Skull

loaba's page

1,680 posts (1,714 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,680 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Lelomenia wrote:
What’s the point of strength?

For a martial-type, several game functions are predicated on it?

Ruins of Azlant is an outdoors-type campaign where value is placed on STR-based skills like Swimm and Climb.

CMB and CMD both suffer a negative STR score.

Carry capacity, if you're paying attention to it, pretty much needs a neutral STR score, if not a positive modifier.

DEX-to-damage is a thing, sure, but in my case, the earliest I can get it is 3rd level. And it, of course, costs a very valuable feat. Until then, STR is a needed damage component.

All of the above can be mitigated through time (leveling) and money (provided certain equipment is available). Regardless, the game pushes you towards STR as a more cost-effective way of dealing with these issues.

/ truly I'm less interested in "defending" my take on the importance of STR and more interested in what a 7 WIS means to character roleplay.


My gaming group, which has been on hiatus for a couple of years now, is gearing up to start Ruins of Azlant this coming Saturday! It's been a long time coming and I can't wait to get back into the swing of things.

I was waffling between Strength Fighter (simple and to the point) and Swashbuckler Inspired Blade (very MAD considering the 15 PB), but have since settled on plain-Jane Swashbuckler.

15 PB pretty much means something is getting dumped and I went with Wisdom. I've seen where folks suggest tanking STR, but that seems like a raw deal.

Stats are as follows: 12, 16, 12, 10, 7, 16

I managed to mitigate the WIS/Will save issue via Iron Will (feat) and Indomitable Will (trait). My question is, how would you have skinned this cat? Plain ol' Swash needs a modicum of STR and CON and then lots of DEX and CHA. That leaves INT and WIS as the dump candidates.

What are your thoughts? How does one play a 7 WIS? Should I revaluate the STR angle? I do like being able to carry my basic load-out...

/ Campaign trait is Expert Explorer and I'm envisioning the love child of Calico Jack Rackham and Sir Ernest Shackleton.

// the rest of the party went Trog-style and dumped CHA. God help us all.


First, on-topic - just don't think I'm brave enough to go with straight 3d6. Good on you for being game and running with it.

Slightly on-topic, in terms of limited stats, for our new campaign (Ruins of Azlant), we went with 15 point-buy. Not quite as scary as 3d6, but the DM requested everyone strongly consider one negative mod stat. Far as I know, everyone agreed and is complying with the request.

Gotta say it really does help out on the character development department.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Dunn wrote:
loaba wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:
But it's not an entirely separate issue at all since the method of stat generation exacerbates MAD vs SAD issues.

MAD vs SAD (if they even exist) is a completely separate debate that revolves around individual class requirements, X class needs more than Y class.

Point Buy vs Random Generation is about 1.) preference and 2.) fairness. The original method of stat generation was 3d6-in-order and all other methods of that style were developed to be more fair.

The fact that Point Buy even exists is because rolling for stats is completely unfair.

Unless the players are rolling a different number of dice or some are definitely loaded, rolling is fair as a method of generation. The results may not be equal, but the process was just as fair as starting with point buy - which may also produce unequal results depending on the skill of the player and the character class he is building toward (back to the SAD/MAD issue).

That is true - rolling is fair in terms of chances on the dice.

It is also true that random rolling is inequitable and sometimes (many times) precludes players from playing the character they wanted to play. And that's unfair, to me anyway.

Point Buy exists so that players can have fun, playing whatever they want and keeping them equal* with everyone else.

/* not all choices in this game are going to be equal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Dunn wrote:
But it's not an entirely separate issue at all since the method of stat generation exacerbates MAD vs SAD issues.

MAD vs SAD (if they even exist) is a completely separate debate that revolves around individual class requirements, X class needs more than Y class.

Point Buy vs Random Generation is about 1.) preference and 2.) fairness. The original method of stat generation was 3d6-in-order and all other methods of that style were developed to be more fair.

The fact that Point Buy even exists is because rolling for stats is completely unfair.


Fake Healer wrote:
Considering that he is epic-level point buy

Epic level? He's just a regular 'ol top-end point buy character.

25 PB
STR: 16
DEX: 12
CON: 12
INT: 19 (17+2)
WIS: 8
CHA: 10

vs.

15 PB
STR: 14
DEX: 12
CON: 10
INT: 18 (16+2)
WIS: 8
CHA: 10

So we're looking at a slight CON hit and damage/hit output is reduced by one and INT barely suffers at all. Yeah, Icaro would still be a machine @ 15 points.


O.o


Kirth Gersen wrote:
loaba wrote:
If we want to ask sub-questions, then riddle me this; why is a randomly generated 8 better than a point-buy 8?
You'll have to ask someone who actually holds that position, which excludes me. I was just responding to the canard that "point-buy is always more fair!" -- it's not. That's not to say it's an inferior method or that rolling is awesome; it just means that one (1) of the cited advantages doesn't often hold up.

Except that is, Kirth. It is the very definition of fair. I start with 15 point and so do you.

What is not fair, is when I start with equivalent 32 points and you start with a 4 point equivalent. That's not fair. It doesn't matter that you might have a 16 or be able to cobble together a 18. It also doesn't matter that you allow rerolls or that you have some elaborate system whereby you roll multiple sets of stats (all in the name of fairness, no less.)

Not all characters are created equal, but in Point Buy, they start out that way.


master_marshmallow wrote:
loaba wrote:
MAD and SAD - it's all in your head.
What?

I'm talking about Multiple Attribute Dependency and Single Attribute Dependency.

One thing - I do absolutely concur that there is no difference between a 15 PB Wizard and 25 PB Wizard. The Wizard and other classes like him do find it easy to invest in their battery and let the rest shake out as they will.

That doesn't mean PB is flawed, rather it means that setting up a starting stat array for a Wizard should be cake.


You haven't proven that PB is flawed, rather you've shown that some classes have to make more careful choices with their resources.

MAD and SAD - it's all in your head.

Direct question - does a Paladin need to invest in WIS and DEX (as well as CHA and STR), or rather can he get by with a dual major in STR & CHA and everything else is negotiable?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
My Paladin has not multi classed and my Magus doesn't use Dervish Dance.

Icaro focuses on ranged touch and timely Alpha Strikes. Oh yeah, and I gave up my fine Azlanti chassis (yes, I got cloned) to head back to my less-then-optimal Half-elf shell.

To put this dog back on point, you may think a Magus (or any other class) absolutely needs X stats at Y rate and that's just you. That's your take on character building. It's got nothing to do with PB or with random stats that aren't high enough.


master_marshmallow wrote:
loaba wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
My problems with point buy [...is] that it's a lie and players still can't make the characters they want
I'm gonna need more data.

This thread exists.

Pretty much all the data you should need.

To humor you, I will recant the fact that paizo is continuously putting out products that are being warped by point buy.

Dervish Dance wouldn't be as popular as it is if it didn't mean all of a sudden a magus no longer has to buy in a good STR and DEX to be competent in battle.

Gonna stop you right there. I play a 25 PB Magus and he's a machine... with a 12 DEX. Yup. Twelve. I spent my points on STR and INT and I've maxed my Arcane Pool points. He's a regular Angel of Death, a paragon among Murder Hobo's everywhere! And I digress...


master_marshmallow wrote:
My problems with point buy [...is] that it's a lie and players still can't make the characters they want

I'm gonna need more data.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Its not about better, its about whats enjoyable.

And that's the plain truth - random or buy, whatever the group enjoys more is the way to go.


Fake Healer wrote:
loaba wrote:
I want to know who's got the fruit for 3d6-in-order. 'Cause really, this 4d6-DTL AND arrange to taste is just a bunch of Unearthed Arcana bull-pucky.
I used to play 3d6 in order back in the day but haven't lately. Back then you didn't pick a class, you rolled and hoped to qualify for certain ones. Of course having a 14 was a great stat.....and stats didn't mean as much, although apparently everyone back then was rocking 18/00 fighters somehow even though the chance of rolling that was ridiculously rare.

Which really speaks to the reason why I like PB. If I want to play a certain class, I study it and determine what abilities really matter. I know that even with a 15 PB, I'll be able to make it work. And really, truly, I just don't even care if X class only has one really important stats and I have two.


I want to know who's got the fruit for 3d6-in-order. 'Cause really, this 4d6-DTL AND arrange to taste is just a bunch of Unearthed Arcana bull-pucky.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Dice rolling, in general and statistically-speaking, favors SAD classes like wizard a lot less than point-buy systems do.

If you're caught up in SAD and MAD, that's a just a whole other issue. Question is random stat generation vs. point buy stat generation.

If we want to ask sub-questions, then riddle me this; why is a randomly generated 8 better than a point-buy 8? I get the feeling the random rollers feel like their 8 is some kind of badge of honor, while those same Randomites look down on the P-B'er and his 8 (and probable 18).


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
aegrisomnia wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

While I absolutely hate getting into class arguments, and I'm sure I'm gonna regret contributing to the potential threadjack:

If no ability system can address this big problem with wizards, mightn't the fault be on the wizards, not the ability scores?

*Thread explodes*

Moreover, I strongly insist that the design of all classes be revisited until all classes are in line with Fighter in terms of overall power. The Fighter is right where he should be, and other classes were given too much initially and experience unnecessary power creep to the point of being utterly broken (save for the Rogue, who is closer to where he should be).

Discuss.

*Grabs popcorn, soda, kicks up feet*

Finally, I want a pony. This pony will be from the show "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic", and her name will be Fluttershy, because Fluttershy is the best pony—just as I think we can all agree that "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic" is the best television program since Citizen Kane.

Well isn't it?


I look at it this way - regardless of what resources my class needs (martial, caster, SAD or MAD) - it's up to me to use those resources in the best way possible. With Point Buy, I know I'll get to play exactly what I want (PB amount doesn't even matter). Random stat generation means I'll have to play what the dice give me (assuming I even get something playable.)

/been rolling 4d6-DTL all afternoon and the results have been grim. lol
// by playable, I mean something that's not a negative PB equivalent.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
loaba wrote:
Playing a Wizard is just a choice. You're acting like electing to do so is the same as playing some kind of "I win" card.

It's a choice that's arguably better overall, but more germane to the discussion, demonstratively better under point-buy (especially low or moderate point-buy) than under dice rolling -- unless the latter is using fixed order of scores rolled, in which case class isn't much of a choice at all.

That's math, not opinion.

So because some classes only rely on one stat (ignoring the fact that every class could arguably use all the CON, DEX, INT and WIS it could get), Point Buy is vilified (if only slightly), because it allows players of those classes to be really good at what they do? And that makes the utter randomness of rolling for stats "better"?


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Anachrony wrote:
How are weaker classes screwed? Wouldn't they be even more screwed if they rolled worse than the stronger class in addition to having a weaker class?

Let me use small words. The odds of rolling 18 Int for your wizard using 3d6 are 0.46%. The odds of point-buying 18 Int for your wizard using point-buy are 100%. And your wizard pretty much doesn't need anything else (average Con and Dex; you can dump Str, Wis, Cha and not even feel it).

The odds of getting above-average scores for Str, Dex, Con, and Wis for your fighter or monk are very slim with dice, and are 0% using point-buy unless your'e using a LOT of points (in which case the wizard is rocking a 22 Int instead of an 18, or else has his 20 and is also always winning initiative, if you max base value at 18).

Playing a Wizard is just a choice. You're acting like electing to do so is the same as playing some kind of "I win" card.


master_marshmallow wrote:
[Point buy] really doesn't set a level playing field at all.

Sure it does. BAM! – Everyone starts out with exactly the same points from which to buy their stats. That’s seems like a leveling effect to me.

master_marshmallow wrote:
Weaker classes who require more resources are screwed by the point buy system every time, regardless of the person filling that role's natural ability.

And this is exactly where the level playing field ends – choices like class selection. And it goes back to what I was saying about not everyone being equal in terms of character building/development,

All Point Buy does, along with all the other rules for character building and further development, is assure that everyone draws from the same resources. What you do with them determines just how equal PC’s are or are not.


I think full caster level always beats out whatever benefits you might get from the other class, whatever it may be.


Even with the Point Buy system, characters aren't going to be equal because of things like stat placement, class selection, feat selections etc. Some choices are simply better than others. All PB really does is give players more control over their resources. And sure, it saves time and lobbying over random stat rolling issues.

edit: someone said people aren't equal and I certainly think that's true in terms of character building/development. Therefore, why not start the playing field out as level as possible? Point Buy does exactly that.


We use Point Buy and people show up with all kinds of different characters and stat arrays. We've got the competent character builders and those who are less so. We've got the roleplayers and the rollplayers. Game runs just fine.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Change sneak attack damage to a flat +2 damage per Rogue level, not precision damage, and applies to crits. A Rogue deals 1/2 this bonus damage when not qualifying for sneak attack.

I think at higher levels (ie. +20 damage at 10th level), that becomes too fabulous.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
loaba wrote:

Rogues have been on my mind lately, skill points system too.

Player in our group has a Rogue and his initial plan was for the guy to wield twin rapiers. There were a couple of things that played against that of course, like the Rogue's BAB (or lack thereof) and the player's unwillingness to go STR (to better absorb that nasty -4/-4 penalty).

Looking at this situation, how bad would it be for Rogues to have the ability to consider Rapiers as Light Martial weapons? Would that be a real game breaker? I don't know, I think it could be really nice thing.

kukris have 18-20 crit range and they are light martial weapons (if flavor is important you could design a new weapon, the foil, let's say, that has the same stats/damage as kukris except they would do piercing damage like rapiers...)

For maximum efficiency I would choose twin short swords. Remember that at high levels, that would allow him to wield twin sun blades... :)

There certainly other avenues of attack, no doubt. Your suggestions are all quite valid and excellent choices... But... the player has a picture of his character, wielding twin rapiers and that's what he wants to pursue.

Really, I'm of two minds here; on the one hand, I say buck up and spend the required resources (very high STR or DEX+finesse and feats) and absorb the -4 penalty as God intended. On the other hand, I see where a player might find that untenable and therefore be dissatisfied with their character.

For me, giving Rogues the Rapier as a Light weapon, isn't that bad. I'd also want to raise every other classes skill points to INT+6 too (as an additional balancing effect).


Rogues have been on my mind lately, skill points system too.

Player in our group has a Rogue and his initial plan was for the guy to wield twin rapiers. There were a couple of things that played against that of course, like the Rogue's BAB (or lack thereof) and the player's unwillingness to go STR (to better absorb that nasty -4/-4 penalty).

Looking at this situation, how bad would it be for Rogues to have the ability to consider Rapiers as Light Martial weapons? Would that be a real game breaker? I don't know, I think it could be really nice thing.


Arnwyn wrote:

While I agree with you and don't think what the "Quartermaster" is doing is all that helpful, I do have a question for clarification:

What's stopping you from still copying the spells and then selling the tome on your own, and pocketing the "massive value" you get from said tome?

We're "buying" items from the loot pile. Say the loot pile (with the spellbook included) is worth 120k and their are 6 party members. Now let's say that the spell book is worth 10k. Rather than simply copying the spells, I have but the book out of my cut. They each get 20k, and I get 10k+book resale value.


Zog of Deadwood wrote:

Well, unless this is a Blessed Book, and thus a magic item valuable to you in its own right, after you transfer the spells in it into your spellbook, you can sell this thing yourself, right? So you will be able to get both the spells and the "massive value of the tome".

Or am I missing something here?

Lets say cuts are 20k (that's with the value of the book added into loot total). Everyone else gets 20k, while I get 10k+book. The book sells for half value, so I get 5k for the resale.

Everyone else gets 20k and I get 15k. I don't see that as very fair. Why can't we all just get the 20k?


Krome - no, no, I don't have to do anything. The QM is a player who tends to make group decisions tough. He never really goes with the flow. If he insists on doing things his way, then I would simply abandon the caster PC and go with something else.

/ abandoning the PC is a tough choice - he's has "family" in the party and it would be out of character to leave that person.

// don't want to misrepresent the QM - he's a good guy who has never played a caster and definitely wants his fair share of the loot. Problem with pathfinder is that there is a ton of loot that can work for any given member of the party at any given time. Loot dispersal can be tough at times when every hand goes up, saying "I want it, too!"


Lord Pendragon wrote:
Loot division is up to the players/PCs.

Yes - completely agree. I'm playing with 1 veteran DM and 3 noobs and 1 other veteran (The quartermaster) who has never played a caster before.

LazarX wrote:

To answer your title correctly...

The Fighter uses them for toilet neccessities.

Quite right - spell books make exquisite TP and excellent tender as well.

DM_Blake wrote:

The wizard (and other similar "spell book" characters e.g. witch) is the only (few) class(es) that have to pay gold to access their class abilities. Everyone else just gets abilities for leveling up, but the main strength of the wizard is flexibility and access to a huge list of spell - but only if he finds them or pays for them.

If the group makes the wizard count spellbooks as his cut of the loot, then the group is making the wizard pay for class abilities. No other class has this limitation. It's not the same as fighters paying for better weapons and armor because wizards pay for better wands, staves, pearls, etc. Items are not class abilities. Fighters don't pay gold for their bonus feats and weapon training, so why should wizards have to pay gold for their spellcasting?

It's bad enough that it costs gold to copy those spells into the wizard's own spellbook, that is already too much penalty for the core class ability; losing out on a cut of the treasure is way too much.

While I agree with the previous poster who said it's a decision that should be up to the group, and every group divides loot their own way, this is something that I would insist on, and do insist on, when I play wizards. I wouldn't adventure with a group who expected me to sacrifice my cut of the loot for class abilities - as a player, I would find a more reasonable group or just stop playing the wizard (try sorcerer, no such problem).

I'd hate to go this route, but if the QM insists on it then that's what I have to do. He has no problem providing the Cleric with group healing funds (and I agree with that, too), but he wants me to to pay for wands and spell books. Not happy about that.

/ wands - I look at wands found in the dungeon as freebies of sorts. I didn't choose 'em, but I can use 'em. If it means I have to pay for 'em at the end of the day, I'm not really into that.


We recently acquired a valuable spell book and as the main Arcane caster in the party it was given to me. In parties past, the caster has always copied spells from the captured book into their own book and then returned the item to party inventory. From there, it would be sold as group loot and the proceeds divvied among the party.

That's how we've always done it... Now, out of the blue, the party's (self-appointed) Quartermaster has determined that the book is, in fact, my solely claimed property and as such is part of my "cut" of loot. Meaning that due to the massive value of the tome, I'm looking at getting little else from the loot pile.

I'm calling foul, here.

What gives? Have I/we been double-dipping all this time? Is it wrong for me to want to simply transfer the spells into my own spell book and not pay for the (apparent) privilege? I mean, the books value doesn't change whether I copy or not...

What are the communities thoughts on this?


If I'm understanding thing correctly, anyone can stand their ground and attempt to feint and then make a single attack. Imp. Feint allows the PC to move and Feint and make a single attack. Two-weapon Feint is similar to standing and making a single attack, but you're now doing it as part of a full attack.

I get where they might look redundant, but I think what this does is open up options for the Rogue. He's not locked in and so the GM can't have foes reasonably anticipate what he'll do next. My goal is for an effective combatant who can either stand and deliver a reliable sneak attack or move and deliver a reliable sneak attack or stay put and flank with an ally and, again, deliver a reliable sneak attack.

In short - I want this guy to have a decent chance at sneaking every round. He doesn't (rightly so) have a lot STR, so bringing that sneak attack to bear is of extreme importance.

/ Skill Focus: Bluff - to me, it seems like having as high a Bluff as possible is of utmost importance to this build.


ArmouredMonk13 wrote:
Feint is a move action if you use it with Imp. Feint, so one attack when you do each round. When you get Greater Feint you start having fun with Feinting so go there. You may want to at some point take the ninja trick (pressure points) talent to get a bit more out of sneak attack and make the foe easier to hit.

What I'm going for is choices. If I've read the descriptions right - this Rogue can move and Feint or stay put and Feint or move again. Every time he succeeds in landing Sneak damage he gets an AC bonus.

I'm thinking this will allow my friend to enter combat and survive long enough for the rest of the party to get in help him out.


I'm trying to help out a friend of mine who wants a TWF'ing Rogue. In a previous campaign, he witnessed another friend of ours implement a Feint Rogue and he'd like to do that too.

Here's my attempt to accommodate him.

(1st Lvl Half-elf Skill Focus) - Bluff
(1st Lvl Feat) - Weapon Finesse
(2nd Lvl Rogue Talent) - Combat Trick - Combat Expertise
(3rd Lvl Feat) - Two-Weapon Fighting
(4th Lvl Rogue Talent) - Offensive Defense
(5th Lvl Feat) - Two-Weapon Feint
(6th Lvl Rogue Talent) - Weapon Training - Weapon Focus
(7th Lvl Feat) - Improved Feint

What I think I've got here is a Rogue that can Feint in just about any situation and when he doesn't need to Feint (when Flanking with an Ally) he can maybe land to separate Sneak Attacks.

What are your thoughts? Where you take this chain past 7th level?

Note - Half-elf is locked in (I would have preferred Human, personally)


Petty Alchemy wrote:
We have rants about Fighters and martials just about everywhere.

Yup - Fighters get no love 'round these parts.


EsperMagic reminded me of Use Magic Device.

Getting UMD is easy, just don't dump CHA and maybe take the Dangerously Curious trait. While it might be hard to find a good time to take Skill Focus: UMD, it would probably be worth it. A lowly Fighter could be just as good as Rogue in terms of wand-use.

Adding wands to a Fighter's repertoire is good stuff. You're by no means replacing the primary caster (or even the party Rogue), but you're certainly aiding her in resource management.


The Fighter's party role is typically that of a one-man brute squad. At the end of the day, when everyone else is out of spell slots or pool points or what have you, the Fighter is still up and running. Sure, he can't match the high-level wizard spells. He's not supposed to. The Fighter is there to provide consistent damage over the entire course of his career.


I have no issues with a *CHA dump whatsoever. For a Rogue, Weapon Finesse means everything. DEX is huge in that powers numerous class skills and is the basis for its best save. A Rogue will always get great mileage out of a high DEX.

Note - I didn't apply the racial stat bonus yet - slap it in DEX and now we have an 18. That's at least an 18 AC out of the box, if not 19 via something like Dodge. Not too shabby at all.

The Rogue's damage ability comes from his sneak dice. STR is nice, but its not (usually) priority.

/ OP - I very much agree here - don't multi-class. That's a good way to wreck a character.


Additional Traits is a great way to use an abundant resource to gain some ground in a traditionally weak area for Fighters. I'd do it at 1st, when you won't miss the feat as much.

Another thing to keep in mind is that not all skills need to be capped. Fighters may have limited skill points, but that just means it takes 'em a few levels to gain competency. You have to pay for all those feats and a full BAB some how... :-)

Big thing with Fighters - don't get caught up in the Jack of All Trades trap. Choose your method of damage-dealing and focus on it. The game has never rewarded generalists, rather it seems designed to frustrate them.

Fighters are much maligned on these boards and it is quite undeserved. All classes have a role to play and it is a team game after all. If the Fighter is lacking in social situations (more a player/RP issue then a class issue), then surely one of his teammates isn't.


To me, Tank means the ability to soak damage while dishing out devestating hits of your own. That doesn't really play to the strengths of a Rogue.

In order to survive in a dungeon environment, you need CON and DEX. I'd go with STR: 14, DEX: 16 and CON: 14. The mental stats can remain at 10. Being a Human Rogue, 9 skill points should be more than sufficient for your needs.

/side question - and this could change everything - are you going to be the party face? If yes, then CHA takes a front seat and I highly suggest that you reroute to the Bluff/Feint concept.


Nasir ibn Al'Said wrote:
Unfortunately there is no way to make a dual scimitar wielder work without the feat without the horrendous off hand minuses.

-4/-4 is very harsh, but it can be mitigated via high STR and feat selection.


Mouse is a Keleshite Badawin, self-styled Prince of The Desert. He's a small man who makes his living on quick wits and quicker reflexes. Mouse is heartier then he appears and almost always dirty from the road. He peers at the world golden brown eyes.

He prefers to be out and about and only enters the city to trade goods and items of value that he has scavenged.

Mouse
Human Scout 1

STR: 12
DEX: 19
CON: 14
INT: 10
WIS: 14
CHA: 10

Know the Land (Survival)
Devotee of The Green (Kn: Nature
Skill Focus: Perception
Weapon Finesse
Weapon Focus: Kukri

Acrobatics (8)
Climb (5)
Kn: Geography (3)
Kn: Nature (6)
Perception (10)
Stealth (8)
Survival (7)
Swim (5)


In this setting, I feel less cheesy when I ask this question; is Dervish Dance on the table?


I need to get the Legacy of Fire players guide, but am I right in assuming that Katapesh is an eastern desert-type setting?


::dotted::

I'd love to have more info on this. Human Fighter is the first that comes to mind.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Varisians are also pretty boring so it is good that wasn't enforced as a requirement.

Oh I beg to differ. When played as a combination of Spanish and Italian gypsy culture, the Varisians come alive quite nicely. We're having a great time with it.

No Elves - if that's what floats your boat, go for it. As a player, it would frustrate me a bit (I'd see it as heavy-handed and arbitrary.)


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
That is unfortunate, on the no surprises. As a dm I try not to recycle, got to shake it up a bit!

By no surprises, I mean that anything goes. Are all the magic items that are in the books available? ::Check:: - they exist in the world and could possibly be acquired (though not necessarily at the exact time that might want them.) Same goes for the baddies and buffs. If it's in the books, we utilize it.

"My world doesn't have Elves" is not something that has ever been uttered at any of the tables where I play.

/ special note: in Shattered Star, the DM did take the time to encourage us all to make native Varisians (he stopped short of requiring it). He's also been handing out unique multi-purpose magic items as well.

// my 20 level progression helps me sort through all the possible options, which can be very overwhelming. It helps me focus (and with ADD, I need all the help I can get in that department.)


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
loaba wrote:
written backstory doesn't matter to me. I'm much more comfortable with an informal interview via email or skype or text etc. If I were gonna write anything down then I would do it while preparing a 20 level progression matrix.

:''(

But... your 20 levels of planned progression may totally not fit with the setting, opponents and available items or buffs.

I typically confine myself to the CRB, UM, UC & AGP. If the setting calls for something specific then I design for that. I never veer from the core races BTW and tend to focus on Humans, Half-elves and Elves.

As for opponents and items and buffs, I know who all I play with so there are never any surprises there.

1 to 50 of 1,680 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>