Adagna's page

Is there such a thing if I want to play a character similar to a paladin ie some kind of divine or arcane abilities, heavy armor/fighter type, but without the slippery slope of morality that the paladin are bound to. I'd rather not have to multi-class but that is an option I suppose.

Are there cleric builds or some other archetypes that could mimic a paladins fighting ability but aren't so morally set in stone?

So I have noticed both in reading, video, and real life playing that many GM's myself included often "force" players to dialogue out any interaction with NPC's for diplomacy and intimidation etc. This is always justified by immersion or role playing. However I just got to thinking about this from another perspective.

We don't ask our players to describe in detail how they will disarm that magic trap, or what exact techniques are being used to extract an alchemical poison etc... something they likely would not know how to do in their personal OOC life. But many players are equally challenged on how to actually speak diplomatically or in an intimidating way. Yet we expect our player to actually be able to speak in the way their character would speak even if they are not personally skilled in it.

This seems like a double standard. A player should theoretically be able to pull the "disarm magic traps" card and say "I don't personally know what to say, but my character would, I want to speak to the unruly mob diplomatically to calm them down" and then roll a diplomacy check, just as they would if they said "I want to disarm the magic trap". I see so many example of GM's who stop and say "well what are you actually saying to them?". I think if you as a player know what you would want to say you should be able to, and maybe reward them with an additional +1 or something if it is really good. But players shouldn't be penalized for not being good at what their PC is good at IMO.

I am playing a PFS unchained Rouge. Strangely I end up tanking about half or more of the times I play, mainly due to my AC 18. I spent every last GP I had getting +1 darkleaf lamellar leather. In the last scenario I played this armor is the only reason I didn't die like 3-4 times. That last play put me into 3rd level, and I am debating between dodge for a +1 AC, or Godless healing so I can heal myself if I do get hit. Several times we have had to play with no healer in the group, at best a caster with a wand of CLW. But being able to be more self sufficient with healing would be ideal since I am also usually behind enemy lines flanking.

Is it more valuable to have a AC 19 over an AC 18, and possibly get hit less often or be able recover from a hit since I only have 18 HP.

In the past I have played with a GM who would award skill proficiency/levels or make it a class skill through role playing. In one instance a character I played was constantly coming up with ridiculous stories and excuses for why certain things were happening ie why he had just snuck up into the lady of the house's bedroom through the window.... I was awarded perform:comedy or something similar.

Curious what others think of this house rule. I like the idea and I think it encourages more vigorous role playing since there is possibly a more tangible reward for it.

As a side note, this GM would also award different amounts of XP based on good role playing. Does anyone else do this? I do like this idea but it did start to make a difference since certain players who were better at this did slowly advanced faster then the rest of the party.

Is it just assumed that most magic weapons are created by casters with levels above any conceivable PC/NPC? In theory a dispel magic spell should render a magic weapon a master crafted weapon if you were a high enough caster level right? Is the process for making a magic weapon/armor different so that dispel doesn't work on it?

Can I use 2 prestige points to take 750 GP off of a more expensive item? The rules seem to not allow it based on how they are written but I guess I don't see why it wouldn't be able to work that way.

I'm curious if anyone has a house rule for any feats that make a skill a class skill, where a character already has that class skill.

These feats usually give a +2 to the skill and then also make that skill a class skill for that character. I was contemplating making it an additional +1 if it is already a class skill. It seems like many of these skill feats are geared towards non-rogue classes. Rogues already have most of these skills as class skills, so while the bonus is nice half the feat is "wasted" since it has no real effect.

Any thoughts?

I have been reading through the Goblins of Golarion, and this tribe of Goblins sparked my interest and it seemed like a great campaign for a group. But in doing some searching this is the only mention of the aristocrat alchemist Jurdan Terzain.

Has anyone seen any further supporting information about these guys? It seems like it'd be a lot of work to flesh this out myself but it could be equally rewarding if I did.

Can someone give me the readers digest version of the difference or benefits of having the codex vs just getting all the bestiaries? Is the codex more for if you want to let your characters play monstrous races? Based on the description of the codex I'm just a little confused as to what it would really be used for, or allows you to do.

I see a lot of discussion about min/maxing and peaking class abilities to get the best modifiers for a given class. This makes some sense as the characters who make the best model of their class will be more likely to head out and adventure because they are good at what they do.

Does anyone play a more mid level ability to give the max amount of bonuses across all the abilities? More of a Jack of all Trades type approach?

I like the idea of this kind of character but before I put the work into building it I thought I would get some input if this is a good way to play, a frustrating way to play? and why.

Thanks.