Aksess's page

Should players be prevented from trivializing an enemy with an obvious weakness?
Non-flying enemies with low reflex saves fall into pits for entire encounters, wizards get grappled to prevent casting and can't escape.

DM wasn't happy with the results because the combat is so binary. We're playing published adventure paths and these are the encounters in the book. Should the DM just keep playing the APs as written and let the players trivialize fights? Counter all player tactics in advance by giving all enemy casters talismans of freedom and all the golems levitate spells? Spawn extra minions in each boss fight, thus spiking up the CR of the encounter? DM discussed the issue with us and asked us how we'd like him to handle it.

Problem: Shields aren't that great.
Problem 1: Between armor check penalty, a flat +1 or +2 shield bonus to AC (without magical enhancement) unless you burn a feat on shield focus (+1 to the AC bonus your shield provides).
Problem 2: Shields compete with the ability to use a 2-handed weapon, which will have higher raw damage dice and that x1.5 STR mod to damage.
Problem 3: Shields are both treated as armor and/or weapons arbitrarily, and there's no benefit to shields of a special material except mithral (to reduce ACP).

Tentative solution to problems 1 and 2:
Would adding 1/2 STR modifier (rounded down) to the shield bonus to AC that shields provide sweeten the option? That 1-2 flat bonus to AC just feels a bit wrong in comparison with the scaling 1.5 STR modifier bonus to damage that 2-handed weapon-users get. Or perhaps adding 1/2 STR modifier OR the base AC bonus of the shield (1 for light, 2 for heavy), whichever is greater?

I could be completely wrong here, and it could be that the potential +5 magical enhancement bonus in addition to the +2 of a heavy shield is sufficient. I was thinking that it'd be nice crunch AND fluff if shields scaled off of the abilities of the user rather than their money/amount of magical enhancement, reflecting the concept that a skilled combatant could use a shield more effectively than a commoner.

I've done some cursory searching through the messageboards, but not knowing what kind of keywords the topic would have it's hard to find a thread for it.

We're going through a Paizo campaign, and my DM likes to do things narratively, but blend the narrative into in-game consequences. After a particularly powerful hit, I was told that I have a hole in my magical armor despite no sunder maneuver being used. A big boss swung at an ally but rolled a 1, his weapon slipped and hits another player 30 feet away. If a player or NPC rolls a 1 on an attack, it's not merely a miss, but a chance to have a catastrophic combat failure regardless of character level, sometimes just restricted to dropping a weapon (entirely up to the DM).

At first I just rolled (pun intended) with it, but the overall effect seems to create an environment where the simplest action (an attack against a mook) can turn into disastrous consequences (falling prone, etc). Combat, in my mind, has almost developed into roadrunner and wile e. coyote complete with falling anvils (a slight exaggeration). Enemies will literally kill themselves in fights. A thrown weapon might impale a player and reapply its magical on-hit damage each turn until the player un-grapples himself from it...or it might deal normal damage.

Do other people play in an environment like this? 2/4 of the players are brand new so don't really have an opinion. Everything is up to the DM's discretion about what events occur and how. Would you object to having such randomly applied consequences, or perhaps even appreciate it? How would I even phrase such an objection?

Text for the feat Discipline Expertise:
"Choose a class you have at least one level in. You can a +2 competence bonus to checks with the skills associated with maneuvers available to that class".

If I'm interpreting this correctly that means that the Warlord, which has access to Golden Lion, Primal Fury, Scarlet Throne, Solar Wind, and Thrashing Dragon gets +2 Acrobatics (Thrashing Dragon), Perception (Solar Wind), Diplomacy (Golden Lion), Sense Motive (Scarlet Throne) and Survival (Primal Fury)?

How is this not completely better than core rulebook feats such as Deceitful (+2 to bluff and disguise. If you have 10 or more ranks, the bonus increases to +4) or Skill Focus (+3 to a skill, if you have 10 or more ranks this bonus increases to +6)?

The Core Rulebook feats require you to be level 10 and have 10 ranks in those skills to get a total of +4 to two skills or +6 to one skill. Discipline Expertise lets PoW classes get a total of +10 spread across 5 skills at level 1.

Would you folks consider this balanced (specialization in 1-2 skills vs broad skill increases across the board)?