Altoid Ant's page

I love everything Mysterious Stranger said. It is rare I see that attitude on these boards. Most players seem to think the GM legally bound to allow anything the rules allow.

You've said the GM has put a lot of thought and effort into his game. He seems to have a vision and knows what his world is like. I can tell you, in my experience, this is the type of GM you want to play with. I've been in too many games where the GM had a vision of the game, but allowed characters that didn't really fit that vision and everything was a complete mess. The GM is probably telling you no for a reason. You have to assume that his goal is for everyone to have fun, and he may be telling you no, to ensure that happens. You really have two choices: Trust him and assume that is the case, or don't trust him. If you don't trust your GM, you should probably find another game.

well one of my major issues is that I'm struggling to understand what the theme is. were playing the skull and shackles campaign, just started book two. and we've fought a lot of monsters, we have elves, orcs and halflings. one of our PC's is a lizard folk and the other is a magus. so we have magic as well. theres just a disconnect for me. I don't understand why some major fantasy elements are okay whilst some minor ones aren't. thats basically my issue, I just want more clarification.

I'm on the "Talk it over with the GM" side, but I would also advise you to hold him accountable to what he says. It sounds like he keeps changing things mid-adventure, which is not good. Also, is he similarly restrictive with the other players, or just you? If he treats everyone else differently than he treats you, that's a serious problem and you should leave the game. If he's consistent with everyone, then it's not such a big issue and I would stick with it if the game is otherwise fun.

I had a GM for a while who nerfed every character I made into oblivion, but let a couple of his "favorite" players run horrendously broken, overpowered, and even illegal characters. I bailed on that GM and that was the right decision for me.

So far I'm the only one whose had stuff disallowed in this game but I've been assured by the other players that in another game they're playing he's disallowed a horse for some reason. I don't know the details of that situation so I can't really comment.

The Rules wrote:

As you gain levels, your animal companion improves as well, usually at 4th or 7th level, in addition to the standard bonuses noted on Table: Animal Companion Base Statistics. Instead of taking the listed benefit at 4th or 7th level, you can instead choose to increase the companion's Dexterity and Constitution by 2.

That should do it.

ah okay, well for a wolf its just way better to stick with the upgrade on the table haha.

Undersized Mount would also let you ride a medium sized mount as a medium sized race. Not that I think this GM would let you take it. You don't HAVE to take the large size upgrade either, you can take the stat boost instead.

don't you get both?

"7th-Level Advancement

Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d8); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4."

...

we would have means of feeding it, we keep rations on board the ship. we'd just have extra. and I have been to a lot of old buildings and the occasional castle. but its important to remember back when those were built the average person was at least a foot shorter. so whilst I've seen lots of 5 foot doorways its important to note that people are exponentially a lot taller then we were when they were built.

in a pathfinder setting the average hight of a person isn't that of a person from two-hundred years ago. its the hight of us now. and the campaign were running is skull and shackles. we've just started the second book.

When a GM runs a game he will usually have a definite idea of what type of game he wants to run. Some characters and idea’ do not fit in to the game he is running. The character or ability may be perfectly legal but just doesn’t fit the campaign the GM is running. While the idea of playing a greedy thief who’s is willing to sell his mother into slaver for a coper piece may be cool. Playing that character in a campaign where the players are freedom fighters trying t to bring down a corrupt tyrant is not going to work well. In some cases you may be able to modify the character so that it is acceptable, but other times the character simply does not fit. In that case the best thing to do is to save the character concept and play it in another campaign.

Another thing to consider is sometimes the GM has plans for how the campaign is going to go that make certain concepts or options less valuable or even totally useless. I can see a couple of problems with the wolf companion. First is that much of the game is taking place on ship, or if you are traveling by ship between adventures for a long time feeding and exercising the wolf is going to be difficult. Also many crew members may be unwilling to sail with a wolf the size of a horse on board. Another thing is if most of the adventures are going to be dungeon crawls taking the wolf with you may be a problem. Your GM may be simply trying to save you from having a totally useless companion, but not wanting to give away too much of the campaign.

I don’t really understand the reason behind the agile breastplate, but I also don’t have all the information either. In any event it is probably only relevant at early levels. Once you can afford it a mithral breastplate is going to be better anyways. A mithral breastplate has an armor check penalty of only -1. This can be totally eliminated by taking the trait armor expert which is probably a good investment for a range anyways.

well as of right now we have our own ship. and to be honest the maintenance of a wolf would only be an issue if the GM decides to make it an issue. I mean we don't have to detail every time we need to eat or go to the bathroom or anything so I don't see why we should demand that of an animal companion. and we haven't really had a dungeon crawl yet in the game. and if we did I don't see why a wolf couldn't come in. I mean if a dungeon is so small that a medium creature can just fit into then you can't really expect a medium creature to be able to fight in those conditions.

While this may or may not have any relevancy to your past GM rulings, one possible avenue of his disallowance of the Agile Breastplate might be that it first came out in the Advanced Player Guide (and later got reprinted in Ultimate Equipment); so if he just wanted stuff from the Core Rulebook used, that might explain that little rules disconnect.

nah its not that, one of the players is a magus and the other is playing a monster race, Lizardfolk.

Openly and honestly communicating how you feel is usually a good way of doing things. I would start by explaining your uncertainty - highlight that you do have certain ideas for your character, but because things are disallowed in a way you don't entirely understand, it's hard for you to plan out your character and this is making things more difficult for you than it should be.

Try explaining what you want to do, then asking what the best way of doing that would be. Good GMs are generally willing to cooperate and find something you can both work with, and since he does seem to be pretty good overall... ^^

yeah, I guess I'm just gonna have to bite the bullet and reopen the discussion. hope it goes well. I'm also quite new to the group so that makes it harder. I don't wanna be the new guy whose walked in and demand everything change for me.

hi, I'm a player. maybe a difficult one and I'm currently in a game with a GM who I feel is being difficult.

I'm still relatively new to the game and was wondering, whats the best protocol when stuff people start butting heads.

I'll give a little more information. and being honest, it hasn't become an issue, mainly because I've just rolled over and gone with it, though I'm not happy with the GM's decisions and it negatively effects my enjoyment of the game.

just for some specifics. I wanted to get an Agile Breastplate, its a 400g breastplate that decreases the armour check penalty from -4 to -1 on climb and jump checks. he's disallowed them and I don't really know why. he just doesn't like them.

the second issue is that, I'm playing a ranger and I'm not allowed to have a wolf as an animal companion. so I have to settle with a dog. I said that I wanted a wolf so that once the wolf gets big enough (becomes large at level 7) I can ride it. he said no, and that I can't ride a large wolf or a large cat. He also didn't want me to have a wolf because it doesn't fit the theme (pirate) which, personally. I don't understand. the climate is tropical and wolves can live in tropical area's but yeah, I'm not allowed.

I guess my major issue is, I don't understand where or why he draws the line. it feels like i'm playing chess with someone whose changed the rules for arbitrary reasons. I don't understand why a magical halfling bowman is fine but a more highly flexible crafted breastplate isn't.

I also feel its important to note, that why'll this thread is detailing my issues I have with the gm. he is a good gm, he is passionate and puts a lot of thought into the game and for all of the few things that bug me theirs a lot he does right. the point of this thread is really just for advice on how to deal with clashes and hopefully learn how to pre-emptively deal with them.

Combat reflexes is the obvious choice. we have a Cleric Lizard man in our group with a spear and combat reflexes. in one encounter he killed 4 out of the 6 Grippli in one turn just due to them moving through threatened area. it was awesome.

Hey guys, I'll be honest in that I know nothing about converting monster races into player races. the monster I've always wanted to play as since I've started playing was a Dullahan.

Heres the info on a Dullahan.

-------------------------

Dullahan CR 7
XP 3,200
LE Medium undead
Init +2; Senses blindsight 60 ft.; Perception +16
Aura frightful presence (30 ft., DC 19)

DEFENSE
AC 21, touch 11, flat-footed 20 (+10 armor, +1 Dex)
hp 85 (10d8+40); fast healing 5
Fort +7, Ref +5, Will +12
Defensive Abilities channel resistance +4; Immune undead traits; SR 18

OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft. (20 ft. in armor)
Melee +1 keen longsword +14/+9 (1d8+6/17–20 plus 1d6 cold)
Special Attacks chilling blade, death’s calling, summon mount

STATISTICS
Str 20, Dex 14, Con --, Int 14, Wis 16, Cha 18
Base Atk +7; CMB +12; CMD 24
Feats Iron Will, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Trample, Weapon Focus (longsword)
Skills Handle Animal +14, Intimidate +17, Perception +16, Ride +7, Spellcraft +15, Stealth +10
Languages Common, Sylvan

SPECIAL ABILITIES
Chilling Blade (Su)

A dullahan is proficient with all simple and martial slashing weapons. When it wields a slashing weapon, the blade inflicts +1d6 cold damage and gains the keen weapon property.

Death’s Calling (Su)

Once per day as a standard action, a dullahan may place death’s calling on a target within 60 feet (DC 22 Fortitude negates). If the dullahan knows and speaks the target’s name, the target takes a –2 penalty on the save. If the victim fails the save, he becomes staggered for 1d6 rounds. For the next 24 hours (or until the dullahan is slain), all critical hits against the victim automatically confirm. Finally, the victim automatically fails all Constitution checks to stabilize while dying. This is a mind-affecting curse effect. The save DC is Charisma-based.

Summon Mount (Su)

As a standard action, a dullahan can summon a war-trained heavy horse with the fiendish creature simple template. This horse remains until it is slain or the dullahan dismisses it. He can only have one such horse in his service at a time.

-----------------

So guys, do you think its doable? and would you mind helping me do it?

I was thinking the other day (dangerous I know) about the relativity of our characters mods to each other. this thought mainly occurred to me when my character got knocked out for the second time in our campaign, and nobody else in the party did. now my character is a brawler with a con of 12. I know its not high, but it is above average and I thought I could compensate by having a high AC.

Anyway, my point is that I had the lowest con in my party. other members all had a minimum of 14, even our arcanist and so the enemies we faced had been adjusted to that. if the whole party has a high con, the GM would ajust accordingly. so it got me wondering. why invest in con then? or at least, why should everyone invest in con?

its kinda like the saying, if everyone is special than no one is. and if everyone has a high con, str, int etc. than no one does. does anyone else feel this way?

Don't they have gigantic heads?

I would just go huge cloak with hood and leave it at that...

Get a hat of disguise ASAP.

didn't know that was a thing. thats awesome, I'll definitely have to snag that. thanks.

I find it highly unlikely that a party that you are adventuring with would not count as close interaction. Your voice, behaviour, even looking closely at you would give the game away. If they had no choice perhaps they would accept that you hid yourself with a mask but you had better have a much better reason.

Is there a reason you don't just play a halfling or gnome?

I know that its hard to convince my party members that I'm a different race. thats why I'm looking for ways to buff my characters disguise skill and looking for appropriate magical items that would make it probable that the party wouldn't pick up on him being a goblin. and the reason I want to play a goblin instead of a halfling or a gnome is because I not only want to play a goblin instead, I'd also want to play a character in disguise.

Have you given your goblin the Ugly Swine trait?

Hmm

yeah I have :)

Check out the monster mask from Ultimate Equipment:

Monster Mask

Price varies; Weight 1 lb.

This articulated mask resembles a specific type of humanoid monster, such as a bugbear, goblin, orc, or hobgoblin. The mouth opens and closes when you move your jaw and its skin is actually carefully-painted cloth. Though such masks are usually intended for theater performances where an actor plays the role of a monster, adventurers have been known to use them to help blend in with monsters of the appropriate type. The mask negates the –2 Disguise DC for disguising yourself as a different race, but only at a distance of at least 20 feet or when you have concealment; closer than this distance or in clearer circumstances, the mask is obviously a false representation. It only covers your face and is normally worn with a wig or helmet to disguise or cover the rest of your head. Each mask is most suitable for a wearer of a particular size, though some size and monster combinations are less believable than others (a Small creature in an orc mask may be able to pass as an orc child, but a Medium creature in a goblin mask at best looks like a deformed hobgoblin).

Note that "humanoid monster" could mean "gnome or halfling," technically (or ratfolk). The character won't pass as a member of another race at close distances, but townsfolk probably won't lynch him on sight, either.

that could work, Thanks. I'll definitely be picking up one of those. so I guess from a distance of 20 he'll have a +9 bonus to disguise, which means from 20 feet away I only need to roll a 2 and up close I only need to roll a 4. the only thing I'd struggle against is people who would be actively looking at me. then the DC becomes whatever they roll.

Hi everyone, I have an idea for a goblin character, and it be helpful if he didn't get murdered every time he walks into town or by his party members until they get to know him.

the idea is that if someone sees him, they wouldn't know what race he was but would probably assume he's a halfling or a gnome, basically they instantly wouldn't think "AHHH MONSTER, KILL IT QUICK!!!"

I have the idea of him wearing a Poncho, mask and a hat,something like a ninja turtle mask and a cowboy hat. If you're wondering he is a Bolt Ace gunslinger archtype. I was thinking about making the mask magical and grant a minor +2 bonus to disguise or something.
at the moment he has +7 to disguise, what kind of DC check do you think a player would have to beat to so people aren't suspicious about his race.

and how much would you price clothing that just enabled people to not be able to figure out your race?

hey guys, I just wanna say thank your all for the advice :)

hi all. First of all I'm interested in making a ranged elven rogue.

the way I plan to go about this is by picking up both the Scout and the Sniper Archetype. the idea that by level 8, my character should be able to deal sneak attack once every turn from a distance of up to 60ft away, his weapon of choice being a composite longbow.

stats are subject to change (also my regular table has there own rules, your total stats have to equal 80 before race mods.)

18
20
10
10
10
16

what feats/rogue talents would you recommend for this kind of build?

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

I mean even if I play a good utilitarian pragmatist who thinks killing is wrong but will kill if the effect is that future lives would be saved by taking this one life. so its very easy to justify killing a bad guy in a campaign. I find it harder to justify stealing the dead guys stuff. I guess I could argue that he won't need it anymore and it will help me save others in the future, but it still feels like a contrived reason to justify taking his stuff.

So you are 100% ok with taking someone's life, but not their stuff?

If your enemies were still alive after the fight would you rob them?

Are you placing more importance on ownership than life?

I'm not 100% ok with taking someones life, thats why I put the 'killing is wrong' part in there. don't cherry pick.

anyway. its about weighing the pro's and cons. or the good vs the bad.

the bad; i have to kill someone. the good; killing them will save more lives. does the good out way the bad. yes, therefore killing this person in this situation is morally justified.

in that situation, me killing helps others. in the situation of me stealing, it helps no one but myself.

if my enemies were still alive after the fight I wouldn't rob them unless robbing them would somehow be for the greater good.

and i'm not placing more importance on ownership than life. its absurd to draw that conclusion.

You posted this thread twice and I posted my answer in the other thread.

I think Ashiel expresses it better than me.

yeah, sorry. I originally posted it hear but thought that it might better of been placed in advice.

Looting bodies is neither good nor evil. Pathfinder defines good as altruistic, respectful of the dignity of sentient creatures, and protective of life. Evil is hurting, oppressing, or killing.

Looting a corpse (a soulless object) is less of a moral issue than stealing from a living person is.

However, it's important to note that if your character feels uncomfortable then the character feels uncomfortable. Trying to shoehorn every preference, stigma, taboo, personal code, and so forth into a moral alignment will just invite problems and sadness.

And remember, most characters of an alignment aren't 100% consistent with their alignment, merely mostly consistent. Thus you can have your Aladdin type characters and Robin Hoods who do things like steal and still be considered good guys overall.

okay thank you for your response. I guess I should just try and go with it and not think about it to much, at least for the sake of the other members. Anius brought up a good point of it being more of a lawful vs chaotic thing. its just feels kind of similar to grave robbing. thanks.

(originally placed in general discussion but I think it might be better of in advice.)

Hi everyone. I was wondering what the general opinion is on looting the bodies of fallen enemies. do people consider it neutral or evil? this particular scenario along with others often leave me torn on how to act.

I mean even if I play a good utilitarian pragmatist who thinks killing is wrong but will kill if the effect is that future lives would be saved by taking this one life. so its very easy to justify killing a bad guy in a campaign. I find it harder to justify stealing the dead guys stuff. I guess I could argue that he won't need it anymore and it will help me save others in the future, but it still feels like a contrived reason to justify taking his stuff.

the reason I feel conflicted is because I the player (me) obviously want the loot because more loot generally leads to more fun. but the character wouldn't feel the same way, its not a game to them.

a similar situation arrived when in my last game, we came across a shrine to an old long lost deity with some trinkets (can't remember what is was, some gold and maybe a neckless or something) from a player perspective everyone was happy, yay. we found loot. and in game I justified my concerns asking 'do you guys think this is right' to which the neutral members didn't care and the other lawful good character justified it with, if this was a shrine to an existing god then no. it wouldn't be. but because its a primitive shrine to a false deity its fine. to me this kinda felt like stealing from a wishing well, I don't personally believe in wishes but I'd still consider it wrong to take the pennies even if all they would do is sit there and rot.

and this also brings me to my second/third point. think i've lost track now. I don't want to be a stick in the mud. I don't want to always argue alignments and morality in every session. I don't want to be THAT guy who just kills the merriment of adventure by posing introspective moral quibbles.

so tell me, how do you guys handle this sort of thing. or am I just over thinking it?

Hi everyone. I was wondering what the general opinion is on looting the bodies of fallen enemies. do people consider it neutral or evil? this particular scenario along with others often leave me torn on how to act.

I mean even if I play a good utilitarian pragmatist who thinks killing is wrong but will kill if the effect is that future lives would be saved by taking this one life. so its very easy to justify killing a bad guy in a campaign. I find it harder to justify stealing the dead guys stuff. I guess I could argue that he won't need it anymore and it will help me save others in the future, but it still feels like a contrived reason to justify taking his stuff.

the reason I feel conflicted is because I the player (me) obviously want the loot because more loot generally leads to more fun. but the character wouldn't feel the same way, its not a game to them.

a similar situation arrived when in my last game, we came across a shrine to an old long lost deity with some trinkets (can't remember what is was, some gold and maybe a neckless or something) from a player perspective everyone was happy, yay. we found loot. and in game I justified my concerns asking 'do you guys think this is right' to which the neutral members didn't care and the other lawful good character justified it with, if this was a shrine to an existing god then no. it wouldn't be. but because its a primitive shrine to a false deity its fine. to me this kinda felt like stealing from a wishing well, I don't personally believe in wishes but I'd still consider it wrong to take the pennies even if all they would do is sit there and rot.

and this also brings me to my second/third point. think i've lost track now. I don't want to be a stick in the mud. I don't want to always argue alignments and morality in every session. I don't want to be THAT guy who just kills the merriment of adventure by posing introspective moral quibbles.

so tell me, how do you guys handle this sort of thing. or am I just over thinking it?

I think Its still in the play test but Vigilante is perfect for this. you have one class that grants you 4 options that each deliver a different combat style. Avenger is a great martial, Stalker is your Rogue, Warlock is your Arcane guy and Zealot is your divine. despite this they all share the secret identity aspect so you could play this as a group of heroes trying to gain information by day and kick butt by night.

If the goal is to optimize claws on a Barbarian, Feral Combat Training: Claw and Dragon Style/Ferocity to make 2xSTR/1.5xSTR work for rage is probably the single most potent option, and it gives you a 'backup weapon' if you can't rage. There's nothing that says you have to use flurry with Feral Combat Training if you don't want to; Master of Many Styles opens up the option of crossing dragon with another style.

Boar is nice, though if you really want to maximize an exclusively claw-based build, the usually-pointless Tiger Claws ability of Tiger Style is actually pretty nasty when crossed with Dragon Style and Power Attack. It's a single strike that stacks unarmed damage twice, and it's an attack with 'a one handed weapon using two hands'. So assuming that it's your first 'unarmed strike' in a round, then you essentially end up with a single double-claw strike that has 2xweapon, 4.5x STR and 3x Power Attack, and it could still be used with Cornugon Smash and Hurtful. You can also use the Strength Surge Rage Power with it to help send the target flying if you want to tap into the Bull Rush aspect of the ability.

Eldritch Claws is one of the few exclusive benefits to natural attacks, if you're worried about not having enhancement.

that all sounds great but unfortunately the only monk archetype my character can take is the martial artist. The others have an alignment requirement thats not compatible with barbarians. thanks though.

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

Claxon wrote:

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

to be honest, I try to stay away from magic items. when I plan a character around magic items I feel like I'm stepping into the GM's terrain. I feel its up to them to decide when and where what magical...

I agree. Which is why I think trying to use feral combat training and flurry doesn't work well IMO.

Better off getting as many natural attacks as you can. Animal Fury gives you a bite BTW.

so would you say this build suits a strictly low level campaign? just go solid beast totem barbarian and pick up a bite attack?

I wouldn't say it's strictly low-level, it's just a lot harder to be good at than doing the standard easy thing of two-handed weapon with power attack.

true, but than again I find that with most martial builds. its hard to do better than a min maxed barbarian half-orc with a great axe and power attack. thanks for the advice.

i would do as follows:

1) DR = regeneration. you get hit but it heals right away (RP it..)
2) go stalwart road.
3) beast totem Vs level 2 dip as ranger = claws.

whats stalwart road, and I don't understand the level two dip in ranger.

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

to be honest, I try to stay away from magic items. when I plan a character around magic items I feel like I'm stepping into the GM's terrain. I feel its up to them to decide when and where what magical...

I agree. Which is why I think trying to use feral combat training and flurry doesn't work well IMO.

Better off getting as many natural attacks as you can. Animal Fury gives you a bite BTW.

so would you say this build suits a strictly low level campaign? just go solid beast totem barbarian and pick up a bite attack?

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

Claxon wrote:

Feral Combat Training wont let you use natural attacks with iterative attacks, unless you're a monk using flurry.

Increasing damage dice really only gets you so far. You need big static damage multipliers. Generally, a barbarian has a big strength score that gets multiplied by 1.5 for two handed weapons and uses power attack with +3 damage for every -1 to hit. With natural attacks you don't get the same return since you only get full strength and +2 damage for -1 to hit. Though, it can work out alright since all your natural attacks are at full BAB, the penalty to hit from Power Attack isn't as bad.

But you still best to try and acquire as many natural attacks as you can.

I don't think Feral Combat Training will help you enough to be worthwhile.

not even when combined with a level of monk and boar style?

It will depend on how BAB from other classes stacks with monk BAB to determine the effect of Flurry of Blows, which I honestly can't remember how it works.

Bear in mind though, that then means you can't wear any armor. Which means you will have a pretty poor AC unless you give yourself more dex. And if you give yourself more dex, it means less strength for damage. Unless you use an agile amulet of mighty fists, which means no amulet of natural armor. And you're going to need the amulet of mighty fists anyways because you can't enhance your claws otherwise.

It starts getting a lot more complicated when you go this route.

xDemoquinx wrote:

Couldnt you take Dragon style to get 1.5 str for claws? Would need IUS and feral combat training though

You could, but keep in mind he can only use one style at a time without a level in Master of Many Styles, which would replace Flurry of Blows.

to be honest, I try to stay away from magic items. when I plan a character around magic items I feel like I'm stepping into the GM's terrain. I feel its up to them to decide when and where what magical item shows up. and unless a character has knowledge arcana I doubt they'll even have enough knowledge about specific magic items to be pursue.

Couldnt you take Dragon style to get 1.5 str for claws? Would need IUS and feral combat training though

could do, that would work a lot better with the greater beast totem rage power - pounce. thanks.

Feral Combat Training wont let you use natural attacks with iterative attacks, unless you're a monk using flurry.

Increasing damage dice really only gets you so far. You need big static damage multipliers. Generally, a barbarian has a big strength score that gets multiplied by 1.5 for two handed weapons and uses power attack with +3 damage for every -1 to hit. With natural attacks you don't get the same return since you only get full strength and +2 damage for -1 to hit. Though, it can work out alright since all your natural attacks are at full BAB, the penalty to hit from Power Attack isn't as bad.

But you still best to try and acquire as many natural attacks as you can.

I don't think Feral Combat Training will help you enough to be worthwhile.

not even when combined with a level of monk and boar style?

So, the main problem here is that by focusing on claws, you're never going to get iterative attacks in a conventional way. Meaning that you're going to suffer on damage compared to anyone else after level 6 (once full BAB classes are getting are getting their first iterative). That's the main problem with natural attack based builds is that without iterative attacks, you're damage just can't keep up. Which is contrasted by the fact that early on it is more effective because you have more attacks.

If however you are set on it, I suggest building for high strength and high con.

18 strength (20 with human bonus)
14 dex
18 con
12 int
10 wis
8 cha

You'll want to find as many other natural attacks as you can. Get a bite and a gore if possible.

Pick up superstitious rage power, and use the human favored class bonus to enhance it.

Come and Get Me can get you more attacks in a round (which allows you to deal more damage), but you'll need combat reflexes and thus you need some dex.

I was thinking of going down the route of Feral Combat Training and Boar Style, maybe improved natural attack and maybe taking a level dip in Monk (Martial Artist archetype.) do you think that would help?

hey guys, I wanna make a Beast totem warrior build. preferably human. and I want the build to revolve around the 'lesser Beast Totem' Rage power. I want to optimise the damage from the claw attacks.

as for point buy. our stats have to add up to 80 before mods, so its a lot of points to play with.

It basically is a three-bladed punching dagger. it is a d4 / x4 crit weapon, and you have then implanted via Cybertech.

oh okay, thanks. though to be fair. I can't imagine my group allowing cybernetics that advanced into our rp. plus starting out with that at level 1 is a big thing to ask for. I think I'll be better off trying to make the beast totem barbarian build workable.

The weapons rigorously need to be mad of Adamantine

is it possible to have adamantine natural claws? haha.

Use the Technology guide. Use Implanted tri-bladed katars in each arm. Then go invulnerable rager barbarian with Renewed Vigor and Regenerative Vigor.

could you send me a link please. all I can find thats similar to what you've suggested is a punching dagger.

One of the defining characteristics of Wolverine is his fast healing. Consider Skald. Take the Rage talents you want as normal, but take the feats Skald's Vigor and Greater Skald's Vigor. Consider the Totemic Skald archetype as it would mean more strength gain from your song, hence more fast healing.

to be fair I think I'd rather focus on the claw aspect rather than the healing aspect. besides, I wanna focus more on DPR rather than Buffing myself and others.

hi guys. now I was thinking of just doing a barbarian, Beast totem.
now, this build entirely revolves around making the lesser beast totem as effective as possible.

also, we normally have a house rule that all our stats must add up to 80 before mods. its a lot I know, and I most likely will be playing it as a human. what do you guys advice.

as for feats I was looking at, Feral Combat training, Boar Style. maybe taking a level or two dip into brawler.

what do you guys think?

A bunch of People who've been turned to gold. one clasping a map that leads to an artefact called The Hand of Minos

So I will drop the rapier and just use a crossbow untill I can get two light repeating cross bows. Regarding the repeating crossbow, do I use all my bolts at once or once per round?

I was looking at feats and I would assume I have to take rapid reload and two handed fighting. Sadly it would lower my bluff bonus but make be spam the bolts later on.

Of I had quick draw and multiple crossbows could I core one and draw another loaded crossbow?

dual wielding light repeating crossbows isn't a great idea. heres why.

you can fire them one handed but you fire them at a -2 penalty. and then, if you want to use a crossbow in each hand you'll need the two weapon fighting feat which would be another -2 -2 on top. so you'll be firing twice at -4 -4 each. and thats if you have the TWF feat. if you don't have it, don't even try it. i think its like something like -8-8 so it'll be like -10-10. you'll never hit lol.

this could be avoided by using two repeating hand crossbows instead of two repeating light crossbows. the repeating hand crossbows don't have a -2 penalty for firing them one handed. so with the TWF feat you'll be able to fire both at -2-2 which is the best you'll ever be able to get.

now thats only problem number 1, now onto problem number two. reload. you need a free hand to reload. even the repeating crossbow requires a free hand, even the repeating hand crossbow requires a free hand which, in my opinion makes it a completely pointless weapon. I think even paizo know this because it was published in ultimate equipment but its not on any of there websites. weird lol.

anyway, reloading a standard light crossbow is a move action, rapid reload reduces this to a free action. the benefit of a repeating light crossbow is you don't need to reload your crossbow after every shot, but you do still need to pull the lever to ready the next bolt, which is a free action. so if you don't have the rapid reload feet. the repeating crossbow is better, if you have it the regular one is better. since after every five shots, you don't spend a full round action to load another 5 bolts. although, you could argue that since you need an exotic weapon prof to use the repeating crossbow. its a bad weapon.

if you want to duel wield crossbows, this is the only way I can think of doing it and it requires your GM to be very lenient.

have two repeating hand crossbows. and twf. have them be magic items with the endless ammunition enchantment. so you never need to spend a full round action, per crossbow to reload and then spend how many standard actions it would be to put one away, then draw it, then put the other away etc.

now, in order to solve the needing a free hand problem. there is a spell called unseen servant which basically is a kind of 'force' under your control that can do minor things for you. open doors, pull out a chair, clean a glass etc. I personally would allow you to use it to pull the lever. its well within the abilities power, but some might consider this abusing the rules. you may be able to talk your gm into making this ability a +1 enchantment. which I think is very reasonable but it is a house rule, and if you guys aren't allowing house rules, it probably wouldn't fly.

now another problem... it aint cheap.

it would be 2 masterwork +4 weapons. and the base price for a repeating hand crossbow is 800.

so 800 base + 300 masterwork + the +4 enchantments x 2!! you're looking at 66,200 gold. which is a lot of money to what only amounts to 1 to 3 extra shots per round depening on whether you have improved and greater TWF. also its a hand crossbow so providing your character is medium sized only does 1d4.

so that would be an average of an extra 6 damage, providing each additional shot hit. it be way cheaper to just have one light crossbow and make it a flaming one for 9,100 gold. so you'd do the same damage, and you'd save 57,100 gold and 3 feats.

but, yeah, duel wielding crossbows are awesome and all the math in the world isn't gonna change that lol. anyway thats the only way I can see it happening.

Rangers gain spells at level 4, its a bit late but it might be what you're looking for.

Question about fighters bonus feats. Do you only get it on the even fighter level or even character level?

So far I have:

10 str
15 dex +2
14 con +2
12 int +1
10 wis
16 cha +3

Hp 10

I receive a +12 in bluff, +7 in deplomacy,+6 in slight of hand along with +7 in intimidate if my math is correct.

Took feats in dishonest and bluff skill.

the way it works a fighter gets a feat every level because you get a feat every odd level though normal character advancement, and you gain a bonus feat on every even level for being a fighter, plus an extra one on level one.

now, if you take an odd level dip in another class, say one level of rogue. it throws the numbers out of wack and so half the time you gain no feats and the other half you gain 2.

hope that makes sense.

you can create a really cool rogue character with high charisma. Kind of a conman styled character, the only catch is the charisma isn't particularly useful to core rogues besides bluff checks.

actually, scratch what I said. high charisma could make a good faint and sneak combo. probably won't be a TWF guy though since you need a full round action for that.
and of cause, rogues have bluff, diplomacy, disguise and intimidate as class skills. meaning that with a high charisma, you'd make a fantastic face. you just wouldn't be a great combat guy compared to the fighter/barbarian/ranger etc.

my advice if you want to go rogue is to talk to your party because good teamwork is crucial to rouges. tell them that you'll gladly be the skill monkey of the group but tell them in advance in exchange for skills, you need a flanking buddy. and hopefully one of the characters will lap at the chance to be your knight in shining amour that distracts them from the shadows lol.

also, if you like all of the skills of a rogue and you want to be that charming face of the party. but you don't really like having to be tactical. you can just take one level in fighter, give your guy high strength over dex and decent armour. the ability evasion will be useless but I think its a fair trade off. and its fun to be able to sneak attack with a great sword haha.

Leonhart Steelmane wrote:

Have you thought about playing a slayer? in the advance class guide there are hybrid classes. and a Slayer is the hybrid of a Ranger and a Rogue.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer

see core only early in thread.

my bad.

+1 keen dueling short sword.

whilst that does sound awesome, with the exception of initiative it really doesn't suit a TWF build. more of a faint and stab rather than a double stab build. thanks though.

Mechanically useful and flavorful and awesome are very different. Mechanically, the best thing you can do is get it to +5 as soon as possible, then maybe tack on Speed or Holy or something. Flavor-wise, Bane wouldn't be too bad. If there's a group of enemies you encounter frequently, maybe one that's even your favored enemy, consider tagging Bane onto your weapon. As a TWF person, static bonuses to damage will be awesome for you.

What I recommended earlier are probably the best choices. However, Bane (+1) is fairly flavorful, Ghost Touch (+1) is situationally useful, and Vorpal (+5) is a fun mechanic to have (but nowhere near worth the +5)

Oh, and if your GM is so generous, try picking a Runeforged weapon. Not sure if it fits the flavor of your campaign, and possibly problematic, but it's a sin sword!

whilst rune forged sounds cool I don't think my DM would let me have something like that in this campaign. not many runes in the Caribbean lol

Bane is could work with my characters favoured enemy (humans), since my guy essentially has three weapons now I was thinking of enchanting it with throwing and anchoring. I though that could be fun, throwing a blade at someone and sticking them in place so they can't escape from me. though I figured it'll be a waste of a +1 to give a weapon without a range increment a range increment. might as well get a decent knife instead of a shortsword.

as far as I'm aware theres nothing like this.

personally, repeatly running into loot thats useless to the party would get on my nerves, I'd recommend talking to your party and if you all feel the same way. bringing it to the attention of your dm. I mean finding magical bolts wouldn't be out of place. not like finding a katana in middle earth lol.

on a side note, I love Xbows as well. wish they were better mechanically but what you gonna do.

well you have two people who would be comfortable in the woods, areas where most people wouldn't go and a drunken monk. a character who drinks is awesome because they can get in to so many funny situations.

off the top of my head, a large ruckus can be heard coming from the woods. a bunch of goblins/ocrs/whatever your rangers favoured enemy is are trying to kidnap the monk. he's tied up, thrown into a chest and is making a lot of noise. this is wear your other two party members show up and rescue the monk. if they don't manage to free him during the fight, maybe a boss monster can show up after for the monk to get there chance to show off most likely whilst the other two are already wounded and thus may have to fight more conservativly.

Have you thought about playing a slayer? in the advance class guide there are hybrid classes. and a Slayer is the hybrid of a Ranger and a Rogue.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer