Discuss
Will we use:
- Feat Taxes rules (My barbarian would like to do sunder a lot)?
- Background Skills?
Hmmm... I guess this isn't the time to pitch some of my more out-there character ideas. No pseudodragons or awakened foxes this time. :D
How would you feel about a tengu or a nagaji? Given Numeria's reputation for strange creatures and technology, I can see the curious traveling from distant lands to see things.
Or I might possibly go for a witch or shaman and have fun with my familiar/spirit animal. :D
Really, though, I tend to have enough character ideas that I can wait and see what others want to play and fill in the gaps in party makeup.
No that’s fine. I’m pretty open to letting things in. I think letting everyone give their character extra flavor just adds to the game.
No that’s fine. I’m pretty open to letting things in. I think letting everyone give their character extra flavor just adds to the game.
I will get that as a yes to feat taxes and background skills.
Thanks
Sorry JohnnyBlack I completely forgot about your question. That’s a yes to both.
Does technology actually use Knowledge (arcana) at all? I had only glanced at the list before, but now that I've read it, it looks like they just list that skill to say that it isn't used.
Sooooo... does that mean I *could* pitch my weirder ideas? :D
They're both actually ideas I've done before, but whose campaigns ended before they'd even gotten far enough to gain a level. First is Terexaltherin the pseudodragon rogue. The idea with him is that he's a very inquisitive little fellow who happened to befriend a scholar, learned to read, and now wants to experience all the strange places he's read about. The plan for him would be to use the old monsters as PCs rules, so he'd basically just have his pseudodragon hit dice at first level, and not get a rogue level until second level. This would be a bit awkward because he'd really be depending on sneak attack damage to be relevant in combat.
The other idea is Silvertail the fox sorceress. Basically she's a former familiar whose master died to one of Numeria's strange technological dangers, and somehow the magical feedback awakened her and gave her some of her master's magic. My plan to build her is basically to make her a kitsune who's taken the alternate racial trait to be able to take fox form at first level, and then saying that said fox form is her only form.
Would either of those be okay? I'm leaning towards Silvertail more just because she's more practical (size and body shape don't matter for spellcasting, compared to melee damage), and because we already have someone with disable device in the party.
I don't think technology uses Knowledge (arcana). As I recall it's all Knowledge (engineering). But it's still Pathfinder so there's magic around, so arcana's not useless.
I don't think technology uses Knowledge (arcana). As I recall it's all Knowledge (engineering). But it's still Pathfinder so there's magic around, so arcana's not useless.
I'll leave Knowledge (arcana) for somebody else then, presumably our arcane caster. I was only training it to fit the technology theme.
"A Whetstone allows you to sharpen a blade," but that feels a little vague; which weapon groups would be included? Light blades and heavy blades seem fairly obvious, but what about axes or polearms with a bladed tip? Axes need to be sharpened just like knives do, and several polearms have "blade" in their description.
So, what's your GM ruling?
|
Some clerical stuff:
I sent Grandlounge a PM, in case he's not getting notifications for the other thread. I know that happens to me occasionally.
Condensing the character creation rules so far into one location for easier searching.
Content Available for Use in this Campaign: All Paizo published material is available for use.
Third Party Material: No third party material will be allowed for use in character creation.
Ability Scores: Ability scores will be generated via 15 point buy with no ability score starting below 7 prior to racial adjustments.
Races: All races from the core rulebook are available for play along with suggestions from the players guide. As long as it fits in with the AP I'm fine with it.Classes: All Paizo published classes are acceptable. Refer to rule above.
Feats: I'm not picky, just make it work.
Traits: All characters will start with two traits of which one must be Campaign trait. You may take a drawback to gain another trait but be prepared to roleplay the drawback.
Starting Wealth: All characters starts with the maximum wealth for their chosen class.
Player's Guide: All players are strongly encouraged to download a copy of the Players Guide for use in character creation and to get a feel for adventure.
Meaning these four are okay: aasimar, changeling, orc, and tiefling?
Will we use:
- Feat Taxes rules (My barbarian would like to do sunder a lot)?
- Background Skills?
The player's guide says to ask about mechanical crafting, that it isn't assumed we have access. I was planning to take the Technologist feat and train Craft (mechanical)--is that okay, or will access be limited?
Almonihah- I'm leaning towards Silvetail. I like the backstory. It would also give you a reason to be in the town of Torch in the first place.
Anyone else have character concepts?
Knowledge (Arcana) is used to identify constructs. Without Technologist, however, certain technology-based constructs might not be identifiable.
I'm building a kineticist. Should have it ready tomorrow; going through final tweaks due to the feat tax rules and whatnot. I'm thinking he's a Dwarf who took an accidental electrical discharge and developed new strange powers.
All right! I'll go ahead and start building my vulpine sorceress now, then. :)
Anyone else have character concepts?
I'm finishing up equipment now, then will start on backstory and personality.
Knowledge (Arcana) is used to identify constructs. Without Technologist, however, certain technology-based constructs might not be identifiable.
I thought that too, but the player's guide says Knowledge (engineering).
Should have it ready tomorrow; going through final tweaks due to the feat tax rules and whatnot.
What exactly are feat tax rules? I don't think it will affect this character, but still curious for the future.
In all honesty, I’d rather play normal PF without customizations, but it seems the GM confirmed we’re using these ones above.
The new (more complete) document is HERE.
Basically grants you for free, joins two feats together) so it is easier for you to take more "unused" feats.
Combat maneuvers? Check!
Dodge joined with Mobility? Check!
Power Attack and Vital Strike for free? Check!
Weapon finesse is now a choice? Check!
By the way, my barbarian is almost ready, just adding the Feat Taxes and Background Skills options...
Vital Strike isn't free, it's still the same feat. As I mentioned, I'd rather play without these rules (as I feel they're fairly abusive) but I don't mind.
Okay, here's a draft for Silvertail. I've built her as a Kitsune who's used the superior shapeshifter alternate racial trait to be able to assume fox form at first level, then applied the fox form stat changes and removed the ability to change shape. I debated a bit on her bloodline but decided on Void-Touched, as appropriate for someone who's been altered by one of the strange horrors of Numeria.
And yes, she has two tails.
I can write up more backstory and such if desired, but it would just be expanding on what I wrote above.
Who is for the Feat tax rules? Who is against?
I wasn’t thinking when I said I was for them. I’d rather play without, but if everyone’s characters are all ready built with them we can keep them so everyone doesn’t have to rebuild anything.
Who is for the Feat tax rules? Who is against?
I wasn’t thinking when I said I was for them. I’d rather play without, but if everyone’s characters are all ready built with them we can keep them so everyone doesn’t have to rebuild anything.
At a quick glance, it is not something I would be for. They seem more like a power-up than a fix.
Combat Expertise already has a solid replacement in dirty fighting, and that's the only prerequisite feat that significantly bothers me.
I'm ambivalent on the subject. It really only makes a difference for martial characters, which I am... very much not this game. I also have some kind of negative emotional connections with the rules because of some games they've been involved in previously, so I don't think I can judge dispassionately.
That being said, I would argue for including the consolidated combat maneuver feats and excluding the rest. Combat maneuvers are ridiculously expensive to be decent at for how rarely they're actually practical (they basically only work on enemy humanoids and similar foes, as bonuses from size, having multiple legs, etc. make them fairly impractical to try on most monstrous foes).
Combat maneuvers are ridiculously expensive to be decent at for how rarely they're actually practical (they basically only work on enemy humanoids and similar foes, as bonuses from size, having multiple legs, etc. make them fairly impractical to try on most monstrous foes).
Oddly, when I used to describe Pathfinder to 3.5e players, my pitch went something like this, "The two most significant changes are differentiating the classes and re-balancing some of the rules. For example, the sorcerer is more different from a wizard now, and combat maneuvers have been nerfed."
Still don't have themApplied to my character, if you what to backtrack
Combat maneuvers are ridiculously expensive to be decent at for how rarely they're actually practical (they basically only work on enemy humanoids and similar foes, as bonuses from size, having multiple legs, etc. make them fairly impractical to try on most monstrous foes).Oddly, when I used to describe Pathfinder to 3.5e players, my pitch went something like this, "The two most significant changes are differentiating the classes and re-balancing some of the rules. For example, the sorcerer is more different from a wizard now, and combat maneuvers have been nerfed."
It never ceases to amuse me how two people can play the same rules and have completely opposite experiences. :D
I don't really have strong feelings one way or the other. It was just a thought based on how few combat maneuver builds I've personally seen.
It never ceases to amuse me how two people can play the same rules and have completely opposite experiences. :D
So true.
Several winters ago, our local VOs went to the bar to organize the GM schedule for an upcoming convention. On the way out, one of them bragged a little bit about his new crit-build. Tons of people love critical hits, and I may be the only person who hates them. I said so, and . . .
It was around 11pm when everybody else left, after midnight when the two of us did. That means we spent over an hour standing in the parking lot on a winter night, debating fighters built for crits. At one point, he actually put his laptop on the trunk of his car and we created a spreadsheet to compare our choices.
And that is far from the only such story I have.
Let’s just go ahead and throw out those feat tax rules. Pretend I didn’t say anything. We won’t be using them.
Got it... Background skills?
I believe Grumpel said background skills are okay. I like them!
@GM: how would you feel about a ratfolk? I'm considering creating a ratfolk scavenger investigator instead, to be our skill monkey/traps/technology gadgets guy.
If the GM approves the ratfolk idea above, I hope you guys can cover the damage side - because the character sucks balls in combat! Heh.
If the GM approves the ratfolk idea above, I hope you guys can cover the damage side - because the character sucks balls in combat!
It might be close, with Almonihah also doing a low damage, non-caster. Only one way to find out, though :-)
And remember, I already have the technology gadgets completely covered. Though if you want to cover all six of them, so that I don't need the Technologist feat at all, I'd be happy to rebuild my skills.
Oh, if it clashes with you guys, I will simply go back to the previous idea. Since we have a barbarian, I can also build something on melee more defensive oriented to help on the frontline, or some sort of caster blaster. The ratfolk was simply someone who could cover the trap side of things (and being more of a skillmonkey, I could cover the tech part as well) - but the payoff is being practically a zero in combat. I'd rather build something else that doesn't overlap with you guys :)
Background skills are a go. I like those.
I would be a little worried about two players going low damage. Not necessarily at first, but as we progress onward. I usually tend to let players play the races they want as long as they can justify it. If the rest of the party makes up for the Damage then I’d be ok with it.
Input from anyone else?
Looks like one of my questions got missed:
"A Whetstone allows you to sharpen a blade," but that feels a little vague; which weapon groups would be included? Light blades and heavy blades seem fairly obvious, but what about axes or polearms with a bladed tip? Axes need to be sharpened just like knives do, and several polearms have "blade" in their description.
So, what's your GM ruling?
And a new one:
Does using Disable Device to disarm a trap require me to find it with Perception, or could somebody else point it out to me?
Silvertail won't be terrible at damage long-term, though early she'll be bad, but she is going for more of a disabling/support kind of spell list. Damage is kind of her back-up for when her other spells don't seem like they'd be effective.
Silvertail won't be terrible at damage long-term, though early she'll be bad, but she is going for more of a disabling/support kind of spell list. Damage is kind of her back-up for when her other spells don't seem like they'd be effective.
Grakza will be okay at damage short-term, but crappy long-term. My spell list will be all support and condition removal. I'm not planning on a single spell or ability that targets enemies.
As long as my barbarian gets healing, he can deal with the frontline...
As long as my barbarian gets healing, he can deal with the frontline...
I think you'll like the way I play divine casters :-)
Unless noticed otherwise in the ability, you can disable a trap someone else found.
JohnnyBlack here, my character Gud the Drummer is ready!
An unkept kellid barbarian that wishes Numeria would go back to old and simpler times, without the pansies of the Technic League whispering in the king's ear.
His idea of "people's touch" involves punches to the face, and he prefers to let his ax do the talking in social situations.
When he does talk, he mostly grunts, but at night he loves to play his drums. Loudly. And poorly.
Also, when he pays with what "civilized" people call "coins", he doesn't worry about which metal they are made of.
What can we say, he is a simple guy, with simple tastes.
And yes, I think he will grow fond of Grakza very quickly.
I’m still going for the Dwarf kineticist. :)
I'm thinking of a Leshy natures fang druid controller archer.
I'd love to see a druid in the party, so much more teamwork potential between casters with a arcane, divine, and nature magic!
BACKSTORY Though Grakza's tribe feared and hated technology as a symbol of the oppressive Technic League, she had long been fascinated by it. Knowing their feelings, she hid hers until what she thought was the right moment. Then, she told her clan that her gadget would guarantee victory against their rival tribe, but when the time came, it only sprayed her face with glowing liquid.
When Grakza's promised aid didn't appear, her tribe lost more warriors than it could afford, in a battle that it had only waged because of those promises; promises that they believed because Grakza had been favored by the gods ever since childhood.
When several children fell down a ravine while exploring forbidden areas, only Grakza escaped without any broken bones. When Chief Chulok lectured them and Shaman Semik cast a spell to scare them into obedience, only Grakza resisted his magic. When the shaman cast bones to see how he could rein her in, only he ended up wearing any reins.
Semik thought that taking Grakza as his apprentice would teach her discipline, and she did learn a lot from him, it just wasn't always what he meant to teach her. When he made her live away from the clan for weeks at a time to teach her self-reliance, she visited nearby villages instead--and learned about technology.
However, that disobedience only demonstrated her luck and divine favor yet again. When a new disease crippled the tribe and several communities one season, Grakza's travels enabled her to bring medicine from Torch--the first place to find a cure--to her clan and the other villages.
After that, she developed relationships with many residents of the stable communities, and especially with Khonnir Baine, a wizard in Torch. He not only nurtured her interest in technology, he often taught her little things that he had learned since her last visit. So, when a technological mishap left her with some sort of wasting disease that was eating her skin, she naturally sought out her friend, Khonnir. Unfortunately for both of them, he was missing. Especially since Grakza's failure had gotten her clansmen killed and herself banished. The human wizard was now the closest thing to family she had left.
Hey guys! Archlich here. Here's my Dwarf for the game - with the sheet and a small background summary. I am very much ready to start when you guys are :)
Excellent! :)
I've got a backstory in mind for Silvertail, but I'd almost rather have it come up naturally in-play instead of explaining it all here. Is that okay withe everyone (mostly the GM)? Maybe I could just PM it to the GM.