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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Why fighters suck


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

601 to 650 of 784 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>

ciretose wrote:


If we were working the scenario through a module or ap (as I suggested)and those items appeared randomly, sure.

That sounds like a minor contradiction, since it wouldn't have been random.

ciretose wrote:


But if, as james pointed out, you can't even craft a partially charged wnd,having a "Ye Old Used Magic Shoppe" appear and have wands exxactly priced to get around wbl is a bit absurd.

Book prices and book items means an equal playing field and cear guidelines we all can follow.

Then, in theory, if the 2nd level post had said something like 'and recovered some wands from a group of fearsome orcs that had been terrorizing a local township' instead of 'and bought some second hand wands', it would have been OK?

I honestly don't understand the point of your complaint. You spent a lot of time skirting the edge of being reportable just to apparently contracdit yourself (that is, it's ok, but not the way it's been done). As a character levels organically, sometimes you find discharged wands and odd gear (**). It's book legal, as far as I know...I'm pretty sure it happens in published adventures, and I know it happens at every table I've ever sat down to (honestly...we never get a fully charged wand...the badguys have too much fun using them against us).

(**) As an aside, I think it would be an interesting twist to an experiment like this to indicate that some portion of gear as you level has to be randomly generated and either used as-is or sold...but the bookkeeping for something like that would probably get out of hand. It would certainly stay more true to the notion of characters levelling through time.

Andoran

In written adventure you can't hand select them in the amout you want to pay for the exact amount you want.

If we only want to have access to what we find in the adventure or can craft, I am fine with that.

But the clear intent is to buy things for less than cost get around WBL.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
I will be posting my builds later. I'm getting ready to head out to work. I've been busy with non-gaming stuff. I've got a vacation to get ready for, I started exercising, I have been getting involved with politics and atheism, and I have Gilder to blame for it.

That sounds intense.

Throw in some dungeons and I could probably make a campaign based on your life, Bob. :)

Andoran

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

I disagree with the ruling for all the points I made, but I defer to the judge.

EDIT: While I still defer, I just checked the rule for wands.

"The price of a wand is equal to the level of the spell × the creator’s caster level × 750 gp."

Pg 496 of CRB.

Can I get a citation for pro-rated prices for wands?

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Once again this needs to be said. In this instance, you cannot assume you will find X. Wands with partial charges is something that a DM will have in place or an AP will have in place. Now since we aren't using an AP, this does not come into play. Also, who's to say that you got that wand anyway? There would be others in the party who may want the same item.

You need to stick to the money you have and the prices that are in the book.


I agree with ciretose and shallowsoul, but the judge have spoken, lets the contest continue.

Andoran

Lemmy wrote:

Finally, I agree with Nicos that an additional judge could be helpful, I've said before that while I'm glad to be thrusted as a Judge, I'm sure I'm not the most qualified.

Qualification isn't as important as honestly. Even if you are on Ashiel's side of this debate, you've been an honest broker in the debate so far.

I am not as concerned about what specific version of the rules we follow, as long as we both agree to follow a ruling.

Andoran

Also, as I was looking at potions, in the SRD enlarge is 250 gp, making me wonder how Ashiel was able to afford them…

Perhaps someone could cost check her sheet. I don’t want to be accused of being nitpicky, but when you see 750 GP worth of enlarge potions on a max 1000 gp sheet…just sayin…


ciretose wrote:

Also, as I was looking at potions, in the SRD enlarge is 250 gp, making me wonder how Ashiel was able to afford them…

Perhaps someone could cost check her sheet. I don’t want to be accused of being nitpicky, but when you see 750 GP worth of enlarge potions on a max 1000 gp sheet…just sayin…

The simplest explaination is that Ashiel purchased CL1 potions of enlarge person instead of CL5 versions.

Andoran

Next level, since I have time at lunch.

Spoiler:

=================================================
3rd Level Human Fighter
==================================================
Init +4; Perception +2
Hp: 26 (1d10 +1 + 3 Toughness)
AC: 18, touch 12, flat 16 (+6 armor, +2 dex)
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +3 (+4 vs fear)
==================================================
Speed 30 ft. (30 ft.)
Melee: +1 Falcion +9 (2d4+10 (power attack) or Club +7 (1d6+9) (both if two-handed)
Ranged: Shortbow +5 (1d6), Sling +5 (1d3+4, 50 bullets)
==================================================
Str 18, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 7
BAB +1, CMB +5, CMD 17
Traits - +2 Initiative, +1 Will save
Feats - Toughness, Power Attack, Furious Focus, Weapon Focus (Falcion), Iron Will
Skills Ranks – Climb (+8, +5 in armor), Intimidate (+2), Knowledge [dungeoneering] (+6), Knowledge [Engineering] (+6), Perception (+3), Stealth (+5), Survival (+6)
Equipment - Weapons, Masterwork Breastplate, Cure Light wounds (2), endure elements (1), Potion of enlarge person (1) 44 gp worth of goods

The 2000 gold difference went to a +1 weapon, because 3rd level is where you start seeing things with damage reduction magic or that can only be hit with magic weapons.

I now have full movement in my armor, and my armor check penalty is reduced by one, meaning I am one skill point better than the ranger in the same armor in all of the dex and strength based skills.

I decided to take Iron will now rather than later. Will save also start to matter at this level, and deadly aim can wait.

I will probably take weapon specialization as my next feat, which combined with deadly aim going up is going to make the next level a big boost for damage for me.


Actually, it's even simpler than that; there's a rather important disclaimer above the table with the 250 gp price tag for that potion:

"The following table is taken from d20srd.org, the definitive 3.5 SRD resource (it was not created or provided by Paizo.)"

The table with Pathfinder potion costs puts the price at 50 gp.


Chengar Qordath wrote:

Actually, it's even simpler than that; there's a rather important disclaimer above the table with the 250 gp price tag for that potion:

"The following table is taken from d20srd.org, the definitive 3.5 SRD resource (it was not created or provided by Paizo.)"

The table with Pathfinder potion costs puts the price at 50 gp.

You know, I've looked at that page probably three dozen times and never noticed the disclaimer. Thanks for pointing that out.

Andoran

Chengar Qordath wrote:

Actually, it's even simpler than that; there's a rather important disclaimer above the table with the 250 gp price tag for that potion:

"The following table is taken from d20srd.org, the definitive 3.5 SRD resource (it was not created or provided by Paizo.)"

The table with Pathfinder potion costs puts the price at 50 gp.

If that is the rule, that is the rule. I'll swap out my oil of magic weapon for one of those then.


ciretose wrote:
Chengar Qordath wrote:

Actually, it's even simpler than that; there's a rather important disclaimer above the table with the 250 gp price tag for that potion:

"The following table is taken from d20srd.org, the definitive 3.5 SRD resource (it was not created or provided by Paizo.)"

The table with Pathfinder potion costs puts the price at 50 gp.

If that is the rule, that is the rule. I'll swap out my oil of magic weapon for one of those then.

It seems to be. For grins I checked the PRD site and there is no such table (as you'd expect). I also checked my pdf copy of the CRB and I do not see an handy-dandy list of potions-with-costs. The PFSRD list appears to have been put in mainly for convienience without doing cost checks.

Andoran

Zilvar2k11 wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Chengar Qordath wrote:

Actually, it's even simpler than that; there's a rather important disclaimer above the table with the 250 gp price tag for that potion:

"The following table is taken from d20srd.org, the definitive 3.5 SRD resource (it was not created or provided by Paizo.)"

The table with Pathfinder potion costs puts the price at 50 gp.

If that is the rule, that is the rule. I'll swap out my oil of magic weapon for one of those then.

It seems to be. For grins I checked the PRD site and there is no such table (as you'd expect). I also checked my pdf copy of the CRB and I do not see an handy-dandy list of potions-with-costs. The PFSRD list appears to have been put in mainly for convienience without doing cost checks.

New classes like the alchemist and magus throw everything off. Wonder if that was an intended or unintended consequence.


ciretose wrote:


New classes like the alchemist and magus throw everything off. Wonder if that was an intended or unintended consequence.

I think it only skews the pre-made table, and since that follows the potion formula I don't think anything is really thrown out of whack (I mean, no more than putting spells lower level on some charts than others already does).

Andoran

Zilvar2k11 wrote:
ciretose wrote:


If we were working the scenario through a module or ap (as I suggested)and those items appeared randomly, sure.

That sounds like a minor contradiction, since it wouldn't have been random.

ciretose wrote:


But if, as james pointed out, you can't even craft a partially charged wnd,having a "Ye Old Used Magic Shoppe" appear and have wands exxactly priced to get around wbl is a bit absurd.

Book prices and book items means an equal playing field and cear guidelines we all can follow.

Then, in theory, if the 2nd level post had said something like 'and recovered some wands from a group of fearsome orcs that had been terrorizing a local township' instead of 'and bought some second hand wands', it would have been OK?

I honestly don't understand the point of your complaint. You spent a lot of time skirting the edge of being reportable just to apparently contracdit yourself (that is, it's ok, but not the way it's been done). As a character levels organically, sometimes you find discharged wands and odd gear (**). It's book legal, as far as I know...I'm pretty sure it happens in published adventures, and I know it happens at every table I've ever sat down to (honestly...we never get a fully charged wand...the badguys have too much fun using them against us).

(**) As an aside, I think it would be an interesting twist to an experiment like this to indicate that some portion of gear as you level has to be randomly generated and either used as-is or sold...but the bookkeeping for something like that would probably get out of hand. It would certainly stay more true to the notion of characters levelling through time.

We've moved past this, but there aren't "2nd hand wand shops" that I am aware of. Wand prices are listed in the book as "Equal to the level of the spell × the creator’s caster level × 750 gp."

I don't even know if their is a mechanism for determining number of charges a wand has. I generally hand wave it so I don't have to keep track of it as the GM and just tell the player, but I don't know how one would know.

What I was describing was going through an adventure and if you find a partially used wand, you play with it as is. Sometimes it helps the group, sometimes it doesn't.

Having a "used magic wand shop" to me is kind of ridiculous when you can't even make a wand with less than full charges. The only reason you would do it would be to get around WBL, which is pure metagaming.

Andoran

Zilvar2k11 wrote:
ciretose wrote:


New classes like the alchemist and magus throw everything off. Wonder if that was an intended or unintended consequence.
I think it only skews the pre-made table, and since that follows the potion formula I don't think anything is really thrown out of whack (I mean, no more than putting spells lower level on some charts than others already does).

Well putting spells lower level is exactly what throws it out of whack.


ciretose wrote:

Qualification isn't as important as honestly. Even if you are on Ashiel's side of this debate, you've been an honest broker in the debate so far.

I am not as concerned about what specific version of the rules we follow, as long as we both agree to follow a ruling.

First, I'd not say I'm on anyone's side in this debate. Although I share Ashiel's belief that fighter are somewhat underpowered, there is nothing I'd like more than be proven wrong.

Second My opinion is that we should follow RAW to the letter. It's not how I play in my games, but since we do not share a gaming group, RAW is all we have in common. Therefore, I'll judge any builds I see here based on it.

The one exception would be the Leadership feat, since we evaluating how 3 different classes contribute to the party, not how 3 different classes + their pet wizard/cleric/whatever do.

But if you guys want to allow Leadership, I'm okay with that.

And still we haven't decided a pratical way of comparing. Builds are nice and all, but wasn't the goal to compare from whom the party benefits more rahter than who can solo an adventure?

I suppose we could create 3 not highly optimized characters to act as a the theoretical party. Maybe a Wizard/Rogue/Cleric trio?

Ashiel, Ciretose, do you have any suggestion as how to handle the encounters? (Not just "use APs, use X test", but how to do it online.)

I suppose we could use a random encounter from an AP or create/use a mini-adventure like "The mayor's daughter has been kidnapped. Bring her back. The kidnappers say they'll kill her if they don't get the money in 2 days" which would involve finding out who is culprit, locating the culprit's base and invanding it. All that inside a given time limit.


To quote the SRD again:

"Prices listed are always for fully charged items. (When an item is created, it is fully charged.) For an item that's worthless when its charges run out (which is the case for almost all charged items), the value of the partially used item is proportional to the number of charges left.

Andoran

Lemmy wrote:


ciretose wrote:

Qualification isn't as important as honestly. Even if you are on Ashiel's side of this debate, you've been an honest broker in the debate so far.

I am not as concerned about what specific version of the rules we follow, as long as we both agree to follow a ruling.

First, I'd not say I'm on anyone's side in this debate. Although I share Ashiel's belief that fighter are somewhat underpowered, there is nothing I'd like more than be proven wrong.

Second My opinion is that we should follow RAW to the letter. It's not how I play in my games, but since we do not share a gaming group, RAW is all we have in common. Therefore, I'll judge any builds I see here based on it.

The one exception would be the Leadership feat, since we evaluating how 3 different classes contribute to the party, not how 3 different classes + their pet wizard/cleric/whatever do.

But if you guys want to allow Leadership, I'm okay with that.

And still we haven't decided a pratical way of comparing. Builds are nice and all, but wasn't the goal to compare from whom the party benefits more rahter than who can solo an adventure?

I suppose we could create 3 not highly optimized characters to act as a the theoretical party. Maybe a Wizard/Rogue/Cleric trio?

Ashiel, Ciretose, do you have any suggestion as how to handle the encounters? (Not just "use APs, use X test", but how to do it online.)

I suppose we could use a random encounter from an AP or create/use a mini-adventure like "The mayor's daughter has been kidnapped. Bring her back. The kidnappers say they'll kill her if they don't get the money in 2 days" which would involve finding out who is culprit, locating the culprit's base and invanding it. All that inside a given time limit.

I liked what was proposed above about dice rolling random AP sections. I am fine with judges posting opinions about effectiveness in the given encounters at the level they expect to encounter them.

This is all going to be subjective. I am not here to convince Ashiel (I believe that impossible) but to make an argument that people can look at and make their own decision.

The problem with RAW is that everyone has a different opinion of RAW. As I said above, I would kind of like a citation for partial wand pricing, because I can't find one. 1/50 of price doesn't make sense to me, since the wand itself has a value (and can be recharged) so I would like to know what is being used.

We can't check sheets if we don't know how people are pricing things.

I am not concerned if some rulings go against me, as people can make their own judgments about the rulings and the builds. As someone else said up thread, if you need a lot of corner case rulings to make a strong build for a class, that says something as well.

I'm going to post as clean as I'm able so the class can stand for itself.


Lemmy wrote:


And still we haven't decided a pratical way of comparing. Builds are nice and all, but wasn't the goal to compare from whom the party benefits more rahter than who can solo an adventure?

I proppose you judge the build acording to those two criterias. who can solo better (because that is akin to the op) and who contribute more to a very standar party.


ciretose wrote:

Next level, since I have time at lunch.

** spoiler omitted **

The 2000 gold difference went to a +1 weapon, because 3rd level is where you start seeing things with damage reduction magic or that can only be hit with magic weapons.

I now have full movement in my armor, and my armor check penalty is reduced by one, meaning I am one skill point better than the ranger in the same armor in all of the dex and strength based skills.

I decided to take Iron will now rather than later. Will save also start to matter at this level, and deadly aim can wait.

I will probably take weapon specialization as my next feat, which combined with deadly aim going up is going to make the next level a big boost for damage for me.

Ciretose, I would like to see the skill more detailed, not only the final mod but all the rank, penalties and bonus.

Not becaus i am suspicious of you but it would make the reading of the build easier.

Andoran

Sure, I can post it later.

Be suspicious, I want the builds vetted properly. If I make a mistake, best to fix it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who has been lurking and reading this discussion. I am finding it informative and I am being given enough information to draw my own informed conclusions. Thanks for the effort in the builds.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

The fair way to do wands is full value.

You cannot assume you're going to find the wand you want in the proper charge amounts to fit your budget, nor that you can find them in loot. Doing so is metagaming, fitting the world to your character.

If you have the Craft Wands feat, I'd let you get away with partial charges on wands for spells on your list, as you could just make another fully charged when you want to. It would also serve as a 'gimme' if you don't allow WBL boosting with Crafting feats...which, I believe, is a problem you have to work out.

Ashiel DOES seem to be relying on items more then class abilities to get stuff done at this point...not a bad idea for a low level character.

I also recall that Ashiel relies heavily on casting leverage to increase her character's abilities, so you are really going to need a ruling on Crafting stuff.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

The fair way to do wands is full value.

You cannot assume you're going to find the wand you want in the proper charge amounts to fit your budget, nor that you can find them in loot. Doing so is metagaming, fitting the world to your character.

If you have the Craft Wands feat, I'd let you get away with partial charges on wands for spells on your list, as you could just make another fully charged when you want to. It would also serve as a 'gimme' if you don't allow WBL boosting with Crafting feats...which, I believe, is a problem you have to work out.

Ashiel DOES seem to be relying on items more then class abilities to get stuff done at this point...not a bad idea for a low level character.

I also recall that Ashiel relies heavily on casting leverage to increase her character's abilities, so you are really going to need a ruling on Crafting stuff.

==Aelryinth

If you need a ruling against RAW to "keep it fair" then we're already done here.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:

There is a 75% chance that such an item is available in a given town if the market value of that item is within the town's GP limit. The most expensive wand I purchased was a cure light wounds wand with 12 charges, which has a market price of 180 gp. It might take a few tries, but I'm statistically capable of finding such a wand as part of a town's typical traded goods in any community of Hamlet size and larger.

Hey if you want to play the game that way that's fine.. it just lowers your argument in my mind (and evidently in others).

Do the math on the number of wands that are 'available' and realize that each and every one of these has to have been used down to the level that it is. It's simply not reasonable.

Put it this way: You are reading that for a given spell that there is a 75% chance of a wand with 1 charge, another 75% chance of a wand with 2 charges, another 75% of a wand with 3 charges, etc. Reading that way it's near impossible for a given town not to have a number of wands having up to 12 charges available for sale.

If that's what you feel you need to resort to in order to present your argument, then I think you've already lost.

Ashiel wrote:


My group tends to use teamwork. Sometimes that means helping each other carry some burdens. Assuming Ranger/Bard/Cleric/Wizard, the wizard will ideally cast haste, the cleric and bard apply oils to the Ranger who is already wielding the club if they plan to use this tactic, who casts lead blades and then draws the shield. In 1 round, the ranger is now providing soft cover for the entire party, benefitting from a 19+ AC, dealing 6d6+5 points of damage per hit with two attacks per round.

I understand. And even though your wizard cannot cast haste, I'm sure he's casting enlarge person instead.

And I also understand that you are needing a situation where you can control the encounter, that won't benefit from hearing you cast, etc.

Meanwhile the party with the fighter has this with far less investment than the entire party's actions. This would let the bard and cleric buff the entire party rather than just augment the ranger up to the fighter's level of combat prowess.

That this is the level that's required to match the fighter speaks volumes of the disparity that you feel, at least subconsciously, is there.

Ashiel wrote:


I don't really care about the Fighter's damage. He deals his damage, I deal mine. At this level damage isn't the main thing I'm concerned about. Dealing enough damage to not be ignored is enough, and I do that fine.

Nah, dealing the fighter's level of damage is very viable and meaningful. It perforce focuses everything on the fighter, but unlike your example where it mandates every action going to the ranger the fighter does his job without that kind of action or resource drain.

Dealing that level of damage simply ends the fights without relying upon the wizard's sleep spell or the like to drag you along. When the wizard is able to contribute something like that it's wonderful, but the enemy isn't rushing to gack the wizard because the front line is gacking them rather than just standing in their way dealing enough to get by. Dealing 'just enough damage to get by' puts more pressure on the rest of the party to deliver damage and alter fights.

Put it another way. Against your party an enemy who knows the PCs will go after the wizard first then the Cleric and Bard. Against the fighter's party (especially if he was more damage focused than Cir is making him) they would need to go after the fighter first.

Now I'm not saying that your style is wrong. It's very viable. But the fighter is bringing more here along these lines and is currently requiring less support than the ranger. This might be contrary to what one might otherwise think, but demonstrates that the fighter, while not flashy, simply gets the job done.

-James


Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

The fair way to do wands is full value.

You cannot assume you're going to find the wand you want in the proper charge amounts to fit your budget, nor that you can find them in loot. Doing so is metagaming, fitting the world to your character.

If you have the Craft Wands feat, I'd let you get away with partial charges on wands for spells on your list, as you could just make another fully charged when you want to. It would also serve as a 'gimme' if you don't allow WBL boosting with Crafting feats...which, I believe, is a problem you have to work out.

Ashiel DOES seem to be relying on items more then class abilities to get stuff done at this point...not a bad idea for a low level character.

I also recall that Ashiel relies heavily on casting leverage to increase her character's abilities, so you are really going to need a ruling on Crafting stuff.

==Aelryinth

If you need a ruling against RAW to "keep it fair" then we're already done here.

I do not think is strictly RAW.

And this contest is about the classes not who can read better the rules. I do believe this thing should be allowed in the contest, in the end the judges would decide.

I still think this needs more judges, I could do it but i am biased. Maybe Aelryinth ?

Andoran

I am posting with a goal of RAI, not just RAW. If you depend on a lot of consumables, I will hope the judges take note they will be "spent" even if it isn't reflected in WBL.

I am trying to build as I would level in a way that is so straightforward no rulings will be needed and that if it were pluged into any game, no one would bat an eye.

The judges can take that as they like when comparing.

Silver Crusade

Here are a set of twin archer fighters I made. I didn't go to any great lengths on their background.

The Brothers Flightarrow:
“Finn Flightarrow”
5th level human Fighter (Weapon Master) Alignment: Chaotic Good
Str: 14
Dex: 19 21 (Belt of Incredible Dex +2)
Con: 10
Int: 12
Wis: 12
Cha: 7
Hp: 5d10 + 4 (Level)
Spd: 30ft
AC: 19 (10 + 5 (Dex) + 4 +1 studded leather armor)
Touch AC: 15
Flat-footed AC: 14
Traits: Latent Psion (+2 will saves vs. Mind effects) & Duskwalker Agent (10% off when buying magic items.)
Initiative: + 5
Fortitude: + 5
Reflex: + 7
Will: + 4 (+ 6 vs Mind Effects)
Feats: Weapon Focus (Bow), Weapon Specialization(Bow), Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Deadly Aim, Iron Will.
Weapon Master abilities: Weapon Guard (2nd), Weapon Training (3rd), Reliable Strike (5th),
Fighter abilities: Armor Training 1,
Skills: Climb: + 7, Craft (Bows): + 6, Knowledge (Dungeoneering): + 6, Profession ( Soldier): + 6, Ride: + 10, Perception: + 8, Stealth + 9, Survival: + 6, Swim: + 7
Attack: +1 composite longbow (Str +2): + 13 Damage: 1d8 + 6 x 3
Rapid Shot: + 11/+11 1d8 + 6 x3
Point Blank Shot: + 14 Damage: 1d8 + 7 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Point Blank Shot + Rapid: + 13/+ 13 Damage: 1d8 + 7 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Deadly Aim: + 11 Damage: 1d8 + 10 x 3
Deadly Aim + Rapid Shot: + 9/+ 9 Damage: 1d8 + 10 x 3
Deadly Aim + Rapid Shot + Point Blank Shot: + 10/+ 10 1d8 + 11 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Deadly Aim + Point Blank Shot: + 13 Damage 1d8 + 11 x 3

Gear: +1 composite longbow (+2 Str) (2,070gp), Belt of Incredible Dexterity +2 (3,600gp), Eyes of the Eagle (2,250gp), Cloak of Resistance + 1 (900gp), +1 studded leather armor (923gp), Potion of Shield (45gp), Potion of Divine Favor (45gp), Potion of Cure Light Wounds (45gp), Potion of Shield of Faith (45gp), Potion of Expeditious Retreat (45gp), Potion of True Strike (45gp), Potion of Darkvision (270gp), Regular longsword, 60 Arrows.

“Quinn Flightarrow”
5th level human Fighter (Archer) Alignment: Chaotic Good
Str: 14
Dex: 19 21 (Belt of Incredible Dexterity + 2)
Con: 10
Int: 12
Wis: 12
Cha: 7
Hp: 5d10 + 5
Spd: 30ft
AC: 19 (10 + 5 (Dex) + 4 (+1 studded leather armor)
Touch AC: 15
Flat-footed: AC 14
Traits: Latent Psion (+2 will saves vs. Mind effects) & Duskwalker Agent (10% off when buying magic items.)
Initiative: + 5
Fortitude: + 5
Reflex: + 7
Will: + 4 (+ 6 vs Mind Effects)
Feats: Weapon Focus (Bow), Weapon Specialization (Bow), Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Deadly Aim, Iron Will.
Archer Abilities: Hawkeye, Trick Shot (Disarm), Expert Archer
Skills: Climb: + 6, Craft (Bows): + 6, Knowledge (Dungeoneering): + 6, Profession ( Soldier): + 6, Ride: + 9, Perception: + 9, Stealth + 8, Survival: + 6, Swim: + 6
Attack: +1 composite longbow (Str +2): + 13 Damage: 1d8 + 6 x 3
Rapid Shot: + 11/+11 1d8 + 6 x3
Point Blank Shot: + 14 Damage: 1d8 + 7 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Point Blank Shot + Rapid: + 13/+ 13 Damage: 1d8 + 7 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Deadly Aim: + 11 Damage: 1d8 + 10 x 3
Deadly Aim + Rapid Shot: + 9/+ 9 Damage: 1d8 + 10 x 3
Deadly Aim + Rapid Shot + Point Blank Shot: + 10/+ 10 1d8 + 11 x 3 (Within 30ft)
Deadly Aim + Point Blank Shot: + 13 Damage 1d8 + 11 x 3

Gear: +1 composite longbow (+2 Str) (2,070gp), Belt of Incredible Dexterity +2 (3,600gp), Eyes of the Eagle (2,250gp), Cloak of Resistance + 1 (900gp), +1 studded leather armor (923gp), Potion of Shield (45gp), Potion of Divine Favor (45gp), Potion of Cure Light Wounds (45gp), Potion of Shield of Faith (45gp), Potion of Expeditious Retreat (45gp), Potion of True Strike (45gp), Potion of Darkvision (270gp), Regular longsword, 60 Arrows.

Finn, like is twin brother Quinn, were raised to be superb archers by their father Vinlin Half-Elven. After Vinlin was killed, the brothers took care of each other on the streets of Katapesh where they perfected their skill in archery while in the service of the Duskwalkers. Even though they are identical twins, Finn and Quinn decided to add their own unique style of archery on top of what their father had taught them.

I apologize for any errors I may have.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ashiel's style of play leans heavily on leveraging non-class abilities until later levels...extra gear, spells from allies, etc.

Ciretose is playing a stand-alone. The play style and design alone is going to cause conflicts. Ciretose is assuming stuff isn't available, and Ashiel is building as if it is.

The goalposts might be the same, but the rules of the engagement are different.

Example: Under Ashiel's style of play, everyone should be tossing alchemist fire at the enemy. This is a very good way to rack up damage at low levels, but renders everyone pretty much the same damage and means it doesn't matter what class you are. It doesn't matter if you're great with a falchion when the guy over there is burning from 4d6 fire damage for two rounds.

You don't have to worry about carrying oils and Enlarges if the other characters buff you up to take care of that for you.

So, Ashiel's style is predicated on synergies, and Ciretose is on being alone, and taking advantage of synergies if the party works that way.

Unfortunately, you can't rely on synergies in a contest like this. Party cooperation is highly mutable, and styles of play aren't always 'buff the melee'.

Also, the 'war oxen' at low levels is a no-no. It's like assuming you're going to get all your gear for half price because you have Smithing ranks. Taking a couple weeks off to train a rote packbeast should never be assumed. Animal companions don't take nearly so long, and are much easier to train. Generally, if you want a war ox, you should pay for the war ox. Training a warbeast is not something that just happens because you have skill ranks. A warhorse is significantly more then a riding horse. An ox trained for combat should be similarly pricy.

It's these background assumptions that Ashiel is assuming any DM will let her do that is eroding her arguments.

And no, I wouldn't let the Fighter invest in AH ranks to train a warhorse so easily at lower levels, either. Taking advantage of fine points in the rules isn't a class argument. Assuming you're just being given the time and facilities to train a non-Animal Companion just hits a button for me. Training an animal to fight is not that easy.

==Aelryinth

Shadow Lodge

Of course, it is assumed that consumables are used over the course of a character's adventure, since almost all adventures provide wealth above WBL, with most of that being the consumables to use.

There's still been no decision on how these characters are going to be tested. There's not really any point in continuing to build the characters past level 1 until they get through all the level 1 encounters to be decided upon.

Andoran

And if you spend 1000 gp on consumables and I spend 100, in real game I will have 900 more gold than you later.

Which judges can decide to consider of not.

Not to mention where are you putting and retrieving these things from prior to handy haversack


I'll address the concerns mentioned in this thread later on. I'm in the middle of a game today, and I'm currently preparing for a game this evening. Just an update.


Sir Giacomo, is that you?

Andoran

Nicos wrote:

Ciretose, I would like to see the skill more detailed, not only the final mod but all the rank, penalties and bonus.

Not becaus i am suspicious of you but it would make the reading of the build easier.

As requested

Skills as requested by Nicos)

Spoiler:

Acrobatics 2 (-1 in armor), Appraise 1 ,Bluff -2 ,Climb (+8, +5 in armor), Craft (N/A), Diplomacy -2, Disable Device (N/A), Disguise -2 ,Escape Artist 2 (-1 in armor), Fly 2 (-1 in armor), Heal (0), Handle Animal -2, Intimidate (+2), Knowledge [dungeoneering] (+6), Knowledge [Engineering] (+6), Linguistics –, Perception (+3), Ride 2 (-1 in armor), Sense Motive 0, Sleight of Hand -,Spellcraft, Stealth +5 (+2 in armor), Survival +6, Swim 4 (1 in armor), UMD -

I will try and incorporate this into the build, going forward.

I may go ahead and post 4th level soon as well, since I'm here.

Cheliax

I understand both Ashiel and Ciretose views and are both valid.

The only problem is as Aelryinth says, one gives for granted he gets X from a party when the other one is not taking that into account. So they are both good builds, solid choices but you can't always assume things are going to go X way for a character. Since you would not be playing with your usual gaming group and as many of us that play here you always wonder why X didn't do this in the situation or wtf was he thinking by using that spell instead of this for that.

I believe Ciretose approach is more valid for the "test" since it doesn't assume a predetermined party of friends that will do X things that benefit him every time and will do X tactics. His character adapt to whatever crazy party he gets. Like already said you never know what kind of crazy guys you end up playing in the forums and they have their own playstyles that will probably won't match one's ideas of how to tackle encounters or other situations.

Other than that both approaches are valid, but they are just taking different approach and doing arguments to defend their approach that cannot be compared and hence not completely fair.

Ashiel can use magic items for his class short coming but not because he expect his party to do X things, for the same reasons I explained above.

I still think the fighter does good damage and is a good option because he is versatile, but Paladin and Ranger have their perks and reason why I would take them over a party if I know the type of game or AP I'm playing. It's like the cavalier, you will never see some one use it because 1/3 of his class is his pet, 1/3 is his leader role with team feats and bonuses, 1/3 actual class abilities like challenge and order. SO basically if you can't have mounted combat a lot your just playing to 2/3 of the cavalier strength which means you have a semi useless pet that only stands outside everywhere you go to, but hey he can still be a good wall that smacks back also.


ciretose wrote:


I may go ahead and post 4th level soon as well, since I'm here.

As an aside, I'm just curious on your choices with this fighter.

You went with:
STR 18 (16+2)
INT 12
WIS 10
DEX 14
CON 12
CHA 07

I would have considered:
STR 18 (16+2)
INT 07
WIS 13
DEX 14
CON 14
CHA 07

For half the skills/level (i.e. 2 less) you pick up WIS and CON, which you are already feeling the need to address via feats and traits.

On skills.. could you write the skills as Skillname +X/+Y mod (Z ranks) i.e. Intimidate +2/+6 enlarged (1 rank). This way it's easy to both count up your skills and to see how invested in each you are.

What skills are you seeing that are worth that? I think that I might be tempted, on a 15pt buy, to get by with 2skills/level instead of 4/level and spend those 6 creation points elsewhere.

In a party these dips can help where there isn't coverage, to aid others, or where everyone individually can use them.

I don't think that if we take Ash's suggested party (Cleric, Wizard, Bard) or the iconic one (Cleric, Wizard, Rogue) that there will be missing coverage. Wizards in an iconic party tend to at least dip each knowledge, and if the party has a bard the slack is certainly picked up there.

I'm thinking that this is to defend against the likely claims of weakness in skills for the purpose of this contest. Rather given an iconic party there really isn't much lost.

Consider if you invest in one skill then dip into skills that every one uses that are class skills, or can be made class skills.

Personally I would go with heavy armor trait (+1 AC in med/heavy armor), and cause I like it Blade of Mercy planning on the Enforcer and Intimidating Prowess feats. Thus the one skill I would pick would be intimidate.

It is somewhat redundant if the 4th person is a Bard, but less so if it's a rogue. So YMMV.

Also you seem to not be going with an archetype. I would suggest (to dovetail with Blade of Mercy) Dawnflower Dervish. You lose a little on the armor training, but at 11th the ability there makes up for it all as it greatly reduces pressure on the party to deliver full attacks to you.

James


Did we not already do a comparison between classes running without having help from a party. If we are going to bother adding in a party it might be best to assume the party is actually going to help out, otherwise why not just go back to the solo class comparison.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

We finished the challenges for Ciritose's 2nd level fighter last night, and Ashiel's 2nd level ranger a few minutes ago. The pali is still being tested right now.

We started with a series of combats. For brevity we reduced the formerly stated number of 5 times each to 3 times each. We regularly switched off who was the fighter and who was DM. However there were 7 of us so we were able to run more than one challenge at a time.

After that we took each of the characters through a series of adventures to see how they'd fair. I think these better represent what the characters can actually do. They also took much more time to finish as we tried to be as considerate as possible to each of the characters available options in any given scenario that came up.

And because we had all gathered to play D&D and our DM didn't show, so we had LOT's of free time, and because we felt like we just wanted to take the test to the next level (because honestly we were enjoying ourselves) we did ALL of the challenges a second time. This time throwing out wild cards events for every challenge like crazy weather. (Pali is on this part still)

Another thing worth noting is that for the combat only portion we were not just fighting in a void. Round 1: A bridge over a stream in the woods. Round 2: A city's market area. Round 3: A crypt with narrow corridors and low ceilings. This gave us a wilderness encounter, an urban encounter, and a dungeon encounter, which also varied the sort of wild cards available to each encounter.

The full play test reports will be written up sometime later tonight when I get off work. A few highlights:

1. Ciretose's nameless fighter says screw you to choker ambushes. He refuses to be grabbed, they fail to run away and hide, and he crits on each choker (which one hit kills them). Repeat for all three encounters with the chokers.

2. Ashiel's ranger, Eleowyn, during one of the adventures she was badly wounded and out of cure light wounds charges, so she decided to get the hell out of the area and get back to the village. She rolled poorly on her steath check and was spotted by a goblin patrol who chased her through the woods. She used her wand of entangle to slow them down and managed to get to a farmers house and stole a horse to escape. Seeing as how pathfinder chase scenes usually are predictable and boring, we all thought this was pretty awesome.

3. Samson...just samson in general. He is awesome. He likes to kill fire beetles. He just had an epic death against a Forlarren who failed it's remorse will save. Not having any knowledge of the Forlarren, Alexander sees that it is remorseful for its crime and decides to let her go after a brief lecture.


How about we build 3 characters, a rogue, a cleric and a wizard. Not heavilty optmized.

All character would share this same party.

We assume, lets say, half the wizard/cleric spells are spent on buffing these characters, the rest is CC, blasting and self buff.

I already gave my reason for relying on RAW instead of RAI. Multiple times. RAI can be debated, RAW can't.

If half-charged wands are available by RAW, then, for the purpose of this challenge they are available for everyone. If Ciretose, Ashiel or Bob find a very cheao item that they can benefit from, I'm okay with that.

Right now, none of these characters has a caster level, so whatever wand Ashiel uses can also be obtained by Ciretose.

But since there is clearly a debate, I propose that Aelryinth be added as Judge.

Andoran

@James - Part of Ashiel's complaint was the lack of skills and versatility.

So I want to show I can build out a fighter that can have 5 skill point and still out damage/tank/switch hit the ranger or pretty much anyone else.

And if I can do that with a vanilla build, all the more strength for my case. And if I can do it by just swapping Wisdom and Int from Ashiel's build, all the stronger my case is.

As is being shown by Ashiel, the more you have to do things that raise eyebrows to accomplish your goal, the weaker your argument becomes. I want no eyebrows to be raised on anything I am doing, with the exception of people going "That is better than I thought it would be..."

I wanted to run each through an AP, getting money and equipment as we went, but that was turned down. So we have this, which is useful if not ideal.

Speaking of which, Level 4

Spoiler:

=================================================
4th Level Human Fighter
==================================================
Init +4; Perception +2
Hp: 31.5 (11 + 5.5 x 3+ 4 Toughness)
AC: 19, touch 12, flat 17 (+7 armor, +2 dex)
Fort +6, Ref +4, Will +4 (+5 vs fear)
==================================================
Speed 30 ft. (30 ft.)
Melee: +1 Falcion +10 (2d4+15 (power attack) or Club +8 (1d6+12) (both if two-handed)
Ranged: Composite Longbow +6 (1d8+4), Sling +5 (1d3+4, 50 bullets)
==================================================
Str 19, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 7
BAB +1, CMB +5, CMD 17
Traits - +2 Initiative, +1 Will save
Feats - Toughness, Power Attack, Furious Focus, Weapon Focus (Falcion), Iron Will, Weapon Specialization (Falcion)
Skills Ranks – Acrobatics 2 (-1 in armor), Appraise 1, Bluff -2, Climb (+8, +5 in armor), Craft (N/A), Diplomacy -2, Disable Device (N/A), Disguise -2, Escape Artist 2 (-1 in armor), Fly 2 (-1 in armor), Heal (0), Handle Animal -2, Intimidate (+2), Knowledge [dungeoneering] (+6), Knowledge [Engineering] (+6), Linguistics –, Perception (+4), Ride 6 (3 in armor), Sense Motive 0, Sleight of Hand - , Spellcraft, Stealth +6 (+3 in armor), Survival +7, Swim 8 (5 in armor), UMD -
Equipment - Weapons, +1 Breastplate, Cure Light wounds (2), endure elements (1), Potion of enlarge person (1) 44 gp worth of goods. Cold Iron Dagger, Silver Dagger, Ioun Torch,

1000 went to +1 Armor and another 1000 to a +1 Cloak of resistance.

I’m spending 400 on a composite Longbow to get that to do some viable damage, and another hundredish to pick up a ioun torch and a cold iron and silver dagger. I probably will take deadly aim next, but for now ranged attack is an ok 1d8+4.

Speaking of damage, my power attack goes up, but thanks to furious focus my attack bonus does not go down. So add another +3 to two handed damage. And I’m taking weapon specialization for the Falcion, so we can throw another two on top of that taking me to 2d4 +15 damage, with 18-20 crit.

I’m probably done for the day, I have actually work to do that they pay me for…

Andoran

Lemmy wrote:
RAI can be debated, RAW can't.

Oh yes it can. Ashiel is arguing with Sean K. Reynolds in another thread because he said you can't have odd numbered ability bonus items and she says you can because nothing in the rules said you can't.

I believe his response was "Nothing in the rules says you can't move when you are dead, either."

RAW doesn't work when you argue that what is omitted is allowed.

I am fine with Aelryinth as a judge. I'm also fine with you, as you've done fine even if we don't agree all the time. As long as there is a ruling, I can work with it.

Andoran

WPharolin wrote:

1. Ciretose's nameless fighter says screw you to choker ambushes. He refuses to be grabbed, they fail to run away and hide, and he crits on each choker (which one hit kills them). Repeat for all three encounters with the chokers.

This is great stuff. And his name is Rufus :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The last fighter I played, everyone in the group thought he was overpowered compared to the rest of the party (up through about level 12). He was somewhat min-maxed, but not too bad. Some of the rest of the party was max-minned (did I coin a new term), but not too bad. They included a battle oracle, a rogue, a bard, and a witch.


ciretose wrote:

@James - Part of Ashiel's complaint was the lack of skills and versatility.

So I want to show I can build out a fighter that can have 5 skill point and still out damage/tank/switch hit the ranger or pretty much anyone else.

And if I can do that with a vanilla build, all the more strength for my case. And if I can do it by just swapping Wisdom and Int from Ashiel's build, all the stronger my case is.

As is being shown by Ashiel, the more you have to do things that raise eyebrows to accomplish your goal, the weaker your argument becomes.

I understand and surmised much of this. I just think it's curbing more to the contest than would suit me as a purist I guess.

But best of luck,

James


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PRD wrote:

Prices listed are always for fully charged items. (When an item is created, it is fully charged.) For an item that's worthless when its charges run out (which is the case for almost all charged items), the value of the partially used item is proportional to the number of charges left. For an item that has usefulness in addition to its charges, only part of the item's value is based on the number of charges left.

in other words, divide the cost by 50 to calculate the cost per charge and add up the price for each charge seperately.

750 divided by 50 is 15, 15x12 is 180. using a 12 charge wand of cure light wounds as an example

secondhand wands are far more likely to be found in a community than fully charged ones. erase all thoughts of "magic mart" from your head. think of a market district that has multiple dealers that each might have a few items.

the only way there is going to be a constant supply of fresh items is if a community were to have a factory of devoted crafters who spend thier lives producing these wands or whatever item. consumable items are also easier to find than high level spellcasters. especially when you need high level spells.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
PRD wrote:

Prices listed are always for fully charged items. (When an item is created, it is fully charged.) For an item that's worthless when its charges run out (which is the case for almost all charged items), the value of the partially used item is proportional to the number of charges left. For an item that has usefulness in addition to its charges, only part of the item's value is based on the number of charges left.

in other words, divide the cost by 50 to calculate the cost per charge and add up the price for each charge seperately.

750 divided by 50 is 15, 15x12 is 180. using a 12 charge wand of cure light wounds as an example

secondhand wands are far more likely to be found in a community than fully charged ones. erase all thoughts of "magic mart" from your head. think of a market district that has multiple dealers that each might have a few items.

the only way there is going to be a constant supply of fresh items is if a community were to have a factory of devoted crafters who spend thier lives producing these wands or whatever item. consumable items are also easier to find than high level spellcasters. especially when you need high level spells.

The fact that you can't create a partial wand means you would have to luck into finding a wand with exactly how many charges you could afford.

It is allowed, the judge ruled. But let us end the farce that it is something that you can acquire commonly in most campaigns, or that you could walk into the magic mart and find exactly the wands with exactly the charges you need.

I am fine with the builds posted by Ashiel. They make my points about her playstyle better than anything I could post.

I am really enjoying this.


ciretose wrote:

The fact that you can't create a partial wand means you would have to luck into finding a wand with exactly how many charges you could afford.

It is allowed, the judge ruled. But let us end the farce that it is something that you can acquire commonly in most campaigns, or that you could walk into the magic mart and find exactly the wands with exactly the charges you need.

Doesn't strike me as that much more unlikely than finding any other particular specific item you're looking for at a magic mart. If we were expecting realistic supply and demand, Golarion would have giant factories devoted to cranking out a steady supply of the big six magical items that every single adventurer always buys.

Heck, I would think cheap partially charged wands would be all over the place. After all, they're cheap. The vast bulk of people in the pathfinder universe aren't exactly rolling in cashy money. Getting a freshly made and fully charged wand would be out of most people's price range. A cheap, mostly used up wand, on the other hand, fits into the budget of a whole lot of people who couldn't afford one otherwise.

601 to 650 of 784 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Why fighters suck All Messageboards

©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.