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

voska66's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 2,531 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,531 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I see lots of high level play. All the AP I've run end between 17 and 20th level.

Now I have a ton of 1st to 5th level characters. A game starts and dies before it gets past that point.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Neal Litherland wrote:

Whether you're a player or a DM sooner or later a caster is going to give you trouble. Clerics and wizards, sorcerers and bards, orcales, arcanists, and magi, oh my!

Nothing is more frustrating then being steam-rolled by a magic user. So the next time you're looking down the barrel of one of these big guns, stick a carrot in it and see what happens!

How to Shut Down Spellcasters

As always, though it's mentioned in the guide it bears repeating, there is a counter to EVERYTHING. So if you're going to go after a magic user it pays to know as much about them as you can in order to have the best possible strategy.

Best way to shutdown casters is to not shut them down. Give them every opportunity you can burn spells, let them feel god like. Eventually the run low on spells. Then you hit them. This works a couple of times then they get cautious with spell use, saving up spells just in case. Suddenly the game plays much better as magic is no in check.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I find high level play is more a about choices and consequences. The question then become not if the players can do something but should they do it.

The problem is having consequence the players care about. If you use the lower level to immerse the characters in the setting then they begin to care about it. Then consequences that impact the setting have an impact on the player decisions at high levels.

I find it's hard to get players invested to this degree though. The Ultimate Campaign book sure helps though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CommandoDude wrote:

How do?

The GM for my home game has ruled that we can't purchase magic items above the purchase limit of cities. We are 12th level, and I am a cleric who can teleport across the world and plane shift to other dimensions, but the largest city we can get to has a purchase limit of 30k.

Basically, the casters in our group (including me) want to get +6 headbands which are 36k priced. How do we do this? I do not believe that a 12th level caster who can literally reach anywhere in the universe via planar travel (my common tactic of getting anywhere on the same plane is to plane shift to a different plane and then plane shift back around whereabouts I want to go) can't get a dang +6 headband.

Have a rogue in the party take Black Market ties. With DC 25 diplomacy check the rogue can raise the purchase level of small city to that of Metropolis which has purchase limit of 100,000 gp. With out check they it's 50,000 gp. Also if you don't have that a small city has 1D6 major magic items. Since a headband +6 is major magic item the possibility exist that it could be in any number of small cities or large towns (1D4).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
The Unchained Barbarian was ostensibly made to be simpler to understand, though. Juggling the action economy problems stances bring to the table is a negative on that front.

I don't see it as negative. I give up a move action to get all the benefits of Reckless Abandon with out the AC penalty. Still makes me wonder why Reckless Abandon still exists. Sure it's the only way to use Natural or Ranged attacks I guess but why?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blave wrote:

I'm a bit baffled by the duration of Debilitating Injury. It lasts one round, which means it ends at the beginning of the rogues next turn, correct?

So... the rogue will never get any use out of it himself unless he manages sneak attack the same for twice in one round? That's not gonna happen before level 8 unless you dual-wield. Even then it's not that easy to set up a full-attack with sneak attack AND happen to hit with both attacks, especially since you'll suffer dual-wield or iterative attack penalties (though the second attack would benefit from Bewildered if the first is a hit).

That seems unneccessary limiting, considering the ability was meant to fix the rogue's "to hit"-problem. Shouldn't the duration be "until the end of the rogue's next turn" or something like that?

It lasts 1 round plus 1 round for each additional sneak attack you land. Seems to me it assumes a 4th level rogue will be dual wielding.

But really the rogue never had problems hitting at levels 4-8. This addresses the rogue's problem at hitting the higher levels when they do have multiple attacks. At 4th level you can multiple attacks with TWF and then the situation AOO. And really if you land a sneak attack against a CR appropriate creature the creature will probably be dead before your next round anyways with the bonus the flanking partner gets.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sir Dante wrote:

Just got my copy of unchained and have begun to read it through.

But the signature skill stopped me, is it just me or are they very underwhelming? I mean sure the rank 15 and 20 are good but very few games reach lvls 15-20.

Was just wondering if anyone else thought the unlocks should be something like 3,6,9,12 or 4,8,12,16 etc.

Any thoughts?

I think they should be 15 and 20 where the good stuff comes in. That's when you would want a skill do more since skill use become kind of trivial at that point. Diplomacy has been doing the same thing since level 1. Only difference now is at high level it's an auto success. This great for rogues as skill monkey, it keeps skill valid at the higher levels. At the low levels skills work fine, no need for a boost.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CWheezy wrote:

Finesse training: Fighter Weapon Groups instead of one weapon. Done.

The rogue is actually pretty bad still, bad fort and will saves are crippling and they still don't have an innate to hit booster like other martial classes

That was my complaint to till I read the Major Magic rogues talent. The to hit problem doesn't really come into play till high level. The problem at level 9-15 was you iterative attacks tend to miss, not big deal now Debilitating injury lower the AC. Around level 16 though landing that first sneak attack to lower the AC gets very difficult. You could find yourself needing 18 or high to hit. But that's where True Strike comes in via the Major Magic talent usable 16 times per day. Now you make the first strike with a +20 and your opponent is -8 to AC, that's basically +8 to hit. Now you are landing the rest of your attacks. Even that really high AC opponent now is instead need 18/20/20 you need 10/15/20 as well any buffs from party makes that better. When it 18/20/20 you might give 15/20/20 after a +3 buff inspire courage now it's 7/12/17. Much better than rogue was before, they are actually useful at the top levels now.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:

A second edition is pretty much inevitable economically. At some point, people will get enough of the constant release of new classes, feats and items into the existing system, not even to mention inconsistencies in the current rules and unwanted synergy effects. Sales will taper off as people turn to other, less convoluted systems. And the Paizo staff will want to keep feeding their families.

A new edition will have some die-hards who will stop buying Paizo products altogether, but if the developers manage to make the system substantially better with their new iteration, enough others will keep playing, return or start playing that it will work out.

Pathfinder Unchained pretty obviously is a way for them to probe what kind of changes the fanbase reacts positively to. The developers can gauge the feedback and use it as a core around which to build a new edition of the game.

For main rule system sure but from setting they have room to grow there for another decade. I'm not sure what other books I could possibly need for Pathfinder on rule base point after Unchain and the Occult book. I'd love to see more Golorian hard cover books on different continents.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I was kind of surprised by weapon finesse and the dex to damage. I don't think dex to damage was needed. More damage for a character class that has trouble hitting at high levels don't help much. At the lower levels sneak attack did more than enough damage as they could hit fairly consistently. At level 16 the rogue still suffers needing 15 or better on D20 to hit some of the tougher monsters.

At level 16 a rogue has about +25 to hit and the AC you can be trying to hit is around 33-41. Take CR 18 Ancient Blue Dragon with a 41 AC due the shield spell. Now assuming Two Weapon Fighting for -2. The rogue needs 18 or higher to hit with their primary attacks and 20 with the next 4 attacks. So Dex to damage really doesn't help much here.

At the early level the rogue worked just fine.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Calth wrote:

Trying to answer some of the non-monk questions posted.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **...

On the Barbarian and Reckless abandon, Reckless Abandon is a stance rage power to so won't stack as you can only have 1 stance active at time.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like what they did with Barbarian I would use that but do you apply the changes to Rage to other class that have Rage or would the new Barbarian just use a different Rage rule compared other ways to get Rage. For example the BloodRager but there is also the Rage spell and Skald's Inspired Rage. Also there are few feat that give a bit of Rage. Do all those use the new Rage Mechanic?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
Avadriel wrote:

Page 9 and 12, accurate stance rage power seems to make reckless stance an actively bad option.

Reckless Stance is not limited by what weapons it can apply to. You could use Reckless Stance with a bow, but not with Accurate Stance, for example.

Accurate Stance = Melee weapons and thrown weapons only.
Reckless Stance = Anything at all.

Useful for natural attacks tool. Also since Reckless Stance is an untyped bonus it stacks with the Bard's Inspire Courage where Accuracy stance being a competency bonus will not.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DinosaursOnIce wrote:

I may be in a minority but one of my biggest hopes is that they go digital only (them and everyone else). It's not that I have a particular preference for digital over print but it wastes less paper and is more environmentally friendly.

My fear is that dinosaurs will not get any future support (fluff or new types). I don't actually hVe any really big fears.

How is going all digital more environmentally friendly. I'd argue the exact opposite. To use digital material you need a device capable of reading. You have tons of devices on the market to read these PCs, laptop, tablets and such. All of them last about 3-5 years and end in the junk pile. Now compare that to a book you have on shelf. I mean I still have some of original AD&D books from the mid 80s. Now my Apple II, that I no longer have nor the 8088, 286, 386, pentium II, Pentium III, 3 AMD PCs, 2 laptops, and now I have Ipad and Kobo. All that old stuff is in some landfill not breaking down like paper book would.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM_Blake wrote:

I have never actually had any player do this. Ever. Hundreds of PCs, nobody has invested all, or even most, of their wealth into consumables. EVERYBODY wants the Big-Six to varying degrees, so everybody invest some, usually most, of their wealth into it.

So, hypothetically, if I had a player make those decisions, I might drop a hint to the whole group that they have a team member who is falling behind in his gear through excessive consumable usage - since these consumables almost always benefit the whole group, maybe they should come out of "party treasure" rather than individual wealth. In other words, maybe every PC should chip in to buy those wands and potions.

I would also drop an item exclusively for this PC. The item would be of decent value and really only usable by him. This would help him catch up. I would also slow down on giving out generic items for everyone else for a little while; I might replace them with consumables the rest of the group wants. This should help balance things out.

I've do it as player. Consumable at the lower levels are too useful not use. Permanent magic items are expensive and typically not quite as good the permanent item you could afford. It's short term greater benefit vs long term lesser benefit. Eventually the permanent item will fall into you lap or you will have the gold to buy it without having to save.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like the Slayer because it does exactly what I was already doing by multi-classing the rogue with the ranger. It does it better as I don't have divine spell and at lot of the nature stuff.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like multiclassing in theory crafting to see what I can make. I find it doesn't help much in most cases.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alasanii wrote:

Thanks guys. Yeah, I am going to focus mainly on melee with an okay archery skill. I am going to be the party sneak and face so I am taking the heretic archetype with the conversion domain.

I will take half-orc and use a falchion. We also have a monk and a paladin so we will have melee pretty much tied up. I am guessing the other members are going to be casters.

Stats array
Str 15, dex 16, con 13, int 12, wis 15, cha 11

Any suggestions on first level feats? Improved initiative? Judgement surge?

Thanks again guys I really appreciate the advice.

Put you 12 on Wis and put the 15 CHR is you want to be the party face. Put you stat boost at 4th, 8th, 12th and 16th on Wisdom. This will keep inline with the stat able to cast the spells when you get them.

I'd got STR 15, DEX 15, CON 13, INT 11, WIS 12, CHR 15. The higher CHR means you will be better at the social skills. Divine Protection for you saves is good with +2 from Chr at 5th level. Also it stack Sacred Tatoo and Fates Favored from the Half Orc which is good choice to take. Divine Favor is Luck bonus too so +1 to that as well. +4 to your saves is awesome on Inquisitor due to Stalwart at level 12 and headband can increase that to +7.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The big difference is the Bag Holding IV weighs 60lbs where portable weighs nothing. If you are Str 8 Wizard with an entire library of books with you a 60lb bag is very heavy, portable hole is not.

Also the portable hole is bigger than bag of holding IV. The bag of holding holds 1500 lb in 250 cu feet. The portable has no weight limit and holds 1130 cubic feet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Magda Luckbender wrote:

Summary of conversation to date:

*** Start of Summary ***
Dex to damage is not Overpowered but allowing it does have the major game effect of devaluing Strength. Dex-based fighters become about as good as Strength-based fighters, leaving little mechanical reason to ever be Strength-based. So long as you are OK with this global change, allowing Dex-to-damage is probably fine.
*** End of Summary ***

Here's an extreme example of Dex-to-Damage as an Exploit [Songbird of Doom]. This obscenity shows what a powergamer can do with Dex-to-Damage. Kudos to this thread's OP, for showing us a brilliant build that abuses Dex-to-Damage.

My personal opinion: I loathe Dex-to-damage and rarely allow it. I am a martial arts aficionado. I observe that a lot of non-martial-artists see a skillful exchange of blows and, not really understanding what they see, interpret it as an agile exchange of blows. I think this is the origin of the whole Dex-to-damage meme. I hate it. I don't think it's overpowered, but I do think it's lame and stupid.

Martial art is combo of both agility and strength. The key strength though is core strength not bulging biceps. That keeps your center and maximizes your agility and maximizes the efficiency of strength in blows. How much you can arm curl doesn't matter when your agility and core strength allow you put you weight direct behind the blow in small surface area maximizing you damage.

So I have no problem with dex to damage but I think any feat that allows it should have a prerequisite Str of 13. Nothing worse that seeing a 7 str fighter with dex to damage. That's just stupid.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
alexd1976 wrote:

Any feat that allows non-casters even a slim chance to approach the power level of casters should be allowed.

There is no problem with this feat, you shouldn't even have to ask.

Dex does not 'do too much already', anyone arguing against this feat probably doesn't play fighter types...

Casters only need one stat to get bonus spells, harder to resist spells AND more spells per day.

Fighters need CON for HP, STR for combat and DEX for defense. Allow this feat.

Caster need CON for hit point and Fort save, Dex for defense and Reflex save. I've never seen a caster survive with out those two stats above 10 unless we started at 10th level or higher.

A fighter follows the same but instead INT they put it on STR. STR still does little compared to a casting stat though. So the argument stands.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Eryx_UK wrote:

My experience is that optimization was never really part of role playing games until the late 90's and the release of 3.5 D&D. People just played their characters and told the story that the group was playing.

I put the blame on two things. One is ease of online discussion. By this time nearly every home has an internet connection and suddenly we were all able to share and talk as a global gaming community. From that players learnt what others had done and things started to click into place. Secondly, I put a lot of the "blame" on newcomers to the hobby. Many have come from computer gaming and MMO's where being the best of the best is paramount. The older role-players are moving on, popping their clogs or just not getting involved, and so the vocal new generation are having things changed to their way of playing. Times have changed

D&D 3.5 came out in 2003. 3.0 in 2000. So "the late 90's and the release of 3.5 D&D" don't really correlate.

The difference, in my opinion, is mechanics. D&D 3.x allows optimizations in ways early editions did not. The palette to work with is much larger.

Int the 90s there was the 2E black Players Options books. That was "Combat and Tactic" and "Skills and Powers". Those books had tons of optimization, that came out in 95. Prior to the optimization came came from the players handbooks. The race ones had the most options and did the subsclass books. Fighter added a bit but the Eleven Handbook really changed the game. It's this book that introduced what later become combat feats.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I had Neutral Evil character in a game set in the Forgotten Realms. My character was a Inquisitor of Mask. In the game I ran an extortion set up. I manipulated factions against each other for my own benefit and profit. Always came off as the hero saving the day getting the big reward only if they knew I was the causing the problems in the first place, the mastermind behind everything. The party comprised of fighter, rogue and alchemist. The schemes we pulled were done as party. None of use played stupid evil.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Depends on the party really.

I've seen high level barbarian burn a cure light wounds wand after every combat.

Scrolls and UMD are useful but if you don't get an opportunity replenish you stock of scrolls and wands things get ugly quick.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'd like to have to the Blood Rager's bloodline progress. It seem cool but nothing over powered.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:

So, often I see people complain about fighters not having the resources they need to do things. Most of them say you can't fight CR appropriate things because they need magic gear and thus 100% rely on spellcasters to do the things they need to do.

This feat is core and has been available the whole time.
Sure, I guess it's a 3 feat tax to have access to all your important magic items at half cost without needing pesky spellcasters and it does require skill investment.

But per the crafting rules, you can substitute a craft check in place of a spellcraft check. If you're a Lore Warden you can just make a spellcraft check.

Hell, let's look at a fighter build:
human, 20 point buy:
16(18) STR
14 DEX
14 CON
12 INT
10 WIS
8 CHA

So that's 4 skills per level. Max out perception and craft (weapons and armor) along with Profession (tailor) and you can literally make your own magic armor, weapons, and wondrous items. Plus extra skills to put in whatever, unless you don't wanna go human. And there's still favored class.
By 8th level you feasibly have the means to make yourself some of these or even lower level if you just want these.

Not to mention that you can also make your own stat items, cloak of resistance, amulet of natural armor, and even a headband of wisdom to boost those will saves.

Three feats seems like a lot to any other character, but if I choose to just craft a keen weapon instead of taking Improved Critical, and I can also get my magic weapons on the cheap, is that not worth the feat?

Is Craft Wondrous Item not worth taking instead of Iron Will?

Retraining cheese aside, this seems like something that I either missed being a fad, or is something people dismiss completely when dissing on the fighter.

I usually take it to craft weapons and armor. I've never done for wondrous items though. Just didn't feel right for my fighter with Profession Blacksmith to be making wondrous items unless I can pound of metal with hammer. Not saying you can't do it but just doesn't make sense the character I make.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just steal from the rogue instead. Pick up the sleight of hand skill yourself. It's not like rogues are good a perception for anything other than traps. So you won't need the highest skill to do it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
leo1925 wrote:

Forum ate my long post.

It's nice that you selected, mostly, 5th level (usually augmented) mythic spells to compare a non-augmented 3th level mythic spell.

You can counter mythic wall of thorns quite easily, it's called freedom of movement, and you might be able to bypass it by flying over it (depends on the terrain) or dimension door your way across it (again depends on the terrain).

Mythic heroism is a spell that has a long enough duration to last (usually) the entire dungeon.
If the entire party has it and their opposition doesn't then the party's capabilities are at least a couple levels higher than they should be and the opposition is effectively weaker.
If some of the members of the party have it and some don't, then the members that do have it have capabilities that are at least a couple of levels higher than they actually are and are severy outperforming the party members that don't have mythic heroism.

Long story short, the +4 to attack, damage, saves and skills for the entire dungeon at the cost of a 3rd level spell and a mythic point is TOO much of a benefit.

I've found 10 minute per level spells last about two combats at least until you are high level. But then you usually end up having it dispelled.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I ran WotR and mythic was crazy powerful but it also had someone of most challenging fights at high levels. Sure most of the encounters were push overs but there were a few interesting once that proved a real challenges. All of them were mythic encounters with the dual initiative ability.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Silver Surfer wrote:

I do wish people wouldnt get so into semantics and pedantics!

The essence of what I'm saying is that it feels that the ACG was a real tipping point in PF bloat..... it is the first time I can remember that classes appeared that actually put other classes almost into retirement. Up until that additional classes filled holes.... I really dont think many of the ACG classes served much purpose.

The arcanist took a real bite out of the wizard and IMO virtually puts the Sorceror into retirement.

Bloodrager puts Barbarian in the shade

The Shaman... a complete farce IMO.... just when I thought the Oracle was OP with Divine Protection and add to Charisma to everything.... then along comes the Shaman! Single handedly it has almost put the Oracle, Witch, Cleric and Druid out of business entirely!! What is a real joke was that the Druid had a whole load of Shaman archetypes years before the ACG!!!! I mean... why even bother?!?!!?

And the Swashbuckler has put the cat amongst the pigeons too!

Currently playing a Shaman, it looked like it was more powerful than the Oracle, Witch, Cleric and such but now that I've played it for a bit I'm finding where balances. The hexes are much weaker in that you have no major or grand hexes. The next thing I notices is while you have 9th level spell access you gain spells later. For example you get heal as level 7 spell instead of 6th, a lot spells are like that. The Shaman has Jack of All Trades spell list great for covering all the bases or supplementing an area but not great for specializing in. I'm finding it no more powerful than the any of the other Full Casters.

Another class I played was the Slayer. Found it weaker than a Ranger and stronger than the rogue and stronger the the fighter except for when it came to AC. Have blood rage ready to play, look pretty much like a twist on a barbarian but no better.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Silver Surfer wrote:

I do wish people wouldnt get so into semantics and pedantics!

The essence of what I'm saying is that it feels that the ACG was a real tipping point in PF bloat..... it is the first time I can remember that classes appeared that actually put other classes almost into retirement. Up until that additional classes filled holes.... I really dont think many of the ACG classes served much purpose.

The arcanist took a real bite out of the wizard and IMO virtually puts the Sorceror into retirement.

Bloodrager puts Barbarian in the shade

The Shaman... a complete farce IMO.... just when I thought the Oracle was OP with Divine Protection and add to Charisma to everything.... then along comes the Shaman! Single handedly it has almost put the Oracle, Witch, Cleric and Druid out of business entirely!! What is a real joke was that the Druid had a whole load of Shaman archetypes years before the ACG!!!! I mean... why even bother?!?!!?

And the Swashbuckler has put the cat amongst the pigeons too!

Currently playing a Shaman, it looked like it was more powerful than the Oracle, Witch, Cleric and such but now that I've played it for a bit I'm finding where balances. The hexes are much weaker in that you have no major or grand hexes. The next thing I notices is while you have 9th level spell access you gain spells later. For example you get heal as level 7 spell instead of 6th, a lot spells are like that. The Shaman has Jack of All Trades spell list great for covering all the bases or supplementing an area but not great for specializing in. I'm finding it no more powerful than the any of the other Full Casters.

Another class I played was the Slayer. Found it weaker than a Ranger and stronger than the rogue and stronger the the fighter except for when it came to AC. Have blood rage ready to play, look pretty much like a twist on a barbarian but no better.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Revan wrote:
Duiker wrote:

It says in the product discussion for the last book that you should be starting at level 15 and probably finishing at level 17:

Link here

This is more or less the default assumption of APs, probably because it means that casters will have access to their highest level of spells in the final battle.

The only exceptions so far: Council of Thieves and Jade Regent both go to 15th level, while Wrath of the Righteous stands as the only AP to go all the way to 20th level (as well as providing a full progression of mythic tiers).

Another Exception is King Maker at 18th.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Trogdar wrote:
Low point buys are worse for any class that doesn't rely on one stat.

Low point buy is bad for all classes. I mean if you have 5 point buy all classes suffer. It makes it very hard to get casting stat a stat that enable casting higher level spells or meeting feat requirement.

The game is design for 15-25 point buy. Go less or more than that and it creates problems. Nothing you can't work around but you have to realize that the problems are there.

My players like high stats super hero style games. It requires me as the gm to adjust things. Magic gets out hand quickly if you aren't prepared for all the things players will pull. I actually find the best way to deal with it martial bad guys. Sure they die all the same but they can actually damage the party better than other casters can.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Not quite true.

Wizards had to earn the most xp...after level 11.

From 4-9, wizards leveled faster then any other class.

It's why you see things like fighter/magic-user 4/6, 4/7, 5/8, 6/9, and 7/10 on old PC sheets. Wizards leveled VERY fast in the midlevels, so they weren't weak long.

And due to the way xp worked then, a multiclassed f/m-u was never more then a level behind the straight wizard, and could actually be higher level then a straight classed fighter type.

Granted, at level 18, the fighter might be 20, 21. But he got 6 hit points and +2 to hit, and the wizard got meteor swarm at a time when meteor swarm could take out a demon lord.

wands in 1e were much closer to what staffs are today, just smaller. They often had unique abilities you couldn't duplicate with spells, and/or were more effective at certain spells. Wands of fire and lightning, for instance, counted 1's rolled as 2's when tossing fireballs and lightning bolts, respectively.

==Aelryinth

Can't say I remember that. If you had enough XP to be 4th level fight you wizard level would 3rd. At 5th level fighter you'd 4th level fighter. At 6th level fighter and 6 the level wizard. It's at 7th that this changes. They stayed relatively the same till 9th level.

Thieves had the best progression at all levels.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't think magic is a problem at all. Magic gets out of hand when you have stats too high. A 15 point buy and caster are not an issue from my experience. Caster get out of hand when when you have higher stats. I find it's when caster can max out their casting stat that DCs for saves are higher. A high casting stat alone isn't a problem, attaining that with 15 point buy results in weaknesses. Magic items in this case shore up weakness instead of increasing the caster's power. If the caster is more balanced the items instead bring the caster up to the level they would be if they maxed out the casting stat.

So higher stats mean less weaknesses with a maxed out casting stat that can be boosted high enough to cause unbalances to the game. The game still works but it introduces all the problems you see people complain about when it comes to magic.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Having played many game systems I'd say Path Finder has good control on power creep compared to many others. There is power creep it's been about 6 years now. 6 years and power creep where it is very impressive that it has gotten out of control.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Just a Guess wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:
Just a Guess wrote:
The GM decides whether FAQs are followed. The player can only choose to reroll or leave the game.
*COUGH*PFS*COUGH*
With PFS all of the FAQ garbage is used. That'll only make things worse.

That's why I don't do PFS, I don't have time to go through FAQs to see what's new and changed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Fast Healing 20 vs DR 20/-: Depends on how often you're taking damage. If you are only getting hit once a round, then yes, fast healing will be on par with DR, in essence negating the same 20 hp. However, if you get hit twice a round, DR is twice as good, and so on. The advantage of Fast Healing is that in rounds you DON'T get hit, you still gain 20 hp of healing - but that's still only when raging, which if you're close enough to warrant raging, your close enough to be getting swung at.

Also depends what type of damage you are taking. If you fight a lot of casters you probably won't be using your DR much but Fast Healing will heal magical damage.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Take Primalist to get some rage powers like superstitious, witch hunter and spell sunder. If you go untouchable and don't really want any spell like abilities swap out 4th, 8th and 16th blood line powers for 6 rage rage powers.

Also consider the spell eater to get fast healing instead of DR. You get fast healing 2nd level while raging. Then you grab combat expertise and the stawart feats. Get the reckless abandon rage power. What this does is lowers you AC and boost you fast healing and non penalty to attack. You can Fast Healing 20 at 20th level (class 6, rage powers 2, improved stalwart 12). I think fast healing is a bit better than DR 20/- as it heals you even if the damage by passes your DR as spells for example.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

We just played that adventure. We found most of the fights were easy too but not all were for sure. The GM needed to roll 20 to hit the fighter as the fighter was sword a board fighter but the rest of the party had much lower AC. So the fights would be few attempts against the fighter then gang up on the rest of us. Our character are fairly optimized not over the top. We have lot optimization for out combat encounters as much as we do in combat

How's it possible that your players have a high AC on the witch, wizard and barbarian. Sounds like you may have higher the 15 pt buy of stats. If that is the case a quick fix is to apply the advanced template. Since you aren't using XP you don't need to worry about that part. You don't need to apply the template everywhere just here and there. Keep some easy encounters as even those use resource like Darkness, casters can only cast so many of them.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I use traits all the time in the games I GM. Never had anything broken about them. At worst I saw one player with the magical lineage trait on Magus to use intensified Shocking Grasp. I didn't find that to be game breaking. I mean it was good at 10D6 at level 10 but that seemed about on par with what others were doing at that level. Not a big deal with a 15 pt buy but I can see it being a problem with high pt buys.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quatar wrote:

Well it's going to be for a Barbarian or Bloodrager (not sure yet), so not exactly a stealth or sneak attack character.

Was considering if switching out the Half-orc's Darkvision for the LLV from Forest Walker is a good idea.

Go for both Darkvision and Low Light Vision. Half-Orc Racial darkvision with Blood Dragons Trait select Low Light Vision. Best of both worlds.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Shaman with the life spirit gets to channel positive energy 1 + CHR times per day. The Witch doctor get 3 + Chr but at Cleric level -3. Not sure what happens with Witch Doctor that takes the life spirit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I like the Circlet of Persuasion. A low cost item that +3 to all Chr Based skills. That items helps most classes but I love it on Rogue or Fighter where I don't have the highest CHR.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you want mage armor via wand go for Use Magic Device. Sure you won't have that as class skill but you can spend feat to take additional trait and Dangerously Curious to make it class skill with +1 trait bonus. Skill focus is better in the late game but if the is PFS it's not really worth it. This gives you +4 if you use your 5th level feat for it. Monks get lots of bonus feats so they shouldn't be an issue. If you can Circlet of Persuasion it add +3 to any Charisma based skill and I think it's 3500 gp. So if you can get that at level 5 assuming say 10 CHR you could have +12 (5 rnks, 1 trt, 3 cs, 3 mag). A 3rd level caster wand would cost you 2250 GP for mage armor that lasts 3 hours.

1D6 sneak really isn't worth it for the loss in you to hit bonus as others have said.

For trapfinding, talk to GM and see if you can the trap finding trait from the Mummy's Curse Player Guide.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
j b 200 wrote:
looks like a good spell to go on the pile of "stuff not used in my game." I mean seriously, this seems too overpowered for a 1st level spell, not to mention this useage

It's not a bad spell. Looks over powered on paper. In actual use it's nice for both the players and GM. What you will find as GM is that the spell keeps the hit points up and leads to longer work day. Basically an extra encounter, 2 if they easy. Player like any healing they can get. As the game progressed I found the spell got less and less use. When you get Heal you don't really use it that often.

On a wand it works good but not too good just a bit better than wand of Cure light wounds x2. Turns out to be 2D8+5 for 2 CL wand. One's 2D8+2 the other 2D8+5. Both take 2 rounds to do. Not a big deal. You can spend more gold for better wand but really you don't need to.

I'm playing this a game right now. Hex vulnerability was the most power at level 2 I found. Now I'm level 5 and while it gets some use not very often. Haven't had chance to get wand yet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Abyssian wrote:

Having played lots of AD&D and 2nd edition prior to my 3rd, 3.5, and PFRPG times, I can say that the absolute of a battle-mat is very, very good. As a DM/GM, it can add to the "mind's eye" by giving all players a similar and realistic view of what is happening.

Does it detract from the narrative? I don't think so.

Does it change storytelling elements? Sure...if you let it.

In the end, only what generates the most fun really matters.

If you embrace it as a tool, I think you will be fine. If you grudgingly accept it as "the rules," you may have different results.

I hope this helps.

Abyssian

I find the battle map is problem due to setting it up before each encounter. It slows the game down a lot. At the same time we've had some great fun after a 1/2 setting up and drawing the battle map out for an interest 3 hour battle of epic proportions. Nothing worse though that setting up a battle map 1 round fight where to you 10 minutes to draw it out. Easier not to use the map there.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jodokai wrote:

Playing the game without a Map creates a very different environment. Rogues become infinitely more powerful (although infinity*0 is still 0) because all you have to do is tell the GM "I flank the guy" which is WAY easier than actually trying to get into position. People will never worry about feather step or difficult terrain. They won't need improved precise shot, because all they need to do is say "I five foot step for a clear shot"

Personally I HATE playing without maps for battles. There are certain classes that have abilities that are completely negated by not having them. For example the Swashbuckler can move his full move without taking a -10 penalty to his acrobatics, without a map, everyone can just say "I acrobatics around him" you'll always consider yourself moving less than half your movement.

There's a lot of rules that covering moving in combat and positioning rules, and people have to spend resources to make those things easier. Without maps for combat, you completely negate the need for those things.

Nothing is negated when you don't use a map. That would the gm hand waving things. You don't ignore the rules just because you aren't using 1' square grid map and miniatures. Like I said a GM can handwave the rules but they can do that on grid map too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'd say Primal Spell Eating Untouchable Blood Rager. Make it a Half Orc with a double axe. Don't worry about the two weapon fighting just use it as two handed weapon. That way you can take Orc Weapon Expertise feat with Disruptor option. Be an Arcane bloodline for disruptive blood rage and get the disruptive feat at 6th level as bonus feat. Pick the witch hunter and superstitious at 4th level and 8th pick reckless abandon and spell sunder and finally at level 16 grab 2 improved DR. You'll want Combat expertise for the Stalwart. You take -1 to hit for +1 AC that is converted to DR +1/- which is converted to +1 fast healing. Reckless abandon give +1 to hit for -1 AC canceling the penalty to hit from combat expertise. At 20th level you could fast healing 19 (5 DR normal, +2 for Improved DR, +12 for Improved Stalwart) and Spell Resistance 32.

This is a magic killer!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been been playing RPGs since 1980. I started with Basic D&D red box. Progress to Ad&D, AD&D 2E, 3E, 4E and PF.

So I'll address the the Big Six.

In all the games I've run in the 35 years the big six aren't needed. My experience shows me that the games are designed for the least optimal choices. The big 6 are the most optimal choices. So if you don't choose one of the big six for slot it's not big deal or if you don't maximize that slot also not a big deal. You can do it and the game works fine too, you will be able to take on a bit tougher encounters with less resistance at the high levels than those with out the big 6 but that's the only difference.

The thing is players get in the habit of expecting the big 6 and feel the big 6 is all that is worth having. Anything else you find is to be sold to get a big 6 item.

If you don't like the big 6 there are things you can do to discourage this behavior. I would be provide interesting magic items filled with depth with situational abilities that come up often after acquiring the items. This is a form of conditioning will over time get players keeping a using those items. Later on you can scale back on situations an you'll see your players keeping interesting item over the big 6 item. Just remember to throw the players a bone from time to make the item(s) feel worth it.

This won't work at first, you get players looking at the gp value of said item and just selling. Then the situation encounters show up where that item would have been useful. Next item they keep testing the waters and are rewarded greatly for doing so. Keep doing this and players start doing it automatically. It works great.

1 to 50 of 2,531 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.