paizo.com Favorited Posts by Algarikpaizo.com Favorited Posts by Algarik2023-06-01T23:43:48Z2023-06-01T23:43:48ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Who cares if they're skill starved, you only need 8 skillsAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ihz?Who-cares-if-theyre-skill-starved-you-only#272021-11-27T10:21:36Z2021-11-03T15:34:04Z<p>I agree with Mark to a certain extend. Skills were not created equals. Some of them are rolled very frequently: Perception, the 5-6 useful knowledge skill, etc. Others are so rare they might as well come of as often as trivial character caracteristics such as weight. </p>
<p>To mitigate this a little i use a few extra rules and tricks; </p>
<p>1. The background skill rule from unchained works great. Skills are divited into adventuring skills(useful) and background skill (less useful). Each character are given 2 extra skill rank per level to put into background skills. A character can decide to spent extra rank they would get for adventuring skill into extra background skill. </p>
<p>This is great because it allows skill starve classes, such as Paladin, Clerics and Fighters to have something else than their class defines them without gimping themselves. Your fighter could pick up craft(Armor) to be an armor. your cleric of Shelyn can pick up artistry(Painting) to show his dedication to bringing beauty in the world. </p>
<p>2. Verbal duels ruleset from Ultimate intrigue is great because it gives secondary skills, such as Knowledge(Nobility) or Knowledge(History) ways to shine within its system. It's also good for social duel because it's complex without being too complicated. I used it a few time and had a lot of fun with it. The only downside is that it's mostly focused for one on one debate, so i allow the party to help the primary debater with ''aid another'' so they can contribute.</p>
<p>3. I make sure that players concept align with their skills. A noble character typically need some ranks in knowledge(nobility), Ride, Perform(Any), etc. </p>
<p>4. I make sure that secondary skills can come in handy during investigation, information gathering, etc. For example, linguistics checks to notice forgery, knowledge(nobility) to know some dark facts about the local noble familly, etc. </p>
<p>5. I'm not overly generous on magical items and special material. If they want some, they can craft it. </p>
<p>Sure my trick wont make secondary skill any more powerful than the classic adventuring skills, but i find that it justify taking them at times. I've had some good success so far.</p>I agree with Mark to a certain extend. Skills were not created equals. Some of them are rolled very frequently: Perception, the 5-6 useful knowledge skill, etc. Others are so rare they might as well come of as often as trivial character caracteristics such as weight.
To mitigate this a little i use a few extra rules and tricks;
1. The background skill rule from unchained works great. Skills are divited into adventuring skills(useful) and background skill (less useful). Each character are...Algarik2021-11-03T15:34:04ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c&page=2?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#542021-10-31T09:41:47Z2021-10-30T15:43:26Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Waterhammer wrote:</div><blockquote> Luckily, feather fall has only a vocal component. </blockquote><p>Oh good catch! I guess it makes arcane armor training a tiny bit better then.Waterhammer wrote:Luckily, feather fall has only a vocal component.
Oh good catch! I guess it makes arcane armor training a tiny bit better then.Algarik2021-10-30T15:43:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=3?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#1012021-10-31T09:43:02Z2021-10-29T23:25:03Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>Actually, according to the rules, Evil implies "hurting, oppressing, and killing others." Those are not singular things. You can't just reach in a say "Evil is hurting ... others'. That is taking the issue out of context and creating a logical inconsitency. Hurting can mean very different things, from a tiny amount of pain to outright torture. Hurting AND oppressing AND killing, used together, imply something fairly specific. It goes on to say that some do these things out of a lack of compassion (ie, are willing to do it if it is convenient to do so) or that they actively enjoy doing it.</blockquote><p>Fair point. I might have been reading too much into it. And i know Pathfinder was not written to hold ''pure RAW'' scrutiny so taking everything within context is important.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>By no means are Paladins forbidden from hurting or killing Evil creatures. Killing is a neutral action in a vacuum. Animals hurt and kill each other without alignment issues. A Paladin using violence to subdue and apprehend (or execute) an evil criminal is certainly justified. How that Paladin goes about it, why they are going about it, determine whether the action is Lawful or Chaotic. The action is neither Good nor Evil. It is merely an action.</blockquote><p>I'm not sure i would call killing neutral within Pathfinder's morality, but i'm not totally unconvinced either. Animals being devoid of morality is generally justified because they don't have moral sentience, otherwise Cats would totally be ''Evil'' by what they do to birds.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>I'd point you more towards alignment being a specific kind of universal force that people align themselves with. Things can get a bit more sticky in the Outer Planes where being can be made up of these forces. But that is outside the discussion of Paladins and their role.</blockquote><p>Yeah that's actually what i meant. Alignement in pathfinder are real in the sense that they aren't merely conceptual.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>Feel free to judge away! I won't take offense to what you say. This is just an free exchange of ideas and discussions of paradigms within a game system. It is not like its reflective of my real life worldview.</blockquote><p>Cool! Just wanted to make sure, written communication is not ideal to convey intent and tone at times.
<p>I think you convinced me that it is a working system if you apply some judgement. </p>
<p>When i look at the game moral framework though, i feels like it's a weird melting pot of consequentialism and deontological ethics mixed together without a clear definition of what it's core concept means. </p>
<p>Still thanks for explaining, i can at least understand your point of view now!</p>DeathlessOne wrote:Actually, according to the rules, Evil implies "hurting, oppressing, and killing others." Those are not singular things. You can't just reach in a say "Evil is hurting ... others'. That is taking the issue out of context and creating a logical inconsitency. Hurting can mean very different things, from a tiny amount of pain to outright torture. Hurting AND oppressing AND killing, used together, imply something fairly specific. It goes on to say that some do these things out...Algarik2021-10-29T23:25:03ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#992021-10-31T09:43:27Z2021-10-29T22:46:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>It was not my intention to come off as critiquing your position. My statement was a general one, meant to address an issue a lot of people have with alignment in games when it differs from reality. If it does not fit you, feel free to disregard it.</blockquote><p>No worries! I was merely trying to access, it's hard to do over text.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>I do, actually, adhere to the core definition of alignment in the game system. There are no contradictions in it unless you actually bring in real world moral frameworks (such as causing harm or killing to be inherently evil). Many people find it too simplistic or vacuous to adequately serve as a reliable form of moral structure, but after many such discussions over my very long stint of playing these games, I find it more often that the person simply does not like the implications such conclusion make when they view their own actions, behavior, desires or impulses in real life through the same lens. Real life is more morally grey and indistinct and the alignment system in D&D (and pathfinder) are more crystal clear and sharp.</blockquote><p>Then i'm a bit at a loss here. I fear like there's something i'm missing to truly understand your position.
<p>According to the core rulebook, killing and hurting are ''Evil'' act.
<br />
If we agree that the definition of Good and Evil, within Golarion, is defined by the description in the core rulebook, then there's no need to bring in real world ethics into it. </p>
<p>The Paladin code of honor is either self contradicting or way more restricting that it appears at first glance, because, still according to the alignement section, killing and hurting is an ''Evil'' act and yet Paladins are required to punish wrongdoers. </p>
<p>Are Paladins at your tables forbidden from killing or hurting ''Evil'' creature? (Not that there's anything wrong with that kind of play in itself.) </p>
<p>Or is alignement more of a cosmic force that inhabits each creature with alignement and thus removing them from the world/multiverse is in itself an act of the contrary alignement? For example, if killing an ''Evil'' creature is a ''Good'' act, is killing a ''Lawful'' creature a ''Chaotic'' act? </p>
<p>I'm really just trying to grasp how you view it, not judging. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Voodist Monk wrote:</div><blockquote>All this Good vs Evil vs Law vs Chaos is the exact baggage I try avoid. I understand that, at its very core, the Paladin is the embodiment of this very struggle... and it is why I do not play Paladins. Lol.</blockquote><p>I personally think it's fun. You just need to be clear on what alignement represent around your table so people can make choices with clear intent.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Voodist Monk wrote:</div><blockquote>I do madly respect them as an adversary, though. And, as such, I never toy with their duty when we inevitably meet...</blockquote><p>Paladins are cool adversary for Evil games, but i think my favorite type of villains are Lawful Evil. There's just something about a complete Jerk that clings to a code of honor that appeals to me. Like, you can respect their dedication even though you disagree with their ideals.DeathlessOne wrote:It was not my intention to come off as critiquing your position. My statement was a general one, meant to address an issue a lot of people have with alignment in games when it differs from reality. If it does not fit you, feel free to disregard it.
No worries! I was merely trying to access, it's hard to do over text. DeathlessOne wrote:I do, actually, adhere to the core definition of alignment in the game system. There are no contradictions in it unless you actually bring...Algarik2021-10-29T22:46:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#932021-10-31T09:43:47Z2021-10-29T21:44:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Ah, well, that is easily answered... </p>
<p>•glances at Mark Hoover 330's post•</p>
<p>Yep, that about sums it up. If you need to understand what I see as Good vs Evil, you simply need to go to the source book on it, the Core Rulebook. My description of Good vs Evil in the real world differs from the game setting but I am extremely capable of disassociating what I believe from something else, putting it aside and temporarily adopting that new belief system. I do not inject my own moral relativism into the game world.</blockquote><p>Am i mistaken if i read your last sentence as a critique of my position?Injecting seems to imply, forcing as vision and i somehow interpret that as a ''bad thing'' to do. English is my second language and i'm not sure if i'm missing something or reading too much into it.
<p>I would defend myself by adding that, i do not infact inject moral relativism in pathfinder, as i'm not a moral relativist myself. However a definition of Good is needed to understand if an act is Good or Evil. The core rulebook is not very helpful unfortunately. It list some examples of aligned actions, but never define what good is. </p>
<p>Also, just as a side not utilitarianism is not relative in the sense of what Good and Evil is, it's pain and pleasure. Sure pain and pleasure is relative to each moral agent, but according to the theory, actions are mesurable by the amount of pleasure or pain they bring into the world.</p>
<p>I apologize if this comes out as rude it couldn't be furthest from my intention. I'm sure you're an intelligent person, but I also doubt you stricly adhere to the core definition of alignement as it's unplayable and contradicting with a lot of other sources. I'm fairly sure you apply reason and context to judge how an action align.</p>
<p>Simply because Paladins would be walking contradions. </p>
<p>Here's what the corerulebook mentions.
<br />
[Spoiler omitted]</p>
<p>If killing and hurting are evil acts, then Paladins would fall as soon as they kill their first ennemy by virtue of commiting and Evil act. Yet their code requires to '' punish those who harm or threaten innocents'', which is a pretty hard thing to do without killing. I guess they could go Superman still and avoid all killing at all time. It's a cool concept, but i'm also sure it's not how paladins were originaly envisioned. </p>
<p>Again, i do not meant this in a condescending way and i do not imply you follow pure RAW without judgement as your previous comment about the soul sacrifice indicates that you do in fact apply judgement. </p>
<p>I also apologize if my previous comment about framing your argument as utilitarian was offensive, never was my intention either. </p>
<p>Finally, i just want rehiterate that this is just my view on it and i'm not asking you to change your point of view or anything, i'm merely sharing.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Paladins will ALWAYS choose Good over Law, because they fall if they commit the Evil act. It is written into their code. A Paladin SHOULD feel more like a Neutral Good character, instead of a Lawful Neutral character when it comes to the subject of Good vs Evil. The key difference is that Paladin are intrinsically Lawful and should experience a kind of dissonance when they are unable to choose a Lawful option, even if that is not roleplayed out.</p>
<p>I mean, its not hard to imagine what that feels like. We all have a sense of what is 'fair' or not that we experience in real life. When a Paladin has to choose between a Lawful or Chaotic act, I assume it feels very similar to that. Not Evil, but not quite 'right' either.</blockquote><p>I think i agree, because that's how i play most paladins. However the difficulty is not when having to choose between Neutral Good and Lawful Evil, but rather when choosing between Neutral Good and Lawful Neutral.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Lawful Good wrote:</div><blockquote>Lawful good combines honor with compassion.</blockquote>THAT, for ME personally, encapsulates the soul of how I would play a paladin. Honor with compassion. And its that second word that never ceases to confound EVERY player, anecdotally, in my games with the exception of ONE player I've had in the past 15 years.</blockquote><p>There is however within the Lawful Good alignement the following passage:
</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Lawful Good wrote:</div><blockquote>A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.</blockquote><p>This is most certainly not a nice trait. I'd argue it's where the Loyal bleeds in and corrupt the Goodness of Lawful Good. There's something vindictive within it. As if the punishiment is more important that the reparation for an injustice.
<p>However i still agreed with you and Deathless that those two value should define Paladin. Paladins are awesome.</p>
<p>Dang it all these talks about Paladin makes me wanna roll a Healadin! :(</p>DeathlessOne wrote:Ah, well, that is easily answered...
*glances at Mark Hoover 330's post*
Yep, that about sums it up. If you need to understand what I see as Good vs Evil, you simply need to go to the source book on it, the Core Rulebook. My description of Good vs Evil in the real world differs from the game setting but I am extremely capable of disassociating what I believe from something else, putting it aside and temporarily adopting that new belief system. I do not inject my own moral...Algarik2021-10-29T21:44:02ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#902021-11-01T19:29:44Z2021-10-29T18:32:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>THAT, for ME personally, encapsulates the soul of how I would play a paladin. Honor with compassion. And its that second word that never ceases to confound EVERY player, anecdotally, in my games with the exception of ONE player I've had in the past 15 years.</blockquote><p>I have the reverse problem. Myself and my fellow players generally have trouble with the Lawful part of the Paladin.
<p>Almost any time there's a conflict between Law and Good, my players and I tend to gravitated toward Good instead of Lawful, which makes them feels very much like Neutral Good character. </p>
<p>I think that's because i personally view Paladin as champions of good first and champions of Law second. After all, they smite evil, not chaos.</p>Mark Hoover 330 wrote:THAT, for ME personally, encapsulates the soul of how I would play a paladin. Honor with compassion. And its that second word that never ceases to confound EVERY player, anecdotally, in my games with the exception of ONE player I've had in the past 15 years.
I have the reverse problem. Myself and my fellow players generally have trouble with the Lawful part of the Paladin. Almost any time there's a conflict between Law and Good, my players and I tend to gravitated...Algarik2021-10-29T18:32:58ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#872021-11-01T19:21:15Z2021-10-29T17:17:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote>I don't really think there is any correct or incorrect views or opinions on what Paladins are, or are not. To each their own.</blockquote><p>Oh of course.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote>Clerics deal with concepts. They woo crowds with their words. They preach sermons to the ignorant masses. They fill their churches the same way a greed fills a wallet. Like most organized religion, it is all BS posturing. It's just a numbers game to Clerics and clergy. They don't actually care. If someone chooses to join their church, good. If someone doesn't, it's whatever. Even if someone in the church sins or does something Evil, the Clerics are under no obligation to do literally anything about it.</blockquote><p>I think here you are mistaken. I think you're conflating priests and clerics.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Cleric wrote:</div><blockquote>Clerics are more than mere priests, though; these emissaries of the divine work the will of their deities through strength of arms and the magic of their gods.</blockquote><p>Clerics are as much divine champion as Paladins are, they just differ in how they express their gift. Paladin are divine champion to the cause of Law and Good while clerics are divine champions of the dieties, which themselves are alignement with the cosmic axis of Evil, Chaos, Good and Law.
<p>Can cleric be corrupted? Sure they can workship evil good, and are allowed more leniancy than Paladins are, however i very much disagree to the proposition that they are mere bureaucrats and preachers.</p>VoodistMonk wrote:I don't really think there is any correct or incorrect views or opinions on what Paladins are, or are not. To each their own.
Oh of course. VoodistMonk wrote:Clerics deal with concepts. They woo crowds with their words. They preach sermons to the ignorant masses. They fill their churches the same way a greed fills a wallet. Like most organized religion, it is all BS posturing. It's just a numbers game to Clerics and clergy. They don't actually care. If someone chooses to...Algarik2021-10-29T17:17:40ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#862021-10-31T09:44:19Z2021-10-29T16:35:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote>I can't really express how fundamentally I disagree with this. I suppose it has to do with the use of the phrases pleasure/happiness. I am focused on Good vs Evil. Pleasure/happiness can be derived from the suffering of others, and as such, is merely a subjective term that needs an impartial, omniscient arbiter in order to measure and way properly. I do not pretend to be such and simply do not use such metrics in my assessment.</blockquote><p>Ah i see where the disagreement stems from then. In that case for me to understand your argument i would need to understand what you mean by ''Good'' and ''Evil''.
<p>Also, just because pleasure and pain are subjective to each individual moral agent, it does not mean the concept as a whole is subjective. Within utilitarian ethics, what is ''good'' is what brings the maximum amount of happiness to the maximum number of moral agents(which are things that can feel pain and pleasure). </p>
<p>Sure utilitarian ethics has a few bugs and i'm not saying either that it's perfect. It just originally understood your argument as somewhat utilitarian, my mistake.</p>DeathlessOne wrote:I can't really express how fundamentally I disagree with this. I suppose it has to do with the use of the phrases pleasure/happiness. I am focused on Good vs Evil. Pleasure/happiness can be derived from the suffering of others, and as such, is merely a subjective term that needs an impartial, omniscient arbiter in order to measure and way properly. I do not pretend to be such and simply do not use such metrics in my assessment.
Ah i see where the disagreement stems from...Algarik2021-10-29T16:35:52ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#832021-10-31T09:44:34Z2021-10-29T15:08:32Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DeathlessOne wrote:</div><blockquote> The ''general amount of happiness in the world'' has no real bearing to my argument. Happiness in the 'mortal realm' (as we know Golarion and other places in the Material Plane), is a transitory thing and quite subjective. You can be having a really bad day and yet increasing the overall influence of Good in the world. A Paladin's soul is NEVER worth sacrificing to bring about 'happiness'. That is my honest, blunt opinion on it. Then again, it is my opinion on just about ANY soul in question.</blockquote><p>Oh i never meant happiness restrained to the material world, i meant world as in universe, multiverse, call it however you want, i meant world as in ''the sums of things that exists''. I also meant happiness in the sense of utilitarian ethics, which means happiness = Good. If a soul can feel pain or pleasure, then it counts as a moral agent within utilitarian ethics. If your argument is not utilitarian it's at least consequentialist as you mentioned the ''worth'' of the paladin's soul as the argument for their sacrifice not being justified. Which is why i said ''we could immagine a scenario in which the sacrifice of a paladin's soul could be considered a worthy deal''.
<p>According to me, the deal is a good decision for the Paladin only and only if it raise the sums of pleasure/happiness in all world combined. Even if the paladin's soul is used to nefarious ends eventually, as long as the sums stays positive, then its still a worthy deal.</p>
<p>If we go by a more deontological approach, ala Kant lets say, and we suggest that actions are good and bad in themselves, and we define that dealing with Evil is always an Evil act, then sure that type of deal can never be a good act. </p>
<p>However, it seems like the Paladin code, in Pathfinder, is a mix of deontological and consequentalist approach. Paladins seems to follow ''Rule utilitarianism'' which is basically following a set of rules that are trying to raise the amount of Good in the world until the point where breaking those rule is required to save a great amount of Evil. For example, allying yourself with evil is is prohibited, unless you fight a greater evil.</p>
<p>According to my view, being a good decision does not matter on the Paladin's moral character as what count is good intent. The action is aligned with Good if the Paladin intent was perform a ''good'' act. </p>
<p>Now should the Paladin fall if they ally themselves with Evil entities and fail to prevent greater Evil? Eh, i don't know, probably it's a classic case of playing with fire, but then it also depends on the scenario. If the Paladin got betrayed or failed due to means outside his own control, then probably not. </p>
<p>Finally, i don't wanna imply that your views are wrong or anything, i was merely sharing my point of view on the matter as i always enjoy debating on ethics. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:</div><blockquote>The whole good=/=nice needs to die. Technically true but primarily used as a way of saying Good=A&!%•$~!, which is not at all the point of the alignment.</blockquote><p>I totally agree with you, even though that's not how Paladins were originally thought of according to Gygax. I don't have the link, but according to him, killing unarmed, merciless Chaotic Evil prisoner is a Lawful Good act. Which seems to validate my views that alignement in D&D were more or less meant as factions with different flavors.DeathlessOne wrote:The ''general amount of happiness in the world'' has no real bearing to my argument. Happiness in the 'mortal realm' (as we know Golarion and other places in the Material Plane), is a transitory thing and quite subjective. You can be having a really bad day and yet increasing the overall influence of Good in the world. A Paladin's soul is NEVER worth sacrificing to bring about 'happiness'. That is my honest, blunt opinion on it. Then again, it is my opinion on just about...Algarik2021-10-29T15:08:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c&page=2?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#512021-10-31T09:41:54Z2021-10-29T14:15:43Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Senko wrote:</div><blockquote>As I said though the flip side is I either have to give up two feats (armor proficiency and arcane armor training), a swift action each round and still possibly deal with it if the failure chance is high enough. </blockquote><p>Not only that but you'll also have to deal with arcane spell failure if you cast in immediate action spell, making it worse than it already appeared. Rolling Arcane Spell failure on Feather fall gotta be real fun when you need it.Senko wrote:As I said though the flip side is I either have to give up two feats (armor proficiency and arcane armor training), a swift action each round and still possibly deal with it if the failure chance is high enough.
Not only that but you'll also have to deal with arcane spell failure if you cast in immediate action spell, making it worse than it already appeared. Rolling Arcane Spell failure on Feather fall gotta be real fun when you need it.Algarik2021-10-29T14:15:43ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#772021-10-31T09:44:50Z2021-10-28T19:08:53Z<p>I'm not saying you're wrong DeathlessOne, but when i say ''We could imagine a scenario'' i mean that in the broadest sense, as ''it could be possible''. </p>
<p>For example: What if those soul were stolen by Abyssal force to use in a foul ritual and Asmodeus as a way of interviening if the Paladin agree to a deal?</p>
<p>A Paladin would have to be extremely cautious and incredibly courageous to volonteer for such a sacrifice. </p>
<p>Another example: What if containing a greater evil could be prevented by sacrificing one's soul? </p>
<p>If we're going by utilitarian ethics, which is ultimately what your argument looks to be leaning on, then there are some rare possibles scenarios in which a paladin can sacrifice their soul by working with devils to increase the ''general amount of happiness in the world''.</p>I'm not saying you're wrong DeathlessOne, but when i say ''We could imagine a scenario'' i mean that in the broadest sense, as ''it could be possible''.
For example: What if those soul were stolen by Abyssal force to use in a foul ritual and Asmodeus as a way of interviening if the Paladin agree to a deal?
A Paladin would have to be extremely cautious and incredibly courageous to volonteer for such a sacrifice.
Another example: What if containing a greater evil could be prevented by...Algarik2021-10-28T19:08:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#752021-10-31T09:44:54Z2021-10-28T17:14:53Z<p>We could imagine a scenario where Asmodeus could offer a Paladin a choice of sacrificing his soul in exhange for saving a greater number of soul. In which case the sacrifice would be noble.</p>
<p>However, the Paladin could simply refuse and still be ''good'' as if Asmodeus is offering a deal, there's most certainly a catch.</p>We could imagine a scenario where Asmodeus could offer a Paladin a choice of sacrificing his soul in exhange for saving a greater number of soul. In which case the sacrifice would be noble.
However, the Paladin could simply refuse and still be ''good'' as if Asmodeus is offering a deal, there's most certainly a catch.Algarik2021-10-28T17:14:53ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#462021-10-31T09:46:41Z2021-10-28T14:26:33Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Diego Rossi wrote:</div><blockquote><p>I have redone the monetary system. A coin with 9 grams of gold (or even 5 if it is an alloy) is very valuable and not convenient to use for everyday expenses. It is like using 500 € banknotes to buy groceries. So, in my campaign, the standard coins are silver but is possible to get gold pieces to bring down the weight. Gold money is used for most magic items transactions. </p>
<p>In advanced realms (Taldor, Quadira, Chelaxia, etc.) there are letters of change emitted by banks and Abadar churches. After all the Inner Seas region is as developed as Renaissance Europe, so it is reasonable to think that the advanced nations have a complex monetary system. </blockquote><p>I've done something similar in my homebrewed world, but less complex. Basically divided the vavlue of everyhting by 10 and added a new small currency called dime which are worth 1/10 of a copper coin. Everything in game manual that has a listed price is considered to have its price listed in silver instead. Gold is thus pretty valuable has it's worth 10 time it's price in pathfinder. Platine are basically gems tha are just there for deals of extreme value, kind like the old 1000$ bills.Diego Rossi wrote:I have redone the monetary system. A coin with 9 grams of gold (or even 5 if it is an alloy) is very valuable and not convenient to use for everyday expenses. It is like using 500 € banknotes to buy groceries. So, in my campaign, the standard coins are silver but is possible to get gold pieces to bring down the weight. Gold money is used for most magic items transactions.
In advanced realms (Taldor, Quadira, Chelaxia, etc.) there are letters of change emitted by banks and...Algarik2021-10-28T14:26:33ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#392021-10-31T09:46:57Z2021-10-27T19:50:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Diego Rossi wrote:</div><blockquote><p>?
</p>
Arcane Spell Failure is based on the encumbrance of the armor, not the weight you are carrying. </blockquote><p>It would make Arcane spellcaster less inclined to completly dumb str however... •sadistically makes notes•
<p>As for encumbrance, i think it sucks micromanaging it because the inventory sheet is just bad. When i ran my 5e i made a basic custom sheet that was bigger, larger, had entry for the value, the weight and also location. </p>
<p>Oh and i found that most of the time the culprit for extra unaccounted weight is just the sheer amount of coin the party is carrying. 1lbs for each 50 gp is not bad at first level, but it starts to pile up really quickly if you don't find means to convert or store it.</p>Diego Rossi wrote:?
Arcane Spell Failure is based on the encumbrance of the armor, not the weight you are carrying.
It would make Arcane spellcaster less inclined to completly dumb str however... *sadistically makes notes* As for encumbrance, i think it sucks micromanaging it because the inventory sheet is just bad. When i ran my 5e i made a basic custom sheet that was bigger, larger, had entry for the value, the weight and also location.
Oh and i found that most of the time the culprit...Algarik2021-10-27T19:50:45ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#272021-10-27T12:59:17Z2021-10-26T16:31:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Derklord wrote:</div><blockquote>•) Except Bard, which seems to be really unpopular among 3.x veterans in stuck in nostalgia mode, for some reason.</blockquote><p>As a 3.5 veteran i love pathfinder's Bard, but i get where they are coming from, bard design was so frustrating in 3.5...Derklord wrote:*) Except Bard, which seems to be really unpopular among 3.x veterans in stuck in nostalgia mode, for some reason.
As a 3.5 veteran i love pathfinder's Bard, but i get where they are coming from, bard design was so frustrating in 3.5...Algarik2021-10-26T16:31:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#242021-10-27T12:57:48Z2021-10-26T14:49:57Z<p>I think there's another thing to that might explain the lack of ASF. Back in 3.5, there was no easy option to ignore it, if you wanted to play a Gish you were either going unarmored or you had some way to reduce ASF throught prestige class, which didn't come before at least 6th level. </p>
<p>Now that Magus exist to fill the gish archetype, there's absolutely no reason to ever to even consider having to deal with ACF.</p>I think there's another thing to that might explain the lack of ASF. Back in 3.5, there was no easy option to ignore it, if you wanted to play a Gish you were either going unarmored or you had some way to reduce ASF throught prestige class, which didn't come before at least 6th level.
Now that Magus exist to fill the gish archetype, there's absolutely no reason to ever to even consider having to deal with ACF.Algarik2021-10-26T14:49:57ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: On frequency of players having and/or remembering ASFAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9c?On-frequency-of-players-having-andor#152021-10-27T12:53:29Z2021-10-25T15:14:42Z<p>The only time i remember playing a characther with Arcane Spell failure was when in DDO i tried playing a Warforged wizard with Adamentine Body. Needless to say i ended up abandonning that character pretty quickly when i realised that wiffing one third of your spell is just not fun. </p>
<p>As Derklord put it, mage armor is good enough if you want the equivalent of Light Armor AC and if you need more you just can't afford the high percentage. </p>
<p>As for ways to deal with it i always found that Arcane armor training and arcane armor mastery were kind of bad. You need two feats and mithral armor to make it relevant and it still eats your swift action everyturn.</p>The only time i remember playing a characther with Arcane Spell failure was when in DDO i tried playing a Warforged wizard with Adamentine Body. Needless to say i ended up abandonning that character pretty quickly when i realised that wiffing one third of your spell is just not fun.
As Derklord put it, mage armor is good enough if you want the equivalent of Light Armor AC and if you need more you just can't afford the high percentage.
As for ways to deal with it i always found that Arcane...Algarik2021-10-25T15:14:42ZRe: Forums: Advice: When no one can remember you....Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i9w?When-no-one-can-remember-you#82021-10-25T20:00:25Z2021-10-25T14:34:36Z<p>First it wanna say it's an awesome idea, i love it!</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Parliamagne wrote:</div><blockquote>So, here's a question: What happens if someone writes her name in a journal? Does the writing become blurry and fade away over time? Or does the name remain in the journal, but nobody remembers who the name... </blockquote><p>Depending on how you wanna go about the curse, it could also be impossible for her to write her name correctly. If no one can truly remember her, all any attempt to write her name could result in gibberish. That could be justified by the idea Mightypion had to tie it to her true name.
<p>And if you want to add a bit of personal horror, what if she can't be certain of who she really was? What if some of her memories turn out to be fake? Don't quote me on that, but i've read somewhere that our brains are pretty good at filling blanks in our memory with false one.</p>First it wanna say it's an awesome idea, i love it!
Parliamagne wrote:So, here's a question: What happens if someone writes her name in a journal? Does the writing become blurry and fade away over time? Or does the name remain in the journal, but nobody remembers who the name...
Depending on how you wanna go about the curse, it could also be impossible for her to write her name correctly. If no one can truly remember her, all any attempt to write her name could result in gibberish. That...Algarik2021-10-25T14:34:36ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#662021-10-25T20:40:30Z2021-10-22T14:19:13Z<p>As a GM instead of making a paladin fall, i'm a fan of letting them keep their power through a trickery diety intervention. They get to keep their power for a while, thinking their God is fine with their actions until they realise that they have been working for a nefarious god for a while. </p>
<p>After the reveal, they have the choice to realise their mistake and fall, to then seek the path of atonement, or pursue the path of power because they are gone too far already.</p>As a GM instead of making a paladin fall, i'm a fan of letting them keep their power through a trickery diety intervention. They get to keep their power for a while, thinking their God is fine with their actions until they realise that they have been working for a nefarious god for a while.
After the reveal, they have the choice to realise their mistake and fall, to then seek the path of atonement, or pursue the path of power because they are gone too far already.Algarik2021-10-22T14:19:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The Phoenix Down ProblemAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43hxu?The-Phoenix-Down-Problem#132021-10-24T09:50:40Z2021-10-21T20:38:55Z<p>Hoarding habits might be a reason for the ''pheonix down problem'' but as both player and DM i found that usually most consummable items aren't very great to begin with. </p>
<p>- Potions provoke attack of opportunity and generally don't last long enough.
<br />
- Scrolls are fine for niche spell caster never want to prepare, but are generally pretty meh in combat thanks to their spell DCs. Beside, it require specialisation one might not be able to afford to use them reliably.
<br />
- Wands are fine on certain spell, but suffer from the same problem as Scrolls, their spell DC is bad. </p>
<p>Wondrous items are too diverse to quantify, but outside of the ring of wishes, most items with charges had pretty mild spell DC, again making them unreliable at best.</p>
<p>This leaves staves and rods which already see plenty of use, but they are rechargeable and are very powerful.</p>Hoarding habits might be a reason for the ''pheonix down problem'' but as both player and DM i found that usually most consummable items aren't very great to begin with.
- Potions provoke attack of opportunity and generally don't last long enough.
- Scrolls are fine for niche spell caster never want to prepare, but are generally pretty meh in combat thanks to their spell DCs. Beside, it require specialisation one might not be able to afford to use them reliably.
- Wands are fine on certain...Algarik2021-10-21T20:38:55ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why I'm convinced that paladin is without a doubt the worst out of all the 4th level Casters.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i22&page=2?Why-Im-convinced-that-paladin-is-without-a#532021-10-24T09:12:23Z2021-10-20T17:44:07Z<p>Paladins are an amazing mix of DPR, tankyness and support, which only ranger get close to, but i feel like most people over here already made a serious case for paladin, so i won't argue further. </p>
<p>I want however to go over the code of conduct. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>If your main villain puts a helpless NPC in jeopardy, you HAVE to save the NPC, even if this guarantees the villain escapes. Otherwise, mechanically, you lose all your powers.</blockquote><p>I personally think that a DM that makes a paladin fall for choosing to pursue the villain instead of saving an innocent NPC is being way too harsh. Here's what the code of conduct mentions;
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Code of Conduct wrote:</div><blockquote><p>A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.</p>
<p>Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.</blockquote><p>The code does encompass helping those in need, but it also encompass punishing those who harm or threaten innocents. If the Paladin acts with the greater good in mind, i would never make them fall.
<p>Otherwise would the paladin also fail because they failed to catch the villain who then murdered bunch of other innocent helpless people? </p>
<p>Are paladins even that restricted by their code to begin with?
<br />
- They have to respect legitimate authority. This one could be problematic, but each time i've seen it matter, the paladin had an excuse to consider the authority unlegitimate. (The leader is evil, or is not considered legitimate by the Paladin's god)
<br />
- They can't lie. This one is kind of restrictive, but has a social character with very few skill points, this just saves paladins skill ranks they don't have to put in bluff. Beside, even if they can't lie, they can decide to keep their mouth shut.
<br />
-They can't cheat. So what? I've never seen cheating as a mandatory anywhere. Beside, what constitute cheating is not totally clear.
<br />
- Not using poison. Poisons are incredibly niche, so just don't build a poison based paladin.
<br />
- Help those in need. Isn't what all good character do anyway?
<br />
- Punish those who harm or threaten innocent. Again, this is just basic good adventurer stuff. </p>
<p>Paladin in 1e can even associate with evil character to fight off greater evil, so it's not even as restricted as it was in 3.5. </p>
<p>Their code of honor besically boils down to : Be good and honorable. </p>
<p>Honestly, the Antipaladin has a harsher code to follow and they are Chaotic, go figure. </p>
<p>My only grip with paladin is that their isn't a paladin of every alignement like in 3.5. Unless i missed some archetype i'm not aware of.</p>Paladins are an amazing mix of DPR, tankyness and support, which only ranger get close to, but i feel like most people over here already made a serious case for paladin, so i won't argue further.
I want however to go over the code of conduct.
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:If your main villain puts a helpless NPC in jeopardy, you HAVE to save the NPC, even if this guarantees the villain escapes. Otherwise, mechanically, you lose all your powers.
I personally think that a DM that makes a paladin...Algarik2021-10-20T17:44:07ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Game session layout: how many combats are enough?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43h5u?Game-session-layout-how-many-combats-are-enough#102021-09-21T21:35:38Z2021-09-21T13:58:00Z<p>My sessions generally last for 5 to 6 hours. As for how many combat there is, it really depend on what part of the adventure my players are at. If they are in in dungeon we'll be looking at 4 to 6 encounter within one session. If they are taking part in an investigation or a political part of the adventure, there might be 1 or two combat encounter, but it's also entirely possible that there is none. </p>
<p>I have a few solution to solving the 5 minutes adventuring days:
<br />
1. I make time an issue. Most of my quest will have a time limit. If my players rest after each battle because they go nova in each battle, they will reach a point where the baddies just succeeded at doing what they we're trying to achieve, which might not be game over but it will definetly be bad news.
<br />
2. I homebrewed that spellcasters don't fully regenerate their magical energy between rest. I personally play with spell points, but basically my system would give back an equivalent of Caster level+ Spellcasting Stat mod spell slot back per long rest. Sponteanous spellcaster regeneration is increased by 50% while 4th level spellcasters regeneration is decreased by 50%. It might not be a perfect rule, but it still discourage casters from spending all their spells in one battle.</p>My sessions generally last for 5 to 6 hours. As for how many combat there is, it really depend on what part of the adventure my players are at. If they are in in dungeon we'll be looking at 4 to 6 encounter within one session. If they are taking part in an investigation or a political part of the adventure, there might be 1 or two combat encounter, but it's also entirely possible that there is none.
I have a few solution to solving the 5 minutes adventuring days:
1. I make time an issue....Algarik2021-09-21T13:58:00ZRe: Forums: Advice: Pro-Rahadoum/Misothiest CampaignAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gkm?ProRahadoumMisothiest-Campaign#82021-09-06T04:53:43Z2021-09-04T21:38:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:</div><blockquote>The PCs could also ascend just by being so damn good at defeating divine minions that locals start hero-worshipping them, giving them enough spiritual juice to ascend.</blockquote><p>And then they become the very thing they swore to destroy, genius, i love it!
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Failedlegend The Eternal Gish wrote:</div><blockquote><p>I don't think the group is interested in another system 2A (weakening the gods) is how i plan to start the campaign off.</p>
<p>oh and theres minor rumblings amongst the group aabout possible do a kind of kingmaker: rahadoum</blockquote><p>If you're comfortable with high level pathfinder, then Mythic play might be what you're looking for to handle those high CR threats.
<p>Deities and Demigods is a good suggestion as well, but it's probably even more broken than Mythic play. You might wanna look at epic level rules from 3.5(or was it 3.0?) too if you want to make diety and demigods compatible with pathfinder.</p>
<p>If i were you i'd ask your players how they would prefer to play the game. Have they ever played high level campaign? </p>
<p>The highest i've played in pathfinder was 15 and i felt like everything was just inflated numbers and broken spells. I also ran a Dnd 5e game up to lvl 19 and my players hated the higher level as it consisted mostly of rocket tag, banishment spam etc. High level play is not for everyone. Some can make it work, but it just breaks my soul.</p>Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:The PCs could also ascend just by being so damn good at defeating divine minions that locals start hero-worshipping them, giving them enough spiritual juice to ascend.
And then they become the very thing they swore to destroy, genius, i love it! Failedlegend The Eternal Gish wrote:I don't think the group is interested in another system 2A (weakening the gods) is how i plan to start the campaign off.
oh and theres minor rumblings amongst the group aabout possible do a...Algarik2021-09-04T21:38:51ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: How to be a better divaAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gn7?How-to-be-a-better-diva#112021-09-10T11:12:27Z2021-09-04T21:29:04Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Zepheri wrote:</div><blockquote> Being "diva" does not mean that you are the star, it means that you are in the role that determines you to create and in which you develop, if no other person does the same It's not my fault anymore if you're not motivated to role-play </blockquote><p>I feel like this is not what people mean when they refer to a ''diva'' character. The DMG refers to a diva as the type of player who is''[...]the center of attention, the focus of <b>all</b> roleplaying interaction that occurs in the campaign world. Every interactions, introduction, and event is another opportunity for her to shine, <b>while the rest of the group struggles to get a word in edgewise</b>.''<span class=tiny><i>(GameMastery Guide</i> p.72, emphasis mine.)</span>
<p>What you're describing is someone who takes Roleplaying seriously, which is something good. The Diva has that quality but also the bad habits of trampling other's moment to shine as well. If the rest of the group ''struggles to get a word in'' it means that it's a bit more than just roleplaying. The Diva player is probably cutting others who talk, don't let a second for other players who might also have some ideas, etc. </p>
<p>I've been guilty of it in the past, because i love being the party's face. I realized how bad it was when i got paired with another Diva player as we'd often cut each others out. This is a lack of respect and consideration for your fellow player. It goes further than optimization, which is another player archetype; the Power Gamer. </p>
<p>Now now, before i fall into the stormwind fallacy, i'm not saying you can't be both, which i used to be as well, but power gaming is another matter. Power gaming can be good or bad depending on the campaign's goal. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote> I have no remorse for being a "diva" simply because I have a character that remembers NPC names and interacts with the NPC's, and has side-gigs outside the party, and has a ranged weapon for fighting at range, and alchemical items for every situation, and I make Profession Soldier checks to stand guard on the wall when we visit settlements and then drink with my new guard friends at the pub afterwards, and I took traits for skills and make skill checks... I'm having fun playing the game, doing what the game offers possible to everyone.</blockquote><p>There's nothing inherently diva with what you describe as well. It just mean you invest time and energy into your characters, which is great. It becomes a Diva trait if your side gigs includes no other players and takes more than 15 minutes of gametime while others are forced to twiddles their thumbs.
<p>It can be great if your side mission stories and weaves into the GM's campaign, but it becomes annoying when it's so outside the group interest that it steals gametime from others. If you want to engage in such things solo side games or pre-game discussion with the GM are better ways to handle this, imo.</p>Zepheri wrote:Being "diva" does not mean that you are the star, it means that you are in the role that determines you to create and in which you develop, if no other person does the same It's not my fault anymore if you're not motivated to role-play
I feel like this is not what people mean when they refer to a ''diva'' character. The DMG refers to a diva as the type of player who is''[...]the center of attention, the focus of all roleplaying interaction that occurs in the campaign world....Algarik2021-09-04T21:29:04ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: How to be a better divaAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gn7?How-to-be-a-better-diva#42021-09-10T11:11:58Z2021-09-03T14:36:34Z<p>I've had a bit of this syndrome in the past and i don't think there's any magic trick to surpassing it, you just gotta be aware of the problem. Make sure you don't talk over your friend, wait a bit before jumping in social encounters, lets the other time to shine. It boils down to being respectful, simple stuff really. </p>
<p>Mark Hoover's trick are also pretty good. Playing support characters are also good idea as it makes you shine by helping other succeed, thus placing them in the spotlight.</p>I've had a bit of this syndrome in the past and i don't think there's any magic trick to surpassing it, you just gotta be aware of the problem. Make sure you don't talk over your friend, wait a bit before jumping in social encounters, lets the other time to shine. It boils down to being respectful, simple stuff really.
Mark Hoover's trick are also pretty good. Playing support characters are also good idea as it makes you shine by helping other succeed, thus placing them in the spotlight.Algarik2021-09-03T14:36:34ZRe: Forums: Advice: My current party at max strength is steam rolling everything I throw at them.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gk7?My-current-party-at-max-strength-is-steam#182021-09-06T06:17:15Z2021-09-02T16:30:13Z<p>For CR system being useless i feel like this is a case of expectation. As other as mentionned, the CR system is there for PCs with 15 points buy that aren't well optimized. </p>
<p>Instead of bucking my head against trying to find a way to make the CR system work for uber-pcs, i decided to go the other way around.</p>
<p>I might come off as a controlling GM, but my player's character are all 15 point buy, loot is rather scarces and there's a limit to optimization i'm willing to allow in my campaign until i ask the player to dial it down. </p>
<p>Since i've changed my approach i find the CR system to be a lot more sane and players are still having fun.</p>For CR system being useless i feel like this is a case of expectation. As other as mentionned, the CR system is there for PCs with 15 points buy that aren't well optimized.
Instead of bucking my head against trying to find a way to make the CR system work for uber-pcs, i decided to go the other way around.
I might come off as a controlling GM, but my player's character are all 15 point buy, loot is rather scarces and there's a limit to optimization i'm willing to allow in my campaign until...Algarik2021-09-02T16:30:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#242021-09-06T05:22:44Z2021-09-01T18:34:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kasoh wrote:</div><blockquote>What Necromancy needs is a PR agent. </blockquote><p>Does the job comes with inssurance against the pyre and an amulet of undetectable alignement?Kasoh wrote:What Necromancy needs is a PR agent.
Does the job comes with inssurance against the pyre and an amulet of undetectable alignement?Algarik2021-09-01T18:34:40ZRe: Forums: Advice: Pro-Rahadoum/Misothiest CampaignAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gkm?ProRahadoumMisothiest-Campaign#52021-09-06T04:53:23Z2021-09-01T18:31:54Z<p>For the mechanical aspect, i think there's 3 ways of dealing with it.</p>
<p><b>1.</b> Mythic Campaign. Build Gods as CR30 creatures. You can take a look at Cthulhu and Hastur to get a grasp of what a CR30 creature looks like.</p>
<p><b>2.</b> Scale the Gods down. There's two way of doing this;
<br />
<b>2A.</b> Gods are afflicted with a curse/magic device or whatever fits your fancy. Build them as High level character. You could even run an E6 campaign in which Gods are 10-12th level character.
<br />
<b>2B.</b> Depower everything else. Player character stay the same level, but you reskin everything else. For example, a CR 4 Brown bear wouldn't just be a brown bear. It would be a cosmic bear or something. Gods would be high CR creatures or high level NPCs. </p>
<p><b>3.</b> Keep the fluff but play in another system. Something like Mutant&Mastermind is better suited to handling super epic feat. </p>
<p>IMO, second or third option would probably be the best. I've never tried mythic, but in my opinion, pathfinder feels terrible at higher level.</p>For the mechanical aspect, i think there's 3 ways of dealing with it.
1. Mythic Campaign. Build Gods as CR30 creatures. You can take a look at Cthulhu and Hastur to get a grasp of what a CR30 creature looks like.
2. Scale the Gods down. There's two way of doing this;
2A. Gods are afflicted with a curse/magic device or whatever fits your fancy. Build them as High level character. You could even run an E6 campaign in which Gods are 10-12th level character.
2B. Depower everything else. Player...Algarik2021-09-01T18:31:54ZRe: Forums: Advice: My current party at max strength is steam rolling everything I throw at them.Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gk7?My-current-party-at-max-strength-is-steam#32021-09-06T06:16:40Z2021-08-31T17:32:50Z<p>8 Players is madness. I've done it once back in my youth when everyone wanted to played World of Warcraft d20 cause it was novelty and, frankly, it convinced me i would never attempt such folly again. </p>
<p>As for ridiculous? I don't know, i don't know much about mesmerist, but they don't sound like the thoughest bunch, if the group made their save and had ways of dealing with her shennanigans, then sure. Although half of the group succeeding multiple Will saving throws on what was probably a DC 19/20 is pretty unlikely yeah.</p>
<p>As for the rest:
<br />
- Rust monsters are pretty weak and being only two mean they probably got obliterated in the first round. Did they even manage to do something?
<br />
- Shadow Mastif&Elemental looks like a medium challenge for 8 characters, but if i'm getting this right the wizard pretty much nullified the encounters.</p>8 Players is madness. I've done it once back in my youth when everyone wanted to played World of Warcraft d20 cause it was novelty and, frankly, it convinced me i would never attempt such folly again.
As for ridiculous? I don't know, i don't know much about mesmerist, but they don't sound like the thoughest bunch, if the group made their save and had ways of dealing with her shennanigans, then sure. Although half of the group succeeding multiple Will saving throws on what was probably a DC...Algarik2021-08-31T17:32:50ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#172021-09-06T05:22:06Z2021-08-31T17:19:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kasoh wrote:</div><blockquote>Obviously the real villain is Abjuration specialists, who are setting up Conjuration as the fall guy in revenge for stealing Mage Armor. </blockquote><p>Oh yeah, Abjuration Specialist just hate fun, screw those guys and their dispel magic!Kasoh wrote:Obviously the real villain is Abjuration specialists, who are setting up Conjuration as the fall guy in revenge for stealing Mage Armor.
Oh yeah, Abjuration Specialist just hate fun, screw those guys and their dispel magic!Algarik2021-08-31T17:19:38ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#152021-09-06T05:21:55Z2021-08-31T16:59:46Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kasoh wrote:</div><blockquote>I know you stated no interest in the mechanical aspect, but I feel like its important because the setting should have had its society shaped by being able to determine that things are Good and Evil. However, as with most things, people don't like alignment because they don't want to accept labels like evil.</blockquote><p>I personally like alignement as personality short cut, or flawed political affiliation. If someone is labelled as ''Chaotic Neutral'' i can safely assume that they value freedom.
<p>Objective alignements are wonky because in the way they are used, they clash with our understanding of moral. According to Gygax, it is Lawful Good to execute unarmed Chaotic Evil prisonners that surrendered. This should raise eyebrows. Alignement in the way they are represented within the game feels more like factions than moral guidelines. </p>
<p>I'm also reminded of the ''Lawful Good'' alignement of the Kingmaker videogame in which most dialogue option for Lawful Good when dealing with ''evil'' creatures is to charge screaming bloody justice. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kasoh wrote:</div><blockquote>I throw people who claim the art of Necromancy as a neutral act in with the same people who think that you can torture people for good reasons. They want their cake and to eat it too. "I want to do evil and engage in edgelord chicanery but I don't want to actually be evil." No. Take responsibility for your choices and wear your alignment.</blockquote><p>There is some legitimately ''harmless'' spells within the Necromancy school. Here's a list of spells, from the wizard list, that can actually be used for good:
</p>
1st - Bed of Iron, Restore Corpse, Positive Pulse.
<br />
2nd - Command Undead, Life Pact.
<br />
3rd - Gentle Respose, halt Undead,
<br />
4th - Greater, Positive Pulse.
<br />
5th - Absorb Toxicity, Lesser Astral Projection,
<br />
6th - Not much unfortunately.
<br />
7th - Control Undead, Temporary Ressurection
<br />
8th - Clone
<br />
9th - Astral Projection </p>
<p>Sure the list isn't that great, but i'd also argue that all those fatigue, paralyze and sickness spell present in the wizard list are morally superior ways of dealing with foes than stabbing them in the gut with a spear. That is if we assume that killing is an evil act.</p>
<p>Also without getting too much into the morality of torture, as it's a touchy subject, there's been multitude of research pointing out that it just doesn't work. So the bad it causes could even be justified. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kasoh wrote:</div><blockquote>An evocation specialist is like looking at someone who bought a copy of 'The anarchists cookbook' off the internet. There's only so much you can do with evocation and most of it involves killing people in a horrible fashion with elements. Why aren't these arsonists in training locked up? Because they feed the Adventurer Industrial Complex man! That's the real conspiracy. </blockquote><p>Loooooook, while this might not completely false, Evocation is about creating energies, there's bunch of useful force spell•, there's light spell, darkness spell, wind spell which are useful for navigation, and of course explosions.
<p>• Which reminds me that mage armor being conjuration is a sham. </p>
<p>Guys lets focus on the real baddies: the conjurers they stole half of evoker's specialties and they even consort with demons and devils half of the time and if undead are evil with and ''e'' demons and devils are ''E' Evil!</p>Kasoh wrote:I know you stated no interest in the mechanical aspect, but I feel like its important because the setting should have had its society shaped by being able to determine that things are Good and Evil. However, as with most things, people don't like alignment because they don't want to accept labels like evil.
I personally like alignement as personality short cut, or flawed political affiliation. If someone is labelled as ''Chaotic Neutral'' i can safely assume that they value...Algarik2021-08-31T16:59:46ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#112021-09-06T05:21:25Z2021-08-31T14:12:43Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">strayshift wrote:</div><blockquote> As an enchantment practitioner I SUGGEST that you guys should carry on debating what an evil twisted bunch those necromancy practitioners are and just leave us far less dubious and far more ethical students of the arcane arts to practice being so low key that we're happy here behind the scenes, not harming (or controlling) anyone, not in the slightest, no sirs... </blockquote><p>A morally upstanding wizard should refrain from having anything to do with enchantment and necromancy alike! There's a reasons wizards has to abandon two school of magic and that's so they can avoid ever touching enchantment and necromancy!
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Chell Raighn wrote:</div><blockquote>If you truly wish to be an innocent wizard who can never do wrong, you must join us in the ranks of the illusionists. </blockquote><p>Pfff Illusionist, why cast spells when you can fake it am i right?
<p>Evocation is the purest form of magic!</p>strayshift wrote:As an enchantment practitioner I SUGGEST that you guys should carry on debating what an evil twisted bunch those necromancy practitioners are and just leave us far less dubious and far more ethical students of the arcane arts to practice being so low key that we're happy here behind the scenes, not harming (or controlling) anyone, not in the slightest, no sirs...
A morally upstanding wizard should refrain from having anything to do with enchantment and necromancy alike!...Algarik2021-08-31T14:12:43ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#82021-09-06T05:21:07Z2021-08-31T13:07:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote>I was meaning Golarion soldiers... not soldiers, in a real life general sense. Not saying real life soldiers haven't done some terrible things, we just weren't the target of that particular comment. As a veteran, I could see how my example could be offensive if taken to be applied to all soldiers.</blockquote><p>Oh i was also refering to golarion's soldier, maybe i just didn't picked the proper words sorry!
<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote>I think being alive leads to suffering. Lol. So there may be some debate on which side suffers the most, and whether or not being turned is a liberation or a curse. </blockquote><p>I think the same too, but if that's true, Undead is a form of punishment; eternal unrest. It dulls out physical pain, but does next nothing to alieviate the stress of simply existing.
<p>As for curing spell being necromancy spell in earlier edition, i will admit that some part of me licked that, however, it made little sense. </p>
<p>The ''Necro'' prefix means that something is related to death or corpses it has nothing to do with life. Traditionally, Necromancy as also been seen as a tool to control the dead or to communicate with the them for purpose of divination. </p>
<p>I'm gonna go against the grain and say that necromancy shouldn't be a school, but only a label for spells that deal with the dead. All necromancy spells could be split into the remaining school.
<br />
1- Spells that raise the dead could be conjuration spells.
<br />
2- Spells that control the dead could be enchantment spells.
<br />
3- Spells that makes other sick, enfeebled or otherwise incapacitated could be transmutation.
<br />
4- Spells that blast with dark energy should be evocation.</p>
<p>Necromancy is a themathically appropriate school, but i feel like it doesn't hold to scrutiny. </p>
<p>As for what school cure wound spell and inflict spells should be, i think they should be within evocation. Evocation is already the school of summoning energy and Conjuration has a bad habit of trampling on its schtick.</p>VoodistMonk wrote:I was meaning Golarion soldiers... not soldiers, in a real life general sense. Not saying real life soldiers haven't done some terrible things, we just weren't the target of that particular comment. As a veteran, I could see how my example could be offensive if taken to be applied to all soldiers.
Oh i was also refering to golarion's soldier, maybe i just didn't picked the proper words sorry! VoodistMonk wrote:I think being alive leads to suffering. Lol. So there may be...Algarik2021-08-31T13:07:20ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What about all the good things Necromancy did?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gjp?What-about-all-the-good-things-Necromancy-did#32021-08-31T07:21:50Z2021-08-31T05:05:03Z<p>I guess i'll take the bite!</p>
<p>Is the whole school of necromancy evil? Of course not, it's a tool. While the school definitely focus on getting people dead or sick, it's no more evil than a sword is. </p>
<p>Necromancy just has this unfortunate association with undead reamination, which is undoutably evil. Sure, sure, we can always argue that using undead to do labour or to fight wars helps the living, but it also has the horrible tendency of backfiring. Mindless undead hates life and when left unchecked they might go on a rampage. Raising someone into a undead also corrupts which most certainly leads to suffering, which can't be good. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote> I will argue that even the epitome of necromancy, Lichdom, is no more inherently "Evil" as being a random soldier in a random king's miltary... the things mortals will do for their kings, their gods, and the countries are horrendous. Most liches sacrifice fewer lives in pursuit of their goals than your average soldier sacrifices for a pathetic promotion and a shiny piece of ribbon.</blockquote><p>This argument is problematic for two reasons.
</p>
1. Lichdom being the epitome of necromancy is totally subjective. I personally find that Astral projection opens up way more interesting possibilities.
<br />
2. This argument is a fallacious debate tactic called ''Whataboutism''. The unethical behavior of military personnel has no bearing on the moral ''goodness'' of Lichdom. Both can be terrible.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">VoodistMonk wrote:</div><blockquote>But, to judge all liches by the actions of a few, is just as wrong as labeling an entire school of magic as Evil... rather than making magicians be held accountable for what they do with Necromancy.</blockquote><p>Well, the path to Lichdom is rid with so many unspeakable act that we can, in fact, judge all liches to be horrendous. Now sure, some Lich may be less evil than other, it still doesn't make them anywhere near ethical.I guess i'll take the bite!
Is the whole school of necromancy evil? Of course not, it's a tool. While the school definitely focus on getting people dead or sick, it's no more evil than a sword is.
Necromancy just has this unfortunate association with undead reamination, which is undoutably evil. Sure, sure, we can always argue that using undead to do labour or to fight wars helps the living, but it also has the horrible tendency of backfiring. Mindless undead hates life and when left...Algarik2021-08-31T05:05:03ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Intelligent undead and Intimidate/DemoralizeAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gg9?Intelligent-undead-and-IntimidateDemoralize#82021-09-07T14:48:16Z2021-08-28T15:54:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:</div><blockquote><p> <a href="https://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9svt" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">I should have checked the FAQ first.</a></p>
<p>Intimidate is mind-affecting. But immunity to involuntary reactions to emotions doesn't mean they can't still feel those emotions and act on them. </blockquote><p>Ah, that's a shame, i felt like my interpretation made sense. Oh well, i'll probably still use it that way in my home game.Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:I should have checked the FAQ first.
Intimidate is mind-affecting. But immunity to involuntary reactions to emotions doesn't mean they can't still feel those emotions and act on them.
Ah, that's a shame, i felt like my interpretation made sense. Oh well, i'll probably still use it that way in my home game.Algarik2021-08-28T15:54:14ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Intelligent undead and Intimidate/DemoralizeAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gg9?Intelligent-undead-and-IntimidateDemoralize#52021-08-28T09:13:16Z2021-08-28T07:55:08Z<p>I'm not sure that RAW undead are immune to all effect of intimidation. Sure they can't be demoralized, but the way i read the rule it looks like they can still be coerced or influenced with the skill. </p>
<p>The way i justify it : Undead have no stress respond to the physiological/psychological effect of fear because their brain is dead meat. They can however still understand threat and ''fear'' for their existance. They just won't even act sluggish because od those fear.</p>I'm not sure that RAW undead are immune to all effect of intimidation. Sure they can't be demoralized, but the way i read the rule it looks like they can still be coerced or influenced with the skill.
The way i justify it : Undead have no stress respond to the physiological/psychological effect of fear because their brain is dead meat. They can however still understand threat and ''fear'' for their existance. They just won't even act sluggish because od those fear.Algarik2021-08-28T07:55:08ZRe: Forums: Advice: What would a high level Qlippoth do as a favor for a player?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43gfx?What-would-a-high-level-Qlippoth-do-as-a#102021-08-28T07:57:51Z2021-08-28T07:45:46Z<p>What about a neutral fallen celestial driven mad by the quipploth's torture? The party could try to help the celestial to find it's true nature back while it's travelling with them.</p>What about a neutral fallen celestial driven mad by the quipploth's torture? The party could try to help the celestial to find it's true nature back while it's travelling with them.Algarik2021-08-28T07:45:46ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to intervene when a player gives up?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g8e?How-to-intervene-when-a-player-gives-up#182021-09-06T05:19:10Z2021-08-28T03:32:54Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Temperans wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
On that note, @Algarik</p>
<p>People say that most of the rules are related to combat. But if you actually look at all the rules, alt rules, and bonus rules you would notice that most of it has to do with handling a variety of encounters everything from terrain, to social, to just "how do I drive a cart", to creating a variety of things (to help or torment players).</p>
<p>Its really incredible how many alt rules are there mostly ignored because "this game is about combat". </blockquote><p>I'm not saying that there is no rule to deal with something else than combat. However i'll have to disagree. There's some guidline on how to run social encounters in ultimate intrigue, it's still pretty anemic compared to the amount of content dedicated to combat.
<p>The game is combat simulator with extra side rule. </p>
<p>It's impossible to progress in pathfinder without gaining combat capabilities. Even NPC classes can't avoid gaining hit dices and base attack bonus as they level. </p>
<p>Combat is this huge thing with a huge library of 6 bestiaries to fight, with epic battle. It's also pretty cohesive and work on the same framework.</p>
<p>Skills are all one or two roll to solve problems. </p>
<p>Side rules sometimes work, sometimes are janky and some of them doesn't even mesh well with the base game.</p>
<p>Lets take the verbal duel from Ultimate intrigue. It's fun i really like it. It's also it's own mini-game that interact sideway with the system. It doesn't even use the traditional skill bonus.</p>
<p>Spells without combat applixability are also fairly limited. </p>
<p>In conclusion, while i don't think pathfinder is exclusively a combat game, i still think it's mainly built as a combat game with side dishes of exploration and social rules.</p>Temperans wrote:On that note, @AlgarikPeople say that most of the rules are related to combat. But if you actually look at all the rules, alt rules, and bonus rules you would notice that most of it has to do with handling a variety of encounters everything from terrain, to social, to just "how do I drive a cart", to creating a variety of things (to help or torment players).
Its really incredible how many alt rules are there mostly ignored because "this game is about combat".
I'm not saying...Algarik2021-08-28T03:32:54ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to intervene when a player gives up?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g8e?How-to-intervene-when-a-player-gives-up#162021-09-06T05:19:05Z2021-08-27T22:54:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Derklord wrote:</div><blockquote><p>This is actually a misconception. One should not pursue unrelated/non-synergetic combat styles, but Pathfinder highly rewards building hybrid-ish or flexible characters.
</p>
This is yet another thing where the stupid "distinct/traditional party roles" crap that mentally calcified old players still propagate hurts the game.</blockquote><p>Fair point. Hybrid class are actually pretty good and i like them a lot. However, there's still an amount of specialisation that character must commit and character tend to maximize combat abilities as it's also what the game is the most equipped to deal with. The other pillars, lets say social and exploration, are anemic compared to the amount of combat rules.
<p>I really try my best in my homebrew campaign, i use social conflict rules, i try to involve player into their skill check roll, but still combat takes at least 40% of the campaign space. Granted i might just be a combat focused GM. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Derklord wrote:</div><blockquote>Also, giving PCs more skill ranks can help. Paizo removed the terrible overpricing of cross-class-skills, but sadly didn't fix that many classes have objectively too few skill ranks per level</blockquote><p>Hard agree. This is why i play with the Background Skill rule, it really helps fleshing out characters.
<p>Edit: About skill, i also raised each class outside of int-based casters, paladin and cleric to at least 4+int. No more 2+int on fighter and sorcerer that's just bad. It plays a bit on the Rogue ''role'', but i couldn't care less as i encourage everyone to stay away from the class and pick slayer instead.</p>Derklord wrote:This is actually a misconception. One should not pursue unrelated/non-synergetic combat styles, but Pathfinder highly rewards building hybrid-ish or flexible characters.
This is yet another thing where the stupid "distinct/traditional party roles" crap that mentally calcified old players still propagate hurts the game.
Fair point. Hybrid class are actually pretty good and i like them a lot. However, there's still an amount of specialisation that character must commit and...Algarik2021-08-27T22:54:40ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to intervene when a player gives up?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g8e?How-to-intervene-when-a-player-gives-up#142021-09-06T05:18:57Z2021-08-27T16:17:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Where I get frustrated though, as a GM, is that because of these silos the players put their characters in what ends up happening is on extended skill uses, like in social situations or on complex puzzles or whatever, three of my players just sit around playing on their phones or laptops while the fourth one shines.</blockquote><p>Unfortunately Pathfinder 1e is very much a specialist based game. To make everyone more rounded up there has to be some agreement that this is the intented goal of the game. In my current E6 campaign, i made it very clear to the players during session 0 that i would use social conflict and verbal duel.
<p>Another solution might be to restrict class selection to 3/4 BBa and 3/4 caster class. Those class are generally the more polyvalent and the most balanced one. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Moreover, after a session like that wraps inevitably one of my players comes back and says "can we have less social encounters" or "can we handwave traps" because they were bored while the other player did their thing.</blockquote><p>Yikes that's rough. I'm sure you're an excellent GM from what i've been reading, but does that player stay out of social encounters because they lack the skills to do so or because they lack interest?
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Can we start another thread entitled "how to intervene when the GM gives up" b/c these kinds of situations are really getting me down.</blockquote><p>I feel ya, GM burnout is a real thing. What i advise is to talk to you player and see how they feel. I've stopped some campaign in the past when i realised i wasn't having fun anymore and my players were also getting a bit down. Sometimes taking a small break or starting something new helps. Good with luck with that!Mark Hoover 330 wrote:Where I get frustrated though, as a GM, is that because of these silos the players put their characters in what ends up happening is on extended skill uses, like in social situations or on complex puzzles or whatever, three of my players just sit around playing on their phones or laptops while the fourth one shines.
Unfortunately Pathfinder 1e is very much a specialist based game. To make everyone more rounded up there has to be some agreement that this is the intented...Algarik2021-08-27T16:17:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Ideas for reducing nuclear mythical rocket tag at high level playAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g7p?Ideas-for-reducing-nuclear-mythical-rocket#92021-08-21T12:54:31Z2021-08-21T05:49:35Z<p>@Ryze Kuja.</p>
<p>Awesome thanks!</p>@Ryze Kuja.
Awesome thanks!Algarik2021-08-21T05:49:35ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Ideas for reducing nuclear mythical rocket tag at high level playAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g7p?Ideas-for-reducing-nuclear-mythical-rocket#72021-08-21T12:54:26Z2021-08-20T18:47:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryze Kuja wrote:</div><blockquote> As far as balancing monsters after that, I use a Combat Manager on my Surface laptop, so advancing the monsters was hardly any effort at all.</blockquote><p>That sounds so useful, might i inquire on where you'd find such a tool?Ryze Kuja wrote:As far as balancing monsters after that, I use a Combat Manager on my Surface laptop, so advancing the monsters was hardly any effort at all.
That sounds so useful, might i inquire on where you'd find such a tool?Algarik2021-08-20T18:47:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why do the developers insist on realism for martial characters only?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42qmz&page=2?Why-do-the-developers-insist-on-realism-for#872021-08-26T14:56:48Z2021-08-20T15:24:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Every Paizo spellcaster though gets the trade off that their spells and powers only work a handful of times/day.</blockquote><p>Well now there's the kineticist that fills the niche that warlock does in D&D, which is : a Blaster with infinite blast. Pretty well made imo.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Finally, a note about making "anime" style martials with flashy combat techniques: if you want this, work with your GM. I mean, Traits exist for a reason and there's TONS of ways to customize your characters.</blockquote><p>An anime swordsman is just a Magus. It has good sword abilities, spell and it can channel magic through their sword.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">avr wrote:</div><blockquote>Stylistically, a lot of people don't want flashy magic. A game which requires people to play characters with obvious spellcasting will lose those people right off the bat. A bunch of abilities which may be extraordinary but don't qualify as supernatural is required to keep them happy.</blockquote><p>I feel like this is true, or at least i definitly agree with it. I don't want the ''mundane'' to be fantastical, this is why i stick with E6, it gets heroic enough for my tastes.
<p>That being said, i feel like there's no reasons to expect any class to stay mundane at higher level. If you like realistic play, core Pathfinder is just a bad game for this. Hence the original complaint and the million existing threads of martial vs caster disparity.</p>Mark Hoover 330 wrote:Every Paizo spellcaster though gets the trade off that their spells and powers only work a handful of times/day.
Well now there's the kineticist that fills the niche that warlock does in D&D, which is : a Blaster with infinite blast. Pretty well made imo. Mark Hoover 330 wrote:Finally, a note about making "anime" style martials with flashy combat techniques: if you want this, work with your GM. I mean, Traits exist for a reason and there's TONS of ways to customize your...Algarik2021-08-20T15:24:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why do the developers insist on realism for martial characters only?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42qmz&page=2?Why-do-the-developers-insist-on-realism-for#792021-08-26T14:57:24Z2021-08-19T17:28:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>That I agree is frustrating. Level 1, PCs don't need to be superhuman. By level 20 I feel like they should be cutting the very air to make sonic booms or something. Real Anime level martial power.</blockquote><p>Yeah hard agree. We often conflate martial with mundane, but it shouldn't be. Pathfinder, 3.5, 5e, they all operate on the assumption that adventurers starts with powerlevel barely above your small town guard and finish with godlike level abilities.
<p>This is my main gripe with those system in general. The game tries to be lord of the ring for the first five level, then it switches to classic epic fantasy for level 6 to 10, then it jumps into superheroes with fantasy cosmetics. However, it is poorly assumed as we can see with martial being restricted by ''realistic'' standard even at high level. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Mark Hoover 330 wrote:</div><blockquote>Martials can have a rich, rewarding life outside of combat if you choose to build and play them that way. Otherwise they can be as wooden and 2-dimensional as the Fire Wizard in my megadungeon game. The choice is yours</blockquote><p>Any character can be two-dimensionnal, martial just have a harder time finding uses outside of combat. Find any unconventionnal situation and you're probably better with magic than without. It's not like skills was a pure martial thing either, casters get those too and they generally end up being better.Mark Hoover 330 wrote:That I agree is frustrating. Level 1, PCs don't need to be superhuman. By level 20 I feel like they should be cutting the very air to make sonic booms or something. Real Anime level martial power.
Yeah hard agree. We often conflate martial with mundane, but it shouldn't be. Pathfinder, 3.5, 5e, they all operate on the assumption that adventurers starts with powerlevel barely above your small town guard and finish with godlike level abilities. This is my main gripe with...Algarik2021-08-19T17:28:49ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to intervene when a player gives up?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g8e?How-to-intervene-when-a-player-gives-up#22021-08-21T09:05:16Z2021-08-19T16:49:35Z<p>My way of dealing with similar issues really depend on the level of game expertise the player have. </p>
<p>One of my expert players gets whiny whenever ennemies exploit ''unfun'' mechanics such as poisons, stealth or whatever he feels is ''unfun''. As he's a good friend of mine, i kindly remind him to stop whining and to deal with it. </p>
<p>Two of my other players are rather new to pathfinder. Not new to roleplaying in general, so i remind them of options that's available to them, within the system.If they ask if they can do something a bit more original, i'll find the closest possible action within the system and might tweek it a bit if necessary.</p>
<p>If characters have any knowledge skills i'll also allow for them to roll to find unconventinal weaknesses and such.</p>
<p>Although, it very, very rarely happens that players feels useless at my table. I supervise character creation and level up so they don't end up with abyssmal combat abilities. In addition i'm not in the habit of designing encounters in which characters will end up 100% useless.</p>My way of dealing with similar issues really depend on the level of game expertise the player have.
One of my expert players gets whiny whenever ennemies exploit ''unfun'' mechanics such as poisons, stealth or whatever he feels is ''unfun''. As he's a good friend of mine, i kindly remind him to stop whining and to deal with it.
Two of my other players are rather new to pathfinder. Not new to roleplaying in general, so i remind them of options that's available to them, within the system.If...Algarik2021-08-19T16:49:35ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why do the developers insist on realism for martial characters only?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42qmz&page=2?Why-do-the-developers-insist-on-realism-for#762021-08-26T14:57:49Z2021-08-19T15:10:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">SheepishEidolon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Algarik wrote:</div><blockquote>Also, i feel like the problem with martial isn't realism, cause as other have pointed out, they are not. The problem, imo, is that they lack out of combat utility.</blockquote>Well, I read that all the time here. But I wonder: What would you call <i>enough</i> out of combat utility? </blockquote><p>I think Scavion made a good account of what martial lack, but i'm gonna to answer what i think they also lack.
<p><b>- Skill points.</b> Most martials, outside of Slayer, Rogue and Ranger, have a very low amount of skill points. 2+int should just not exist on any martial outside of Paladin.
<br />
<b>- Better Mobility.</b> As Scavion mentionned, better mobility regarding climbing, swimming, jumping. Why not allow martial to run on wall for a movement with climbing or acrobatics? Oh and while we're at it, maybe reducing the armor speed penalty? It's quite hefty to lose 1/3rd of your speed for wearing armor. Sure armor check penalty make sense, but armor didn't reduce your speed by THAT much. Armor is generally though cause of the heat and exhaustion.
<br />
<b>-Herbalism&Alchemy.</b> Those should be expanded. We have a few cool herbs with neat ability in Ultimate Wilderness, but that's about it. Brew Potion should not require you to be a caster even if you don't have the alchemist class. Herbalism & Alchemy should be a time-consuming way of dealing with magic for those who can't afford to cast spells. I would say it should even be able to ressurect the dead with the proper ingredients and recipes. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Scavion wrote:</div><blockquote>It's also integral that a martial does not sacrifice efficacy in combat for these things.</blockquote><p>And this, so much this. Martials have to deal with so many feat taxes that they can't afford to specialize much outside of their combat niche. Meanwhile casters can switch what they are good at on daily basis thanks to their spell list.
<p>In the end, it's a bit of a futile discussion as we all know pathfinder 1e is not gonna be printing new rules in the future, we all have to rely on hombebrew and 3rd party books to amend our games in ways we feel is right. I personally like E6 as it's, in my opinion, the best level at which everyone is kinda balanced and it allows people to get a bit more creative with their feat choice (especially since i give 1 feat on every level instead of even level before epic level.)</p>SheepishEidolon wrote:Algarik wrote:Also, i feel like the problem with martial isn't realism, cause as other have pointed out, they are not. The problem, imo, is that they lack out of combat utility.
Well, I read that all the time here. But I wonder: What would you call enough out of combat utility? I think Scavion made a good account of what martial lack, but i'm gonna to answer what i think they also lack. - Skill points. Most martials, outside of Slayer, Rogue and Ranger, have a very low...Algarik2021-08-19T15:10:56ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Thoughts on this optional system: Personal FeatsAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43g4q?Thoughts-on-this-optional-system-Personal-Feats#72021-08-20T07:29:04Z2021-08-17T15:13:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Faolán Maiali the Azure Abjurer wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Naturally, which feats could be gained in the Personal feat slots is open to debate and re-balancing.</p>
<p>It would make sense to exclude skills that are ubiquitous to almost any adventure, like Perception.</blockquote><p>The basic idea is nice indeed. Some feat utility are also heavily dependent upon the GMs uses of some mechanics and the type of campaign.
<p>For example, in an hombrewed campaign i'm currently playing, there is a very heavy focus on survival, foraging and exhaustion. Players, including myself playing a witch, pretty much all have endurance or very high constitution as being fatigued is harsh when we have to worry about being able to retreat at all time! I wouldn't give endurance for free in such campaign. </p>
<p>As for feat boosting skills might i suggest looking at the ''Background skill'' optional rule from Pathfinder unchained? The rule basically separates skills into ''Adventuring Skills'', which are useful for any adventurer, and ''background skills'' which are generally very situational if not completely useless in most campaign. That could give you an easy reference as to what feat to allow for your ''Personal Feats''. </p>
<p>I don't think i'd personally allow anything that gives any sort of combat feat prowess improvement, be it martial or physical. If anything it think i would only allow feats that would help out subpar combat style such as Two-Weapon Fighting. </p>
<p>In the end i feel like no matter the list, it will still end up being a power creep. Although it might be possible to lower its effect so it's manageable.</p>Faolán Maiali the Azure Abjurer wrote:Naturally, which feats could be gained in the Personal feat slots is open to debate and re-balancing.
It would make sense to exclude skills that are ubiquitous to almost any adventure, like Perception.
The basic idea is nice indeed. Some feat utility are also heavily dependent upon the GMs uses of some mechanics and the type of campaign. For example, in an hombrewed campaign i'm currently playing, there is a very heavy focus on survival, foraging and...Algarik2021-08-17T15:13:38ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: So What Do You Guys Think of Traits?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fml&page=2?So-What-Do-You-Guys-Think-of-Traits#802021-08-11T08:27:33Z2021-08-10T16:23:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Claxon wrote:</div><blockquote><p>The problem is you can come up with all sorts of reason to justify something being in your background, that power gamers aren't going to care about.</p>
<p>I don't disagree with you that character traits should sync up with backstory, but trying to "enforce" it... </blockquote><p>This is basically what the Stormwind fallacy denounce : Powergaming is not opposed to roleplay, they both work on different scales.
<p>Although i do agree with Lord_Rachen as well, i like when traits mechanical benefit fits with the character concept, just like i like when ability scores matches the character description. </p>
<p>Although as i mentioned before, i couldn't really care less about ability names, the don't have any impact within the game world.</p>
<p>- Wanna take Rich parent to represent your character owning a successful business before leaving for adventure? Sure, it's a good justification.
<br />
- Wanna take Birthmark and fluff it as a divine tatoo instead? Sure it doesn't have to be a birthmark in my game.
<br />
- Wanna take indomitable faith without being super religious? Sure, your character can just be naturally strong willed. </p>
<p>IMO, mechanical abilities are just the mechanical expression of your character concept. In the end what matters is that your collection of traits, abilities and powers manage to convince me that they are representing your character idea. </p>
<p>It goes both way however, cause i'm sorry, but at my table, if your character has 8 in Charisma, you don't get to describe your character as ''charming'' without investing in some skills or feat.</p>Claxon wrote:The problem is you can come up with all sorts of reason to justify something being in your background, that power gamers aren't going to care about.
I don't disagree with you that character traits should sync up with backstory, but trying to "enforce" it...
This is basically what the Stormwind fallacy denounce : Powergaming is not opposed to roleplay, they both work on different scales. Although i do agree with Lord_Rachen as well, i like when traits mechanical benefit fits...Algarik2021-08-10T16:23:56ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Press-Ganged MonstersAlgarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ffs?PressGanged-Monsters#72021-08-26T15:20:50Z2021-08-05T16:53:02Z<p>I like those kind of ''traitor'' NPCS in theory, but in practice i always end up roleplaying them way too friendly and i just don't have the heart to follow through their betrayal.</p>I like those kind of ''traitor'' NPCS in theory, but in practice i always end up roleplaying them way too friendly and i just don't have the heart to follow through their betrayal.Algarik2021-08-05T16:53:02ZRe: Forums: Advice: Would you ever retcon PC death? What if you missed a rule?Algarikhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fmt?Would-you-ever-retcon-PC-death-What-if-you#372021-08-04T16:27:53Z2021-08-04T16:05:11Z<p>@Sunking</p>
<p>Yeah, the rule is not exactly super clear, it can be read both way. </p>
<p>Although, i think i prefer my reading cause requiring a move action is mostly a nerf to martial, casters won't really mind most of the time.</p>@Sunking
Yeah, the rule is not exactly super clear, it can be read both way.
Although, i think i prefer my reading cause requiring a move action is mostly a nerf to martial, casters won't really mind most of the time.Algarik2021-08-04T16:05:11Z