What is everyone's fascination with...


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 465 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, some of us prefer more mature games. I only play with 10-year olds. Why does that sound weird.


Huh... guess Kobolds are like that too. Reminds me of an Evil Halfling Cleric from the first 3.5 campaign I played.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Look we all know that people just cheat when rolling for stats
If by "we all" you actually mean "people who play with 6-year-olds," then I might agree. But overall experience has shown me any number of examples in which this didn't happen.

"Oh no the dice was cocked!"

"No guys I really did roll all 17s and 18s at my home!"
Plays rolls 7s.
GM: "Hahaha. Reroll that array"

GM:"Roll 5d6, drop lowest, add 4 dice up to 18 seven times drop lowest."

GM:"roll 14+1d4"


Also, for those who like PF as a build game and enjoy making characters for the fun of it and possible use at a later date, point buy is useful.

Rolling up stats for a character you don't have a game for but hope to play someday is kind of pointless. Most GMs won't take it. Point built characters can be used anywhere someone wants that point buy value.

Even if you're not "cheating" rolling the dice for the character and the GM is willing to trust that, if you make up a bunch of characters, it's likely the good stat ones would see more use.


Player rolls poorly
PC dies to monster
Player rolls poorly
PC dies to monster
Player rolls well
Sir Thog the third is a character with great tactical sense!


...why do I have the weird feeling that Rhedyn has just ushered this thread into a new state as "How much cheating... #2"?


Been playing with a modified PB that I feel produces more "fair" characters than the existing one:

Score (Cost)
7 (-3), 8 (-2), 9 (-1), 10 (0), 11 (1), 12 (2), 13 (3), 14 (4), 15 (5), 16 (6), 17 (18)

At 15 point buy:
Fighter or Monk: Str 16, Dex 13, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 10
Wizard: Str 7, Dex 12, Con 12, Int 17, Wis 9, Cha 7

At 20 point buy:
Fighter or Monk: Str 16, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 14, Cha 10
Wizard: Str 7, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 17, Wis 10, Cha 7


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rhedyn wrote:
"Oh no the dice was cocked!"

When you make an absolute statement, such as "everyone cheats," providing a few examples of cheating does not prove your statement. Providing a few examples of not cheating does, however, disprove your statement.

Be careful speaking in absolute terms unless you can actually show that there are no exceptions.


Rynjin wrote:

"Convoluted"? Hardly.

It's a simple ratio you should have figured out by the time you've done it a couple of times.

The only one I don't know the value of off the top of my head is a 17, because who buys a 17?

Its like an 18 that you get at severe discount but put on layaway till level 4. For PFS you're really only going to get 2 stat ups.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Look we all know that people just cheat when rolling for stats
If by "we all" you actually mean "people who play with 6-year-olds," then I might agree. But overall experience has shown me any number of examples in which this didn't happen.

so you use 3d6's then because I think she's talking about cheating the system through all the weird systems to give good stats.


Bandw2 wrote:
so you use 3d6's then because I think she's talking about cheating the system through all the weird systems to give good stats.

I've played in games where we used 3d6, in order. I've played in games where we used 4d6, drop lowest, in any order. I've played in games where we used 2d6+6. I've played in games where we've used a variety of point buy systems.

Currently I use 4d6, drop lowest, and you can default to the Elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) after rolling, if you choose.

Playing with houstonderek, andostre, jess door, silverhair, psychicmachinery, mundane, and any number of others, I've never run into this rampant cheating of dice rolls I keep hearing about. Weird, huh?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
so you use 3d6's then because I think she's talking about cheating the system through all the weird systems to give good stats.

I've played in games where we used 3d6, in order.

me too, nice to see another veteran from the dark days. never did get to play a paladin

don't confuse my opinion on the matter for a clarifying statement of someone else's opinion.

just saying your conflating her hyperbole with her stating facts.


People who cheat their ability scores are the same people who cheat their Will saves, so don't worry, PBers get to deal with them, too.

Rhedyn is more saying "non-3d6-drop-lowest is cheating", though, which is a different brand of...that.


I also like arrays. No rolling, no charts, no points, no claims of fairness. Here's a set of numbers, use these pre racial, deal with it.

Incidentally, 1-for-1 point buy is ridiculous. Why ever not have a massive outlier? It just costs a slight shave off a few stats to get a post racial 20, which is no cost at all. At least with mainstream point buy you have to really sacrifice something to pull that off, unless you're one of those weird GMs who gives 30+ points, in which case, why do you even bother? Just tell them write what they want at that point.


"Point buy favors SAD classes, rolling helps MAD classes."

Why?! Because you assume you'll be lucky when rolling your monk. Why not just play a higher point buy if that's your actual concern? And don't even get me started on the caster vs martial split. Even the guy who rolls crap and plays a full caster in your group will soon be miles more powerful than the guy who rolled amazing and picked a martial, assuming that guy didn't just go, "Oh look, I rolled my wizard with really high stats." That problem had absolutely nothing to do with stats.

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Rhedyn wrote:

"Oh no the dice was cocked!"

"No guys I really did roll all 17s and 18s at my home!"

Never seen this.

Rhedyn wrote:

Plays rolls 7s. GM: "Hahaha. Reroll that array"

GM:"Roll 5d6, drop lowest, add 4 dice up to 18 seven times drop lowest."
GM:"roll 14+1d4"

Generous or lower-risk stat rolling methods aren't cheating any more than using a higher point buy would be. Either way you're using an agreed-on method for producing stats which you find enjoyable to play. (Assuming in the first case that the GM defines ahead of time how low an array needs to be to qualify for a reroll, eg anything below 15 point buy.)

Triune wrote:

"Point buy favors SAD classes, rolling helps MAD classes."

Why?! Because you assume you'll be lucky when rolling your monk. Why not just play a higher point buy if that's your actual concern?

Most rolling methods have a distribution that makes very high or low scores uncommon, such that MAD arrays (eg 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8) are more common than SAD ones (eg 18, 14, 12, 12, 8, 7). Both these arrays are standard 20 point buy. Higher point buy is not a great solution since not everyone who wants to encourage MAD arrays also wants higher stats. Capping the max pre-racial stat below 18 is an alternative way to handle that concern.


thorin001 wrote:

I like watching many of the people who defend rolling lie about their motivations. Usually what they mean is that their pseudo-random rolling method gives them higher stats than what they think they will get from a point buy.

The justification of 'rolling prevents min-maxing' is hogwash unless you keep the stats in the order you rolled them. Putting your low roll in Cha is no less min-maxing than buying a low Cha.

The justification of 'you can't play your concept with a point buy' is purely stating that you want higher stats, but lack the honesty to say it outright.

If you like to roll everything, great, enjoy the game the way that is the most fun for you. If you like high stats (and who doesn't) then be honest about it.

I'm a perpetual DM. I like high stats, for my player's characters. That's not the only reason I prefer rolled stats.

Let me be honest though: resorting to invective is an unattractive trait.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Weirdo wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:

"Oh no the dice was cocked!"

"No guys I really did roll all 17s and 18s at my home!"

Never seen this.

I have, it was sad.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I've also seen a tips and tricks discussion of die rolling suggesting rolling the d6s one at a time and aiming subsequent rolls at low results to 'get another chance'. Best to combat this by requiring all dice to be rolled at once.


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Incidentally, 1-for-1 point buy is ridiculous.

It is, unless it suddenly becomes 10- or 20- for 1 at the upper registers. Then a post-racial 19 might be possible, but only by dumping everything else.


Bandw2 wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:

"Oh no the dice was cocked!"

"No guys I really did roll all 17s and 18s at my home!"

Never seen this.

I have, it was sad.

I saw it once. Kind of.

It was actually someone asking me how common it would be to roll an 18, because they didn't want to look like they were cheating when they showed up with two to three 18s in their stats.

That person was also only 13 years old.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

This thread is getting weird.

Am I the only one who generally wants to have at least one low score?

Probably not, but I'm not one of them.

I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.

If I have a low Int, I have no skills, so I can't do much. I HATE having no skills.

If I have no Wis, I get dominated/paralyzed/stunned for 10 rounds/whatever'd, and I actually can't do ANYTHING.

If I have a low Cha, it makes it a bit harder to participate in social stuff (I prefer 25 point buy because unless I'm a super MAD class I can keep a 10 or 11 Cha).

Since I almost exclusively play martial characters:

I can't dump Str, because unless I'm a Dex build I can't hit shit. If I AM a Dex build, being slowed to 20 feet of movement until about third level, and dependent on the GM allowing combined items (Muleback cords with a Cloak of Resistance) doesn't fit the image in my head.

I can't dump Dex unless I'm playing someone who can use Full Plate I need to not get hit.

I can't dump Con, because there's two separate, different, and very "fun" ways I can die if I do so.


Triune wrote:

"Point buy favors SAD classes, rolling helps MAD classes."

Why?! Because you assume you'll be lucky when rolling your monk. Why not just play a higher point buy if that's your actual concern? And don't even get me started on the caster vs martial split. Even the guy who rolls crap and plays a full caster in your group will soon be miles more powerful than the guy who rolled amazing and picked a martial, assuming that guy didn't just go, "Oh look, I rolled my wizard with really high stats." That problem had absolutely nothing to do with stats.

It's actually true that Point buy favors SAD classes. On the other hand...

Rolling favors no classes specifically. IMO you're roughly as likely to get a roll for a decent SAD class as for a MAD class

That being said, you're also just as likely to get a roll that isn't decent at all and that really sucks. [This is why all the funky high-weight roll systems are used by many on these boards.]

Personally I just hand out an array for the players to arrange as desired. [Though something like roll Xd6, keep 3 highest, in order can be fun if you go in not planning to play any specific character until the stats are determined.]


Kirth Gersen wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Incidentally, 1-for-1 point buy is ridiculous.
It is, unless it suddenly becomes 10- or 20- for 1 at the upper registers. Then a post-racial 19 might be possible, but only by dumping everything else.

As an alternative he might find acceptable

11: 1 point
12: 2 points
13: 3 points
14: 4 points
15: 6 points
16: 8 points
17: 12 points
18: 16 points

I'd also recommend killing the 'dump to 7' option, but that's just me.


Rynjin wrote:
I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.

I like characters that can do stuff. They don't have to be able to do everything. A -1 or -2 isn't gonna kill me (well, not me the player, anyways) and gives the character a weak spot. Characters with glaring weak spots are more interesting.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Incidentally, 1-for-1 point buy is ridiculous.
It is, unless it suddenly becomes 10- or 20- for 1 at the upper registers. Then a post-racial 19 might be possible, but only by dumping everything else.

As an alternative he might find acceptable

11: 1 point
12: 2 points
13: 3 points
14: 4 points
15: 6 points
16: 8 points
17: 12 points
18: 16 points

I'd also recommend killing the 'dump to 7' option, but that's just me.

8: -2 points

9: -1 point
10: 0 points
11: 1 point
...
16: 6 points
17: 18 points
18: 30 points


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

This thread is getting weird.

Am I the only one who generally wants to have at least one low score?

Probably not, but I'm not one of them.

I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.

If I have a low Int, I have no skills, so I can't do much. I HATE having no skills.

If I have no Wis, I get dominated/paralyzed/stunned for 10 rounds/whatever'd, and I actually can't do ANYTHING.

If I have a low Cha, it makes it a bit harder to participate in social stuff (I prefer 25 point buy because unless I'm a super MAD class I can keep a 10 or 11 Cha).

Since I almost exclusively play martial characters:

I can't dump Str, because unless I'm a Dex build I can't hit s!#&. If I AM a Dex build, being slowed to 20 feet of movement until about third level, and dependent on the GM allowing combined items (Muleback cords with a Cloak of Resistance) doesn't fit the image in my head.

I can't dump Dex unless I'm playing someone who can use Full Plate I need to not get hit.

I can't dump Con, because there's two separate, different, and very "fun" ways I can die if I do so.

I can counter point all of these specifically but it kinda just comes down to having high expectations for what counts as "doing something". I can work with 3 skill points per level, i just need to not put everything at max.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.
I like characters that can do stuff. They don't have to be able to do everything. A -1 or -2 isn't gonna kill me (well, not me the player, anyways) and gives the character a weak spot. Characters with glaring weak spots are more interesting.

I don't agree, mostly because characters with glaring weaknesses tend to die quickly.

Not much of a chance to be interesting if your screen time isn't long (or mostly involves you sitting in the corner with your thumb up your ass because of a failed save).

Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

This thread is getting weird.

Am I the only one who generally wants to have at least one low score?

Probably not, but I'm not one of them.

I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.

If I have a low Int, I have no skills, so I can't do much. I HATE having no skills.

If I have no Wis, I get dominated/paralyzed/stunned for 10 rounds/whatever'd, and I actually can't do ANYTHING.

If I have a low Cha, it makes it a bit harder to participate in social stuff (I prefer 25 point buy because unless I'm a super MAD class I can keep a 10 or 11 Cha).

Since I almost exclusively play martial characters:

I can't dump Str, because unless I'm a Dex build I can't hit s!#&. If I AM a Dex build, being slowed to 20 feet of movement until about third level, and dependent on the GM allowing combined items (Muleback cords with a Cloak of Resistance) doesn't fit the image in my head.

I can't dump Dex unless I'm playing someone who can use Full Plate I need to not get hit.

I can't dump Con, because there's two separate, different, and very "fun" ways I can die if I do so.

I can counter point all of these specifically but it kinda just comes down to having high expectations for what counts as "doing something". I can work with 3 skill points per level, i just need to not put everything at max.

If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.

sure if you're trying to intimate people or use acrobatics to ignore AoO, but climb DCs, swim DCs, acrobatics to jump 5 feet, diplomacy on random civilians, knowledge checks on information, craft checks and the like, all have static DCs.

once again it's just different opinions on the constitutes "doing something"


Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.

sure if you're trying to intimate people or use acrobatics to ignore AoO, but climb DCs, swim DCs, acrobatics to jump 5 feet, diplomacy on random civilians, knowledge checks on information, craft checks and the like, all have static DCs.

once again it's just different opinions on the constitutes "doing something"

If all you can make is the basic DCs, then someone else needs to pick up the slack to make the higher ones.

Which makes your skill investment almost entirely pointless unless all you do is Aid.

And hell, half those hings you said STILL scale.

As you progress, on average walls (or mountains) become harder to climb, waters become rougher, Acrobatics checks need to be higher to jump farther or balance better (BTW jumping 5 feet is a DC 20, so you DO need to max it for a few levels to hit that DC by any point it matters), Knowledge checks only show up for more obscure information needing a 20/25/30 DC, Craft checks nearly exponentially increase for anything you're likely to find useful at high levels.

All of which points to "Max it or go home".


Weirdo wrote:


Most rolling methods have a distribution that makes very high or low scores uncommon, such that MAD arrays (eg 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8) are more common than SAD ones (eg 18, 14, 12, 12, 8, 7). Both these arrays are standard 20 point buy. Higher point buy is not a great solution since not everyone who wants to encourage MAD arrays also wants higher stats. Capping the max pre-racial stat below 18 is an alternative way to handle that concern.

That is absolutely true, but it falsely equates hurting SAD classes with helping MAD ones. You're not helping MAD classes by rolling, unless your rolling method ensures high overall stats.

SAD classes need a 16 in one roll to be close to tip top, that's about it. 17s and 18s are just gravy. MAD classes need SEVERAL high rolls, not just decent ones (12's and 13's). Higher point buy ENSURES a person can play a MAD class if they wish. Someone who wants to play a monk is far, far more likely to get screwed by the dice than someone who wants to play a wizard. Dice rolling actually hurts MAD classes more than SAD ones.

Spread out arrays are not MAD arrays, higher arrays are. Spread out does not mean higher unless, of course, you assume you're gonna get lucky.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.

sure if you're trying to intimate people or use acrobatics to ignore AoO, but climb DCs, swim DCs, acrobatics to jump 5 feet, diplomacy on random civilians, knowledge checks on information, craft checks and the like, all have static DCs.

once again it's just different opinions on the constitutes "doing something"

If all you can make is the basic DCs, then someone else needs to pick up the slack to make the higher ones.

Which makes your skill investment almost entirely pointless unless all you do is Aid.

he's going to carry me up the cliff? '3' kudos to him. i guess he could climb up and then tie a rope down for us and knot the rope for easy climb DC. still need to climb.


Rynjin wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.
I like characters that can do stuff. They don't have to be able to do everything. A -1 or -2 isn't gonna kill me (well, not me the player, anyways) and gives the character a weak spot. Characters with glaring weak spots are more interesting.
I don't agree, mostly because characters with glaring weaknesses tend to die quickly.

Weirdly, the only time I've ever seen this happen is when the glaring weakness is Con.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
I like having characters who can actually DO stuff.
I like characters that can do stuff. They don't have to be able to do everything. A -1 or -2 isn't gonna kill me (well, not me the player, anyways) and gives the character a weak spot. Characters with glaring weak spots are more interesting.
I don't agree, mostly because characters with glaring weaknesses tend to die quickly.
Weirdly, the only time I've ever seen this happen is when the glaring weakness is Con.

Or Dex (get hit more), or Wis (failed Will saves).

Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.

sure if you're trying to intimate people or use acrobatics to ignore AoO, but climb DCs, swim DCs, acrobatics to jump 5 feet, diplomacy on random civilians, knowledge checks on information, craft checks and the like, all have static DCs.

once again it's just different opinions on the constitutes "doing something"

If all you can make is the basic DCs, then someone else needs to pick up the slack to make the higher ones.

Which makes your skill investment almost entirely pointless unless all you do is Aid.

he's going to carry me up the cliff? '3' kudos to him. i guess he could climb up and then tie a rope down for us and knot the rope for easy climb DC. still need to climb.

DC 5 Climb doesn't need any ranks, so that point is moot.

You're still not DOING anything, just benefiting off the other players' work in order to progress.

If he hadn't been there, you were f$#%ed.


Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If you don't need to put everything at max, you don't need to pass a skill check, since most of them scale with level.

sure if you're trying to intimate people or use acrobatics to ignore AoO, but climb DCs, swim DCs, acrobatics to jump 5 feet, diplomacy on random civilians, knowledge checks on information, craft checks and the like, all have static DCs.

once again it's just different opinions on the constitutes "doing something"

If all you can make is the basic DCs, then someone else needs to pick up the slack to make the higher ones.

Which makes your skill investment almost entirely pointless unless all you do is Aid.

And hell, half those hings you said STILL scale.

As you progress, on average walls (or mountains) become harder to climb, waters become rougher, Acrobatics checks need to be higher to jump farther or balance better (BTW jumping 5 feet is a DC 20, so you DO need to max it for a few levels to hit that DC by any point it matters), Knowledge checks only show up for more obscure information needing a 20/25/30 DC, Craft checks nearly exponentially increase for anything you're likely to find useful at high levels.

All of which points to "Max it or go home".

While I totally approve of Maxing it, Maxing it shouldn't be required to perform necessary rolls.

Maxing it should make you so damned good that you don't NEED to roll to pull off the necessary task. That in the rare occasions freakishly dangerous/risky shit comes up you've still got a solid chance [8 or better] rather than a desperate prayer [18 or better]

Adventures designed to require maxed skills past a certain point A: invalidate the growth of characters who are maxing those skills and B: are just begging to be bypassed by magic.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Triune wrote:
Weirdo wrote:


Most rolling methods have a distribution that makes very high or low scores uncommon, such that MAD arrays (eg 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8) are more common than SAD ones (eg 18, 14, 12, 12, 8, 7). Both these arrays are standard 20 point buy. Higher point buy is not a great solution since not everyone who wants to encourage MAD arrays also wants higher stats. Capping the max pre-racial stat below 18 is an alternative way to handle that concern.

That is absolutely true, but it falsely equates hurting SAD classes with helping MAD ones. You're not helping MAD classes by rolling, unless your rolling method ensures high overall stats.

SAD classes need a 16 in one roll to be close to tip top, that's about it. 17s and 18s are just gravy. MAD classes need SEVERAL high rolls, not just decent ones (12's and 13's). Higher point buy ENSURES a person can play a MAD class if they wish. Someone who wants to play a monk is far, far more likely to get screwed by the dice than someone who wants to play a wizard. Dice rolling actually hurts MAD classes more than SAD ones.

Spread out arrays are not MAD arrays, higher arrays are. Spread out does not mean higher unless, of course, you assume you're gonna get lucky.

14s generally fine for secondary stats, and then you just need a 16. monks generally never get touched by anythign so they don't really need amazing con either.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:


DC 5 Climb doesn't need any ranks, so that point is moot.

You're still not DOING anything, just benefiting off the other players' work in order to progress.

If he hadn't been there, you were f$+%ed.

it's raining and i need to hustle since we're being attacked by, idk, zebras, carnivorous zebras.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe, instead of +1 to any stat per 4 levels, stat increases could be tied to the classes themselves, as class features? That way, the MAD classes could get much better stats over the course of their careers, without getting a huge bundle up front and then multi-classing out.

As a baseline, maybe the wizard keeps his +1 Int per 4 class levels.
But then we turn around and give the cleric +1 Cha at 2nd, +1 Str at 4th, +1 Wis at 6th, or whatever.
Maybe the fighter, rogue, and monk get +1 to any one stat, every single level, with a caveat that any one stat can't get more than +1/3 levels or so.


Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:


DC 5 Climb doesn't need any ranks, so that point is moot.

You're still not DOING anything, just benefiting off the other players' work in order to progress.

If he hadn't been there, you were f$+%ed.

it's raining and i need to hustle since we're being attacked by, idk, zebras, carnivorous zebras.

Better hope you have max ranks then, because that's a DC 20 check.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

also Rynjin

bringing up something you said, if you skills aren't maxed you shouldn't being doing them right? so why do you care if you have the highest charisma? dumnp charisma for days.

also you a paladin? dump wisdom for days, you got your charisma to saves.

not a wizard? dump int if you have any casting use spell instead of skills.

not a front liner and good saves? you can leave con low.

in heavy armor? you don't need dex.

going dex build/gunslinger? you don't need strength.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:


DC 5 Climb doesn't need any ranks, so that point is moot.

You're still not DOING anything, just benefiting off the other players' work in order to progress.

If he hadn't been there, you were f$+%ed.

it's raining and i need to hustle since we're being attacked by, idk, zebras, carnivorous zebras.
Better hope you have max ranks then, because that's a DC 20 check.

meh 5 ranks, i'm level 10 with an okay strength score and it's a class skill. if i fail most likely it will just be no progress and not falling into the zebra's embrace.


Bandw2 wrote:

also Rynjin

bringing up something you said, if you skills aren't maxed you shouldn't being doing them right? so why do you care if you have the highest charisma? dumnp charisma for days.

also you a paladin? dump wisdom for days, you got your charisma to saves.

not a wizard? dump int if you have any casting use spell instead of skills.

not a front liner and good saves? you can leave con low.

in heavy armor? you don't need dex.

going dex build? you don't need strength.

None of which constitutes a "glaring weakness" except the low Int (which is a weakness in itself, since you HAVE NO SKILLS as I've already mentioned) since you have a class feature that covers it.

I have a low Wis Paladin. That's not a weakness.

Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:


DC 5 Climb doesn't need any ranks, so that point is moot.

You're still not DOING anything, just benefiting off the other players' work in order to progress.

If he hadn't been there, you were f$+%ed.

it's raining and i need to hustle since we're being attacked by, idk, zebras, carnivorous zebras.
Better hope you have max ranks then, because that's a DC 20 check.
meh 5 ranks, i'm level 10 with an okay strength score and it's a class skill. if i fail most likely it will just be no progress and not falling into the zebra's embrace.

Why are you level 10 all of a sudden?

You have to GET there first. 10 levels with no skills. It NEVER came up before then?

Please.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

also Rynjin

bringing up something you said, if you skills aren't maxed you shouldn't being doing them right? so why do you care if you have the highest charisma? dumnp charisma for days.

also you a paladin? dump wisdom for days, you got your charisma to saves.

not a wizard? dump int if you have any casting use spell instead of skills.

not a front liner and good saves? you can leave con low.

in heavy armor? you don't need dex.

going dex build? you don't need strength.

None of which constitutes a "glaring weakness" except the low Int (which is a weakness in itself, since you HAVE NO SKILLS as I've already mentioned) since you have a class feature that covers it.

I have a low Wis Paladin. That's not a weakness.

oh you;ve attached yourself to Cleaver's "glaring weakness" statement, i just have issue with people needed all stats to be at least 14/12 or something


Bandw2 wrote:

also Rynjin

bringing up something you said, if you skills aren't maxed you shouldn't being doing them right? so why do you care if you have the highest charisma? dumnp charisma for days.

also you a paladin? dump wisdom for days, you got your charisma to saves.

Ah yes, the Paladins. Glorious fools of justice and goodness who can neither read their surroundings nor their opponents.

Quote:
not a wizard? dump int if you have any casting use spell instead of skills.

Works great, the Wizard has spells AND skills, you have jack all nothing.

Quote:
not a front liner and good saves? you can leave con low.

Nobody in this game leaves con low.

Quote:
in heavy armor? you don't need dex.

Unless you're a Fighter! Only the class most likely to use Heavy Armor [followed perhaps by the Paladin, who can indeed endure a low dex if they're both in heavy armor and are willing to sacrifice the ability to hit enemies at range.

Quote:
going dex build/gunslinger? you don't need strength.

Woah, we agree on one. [Well, except for having to carry all that heavy ammunition and powder and coins and gear...]


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:


Why are you level 10 all of a sudden?

You have to GET there first. 10 levels with no skills. It NEVER came up before then?

Please.

when was i not level 10 in this hypothetical discussion? and no i wasn't attacked by zebras and needed to get up a cliff until now. before it's just been up an incline or to get a height bonus in combat or something.


My usual stat array is 16/14/14/12/12/7, so I do like having at least a 12 in Int (and the other 12 then is kinda stuck to Wis).

Some classes just have the fine gift of not needing one stat or another for whatever reason.

Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

Why are you level 10 all of a sudden?

You have to GET there first. 10 levels with no skills. It NEVER came up before then?

Please.

when was i not level 10 in this hypothetical discussion? and no i wasn't attacked by zebras and needed to get up a cliff until now. before it's just been up an incline or to get a height bonus in combat or something.

When were you ANY specific level?

At level 10 Climb is a non-issue because flight. I figured we were, you know, talking about levels where the Climb skill actually MATTERS.


Rynjin wrote:

My usual stat array is 16/14/14/12/12/7, so I do like having at least a 12 in Int (and the other 12 then is kinda stuck to Wis).

Some classes just have the fine gift of not needing one stat or another for whatever reason.

Yeah, 3.X was basically designed for full casters who only heavily value one stat and can freely put all their level-based stat ups [and eventually only pay for one set of inherent bonuses to] their single critical stat.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

also Rynjin

bringing up something you said, if you skills aren't maxed you shouldn't being doing them right? so why do you care if you have the highest charisma? dumnp charisma for days.

also you a paladin? dump wisdom for days, you got your charisma to saves.

Ah yes, the Paladins. Glorious fools of justice and goodness who can neither read their surroundings nor their opponents.

Quote:
not a wizard? dump int if you have any casting use spell instead of skills.

Works great, the Wizard has spells AND skills, you have jack all nothing.

Quote:
not a front liner and good saves? you can leave con low.

Nobody in this game leaves con low.

Quote:
in heavy armor? you don't need dex.

Unless you're a Fighter! Only the class most likely to use Heavy Armor [followed perhaps by the Paladin, who can indeed endure a low dex if they're both in heavy armor and are willing to sacrifice the ability to hit enemies at range.

Quote:
going dex build/gunslinger? you don't need strength.
Woah, we agree on one. [Well, except for having to carry all that heavy ammunition and powder and coins and gear...]

not gona go throguh makign a million quote brackets.

1. detect evil
2. I cast spider climb/fly/knock/teleport/detect thought/fear/Identify... omg so many spells to choose from
3. I do occasionally, seriously don't expect to front line and have escape options, (this is relying on good saves in general as well) then it CAN be left low.
4. Fighters not archtypign out armor mastery are wasting some good archetypes
5. handy haversack


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:

My usual stat array is 16/14/14/12/12/7, so I do like having at least a 12 in Int (and the other 12 then is kinda stuck to Wis).

Some classes just have the fine gift of not needing one stat or another for whatever reason.

Bandw2 wrote:
Rynjin wrote:


Why are you level 10 all of a sudden?

You have to GET there first. 10 levels with no skills. It NEVER came up before then?

Please.

when was i not level 10 in this hypothetical discussion? and no i wasn't attacked by zebras and needed to get up a cliff until now. before it's just been up an incline or to get a height bonus in combat or something.

When were you ANY specific level?

At level 10 Climb is a non-issue because flight. I figured we were, you know, talking about levels where the Climb skill actually MATTERS.

is everyone having fly cast on them? no i assumed the wizard flew up to tie down the rope.


You seem to automatically assume every character springs fully formed from the mind of Zeus at a level where this shit can actually help you.

Detect Evil only really works once you hit about 8th level (when most things will finally be level 5). Handy Haversacks are pretty expensive at low levels too.

Spells are a thing that, you know...not every class has.

201 to 250 of 465 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What is everyone's fascination with... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.