Andarr's page

Andarr wrote:

Meant to write wizards, not casters.

But it's quite funny isn't it? Other casters who have other mechanics beside just... Well, casting spells, are now in a better shape that the class which is all about casting spells.

Meaning you either need to somehow add mechanics or buff to wizards as a class, but that can't be about making spells more powerful, because if you do you are also buffing other casters, who are already more or less fine.

Sortof like adding a ton of familiar options to make familiars way more compelling - suddenly making the Wizard familiar thesis way more appealing by allowing wizard to both have the most top level spells alongside a familiar that is only slightly behind a Witch?

You mean the high level spells that are rarity gated, or the fabled 10th level spells that are watered down versions of old 9th level spells (and which you both get later on, and get to cast fewer of per day)?

And as for familiars. You have a whole class dedicated to familiars. I want to play a wizard, imagine that.

But hey, as I mentioned. Two categories of posters. Repeat after me 'Wizards are fine' enough times and certainly people will start believing it.

Meant to write wizards, not casters.

But it's quite funny isn't it? Other casters who have other mechanics beside just... Well, casting spells, are now in a better shape that the class which is all about casting spells.

Meaning you either need to somehow add mechanics or buff to wizards as a class, but that can't be about making spells more powerful, because if you do you are also buffing other casters, who are already more or less fine.

I bashed those segments because, truth be told, they deserve bashing. I did not point any individuals out.

The premise of boards like these should be debate, and people should be open-minded, and willing to accept evidence of issues, and, if presented with enough evidence, perhaps have a honest change of heart.

Both categories I mentioned cannot, because the first category sees the current state of casters as desirable, and the second category refuses criticism on the ground that they love Paizo so much.

This is a systemic issue. You can't fix it with a new book. You would have to fix it with a massive errata, but that would mean actually accepting the fact that mistakes were made, which reading these boards does not seem to be the case.

I have accepted that PF2e will have weak casters, and that nothing will change it.

This kind of post is, sadly, pretty pointless on these forums, because of quite a few simple factors.

On these forums, you have quite a few posters (they will recognize themselves), who absolutely loathe wizards. They will pretend wizards are ok, despite it not being the case, with little or no evidence to back that statement up, while gloating with schadenfreude. That is a sad fact.

Then you have a lot of posters who unapologetically love Paizo. For them, Paizo can do no wrong and must be defended at all costs, from any possible criticism, even when that criticism is founded.

The posters who have actually played wizards firsthand... Will only have done it once, because the class itself is a dumpster fire. You need only try to hit a ray spell with your pitiful, unmodifiable roll to hit and miss it it a few times in a row, therefore wasting both your actions and your spell, before you realize that.

I could list all the nerfs wizards have gotten, but it's pointless, because the attitude of the first category of posters is just to shove their fingers in their ears and go 'LALALA I can't hear you!' . The issue here not being that wizards did not need nerfs, because they did, but much more about compound nerfs.

Since apparently PF2 is being balanced the way certain MMORPGs or MOBAs are, then at the very least the concept of balance should be understood...

If you play LoL, and you nerf first a champion, and then their main rune, then you end up nerfing that champion not 2x, but 3x because the nerfs compound themselves.

Wizars now have fewer spell slots, no way to boost their save DCs, have to expend higher spell slots to get better effects... That is an exponential nerf, not a geometric one.

But ah well, what does it matter, no one plays casters anyway. All the martials need now is a healer, they can do it all on their own, much to the delight of the majority of posters on these boards.

In Pathfinder, it would take several direct hits from a longbow to get you down, in real life one would suffice.

There goes the comparison.

Oh hey, a post where someone asks what wizards should do, the first answer is Gorbacz.

Why am I not susprised.

Keep up the "good" work.

Just to be clear, we haven't seen the final version of the witch and they made clear they heard us about the whole "dead familiar no casty" thing.

I'm sorry, but this is such a gimmick, and a fun tax.

I've been playing for over 20 years now, I can count on one hand the amount of times when my DM actually did something against my familiar actively.

Most of the times, DMs forget your familiar even exists unless you try to do something with it (send him scouting, cast a spell through him...) so saying that the witch won't be able to cast if her familiar dies, I hope you are not actually counting that as a real drawback. Because factually speaking, it won't be.

Or the DM will have to keep track and try to somehow kill the witch's familiar, which seems like a fun tax for the DM.

The real issue is that there is basically nothing nowadays to differentiate an evoker from say, an illusionist.

No more spell focus = DC stays the same for your school

Focus spells are... Well, pretty much a joke? Utility is exceedingly limited, and there are very few of them to boot.

The spell list is still very very small, and there are a lot of absolutely useless spells, or spells that only have a real effect on a critical failure of the save (which personally, given the fact that you now have fewer spells to use per day, I would avoid...).

The "feats" are underwhelming, and I would say that they do not offer real diversification of the wizard at all.

When building a fighter, barbarian, or rogue, there are several viable ways to go at it.

If I am building a wizard who is going to go dungeon dwelling... Not so much.

Removing all buffs except haste did not exactly help either. I get why they did it, and sure theoretically wizards are still flexible.

But that's theory only. If a DM is set on you only having common spells, and limits everything uncommon or rare... (which he can do), then all wizards are going very similar to one another.

And I was going over spell lists and now wail of the banshee and finger of death are not on the arcane spell list anymore... Well. They've only been staples for several editions now. But that's just a pet peeve of mine.

Their cantrips are now scalable by levels... or half their levels to correspond to their heighest spell levels.

They now have some sort of unlimited ammo.

They have unlimited ammo... which costs 2 actions to activate and deals less damage than an arrow shot by an archer.

Archer : 3 strikes per round, wizard: one cantrip + one strike per round (good luck hitting that one, since your primary characteristic is not dexterity).

Yeah, thank god for unlimited ammo.

This cannot be right, can it be? As far as I can tell, there is no limitation against a 19th-level wizard using Drain Bonded Item to replenish a 10th-level slot, or using Spell Blending to gain more and more 10th-level slots.

This seems grossly overpowered by 19th. Is this intentional? High-level gameplay should not be discounted, especially when adventure paths are supposed to go to 20th.

The sorcerer has a restriction against this. The wizard does not, which makes the wizard far better at abusing 10th-level slots.

Overpowered? Come again?

You do realize that "10th level spells" are just nerfed version of ex 9th level spells, right?

And that instead of having 3 10th level slots, you only get one, and to get a second you either need to spend your 19th level feat or sacrifice 2 8th level spells with a certain arcane thesis?

Also, this whole "concern" about how "overpowered" this is is pretty funny, seeing as how 99% of campaigns will end up way before any PC makes it to 19th level.

I just houseruled that spells automatically heighten to the maximum level without having to use higher level slots (effectively giving casters automatic scaling back).

It's been working out pretty well, and no complaints from either my players playing casters OR melees.

Of course I'm sure a lot of the people in this thread will tell me that this is "unbalanced", which is a barrel of laughs considering all the nerfbats wizards took to the skull in the transition to 2nd edition.

Blasting used to be the suboptimal option.

It still is, but now the rest is terrible too.

Unlimited, freely scaling cantrips are just like someone sending you flowers while you are laying in a hospital bed after being kneecapped, they're nice but they don't really help.

Summoning does not exist anymore. Buffing does not exist anymore. Save or suck does not exist anymore. Just don't even pretend they kept those as options.

Hell, finger of death is now divine only. xD

In exchange of that, my 3rd level fireball now does 1d6 more than it used to do at level 5 (yay!) but you are NEVER going to use a higher level slot to actually memorize it to do more damage.

Andarr wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Andarr wrote:

And they both took the nerf bat to magic to satisfy "martial" players and for the sake of "balance". Seriously? "Balance"? Is this a MMORPG? Or is this a pen and paper RPG?

It's cooperative game you play with others to tell a story.

That has always been the case.

I fail to understand why magic being, well, magic caused people such issues.

I would much rather they had gone the way "Tome of Battle" had gone, instead of nerfing magic.

1 character completely invalidating the rest of the group commonly enough was the issue.

And if you look over the Martial classes they are leaning into a ToB approach.

I seriously wish people would stop saying things like "the caster invalidated the rest of the party".

That statement is just blatantly false, and comes from either theorycrafting or poor DM'ing. But it was taken at face value and now look at wizards.

I mean... I could have (somehow) swallowed the pill if they had made it so you could use the heightened version of a memorized spell if you used a slot containing another, higher level memorized spell for it.

But you have to memorize it xD

Imagine. I am sure you will see plenty of people memorizing a heightened fireball... Or not. Because with three slots to memorize spells, I am sure you're going to waste one for it.

Andarr wrote:

And they both took the nerf bat to magic to satisfy "martial" players and for the sake of "balance". Seriously? "Balance"? Is this a MMORPG? Or is this a pen and paper RPG?

It's cooperative game you play with others to tell a story.

That has always been the case.

I fail to understand why magic being, well, magic caused people such issues.

I would much rather they had gone the way "Tome of Battle" had gone, instead of nerfing magic.

I have yet to see the point of PF2, outside of the "reset" aspect of a new edition (getting rid of bloat and the powercreep which inevitably happens as supplements accumulate over time), and to kowtow to people whining for more "balance".

Usually I am excited for a new edition because it improves things, I see 0 improvement in PF2, just a different take on things.

And for people wondering what do I mean, if you are old enough, for me an improvement was leaving thac0 behind in the 2nd edition and moving to the BAB system.

Same for the old ac system which went from AC10 to AC -15 (tarrasque I think) and moving to the AC which inched upwards.

I mean, I took the first survey, then came to the boards, and expressed concerns.

I was shut down at every turn. Especially by the guy with a bag as his avatar (hell if I can remember his name now). Told that wizards deserved the nerf, etc, etc.

Tried fighting back with good arguments, was ignored and borderline flamed, AND the moderators thought I was being inflammatory, whereas that guy kept baiting all over the boards with full impunity.

The result is this. I bought the core rulebook pdf... And that will be it for me. I am very, very disappointed by this edition. And no, I won't keep playing the first edition, because like all older editions, it's just going to keel over and disappear.

So now I have the choice between:

5e or PF2

And they both took the nerf bat to magic to satisfy "martial" players and for the sake of "balance". Seriously? "Balance"? Is this a MMORPG? Or is this a pen and paper RPG?

I mean, I'm glad for you all, I guess it's time for an old coot like me to actually stop playing RPGs altogether, or to switch to a completely different system and actually stop playing a D&D based system, which honestly makes me want to cry.

It's 100% legal for a GM to say any Uncommon or Rare thing is available to players.

If you're a player and you want an Uncommon or Rare thing, talk to your GM. They might just give it to you. They might make you go on a quest or something to track it down. They might not give it to you because that thing doesn't work in the game they're running.

This is a core part of the whole "Giving GMs agency and control" that 2nd edition is all about, and will help GMs keep a handle on their game to a level of complexity they are comfortable with.

Talk to your GM.

Sorry, but this sounds pretty terrible.

PF2 seems to try very hard to be like PF and 5e at the same time, and I think it fails pretty badly at both.

The concept of "rarity" as an extra label you add to equipment or spells is completely artificial, as the DM has always had the option of restricting access to spells x and y in his games, I am certain quite a few did not wait for anyone to add an "uncommon" or "rare" labels to spells.

In the end I'd rather those spells were removed than to have them in the rule but with a "nope, sorry, can't have it 'cause I say so" label.

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP.

What I saw in the play test I certainly did not like. Normally I would order the premium versions without even thinking about it, but unless Paizo clarifies what or if anything changed compared to the play test, I am holding off.

And not just generic comments.

Jeff Deaner wrote:

Jester David wrote:

Andarr wrote:

Pf2 seems to me like it took more than a few pages out of the 5e.

But 5e and Pathfinder should be directed towards different audiences. It's pretty obvious the 5e is geared towards more inexperienced players, who care more about "class balance" (when did that EVER become a thing in pen and paper RPGs... Sigh) and ease of play than a more complete and simulationistic experience like most PF players do.

Comments like this always baffle me...

First, ever comment from every Paizo staffmember I have every read gives me the impression they have never read 5e, let alone played it enough to have an idea how to emulate it.

However, MacFarland and Bonner were both in the 4e design team...

Which also boggles you mind.

There’s so many comments of “they borrowed X from 5e!!” When said design elements are often from 4e or even Star Wars Saga, both of which predate Pathfinder.

How can that boggle your mind? I don't care who did it first, I discovered in in the 5e, and therefore associate it with that. I think the whole "Let's give unlimited cantrips to casters so we can nerf spells" is fine for 5e, but not for PF.

And again, PF 2e has a metric ton of other issues.

Not going to lie.

I see 0 appeal in PF2.

The point of a new edition, was, to myself, to improve upon what is good and change what is bad. Not to do away with everything and start over. Just look at how the 4th edition crashed and burned... That should have given the writers a good writing direction.

Pf2 seems to me like it took more than a few pages out of the 5e.

But 5e and Pathfinder should be directed towards different audiences. It's pretty obvious the 5e is geared towards more inexperienced players, who care more about "class balance" (when did that EVER become a thing in pen and paper RPGs... Sigh) and ease of play than a more complete and simulationistic experience like most PF players do.

I will admit it - I am a caster player, and I am VERY disappointed by the general "hit the casters with a bat until they stop moving" trend that started with the 5e, and which I'd hoped would spare the second edition of Pathfinder. Seems to me like a vocal minority is making a crusade to try and paint casters in a bad light, therefore ruining them for the silent majority.

I don't get the "revolution" concept.

Paizo is not Hasbro. If you mess up with PF 2e, you might as well start liquidating assets, because I doubt from a financial point of view Paizo can withstand the kind of losses that Hasbro took with the 4th edition.

Also, you will lost me as a player (and a a consumer...), because I entirely reject the idea of revolution for the sake of it. I hated the 4th edition, as much as I loved Pathfinder taking what was good of the 3,5 and continuing in that direction.

More than anything, if this has been internally playtested for two whole years, how could this EVER see the light of day?

It's hell of clunky, poorly formatted and to be honest does not hype me even half as much as the original Pathfinder did. I hope the public playtest actually makes a LOT of changes to things as they are, because otherwise... Well, RIP Pathfinder.

And I'm sure some people will fly to the rescue and point out what an awesome work this is, etc... Like they did for the 4th. Food for thought. Dungeons almost ended with that edition!

"Not like we can keep playing the old game" Really?

Pathfinder was an IMPROVEMENT over 3,5. So far PF2 is not an improvement, just a change for the sake of change...

If this edition goes through as is, even though I have been playing magic casters since the first edition of dungeons, I suppose I will have to stop. Might be the edition that actually has to stop me playing fantasy tabletop RPGS completely (and I have been playing for 29 years).

I am just in awe at the fact that even Paizo seems to be taking "balance" into account, as if Pathfinder had become some sort of MMORPG or Moba game where people whine that x is overpowered.

Summon monster? Gutted. Read the concentration rules. Good luck using making use of the summoned monster, and also enjoy the tasty one minute max duration.

Enchantment school? I mean... Not sure what to even say. It's gone.

Everything has a shorter duration or a lessened effect. And going with the "unlimited" cantrip as a sort of band aid is, in my opinion, a terrible imitation of the 5th edition.

I thought the objective of a new edition was to improve upon precedent work, like Pathfinder had with the sorry mess that was 3,5. Instead, they decide to radically change everything for the sake of changing. And they don't even simplify anything.

Numerous other things also flabbergast me - no more smite for paladins. Rangers looking... Well, less than useful to be polite. I suppose they will sell new books and that it will be sufficient to keep Paizo afloat for a new more years, but I am so disappoint by what I see, I honestly expected a lot more from such a great company.

I think you people are totally overreacting.

You honestly make it sound as if the wizard could use an action to lose the spell and gain another one instantly.

It's 10 minutes. Granted, in an investigative context it might be very strong, it will not save you from an ugly death in a combat context.

Don't see what the issue is. If anything, it's a welcome addition.

No, you don't get it.

As the feat is written, as it stands, nowhere is it written that the feat overcomes the "handedness". All it says is that the goblin does not take penalties for using medium firearms. Nowhere is it stated he can actually WIELD the medium firearm with two hands, where by the rules it requires three since it is a medium musket.

Oh god.

What year is this? Oh wait, it is 2013. And this is a dead horse you are beating on.

I wonder why some people still think that you have to make a weak PC in order to role-play and enjoy the game. That there still is a mentality of "Powergamers/Optimize want to ruin the game and don't enjoy role-playing but ROLL-playing!!!!".

Personally, I never play weak PCs. I like my PCs optimized and relevant in their roles. I am still an avid role-player. I also don't go overboard (in my group, we ONLY use Official Pathfinder material and nothing else, because THEN the really bad stuff starts). We don't use weird or exotic races with tons of powers that are on the verge of overpowered, unless it is a "funny" campaign.

And we never let anyone make a PC so blatantly powerful that it overshadows all the others, because that obviously detracts from other people's appreciation of the game.

Personally, the greatest challenge I have had is matching veterans with newbies. Even helpful veterans, willing to lend a hand in all aspects of character creation and role-playing end up frustrated when the newbies don't do their homework (and I don't mean reading all the PF books - just being prepared for a session and knowing the basic rules).

Andar cracks his knuckles.

"Hmm... My intention would be to perhaps rest before we move in to attack them, so that I might regain the mystical power I spent healing Firemane. I hope that is alright with you..."

/ooc Sorry, been having night shifts and that really messes my activity cycle.

I like the game so far. Can't wait to get into more trouble :D

Andar is furious.

"Do you get it now? Would you STOP being so damn naive? These people are scum and murderers, and god only knows what else! And you will have this one guide us to the others? What is to tell us that he will not try to slit our throats in our sleep? Stop living in a fairy world. Bandits are bandits, and I don't care about their reason for choosing a life of sin and depredation. Mark my words, as explained in the charter, the next ones we will meet will their end at the tip of my scimitar and that will be the end of it. After being properly interrogated. Listen to Najara!"

Sling 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (7) + 2 = 9

Eventual Damage 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (1) + 2 = 3

Perception Check: 1d20 + 8 ⇒ (12) + 8 = 20

The moment he hears the noise, Andar leaps to his feet, unsheathes his scimitar, orders Firemane to follow him and rushes to investigate the note, (running/double moving as necessary), while mumbling things about naive, bumbling fools.

"I bloody well knew it... Time to end this."

"I think we should move out as quickly as possible... If none of you will, I'll deal with our prisoners, and then we can get on our horses and start heading the way they came... So that their tracks do not grow too cold. Between Gordom and me, we have two accomplished outdoorsmen, we will have no trouble following the trail back to their base and finding sustenance in the wilds, and we will find a campsite just as easily. If we get to their base before they start suspecting something, they will not be on their guard, and we can use it to our advantage."

With that, Andar starts munching down on the offered food, happy to have a warm meal once again.

"I suggest we make haste and find this Kessle as soon as possible... We don't want her to have time to set too many traps. Staying off the road and walking in is also a good idea... I would suggest we deal with these bandits, and then ride out to Kessle's camp in time to walk in at night, when detection will be more difficult and some of the bandits will be asleep."

"So." Andarr, Shix and Firemane enter the room where the unnamed bandit is. "Let us begin." Andarr cracks his knuckles.

"Friend - and I use the term ironically - I'm going to tell you something about me before we begin." Andarr holds out his hands, as if to stop the bandit from speaking. "My name is Andarr, and I am a so-called barbarian. In my society, for the crimes you have committed, there are only two kind of punishments: death or exile. Exile obviously does not apply in your case. I am however told by my more civilized friends." He gestures towards the door "That there are other more lenient penalties in so-called civilized nations. Since they will be the ones deciding your fate, you seem to be in luck."

Andarr starts pacing around the room, circling the prisoner.

"However, contrarily to what my friends, I don't care about your name, or why you joined arms with Happs, someone who seems to relish raping and torturing women while exorting money from honest, hard-woking traders like Oleg and his wife."

"I have a few questions for you. I won't lie to you, I'm not going to torture you because that's just not my thing... But cooperating or not might make a difference when my friends decide what awaits you after this little chat." He nods to Firemane, and the great cat yawns casually, showing rows of razor sharp fangs. He then licks his chops.

'What I want to know is the following:
- Where is your leader (the woman Oleg spoke about)?
- How do we reach her ?
- How many other bandits are there?
- When are you expected back?
- What defenses/guards does your outpost have?
- How do we best evade them?
- What is the signification of that stag amulet Happs wears?
"

"Shix, I'll leave the floor to you now."

1d20 - 2 ⇒ (8) - 2 = 6 Intimidate for me
1d20 + 0 ⇒ (12) + 0 = 12 Intimidate for Firemane
1d20 + 4 ⇒ (13) + 4 = 17 Sense Motive for me

Andar observes the proceedings with curiosity, wondering exactly what the point of taunting these people, or hearing their sob stories, is.

Sense Motive Check: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (13) + 4 = 17

Speaking to all of the bandits at once (and not just with Rollo)
"Tell us about this amulet. What does it represent?"
Speaking to Happs:
"You are dead. Leaving children and a wife to suffer for your crimes, and then turning to a life of crime where you threaten random women with torture and rape... Let's just say I'll leave you a choice. You'll get a quick death if you cough up anything useful to us in the pursuit of the woman Oleg saw you with, or any information about that amulet you were wearing. Whether you truly threatened your men with planting false evidence on them to scare them into working for you is besides the point."

"Don't worry, I'm not going to torture you or anything like that... The difference will just be between being killed by ME or by Firemane here..." He pats the cat.

Very nice Vivian, loved your intervention!

Andar shakes Oleg's hands. "My friend, this is nothing. Rest assured we shall deal with the woman you spoke of as swiftly as we dealth with her toadies. You will be disturbed no longer." He smiles. Patting Firemane, Andar murmurs words of powers, and the great cat's wounds begin to close and mend at incredible speed.

Cure Light Wounds 1d8 + 1 ⇒ (1) + 1 = 2

Andar examines the amulet, curious about the signification of the stag's head.

Knowledge Nature check 1d20 + 5 ⇒ (6) + 5 = 11

"Oleg, do you know anything about this?" He shows the man the amulet. "Happs carried him on his person... And I'm willing to bet it has some sort of signification that evades us."

Andar unrolls the charter and starts reading from it:

"The punishment for unrepentant banditry remains, as always, execution by sword and rope."

He slowly rolls the scroll back, and tucks it in his backpack.

"This IS the law in Restov. I never suggested gutting them like animals, simply beheading them in a humane and swift way for their crimes. These are not innocent people. How many lives did THEY take? How many women did they rape? The moment they chose to steal and murder instead of living like honest men, they knew their lives were forfeit the moment they encountered a patrol."

Andar slowly walks away, shaking his head. He then whistles, calling Firemane back, and tends to the feline's wounds.

ooc: How many hps did Firemane lose?

Andarr seems surprised at Gordom's reaction.

"They never meant to rape or torture anyone? Did you not hear that Happs say that he would have fun beating Najara, but only AFTER she'd had to watch them have their "fun" with Svetlana first? I would think that qualifies as a threat..." Andarr shrugs.

"I also do not understand why you offer mercy to people that have been racketeering our hosts for spirits know how many months. You are an awfullty lenient person, and a good man, but you would do well to remember that not everyone has the same moral fiber you possess - simply think of what would be happening right now had they defeated us. Because if you think they'd be having the same argument, you are sorely mistaken."

"You also speak of oppression. I simply do not understand what oppression has to do with anything. Crime deserves punishment, regardless of how you judge my culture to be barbaric or not."

Turning to Juwwem: "Oh, as I said. I won't execute them if it's not the will of a majority of us. I certainly will keep an eye on them though. I thought the idea was to keep the leader alive, and interrogate him, not to act as wardens of a non-existent jail. I know for one I am not going to stabilize every bandit or enemy we meet in the hope of having them delivered to a far-off and hypothetical prison cell."

"Well... I like it when a plan comes together. Or not. Let me finish this scum" he points to the unconscious bandit in Gordom's arms. "And then we can finish the others. Their leader is stable apparently. We should dig a mass shallow grave for them, before their bodies start to stink... After stripping them of their equipment of course."

When the group comes together, Andar speaks: "I don't know what your opinion is on this matter, but where I come from, there are only two punishments... Exile or death. This scum made it abundantly clear they were willing to rape and torture women, and they've only kept Oleg and Svetlana alive because they extorted money from them. The charter mentions that we are free to deal with banditry as we see fit. I propose we execute all the underlings that are still alive. We then question their leader..." Andar puts up his hands, as if to ward off opposition. "And by that I do not mean torture him. Just try to wring information out of him with intimidation and trickery or diplomacy... And then execute him in a humane way. I'll do the honors if no one else wants to. If the majority of the groups disagrees with my methods, I will of course abide by their decision."

Andar then remains silent, waiting for other points of view.

"Oh, and after that, I suggest we rest, heal up, and tomorrow we can backtrack to where these bandits come from... Or start exploring the region. But I think dealing with the woman Oleg mentioned quickly would be a good idea, we can save the exploration for after that."

ooc: I think we should give some of the bandit's equipments to Oleg... After all, he suffered enough through this.
By the way, what stuff were they carrying? :P

ooc: Mmm... Ok. He seems to want to hit Gordom. I charge the grappled bandit then!

Attack Roll (remember the bandit has -4 Dexterity due to being grappled) 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (8) + 4 = 12
Damage Roll 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (3) + 2 = 5

Kicking up a dust, Andar sees Gordom restraining the bandit to keep him from getting away. "Very good Gordom! Now keep him still just a second. This'll be over in one minute..." says Andarr, kicking up a dust cloud as he charges the bandit, aiming for his neck with a swing of his scimitar.

While fighting the last conscious bandit, Andar speaks:

"My cat has probably eaten your companion by now... That's what he gets for threatening an innocent woman with rape. Your boss is bleeding out on the ground, courtesy of my scimitar. Your other friend, over there" He nods towards the bandit slumped on his horse - "Has turned into a pincushion, courtesy of my friend on the wall... If you surrender, I promise your death will be clean, a single blow to the neck. You won't feel a thing. Trust me when I tell you if my cat gets to you, you'll feel a lot more pain than that!"

If you're not picky about initiative order, and the others are still inside, then I guess I'll keep attacking. I assume (hope?) Firemane sort of understands the situation when Rolo drops his weapons, and comes back outside. In that case I'd expect the cat to do double moves to get closer to my current target (probably will take it more than one round), and thereafter if possible do a single move action and then attack with a bite. Anyway, I keep fighting:

Attack roll 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (7) + 2 = 9
Damage roll 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (5) + 2 = 7

Don't get me wrong... We'll continue this in character. It's just a matter of feasibility. There is nothing to do in the middle of nowhere with prisoners.
- Can't let them go for sure.
- Can't leave them at the trading post.
- There are no patrols, no prisons. Just our moral compass and some common sense. No one is going to drop by in a week or so and get rid of them for you.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt we are in the immediate vicinity of a city that has facilities to house prisoners. And to get them there, we'd need to leave Oleg's, and risk one of the bandits escaping during the trip, or an ambush by their eventual companions... And besides, although the Swordlords claim jurisdiction, the truth is, they don't have it.

PS: Would be sweet if people answered a bit faster and we could get this moving. As for the fight, I ought to be ok, but I would not mind if you took a few shots at the bandit Gordom :p

I never intended to torture them... That's not the way Andar is. I just asked the rest of the group if they thought ahead to what it means to have bound bandits in the middle of nowhere without any kind of prison and/or law enforcement that can take them off our hands quickly.

I mean, I would not want to leave them at Oleg and Svet, even if that were an option. Just imagine what would happen if they were to break free.

And in the absence of law, given their crimes, execution is actually a very normal sentence. Hell, a swift death is more than Oleg or Svet could have expected at their hands, had we been defeated. I do not think that is evil in any way (but robertness has the final say, of course). Oh, and there are no more "alignment violations" by the way. Unless robertness has house rules about them (but I didn't see them anywhere).

Andar comes from a violent, war-like society. He is a good person, but in his culture there are only two punishments for crimes: exile or execution, so don't expect him to read bandits their Miranda rights ^^

Edit: Oh, and by the way, the fight is NOT over yet... I am still engaged in hand-to-hand with one of the bandits in the middle of the courtyard.

Please don't tell me we are doing this... We're in the middle of the wilderness! There are no prisons, and there is no law enforcement around here. What are we going to do with bound bandits? I'm not keen AT ALL on the idea of having to somehow take care of prisoners. The logistics and the time lost are going to be a nightmare.

I'm all for executing the ones bleeding out, with the exception of their boss. And I don't think this is an especially evil act, given their inclinations towards Svet...

Does anyone have them, and/or have any suggestions on how to build them correctly?

Sleep is 1st level and affects 4 HD
Deep Slumber is 3rd level and affects 10 HD

Eternal rest as a level 5 spell that affects between 15 to 25 HDs? Should "successive" spells all have a 2 level leap and affect further HDs? Or was the sleep line discontinued because it was deemed too powerful to continue?

Thanks for any and all help :)

Looking around, Andarr sees the bandits dropping like flies, and nods in approval.

"A job well done, no doubt. Firemane will easily dispatch the last of this vermin, I'm sure. As for you!" He turns to the bandit that just shot and missed him by half a mile. "Did you not just see your boss drop? Do you really want to follow him? No matter! I shall oblige you then!"

ooc: I charge the bandit that shot at me. Firemane does a full attack on the bandit he is adjacent to.

Attack rolls:
F Bite Attack 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (1) + 2 = 3
F 1st claw 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (2) + 2 = 4
F 2nd claw 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (6) + 2 = 8
Andar's attack roll: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (13) + 4 = 17
Damage rolls:
Andarr 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (3) + 2 = 5
F bite 1d6 + 1 ⇒ (4) + 1 = 5
F claw 1 1d4 + 1 ⇒ (1) + 1 = 2
F claw 2 1d4 + 1 ⇒ (4) + 1 = 5

I was wondering if Firemane could use a double move action to reach the bandit inside the house, if a single move action does not suffice, instead of a move action + a standard action to attack? Obviously, if a single move action is enough, he'd attack once reaching him, instead of double moving.

Well, this is working out great... Now to make mincemeat out of Rolo, capture the fleeing bandit, and then we'll be done. Almost...

Sorry, had to go to work... roll to confirm crit (one of the few times you don't want to actually confirm it... Sigh):

Roll to confirm critical: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (8) + 4 = 12

Thank god not confirmed!

"Why... Won't you DIE?" Andarr swings his scimitar at Happs again, hoping to down him once and for all.

"Firemane, go get our friend Rolo... Have yourself a snack!"

ooc: Whether I hit Hopps or not, I then use my move action to get inside the house Rolo went into, along with Firemane. Firemane does not attack Hopps, and instead uses a move action to get inside the house and attack Rolo, if he can reach him.

Rolls:
Attack roll for Firemane against Rolo: 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (7) + 2 = 9
Attack roll for Andar against Happs: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (19) + 4 = 23
Dmg roll for Andar: 1d6 + 2 ⇒ (3) + 2 = 5
Dmg roll for Firemane: 1d6 + 1 ⇒ (3) + 1 = 4