Adventure Path: Jade Regent

Game Master Ravenath

Ok! Discussion room for the Adventure Path!

Ok, guys. I have made my mind. I have decided that a monk fits this AP a lot.
But I have never used a monk, and I haven't played pathfinder for a loooooooooong time.
I have read that the monk can a big deception in a lot of cases. So I ask you for advice. If I want to be an unarmed monk, what kind of build should I aim for? Is it imposible to make an unarmed monk viable? I have read about tetori and dragon disciple, but there is arguments pro and against those builds.
What do you say?

Well I play a zen-archer monk rogether with my wive's barb we demolish a Lot in seconds. And with monks defences he plays an excellent trap spotter.
For unarmed monks tetori work well, but monks have some other problems. They are crazy MAD, can easelybe stopped bx Dr.

I love the monk, I played almost exclusively monks for the first three years of Pathfinder play. But they've got they're issues. Unarmed combat is one of them. There still aren't any great solutions for that either. At least, I don't know of anything to fix it.

One thing that always helped my monks is thinking of them as martial battlefield control, rather than trying to get them to be a big damage dealer or anything like that. Especially with feat tax rules, there're some pretty great things a monk can do in that area.

Also, take a look at the unchained monk. It doesn't fix everything, and some problems are worsened, but it might be a good play style for your monk. Then again it very well might not (especially as it cannot take any archetypes without houseruleing it).

While we're here, we should also finalize character creation rules.

Things that seem pretty decided (correct me if you feel any of this is not):
20 point buy
Max health at first level
Average+1 health after first
250gp starting wealth
All paizo sources

Things that seem undecided:
Spheres of might
Feat tax rules
Background skills

I really like background skills.
I think Feat tax rules is quite good.
I am not in favor of spheres of might.

The same here, Feat tax rules good, Spheres of might not in favor.

So, @Languagejunkie, if I decide to make it a martial battlefield control, what type of monk do you suggest?

It's more about playstyle than build. Instead of trying to jump in and deal damage like a fighter, focus on tactics and stopping enemy charges, distract the big guy for a bit while some of the littler ones are taken care of, disable, stun, trip, disarm, get in position to flank with the guy that really needs it, etc. Use the monk's high mobility to keep the enemy from doing what they want to do and help your allies get what they need. A lot of various builds work for that in different ways, but one thing that does change for building is it allows you to reduce MAD (especially with Feat Tax). You don't as much need a high strength for it because while damage is good, it's not necessarily the goal.

Shame about Spheres of Power- While I wasn't intending on using it except for a handful of NPCs to greatly expand character versatility, while providing relatively marginal boosts to martial power. But it's understandable that you guys don't want to learn or deal with a new subsystem, so I'll let it go.

I am definitely down for Background Skills.

In addition, the adventure path reccomends your characters already know each other relatively well- Largely due to the fact that Sandpoint is hiring you guys to deal with the Goblins who somehow got access to a bunch of fireworks. While this isn't particularly bad (They aren't good weapons), it *has* made them increasingly bold. So now Goblin ears are worth 10 gp each.

Although I understand that the Feat tax rules are popular (more! better! stronger! faster!) I worry that it will lead only to increased min-maxing and uber-powerful builds. While I don't oppose min-maxing as a concept, I want to point out that the APs are NOT written with it in mind and are built for a 4 PC party. Having run a few APs in the past, the PCs quickly outpace their challengers by level 4 or 5 even with just the standard Paizo rules, leading GMs to have to increase the power of their combat opponents in order to make fights last more than 1.5 rounds (or 1 round if the party has surprise).

Some players have the most fun when they dominate every single combat without breaking a sweat; I am not one of those. I prefer challenging combats that push you to your limits and make it feel like you need to pull out all of the stops and use your smarts to defeat the opponent. I'm not saying that every combat has to be like this, but it feels like a huge letdown when you can one-shot the BBEG.

What do others think? I'm willing to try the feat tax rules, I just worry that it will lead to the need for a lot of extra work for the GMs once the power creep strikes a few levels in.

I agree with everything Branding Opportunity has said. While not opposed to the feat taxes in principle, I worry they'll result in an overpowered party.

I perfectly understand that.
I just saw it in the past and thought it would make it easier for some builds. Especially dex builds.
But I have to say the key to a truly overpowering party is not feats but good Teamwork ;-)

Sounds fine to me. I've never actually used it before so I don't know how it would affect the game and am totally fine with not using it.

So, it sounds like:
Spheres of Might No
Feat Tax Rules No
Background Skills Yes

Sound good?

Wow, those arguments are good, and I don't want to be doing maths to make bigger encounters on my GM turn :D I'm against Feat Tax now :D

Regarding the monk thingy, tetori is master grappling. I think that counts as slowing down the enemies. I think I'll do it like that.

Honestly, I do not see many problems with the Feat Tax rules. For the most part, many of these are simply condensing feats that still require specialization to get further with them (Such as with Deft Maneuvers to Greater Dirty Trick), gets rid of various feat taxes (Dex to hit), or allows for options to apply to a wider array of weapons (Such as weapon focus).

I don't think they'll create too much of a vertical power boost for most players, but will most likely serve as a much needed horizontal power boost for many character concepts (The monk can now not only grapple, but trip! Overrunners can do other things!)

Background skills are very nice.
Feat tax is mainly because soo many people think that Martials are in power level way behind casters.
But then for our gms sake let´s scrap feat tax.
It makes their lives easier too :-)
I plan a STR samurai anyway.
Also if you trip with your weapon you use your dex anyway. ;-)

As I've stated, I'm willing to try the feat tax. I just worry about power creep.

Ok, let's have a vote:
I vote yes to feat tax.

If given a choice, I'll vote no.

I also vote no, just to make it easier for each of us when we GM.

I do think I'll let my party of three use it in the RotR campaign I'm running offline, though.

In addition, the adventure path reccomends your characters already know each other relatively well- Largely due to the fact that Sandpoint is hiring you guys to deal with the Goblins who somehow got access to a bunch of fireworks. While this isn't particularly bad (They aren't good weapons), it *has* made them increasingly bold. So now Goblin ears are worth 10 gp each.

My character's backstory connects her to Koya. Perhaps she'd be willing to hunt goblins at her request? I'm willing to modify my story a bit to mesh with everyone else.

I'll vote no. While I don't have anything against it and might do it in a game I run, I think a rotating gm game is not the place to try it out.

This is Languagejunkie with my (yet incomplete) character. I'm still working on formally writing out background, but the gist of it is that Samell was abandoned by his orc father because he was growing up so weak, though Samell barely remembers. He was found by Sandru and brought to Koya, who then raised and taught Samell. Samell never quite felt as though he belonged in Sandpoint due to his heritage, and so he has recently it been icing for some sortn of adventure to take him away.

Enge, with both of us connected to Koya, perhaps the timing was just right that, while still a child, I was there as Koya nursed you back to health. Maybe, depending on how often you visited Koya, there could be almost a nephew/aunt type relationship between us?

As for Palea, other than both growing up in Sandpoint and being at least closish in age, there's not a whole lot to connect us. Maybe some sort of childhood friends since we were both kind of outsiders within the town?

That sounds like a good connection idea! I would expect Enge to visit Koya whenever she was in Sandpoint, which would have been a few times over the past 20 years.

As for Palea, other than both growing up in Sandpoint and being at least closish in age, there's not a whole lot to connect us. Maybe some sort of childhood friends since we were both kind of outsiders within the town?

They're actually not that close in age as Palea is only 17. She would have most likely lumped him into an age category with her much older brothers. Samell would have been aware of her history though, and she certainly would have been aware of him as another outsider.

Perhaps she could have come to talk to Samell when things got bad in her family, looking for some guidance and understanding. Their friendship could have begun then.

That does sound better. I like that.

Could everyone take a look at this archetype ability, please? I need a GM call on by "Battle Dance ability, but since we're all going to be GMing eventually, I'd like everyone's input. Here's the ability:

After reading this, does the GM think that the Dawnflower Dervish (or DD) loses the normal versions of inspire courage, inspire greatness, or inspire heroics so that she can only perform them as a battle dance? I realize that you can't do both at the same time.

Thanks

From what I read, I'd rule it as not making a alteration to the performances directly, so various archetypes can replace or alter those performances. It alters Bardic Performance directly as a result.

From what I read, I'd rule it as not making a alteration to the performances directly, so various archetypes can replace or alter those performances. It alters Bardic Performance directly as a result.

So she loses her ability to perform the regular bardic performance of inspire courage, etc?

When the Dawnflower dervish uses the inspire courage, inspire greatness, or inspire heroics bardic performance types as battle dances, these performance types only provide benefit to the Dawnflower dervish himself.

IMO, I think this is the relevant portion. When you use inspire courage etc. it can only benefit you which means no you cannot use the regular versions.

I agree with LanguageJunkie that bardic abilities would only apply to oneself in that case.

Which is why I utterly dislike the dervish dancer bard.
It makes the master supporter an inferior mage.

Ei, Guys, what do you think about adding to the monk a level of sorcerer for auto-buf? Is that waste of time?

I'm more inclined toward a story-based approach for characters: Does taking a level in something else fit the character's background or trajectory?

To really answer the question would require comparing the relative bonuses from the buffing spells gained vs. from taking another level in monk, which I will leave to someone else.

I am with Dslak. Sometimes you add a level because of plot and it is cool.
But it is your character. I just think monks are hard to make right anyway :-(

I'm in agreement. Yeah you could do that and find a story reason, but is it the story you want to tell?

As for the effectiveness of a choice? I'm of the opinion that any given build is good for some players, but not every player. Is it right for your playstyle? I don't know.

It can't happen yet anyway, my suggestion would be that you start playing, and down the line a bit, if it fits your character and playstyle then go for it.

I'm really glad to have so many players with a story driven approach in this campaign. I was out of pathfinder sooo much time that I thought all pathfinder players would be powergamers :D

Yea thats why I play a samurai.
The most Op melee class. Nope.
Because I am a japanaphile

Welcome aboard Takafumi! Glad we're all here and ready to go now.

I was reading this thread and didn't notice the game being already online in the other thread :D

I was reading this thread and didn't notice the game being already online in the other thread :D

I was beginning to suspect that might be it. Glad you got it figured out anyway.

Wow! @BrandingOpportunity, that's a fine template what you have in your character sheet. Is it available anywhere?

Wow! @BrandingOpportunity, that's a fine template what you have in your character sheet. Is it available anywhere?

It's from HeroLab. Would you like me to do it for your PC? You would just have to send me your character sheet.

Cool! Here it is: https://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=1531246

Takafumi, a few things you need to update:

I forgot about Background Skills. Will need to update Enge.

Branding Opportunity, I chose Perform (dance) -my katas can be performed as a eastern styled dance- and scribe.
For now, if I cannot damage it, I'll pin it :D Maybe in the future I change the idea.

Here's a thought: shouldn't you have a PC for this adventure too, Vagabond? That way when you are ready to pass the GMing mantle to the next person, you already have an established character?

While that would certainly be a reasonable assessment, I'd rather not play a character in-game while DMing myself. This is largely due to not wanting to have my character be the mouthpiece of the DM, the character concept requiring a level to really click into place, and the fact that I can just as easily slot him in later on in the campaign, allowing me to focus on running for now.