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

yeti1069's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 805 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 805 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I've also come up with a puzzle that uses a tiled surface like a chess board, but where the edge of each square teleports a character crossing the threshold to another square on the board. Each edge has its own destination, and players may enter squares facing a different direction than they were when they started their movement.

For example:

ABCDE
12345
FGHIJ
67890

If you step down off of A, you may end up entering J from the right side. Stepping up off of A may have you enter from the bottom of 6.

Add some dangers, that have to be dealt with, or a time limit for getting across.

Spoiler:
As a hint, I was thinking of having the twisting, turning hallways leading up to this room actually be the solution...right turn, straight, right turn, left turn, straight, etc...corresponding to the directions on the chessboard.


Another:

Get them across the river:
You have a chicken, a bag of feed, and a fox that you need to get across the river intact. Unfortunately, the boat is only large enough for you to carry one of them across at a time, and if you leave the chicken with the feed it will eat it; likewise, the fox will eat the chicken if left alone with it. How do you get them all across?

Solution:
Take the chicken across first, leaving the fox with the feed. Next, go back, grab the feed and bring it across to the other side. Now, take the chicken BACK to the starting side, and swap it for the fox, which you bring across and leave with the feed. Finally, you return to pick up the chicken and reach the other side with all 3.


Here's a logic puzzle I've used before:

3 switches:
You're in a room with 3 switches that you are told light 3 lightbulbs/torches in another room. They are clearly marked On/Off, and you may switch them back and forth as often as you like, for as long as you like. Once you are satisfied, your trial is to leave this room, walk down the hallway to the room with the bulbs/torches, and identify which switch corresponds to which bulb/switch.

Solution:
Turn one off, one on. For the last, turn it on for a while, then turn it off just before you leave the room. When you get to the 3 lit objects, one should be on, while two are off, one of which should still be warm from having been left on for a while previously.


thorin001 wrote:
yeti1069 wrote:
Also, any feat that essentially just modifies an attack action (Vital Strike, for example), but is listed as a standard action, should be changed to simply be an attack action, so these feats can combine with stuff like Spring Attack.
The reason Vital Strike and the like are not attack actions are to prevent them from being used in a full attack. That said, there is no reason not to put in a line saying that such feats can be used with Spring Attack other than martials can't have nice things.

There has to be a way to word such feats to function with things like Spring Attack without specifically having to call out those interactions in the feats' descriptions, since A) that results in a lot of extra text, and B) doesn't work well for future-proofing.


Thelemic_Noun wrote:

Also, to make Combat Expertise useful, it should let you ignore a bunch of the "nyah nyah, no AoO for you" powers like Point Blank Master.

How about this? Remove Combat Expertise as a prerequisite for all feats it is currently attached to.

Or, the way to make it useful would be to alter it in one of a few ways, such as:
1. In addition to the AC stuff it does now, it also adds your Int bonus to your CMB and CMD (partially negates penalty from CE).
2. Adds the AC bonus to your CMB and CMD (negates the penalty from CE on maneuvers).
3. Have CE function as fighting defensively for all intents and purposes: feats, abilities, traits, that modify fighting defensively also modify CE. So, for example, the Crane Style feat line would, in total, increase your AC bonus when using CE by 2, and reduce the penalty you take by 2 (3?). Yes, I know that this essentially makes CE free for a while, but if you're spending that many feats, why not?
4. Double the bonus provided by CE when wielding a shield, or when wielding only a single weapon in one hand.
5. Completely rewrite the feat and separate it entirely from its current form.


I'd also include:

-A Deed around level 6-9 that allows the Swashbuckler to spend 1 Panache to move 10 feet with a 5-foot step.

-The Rapid Attack ability from the Mobile Fighter archetype as a standard class feature at level 11.

-A Deed that allows the Swashbuckler to make one turn while charging so long as they have at least 1 Panache remaining, and allows them to spend 1 Panache to charge over difficult terrain and obstacles, and allows them to combine the charge action with a list of specific circumstances including balancing on a narrow surface, swinging from something, jumping).

-Consider granting Cha to AC, stacking with light armor (or not).


ElementalXX wrote:

1. Make Charmed life a free action usable out of your turn, actually make all of inmidate/swiftaction abilities this way

2. Should keep light armor proficiency, no reason nor temathically nor for balance (higher dex is not higher AC), high dex swashbuckler wont be using armor anyway
3. Should get dex to damage at level 5 for one weapon, like the gunslinger, when using only one weapon
4. The two weapon option should be an archetype, and it should lose something important to balance
5. I think is ok as precision, combined with dex to damage it would be way to strong. It would be like permanent smite evil, actually more powerful
6. The deeds are pretty good BUT change the order of some. Mostly deed should be less and scale, for example

Evasive (Ex): At 15th level, when the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she gains the benefit of the evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge rogue class features. She uses her gunslinger level as her rogue level for improved uncanny dodge.

to

Evasive (Ex): At 5th level, when the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she gains the benefit of the evasion
At 10, uncanny dodge
At 15,improved uncanny dodge rogue class features.
She uses her gunslinger level as her rogue level for improved uncanny dodge.

I'm basically in favor of all of the above, with some tweaks.

I think I'd prefer simply adding Cha as a bonus to Will saves vs. certain effects (similar to the feat that does this in the ACG), along with a good Fort save.

I'd think that for Evasive, Uncanny Dodge should come first, as that seems the most swashbucklery to me. Maybe Evasion at 10, Improved Uncanny at 15.


Also, any feat that essentially just modifies an attack action (Vital Strike, for example), but is listed as a standard action, should be changed to simply be an attack action, so these feats can combine with stuff like Spring Attack.


Power Attack, while a tax, is at least a useful feat, and highly desired by many martial characters even without looking at any chains.

All the +1 to X feats should definitely scale with level.

Any feat chain that requires successive feats to essentially just scale the first feat (ie., Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved TWF, Greater TWF, all the Improved/Greater maneuver feats, etc...) should probably get rolled up into a single feat that scales by either level or BAB, depending upon what the feat does (TWF makes sense to go by BAB, for example, since it would be kind of odd to gain offhand attacks faster than main hand ones).

I think all of the +2 to 2 skills feats should be removed.

I think Skill Focus should remain as-is, BUT should gain some new benefit somewhere before getting to the +6 bonus--basically, it should grant some new, special usage to every skill (probably print that in the skills' "Special" descriptions, rather than listing it all with the feat).

Point Blank Shot makes sense, but it should scale.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, I think Combat Expertise is the worst of the bunch.

It has an ability score requirement that most characters who would actually want the feats locked behind CE won't have.

It's a gatekeeper for a rather large number of feats/feat chains.

It has ZERO interaction with almost every feat that requires it as a prerequisite (CE is downright detrimental to using combat maneuvers, for example).

As stated earlier in the thread, it essentially works just like fighting defensively, has some overlap with fighting defensively (Stalwart feats, for example), yet doesn't gain any of the benefits aimed at fighting defensively (ie., Crane Style, and numerous other feats, class features, and traits), and is often worse than fighting defensively.

It mirrors Power Attack's penalty vs. bonus progression, but at a worse rate of return, and without any special benefit to a combat style well-suited to using the feat (I'd probably increase the defense bonus for characters wielding a single weapon in one hand with either no offhand weapon, or a shield).

It rarely gets used.


RumpinRufus wrote:
yeti1069 wrote:
Why do you need Weapon Finesse?
Well, this build demands huge Dex because you need lots of AoOs and good AC. And you need good Wis for Panther Claw and more AC. And some Cha for panache. Adding Str to the mix just seems way too MAD. Much better, I think to go the Finesse/Agile AoMF route.

True.

With Kata Master, I don't think Cha is all that important, especially if you're picking up more than a few monk levels. Wis+1/2 level should be enough Panache-equivalency so long as you have 1 or 2 standard points of Panache (that can be regenerated).

I'd rate that benefit higher than what Swashbuckler 1 provides all on its own, but all the other stuff monk comes with really tilts those scales, even if it means having to burn a feat or a few thousand gold on Weapon Finesse or Agile, respectively. It means delaying something a little. I'd probably bump Panther Style to level 3, grab Panther Claw at the same time, and push Panther Parry to level 9, pushing back Dodge (and everything that relies on it). It's good, but it isn't a necessity for everything else to work.


Why do you need Weapon Finesse?

As for Crane Wing, I forgot about the stupid errata. In my game at home, I've ruled that an attack that has missed due to using Crane Wing using the +4 AC version also triggers Crane Riposte.


TGMaxMaxer wrote:
If you are thinking about swash, kata master and MoMS archetypes stack. Then you can parry/riposte with all monk weapons and unarmed strikes. Not sure if it works for you,but could get you more panache to use without the extra panache feat.

Woah! Nice!

So, the Swashbuckler level can be skipped, you get more Deeds, and you get more Ki naturally, which also lowers your dependence on Cha, and removes the need to pick up Extra Panache!

Not gaining a level here, because we'd want 4 monk before going fighter (vs. 2 monk/1 swashbuckler/1 fighter), but that's not too bad sine the extra 2 monk levels are bumping all your saves by 1 (vs. +2 on just Reflex), and you pick up Fast Movement, Ki (notably Wis+2 added to Panache pool, for Cha+Wis+2), Maneuver Training (+1 to CMB/CMD), 1d8 unarmed strikes, and +1 AC along with everything else you get with a Ki pool, and Slow Fall.

I'd probably go: lvl 1-2 monk, lvl 3-4 fighter, level 5-6 monk, rest fighter.

1 Monk -Combat Reflexes, Panther Style, Snake Style, Improved Unarmed Strike
2 Monk - Snake Fang
3 Fighter - Panther Claw, Panther Parry
4 Fighter - Combat Expertise, Improved Trip
5 Monk - Vicious Stomp
6 Monk
7 Fighter - Greater Trip
8 Fighter - Power Attack
9 Fighter - Felling Smash
10 Fighter - Combat Style Master (or Dodge)
11 Fighter - Dodge
12 Fighter - Mobility

From 13 on, may want to consider going back to monk until 19, since the Kata Master should qualify for Signature Deed at 11 monk (level 19 with this set-up). Conversely, could also stick with monk after level 7 (so you don't delay Greater Trip) to get Signature Deed by level 14, and then go back to fighter. If going that route, I'd want to fit another Style in there, since we'd get the upgrade along the way that allows us to enter 3 styles at once as a Swift action (replaces the need for Combat Style Master for most purposes). Could pick up the Crane feats for yet ANOTHER riposte-type action (which thankfully uses neither a swift, nor an immediate), and some more AC.

Actually, I think I like that better...

1 Monk -Combat Reflexes, Panther Style, Snake Style, Improved Unarmed Strike
2 Monk - Snake Fang
3 Fighter - Panther Claw, Panther Parry
4 Fighter - Combat Expertise, Improved Trip
5 Monk - Vicious Stomp
6 Monk
7 Fighter - Greater Trip
8 Monk
9 Monk - Crane Style, Dodge
10 Monk
11 Monk - Crane Wing
12 Monk
13 Monk - Crane Riposte, Power Attack
14 Monk
15 Fighter - Signature Deed (Parry), Felling Smash
16. Fighter
17 Fighter - Mobility, Spring Attack


True. That looks pretty good! I'd been looking at what monk is getting from 4-6 (more saves, higher damage die, AC bonus, speed, etc...), but getting the focus of the build online sooner is a good idea.

Level 7 you get two feats with that set-up, so you could grab Power Attack there for Felling Smash at 9.

Would another fighter archetype work better? The bonus to CMB from Lore Warden is pretty nice, but the free Combat Expertise, which is the big draw for a lot of characters doesn't mean as much with that Swashbuckler level in there allowing you to use your Cha to meet Int prerequisites, and you want a bit of Cha for a pool of Panache.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Could add in some tripping to jack up those attacks even more:
1. Master of Many Styles Monk – Combat Reflexes, Panther Style (H), Snake Style
2. Monk – Snake Fang
3. Swashbuckler – Panther Claw
4. Monk
5. Monk – Extra Panache
6. Monk – Panther Parry
7. Lore Warden Fighter – Dodge, Mobility
8. Fighter – Combat Expertise
9. Fighter – Improved Trip
10. Fighter – Greater Trip
11. Fighter – Vicious Stomp
12. Fighter – Power Attack
13. Fighter – Felling Smash
14. Fighter - Spring Attack

Move to an opponent; provoke an AoO on the way, Panther/Snake/Parry chain, get to opponent, Power Attack and trip, 2 AoOs, back away from opponent, possibly provoking more AoOs from first enemy/new enemy.

If you can use an immediate action and a swift action in the same turn (immediate eats up swift action on the NEXT turn), you could conceivably get 3 attacks against anyone you pass on the way to your Spring Attack target, 3 attacks and a trip on that target, and 3 attacks at anyone you pass as you leave. You could also sub one of your AoOs from being attacked/missed while moving for a trip, which will generate 2 attacks if successful, so you could actually be doing 4 attacks to anyone taking an AoO against you.

So, move, provoke AoO, trip with Panther, Greater Trip attack, -4 attack against you, +4 attack against them now, Vicious Stomp. If it misses, Snake. If it hits, Parry then Riposte. If Snake hits and you didn't Riposte, hit again.

Power Attack hit your main target, trip, Greater Trip attack, Vicious Stomp at +4 attack.


Dex-focused gives you 1 stat for AC, Reflex saves, Initiative, ranged attack, melee attack, melee damage (and possibly ranged), and some valuable skills (Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Stealth).

Str-focused gives you 1 stat for melee attack, melee damage, ranged damage (and possibly attack with throwing weapons), some mediocre (but occasionally important) skills (Climb, Swim), carrying capacity, and checks to break things.


What I would have liked to see on the Swashbuckler to make it more mobile:

-Spring Attack as an automatic feature somewhere between levels 4 and 8.
-The ability to charge around corners, up/down stairs, etc...
-Either the Vital Strike chain included, or the ability to make a second attack during a Spring Attack, or something a bit like the Dervish PrC's full attack from 3.5's Complete Warrior.
-A panache deed that grants an extra move action.

It's kind of frustrating that so few things work with Spring Attack/Shot on the Run for basically NO reason, and Pathfinder hasn't adapted the extra-attack-during-Spring Attack feats from 3.5. Every non-magical character wants to stand around full-attacking unless they have pounce, which isn't easy to come by, or Ride-By-Attack and they're mounted, which has its own issues.


Thanks, bbt! I didn't know about that one, and it's pretty cool!


Hey folks.

Cutting right to the chase, the Feral Hunter archetype for the new Hunter class in the ACG has caught my eye, and I was wondering if people had formed some opinions and advice on ways to build such a character.

In particular, what order would you take feats in (assuming the standards for a wild shape-focused druid, with some of the caster-druid staples included)?

What would you select for your spells known? Say, at level 2, 5, 10?

What aspects and summons/wildshapes sync up best?

Also, do you feel you lose much by not being able to wildshape into an elemental or plant?


No, not yet.

I'd prefer to wait and see what the "Unchained" stuff looks like, and figure out whether the system can be tweaked with that enough to fix the major issues with the game.

That is, unless Pathfinder wants to adopt the Edge of the Empire dice system, but I doubt that will happen as it would be an enormous departure.


I don't see why Paizo continues to make stuff like this so punitive, ESPECIALLY given that Sniper Goggles exist.

At the very least, the archetype should scale automatically and probably not replace anything (or eat up an extra talent slot at, say, level 10 and be done with it). Gaining +10 feet/2 levels to your SA range isn't all that amazing even before considering how difficult it can be to land ranged sneak attacks.


Human Wizard Conjurer, LN. God wizard.

Half-orc Invulnerable Rager Barbarian/Unarmed Fighter, CN. He is there to absorb a lot of abuse while dishing it out himself.

Human Wizard Conjurer, LN. God wizard...because the game I was playing the first one in stalled at level 6 and I wanted to do more with the character, but THIS game died, too.


I think of it this way: if you take a strong guy, and have him crush a stone in his fist, but he's got a big dopey grin on his face, or looks kind of bored, that may not be intimidating at all. That's why we see so many scenes where the big strong guy does something like that, and then his boss/sidekick/friend/underling speaks on his behalf emphasizing that what the guy could do to the stone, he could do to YOU.

It being tied to charisma demonstrates your ability to do more than perform a demonstration, but to "attack" someone psychologically. That's also why we have several methods in the game for achieving basically the same results, but without the reliance on Cha or communication (Dazzling Display, for instance). Of course you can accomplish the same things with Str, Dex (think of Bruce Lee doing his "Dazzling Display" with nunchuks), Con, Int, or Wis, but then it's typically doing something else, or takes a trait, racial ability, feat, or spell to do so, because you're going about things a different way.

You also need to differentiate between intimidation and fear. They're closely related, but I feel like they aren't necessarily the same thing. Watching someone get eaten by a creature might instill fear in you without ever involving an attempt to shake your resolve (and that's really what Intimidate is...causing someone to be shaken without resorting to actual violence or magic).

The Terminator may have had a racial bonus, or significant circumstance bonuses, or a fear aura (like a dragon), or some other similar ability.


Artemis Moonstar wrote:

..... Honestly? It would have been better if they there weren't 3 primes you had to hit, but 1. That might work?

Hey Yeti. Mind running it where only one of the primes is what you use to try and hit? I get the feeling it would help. Probably just use the 'middle' of the three.

I'd do it but... I'm lazy. And busy xD. GFs man... Always distractin ya from fixin yer games xD. I keed.

I was mostly aiming at one number for each of my tests, just because I couldn't be bothered to recall all 3. So, for the 6th level set, about half of the solutions were 19, and the other half 29, and I'm fairly certain that I could have made them all 19.

For the 7th level set, they were ALL 31.


I've been doing some test runs with this, just rolling dice and seeing if I can hit the right numbers...

I did about 30 rolls of 6 dice for spells modified up to 3rd level (6th level character), and about 15 rolls of 7 dice for spells modified of the 4th level, and I not only haven't failed to achieve one of the prime numbers, but have done so in under 30 seconds for almost every single roll.


From what I recall of what my players wanted to do, they're looking to create a headquarters for an elite military/police force (something akin to S.W.A.T.--part of the city guard, but outside the main chain of command), using their troops to do good works in the city (maybe effecting repairs, or in martial action against significant threats), and possibly also use their kitchen space to serve the homeless as a soup kitchen.

My contention is that most of the rooms therein would be devoted to simply supporting their new order, not a place for the public, nor as a producer of goods, really.

We're still in the discussion phase, though some stuff has been planned out, but it doesn't strike be as making sense to have a combination soup kitchen and mess hall--the soldiers and destitute might not mingle well, and the latter represents a hazard of sorts in the event of emergency mobilization. I can't imagine, say, a police station house opening its kitchen for such a purpose. Plus, it offers a too easy way to gain entry to the inner working of such a force for any ne'er-do-wells.

I'm thinking that it might produce some Influence, MAYBE some Goods, but it'd be kind of low on the latter, and wouldn't be earning gold.


Coriat wrote:

The only RAW requirement for your kitchen to generate capital is that you explain to the GM how it does so.

To help you do so, you might point out that Paizo's list of prearranged buildings has like over a dozen separate entries that include a kitchen obviously intended to serve food as part of the building's general operations, rather than as a side business selling food to unrelated strangers. The Academy, for example. The Bardic College. The Guildhall. Etc.

Quote:
Based on the quoted text in my original post, he thinks a kitchen for a building that doesnt sell food, host parties, or something else overtly related to food [...]
It sounds like you want your building to provide food to guards. That's overtly related to food.

Under the "Buildings" section, I don't see the output for each building listed, so, while those buildings DO have things like kitchens in them, there isn't any indication that I've seen that they should be counted in producing capital. From what I can tell, the buildings listed are there to give a sense of what one would expect in a typical version of that structure.

You wouldn't, for instance, build an academy without a kitchen, bedrooms, lavatory, etc...

My position (as Kolo's GM), is that, while a building can be oriented toward a particular capital-generating task, it doesn't necessarily do so for all included rooms. For instance, if you had a two story building, the bottom floor being a storefront for, say, textiles, and the upstairs your personal quarters, the rooms upstairs would have no bearing on your income from the shop.


So, an idea that I worked with back in 3.5 for a while, was that fighters gained multiple lines of bonus feats that they could switch between where at level 6 feats would branch, and you would select 2 different feats, one for each "column" and could swap between them. Then, at level 12, they would branch again, and at 18 a final time.

So it would look something like this:

6. Bonus feat 1 | Bonus feat 2
8. Bonus feat 1 | Bonus feat 2
10. Bonus feat 1 | Bonus feat 2
12. Bonus feat 1A | Bonus feat 1B || Bonus feat 2A | Bonus feat 2B
14. Bonus feat 1A | Bonus feat 1B || Bonus feat 2A | Bonus feat 2B
16. Bonus feat 1A | Bonus feat 1B || Bonus feat 2A | Bonus feat 2B
18. 1A | 1B || 1C | 1 D || 2A | 2B || 2 C | 2D
20. 1A | 1B || 1C | 1 D || 2A | 2B || 2 C | 2D

So, as an example, at level 6, you could chose Point Blank Shot for A, and Combat Expertise for B, and would then devote your A feats toward archery, and your B feats toward some combat maneuver (let's say Trip).

6. Point Blank Shot | Combat Expertise
8. Precise Shot | Improved Trip
10. Rapid Shot | Greater Trip

Then, at 12, these trees would split again, so you could have two branching focuses for each broader discipline:

12. Manyshot/Dodge | Fury's Fall/Death or Glory
14. Clustered Shot/Mobility | Felling Smash/Lunge
16. Snap Shot/Shot on the Run | Drag Down/Strike Back

In this case, the fighter could be using one option in the left hand column for full attacks with a bow, or the other option for instances where he needs to be mobile, and could use the first option in the right hand column when he's fighting foes that he can trip, or the second option when fighting larger foes (who he is likely not going to be able to trip).

Then at 18, these would split further, where each existing option would gain 2 more, so Snap Shot would branch twice, Shot on the Run would branch twice, etc...resulting in 8 feats selected at 18 and 20.

The way I handled this was that it took a swift action to change focus. While we were using this idea, the few people who built fighters would use their level 1, 2 and 4 bonus feats, and their standard feats to define the character's primary focus, and to pick up feats that they wanted access to full time, and then would build upon their main role with one tree at 6, while using the second tree to build in an alternative option. One could be focused on offense, while the other is looking toward defense, or it could be melee combat vs. ranged, or two different sorts of combat maneuvers.

We ended up with more varied fighters without dramatically increasing the power level of the fighter: they had more options, and could therefore adapt to more situations, but they weren't bringing much more power to bear at any one time.

It gets a bit complicated when you hit level 12, but it was manageable.

I'd think something along these lines might be the way to go, perhaps including some class features that work this way as well.


First, are we going to see Unchained feats? I hope so, but if not, the fighter needs an ability that allows them to either ignore ability score prerequisites for feats (like Int 13 for Combat Expertise), or have his ability scores count as being higher for the purposes of meeting prerequisites fairly early in the class, although this brings up the issue of making the fight an even stronger dip class.

Fighter needs some abilities that make use of mental stats. Perhaps they could have a choice of tactician, martial artist, leader, where abilities would follow those themes a little, and would use Int, Wis, or Cha, respectively.

I like some stuff like that from the Warblade in the Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords from 3.5...using Int as a bonus to things like Reflex saves, touch AC, Initiative, confirming critical hits, etc...

Fighters, more than any other class, should probably be good with teamwork feats. They should have some options that allows them to share feats like that during combat...they're certainly more suited to that than the Inquisitor is, I think.

I like the idea that (I think) Ryjin brought up earlier about allowing the fighter to "prepare feats" the way a wizard prepares spells each day. That sort of covers the notion that fighters are highly versatile combatants, and good in many areas, while not loading them down with all of that power at the same time. I think it has some thematic issues, but those could be solved with the ability to change X number of selections Y times per day, allowing the fighter to adapt in combat, possibly.

Hopefully there will also be rules for Unchained full attack combat to give martial characters a better combination of mobility and effectiveness.

I already give all the 2+Int characters 4+Int in my games, or 3+Int+1 free rank each level in a thematic skill (for example, wizards get Knowledge: Arcana, Clerics and Paladins get K: Religion, etc...).

I'm on the fence as to whether I feel fighters should gain a good Will save, or just better abilities to augment their save. Personally, I'd think they should have a good Reflex, since they're focused in physical training, and should have an expanded Bravery bonus...probably start it at +2 to your choice of fear, compulsion, etc... then increase it by 1 per X levels, adding +1 to another type of save.

I'd like to see some of the stuff from Tome of Battle that was more mundane in nature brought over...stuff from the Diamond Mind, Iron Heart, and White Raven I seem to recall being less supernatural in nature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ProfPotts wrote:

Sorry, I should have worded that better: Snowball's rubbish as something to bother enhancing with rime spell because it's single-target.

Most single-target damage spells are 'rubbish' really, although the rays at least are rays and get to count as weapons for Feat purposes and stuff; but then only really worth it if you're aiming to be a ray-specialist. Shocking Grasp's only saving grace is that it's a melee touch - so you can keep on swinging until it hits; ranged touch are worse in the fact you can waste the things. Better for a Magus, of course, with a higher BAB to start and the whole Spellstrike critical threat range and stuff (but then you need to be casting melee touch for that anyway).

I'd debate whether a 1 round staggered effect is 'a powerful debuff' - the target loses 1 move action... that's it. A Rime-blooded Sorcerer casting a Ray of Frost cantrip inflicts a slowed effect for 1 round on a failed save (only 1 DC less than Snowball too), and that's staggered plus an additional -1 penalty on attack rolls, AC, and Reflex saves, and reduces the target to half movement (rounded down)... and can fire that puppy off all day, every day.

YMMV, of course, but unless you've got 1st level spells to burn I'd not be going with Snowball (or Shocking Grasp for that matter, just to be clear).

Uh, being a touch attack is rarely a "saving grace" for an offensive spell, since most casters tend to try an avoid getting into melee range with their opponents who probably hit a lot harder--trading 1d6/level damage with someone swinging a two-handed weapon, or who is going to full-attack you is almost never a good idea, while ranged touch attacks allow you to maintain some distance. I'd say that, depending on how you want to look at things, and what you value, they're about even once you account for all the pros and cons on both sides.

Snowball is pretty amazing. How many level 1 spells allow you to impose a significant debuff at range without a HD cap? How many 2nd level spells allow you to do that AND deal damage at the same time? Rime Spell on Snowball is a pretty strong 2nd level spell, allowing a ranged touch attack to Entangle for a round, along with the chance of also staggering your target. Restrict a target to either a single attack, or a single move action at half speed, along with penalties to Dex (AC), to-hit, and making spellcasting difficult?

I think you're undervaluing Staggered. Forcing someone to choose between moving or attacking or casting a spell is a pretty good status effect. Disallowing full attacks is as well. Now, sure, if your target has pounce and a full attack, they could still use that if not too far away, but that combo isn't very common, especially at lower levels. And if you add Rime Spell, even that option is removed, since Entangled prevents charging. Staggered amounts to giving your side an extra full attack action, or preventing an attack, or allowing your team to get in better positions.

It's not the BEST debuff, but, again, we're looking at a level 1 spell here. How much do you want? Sleep is good, until you gain a few levels, and may not even be useful against a tough boss at level 1, and there are a lot of creatures that are immune to sleep and/or enchantments. At level 2 you have some better single target control options, but how many are as universally applicable? I wouldn't build a whole character around Snowball, but it's a fantastic spell to use early on, and a decent spell to have in reserve at later levels.


Craig1234 wrote:
Tim Statler wrote:
Congratulations, your players understand and use tactics. And because of that your rogue is effective.

I'm very happy they use tactics, but I would also like to see variation in tactics. Right now, it's pretty much get behind the guy and sneak attack for every fight.

Sebastian wrote:

What other character classes do you have in the party? As others have mentioned, sneak attack can look better than it is (particularly at low levels), and the effectiveness of sneak attack can seem even greater if you don't have another high damage class in the party to provide a benchmark. For example, if you have a barbarian and a rogue in the same party, the former will hit more often and do more damage than the latter.

Bottom line, I'd suggest leaving the class unchanged and playing a little more to get some experience with other classes and their effectiveness.

Edit: Also, don't forget that concealment on the target spoils sneak attack. Of course, the odd thing about this is that the safest place to be when facing a rogue is a dark/shadowy alley...

We have a Rogue, Monk, Sorcerer, and Cleric

It also seems that the general consensus regarding this is that my own bias against it is that the character has yet to level high enough - I can deal with that. We are on core rules now, and doing RotRL, so we'll be getting to level 15-16 at least, it will be interesting to see how strong it is then.

Thanks all

As others have said, what you have here is a combination of it being too easy to get flanking (who is the rogue flanking with? remember that the other character must be threatening, so must be armed--the monk's unarmed strike counts, but the cleric and sorcerer need to have SOME sort of weapon in their hand), and a fairly low damage party in general, so +1d6 is looking like a lot.

When the monk starts getting more attacks per round, or his damage goes up, he may steal the spotlight more often.

For comparison, if you had a barbarian instead of a monk, the rogue would be WAY behind: 2d6 base damage from a greatsword + 3 Power Attack two-handed, +9 (16 starting Str + 2 racial, presumably, +4 rage =22, or a +6 modifier increased by 1/2 when used to deal damage 2-handed), for 2d6+12 damage, a higher attack bonus than the rogue, and no need to flank to get that damage consistently.

A fighter would be a bit behind that, but would more or less catch up in a few levels. Several other characters would also either be doing considerably more damage now, or would be in a few levels.

I'll say that, in my home game, the player running the rogue has been rather frustrated, as whole encounters go by without him having a chance to make a sneak attack. In many of my encounters, the players find themselves in unadvantageous positions, themselves flanked in a narrow corridor or otherwise surrounded by foes, or fighting against an enemy that prohibits easy movement (large and huge creatures), flying enemies, etc... He recently asked to pick up the Scout archetype, which allows for Sneak Attack on a charge, and then whenever you move 10 feet (doesn't have this part yet), and he still hasn't had consistent luck with SA. As you can see, it can be a rather fickle benefit.


So, when building a half-dragon kobold, do you just take your CR 1/4 kobold, then add half-dragon (+2), but which has a minimum CR of 3, and jump it up to 3?

Or, do you take you CR 1/4, and add some NPC class levels (kobolds are at NPC class level -3), say warrior 3, which brings it to CR 1, then add the adjustment for the template, giving you a CR 3 kobold with 2 extra warrior levels?


scary harpy wrote:


This is probably an unpopular idea: have you considered using the the Advanced Race Guide and reimaging your Kobolds?

How do you mean?

Mykull wrote:

Take all of the set pieces put forth by Vicon (which are all awesome, by the way) and assign them a certain number of 'Victory Points' (let's say 10 apiece and there a 10 scenes [because you're going to have at least one of your own]) for a total of 100 possible Victory Points.

Then create a range and assign values (for example):

90 - 100: Kobold invasion is thwarted. Minor damage to outskirts of town.
80 - 89: Kobold invasion repulsed. Major damage to a very few key areas or wide-spread minor damage.
70 - 79: Kobold invasion halted. Town is currently besieged. Outlying sectors held by kobolds. A strikeforce (PC's) is needed to break the siege or to create a safety corridor through which citizens can abandon the city and safely escape.
60 - 69: Kobold invasion advancing. Fires rage out of control. Key areas are held by the kobolds. The town is either going to be razed or captured; it really just depends on the kobolds' mood. There's only a slim chance to escape. Who/what do you take with you as you run the gauntlet?
59 or less: Kobold invasion successful. The party is either locked in chains with everyone else (somewhat like Scourge of the Slave Lords) or looks upon the smoking ruin of the city from the hill outside of town.

A good idea! Incorporating all of the ideas would make for a rather protracted scene (with my group, probably 3-5 sessions), but that could be worth doing.

I had given the party caster a Ring of Sustenance specifically to make it reasonable for me to pit the players against an ongoing adventuring "day" involving a great deal of attrition. It kind of sucks to run out of spells and not be able to do anything, especially if you're looking at multiple encounters like that, and ESPECIALLY when it's the GM planning things that way, and not foolhardiness on the parts of the players.

So, when the PCs went to blow the floodgate in the sewers, the sorcerer took two hours to rest--kind of sucks having to miss a scene, but it also helped reinforce the scale of the conflict. For the alchemist, I just made sure to drop LOTS of alchemist's fires and acid flasks--not as potent as her bombs, but at level 4 and 5, not so much weaker that she was really hurting.

I think that, if I were to run this again, instead of having the scale you employ there, I'd scale it so the players have to complete about half of the objectives for a successful, if desolate, conclusion to the invasion for the PCs, perhaps assigning each scenario degrees of success in themselves, and offering choices the players can make between options, with some being worth more than others.

For example, Help Set-up Ballistas to work on repelling the kobolds attacking the city walls from outside, or Blow the Floodgate to flush the invaders entering through the sewers, where the first will have a smaller impact on the kobold forces, but will not cause collateral damage, while the second will be devastating to the kobolds, but also have a lot of fallout. So, maybe the siege weapons task is worth 5 points, and the flooding worth 8, if pulled off successfully, but then break them down further by attaching a time frame, or degrees of success with skill checks. Maybe the PCs get sidetracked too much by combat to get the weapons set-up in time to hamper a large portion of the army, or, as had happened when I ran this, the players can destroy the floodgates, causing damage to the sewage system, or find a way to get them open, then reclose them without damaging the gates.

This could be accomplished both through descriptions of advances the players notice, and on point guardsmen or commanders laying out tasks that they are trying to accomplish and giving the PCs a choice of which they wish to tackle.

I think it would be interesting for the players to ultimately fail to repel the invasion, especially since doing so doesn't actually dramatically alter the next portion of the adventure (as I have it written up), but DOES change their motivations. I think I may employ this later when it's time for some of the battles with the undead army--the PCs may be successful in their roles, but ultimately fail to prevent disaster, and have to then beat a hasty retreat, possibly trying to salvage something of the defeat in the process, or need to try and pick up the pieces afterward.


Kryptik wrote:
Sounds like a smashing good time. Thanks for the update!

It was! And no problem! Figured I should come back and let folks who contributed know what the results were like. Still have to do that for the big dragon fight I posted about more recently...

Also, my friend, Kolokotroni on the boards, has terrain pieces--cardboard sections that can be connected to form buildings (even with stairs, doorways, and balconies, and interiors), and urban features--which we used for this to great effect. Kobolds that were above the party were actually on rooftops or balconies, characters could move indoors to ascend stairs, and everyone got a good sense of the visual aspect of confrontations on city streets and open market squares.

Unfortunately, he wouldn't let me go all the way toward providing immersion by setting things on fire... =(


Ravingdork wrote:

.

.

.

Here you go:

THUNDER LIZARD HORDE
NG Colossal army of kobolds (warrior 1)
hp 33; ACR 6
DV 16; OM +6
Tactics dirty fighters
Special darkvision, light sensitivity
Speed 2; Consumption 3

I even made you some kobold heraldry for their shields (far left). :D

The image contains and error.

Thanks for the link to mass combat--the kobold invasion has occurred already, but I'll definitely read up on this for the next big-scale battle I have planned (going to be a while), and it'll be useful when I try to assemble my campaign into publishable form.


Vicon wrote:


5) There is a Dam, or a great sewage gate in the poor section, that if opened, will flood the poor section of the city (where the kobolds have already taken control, have made their staging area, or are bringing in reinforcements. Breaking/opening the Dam/Gate will flash flood the area killing DROVES...

It's been a while, but was flipping back through old threads and realized that I hadn't come back here with the follow-up.

Ended up using a variant on this, where the players, in talking with some of the ranking members of the city guard, realized that the kobolds were invading, in large part, through the sewers, and that if they broke the floodgate that flushes the system, they could take out many of the kobolds. Basically the way the sewer system works is: there is a large cistern that fills from a diverted portion of the major river that flows by the city, and when it reaches a certain volume it pushes open a floodgate that allows it to drain off a bit, flooding the sewer system under the city, which, in turn, cleans out that system. All of the runoff is filtered through gelatinous cubes, which consume materials and pollutants, before flushing out into the sea in a relatively clean state.

After a good deal of fighting already (some to defend civilians attempting to flee from kobolds, aiding guardsmen, and rescuing people from a burning building), they had that strategy session and headed into the sewers to deal with the floodgate. The alchemist and rogue worked together to form and place a substance that would cause the dam to open, with the hope of being able to get it closed again, since simply breaking it would cause some long-lasting problems for the city.

That worked well.

To add to the encounters, I had kobolds attacking from rooftops and balconies, masses of base kobolds (I think the biggest fight features 24 kobolds attacking at once!), fire occasionally bursting from buildings, and some structures collapsing during encounters--the biggest swarm got half destroyed when the players noticed a building starting to sag and positioned themselves so that the kobolds would be between themselves and the dwelling when it came down. During another fight, one player (the monk) leaped into a burning building to save some people, and jumped out the other side. When the fight concluded, and he still hadn't reappeared, one character rushed in to find him, while another tried and realized it would be her death sentence, and two more were occupied with getting one of the PCs out of his full plate.

The climax of the whole thing was when the players fought a kobold synthesist summoner whose eidolon had the form of a dragon (2 claws and a bite attack--with reach, wings, a breath weapon, and a tail attack), along with some support on the ground. When he was almost dead, he tried to flee by flying away, but the party sorcerer tagged him with a Magic Missile that dropped him below 0, which then lead to his plummeting from the sky and dying when he crashed.

I think over the course of the battle, the players defeated upwards of 100 kobolds, and the players had a great time. I really appreciated the input from everyone!


Nazerith wrote:

I've jotted down a basic idea below. Its not a complete sheet and misses many vital things (like attributes and skills). But I wanted to try to capture all the special abilities of the Awesome Mantis Shrimp. I've not made up any abilties as best I can and incorporated many things said above.

But frankly, just writing down everything a Mantis Shrimp can do is pretty terrifying.

** spoiler omitted **...

Now we just need to put that together into a full stat block and figuring out a CR...


Atragon wrote:
jon menghini wrote:

my original plan was this, put seeking and designating lesser on my bow that way i can help my party with the designation by giving them a bonus to hit and i think damage and if i missed i got a second chance with seeking. I didnt really plan on brining up my bow or arrows up any higher than +1 cause that is really a waste of money and it really only had a +1 to hit. I know that could mean the difference to hit or not hit but 2000+ gp is alot and it just keeps getting more expensive.

You might want to consider a higher bonus on it to help overcome DR.

Not all that necessary on a bow when you can purchase or craft cold iron, adamantine, or silver arrows for fairly cheap, although a higher straight enhancement bonus is good for attack and damage.

Atragon, you shouldn't underestimate the value of to-hit.


It should be a small creature.

Give it a slam attack that is counted as oversized x2 (so deals damage as a large creature).

The slam is treated as adamantine.

Give it a special ability that when it hits, it gets a free special Sunder attempt that reduces AC from armor, shields, or natural armor, or an ability to ignore some amount of DR?

On crit, allow Fort save or lose a limb?

The slam does extra damage if used underwater (sonic? fire? untyped?).

Give it a lot of HD, Improved or Greater Vital Strike.

It should have some sort of ambush ability, maybe the Grab ability on its claws, and a high swim speed. Darkvision and innate True Seeing perhaps?

Some impressive DR/-- or DR/adamantine.

Ferocity.
A blending ability for stealth checks.


So here's what I'm considering going forward:

7. Strength Surge, Combat Reflexes
9. Improved Damage Reduction, Extra Rage Power: Clear Mind (or IDR again)
11. ???, Improved Stalwart
13. Come and Get Me, Dazing Assault
14. Unbreakable Fighter lvl 2 = +1 saves vs. mind-affecting; +1 feat (Cornugon Smash)

How does that look given the alterations in my previous post?
What rage power would you recommend for level 11 (barbarian 10)? Another Improved DR?
Would you change anything?

DR would be:
7. 7/--, +3 vs. nonlethal
9. 9/-- (or 10/--), +4 vs. nonlethal
11. 14/-- (or 15/--, or 16/--), +5 vs. nonlethal


Background:

Spoiler:
The PCs (level 6) departed from the city in which they had met and performed acts of valor in pursuit of a kobold army, thinking they may be led by a dragon. Eventually, they reached the dragon, but were joined on the way by a team of dwarves who had been told of the players' intentions and set out to aid them. Together, they defeated the dragon.

The leader of the dwarven band is Prince Qhildir, son of the king of the neighboring dwarven kingdon, leader of an elite combat squad. He's a paladin, and is a member of a religious sub-sect devoted to repelling evil, generally, and undead specifically, that one of my PCs also belongs to. He also is wearing the armor made from the father of the dragon they all just killed, and wielding the weapon that slayed him hundreds of years ago.

Several of the members of the dwarven strike force perished in the confrontation with the dragon and his kobold minions.


What I'd like is an adventure that does the following:
-gives the players a chance (and some reasons) to grow attached to the prince, to get to know him, and form a bond
-gives the players a chance to explore some of the dwarven kingdom
-involves some social encounters, and some combat encounters that the prince will join them for

The ultimate goal are for the players to spend some time (a couple of weeks to a month) living and adventuring with the dwarves, and to develop an affinity for them, so that, later, when some problems begin to arise in the dwarven capital, the players will have a genuine interest in wishing to aid their friend.

This can include meeting some interesting NPCs, getting into some tough scrapes (combat, traps, environmental hazards, weather, political intrigue) with the prince and a number of dwarven NPCs (the latter won't be traveling with them).

Regional details:

Spoiler:
The dwarven kingdom of Ferrumgaard lies within and around a maintain range to the north of the land the PCs have adventured within. The two kingdoms are on friendly terms after declaring a truce to a war between them waged a few hundred years ago. Dwarves have established settlements of various sizes in the high plains and foothills before the mountains, consisting mostly of low stone buildings with multiple basement levels, while the region's major cities are carved out within the mountains themselves.

There is a trade center at the head of a river that eventually runs by the capital of the southern kingdom, and the major trading port city the players are familiar with. The place exists as a market to sell and trade the goods the dwarves fashion (jewelry, metal- and stonecraft, including both mithral and adamantine items, all of both mundane and magical varieties) and to purchase wares of the varieties that they do not produce (wood, cloth, fur, parchment, etc...). Dwarven farmers also use this as a place to distribute their crops and meats. The entrance lies two days from a small seaport.

Traveling to the seat of the king involves going by foot, or something between a mine cart and a locomotive, from the market city to the capital. Both cities are multi-leveled.

The kingdom is lawfully inclined, and just on the good sign of neutral. The king is a lawful neutral cleric and the society is based largely upon merit, but has a touch of socialism--there are no beggars or homeless, but there are definite gradients in wealth and influence.

On the other side of the mountains are nigh-endless frozen plains...a dangerous place, but somewhere that some dwarves have settled in small numbers. Somewhat to the west, there is a small trollish nation that has largely remained aloof from the goings-on of the dwarves, but has started to expand recently. There may be any number of savage races in or around the mountains (mostly either high up among the peaks, or off to the west) away from the major settlements of the area. Drow may exist somewhere underground nearby.

I'd appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thanks in advance!


Rysky wrote:
CommandoDude wrote:
yeti1069 wrote:


Spent the rest of the fight looking up the rules regarding AoOs and 5 foot steps, and the withdrawal action, only to be told that at THIS table, no one stops play to reference stuff in the books. Being a rules lawyer is disruptive. Last time I played with that DM.

Wow, not only playing the game wrong, but actively preventing a player from looking up said rules which could prove him wrong even when said player can't even play anymore?

That's about as low as you can go. Y'know, short of RocksFallEveryoneDies

An actual Rockfallseveryonedies would have been preferreble to this. This was purely Small Name, Big Ego. "I AM GOD! DO NOT QUESTION ME!"

Agreed that I would have preferred that, I think. Although, it wasn't JUST the DM on this...the whole group had this attitude of, "you don't question the GM during the game; what he says goes." The only other time I played with that group was in the aforementioned Mutants & Masterminds game (different GM). You can see how well THAT went.


In a 1-shot game of 3.5 I rolled up an archery-focused ranger. In our first fight, we take on a few dire boars, and one charges me and knocks me down to under half HP. On my turn, figuring offense was my only way out of this, I say that I take a 5 foot step back, only to be told that I provoke an attack of opportunity. Having played 3.5 for a while at that point (and being kind of a rules lawyer), I point out that the entire POINT of the 5 foot step is to allow characters to move without provoking an AoO, but the DM wasn't having it, and everyone was clearly irritated by my holding the game up. So, I said I'd use the withdraw action. Nope, AoO. Ask if I can pull out and drink a potion without provoking. Nope. So I take my shot with the bow, provoke an AoO, and drop to negatives before I loose the arrow.

Spent the rest of the fight looking up the rules regarding AoOs and 5 foot steps, and the withdrawal action, only to be told that at THIS table, no one stops play to reference stuff in the books. Being a rules lawyer is disruptive. Last time I played with that DM.

Another game, another DM...we were somewhere around level 7 or 8, one player had gone home early, but left his character sheet with us so we could keep him active as we adventured. We're investigating some evil disturbances and such, and go to check out a dilapidated cathedral. We walk up to the doors, open them, and are treated to the sight of a cleric or wizard (can't recall which) holding a scroll, which he uses immediately. CIRCLE OF DEATH! Miraculously, everyone made the save (they all needed to roll 14+ at BEST, besides my paladin)...except for the character of the player who had left. He died.

Same DM and game: chasing an enemy through the woods and finally catch up to her in a clearing and start fighting it out with the ogre mage and her two ogre kids, when halfway through the fight, a cloud giant walks in to support their side. No Spot or Listen checks to notice the HUGE lumbering giant crashing through the woods.

Ditto: Traveling to meet someone that had requested our presence, and arrive at a clearing with a shack at the far end. As we approach, a red dragon leaps up into the air from behind the structure, flies over to us, and lets loose a maximized breath weapon. My paladin had the highest saves and the most HP in the group, and I failed and died. The only reason half of the other characters didn't join him is that we pointed out that the DM was using the wrong template for the breath weapon cone descending upon us, and everyone else managed to be just outside of it. The DM backpedaled a bit and offered me a chance of being revived by my deity, but I shook my head and left.

Last one, different game and DM, this time Mutants & Masterminds: I was playing a hero with the Unlucky fault (or whatever they're called) and had had several mishaps over the first couple of games, all mostly narrative, and then things started going VERY poorly for me, like getting beamed in the head by a basketball for as much damage as our heaviest hitter could do, and then narratively having my arm broken by a rival, just because.


MrSin wrote:
yeti1069 wrote:
Which weapon enchantment do you think I should go for first? Keen (on a bardiche), or Furious? Or something else?
Imo, Furious comes first so you can reach a higher effective enhancement bonus, then courageous after you've picked up +2(you'll probably have a few more morale bonuses from rage powers or heroism, and a +2 to them while raging is pretty awesome), then keen after that or continue enhancement.

Well, apparently everyone else had misplaced their character sheet in the intervening 9 months or so since we last played and either remade their characters completely, or tried to recreate them (invariably including some alterations), so I made a couple of small changes, swapping Lesser Celestial Totem for Knockback, figuring that the party had lost much of its healing support, and knowing that it could be useful to use my unarmed strike to push someone into the range of the bardiche I had swapped my greatsword for, as per your suggestion. I had enough coin to get a +1 Furious version.

I'd considered superstitious, but my friend pointed out that his character (a witch) and mine were fairly close, and that a lot of that bond had formed via his supporting me in combat with some buffs and healing--notably, Enlarge Person is tough to work around with Superstition unless I start every fight holding off on rage, which went against the grain of the character, as did developing an animus to magic at this stage of things.

Knockback worked WONDERFULLY! Among other things, we ended up fighting a dragon who kept getting adjacent to me, to try and deny me my reach (and better weapon), so my first attack was to try and bull rush-hit the dragon away and then either attack, or 5 foot step back and attack, with my good weapon. This worked a few times, including once where I managed to kick the dragon back into flanking position for the rogue with TWF so she could get all of her attacks on him.

I also was extra glad I hadn't gone with Superstitious, since one of the party members changed his character to a wizard with a fair amount of support (some battlefield control, but also Enlarge and Haste). I'm going to talk to him about possibly picking up something like Baleful/Benign Transposition or Greater Slide or some such as well.

Now, I have to amend my future plan for this guy...thinking I'll take Combat Reflexes at level 7, but not sure which rage power to pick up then--leaning toward a choice between Guarded Stance, Strength Surge (going to try to get an item to enable rage cycling), Surprise Accuracy (ditto), or possibly picking up Lesser Celestial Totem again.

On the decision between Strength Surge and Surprise Accuracy, the latter can be used for either an attack that I want to hit (such as an iterative) or on CMB for an important Knockback, but I have to use it before seeing the die roll, so it may be irrelevant, and isn't a very large bonus, while Surge provides a big bonus to Knockback (or whatever other CMB/CMD comes up), and can be used after rolling (I think), but is more limited in scope.

Guarded Stance would be to slightly offset the penalties I take to AC (-2 rage, -2 reckless abandon right now, -2 charging sometimes, -2 large sized), but it may not be enough to be worth it. Right now my AC is 21 before raging at level 6, so not great, but I'd like to stop getting hit by mooks and iterative attacks ALL the time. Gobs of HP and some pretty good DR help (A LOT), but getting missed would be nice, too. Will talk to wizard about picking up Blur possibly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Gauss wrote:

Just a point here, the pro-slope arguments are missing the fact that you have to be ON the slope. That is written into the rule.

The slope only exists around the 10x10 pit. The 10x10 pit is not a slope, it is a sheer wall and as such if the pit is opened up underneath a target they cannot use the climb-slope rule.

For targets adjacent to the pit then, yes, you can use the slope rule.

Summary: you have to be on the slope to use the climb skill's slope DC. Adjacent to the slope is not what the rule is.

Please show us anywhere in the rule as written where it says you have to be on the slope? It's not there so you won't find it.

Also please explain how in the world can you be on the slope AND falling at the same time? You are either on the ground or you are falling through the air, it's not possible to be doing both at the same time.

@bookeeper, How can you defeat a 3rd level spell (mirror Image) with a free action (closing your eyes)? Or any level of spell that sets a target on fire with a water skin?

The power of a spell doesn't matter when it comes into contact with the rules of the game. If the rules say the universe works this way and the spell doesn't specifically say it changes how the universe works then the universal rules beat the spell 100% of the time.

Falling down a slope: http://youtu.be/Hn-4JziqcEI

How about looking at it from this perspective? Is there a rule for catching yourself at a ledge (a right angle)? That would necessarily be easier than either A) catching yourself on a vertical surface, or B) at a sloped ledge (greater than a 90 degree angel relative to you).

How can you catch yourself on a slope if you aren't on a slope? Why would you assume that falling with a slope within reach (as in the Create Pit example) be so much easier than catching yourself against a wall? Easier, sure, but 25 points easier? That makes no sense.

Closing your eyes to "defeat" Mirror Image isn't a purely positive solution: you end up with a 50% miss chance, and are doing nothing to erode the difficulty in hitting the target with Mirror Image up, and open yourself to everything that comes with the Blinded condition, unless you're only closing your eyes while you're making your attack rolls, which some GMs would not permit.

Your supposition about the rules of the game and how they govern the universe only works if you disregard the facts that spells often change these rules, and that there IS a design intent behind things, and a nod toward balance. There aren't many spells out there that allow a character to negate their effects through a very easy skill check, and even fewer that allow a character to semi-negate a failed save that the spell calls for with an easy skill check.

Why don't you start a thread to FAQ this to put the argument to rest?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, as has been said (several times by Kolo, in particular), single monster encounters are awful.

I've run several over the years, with mixed results, and have been a player in many more, often with AWFUL results.

There are basically 3 ways a single monster encounter can go:
1. The monster gets its ass handed to it thanks to the enormous difference in action economy between one monster and 4 or 5 players (not to mention that the players are all focused on one foe, while that creature has its attention divided).
2. The monster is so outrageously powerful as to be able to stand up to the combined might of several players that you're more often than not playing a game of death roulette where the creature can too easily squash any single player...and as players go down, the monster's advantage and relative power go up, making a TPK likely.
3. Miraculously, the fight feels tough, but not overwhelming, and everyone has fun.

Which of those do you think comes up more often? (Hint: it's not #3).

If APs are giving too many of these sorts of encounters, either do as Kolo suggested and double whatever you're pitting against the players, or take 5 minutes and assemble a small group of slightly weaker foes to support the big guy. You can just pull stuff out of the bestiary, if it makes sense, or the NPC Codex, or do a search on the d20pfsrd website (I do this sometimes--search for dwarf or kobold, for example, and you'll get entries for classed versions of these creatures from modules and adventures that have been posted to the site, giving you a variety to choose from).

Recently, I had the players in my game square off against a fairly tough dragon, but instead of trying to build the thing to stand up to the punishment of the whole team, I made it tough, then added in 2 kobold casters, and a swarm of weaker kobold warriors. That helped to divide the players' attention a bit, and bought the dragon some time. Truthfully, I think I could have added more of the warriors to the fight. As it was, once the kobolds were all taken care of, the dragon took a beating, even when flying out of reach of most of the characters, because everyone could bring their resources to bear on a single target who could do only so much.

If you want an example of a single monster that worked well (I thought) against a full party: back in 3.5 I designed a void mind (template) minotaur (I don't recall whether he was large or huge sized) with a reach weapon, a good attack bonus, Combat Reflexes, a big Dex, and the Knockback feat/ability, and placed him atop a fairly small platform in front of the only path leading off of it (except down). The PCs had to get past him, and he was designed to prevent them from doing just that--anyone approaching him provoked an AoO, and he'd hit them fairly hard, then get a free Bull Rush against them, knocking them back. A few of them got knocked back far enough to get sent over the edge, dropping some distance (depending on where they were knocked off) to the stairs winding around the pillar. One players spent half the fight Feather Falling thanks to his ring. The minotaur had good saves, SR, and I think probably DR. Players had to use ranged attacks, try to tumble through his reach, try to exhaust his AoOs fo the round, or hope their AC would get them a miss.

Those sorts of encounters are rare, and while this guy wasn't overwhelming them with damage, he was hitting them hard, and was himself very difficult to harm. Parts of the encounter were frustrating for the players, and it could have very easily gone sideways and killed a few, and prevented the rest from moving on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've used the Create Pit spell with some regularity in the games where I got to play a wizard, and I'll say that while I like the spell, it has been a mixed blessing. Kolokotroni can attest to that!

Sure, the spell takes one or more creatures out of the fight for some number of rounds, but the spell cannot be Dismissed, and it is fairly difficult to attack anything that has fallen into the hole, so what often occurs is that a creature or two gets taken out of the fight while the party mops up the rest of the monsters in the encounter... And then waits for several rounds doing nothing, because they don't want to risk falling into the pit themselves, and cannot move up to the edge, attack, and move off the slope during their turn.

There have been several encounters where the players were more annoyed with me for casting Create Pit than the GM was, because the spell left everyone standing around bored, waiting for the monster(s) to come back up, or it prevented one of the melees from getting TO the monsters on the far side of the pit, or ruined charge lanes.

Now, this wasn't too much of a hardship for my wizard, since he had the Teleportation subschool and could walk up to the edge, fire a crossbow quarrel or a spell down into the pit at the monster, and then swift action teleport 5 or 10 feet back so he wasn't at risk of falling in himself.

Of course, what often happened when everything else was finished in an encounter except for the stuff down the pit, was the party would array themselves around the pit and ready actions to attack as soon as the creature(s) rise to the surface.


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


As I wrote earlier it's a DC 10 climb check to catch yourself from sliding down a slope and falling into a bit. This means any target who makes that check doesn't move so the only need to crawl 10 feet to be completely out of the pit's area. If they can make a DC 15 check then the move at half speed (usually 15 feet more or less).
the reason 1 point is usually enough is Climb is on 80% of the creature types out there's class skill list. This gives them 1 +3 +(Str/Dex Bonus) vs that DC 10 making this an almost automatic success to avoid falling into the pit AND making it out.
Everyone puts a point into the climb skill for a reason and this is one of those reasons.

That would be against slipping into the pit when you're standing on the sloped surface around it. If you fail your Reflex and fall into the pit, you would be rolling Climb vs. DC 45. And even in the case of slipping into the pit, I'd say you'd be rolling against the same DC--the Climb check of 10 + slope's DC is to catch yourself from sliding down the slope, not from falling off the end of it, and allowing a Climb check in that circumstance would negate the Reflex save that the spell calls for. I wouldn't allow someone to do that. Catching yourself falling into the pit? Sure, but I'd like to see someone make that DC 45 check at a level where Create Pit is still relevant.


Thanks. I'll probably do that then.

Another query: do enhancements that raise the +X on a weapon also grant the DR-bypassing properties associated with higher enhancement bonuses?


Which weapon enchantment do you think I should go for first? Keen (on a bardiche), or Furious? Or something else?

1 to 50 of 805 << 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.