You're both wrong [Devilkiller on a technicality]
APL+1 is supposed to be "moderately challenging." Pretty easy but with a slight chance things might go wrong.
Who said I was countering your point? I was just highlighting that this is my way for my games.
You don't like it you don't have to play that way. Doesn't stop me from running my own games my own way.
Incidentally I get kind of sick of people assuming that just because a new class comes out that overlaps with a theme an old class filled suddenly that old class is no longer allowed to fill that theme.
yeah, I'm of the opinion that a lawful good pirate is... wait for it... still a pirate. He never kills anyone that legitimately surrenders [and never personally attacks a non-combatant.] And in general his primary objective is other pirate ships, though if he's not the captain all he can do is plead his case and do his best as part of the crew.
What's the point buy/roll, etc., for this campaign?David said 20 point buy upthread.Could I play an aasimar?
David says he's open minded, post your character and he'll give it an open minded look [his words paraphrased.]
In any case, my plan would be a charisma-over-wis-focused hangover cleric of Besmara (so good face skills, etc). If we have a higher starting level or an expected accelerated start, I'll go with the Evangelist archetype, otherwise waiting until level 3 to channel is brutal.
This would be competing with the Cleric of Calista face that's been proposed, but competition always happens in these recruitment threads anyway.
Best of luck.
EDIT: also, David has stated that there shall be no levels skipped. You guys are starting at level 1.
Elannaris Darantholar wrote:
What you guys think about we define what roles wound be desired?
This is strongly advised IMO
Looks like a good starting point, I imagine others may have ideas for tweaking it.
One idea might be trading the tank for a support/healer type, one who specializes in magic that allows him to mitigate incoming damage, take some of it on himself, all that sort of stuff.
David Barker wrote:
it is only clerics with archetypes, feats and domains clerics can be diverse
And in reference to a discussion earlier...
As for setting ships on fire, clerics with the fire domain or it's subdomains are quite ok at that as well.
There's also burning arrows/crossbows/catapults with pitch. Not 100% sure where the gamerules for it are, but people in the real world did plenty of burning enemy ships without magic.
Also Greek Fire [Alchemist Fire?] is kind of a big thing in the mythology of ship battles.
I am of the same mind Archlich, though since I'm not actually participating and basically spectating, I don't really have a say anymore.
I do hope David keeps it pure cleric, but that's up to him and you guys.
Edit: thus this post is also serving as a headsup to David that I won't be playing. Having one additional player beyond the normal slots [Sam] is throwing enough of a monkey wrench into it, having two extra would pretty significantly alter the experiment.
Arcane: Gnome/Wayang Cleric of Shelyn, Veiled Illusionist PrC. By level 10 you're memorizing nothing but Shadow Spells, and their DC is INSANE, letting you fireball/web at will.
If one of you guys wants to do this go for it. I'm just posting on this to highlight the lack of need for it so nobody feels required to pursue it.
I just want to point out that an Arcane caster isn't exactly necessary. Sure there are things arcane magic does better/easier than Divine magic, but a party where everybody has divine magic isn't one that MUST have arcane magic.
The Archlich wrote:
I think our worst issues will be with trapfinding and skills... Not sure if any archetypes cover this.
Assuming David permits it, there's a trait for Trapfinding and disabling magical traps.
Your trapmonkey should at least have Perception and Disable Device at least, anything else is gravy.
On the skills note, a cleric party won't have anybody with a huge number of them so specializing on skills is really important for the low levels. You've got a survivalist tracker type, either a dedicated face [A human spending his favored class bonus on skills has 4+int or even 3 if Int was dumped to 7 because stat penalties don't impact Race and Favored Class granted skill points] or good cop bad cop [one takes Diplomacy, one takes Intimidate and one of the two takes bluff] and a trap monkey [If he squeezes 3 skill points per level trap monkey could BE the survivalist as well, opening up an extra slot]
One thing that helps stretch skill points is remembering not everyone needs perception at level one. It helps that this is a cleric party so everyone is going to have a positive wisdom modifier and at least half [perhaps more] are likely to have a very good one.
Just for clarity David, when you say Average plus one each additional level, do you mean....
Rotating low-high average plus one [so d8 results in 5 at level 2, 6 at level 3, 5 at level 4 and so on]
Rotating high-low average plus one [so d8 results in 6 at level 2, 5 at level 3, 6 at level 4 and so on]
Average round down plus one [so d8 results in 5 at all levels]
Average round up plus one [so d8 results in 6 at all levels]
I already gave my word to play in Sam's game so I won't be participating here, but since I sort of initiated this movement I figured I'd watch it and go ahead and ask for this clarification early.
We're 100% in agreement on this point.
The difference- it seems- is I view my responsibility as a GM is to roleplay the world. My job is to be the player who handles the world and what it does [both Active progress towards the myriad of things of meaning going on in the world with or without the party, and Reactions to the party], not to spend hours customizing the nature of the encounters characters come into contact with.
A Caster party could manage :P [Though in this particular case at least two somewhat martially oriented casters who don't need to spend feats to patch their ability to mix it up will be required at low levels. In particular I recommend a druid. Heck 'Natural Spell' isn't even a Combat Feat.]
I'm not suggesting combat isn't a big part of the game. The question being asked and the rhetoric being used is about characters "staying competitive in combat". Are you going to deny that GMs plan encounters with the PCs combat capacities in mind?
It's far too much work for me to bother referencing the party beyond their level and number of members when planning encounters.
Barring a special campaign requested and agreed on in advance- my parties receive 70% roleplay and 30% combat without regard for their individual capabilities.
While the RP/Combat ratio might differ for other GMs I surmise many GMs take the same 'you're level X with Y people so I'm running a campaign for Y people at level X' outlook.
As far as this arms race you speak of? In my own games the only time it ever happens is if the Players explicitly request a greater challenge. I could care less if you wipe the floor with most of my enemies in 4-6 rounds while taking minimal damage and healing much of it off.
My own perspective on this? Build the character you want for the experience you want!
If you want a character who has it easy, build optimized badasses who only struggle a little against the most difficult encounters.
If you want a character who struggles against the odds and risks death at every turn, then deliberately build something underpowered and lacking synergy.
Retraining it's one of the few things I dislike in the system. I don't see why I need to spend money to retrain something that is not working for my character. Not only that it guarantees myself at least to use online guides to build a character. To avoid taking something that one may have to retrain at later levels. It
Indeed, the price is there for the players who deliberately build with retraining in mind, taking something that's better now and retraining it for something that's better later or is a prerequisite for a feat they can only take later or something like that.
The retraining rules should have included a note to GMs that if a player made a mistake with a character choice they should be able to retrain for free [and that the GM should make sure to provide sufficient downtime without penalizing the party via plot.]
If you're looking to me for a build I've been swamped with IRL issues the past day or two but I am pecking away at it.
As a note to anybody else in this thread with experience with Wizards, by all means please feel free to participate as well.
Usually I am the GM, and I'd be totally fine with something like this. Perhaps adding an additional -1 penalty to all attack rolls for having the third weapon.
EDIT: also I take issue with the thematic claim that Monk schools are founded by Fighters. Fighters and Monks are so far divorced thematically [somewhat less so with certain archetypes] that this is freaking ridiculous.
A monk is a warrior philosopher seeking enlightenment and the mastery of his body and soul. This does not preclude experimentation and development of new arts.
Monks aren't ONLY members of orders passing down wisdom of the past Bubble, there are ALSO Monks who dabble in the unknown and end up founding new orders based on principles previously unknown or underappreciated in the martial arts world.
This is how unique schools find their origins.
That strikes me as more normal [as in, what anybody should be able to do with martial weapon proficiency in a shield] than coolness.
The Throwing Shield is just so much more interesting when it gives a bonus attack [and until the Blinkback belt comes online-IF it comes online, many builds won't go for it- that's only a single attack per combat whatsoever.]
The dynamic of 'should I throw my shield or keep it' is one I enjoy, made a bit more interesting by the fact that I'm playing a level 1 wizard who wears one right now. Said Wizard definitely appreciates the extra 2 points of AC and is built to mix it up in melee a bit, but who would suffer ASF if he cast while wearing it.
Pretty lame if they clarify it like that. The whole coolness of the Throwing Shield is that it's a free action throw.
Now I totally agree this bonus attack should be restricted to once per round, any other attacks would have to come off a normal attack routine.
It's not exactly crippling but it is a huge deviation from standard practices that has a meaningful impact on the character's power.
Particularly because this is a Wizard, and Wizards often do best investing a great deal of wealth into tiny parts in the form of scrolls for contingency options.
You did say there was 1,000 gold worth of 'other stuff' available to each character? That would cover the expenses of learning a few additional spells per spell level available, scribing a few scrolls and perhaps purchasing one or two 3rd level scrolls 'just in case.'
You want ridiculous? :P
He's a Hunter bonded to an Octopus-Chimera who somehow acquired 8 tentacle attacks and traded them in for the ability to swing 8 swords in a natural attack routine.
Don't ask the wizard to cast Mad Monkeys because they might come from here.
To each his own I suppose, Entryhazard.
For me I LIKE the idea of Faith Magic being distinct, being something powered not by one's inner magic [sorcerers] nor one's scientific study of arcane forces [wizards and magi] nor the guidance of a patron [witch.]
Faith Magic is Faith. It's the power of one's belief in something made manifest as miracles.
if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move.
That's how I like it.
Also they aren't JUST powered by their faith, they're defined by it. A Cleric's faith is a massive influence on the character's identity as a whole.
First, I'd like to highlight that there's no guarantee the Wizard will outshine. Often the most powerful wizard tactics redirect shine onto their minion aka partymates who do the cleanup. There are even times the Wizard fails to 'shine' at all despite providing heavy victory-determining support.
Second, could you please provide specific information on the party?
Your companions are a human elemental Bloodrager, a half-orc fighter, a half-orc druid, and a human cleric.
Race and class is a start, but I'd like to know how these people typically behave in an adventure and in combat. Particularly their fighting styles and how much combat vs casting is normal for the druid and cleric.
If you have divine miracles present on your world, it's really hard to maintain doubt that divine powers exist. Raising someone from the dead, or bringing health to the terminally ill by touch doesn't leave much room for doubt.
There is plenty of doubt in my own worlds, where 'divine powers' are basically a different style of magic. Where there are no clear indicators of whether it's a cleric or wizard or druid or anything else you can come up with.
The gods are up there, but they could care less about the behaviors and choices of mortals. They explicitly do not grant divine spellcasting either, that's granted by the faith of the divine caster. That faith is the power channeled into miracles aka divine spells.
Zilfrel Findadur wrote:
Super Genius Games gotta be one of my least favorites 3pp, they always make crazy stuff, just saying.
Crazy awesome you mean.
SGG [RGG now I believe, might be mistaken] is my second favorite 3PP bar none, just behind Dreamscarred Press and just above Rite Publishing.
They all rank above Paizo :P
Typographical error. It's supposed to read 1,000-1,499, the next full 500 is 1500 and actually costs 4 total STR
Of course it isn't Anzyr.
You pay one point plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp
500 is a full 500. You already paid one point and now you pay one further for each full 500 gold.
Read the spell text more carefully Anzyr.
Even valuable components worth more than 1 gp can be created, but creating such material components requires an additional cost of 1 point of Strength damage
We're in agreement thus far. Now read the next part.
plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp of the component's value (so a component worth 500–999 gp costs a total of 2 points
The error you're making here Anzyr, is that the first point is for GP cost between 1 and 499.
plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp of the component's value
GP up to 499 costs 1
500 up to 999 costs 2
1000 up to 1499 costs 3
One place to find clarity on the natural armor thing is in the rules for the Barkskin Spell and Amulet of Natural Armor.
These grant an Enhancement Bonus to Natural Armor and note that even those without a natural Natural Armor Bonus still have one, it's just at a value of 0.
Yeah, the key clause is 'plus a further point of damage for every full 500 gp of the component's value.'
@ Anzyr: read the spell very carefully. It charges you 1 point of strength just for the privilege of casting it, then every full 500 GP thereafter increases the cost by 1.
Low level spells aren't intended to compete with high level spells on any front. If low level spells had scaling DC that matched high level spells, casters would have even more 'go-power' than they do now.
As is basically your top two levels of spells are fairly reliable/worth casting offensively in critical moments. Everything else is support [including a bit of blasting to finish off a nearly downed foe if there's nothing better to do] or cleanup [or no-save control]
That's a pretty rough way to talk about people's playstyles LazarX.
I for one prefer to run my games in such a way that nobody even knows 100% for certain that the gods exist... until the PC's start approaching that realm and start getting involved in the mess that is the cosmology.
I should mention my all-wizard party is all the same faith as well.
Admittedly it was more to take Advantage of Stabilize+Faithful Feedback than anything else.
Mineral Water wrote:
Also, please explain to me how are you activating magic item (Blood Reservoir of Physical Prowess) in the form of a Huge dragon
Obviously it's a Human's Ankle Ring designed to be also be able to be worn by a huge dragon as a claw ring. Take ring off before Dragonform, put back on afterwards.
Why? Why would you use Fighter for a natural weapon user.
The answer is right in front of you.