A party where every PC has the exact same build?


Advice

1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I have been mulling what it would be like to play with a party where every character is built with the exact stats, feats, skills, etc.

My thought was, if everyone is mechanically identical, it could be a good exercise to force them to differentiate themselves in RP, without having the potential crutch of defining their character purely based off what's on their character sheet. It would basically require them to flesh out their PC into a multi-dimensional character. Now, I wouldn't propose playing a whole campaign like this, but maybe like 3-4 sessions (and who knows, maybe they would really start to enjoy it and want to keep going.)

What do you think? And how would you build a character if four party members were going to use the same build?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Related threads:

Musical Party

One class party, a thought experiment.

Themed PC Groups

Thought Experiment, Single Class Campaign

Thread Necromancy welcome.

Another thought: Teamwork Feats would be good here, and might actually get some use.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

All Red Mage party!

Would you allow them to pick different races?

I would probably go for a party of all bards have them pick different instruments and have a traveling band.


Stormagedon Dark Lord of All wrote:

All Red Mage party!

Would you allow them to pick different races?

I would probably go for a party of all bards have them pick different instruments and have a traveling band.

No on different races. Part of the goal is to avoid stereotyped RP choices. I DON'T want it to be "I'm playing the half-orc", "I'm playing the gnome", but rather something like "I'm playing Jordy, whose father was a [], mother came from [], when he was young [] happened to him, and so now he wants to do [] to demonstrate to [] that he is []. But, because of [] he is afraid of [], and has a fondness for []."

I DID actually play a musical campaign! I was lobbying hard for an all-bard party, but we ended up meeting halfway and settling on all musical characters from various classes that formed a traveling band. It was tons of fun, probably the most ridiculous campaign I've played (besides perhaps the all-gnome campaign.) I'd highly recommend that sort of campaign, but now I want to even take it one step farther!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My girlfriend and I did a hunter and sacred huntsman inquisitor in PFS taking all the same feats and stats. We split skills for practicality's sake. Teamwork feats were pretty awesome.


RumpinRufus wrote:
Part of the goal is to avoid stereotyped RP choices.

If that is the case, another option is to have them create their character's RP and backstory, then pseudo-randomly choose race and class. (If you have 4 people, randomly assign Front-line, Caster, Healer, and Skill-Monkey to them (so you have roles covered), then randomly roll classes under those roles, races could be fully random)


KahnyaGnorc wrote:
RumpinRufus wrote:
Part of the goal is to avoid stereotyped RP choices.
If that is the case, another option is to have them create their character's RP and backstory, then pseudo-randomly choose race and class. (If you have 4 people, randomly assign Front-line, Caster, Healer, and Skill-Monkey to them (so you have roles covered), then randomly roll classes under those roles, races could be fully random)

Personally, I find my intended RP vs my actual RP can diverge significantly. I might have a fleshed-out character in mind before the first session. But then instead of actually RPing to express the character I've planned, I end up making the easy, expected choices, like being extra goofy as a gnome, even if that didn't fit well with the intended personality based off my back story.

So, even with the pseudo-random assignment, I'd be concerned that it would devolve into "I'm a dwarf now so I'll be extra-ornery," or "I'm an elf now so I'll be extra-haughty."

The potential beauty of the exact same build is that you are FORCING real in-game RP to be the ONLY distinguishing factor. If they don't differentiate themselves with RP, they probably just won't have any fun... which is actually intended, because you are trusting them to find their fun by truly establishing a character and demonstrating how it is a different character than several mechanically-identical PCs.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to throw an idea your way that helps with kind of forcing role play with controlling players class. Start them at level 0 all same states than let them role play into a class and their stats.

We had a campaign that started this way and it was pretty fun. You can't really fight anything at level 0. So the first few sessions were just straight role playing, and setting plot hooks.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So... you want to prove a point to your players about what you think is fun? And you go about it by forcing them to play the way you want them to play? And it's not even certain it will help to prove your point, they may just get bored and leave the game instead? But that's okay, because that's the intention?
Seems like a very good idea.


All dhampir clerics who channel negative energy.


I've toyed with the idea of a party of mostly identical melee/caster Cleric/Monk1 characters. Something like Ecclesitheurge of Sarenrae with the Reformation Inquisition, using Fire Domain as primary, Reformation Inquisition as secondary, and taking Glory Domain spells as secondary. One level of Unchained Monk for sword flurry, wisdom AC and easy access to Crane. Split stats with Dual Talent for an 18/18 start. They can melee with flurry, crane, Heroism and Favor, cast with high DC, and maybe take Dazing Produce Flame to throw at things.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RumpinRufus wrote:
And how would you build a character if four party members were going to use the same build?

Druid, 100%.

Four full divine casters that can wear armor and hold their own in melee combat. They pick their prepared spells each morning from any on the list, so they can use their choices to customize a role each day. The druid spell list allows them to grab a little bit of everything - utility, healing, buffing, debuffing, and battlefield control. And whenever is necessary, any of them can expend any of their spells for spontaneous summoning. Not the best spell list in terms of pure damage, but that's where the animal companions come in. You can have an epic pack of four animal companions (with characters and relationships of their own) that rips through everything in melee combat with the well-coordinated support of four spellcasting druids. Don't forget to use teamwork feats, to devastating effect. Finally, the druids themselves can gain utility, versatility, and combat prowess through use of their wild shape to transform the whole party into whatever creatures the situation calls for. Cohesion of party abilities suddenly becomes an issue of the past: when you need to fly or swim or blend in you can all turn into birds or fish or rodents. And when you need the extra combat boost that wild shape provides, each character can have a preferred combat form that maximizes their ability to work together as a team and... wait... the party has now officially entered an Animorphs book. I'm pretty sure that constitutes winning Pathfinder.

Scarab Sages

way back in 3.x living greyhawk our normal group started all human clerics, the only difference was in the god chosen. Even same builds and everything there is automatically a bit of difference just in dogma


This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hunter, because 8 people with the same teamwork feats will wreck the s#$$ out of everything.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RumpinRufus wrote:


you are FORCING real in-game RP

Forcing players into anything always turns out so well.


Rub-Eta wrote:

So... you want to prove a point to your players about what you think is fun? And you go about it by forcing them to play the way you want them to play? And it's not even certain it will help to prove your point, they may just get bored and leave the game instead? But that's okay, because that's the intention?

Seems like a very good idea.

Fair questions... it's more about a scenario I would enjoy playing as one of the PCs. I know some of the traps I've fallen into where I make an early RP choice that ends up stereotyping my character in a way that I end up regretting. I am just curious to get feedback on whether others feel the same way... if I were a more skilled RPer then I wouldn't need to try out this exercise, but I was thinking it might be a way to strengthen my RP process.

I also am not suggesting that you actually force anyone to play this way - I'm aware that 75% of players probably wouldn't be interested in this game. But, if you ask a dozen people "would you be interested in this?" and get 4 yesses, there's your game. Play three sessions or so, see if people are digging it, and take it from there.


Rub-Eta wrote:
This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).

John Lennon had the same build as Ringo Starr? News to me.


My Self wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).
John Lennon had the same build as Ringo Starr? News to me.

I'd hardly call the Beatles a boy band...


johnnythexxxiv wrote:
My Self wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).
John Lennon had the same build as Ringo Starr? News to me.
I'd hardly call the Beatles a boy band...

They absolutely were a boy band in the beginning. Beatlemania was the original boy band phenomenon.


Ryan Freire wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
My Self wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).
John Lennon had the same build as Ringo Starr? News to me.
I'd hardly call the Beatles a boy band...
They absolutely were a boy band in the beginning. Beatlemania was the original boy band phenomenon.

Pretty much - screaming girl fans, a repertoire of love songs, sounds like a boy band to me. Of course, back then, it was more of an original concept than what we get now.


RumpinRufus wrote:

{. . .}

I also am not suggesting that you actually force anyone to play this way - I'm aware that 75% of players probably wouldn't be interested in this game. But, if you ask a dozen people "would you be interested in this?" and get 4 yesses, there's your game. Play three sessions or so, see if people are digging it, and take it from there.

Of course, that''s assuming you can find a dozen potential players in the first place . . . .


That depends on where you live. Where I came from the problem was finding GM's for all the hopeful players. Where I am now the issue is finding anyone else who plays at all (I still skype in to my old group), but the new home is in a city that is essentially a retirement community. On the plus side, decent furniture is cheap here.

Grand Lodge

Is it violating the premise to all play Aasimar Medium 1/Unsworn Shaman X?
14 Str, 8 Dex, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 15+2, Cha 14+2
Noble Scion(War), Legendary Influence, Toughness, and teamwork feats.

You can each choose your Medium Spirit, Shaman Spirit, and Hexes every morning. It's hard to be an archer since your Dex sucks. But you can each end up very distinct day to day.

There's a thread on the general idea here:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2swrn?The-Most-Interesting-man-in-the-World#16


Markov Spiked Chain wrote:

Is it violating the premise to all play Aasimar Medium 1/Unsworn Shaman X?

14 Str, 8 Dex, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 15+2, Cha 14+2
Noble Scion(War), Legendary Influence, Toughness, and teamwork feats.

You can each choose your Medium Spirit, Shaman Spirit, and Hexes every morning. It's hard to be an archer since your Dex sucks. But you can each end up very distinct day to day.

There's a thread on the general idea here:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2swrn?The-Most-Interesting-man-in-the-World#16

I like the suggestion. As for if it violates the premise, I'm still unsure. I myself was wondering if Brawler, for example, is already subverting the premise. I suppose in its purest form you don't want anything memorable about the character stemming simply from mechanics... so even any prepared caster may be pushing it, since it could become "he's the blasty one, he's the summoner, etc." But it's already a very extreme experiment... too much limitation could kill it.

I think all gunslinger could be fun. Or all ranger. Or Hell, just go full boy-band and make everyone a Celebrity bard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RumpinRufus wrote:

I have been mulling what it would be like to play with a party where every character is built with the exact stats, feats, skills, etc.

My thought was, if everyone is mechanically identical, it could be a good exercise to force them to differentiate themselves in RP, without having the potential crutch of defining their character purely based off what's on their character sheet. It would basically require them to flesh out their PC into a multi-dimensional character. Now, I wouldn't propose playing a whole campaign like this, but maybe like 3-4 sessions (and who knows, maybe they would really start to enjoy it and want to keep going.)

What do you think? And how would you build a character if four party members were going to use the same build?

I think this is going to backfire in more ways than one.

Your biggest mistake is assuming anything having to do with mechanics is going to improve roleplay at all.

You can have 4 identically built characters, and each have 4 completely divergent personalities.

That doesn't mean ANY of them are going to be well fleshed out complex characters. There are a million different permutations of flat, boring 2D characters, many of which can be applied to the same concept. Taking the boy band concept above:

Bard 1: "Hi, I'm the perky one!"

Bard 2: "I'm the broody one."

Bard 3: "I'm the sensitive one. *sniff*"

Bard 4: "I'm the talented one that everyone will remember after we break up!"

Four different characters, yes.

Hardly complex and nuanced.


RumpinRufus wrote:
so even any prepared caster may be pushing it, since it could become "he's the blasty one, he's the summoner, etc."

The nice thing about prepared casters, though, is that they can mix it up as much as they want to ever day. At some point you have to allow for variation in tactics and playstyles, at least; not everyone is going to enjoy blasting and not everyone is going to enjoy summoning. Although druids, I might add, don't need to worry about who prepares the summoning spells.

RumpinRufus wrote:
I think all gunslinger could be fun. Or all ranger. Or Hell, just go full boy-band and make everyone a Celebrity bard.

These all seem like they could be loads of thematic fun, but would be a mechanical disaster.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:
Hunter, because 8 people with the same teamwork feats will wreck the s~%+ out of everything.

I GMed a special PFS session for a bunch of local GMs with animal companions who wanted to all play their pet class characters at the same time. We called it a "pet stomp."

We had 4 hunters and a witch, and they had teamwork feats galore! It was hilarious.

Hmm

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

We played a scenario at a local con where we all played identical wizards, except for our alignments and robe colors.

The one caveat is that we had no spells prepared--but when we mentioned or spoke name out loud, we all got it prepared.

There were 3 of us, and after beating the bad guys, only one of us could make it through the escape portal. The DM expected us to fight over it, but 2 of us were NG, so we helped the 3rd one through.

I think a party of all inquisitors might be fun. They could distinguish themselves through judgment use during fights, and lots of Teamwork Feats!


Is anyone else reminded of The Legend of Zelda: 4 Swords?

Also gonna +1 the hunter party. Bonus teamwork feats everywhere = win.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Go the full nine yards. Name every party member Bruce.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ms. Pleiades wrote:
Go the full nine yards. Name every party member Bruce.

Jann Quadrent Vincent 4. It's time to Micheal down your Vincents..


dragonhunterq wrote:
RumpinRufus wrote:


you are FORCING real in-game RP

Forcing players into anything always turns out so well.

Skull and Shackles much?

Dark Archive

What happens if you make them all wizards? Do they just win the game?


Halek wrote:
What happens if you make them all wizards? Do they just win the game?

I'm having flashbacks of playing a party of 4 Black Mages in NES Final Fantasy, and just wandering around as a walking death squad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Eldritch Guardian/Mutagenic Warrior focused on dirty tricks.

Because sometimes you just want to break the game.

Seriously- a party of 4 means you have 8 characters going around crippling status conditions. With dirty trick master, that means that 4 enemies are pretty much shut down for the entire fight each and every round. The game just wasn't designed to deal with mass stun locking with identical builds- most of the time, the assumes there is one guy with an specific ability in any party.

Anyway, obviously, with an all fighter party, you will face some problems, but not as much with the set up. They have will saves that can deal with enchantments at least, they have UMD as a class skill so they could just buy some of the 'must haves', and mutagenic warrior means they can ally fly which solves other problems.

If nothing else, this seems like a fun set of enemies to send at the party. Preferably as the crack team meant to capture your players alive, since it is designed for mass shut down that could cripple encounters. So they probably work as the mage slayer unit for a powerful authority that could end up as an ally. Having them kick your butts seems like a fast way to give off the impress 'these guys are good'.


Halek wrote:
What happens if you make them all wizards? Do they just win the game?

Yes. Yes they do. And usually by level 6 at that.


It's definitely not something unique to you. There have been many times I wanted to run or play in a group of matched characters; swarm-fighters for instance really need at least a couple others sharing that talent. All mages from the same school, etc.

Only once, in the World's Largest Dungeon did we all make halfling swarm-fighters (3.5) and it worked pretty good, we did end up all having the same feats and such in the beginning, since you only get so many and need some specific ones to not die horribly at 1st-2nd level.

Even if you do get fighters or some other class to be identical in stats and skills and feats, it will not hold true for more than 3 levels or so. Eventually one is going to get a magic item, like a wand, or a +1 magical weapon, or a pair of boots. At it's most basic level, one character will get some half-plate or a breastplate off a slain foe, and one character will decide that he prefers Leather armor.

Then you 'risk/have':
The fighter with the longsword and the full-plate.
The fighter with the chainshirt and the glowing +1 longsword.
The fighter with the leather armor and longsword with the slippers of spider climbing.
These things will affect how the character is viewed beyond just a personality type. There will be the character known for zipping up walls or the character known for his sword that cuts dragons in half, or his bow that fires electric arrows.

I'd say don't try and get too hung up on things, because no matter how hard you try, it's not going to conform for long.


Pizza Lord wrote:

It's definitely not something unique to you. There have been many times I wanted to run or play in a group of matched characters; swarm-fighters for instance really need at least a couple others sharing that talent. All mages from the same school, etc.

Only once, in the World's Largest Dungeon did we all make halfling swarm-fighters (3.5) and it worked pretty good, we did end up all having the same feats and such in the beginning, since you only get so many and need some specific ones to not die horribly at 1st-2nd level.

Even if you do get fighters or some other class to be identical in stats and skills and feats, it will not hold true for more than 3 levels or so. Eventually one is going to get a magic item, like a wand, or a +1 magical weapon, or a pair of boots. At it's most basic level, one character will get some half-plate or a breastplate off a slain foe, and one character will decide that he prefers Leather armor.

Then you 'risk/have':
The fighter with the longsword and the full-plate.
The fighter with the chainshirt and the glowing +1 longsword.
The fighter with the leather armor and longsword with the slippers of spider climbing.
These things will affect how the character is viewed beyond just a personality type. There will be the character known for zipping up walls or the character known for his sword that cuts dragons in half, or his bow that fires electric arrows.

I'd say don't try and get too hung up on things, because no matter how hard you try, it's not going to conform for long.

Cool to hear that a similar thing has worked out for you in the past!

I was not planning on forcing identical gear - if anything, I was considering giving 2x WBL to allow them to diversify a little bit. Or probably something like 1x WBL base with 3 bonuses of extra 1/3 WBL if they have their character description, backstory, and motivations/goals submitted 1, 2 and 3 weeks before the first session (in any order, and allowing substitutions of other character-related information for any of those pieces.)


Rub-Eta wrote:

So... you want to prove a point to your players about what you think is fun? And you go about it by forcing them to play the way you want them to play? And it's not even certain it will help to prove your point, they may just get bored and leave the game instead? But that's okay, because that's the intention?

Seems like a very good idea.

God, people are so melodramatic.

This is an excellent idea.


I think this would be a fun play-by-post concept. I'd play in it.

Scarab Sages

I'm with the kobold. It could very well be a blast.


lemeres wrote:

Eldritch Guardian/Mutagenic Warrior focused on dirty tricks.

Because sometimes you just want to break the game.

Seriously- a party of 4 means you have 8 characters going around crippling status conditions. With dirty trick master, that means that 4 enemies are pretty much shut down for the entire fight each and every round. The game just wasn't designed to deal with mass stun locking with identical builds- most of the time, the assumes there is one guy with an specific ability in any party.

If that's what your going for, it's hard to get more ridiculous than having an entire party use Bewildering Koan.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
I think this would be a fun play-by-post concept. I'd play in it.

Same.


Avoron wrote:
If that's what your going for, it's hard to get more ridiculous than having an entire party use Bewildering Koan.

Disheartening display to intimidate enemies until they are in the fetal position asking for their mommies in 1 round.


Yeah, monsters do it all the time. What's not to like?


lemeres wrote:
Avoron wrote:
If that's what your going for, it's hard to get more ridiculous than having an entire party use Bewildering Koan.
Disheartening display to intimidate enemies until they are in the fetal position asking for their mommies in 1 round.

Doesn't work.

Disheartening Display wrote:
Once affected by this feat, a creature cannot be affected by it again (by you or anyone else) for 24 hours.

You'd need to take a few Damnation Feats so that all of your party's intimidates stack.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:

So... you want to prove a point to your players about what you think is fun? And you go about it by forcing them to play the way you want them to play? And it's not even certain it will help to prove your point, they may just get bored and leave the game instead? But that's okay, because that's the intention?

Seems like a very good idea.

God, people are so melodramatic.

This is an excellent idea.

Frankly theme parties are usually way more interesting and fun than everyone coming up with their own character.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:

So... you want to prove a point to your players about what you think is fun? And you go about it by forcing them to play the way you want them to play? And it's not even certain it will help to prove your point, they may just get bored and leave the game instead? But that's okay, because that's the intention?

Seems like a very good idea.

God, people are so melodramatic.

This is an excellent idea.

Frankly theme parties are usually way more interesting and fun than everyone coming up with their own character.

You just have to make sure you everyone is on board. One campaign had 3 players try to play a witch's coven, but everyone else decided to 'race to the back' as well, so the idea was scrapped quickly.

Liberty's Edge

I have two PFS builds that my wife and I want to do. The / in spells means one of us is choosing one and the other is choosing something different.

If you had a whole party of this, you could spam obscuring mist like there is no tomorrow and everyone in the party could see through it.

PS: Let me know :D if you have any feedback on the build. We are just lvl 1 now and can change things. Also, we only are going to play it like once every 2+ months, so there's no hurry in any build advice....

Elf Lorekeeper Oracle

Retreat Magic: Some elves specialize in magic that fools foes into misjudging elven numbers and locations. These elves gain a +1 racial bonus to their caster levels for the purpose of determining the range and duration of all conjuration and illusion spells that they cast. This racial trait replaces elven magic.

Elven Immunities: Elves are immune to magic sleep effects and gain a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells and effects.

Keen Senses: Elves receive a +2 racial bonus on Perception checks.

Weapon Familiarity: Elves are proficient with longbows (including composite longbows), longswords, rapiers, and shortbows (including composite shortbows), and treat any weapon with the word “elven” in its name as a martial weapon.

Low-Light Vision: Elves can see twice as far as humans in conditions of dim light.

Trait:
Sound of Mind(Regional): You gain a +2 trait bonus on saves against mind-affecting effects

Reactionary Initiative (Combat): +2 initiative

Languages: Common, Elven

Curse: Powerless Prophecy

Mystery: Wave

Favored class bonus: Increase HP at every level

STR: 12
DEX: 18 (Increase at 4, 8)
CON: 12
INT: 9
WIS: 10
CHA: 15 (Increase at 12)

Skills: Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Stealth

LEVEL 1 Point Blank Shot, Water Sight, Uncanny Dodge (Powerless Prophecy)
Powerless Prophecy: You can't take any actions in a surprise round, including free actions. In the absence of a surprise round, you are staggered for the entire first round of combat.
Spells:
0: Light, Detect Magic, Mage Hand, Create Water, Stabilize
1: Obscuring Mist, Protection from Evil, Cure Light Wounds

LEVEL 2
Spells:
0: Guidance
1: Dancing Lights (Lorekeeper)

LEVEL 3 Precise Shot,
Revelation: Fluid Nature
Spells:
1: Divine Favor

LEVEL 4
Spells:
0: Read Magic
2: Magic Missile (Lorekeeper), Weapon of Awe, Cure Moderate Wounds

LEVEL 5 Rapid Shot
+4 insight bonus to initiative (Powerless Prohecy)
Spells:
1: Shield of Faith
2: Defending Bone

LEVEL 6
Spells:
0: Resistance
3: Fog Cloud(Lorekeeper), Channel Vigor, Cure Serious Wounds

LEVEL 7 Weapon Focus (Composite Longbow)
Revelation: Icy Skin (or Ice Armor if no armor)
Spells:
1: Remove Fear / Remove Sickness
2: Remove Paralysis / Lesser Restoration
3: Remove Disease / Remove Curse

LEVEL 8
Spells:
0: Purify Food and Drink
4: Fly (Lorekeeper), Divine Power, Cure Critical Wounds

LEVEL 9 Manyshot
Spells:
2: Resist Energy / Silence
3: Daylight
4: Restoration / Ward Shield

LEVEL 10 Improved Uncanny Dodge (Powerless Prophecy)
Spells:
0: Detect Poison
5: Emergency Force Sphere (Lorekeeper), Breath of Life, Mass Cure Light Wounds

LEVEL 11 Clustered Shots,
Revelation: Wintry Touch
Spells:
2: Delay Poison / Find Traps
3: Invisibility Purge/ Remove Blindness&Deafness
4: Air Walk / Freedom of Movement
5: Fickle Winds

LEVEL 12
Spells:
6: Teleport (Lorekeeper), Heal, Mass Cure Moderate Wounds


Avoron wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Avoron wrote:
If that's what your going for, it's hard to get more ridiculous than having an entire party use Bewildering Koan.
Disheartening display to intimidate enemies until they are in the fetal position asking for their mommies in 1 round.

Doesn't work.

Disheartening Display wrote:
Once affected by this feat, a creature cannot be affected by it again (by you or anyone else) for 24 hours.
You'd need to take a few Damnation Feats so that all of your party's intimidates stack.

Oh, I know you aren't quite getting to 'fetal position' levels....

but there is a key thing here- can you do the normal dazzling display (a prereq for disheat.), and then disheartening display? That would still get you to 'running your fool head off' levels on a 30' wide radius. Dazzling takes them to 'shaken', and disheartening takes them to 'frightened'.

And frankly, doing dazzling and then disheartened seems like the intended use- spend 1 turn to set up, a 2nd turn to finish up and cause a large radius effect. I couldn't see much use in the feat if it couldn't set itself up, and it just pays for its power with the relatively long set up.

But with a party of 4, with maybe 4 familiars, you can break an entire encounter in a single turn with this. Because it is a feat chain that the designers never thought would show up more than once per party, so it gets easily broken with numbers.

1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / A party where every PC has the exact same build? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.