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

mplindustries's page

RPG Superstar 2015 Star Voter. 4,651 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,651 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Star Voter 2015

I do not care how "awesome" your item is. I do not care about its history or how many spell effects you can cram into one thing. I do not care about the rules you made up to accommodate the effect you wanted. I do not care about your item that costs way more than its effect is worth (even if you calculated it perfectly and legally). I do not care about your item that costs WAY too little for what it does (there are WAY too many armors in the 10-15k range with amazing continuous effects).

I basically look for the following:

1) Do you know the rules of the game you want to design for? I don't mean "Oh, this should really be 7th level" or "you accidentally halved the base weapon cost, too" I mean stuff like "I'm making up spells!"

2) Do you understand how the game you want to design for is balanced? No perfection needed, but a low cost item that can raise the dead or steal souls or something is insane.

3) Is your item actually usable? Does it fill a useful niche? If someone found it, would they end up just selling it? If they saw it in a store, would they actually buy it?

4) Can you write in English? I'm not going to pick on a spelling error or two, or misplaced commas, but if I have to concentrate to understand what you typed, that's a problem.

5) Simplicity! If you can fit your awesome idea in 100 words, I'm much more impressed than if it took you 300.

6) Bonus points if your item actually solves a real problem in the game. For example, if your item makes Rogues more awesome, that's a plus. If Monks using it actually get their advertised mobility, I'm on board. If your sling or crossbow makes me as useful as an archer, I'd vote for you in a second.

Overall, I think I'm much too picky, because I've seen no items that made me say, "YES! I love this!" I've seen only a scant handful of pairs where I was voting for the better item--the vast majority of the time, I was voting for the (slightly) less bad item.

Star Voter 2015

I've seen one specific item 7 times, twice in a row once. I hate this item. I have never voted for it and I want it gone. It is cool conceptually, but executed so poorly with, essentially, made up rules that I want to slap someone. Stop showing me this item. Even worse, stop putting it up against other garbage items because it is making me vote for crap.

Side note: are there always lots of just terrible items, or am I just unlucky/too picky?

Star Voter 2015

LazarX wrote:
mplindustries wrote:

Eldritch Knight 10 would be pretty amazing, but you aren't proficient in all martial weapons as a Kensai.

That is correct which is why an earlier poster put 1 level of swashbuckler into his build.

Yeah, but the problem is that who cares about 9 levels of EK? The capstone would be the entire point for a Magus. The rest is just full BAB and like three feats. But competing with that 10th level capstone of awesomeness, you've got the Kensai capstone, which is also excellent.

If it was just "Kensai Capstone or EK Capstone?" I could choose easily (EK), but it's not. It becomes "Kensai Capstone" or "EK Capstone and 10 'eh' levels."

So, yeah, I think you might be better off getting more immediate benefits with the extra 10 levels.

Star Voter 2015

I think I've played at 1st and 2nd level maybe a handful of times per edition of D&D. Once we've done it for the novelty/to test it/to prove we can do it, I don't think anyone I've played with actually enjoys those levels. In 3rd/Pathfinder and actually 5e as well, we've generally found that 3rd level is the ideal low level starting point, even if we're doing E6. But yeah, it sucks to be low level no matter who you are unless you have full BAB and thus can power attack at 1st with a two-hander.

Star Voter 2015

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I fail to see the problem here. Infiltrator doesn't mix well with archetypes that remove Favored Enemy. So, uh, don't be an Infiltrator if you lose Favored Enemy. It seems pretty simple. Are you wishing they'd just say it's illegal to combine them (rather than making it legal, but a bad idea) to save people who refused to read ahead in their archetype choices or something?

Star Voter 2015

So, look, obviously, talking to the players is the best step, but it bugs me whenever I see threads like this and most of the advice is "teach them how to play right (i.e. how you want to play)." Have so many of you failed to considered that they might be playing the way they enjoy best? Who are you to teach them the "proper" way? What if they enjoy just smashing stuff until it falls down? What if they have no fun debuffing first?

There's no "correct" way to roleplay, so, at least consider that they are having fun as is and the real issue is incompatibility of style between PC and GM.

Star Voter 2015

Tower Shields were not based on shields as we know them at all, they were based on large wooden barricades soldiers would slowly advance behind. You would basically carry a short distance, plant it in the ground, shoot a few arrows or whatever from behind it, then move up again.

Star Voter 2015

VRMH wrote:
No, it creates a web. Webs aren't cylindrical, they're a net formed in between the anchoring points.

Uh, what? The Web spell doesn't just make one web, it makes a 20' radius of webs--multiple webs--crisscrossing and whatnot throughout the area. The spell itself even refers to the webbing it creates in the plural.

Yes, if you have a 10' ceiling, the web will not be able to expand up/down to its full extent and you will effectively have a 20' radius cylinder 10' high.

Star Voter 2015

Eldritch Knight 10 would be pretty amazing, but you aren't proficient in all martial weapons as a Kensai.

I don't think you get much from skipping around.

Kensai 20 and then Investigator 10, Inspired Blade 10, Duelist 10 or even just something simple like Slayer or Fighter 10 would all work.

Have you considered Monk since you're already not wearing armor? Master of Many Styles maybe? As hard as it is to use, Kirin Strike could be pretty powerful for you, and there are obviously other styles that could help.

Star Voter 2015

So, first, I never played PFS and never will if I can help it. Secondly, it looks like you are only talking about a single encounter in each of those scenarios when you earlier made it sound like you were useless in every fight. Unless there's only one fight per scenario--that can't be it, right?

Star Voter 2015

1) A FAQ clarified that you can use natural weapons that are associated with one hand, so, slams and claws work, but not a tail slap. And remember, you can only attack with the one, since you need a free hand as well.

2) No, pounce lets you take a full attack when charging, not any full round action. Spell combat is likewise a full round action that allows a full attack, not just any full round action (like charging).

3) Yes, flurry of maneuvers has none of the language found in flurry of blows that prevents natural weapon use.

4) No. You can flurry of maneuvers with spell combat, or flurry of maneuvers with pounce, but you can't pounce and spell combat.

Star Voter 2015

The truth is that abilities like this are a trap. -2 to hit will most often reduce your DPR (damage per round) more than the higher damage increases it. I wouldn't stop people from taking it because it obviates several class features, I would stop people from taking it because it will probably secretly gimp their character while only looking powerful.

Star Voter 2015

kevin_video wrote:
Protoman wrote:
That's a great point, mpl. My pyro just hit level 3 picking up weapon finesse and for the first time in his PFS career I'm looking forward to bait enemies into melee to take advantage of kinetic blade + searing flesh (2 burn for 2d6 Fire damage) + high hit points.
I'm currently a level 2 pyro, and he's almost completely useless. Every fight has been with guys who have only melee weapon attacks, or major resistances to fire. Then there's the high SR. Five sessions and he's only been useful once, and it was against a skeletal dragon.

I have to agree: what kind of game are you playing?

In all my years of playing, I've never encountered SR or Fire Resistance at levels 1 or 2. I usually don't see SR show up until at least 6 or 7, and when I do, it's usually paired with Fire Resist, since it's generally on a demon or devil.

I mean, seriously, a skeletal dragon?! At 2nd level?!

The weapon issue, well, yeah, that's a good deal more common. I know the APs involve mostly monster types, but, in general, when I run games, the opposition is mostly made up of weapon-users, and I'd say it's a pretty even 50/50 split between weapons and natural attacks in the games I've PCed.

Star Voter 2015

If you used a Dueling Sword as a Magus, I'd try to point out much better an 18-20/x2 weapon would be. If you still pushed for the Dueling Sword, I'd probably let you do it because I'd feel bad.

However, no, by the rules, it does not work.

Star Voter 2015

I have to say, as much as I didn't like the Pyro defense because, well, I'd obviously rather not be hit, I'm kind of feeling jealous now. See, I'm sitting here at level 4 with the best AC in the party (I'm 3 over the gnome cleric and at least 5 over all the melee), my Fort/Ref are the best in the party (my Will is third out of 5, behind the Cleric and Magus) and the only reason I don't have the most HP is because the GM gave us all max HP and there's a Barbarian in the party (which bumps her base advantage from 2 per level to 4). So, yeah, I feel like I'm kind of wasting my resilience sitting in the back blasting. Without Weapon Finesse, it's pointless for me to take Kinetic Blade, so, I'm just kind of "stuck" being the toughest backliner ever.

However, if I had Searing Flesh, I could run up to melee range and provoke a lot. Yeah, I wasn't interested in Pyro at all before, but now, I'm thinking a Pyro Blade/Whip specialist might be really fun, to take advantage of the crazy toughness we end up with.

Star Voter 2015

kevin_video wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

Let's face it; in July, Wang Fire will have more options for crushing foes that are "merely" resistant to his attacks, such as performing a long charge to unleash a single more-powerful attack instead of two lesser attacks. And if they're immune? Well, even with the teaser talents, he'll have control options! As befits a summer month like July, it will be a time for fire!

...but also the other three elements, even though it doesn't fit the "heat of the summer" theme

I'm REALLY hoping that Searing Flesh gets a boost as the levels progress. The idea that you deal damage against those with unarmed strikes and natural attacks, as an immediate action, is okay at low levels that deal with slams, unarmed strikes, and animal attacks. Chances are though you're more likely to be facing off against people with clubs, spears, swords, and other melee weapons.

I think the confusion is that turning the ability on takes an immediate action. Once you've turned it on, though, it's just on until you turn it off.

Star Voter 2015

Of course the stat buffs help.

Either you put the buffs in Con and you get your HP back + even more damage and higher substance saves, or you put it in Dex for even more accuracy, AC, and higher form saves (and, theoretically not feel as obligated to burn to your bonus cap, since you're double dipping the accuracy).

The way my group agreed this would scale is with a stat buff equal to your damage bonus, so, from +2 to +12. That lets it keep pace with elemental form for the most part, and there didn't appear to be any other viable formula to use since +1-6 would mean practically nothing. Obviously, we won't really know until August, but we're pretty happy with it.

Star Voter 2015

Protoman wrote:
mplindustries wrote:
RexAliquid wrote:
I'm reading it more as a burn bank. You deposit some burn into it in the morning, then later you can withdraw that burn and use it to supercharge a blast. Useful if you can't take the move action to gather energy, or you want to add infusions that would put you over your Burn-accepted-at-one-time cap. And it looks like you can recharge the bank with burn if you want to keep it topped off.

But, it's not actually useful for that. There is no limit to burn accepted at once, only to total burn accepted across the whole day (Con+3). Unless this is changing, of course.

Occult Adventures Playtest, Page 4:

A kineticist incapable of suffering nonlethal damage cannot accept burn, and a kineticist can’t choose to accept more than 1 point of burn in a single round. This limit rises to 2 points of burn at 6th level, and it rises by 1 point of burn for every 3 levels thereafter.

Wow, how did I miss that? I was well aware of the sentence before and after it. Weird. Ok, so, it does that, but if you look as t what you can realistically do, you will actually have a hard time hitting that cap until you get composite blast at 7, and only then if you can't gather energy, but still want to use both a form and a substance on it, or one infusion and empower. The cap is honestly hard to hit, so, I still don't think it's super useful, but as I said, someone that isn't me will like it, I am sure. The rest is wonderful, though.

Star Voter 2015

RexAliquid wrote:
I'm reading it more as a burn bank. You deposit some burn into it in the morning, then later you can withdraw that burn and use it to supercharge a blast. Useful if you can't take the move action to gather energy, or you want to add infusions that would put you over your Burn-accepted-at-one-time cap. And it looks like you can recharge the bank with burn if you want to keep it topped off.

But, it's not actually useful for that. There is no limit to burn accepted at once, only to total burn accepted across the whole day (Con+3). Unless this is changing, of course.

It looks like the only use for it would be if you wanted elemental overflow's bonus at the beginning if the day, but didn't want to spend burn on you elemental defense in the morning. For high level Earth or any level Air, I could definitely see not especially wanting to burn on my defense.

So, yeah, you could, say, "I am going to nova for three burn later today, so, I will spend it now so I get my overflow bonuses." Which makes it a nice option, but not one I will ever use. I never intend to "plan" on novaing--my core strategy will remain constant, consistent power--so, I will surely spend my overflow burn on my defense and maybe some other all day buff we haven't seen yet. I very much dislike paying a long term cost for a short duration benefit (burn for the rest of the day for a single round of power).

Star Voter 2015

Toxophilite is an English word. Or, well, it's originally from Greek, but it's English now. It's just someone that loves archery. You know, like how philosophy is originally a love of wisdom. Toxotes is archer just like sophia is wisdom.

But yes, it's a bizarre name to use in Golarion, it's bizarre that in order to love archery and devote yourself to it in this way that you must be an archer, and it's most bizarre to me that the ability to shoot arrows with your arrows seems to work more like the old Duelist's ability to parry, rather than the new Swashbuckler's.

Star Voter 2015

Mark Seifter wrote:
*More total wild talents known: Being forced to pick up tons of Extra ZZ feats isn't a good balancing point for a class. As I said throughout the process, I would rather just give you more and limit the power of the Extra ZZ feat so that you have what you need and the extra really feels like icing and not a feat tax to play the class.

Excellent. So, I am taking this to mean a talent every level, since there's not a lot of other patterns that make sense. I am guessing you alternate between infusions and utility talents, but obviously, nothing to go on.

Mark Seifter wrote:

*Expanded Element as a class feature: If you want to pick the same element every time, you can pick up a special boost on the second Expanded Element, and you get something each time, as you'll see in the next bullet point.

*Basic ZZ wild talents: One for each element, with some simple effects you can do. You get your primary element's version for free at 1st, and your expanded element's for free when you pick up expanded (the solo element person can potentially pick up a more powerful wild talent instead)

If we ever earn back the right to see some previews, as a hydrokineticist intending to just stick to water, I'd love to see some of this stuff.

Mark Seifter wrote:
*Gather even more power!: Gather power gets more fearsome. Potential current version allows you to choose to spend 1 full round gathering power for even greater effects (2 point reduction, stacks with a move on the next turn for 3). At 11th level, both of these increase, for a total of 5 if you do both.

That's really awesome. So, that's kind of a stealth damage boost, actually, since our normal full rounds now can go:

1-4: Regular blast
5-10: Empowered blast
1-14: Composite blast
15-18: Empowered Composite blast
19-20: Maximized Composite blast

Beautiful.

Mark Seifter wrote:
*Flexible infusion specialization: Want to throw a crazy form one round and a mighty substance the next? By reverting to the original infusion specialization, I have you covered. Same progression, but it just applies to whichever infusions you use without having to pick one type or the other. It doesn't reduce both by 1 when you have it at 1 for a total of 2, of course; the total cost goes down by 1.

This is just a fantastic change that finally (or I guess, again) allows us to use both forms and substances!

Mark Seifter wrote:
*Overhauled feel the burn, named "elemental overflow" for now: Not only do you get twice as much damage out of it as before, but the elemental essence within you grants you size bonuses to physical attributes that you get to divide as you like (perhaps your deal is sand, so you get more Dex than usual for earth; who am I to judge?) The elemental form wild talents will still exist but give you less stuff (not the size bonuses for one) and probably not cost burn, with a cool thematic (imagine your quasi-aqueous body floating inside a glowing mass of tendrilled water, for instance).

I love every bit of this. No more mandatory Kinetic Form, but now I can keep the stat buffs. Jeez, it's almost like you actually listened to what we wanted. ;)

Mark Seifter wrote:
*Internal buffer: an extremely small (we're talking maybe 3 at most, ever) buffer that doesn't refill on its own but lets you accept burn to fill it and then use it to ignore 1 of the burn of an effect (so spending the buffer doesn't help you gain overflow, but it allows you to do more in 1 round than you could before, since you ignore the burn)

Eh, ok, so, I kind of don't care about this one much at all. You have to take Burn to fill the meter, so, the way I see it, there's one of three possibilities here:

1) It clears over night and so, I'll never use it because, frankly, I can't figure out the benefit of it in this case

2) It doesn't clear overnight, so, I'm going to fill the meter every night before I go to bed and have, essentially, 1-3 free Burn every day that I'll probably never use because it's a limited resource and I'll always be worried I'll need it more later like I am with just about every daily resource.

3) I absolutely don't understand how this works at all.

But, really, every other point you've addressed is great and I'm thrilled. Excellent job.

Now, I just need to work with my GM about how the hell Mythic stuff will interact with Kineticist.

Star Voter 2015

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The summoner, and in particular the synthesist, is problematic to so many because it's (effectively) a full caster that steals the few things the martials have going for them: physical combat and the early levels.

Star Voter 2015

Ok, so, apparently, you don't need to make something up, he just needs to be a Toxophilite Ranger.

Star Voter 2015

LazarX wrote:
mplindustries wrote:

This is not totally accurate, because you can have an enhancement bonus to your Armor bonus and an enhancement to your Natural Armor bonus.

That's why the software allows you to add bonuses directly to the armor.

The real issue is that only enhancement bonuses can alter another bonus. Your armor bonus cannot receive a profane bonus to its value.

The question was specifically about two bonuses specifically applied to an Armor Bonus to Armor class. Natural Armor is a different bonus, just as if we would be talking about a Shield Bonus, or Dodge Bonus.

The speech is clumsy because of the multiple use of the word bonus. it probably would be clearer if we used the terms Profane Enhancement, Dodge Enhancemnt, etc. But we're stuck with what Paizo has made common use.

You were dead on with the Profane thing, but I was trying to say that you can't apply that across the board.

Enhancement bonuses don't apply to your character directly, they apply to another bonus. That's why Amulets of Natural Armor and Magic Armor both work together, because they each Enhance another bonus. That's why Hero Labs is programmed the way it is.

Star Voter 2015

Elicoor wrote:

The haramaki is clearly out of concept for the character I'm trying to portray in the campaign I'm playing.

From the description of the Ultimate Equipment, it doesn't seem the metal parts of the silken ceremonial (metal studs) are functionally different from those in a studded leather.

Here's a pic of a silken ceremonial : http://www.flickr.com/photos/unforth/3554761533/

And here's the studded leather :
http://www.lantredurenard.com/anglais/studdedarmor.html

Or should I consider averything about metal materials on studded leather is deemed as invalid ? If so, FAQ link please.

So, let me say that is not what Studded Leather looks like because Studded Leather never existed. It's a Victorian misunderstanding of earlier art depicting Mail.

It's made up, so, we can't really use any pictures as a guide. In fact, it's going to be up to individual designers as to what they think it looks like and what special materials work with it.

As a GM, I, for example, would not allow your to make Studded Leather with special metal. Or, rather, I wouldn't allow you to get any benefit from the special metal. And yeah, I wouldn't allow the Silken Ceremonial with special metal (or leathers) either.

Star Voter 2015

Toppling is a crappy metamagic. Everyone sees it and how great it looks early, but unless you're playing E6 or something, it's not worth it.

Not only is Tripping not all that useful as you get higher (because more enemies fly or are amorphous), but CMDs scale WAY too fast for caster level + casting stat to have any hope. Some martials can keep up, but they have to do it with extra attack bonuses on top of their (full) BAB, size increases, and probably a weapon with the right enchantment. It's just not reliable enough to bother with.

Sickening is better for sure. Dazing Spiritual Weapon would be a beautiful thing. But yeah, I wouldn't bother with Toppling.

Star Voter 2015

Bonus squared * 100 is 900. 4500 is 5 * 900. So, obviously, someone either missed a few skills, or gave it a discount.

Star Voter 2015

LazarX wrote:
So it boils down to this. You have Item A that gives you a Profane Bonus to AC, You have Item B that gives you a Profane Bonus to AC. It does not matter whether A is a ring, B is a broom. It also does not matter if A is a divine blessing given to the character and B is a ring you just looted off your buddy. No matter what forms A and B take, they will not stack.

This is not totally accurate, because you can have an enhancement bonus to your Armor bonus and an enhancement to your Natural Armor bonus.

That's why the software allows you to add bonuses directly to the armor.

The real issue is that only enhancement bonuses can alter another bonus. Your armor bonus cannot receive a profane bonus to its value.

Star Voter 2015

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, the core problems for the monk are:

1) 3rd edition D&D kills mobility for noncasters because of the full attack action. If everyone could full attack as a standard action and either damage was scaled back or hp scaled up, every martial would be drastically better off.

2) The game is balanced at high levels by "stuff," but the classic monk is defined by not using stuff. My preference here would be to remove the stuff as a balance point, but that won't happen. So, the ridiculously obvious solution, and I can't figure out why it wasn't done years ago, is to just treat the monk as stuff. In other words, allow monk unarmed strikes to be enchanted like normal weapons. Make them tattoos ink or incense or anointing oil or something if it has to be lootable. Problem solved. Why hasn't this been done?

3) The Monk is MAD. Most fun classes are. Raise point buy. It hurts only full casters (because saves go up) who need some hurting anyway, and helps all martials and other quirky builds.

Star Voter 2015

If he doesn't want spells, but wants to stay relevant at high levels, literally his only option is barbarian, since spell sunder lets them punch planes out of existence. Otherwise, he's out of luck. The game does not support mundane contributions past maybe the mid levels.

If he can wait until August, the Kineticist might work for him...

Star Voter 2015

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I disagree that giving up +4 hit/damage is worth it, but, that said, power creep is both inevitable and an illusion.

First, it must exist because at some point, some option is going to be better than some other option in the core. You can't publish options for years with the core as the absolute cap of power.

Other things, like that rogue archetype or the entire slayer and investigator classes are kind of stealthy "oops, we messed up before" fixes for, well, how bad the core rogue is, for example.

But power creep is also an illusion, because for every option that's just better (say, counterfeit mage), there's a dozen more that are horribly weak (like, say, 90% of the other rogue archetypes). Stronger options exist now, but weaker ones do, too. It's basically a wash. Or even a net loss, frankly, since there are SO MANY bad archetypes, feats, spells, etc.

Star Voter 2015

Archery is actually the most powerful style because you can full attack every round with no need to move. It just sucks early because non humans can't get precise shot until 3rd. If something must be done, just take point blank shot off of precise shot's prereqs.

Two handed weapons are strong because they cost only a single feat to maximize: power attack. Dual wielding has a staggering feat cost just to compete. For example, a pair of shortswords with a feat (twf) yields 2d6+(1.5 * str) if both hits land at a -2. Power attack also adds 3 for every pair of swings. However, two handed weapons deal the same base damage in one hit with no penalty.

So, just spitballing:
1) Dealing the 1.5 str and power attack damage costs a feat, one with a prohibitive con req, just like how twf has an absurd dex req.

2) Alternatively, give everyone the twf feat line as is for free.

3) Allow twfers to make two attacks on an AoO or standard action.

Star Voter 2015

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The solution is actually having a really high base Strength written down (like 18), but only playing as if it were 9 unless you are mutated.

Star Voter 2015

The fact tht hardness isn't really that big a deal?

Stone has, what, Hardness 8, right? A level 1 Greatsword wielder with 18 Strength and Power Attack deals 2d6+9 (16 average). Damage in Pathfinder is really high--hardness is awful if you're primarily an energy damage dealer, but it's not going to let you own melee.

Star Voter 2015

This is much too broad of a request. What is it that you want to do? As an extreme example, Invulnerable Rager is a great barbarian archetype for a typical, super strong and tough barbarian, but it's awful if you want to bea finesse/gunslinging barbarian because that requires Savage Technologist, which is incompatible with Invulnerable Rager.

Before even a remotely usable answer to this request can be made, more information about, specifically, what you want to do is required.

Star Voter 2015

For me, I like being the party face, having a versatile assortment of (likely very complicated) abilities, and being effective in a fight (though the specific role is irrelevant), but I dislike the Strength and Wisdom stats, religious characters, limited daily resources, and preparing spells (if I could function without any spells at all, that would work best for me, but that's not super doable in Pathfinder). I also favor defense over offense in general.

In 3.5, my favorite classes were Warlock, Binder, Factotum, Dragonfire Adept, Warblade, Swordsage/Monk with the Ascetic Mage feat, and Bard (with specific music-focused prestige classes).

In Pathfinder, my favorite class currently in print is the Bard (some stuff is better in PF, but I really miss those music-focused prestige classes). The Swashbuckler looks like I could enjoy it, though, I might feel the hurt if I got to high levels, since they suffer the same way all martials suffer in the end game. Despite how lousy it is in general, I would be all over the Monk if there was a way to replace Wisdom with Charisma or Intelligence. I think, now that the Savage Technologist exists, I could like Barbarian. I really wish the Warpriest could be done with Oracle style casting and flavor, rather than Cleric (since I dislike preparing spells, Wisdom, and the religion angle, but I love the sacred weapon and fervor stuff).

But, by this time next year, there is little doubt in my mind that my favorite classes in Pathfinder will be the Kineticist and Medium, since they had the promise of being great reskins of the classes I loved most in 3.5. Now, if only Pathfinder would reskin the Factotum and Tome of Battle...

Star Voter 2015

I would only allow this in the context of a contest like this, not in real, pitched combat. I would just treat it as an opposed attack roll, possibly with a penalty for the archer trying to hit the first one's arrow.

Star Voter 2015

Mark Seifter wrote:
mplindustries wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
At this point, I'm feeling there might not be a meeting during this stage, so if we don't have one by the end of the week, I'll almost certainly post some maybes on Friday.

Any chance of you pushing those up to Thursday? That's my last session before Christmas :D

I'm appreciative of anything we get, though, truly.

Maybe, we'll see what I can do. Definitely not Wednesday though. Also, don't necessarily expect the post mortem to be specific enough for you to use much without at least extrapolating, so it may not give you much without working with your GM.

I get it. He's willing to work with me--we already agreed on 4 skill points and he lets me create water at speeds less than "firehose."

I'll show him whatever you can tell us and he generally trusts me to extrapolate correctly.

I want to play the Kineticist now because, though, I'm sure there's lots of awesome stuff coming, the Hydrokineticist feels fairly "complete" now, at least as far as stuff I care to do is concerned, so, minor updates to damage, costs, and availability of wild talents should be sufficient. My first character after Occult Adventures is published, though, will definitely be a Medium--that really does not feel quite so playable for long with less than half of the spirits available.

Star Voter 2015

nighttree wrote:
As far as replicating the 3.5 Warlock, which seems to be the goal of many...does the Keneticist miss the mark grossly ???

It's basically the same class mechanically. I don't think it misses the mark, it just needs to be stronger than it was in the playtest.

Star Voter 2015

Well, I can confirm a few of these:
Sneak Attack is precision damage
Point Blank Shot is not
Duelist Precise Strike is
Deadly Aim is not
Vital Strike is not
Favored Enemy is not

Basically, unless an ability calls itself precision damage or is Sneak Attack, it's not precision damage.

Star Voter 2015

Mark Seifter wrote:
At this point, I'm feeling there might not be a meeting during this stage, so if we don't have one by the end of the week, I'll almost certainly post some maybes on Friday.

Any chance of you pushing those up to Thursday? That's my last session before Christmas :D

I'm appreciative of anything we get, though, truly.

Star Voter 2015

I just don't think you should have to give up good numbers for the stuff you think is cool. The fact that there objectively weak archetypes has always bugged me.

Star Voter 2015

Oh, ok, so they get, with two arcana any magus can take, their level added to damage instead of....

...buffing their best damage spell by roughly 30% (via critting on a 15) AND still being totally qualified for precise strike just by using, say, a rapier.

Right.

Edit: and dexed based maneuvers are weak because it is 1) easier to boost str and 2) size boosts are key to maneuvers and those penalize dex.

Star Voter 2015

Basically it's as different as it could be while maintaining the "roll a d20 and add modifiers" base. Pathfinder has much less concern for balance, fighters are a joke instead of awesome, rangers are super versatile rather than mobile dpr platforms, the list goes on.

There are no defenders...no way to pull that off at all. You can buff, but healing in battle is generally a poor move unless you are built correctly for it. Generally, the strongest casters are Controllers and EVERYONE ELSE is a striker. Mobility is nonexistent without magic, so battles are a lot less fluid as everyone gets bogged down trying to pull off full attacks.

But, you get a lot more meaningful and open ended noncombat support. You can actually bypass obstacles with clever roleplaying, no horrible skill challenges...

Basically, you trade fairness/balance and a robust tactical combat metagame for meaningful noncombat options and abilities and the freedom to use them creatively.

Star Voter 2015

Yes, you hold the charge. But with Reach Spell, you'd only get one use because you can only hold the charge on touch spells, not close range spells.

Star Voter 2015

Yeah, the Kapenia dancer would be really cool if it weren't for the fact that the viability of the Magus as a class is predicated upon either:
1) crit fishing, which bladed scarves can't do with their 20/x2 crit
2) stacking massive amounts of debuffs onto a single attack, which the bladed scarf is also not well suited for (frankly, very little is, that's why the debuff build dips White Haired Witch).

Plus, the the bladed scarf is best for combat maneuvers (since it has two as special qualities and an ability that harms opposing grapplers), but, a 3/4 BAB class focused on Dex is a pretty bad basis for using Combat Maneuvers.

It's a super cool idea that's great conceptually and awful mechanically.

Star Voter 2015

Arkura wrote:
I guess I'm used to slower paced, low wealth/magic settings so this just seemed to be a lot.

I run no wealth/magic settings and I still expect a Fighter wielding a Greatsword to be dealing 2d6+15 at 6th (+6 Strength, +6 Power Attack, +2 Weapon Spec, +1 Weapon Training).

Star Voter 2015

I think it would depend on what class I was going to be playing, because there are LOTS of level 3 spells that would be amazing to have at-will. I would probably spend most of my points on those.

Star Voter 2015

I expect a level 1 fighting type to be dealing 2d6+9 damage from a Greatsword/Earthbreaker with 18 Str and Power Attack. By level 6, 2d6+14 is pretty "eh," because I'd expect you Strength to be higher by now (no Str belt?) and a Fighter should be able to afford taking Weapon Specialization.

Oh, and I don't think you qualify for Improved Critical until 8th.

Star Voter 2015

So, this might be a ridiculous question, but how does one make a map for this? Now, I don't mean "what elements do I include?" or anything. I mean, physically, how would one actually make a map for this contest? It seems like this is going to require that we have and know how to use some kind of art program or something, is that right?

1 to 50 of 4,651 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.