Talk me down off the ledge... I'm losing hope in PFS and I don't want to

[Iammars]

Don't forget - once you get the Keep, you can slow track your character, gaining an extra 3PP/level.

[WalterGM]

Cao Phen wrote:

Walter Sheppard wrote:

Cao Phen wrote:

77 at level 11? That seems a bit on the low side. I was thinking of at least 10 per level, with the decent AC.

Now, for the maximum amount of HP, you have you have two options, Straight Barbarian, or Barbarian 11/Alchemist 1

*snip*

Nice!

But of course the real victory is going to be when Rukk has Diehard, Tenacious Survivor, and a ring of regeneration.

*cough

Additional Resources wrote:

all half-orc feats except Tenacious Survivor is legal for play

Noooo!!! :P

[Cao Phen]

Iammars wrote:

Don't forget - once you get the Keep, you can slow track your character, gaining an extra 3PP/level.

You are correct (never did slow track, anyways=)).

This gives an extra 8 HP. Giving totals:

- Barb - 364 HP
- Barb/Alch - 385 HP

[WalterGM]

Cao Phen wrote:

Iammars wrote:

Don't forget - once you get the Keep, you can slow track your character, gaining an extra 3PP/level.

You are correct (never did slow track, anyways=)).

This gives an extra 8 HP. Giving totals:

- Barb - 364 HP
- Barb/Alch - 385 HP

Keep? What keep?

scheming finger pyramid

[Iammars]

Walter Sheppard wrote:

Cao Phen wrote:

Iammars wrote:

Don't forget - once you get the Keep, you can slow track your character, gaining an extra 3PP/level.

You are correct (never did slow track, anyways=)).

This gives an extra 8 HP. Giving totals:

- Barb - 364 HP
- Barb/Alch - 385 HP

Keep? What keep?

scheming finger pyramid

Spoiler:

The module Fangwood Keep. You can buy the keep afterwards and it generates prestige for you. It's a 15PP initial investment, but you trade away day job checks for prestige.

[Cao Phen]

In addition to this HP crunch, you most likely are an Invulnerable Rager with possibly DR 9/-. To help with that, you can possibly try and grab the Abrogalian Corset, giving you Absorbtion 20 per day. This varies from the normal DR, as it is simply a damage prevention bubble. You do not need to worry about the DC 18 Fort Save after the bubble pops, since you are at nearly at the 40s on CON with the good saves to Fort.

[David_Bross]

To the OP, I believe this post has demonstrated that there is a vast number of people who play in PFS who feel optimization and figuring out how to do something they want to do in PF's rule system is something they're willing to invest in. I don't think you should be angry about the people you're playing with if they're not doing this, maybe just try to talk to them about things, or if you're GMing, ask about questionable tactics (assuming they're not veterans intent on something).

Onto Rukk, having GMed for him, I can certify he takes those hits and keeps going. I remember having 3 wolves charge him, deal about 50 damage (while Rukk was level 3), and Rukk returning some savage blows the following round. I just shutter to think how many CLW wands he'll blow through on a bad day. I also wonder if Rukk will ever put armor on, but I think we're past that point in his career.

[Dangleberry Tagnut]

David Bowles wrote:

My last three PCs have all had toughness or will have taken it: dwarf fighter, elf lorewarden/rogue and the GM baby summoner I'm working on.

Hmm. I don't think you actually summon babies.

What you need, is a Mummy Pathfinder, and a Daddy Pathfinder. And then they....hey, tell you what, why don't you go ask your Venture Captain?

[TOZ]

Funky Badger wrote:

The Fourth Horseman wrote:

Any character with a 10 con is a dicey proposition, I’ll give you that.

Nonsense.

You're playing a game with dice. Of course it's a dicey proposition!

[BigNorseWolf]

Well, the good thing is that you're dealing with steps, not a ledge. As long as you don't throw dice at the table and rant about how much people suck coming back should be a seamless transition.

[Relmer]

I am truly impressed at how thoroughly this thread got derailed. Kudos to all.

[Silbeg]

bugleyman wrote:

12 con is my absolute minimum for a PFS character, and I usually go 14+.

I cannot disagree with you on this choice, as I do the same. But, it is a choice. Not verone ill make that choice.

However, if I were critiquing a new player's build, I would strongly suggest that thy make he choice to buy up their CON. at least some. A veteran player, I would assume knows what s/he is doing.

[kinevon]

Silbeg wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

12 con is my absolute minimum for a PFS character, and I usually go 14+.

I cannot disagree with you on this choice, as I do the same. But, it is a choice. Not verone ill make that choice.

However, if I were critiquing a new player's build, I would strongly suggest that thy make he choice to buy up their CON. at least some. A veteran player, I would assume knows what s/he is doing.

Had a new to PFS player, built a Witch, Con 8. Edit: Tried to talk him out of that low a Con.

Then he got himself, voluntarily, into melee range of something and provoked.

AoO was a crit. Damage took him from full hp to past negative Con, in one shot.

[Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome]

Brendan Green wrote:

I am truly impressed at how thoroughly this thread got derailed. Kudos to all.

Did you doubt us? hehe ;)

[Robert A Matthews]

kinevon wrote:

Silbeg wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

12 con is my absolute minimum for a PFS character, and I usually go 14+.

I cannot disagree with you on this choice, as I do the same. But, it is a choice. Not verone ill make that choice.

However, if I were critiquing a new player's build, I would strongly suggest that thy make he choice to buy up their CON. at least some. A veteran player, I would assume knows what s/he is doing.

Had a new to PFS player, built a Witch, Con 8. Edit: Tried to talk him out of that low a Con.

Then he got himself, voluntarily, into melee range of something and provoked.

AoO was a crit. Damage took him from full hp to past negative Con, in one shot.

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

[Cao Phen]

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

Not with KON-NON!!!

42 (27+15 Temp) HP at first level. Let's do this!!!

[Mistwalker]

Cao Phen wrote:

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

Not with KON-NON!!!

42 (27+15 Temp) HP at first level. Let's do this!!!

Continuing the Devil's Advocate idea.

Could you show us how you managed to get KON-NON the witch to 42 hp?
:)

[Mark Stratton]

Jiggy wrote:

Mark Stratton wrote:

I *DO* understand, that for some, optimization is fun. It is most decidedly not fun for me.

Well, that's quite a bit different from the statement you actually made. "X is fun for some, but not for me" is very different from "I don't play for X, I play for fun". The former allows X to be a valid form of fun, while the latter makes X and "fun" mutually-exclusive.

Quote:

I wasn't criticizing those who do as players.

Yes you were, even if unintentionally. If it's not your intent to tell people that they're playing a game for a motivation other than "fun", then don't say things that mean that. Or if you do, then don't be surprised when people continue to think you meant what you said.

Well, given that I thought people here had some sense of intelligence, I didn't think I would have to disclaim my post by beginning with "fun is relative" or "fun is subjective." None of us, myself include, can decide what is "fun" for others, and there is no absolute definition.

Please, do not tell me what I "[was saying], even if unintentionally."

Perhaps some people read into the posts of others what they want to so they can feign being offended or whatever. Your choice.

Mark

[Riphaeus]

Kind of a too honest, long response I realize. But I am only responding similarly to the post anyway. Please do not get mad out of disagreement.

tanath said wrote:

1. Most players are really, really bad.

I am so sick of 16 strength rangers, bards that sing and do nothing else, and 10 con melee rogues, there is some kind of huge bell-curve; there seem to be a few really decent players, and it's like everyone else makes bad choices on purpose. I've essentially solo'ed or two-manned a scenario more times that I can count.

If and when they exist, I don't mind those players myself haha. Just sounds like people learning how to make character types and builds and having fun with what may be common D&D mistakes sometimes.

So yeah, I don't understand that problem there as I don't mind those "problems" at all lol.

To be honest though, i think stopping playing is based more on whether you were actually two-manning or soloing or not. To me, I am fine with small groups (two is just the minimum of course..) although four or five people is much more ideal than two.

But still, even assuming you are just talking about "solo-ing" the combat, rather than the whole game (LOL), which from what I read .. the roleplaying and not just the combat is concerning you too, then YES, QUIT IF YOU ARE IN FACT SOLOING.

But as I said earlier, that's not two-manning. That's solo-ing. Like I said, I don't prefer two-man compared at all compared to 3 - 6 playing.. but yes please just don't play if you find yourself "solo-ing".

tanath said wrote:

However, this doesn't stop at stats and numbers. These same decent players are the ones that also get into their character, use different voices, have unique and interesting character concepts, use things like table-tents and pictures to tell a story about who they are. Everyone else (the majority) uses their regular people voices, have completely uninspired character concepts ("I'm a fighter, I have a chain shirt...that's about it") and don't do anything except just act like themselves playing a non-role playing game.

It's not the new players either. I just played three slots at a convention where the only thing standing between a horrific thornekeep TPK on every single encounter were two second level wizards, played myself and an 18 year old teenager who had *never in his entire life played anything resembling a roleplaying game*. We burned through two entire wands of magic missile, because we were evidently the only characters capable of doing any damage to anything.

About getting into their character: I could give less than a rat's but how hard other people are trying to role play their character. Everyone role-plays to the point where that INDIVIDUAL is having fun for THEMSELF. Go wet your pants somewhere else while you get over that life fact.

Using voices is good but not important. Unique/interesting character concept is optional, as is making a well-built combat character.. wow so hard to guess that too, eh? What.. pictures and artistic power-points for what purpose, LOL? Now this is just exaggerating a bit hard .. :P

So is everyone after "using their regular people voices". Because this is actually pretty freakin NORMAL. Gamers using regular people voices you say? welcome to earth.

have completely uninspired character concepts = whatever. go tell your mommy (that also = whatever, unfortunately).

act like themselves playing a non - role playing game = yeah, they were actually just trolling you this whole time. obviously. if they were trying to actually play the medieval fantasy game they'd have just shown up and done the same thing, like it or not. or maybe that's just paranoia.

"It's not the new players either." - Considering that You are the Odd man Out, I wouldn't think so either, :P

tanath said wrote:

2. It's impossible to find one anything higher than 3-7

Yeah, I would agree that it's better to have more or all of the level ranges represented when possible, but

tanath said wrote:

3. You can't ever play up

Just ends up being alot of annoying moaning about the already stated (2.)

tanath said wrote:

4. People like me are despised

tanath said wrote:

5. It's not the geo.

We do not need exaggerations

tanath said wrote:

Finale:

So, talk me off the ledge, or bid me good riddance. GO!

WE DO NOT NEED YOUR EXAGGERATIONS tanath.

[Dhjika]

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

I agree on a first level a crit is often all that needs to be said, especially with a preponderance of great ax wielding orcs.

Where I have seen the low CON comes to hurt is in the 6-11 range where a normal hit takes a character from a couple hit points above zero to below negative con - mostly year 3+ games. These are usually back rank characters that get exposed to missile or spell fire rather than melee.

[Jiggy]

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit?

Having 14 CON instead of 8 CON doesn't just mean 3 more HP, it also means you can go 6 points further into negatives before you die. In total, that means that the crit needs to do 9, not 3, more damage in order to insta-kill the PC.

I don't know about the story in question, but I find that at subtier 1-2, you're usually looking at 1d6+2 damage or thereabouts, with a x2 crit.

The 8 CON witch (we'll even assume her FCB is in HP) has 6 HP and dies at -8. That means the crit only needs to deal 14 damage for an insta-kill. A max-damage crit of 2d6+4, or less than max if it's a longsword (2d8+4), will kill her. A greatsword crit (4d6+8, even assuming highest possible NPC STR at that level) will average 22 damage and almost always kill her (has a 1 in 648 chance of NOT killing her outright).

If the same witch had 14 CON, she's got 8 HP and dies at -14, needing 22 damage to die. Even a max-damage longsword crit won't kill her outright, which is a vast improvement. Even a greatsword crit won't kill her outright if it rolls even 1 point below average damage, giving her a coin-flip chance of surviving a greatsword crit as a 1st-level d6 caster.

That difference is huge.

[Cao Phen]

Mistwalker wrote:

Cao Phen wrote:

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

Not with KON-NON!!!

42 (27+15 Temp) HP at first level. Let's do this!!!

Continuing the Devil's Advocate idea.

Could you show us how you managed to get KON-NON the witch to 42 hp?
:)

Witch? KON-NON the Governator is no witch! KON-NON is muscleman barbarian!!!

*cough
Ahem...

Apparently this is also called "Ledford's Bane" by other people, but I chose to stick to the name I chose first.

12 - Barbarian
5 - Con 20
1 - Favored Class HP
3 - Toughness [Human Feat]
6 - Tribal Scars (Raptorscale or other clan) [Base 1 Feat]

27 - HP at Level 1

Then buy some Pesh from Adventurer's Armory (15 Temporary Hp for 1 hour, -4 Dexterity/Wisdom Penalty for 1 Hour)

27 (+15) - 42 HP

Again, from a different thread:

Quote:

As the originator of the "Ledford's Bane" build, my main intention of the character set was off the curiosity of how much health can I cram into a level 1 character through the new Feat that was released during the time, Tribal Scars. My friend and I bounced ideas back and forth from each other and was dead set to create a character with this build, no changing any specifics when entering Level 2. We named him KonNon the Governator.

It was a quirky idea that we had and we wanted to run with it. However, if people wanted to have that 27 Hitpoint Barbarian, you can. Just remember that Color Spray will be used. And with the frustration of 27 Hitpoints, your GM might coup de grace just to say "nyaaa".

Though with Mike Brock saying that they cannot Coup de Grace someone unless specifically stated in their combat text, simply put it will mainly be the GM now saying "I bumrush all monsters at the spazzed-out barbarian on drugs"

[Mistwalker]

Cao Phen wrote:

Witch? KON-NON the Governator is no witch! KON-NON is muscleman barbarian!!!

I was giving you a hard time, playing devil's advocate, as the example that you responded to was about a 1st level witch, not a 1st level altered state barbarian. :)

[Cao Phen]

Oh, we can sort of do that with the Witch as well:

6 - Base HP
5 - Con 20
1 - Favored Class HP
3 - Toughness
6 - Tribal Scars

21 - Level 1

21 (+15) - Level 1 with PESH!

[kinevon]

Robert A Matthews wrote:

kinevon wrote:

Silbeg wrote:

bugleyman wrote:

12 con is my absolute minimum for a PFS character, and I usually go 14+.

I cannot disagree with you on this choice, as I do the same. But, it is a choice. Not verone ill make that choice.

However, if I were critiquing a new player's build, I would strongly suggest that thy make he choice to buy up their CON. at least some. A veteran player, I would assume knows what s/he is doing.

Had a new to PFS player, built a Witch, Con 8. Edit: Tried to talk him out of that low a Con.

Then he got himself, voluntarily, into melee range of something and provoked.

AoO was a crit. Damage took him from full hp to past negative Con, in one shot.

Gonna play devil's advocate here. Would 3 more HP really have saved him from a crit? A crit at level 1 usually means death unless you are crit by someone that has no STR modifier or you roll with 16 CON + Toughness. A x3 or x4 crit weapon is usually guarenteed death at level 1.

Maybe not, in this case, although it would have been a lot closer to survivable.

Spoiler:

6: Black Waters, the water bug, which has an attack at +5 for 2d6+4, x2.
Average damage for that attack, as a crit, would be 22 hit points. I think I may have rolled low on the crit damage, but not enough to save a PC with 5 hit points and an 8 Con from death. I don't think he took the FCB as a hit point. Even a min damage crit would have had him bleeding and close to death.

Unfortunately for this PC, I roll in the open, and forgot how fragile (and low AC) his Witch was.