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

number6's page

36 posts. 28 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


Multiple Vancouverites (Canadians) are considering this year.
We did not go in 2014, after a terrible 2013 year.

2013 was all the main games devoted to the Pathfinder Society... not the core group of players imo, just the die-hards .. again imo.

The banquet was a giant self-hand-shake. That much money to see the janitor get a 5 minute thank you is insulting and a waste of time. We luv u all that make Pathfinder, but this isn't the Oscars. Make it fun for the participants.

So we left 2014 in the dust.

We are considering 2015. Thankfully it is closer to Seattle proper, but the draw of the event should not be the potential for escape.

Some thoughts.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alignment is soooo sticky that I say toss out strict/definite rules.

Myself I have players designate realms their character originate from.
I then ask players their character ethics or codes of conduct based on class, using the realms as a reference point.
It opens doors for players to self regulate themselves.

E.G. A paladin who seeks to battle and destroy red dragons should not be penalized for using red dragon scales for armor.
Conversely a Monk of Animal Love will not likely be a meat eater with hide armor.

Alignment and its parameters are sooooo subjective that it really requires a solid game world concept and adjudication.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Glutton wrote:

Maybe my tone was indeed aggravated but it was fueled by self reflection, as I spent a good 5 years irritating my friends with monster power builds and leading to all sorts of player versus DM situations.

But point aside, you need to take a look at your posting history and review it with unclouded eyes sir. It's quite distressing.

LOL, it's the Interwebz Glutton. As far as my posting history is concerned my general tendency is exactly what is going on here. Someone posts something rude and I call them out on it. This time it's you.

So yeah, your tone was way out of line. Nice to see that you recognize that.

People play the game the way they like. Not allowing certain material into the game is not due to immaturity, pride or simple lack of understanding. It's just a play style.

I apologize for making you see what you said and how it came across to others.

AD. You have ignored the comment...

"you need to take a look at your posting history and review it with unclouded eyes sir. It's quite distressing."

Arrogance 101 = "I apologize for making you see what you said and how it came across to others."

Are you really reflecting what is "exactly going on here"?
By virtue of your response, you are no less rude and arrogant with lack of humility than Glutton or any poster.... and at this point myself.
Please bash me to heck. Likely I will never post or read this thread again.

Ok flame war over....

As a GM of Mr. Glutton (a proud, and self exalting name of course vs. Adamantine Dragon, a name of humility); Glutton has come a long way to becoming a balanced player. Partially from taking on the critical and sometimes unrewarding (praise-wise) role as a DM.
He has definitely shown an accepting DM limitations and game adjustments.

Sometimes his responses are knee-jerked. He apologized. Way to lay into the wound sir.
Oh those Interwebz.

From my perspective
"Not allowing certain material into the game is not due to immaturity, pride or simple lack of understanding. It's just a play style."
Wow. Ever meet another human?
Do you talk to humans?
I've wasted too much time on Game Masters who ruin games based on the above issues.
I now play RPG games not on what I prefer as a genre, but on the GM. Gimme TOON as a game, if the GM is solid and legitimate, the game will be fun.

Excited to see some more work on what is arguably the most iconic of all Fantasy classes (round table and such).
Was disappointed with the Cavalier in the APG, but some house rules have fixed that.
Looking forward for material to bolster those of us who like the idea of an armored dude on a horse who does not cast spells being decent :)

Fleshgrinder wrote:

Za Frûmi

The Za Frûmi saga and is inspired by orcs and their language. It's almost possible to say that this branch is radio theatre with music, but the music is very important. Deep flutes, great drums, and ambient sound effects and neo folk music could be heard. The dialogue is in the orcs' language, called Black Speech.
They're a Swedish folk band, first three albums are all orc themed.

OMG Brilliant!!!

A little light sounding at times, but the theme is bang on.

Lochmonster wrote:
There's always The Classic Orc Song

Amusing, but pretty General Audience in context.

Looking for what orcs would be with a Restricted Audience. Actually worse than that.

limsk wrote:

Everytime I hear Basil Poledouris Conan The Barbarian (1982) soundtrack I picture musclebound barbarians hacking their foes into red ruin.

I believe that is because that is the movie in a nutshell :D :D :D

Or at least 1 barbarian.

Looking for peoples thoughts/advice on music that is Orc Themed.

I'm building an Orc Campaign for a home-brewed Campaign (using Pathfinder System).
Definitely trying to immediately set the Orc Campaign up to be different than the previous human derived Campaign.
I've done the LOTR & Conan soundtracks to death.

So far I've been taking from the Book of Eli Soundtrack, 300 Soundtrack and Spartacus Blood & Sand but am looking for more.

Heck some non-lyrical "musical" heavy metal would be welcome.

I'm bumping this post as I'm likely a horrible person... or at least horribly honest.

The banquet food was fine. If you cannot handle salt then I guess this was a spicy meal for some.
The desserts were all available. I went out later to hunt for the lemonade. It was gone, but all the 4 different deserts were available and I coulda' built a mountain o' dessert.

For me the complaint with the Banquet was how long the speeches went. It was like the worst wedding I've ever been to. STOP TALKING ALREADY!!!
I was glad that the staff is built on people who are passionate at what they do and the company hires accordingly. Great.
But taking 2.5 to 3 hours to go over EVERY employee and clapping and such seemed over the top. I guiltily bailed at 10:30pm to go to sleep.
The presentations were long and drawn out and nothing seemed remotely prepared.

Thankfully the CEO was drunk. That was amusing and honest ;) :D
I kinda wish she said "Hey, I luvs ya all, free booze for the next hour!".
Then we'd have a party ;) ;) :D :D

The unprepared nature of the banquet was part and parcel for my whole Paizocon experience... except the store. That was well conceived. But then that is where the money is.

Best of luck next year. I won't be attending.... unless I get to sit at a table with a drunken Ed Greenwood!!!

Just edit out the non-useful magic items from the pre-fab adventures. Sub in some legit magic items that the PCs may not want to sell.
Also cut off a lot of magic items from the pre-fab adventures. What the monsters die with, is their normal boring gear. Gives less for the PCs to work with, but also balances out the encounter.
As for buying magical items. Like anything there should be a market. Lamborghini's are not sold in small towns, or even many major cities. So if magical item availability is cut down a bit, it should mean only major cities might have them available for sale.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

I suppose it is true that those two classes need help. I'd just rather make them actually good at their intended purposes than throw them the bone of being insta-good at tumbling.

IMO all mundane classes need some love.

I think the joy of 3.5 / 3.75 is that with any class you can define its "intended purpose(s)" in a unique and fun fashion. As opposed to 4.0 where it gets all blandified and standardized... or basic D&D, oh those were the days.

Rogues do not NEED to be stealthy tumbly backstabbers, but if they so choose to do so, some help in the Tumble arena isn't a terrible thang.

Now that I muse more Archetypes are really a simple solution to many instances discussed to date.
If you feel this way or that way about a class or classes, make a custom archetype for your Campaign to adjust.

Obviously CMD isn't the way to go with Tumble, but as there is no consensus on a better solution, it makes this discussion moot.

That and who said these rules were ever realistic ;) ;) ;)

StreamOfTheSky wrote:
The classes that utilize it are too squishy to do melee well, and needed the tactically flexibility to maneuver into flanks or away when things go south.

Hence my proposal for allowing Rogues and Monks half their class level to Acrobatic Tumble checks... there might be options to create that, I've not read all the books front to back.

To me, it would alleviate changing an existing mechanic for all classes, but bolster those that need to tumble the most. Those soft, supple, squishy non-magical classes.

Donovan Lynch wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
number6 wrote:

How about the same as the feint check DC: 10 plus BAB plus DEX modifier.

No Sensing of Motive required. Just skill at attacking and some physical aptitude for preventing those pesky tumblers.

The issue with that is there are no Feats or Items to increase it, nor will it ever compensate for the Class Skill buonus. It doesn't have enough ability to keep up.

Either BAB + Ability or a skill really is perfect, we just don't seem to have a good skill to make it.

I actually think Sense Motive works fine...I visualize using Acrobatics to avoid AoO's as doing some unpredictable move that allows you to evade...similar to a "head fake" to get past a defenseman in basketball/football. Sense Motive would let you "read" your opponent and know where they're going to move before they do it.

So Inquisitors would be the bestest anti-tumblers in the game... ?

It just doesn't make sense to me (no pun intended).

How about the same as the feint check DC: 10 plus BAB plus DEX modifier.

No Sensing of Motive required. Just skill at attacking and some physical aptitude for preventing those pesky tumblers.

TOZ wrote:
Kill them.


That and buy them the T-shirt that says "I Win at D&D".
Keep killing these players until they make a 1st Level Commoner with Profession Midwife.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

First off Deadmanwalking, pls do not even try to respond with thine Min-Max examples to what I'm about to type.
Some of us do not play the game with expectations of a 15th level character having a +5 Gary Gygax Vorpal sword they bought at the small town magic shop.

Now that my disclaimer is out of the way; I'll suggest a way to have some potential for a mundane lady like a Rogue to be able to Acrobatics her way past a big baddy monster.

I like the Thanis Kartaleon suggestion, but that may not be enough... I guess it depends on the beasty.

A simple solution might be making the check for half move -5DC and +5DC for full move? As opposed to +10DC on a full move.

Another thought was with "mundane" classes such as Monks, Rogues & Fighters they might be able to gain a half level bonus to Acrobatics to avoid AoO. Much like a Ranger Tracking bonus.
With Fighters it could be an Archetype.
This might prevent dipping into a class for uber benefit.

I say "mundane" as Spells are so potent/versatile that any spellcasting class needs no love imo.

I enjoy encouraging non-spellcasting classes.

Lambast me as u will.

Curious on feedback.
Apparently I missed the thread on "do's and dont's" such as No Back Story. I looked at the contest rules and clicked on obvious links associated. Guess I shall have to search more thoroughly amongst the online visual flotsam :(
Post submitting I would have changed the time to 1d4x10 min and 3 times a day.
I'm under the assumption that one would not have to explain what a Hurdy Gurdy is ;) ;) ;)

Hurdy Gurdy of Expeditious Banter

Aura: Moderate enchantment and transmutation CL: 7th
Slot: None Price: 5,000gp Weight: 3lbs

Odelyna Withers was a well traveled bard who moved from various adventuring groups throughout her time on Golarion .  Despite the wealth of skills and knowledge she gathered one aspect of her adventurous life she wished to alleviate was the constant need to dig for information from the mundane local inhabitants.  To speed up this tedious process Odelyna had the Hurdy Gurdy of Expeditious Banter crafted.  By playing her Hurdy Gurdy in the markets and taverns throngs of locals were attracted as much by the odd sound of the instrument as by the dweomer of attraction it issued forth.
A Character with at least one rank in perform (string) gains a +3 competency bonus to Diplomacy checks to Gather Information and the time required is 1d4 minutes (not 1d4 hours). They also gain a +3 competency bonus to any Perform String checks while playing the Hurdy Gurdy of Expeditious Banter.

Requirements: Craft Wondrous Item, Enthrall and Haste. Cost: 2,500gp

Once you mix in the Anti-Paladin the whole concept of a Paladin is over with.... which is a good thing.
A Chaotic Evil champion is anything and everything evil.

Ultimately IMO the Paladin is a religious fervor warrior so devoted to a Gods beliefs that anything outside of it is worthy of destruction. They are all about one dimension; their faith.

I personally take from the TV show Supernatural where the Angels are warriors of the Faith of God to a fault. Thus Paladins are Faulted.... like all human beings and Gods.

Thus the best way to play a Paladin is to define with the DM the parameters of the Paladins so the Alignment is clearly defined.

Unit_DM wrote:

My brother is building a world and he wants it to be a place where magic exists but is very rare in the civilized world (it's been outlawed and put down by the oppressive government). I'm afraid, though of how it will upset the balance between the power of caster/non-caster classes, since casting a spell in public could potentially get you arrested or lynched.

Any ideas on how to make it balanced? Anyone done this kind of thing before? Thanks.

I'm running a low magic-campaign with a few major nations outlawing magic and others being very wary of its public usage.

Imo the general reason for outlawing or even registering ones casting ability (regardless of source) is much like modern gun laws.
A handgun is one thing (e.g. a sword), but carrying around a loaded bazooka, summoning an Apache helicopter or using mind-control device is another situation altogether.

The public (serfs) would naturally fear such abilities that could issue forth at the utterance of a few words and a gesture. This would lead to a large amount of societal disorder with torches, burnings and lots of other unpleasantness. Not the kind of situation a ruler(s) would want on his/her/their plate.

The government(s) of any nation would be required to have some form of magical caster and/or magical items capable of dealing with the eventual magical threats that would present themselves in any Fantasy Campaign (e.g. Dragon). Those do not have to readily show themselves to the PCs. It could a DM in reserve situation.

My method of balance was merely having PCs keeping their spell-casting hidden which proved to be quite the limiter in urban or populated areas. The wilderness/dungeon settings the spell casters could let loose.
One of them did not succeed at being secretive and on a couple of occasions espied. We are currently role-playing through his capture and torture ;) Lesson learned I hope.

I've also made some minor rules tweaks. Specifically and amusingly relating to a previous post on Invisibility and Fly.
I've bumped both of those spells up 2 Levels and any spell respectively related to them.

The final bit is magical items. I've limited them, but I've also tailored them a bit more to the players as well as having items that increase in potency as the PC levels up. This means finding the item is a wow moment, but the item isn't typical D&D from the book.
Instead of "blah, a ring +1". The PC Rogue might pick up an item that grants them Lowlight vision. Then 2 levels later grants darkvision. Then 4 levels later grants something else... etc.

I am personally enjoying it as are the players as the mundane classes can shine a bit more.
Also when a spell caster comes along, because the PCs are not buffed magic users of doom I can pick more flavorful/useless spells for my villains and worry less about effectiveness.
Personal favorite being the legless mutated goblin priestess who cast Spider Legs upon herself to escape after her "carriers" fled (JOY :) )

I think D&D isn't designed to be realistic. The mechanics are just not complex enough, there are obvious high-fantasy elements and there is more than just crossbows that reflect this.

I prefer to approach the game from a 1st level class approach.
In this instance the Crossbow is a perfectly effective ranged weapon for many classes due to their lack of skill with Martial Weapons. My bandits use nothing but Crossbows ;)

If you start factoring in the more fantastical elements such as feats your departure from reality has begun so why fret.

If your goal is to be uber effective; well you'll always find something or other that is more potent than another.
From one of my favorite games Cyberpunk "Style over substance". Works in Pathfinder as well :D :D :D

Um, it is a no-brainer that this spell does not work as written for a good portion of the conditions.

I've read one thread and no official answer was given. Way to go on bad editing and even further failure to follow up Paizo-dudes. Tis fun to do world building, but mechanics count as well ;) :)

I figure the spell should be an Immediate Action.

My DM is a curmudgeon for "official" answers.
I've already house ruled this to an immediate action, but I deplore fixing books my players have bought.

If packs of multiple Orcs, Gobbos and other mooks are made I'm soooo sold.
Glad this avenue is being pursued. I don't paint. I just buy ;)

Well that medium barding proved to be the downfall of the character.
A Heavy Warhorse would have retained 50ft and RUN as a feat.
My cavalier horse with less STR and thus 35ft without RUN got run down by many giant killer ants. What a heroic end to a "s!!&" class.

I've since gone Inquisitor... now there is a well made class that does stuff. I'm not a "killer" but I can fight. I don't have high AC but I'm not low and suspect to easy hits. I have a heavy warhorse I can ride as I have many skills, but I'm not a skill master. I have special abilities that do not confer negatives (like Challenge) and have a lot of versatility in what I choose.
Plus I can now go into dungeons or up stairs without totally compromising a main variable of the class.
Not borken, but not useless.

As a note I was going to go Witch next... but the idea that all my spells were part of a low HP familiar made me think... hmm Wizard good... witch useless.

Well that medium barding proved to be the downfall of the character.
A Heavy Warhorse would have retained 50ft and RUN as a feat.
My cavalier horse with less STR and thus 35ft without RUN got run down by many giant killer ants. What a heroic end to a "s#*+" class.

I've since gone Inquisitor... now there is a well made class that does stuff. I'm not a "killer" but I can fight. I don't have high AC but I'm not low and suspect to easy hits. I have a heavy warhorse I can ride as I have many skills, but I'm not a skill master. I have special abilities that do not confer negatives (like Challenge) and have a lot of versatility in what I choose.
Plus I can now go into dungeons or up stairs without totally compromising a main variable of the class.
Not borken, but not useless.

As a note I was going to go Witch next... but the idea that all my spells were part of a low HP familiar made me think... hmm Wizard good... witch useless.

Arengrey wrote:

Don't make me stat up a 5th level Cavalier and mount vs. a 5th level fighter and mount...I'll do it..,...

Ok do it.

From what I can tell a 5th Level Cavalier Light Horse, trained has an STR of 19. Taking from the Animal Companion Stats in the Core Book.
STR 20 (+1) / DEX 14 / CON 17 / INT 2 / WIS 12 / CHA 6
Natural Armor +6
Feats x3 - various w/ evasion
+1 Stat increase. Let us do STR, as above.

A Heavy trained horse has an STR of 20. It seems it is a Bestiary Horse with an advanced Animal Template.
STR 20 / DEX 18 / CON 21 / INT 2 / WIS 17 / CHA 11
No natural armor. But it can handle some barding with additional Dex.
Feats x2 - Endurance and Run

Now make a Druid Animal Companion Mount.
Cavalier doesn't do better.
Horses do not fit into dungeons so well either.

Last thing of annoyance is I just wanna do heavy barding with decent speed for thematic reasons. Well guess what, I'll get a better AC from using the Mounted Combat Feat to keep the mount alive. Not so thematic, now it is all min-maxing.

Either way, I'm beginning to lean towards a straight Fighter as the horse seems very sidelined, and not so useful and/or used much.

Oh well, mounted combat feat it shall be.

Mojorat wrote:

I was simply trying to illustrate that high level cavaliers are dangerous. the counter them though is to be on the ground with obstacles separating you. the player of the halfling and I were trying to figure out the costs for a lance that did pass wall to solve this problem.

I too love wolf riding halfling cavaliers. It is nice to be able to access potions of Flying like cola at a convenience store. I too remember this style of role-playing when I was younger. Bring out the Klingon Dreadnought piloted by this halfling cavalier and the wizard shall quake in fear :P :P :P

Arengrey wrote:
...and not all classes are balanced

Ideally, they should at least attempt at it imho. Especially in a magic heavy environment. Non-magical classes tend to suffer.

Arengrey wrote:
but to use the Rogue as a comparison is laughable.

Is James EVER going to play a Halfling Rogue ever? Probably not. With good reason. Chet or Erin playing Rogues yet... nope.

Only newb players try Rogues, as they think it will be cool until they get smashed for trying the Sneak Attack the uber monster in light armor/low AC + HP's.

Cavalier, doesn't seem too attractive if Paladins and Druids rate the same along with them having the Spells.

Arengrey wrote:
As far as being a horse lord, my belief is that the game designers wanted to create a class that wasn't solely useful on horseback but could also have abilities independent and beyond his mount.

So like a Paladin, but without the Alignment restriction or spells... spells being pretty darned powerful ;)

Arengrey wrote:
I think all this bluster comes from the initial Str stat of a combat -trained heavy horse in the Bestiary, -big deal it can haul a bigger cart of hay at 1st level.

It isn't just about feed, it's about barding and heavy armor. It kinda sucks to have to move slower than a dwarf for wearing Heavy Armor and Medium Barding as a Knight... go dwarves.

Also conceive of Knights not being 20th Level. Those are human-gods. A "normal" journeyman cavalier level range would be around what ... 2nd to 5th level? A normal 5th Cavalier should be far more capable than a 5th level fighter with a bankroll to buy a Heavy Horse.

Arengrey wrote:
If you really want a "horse lord cavalier" start him up with the human racial trait: Eye for Talent (+2 to Sense Motive and +2 to one ability score [Str, let's say since you're so hung up on it] of your animal companion),...

Ahh yes, researching Min-Maxing capabilities. Something I'd like to avoid.

I just think a Cavalier ideally would have a horse that can carry the rider in Heavy Plate, while wearing at least medium barding at early levels.

For those who perceive this as "he wants a powerful pet", this has been done by those amongst our region and it kinda sucks. We maka da fun of dem "hey welcome Cat and man who rides cat".
It's more about class capability, and not as per 20th level.
Yay, a 20th level Cavalier can ride a horse with heavy barding with heavy armor .... alas his lance cannot reach the flying Wizard who conjures up devils and city shattering meteor swarms or heck a Wish or 2.

Liquidsabre wrote:
Your players are fairly inexperienced I take it?

Um, actually one of my players is more capable of breaking the game than I care for (Arengrey can verify this) ... and this player discounts Rogues as absolute poo. Something that has been proven over and over again in gameplay, despite my previous misconceptions on the class.

Thankfully he plays to a lowered level of play and doesn't try to break the game and lets the less experienced players flounder about.

In my low magic Campaign where wands/scrolls/vorpal swords are not for sale at the 7-11 the Rogues can't do their key sneak attack in Low-Light; so when Orcs invade the camp at night them Rogues is neutered. Oooh take 1d6 Mr. Orc; hey I'm 10th level (agan think mundane human).

Pretend all magic items and all books are not available for player plunder.
If balance means going Monty Haul, well I guess you make a solid point.
Even then, the mage still wins, as they can buy those wands as well, and can Dimension Door beyond that trapped door, or Passwall, or any other magical bypass of a door.

The Cavalier is not a "magical" class, just like a Rogue.

Btw, I'm sure this debae has occured elsewhere to death. So if we rehash it, maybe we could link our pov's.

Yeah, I'm aware there is no winning, but ideally classes are balanced vs. each other.
I'm sure weve all seen the classic play "Rogue vs. the Wizard". Very tragic indeed.
When DMing I have to engage ppl to play Rogues and create world based penalties for Wizards (spellcasters) so as to balance the classes, because why bother with the Rogue when a Wizard can just Knock that door and then Invisibility.
I'm seeing the same
situation with the Cavalier.

Level 20 is not something to plan for imho; and unless the adventure is designed around Mr. Horsey it's going to have to be sidelined.
"Oh sorry Mr. Ed, no dungeon for you, just sit out here for 10 days and eat some feed with the hireling".
So I'd think for balance the Cavalier (horse lord) would be decent with the horse over his compatriots.

Anyways, I've beaten this horse to death :P ;) and gotten the answers needed.

Hi ho silver....

Kierato wrote:

This has been discussed in another thread, that was a typo. The paladins horse uses the animal companion rules with a 6 int.

So the Smiting PALADIN gets a smarter horse than the Cavalier???

Horse Lord indeed.

C'MON DUDES.... the idea of the class is that it is a HORSE LORD!!!
This class rules with horses, without effort. It doesn't need to compete vs. Druids or Paladins, it is all about the rider and the f~*+ing horse. Common' sense pls oh pls.

The other 2 classes get SPELLS.... How do u win... with the spells.... um yeah spells make this game hard.... geee.

Can ANYONE provde a tactical reason to play a Cavalier?!?!?

Vil-hatarn wrote:
Name Violation wrote:

also, if i'm reading it right even, a 1st level horse should be able to carry 456 lbs as a light load. (76 lbs, x 2 for being large, and then x 3 for 4 legged large creature). Look at carrying capacity.

Unless you have a morbidly obese cavalier, the horse can carry you in armor, its barding, and the kitchen sink no problem

No, it's half that. The x2 is for a "large bipedal creature"; the quadruped multipliers already account for size, so you only get the x3, giving a light load of 228 (which is easy to go over even without barding).

No response... so the Cavalier who does not get a Squire w/ donkey gets to carry feed?

Very unheroic imo....

Ok, so I'm going over my DM's head on this one.... this said I'm a DM so I never do this, and disdain the thought of it.

I'm playing a Cavalier. My DM is using the Horse Stats from the PF Core Rulebook. Should he not be using the stats AND Feats from the Bestiary?
I would think so. The idea is a Cavalier gets the Horse as written but with bonuses.

Now this said, add in the advanced template
Should this not be what a Cavalier starts with?!
A Heavy Horse, with bonuses so he is what the class is intended to be, a Knightly Horse Lord.
I'm playing according to my DMs ruling, and my horse with Chain Shirt Barding is almost so encumbered that it moves 35ft... less than a Barbarian. It is not nearly as strong as a heavy warhorse. so it is basically a wimp. Thankfuly it doesn't need feed to live.

It all seems so wrong for a class that does not cast spells like a Druid (uber-powerful) to suffer under pure druid animal-companion rulz :( :(

Hey look, I'm a Druid, my Horse is as good as yours Cavalier-horse-lord, and I cast uber-powerful spells.... u lose Cavalier.

I just want to know for future games how to prevent this kind of thing with actual rules counters?? Are there any handy feats,skills,knowledge abilities worth investing in to get around the situation above....

The best prevention is not trying to make the uber-character that the DM feels the need to adjust his monsters/NPC's to.
The best means of balance is keeping in line with the other players in the group. If you don't stay in line with the other players, well then expect the DM to taylor encounters to neuter the Min-Maxing player from time to time. This way they do not dominate the game sessions by destroying all opponents.
If the DM gets out of hand, then communally the players will let him/her know by not playing at all, or by just complaining loudly.

D&D is a complex, yet simple situation of creating balance and enjoyment for all. It takes some push and pull on both sides of the fence.

I too use Dingle Games. (Friendly Plug)

Please support this gentleman.
If you don't want to spend too much time making mook NPC's this is perfect for you.
Heck, I was using his 3.5 generators and then converting them to 3.75 to save time.
It isn't flawless atm, but with more DONATIONS, it can become so :) ;)

joela wrote:
Has anyone's Pathfinder RPG game reached 15th level or higher? If so, what is your experience so far, both from the player and GM perspective, under the rules?

I'm both a player and GM.

I dropped out for a long time after 2nd edition, so coming into 3.5 (3.75)at 15th level has blown me away.... in all the wrong ways.

As a player I'm currently in the adventure path with Karzoug.
High Level Combat is not epic imo, it seems to be win initiative and kill or be killed. Power Gaming seems necessary, as a base class using the core book is most likely doomed to failure. Where is the 20 rounds of dragon fighting from 2nd Edition...oh wait we defeated a Linnorm in a single round when our Pouncing Fighter Death Dude won Init and crushed it. Yeehaw.
Conversly, if the Linnorm went crazy on the party it coulda been "You'll be dead" (best line in SW).

So for the next Pathfinder Campaign I've requested the GM deny us more than 2-3 sourcebooks to limit spells and feats etc. As well as limiting the number of classes we can take (3 to 4 for multiclassing), and finally and most importantly, no buying magic items unless one has a really high diplomacy and lots of down time to search and roll those DCs.

I am running my Campaign ala low magic using 3.75 rules, and am working to mitigate high level magic sillyness through fear of repurcusions from various "groups" (it's my own gameworld). I've also pushed flying and invisibility up a level so to limit access to key game breakers (imo anyways).

Ferylis wrote:

My ranger needs a way to teleport back to his keep occasionally...

You could always curry favor from the Chelaxian Sorcerer who just happens to have Teleport ;) ;) :D

©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.