Anonymous User 747's page

Well, relative to monsters you fight it's low.

As everyone else said, 15 points actually make the min-maxers better; role players will not dump stats and basically end up with a 16-14 setup; a wizard can pretty easily dump str, chr, and to a lesser extent Wisdom and basically not feel anything.

That's why I tend to go higher points (my default is 24 points nothing under 10... a 20 point buy giving everyone "credit" for taking a 7, so those who refuse to dump stats don't end up vastly underpowered).

Good analysis; maybe the strict answer is have more "paths" built into classes (you choose X class path and just "get feats" from that path). With most of the other options just giving you a variant way to use your action, the pre-defined path just gives you the feats along the line; then the "feats" will be more generic options that can go along with any of the classes lines.

Like as a Paladin, if you choose the Shield, you get the shield options as listed for free. You don't have access to the sword options; unless you take Second Ally (which might unlock those options as feats).

Might go along way in making characters feel more customizable.

I'm glad everyone is keeping open and constructive. This is the conversation I wanted, what I think Paizo needs to hear.

The concept of "what can I do to open it up" is a difficult one, and the short answer is "I don't know". In PF2, each class feature is, in and of itself, an action or reaction. There isn't a way to get a static bonus, or add keywords to actions; and 95% of the items are regulated to your specific class. In fact, even in multiclassing you can not EVER get to the defining characteristics of a class (Paladin retributive strike, rogue sneak attack, etc).

So to open things up, you have to have more "static bonuses" allowed into the game. And make it so that you can stack up a reaction setup (I react retributive strike with a finishing trip attempt added on). That's a fundemental change on what they are going for, but may be necessary to fix up the two inherent problems previously mentioned... lack of customizationand lack of ability to be great at anything. Otherwise by not adding a chance of something accidentally being broken (hey, there's always errata); you've eliminated any chance for Roleplayers to "think outside the box".

After 4 rounds, our group is adding to the list leaving the playtest.

It's not that I think that classes or powers are underpowered. There are some balance issues that have been beat to death (non-scaling druid forms, bardic performances, etc). It's not the lack of the difference between "trained" and legendary... these are problems to be sure, but I am confident the team will eventually fix these issues.

No, the issue is I think the game is, fundamentally, not fun. And I don't know that you can fix this with just playing and rebalancing.

It took playing the (I enjoyed it) Pathfinder: Kingmaker video game to really help me understand the real difference here. I must have played the first act 10 times, just because I wanted to test various combos and builds and rebuilds and feat setups. This was what Pathfinder was all about, what DND 3.5 had that 4.0 and 5.0 lacked, the ability that you were truly building towards something unique with tons of options. Someone that could do their "special trick" without worrying too much about the die roll mitigation.

With Pathfinder 2.0, it felt like no matter what you did, your success was more or less 50/50 on pretty much every action you did (poor scaling made the monsters hitting on 6-7 while parties hit on 13-14, but again I have some confidence you'd balance that out). Your tanks were 2-3 points higher AC than your non-tanks; which sounds like a "big deal", but in our play simply meant things were more regulated to the dice.

And actions? You were so focused on making sure that things can't stack or build in ways that you did not anticipate that, well, everyone is cookie cutter. Yes a few classes have certain specific "long term goal setups" that you can pick and choose (Paladin change was good, for the record; I played a paladin in our final round). But by and large, every character feels the same, like I can't really put much thought into my character creation and say "look how cool!"

In the end, the best you can do with this fundamental system is add a few more interesting options and fix the bad abilities to be slightly better or scale better. But this isn't going to change having a system based too much on everyone being average at everything.

My hope that I don't think will be realized from 2.0 is that you take the parts that work well (love the "3 action setup", I think there SHOULD be a limit to the number of ongoing buffs that characters can have going on, and like at least the idea of the racial feats for free... even if I think there are obvious choices for nearly every race). Take those pieces, put them into PF 1.0 system, and you have something better (already you've given martials "move and attack", which I think was the only thing they were honestly lacking). I hope you do not let Pathfinder die into a 4.0 "blah" system... remember that PF dominated the market because players hated DND 4th.

Please. I believe in you Paizo. With love and hope,

-Dave

I still think my top issue is Trained Vs Legendary only amounting to +3; the minor differences in what you are "specialized" in makes you feel, well, not very special.

I actually think the spells are quite good; though the number that are quite good relative to their level are limited. Magic-types seem to have plenty to work with.

I think they've handled the bland race issues; or at least "vastly improved them". At the very least, I now think races are better than PF1.

I'm giving a lot of feedback. I'm actually feeling the same way as the OP. We haven't given up on the playtest... but I just posted the first message along those lines. Second edition does not feel fun; in almost the exact same way that 4th edition did not feel fun. They were answering a lot of complaints about first edition... the redic class combinations, poor multi-classing, and the disperarity between min-maxed characters and "newer player" characters being so huge that it almost felt like you were playing the same game. I appreciate the way they tried to do things, and I actually like the CONCEPT of where they went with it.... make a simplistic system where "a bonus type is a bonus type", make everything an action, make feats.

The problem? At the end of the day... it's not fun. At all. Somehow I lost the diversity of actions that was made to be part of my character. Far from being an "expert" of a skill, the lack of specialization made it feel like I don't even care which skill I take above "trained". The characters feel cookie-cutter, and (I play on d20pfsrd) I have very few macros because I just don't use a ton of different actions. Combats are slow slug-fests of repeated attacks with everyone having no hp and not being able to chew through those hp very fast.

And while the SurveyMonkey surveys try to do something, they don't really let us express ANY of this. And never will. I've filled out the surveys. They've done a few good changes to address the most major problems. But it's not changing the fact that this new game doesn't feel as fun as Pathfinder 1st; or even some of the "even more broken" other game systems I've played.

I've personally been on the other side of the fence a lot; telling people complaining about the terribleness of magic that in 1st edition it was "flat over the top" like the damage ratios. But for that, things in 1st felt fun. And exciting. And I really want that here, I'm just worried there may be a fundemental flaw in this system that isn't being addressed, and won't be unless more people post like the OP.

Love paizo, believe they will find some way to fix this.

50/25/25 would probably be the right thing; though if a GM wanted it as a storyarc where the blood mixed in a weird way it would be whatever makes the best story :).

Easily the most powerful character I've seen in all of Pathfinder had NO HINT of magic.

It was a Dwarven Wild Rager 2 / Martial Artist x.

The Wild Rager was to gain an extra attack. Martial artist gave bonuses to attacks and AC, and could get past ANY flavor of DR reduction (or hardness). I was shocked to find out this actually lets him PUNCH THROUGH WALLS OF FORCE LIKE THEY WERE NOTHING.

Torwards the end of the campaign (ROTRL, run straight from the book) he was (granted, with bard help and some buffs) attacking in the +50 range on his primary attacks, generally delving out about 400 damage (the campaign ended @ level 17).

He was considered the party powerhouse; above all of the other members (each of which had magic... the rest of the party was a Rage-Inquisitor, a Sky Cleric, a Bard, and a Wizard). His saves were pretty much "only a 1 will fail" too; Monk + high Wis/Dex/Con + Dwarf. Even his armor class was 40ish (and I don't think he had any special buffs for that).

Instadeath curses without the ability to remove sound pretty harsh. It sounds fine to give them a way to remove it, assuming you did not want it as part of a storyarc.

Everyone has it right; it's a matter of fun. If everyone has fun, who cares how weak or strong you are as a GM?

I don't think your build can be; look instead at being able to pass your potions to others and be a buffer. Take additional traits (adopted-helpful and whatever else you want), then "Aid another" to give allies +4.

With very poor physical stats and no real focus towards combat, your to-hit (in the BEST scenario, having spent the action to study) is as good as a 2nd level barbarian; with nowhere close to the average damage output. This is fine, as long as you try not to suddenly become a damage output person.

With you and an Oracle, maybe have the 7th level Kyra changed out for something more combat-worthy and "buff them to the max"?

However the enemy spell casters tell me to.

Agothian-Blooded Aasimar Sorcerer? Str 7 Int: 7 Wis: 10 Dex: 10 C: 14 Ch: 16

Stat point every level for a caster = win. You're just encouraging people to min-max one stat EVEN more.

Bard, support cleric, summoner, summoning wizard, support druid.

Those stats make targeting opponents with DCs difficult and frontlining difficult, so doing something support-based is always recommended for low-stat rolls. You can try to do something front-line, but you'll always be second wing to the character who rolled better and goes to attack.

Inquisitor in many ways is the "alignment unrestricted" Paladin; a divine warrior with the ability to enhance his damage. WarPriest was another way they've put it together.

I think the paladin's abilities are too tied to Lawful goodness to really change; they'd have to make each of the "mercy" sets and such based on a specific alingment. It's better to use the non-alinged substitutes if you want a Chaotic Neutral "Holy Knight".

Keep it simple; just have the prince join the party for a little while. This happens all the time; you don't have to make an OOC scene out of it :).

I built a polearm-master fighter / Inquisitor of Gozreh just to make Whirlwind attack "worth it"

Human Polearm-Style fighter 6 / Inquisitor of Gozreh 3
Str: 18
Int: 14
Wis: 12
Dex: 14
Con: 12
Chr: 7

Traits: Heirloom Weapon (Horsechopper) - +2 Trip
(Would have had Bred for War if it existed at the time, I believe I took +2 init)

Ftr 1) Combat Reflexes, Combat Experitse, Improved Trip
Ftr 2) Dodge
Ftr 3) Mobility
Ftr 4) (Switch Combat Reflexes for Spring Attack), Whirlwind Attack
Fighter 5) Combat Relexes (it's back!)
Fighter 6) Greater Trip
Inquisitor 1) Weapon Focus (Horsecopper), Growth Domain
Inquisitor 3) Weapon Specialization (Horsechopper), Tandem Trip

So 4 times per day (5 after headband) he could grow and hit everyone within a 25 foot reach with either an attack or a trip (and trips would cause a few AOOs). Any enemies adjacent to an ally he got two rolls on his trip (which, after magic items, was +27 I believe?)

He was a god at low-to-mid levels, but as he was approaching 9 tripable opponents become more rare (anything above large requires him to use one of his grow tactics, anything above huge is impossible). Then there are the serpent, ooze, elementals, incoporeals, and flyers. He was still good (solid AC, pretty good damage) even if he could not trip, but he was no longer the "combat ruler" that he was in the lowish range. Still, AE damage can be quite useful, and in 50-60% of the fights trip was still "online", so was a solid build.

But you really have to work on it to make it good. If I had it to do over again I would take Lore Warden instead (higher CMB bonus, free Combat Expertise, and you can trip short-range without using your weapon, so no need to have the "shorten" ability like I thought you needed from Polearm master). I may also have only splashed 1 level of Inquisitor (especially with Lore Warden having more benefits from staying through the higher levels).

Make him a grappler and just take agile maneuvers early. Drop the strength all the way to 5... grapple until you can afford an agile amulet of mighty fist. Probably go maneuver master; use grapple and dirty trick.

Kermit the Killer
Str: 5
Int: 10
Wis: 18
Dex: 19
Con: 14
Chr: 7

1) Improved Grapple, Agile Manuevers

AC: 19 out the gates (23 with friendly mage), with a +5 to Grapple @ 1. By 4 you'll have a 22 dex (after level bump and belt of agility), and by 5 you should have your red ioun stone slotted and your agile amulet. This puts you grappling at +14, and hitting for d6+6 with your fist. Not too shabby :).

"GAH! Get this thing off of me! Why can't I move????"

Here's my PFS character. He has a +1 to dex (left Lantern Lodge), but even without he is quite powerful @ level 10. Manuever Master special lets him add +4 to 1 maneuver / turn, and he attacks 8 times per turn with Manuever/Punch/Punch/Punch - 5/Punch -5 / Claw / Claw / Bite at :

Manuever/+18/+18/+13/+13/+15/+15/+15 for d8+11 per punch (d3+7 / natural attack). Usually trades out several attacks / turn for maneuvers (his standard is to blind using dirty trick for the maneuver for the round; then trip anyone possible @ -5 with natural attacks and finish with some damage). AC is typically 31 (4 from mage armor and 2 from barkskin is typically added in). If he can get in trips (getting more rare @ high levels), he gets 2 AOOs / opponent that is around him on the ground (he has pulled off the "dream" 17 attack round a few times).

He also has the Flying carpet so flying opponents don't bug him (flies up and grapples dragons @ +31)

Polly:

Team summoner would make the GM cry. Especially if synthasist and/or Master summoner were actually legal.

Ah the dreams of having 108 summoned creatures in play at once :). At third level no less.

Stat dumping makes for large disparities between low-power gamers and high-power gamers. A 7 essentially gives you 4 extra build points with almost no loss; 7 Str or Chr for the right characters have no relevant game effects.

For my part, I am a huge stat dumper when it is legal; and note the power of my character relative to the table with some satisfaction. In my home campaign I give 24 points with no stat dumping (give each person the advantage of 1 7 without having them think they need to play some social incompetent or do too much weight calc).

You don't even have to be an Aasimar; if you take Scryer as your Wizard you can do it AND get a strength (or intelligence)-bonus based class.

Magus makes the better "straight melee"; the magus-spell-specialized-shocking-grasp-scimitar wielder is pretty heavy damage. Eldritch knights (especially early-entry) eventually surpass as overall casters, and make excellent archers; but lacking any armor options worth using, it's hard to front-line them. I'm running an early-entry EK and they are quite effective; you get nearly the feats of a fighter, full caster level, 1 spell level behind full mage casting capability, and "BAB-1"... it makes for a diverse character. Plus you can enchant your bow (or whatever weapon) at half-price if you make it your arcane bond.

Ease off peeps; this was an interesting thread on a diverse character, I don't think we need to go into fights :).

As to "overpowered", not really IMHO. I think for most levels, the Wizard 2 / Cleric 1 / Mystic Theurge 10 (early entries to allow this; and trait to make your wizard level = character level) is better. At high you COULD throw on Eldritch Knight for "fighter bonuses", but probably don't want to; the addition of BAB and the ability to use weapons is worthless when you have such a diverse aresnal of spells available. When would you EVER want to actually swing a sword / shoot a bow when you have that many spells / day?

The early-entry EK is also better; since they get "online faster" and get a much better BAB (which equates to more attacks and important feats like Improved Precise coming online faster). Divine Hunter 1 / Scriviner 1 / EK 10 is a fantastic character, can overcome any evil creature's DR 1/day, detect evil, has solid saves, tons of feats, and dishes out some mind-blowing damage with his bow (Weapon Spec + Deadly Aim + Arcane Strike). He also gets to enchant said bow for half price. You can finish with Arcane Archer 4 (if you don't mind the loss of 1 caster level) Wizard 5 to end up with the +17 BAB / 9th level spells caster and go to town.

Manuever Masters don't suffer at all. Level 4 my natural-attacking Tengu Manuever master was getting +15 trips with 4 attacks/round, and doing solid damage.

The key to manuever master is to exploit every point you can get; and honestly, realize it's better as a 6-level splash than a 20-level class. Once you get the Wisdom to manuevers and the 6th level feat you don't have any gain.

At the very least, it's probably the best 1-level splash in the game. What class gives a feat, +2 to all saves, and a free extra attack that doesn't interfere with your "regular" attacks?

My Fighter/Manuever Master is regularly referred to as "overpowered" by the two-weapon gunfighters and wizards of the party :).

At high levels (I'm currently 10), I'm still fine Dirty tricking people blind and punching them in the stomach to nauseate them, even given the free action/flying enemies. Only incoporeals really bother me. As to hitting high DCs, I'm +35 with trip, +31 with Grapple and Dirty Trick (assuming I use my swift action for that manuever, -4 if I used it for another manuever). I get 8 attacks per round and deal solid enough damage (d8+11 per hit for unarmed strikes, d3+7 for natural attacks, and 2 AOOs if I do get to trip someone, which is admittingly becoming rare with all of the flying/incoporeals around me).

As to the monktopus, it is TERRIBLE at low levels; but quite powerful once you pull off all of your combos. It is quite funny though, quite good too. Manuever masters are quite good at ALL levels of play if built correctly; you just have to make sure to focus on all 3 parts of the "good manuever" trifecto (Trip, Grapple, and Dirty Trick).

Starting at 8, going to 12, and you're a dwarf? Sounds evangalist to me.

Take glory domain.

In 1 round, you can:

*Swift action radiate an "aura of glory" (heroism for everyone, +2 to hit, saves, skills).
*Move action start bardic performance (+2 to hit, +2 damage)
*Standard action cast the buff of your choice (Prayer)

So at the end of this, all allies are +5 to hit, +2 damage, +3 saves; all enemies are -1 to hit -1 saves. You probably also dropped out some magic weapons (which last a full adventuring day) on some allies, so they have +2 weapons floating around now; and you can heroism 1 ally with your domain spell so the heroism sticks around for 80 minutes.

And you can channel (albeit only decently) and cast a few healing spells here and there. Have a few buffing wands available too.

Dwarf Buff-o-matic (Evangalist 8 glory domain), 20 point build
Str: 7
Int: 12
Wis: 20
Dex: 12
Con: 16
Chr: 12

Toss on something to increase your wis and some random buffing magic items for the party, along with some wands.

I would not put it vs a level 1 party; I've survived Thornkeep twice; but someone usually has to move up and take the 1 attack from the wight (or get attacked before they get to move). Having said that, Thornkeep is a "5 hour and you get a level 2 character for PFS" module; so it's meant to be extrodinarily dangerous. I agree they went a little overboard with the wight; but then, there are other encounters in that part (and many others in the various parts of thornkeep) that you wonder what they were thinking. And the answer is "they were thinking this is going to be tough as heck for the party :)".

But it can be a campaign ender; worse than just killing a guy; the person who dies also comes back after d4 rounds as yet ANOTHER wight. So if the bodies did pile they keep piling.

I probably would not use it @ 2 either; only because I don't like crit-dead to exist that easily for a party. I've never really had trouble challenging my parties without using such tactics :).

Sure, generic "I can fight wizards really well; and incidentally non-wizards as well" Fighter/Monk that I've played in PFS. Level 10 (technically 9-2 now, but will be 10 next weekend). Has a 1-point add-in from faction change in PFS (Lantern Lodge), thus explaining his slightly-over-20 point buy

Tengu Lore Warden 5 / Qinong Manuever Master 5
S: 7
Int: 14
Wis: 16 (18)
Dex: 22 (26)
Con: 12
Chr: 7

Feats: Agile Manuevers, Weapon Finessee, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Improved/Greater Trip, Improved Grapple, Improved Dirty Trick, Two-weapon fighting (and Improved), Improved Blindfighting

Magic items of note:

Flying carpet (5x5)
Dueling Gloves
Agile Amulet of Mighty Fist
+2 Cloak of Resistance
Green ioun stone (+ 1 saves)
+1 Init Ioun stone
+4 Dex belt
+2 Wis Headband

Traits are +2 Init and Diplomacy-as-class-skill

5th level Qinong ability is barkskin.

How he beats mage types:

If they don't fly, trip them, try to grapple (usually works if they don't have FoM)
If they do fly,try to grapple. If that fails, blind them via dirty trick and beat the heck out of them (closing eyes if they are displaced or mirror imaged to use blind-fighting).
He has a solid init bonus... diviners can beat him out, but only barely.

Generally bats around +31 to his CMB to the manuever of his choice for the round, and if he gets a full attack no "standard" mage can survive (9 attacks with decent to hit, and each attack does +11 or +7 damage).

All saves are +13 I believe, with Reflex being in the +18 range.

And that's unbuffed and on his own, built to beat dragons and demons rather than "mere" human mages :).

Also don't forget that Precise Strike is 1 attack per round AND eats your swift action; old Sal is missing that precision damage on those attacks.

On full attacks there will not be levels where Sal comes ahead at all.

You know, I think this isn't really the death of rogues. This is a nice funeral for the passing of an old friend. They really were mostly replaced by Ranger Kits, Ninjas, and the decision to allow any class to find magic traps even if they can't disable them.

Fairwell rogue. You've been awful since your initial inception day. And yet, somehow, I've always found a place for you in games. You were my 1st 3rd edition character, and we got into a lot of mischief together. Know that your new replacements of Slayer and Investigator do all of the things we always wanted you to do with skills and with combat, so your spirit will always live within them.

The issue is:

*15d6+30, as cool as it sounds, is "only" AE: 82 damage (save for half) with 2 more saves for effects. While that may "sound" cool, remember you're at level 15.... the archers can put out 200+ damage on a single target, which is far more significant.

*This character sucks pretty hardcore until they get there. This is a many level game... starting a character @ high and saying "wow" misses that they are a mediocre blaster cleric until then. Once Spell perfection kicks in, things start unhinging in the game... and there are a lot better things you can be doing than a little extra damage with a fireball.

The best 2nd level spell, bar none, is Heroism. Especially for an Arcane Duelist. It's just "all dungeon", no it doesn't stack with good hope, but you also don't generally do it "in combat". @ 13th level it lasts over 2 hour (or 4 hours with an extend wand).

I always suggest the 3rd level spell Sculpt sound for its double use. First, it's an all day (with extend spell) "the party makes NO SOUNDS while they move" super-stealth buff (Plate mail fighter? Now makes 0 sounds except when he talks). If that wasn't good enough, it's an area effect save for opponents to not sound like a duck every time they talk or want to cast spells (and with your high CHA, it's a DC 21 or all enemy spellcasters in an area effect are UNABLE TO CAST).

4th level you should have one of your spells swapped out for The Requium of the Fallen Prince-King. It lets you actually move and full attack in the same round, and only costs 1 round of your performance (and is also a pre-buff). It's huge for you, and you can recast it. Take perform oratory, you can then take the feat @ 11th that also lets you make all people hit by your inspire courage do +1d6 sonic damage per weapon swing.

The answer is you can, but why would you?

All PFS games and most home games are 75-90% combat. The game structure and most abilities are based around combat; it gives a "nod" to non-combat in the form of skill points, which are a simple D20 roll to determine how effectively what you said is interpreted by NPCs. The rest is simply roleplaying; the shape changing will rarely come into effect, and that will make the game less enjoyable.

Now, let's take your kitsune above, and pretend you didn't care for combat feats. Why not be some form of support caster? A kitsune bard or kitsune oracle could have all of the powers you have listed, but also have many spells that help suppliment their abilities ("Alter Self" gives a further bonus to disguise checks), as well as the ability to enhance your allies in battle. This means that for out-of-combat, you are a god, and can have Honeyed tongue and other such powers. In combat, your high charisma gives solid saves on grease spells and activities, and lets you cast great offensive debuffs like Blistering Invictus (we're assuming the bard here). So now you are just as good at out-of-combat(and probably better, since you are signing based and use Charisma for sense motive), and also have an effective role to fill IN combat.

(Hannah Montanta) It's the best.... of both worlds....

Personally I am going to put this one out there now, you can optomize AND be very good at Social situations very easily. Simply play a Sorcerer with rediculous CHA. Good with spells AND have face abilities. If you wna to get even funnier, play a Sorcerer of the Arcane bloodline and focus heavily in enchantment spells and take spell mastery (dominate person). You then grab silent and still spell and start dominating people at a ball mid-sentence while talking about how nice their chandelier looks. Contrary to popular belief, enchantment spells (if focused heavily on) can do ALOT of powerful things, especially in games that you seem to be advocating that are more "roleplaying heavy." (those games tend not feature mass walls of undead, oozes, and constructs).

The ALOT of Powerful Things, one of the most powerful creatures in existence.

The ALOT

The answer is "no, not really".

Those who feel casters are imbalanced aren't concerned with spells per se. Action-for-action, melee who are engaged with an opponent are more likely to damage out and destroy that opponent.

The issue they see is the ability for casters (particularly in mid-to-high levels) to have a versitile arsenol of weapons to pick and choose. Too many enemies? Use a wall of force to block off half. Enemies are brute with no ranged weapons? Mass fly FTW. Enemy is a caster themselves? Summon a grappler into combat with them. Want to make allies into champions? Good old haste, online, and suddenly you've made melees / archers much more effectie.

Few casters use DCs on their spells (why would they?), so doing more to encourage casting DC spells would be handy (rather than discourage).

As to "winning" with casters, not really? My melee has been called "OP" far more often than my caster (and both certainly moreso than my buffer). But they do have a profound effect that can't be covered by numbers. I have also seen casters die far more often in my time; they have a habit of getting targeted, and are fairly squishy.

It's not just viable; it's actually quite good.

You have two ways of going about it:

*Quick Dirty Trick - Advantage: No multiclassing, drawback: You can't get it until 9th level, and need 13 Int and to take Combat Expertise, a feat tax.

*Manuever Master Monk - Advantage: +2 to all saves, gives you Improved Dirty Trick without needing 13 int / combat expertise, effectively gives you an extra attack that can be a dirty trick, available at 2nd level. Disadvantage: Effectively -1 BAB for life of character, lower sneak attack damage / later access to rogue tricks.

I kinda like the 2nd option because it gives a lot of benefits, but it would not be a "pure" rogue build.

My Qinong Manuever Master 5 / Lore Warden 4 got surrounded by 5 demons when he moved up.

2 attempted to charm him over (amazing saves = ineffective). 3 attempted attacks (1 hit amongs the 15 attacks, AC 31). The rest of the party then moved in.

Next round I proceeded to trip all 5, blind 2 of them, disarming the 3 with weapons (which technically turned out to be a bad idea, their swords weren't as good as their natural attacks), and AOOing/attacking 7 times for unarmed strike damage (actually running out of AOOs). The rest of the party proceeded in to deal good damage. Most of them survived and regrouped, but they were required to "fight till death" to take our ward, so they came back in on us, he dropped the one that was close enough in a round and we wiped out.

Surrounded monk = awesome.

I don't want more pseudo-summoners... they messed that class up too much the first time...

Old arguments are back again; and ironically contradictory.

"Melees can't keep up with casters"
"Dumped stats = totally incompetent"

They're linked; mages, bards, sorcs etc get mechanical benefits from Int / Chr, most fighty-types don't. Most fighty types also need stat points a lot more.

Gruff fighting types are all over Game of Thrones; why not have them mechanically available?

And let's be honest, we're all basically peasent-1s by the game standard, and most gamers tend to be intelligence 11-13 with a charisma in the 6-7 range. But we consider ourselves perfectly competent. Some have even managed to take a few ranks in Diplomacy :).

Bows and whips ARE the best; at low levels it really doesn't matter, but at mid and high you're not going to survive combat or do effective damage very well, especially if you go the "gnome" route.

Concentrate on being a buffer. If you want a really fun bard build, go halfling, take the "helpful" trait (or come from adoption by a family of halflings), and take combat reflexes / bodyguard as your feats. Late get the Benevolent keyword, get arcane strike, and the gloves that let you channel to assist. Use a shield and chain shirt, and keep your dex pretty high. You'll give +6-(eventually) +10 to people for AC about 5 times a round, and have a good AC yourself; in addition to being able to bardsong and cast. It's a fun and useful build.

Straight damage dealing you'll do half-elf with a Dwarven Longhammer and Combat Reflexes with your feat. But trust me, even if you invest in feats for it you'll stop being terribly useful around level 6-7.

I think if you have issuess with grappling monks trivilizing encounters you're going to have a lot more sadness as a GM later.

The good news is even well-speced grappling monks have fights they're going to have difficulty grappling (looking at those CMB 37 dragons that I've randomly had to face). They'll be able to keep up with most "normal" monsters (and certainly any spellcasters), but they have their own problem.

I've seen PFS Fire Oracles doing 100+ damage with DC 21 Reflex save @ level 8; I've seen archers that can snipe out dragons in 2 rounds (and rarely miss); and mountains of "Save or Suck casters". Each will cause far more games to break then your grapple-a-monk at high levels; low levels (especially early year) modules a multitude of options will break.

The charger is almost certainly going to want to be the "Scout" archtype. At 4th level, you get sneak attack damage every time you charge. As to "Death From Above", remember it really only gives you +2 in a VERY specific situation (can get above AND are charging). You may just want to have Weapon Focus, which is +1 in ALL situations.

As to a build:

Chargey McChargerson
Half-Orc Fighter (Unarmed Fighter 1 / Rogue (Scout Swashbuckler) X)

Str: 18
Int: 12
Wis: 12
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Chr: 7

Wields a Luceren Hammer

Fighter 1) Power Attack, Dragon Style (Lets you charge through allies and difficult terrain, well worth the 1 level dip of fighter)
Rogue 1) -----
Rogue 2) Combat Reflexes, Furious Focus
Rogue 3) -----
Rogue 4) (Now you get Sneak attack every time you charge)
Sap Adept, Weapon Focus: Luceren Hammer - Weapon Training Trick
Rogue 6) Vital Strike, Sap Master

So for early levels, just having d12+6 @ +4 to hit and reach is good enough to take out most people. You can actually be second rank since your AC isn't great; knowing that you can charge right through allies if you need to.

@ Level 5, your charge gets you full sneak attack. So you deal (d12+2d6+12, before magic items, with a +11 to hit. With a +1 longsword and the +2 Strength belt you'll deal d12+2d6+14 with +13 to hit... and 2 extra damage if it is non-lethal)

The combat reflexes makes up for your laughable AC, since anyone wanting to get to you will now be taking an AOO as they move in.

@ Level 7 Vital Strike and Sap Master come online. Now your charge deals 2d12+6d6+20 with the same items above... and you'll probably be higher to hit with magic items and such.

Most of your players, by game standards, will have an 11 int.... by the PFS standards we're all a bunch of peasents, like it or not :). It's silly to impose minimums like that; especially since that sort of minimum request for RP is making it more difficult for the Monks / Paladins / Rangers / Barbarians / non-int class X of the world.

It's actually silly, but according to current FAQ, the bonus to reflexes is "Strictly better", since the AC bonus works on CMD.

+20 to a knowledge check isn't a bad use of a feat per se; though if you want the Nature's Whisper and you are going to be a paladin, extra revelation for granting your animal companion +CHA to saves AND keeping your animal companion at full level is probably better for your play experience.

I'd go:

Aasimir (if you have the book to allow) Str/Cha 1/day Alter Self Oath of Vengence Paladin X / Oracle 1 with these stats:

Str: 18
Int: 12
Wis: 10
Dex: 7
Con: 12
Chr: 18

Wielding a greatsword and swinging for the fences. Vs any evil opponents you should be hell on wheels. Get a mithril breastplate and put all stat bumps to Chr to get lots of smites each day (so you don't have to decide "Do I want to use a smite for this combat or not). Your AC will only be "OK", but you can fast-heal, it will be amazing vs smite targets. If you really want to go crazy get Dual-Cursed Oracle and use your swift action to do the Misfortune hex (which is pretty amazing, especially when saving allies).

How do you deal with this? Ban him from your table and ask your organizer / local VO that this player should be asked to leave from organized Society play in your area. That is behavior that GMs and players do not need to put up with.

As info Joseph, he is "strictly" an online player and therefore you are the Venture Officer in question that needs to do this. Here is a page where he writes about his character:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/pathfinder-society-online-collectiv e/bMd-6VT1S84

And having heard this, I'm actually bowing to the wisdom of those who have played more with him and have removed him from my campaign before we started up. I did not want him making other players feeling uncomfortable and potentially breaking up my table before it starts.

Thanks for the warning Quendishir.

Lucern hammers are awesome. Lueren Hammer with Greater Vital Strike dealing 3d12, then every time they move up, you roll a d12. And since you're a barbarian, it's d12 hp! GAR!

First, take Lore Warden @ 1st level; this may sound like a waste, but otherwise you lose 2 HP (your first level is maximized). Yes, you'll suck a bit at first level.

2nd, I'm not sure if you are aware, but dirty trick isn't performed with a weapon. That means, sadly, no dirty trick.

Thirid, unless you are just excited about the whip I'd recommend skipping it and using a Horsechopper. Yes the reach is 5' less, but you threaten AND don't have to spend feats on it. It's also a non-exotic weapon, so if you are playing PFS (or allowed traits) you can Heirloom Weapon (Horsechopper) for +2 to your trip attempt.

I'd feat out as follows (and I'd use the human trait that lets me have +2 to 2 different traits to get +2 to Str AND Dex; that will be more useful than any trait):
Traits: Heirloom Weapon (+2 Trip)
LW1) Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus (HoreChopper)
MM1) Improved Trip
LW2) Improved Dirty Trick
LW4) Fury's Fall
LW6) Greater Trip, Quick Dirty Trick
LW8) Improved Grapple (you start wanting it as an option vs mages about here), Greater Dirty Trick
LW10) Greater Weapon Focus (HorseChopper), Greater Grapple

For armor the best chain shirt you can afford; but that's not your focus (the trip-build focuses on using AOOs to prevent opponents from getting close, thereby negating a need for a real AC).

For equipment, you want a Red Ioun Stone slotted into a wayfinder for +2 to all manuevers as quickly as possible. Then you go with the standard + STR belt / +DEX Ioun Stone / Cracked Pale Green Ioun Stone (+1 atk = +1 combat Manuever) / Gloves of Dueling / Save items.

So many who now play PFS may remember Living Greyhawk. The world started out great, with interesting and diverse characters; and a fair-but-easy-to-get into challenge level.

Then the splat books came. With them came amazing magic (we all talk about "CoDzilla" and the use of divine metamagic), incredible classes, etc. Suddenly the modules had to ramp up in power level, and it began to block newer players from playing (since most newer players didn't read or optimize through all of the SPLATbooks), and everyone group in power. The world eventually became a mess and collapsed.

Now let's look at what is happening in today's world of PFS. APG was a pretty big "power burst", with Summoners and Witches outpowering the melees somewhat; and the addition of Kits giving a good, but still more powerful, variant to the base classes. It was a minor enough bump though, and the Ultimate books succeeded in adding more options without overly affecting balance. Life continued to be good.

Now I'm starting to get a little worried. The main issue I have is with Advanced Races, and specifically with the allowance of "variant" Tieflings and Aasimir. The Tiefling and Aasimir alone were considered "powerful enough"; Aasimir especially had 2 positive stats, no negative ones, great "favored class options", and the unheard-of ability to start with 2nd or 3rd level daily spells. Now you add the ability to actually place those stats (almost) wherever you wan. These days it's becoming more and more rare to see non-Planar players (I played at a table with 4 the other day, and the only non-planars were myself (playing a also-overpowered-but-not-quite-as-much Tengu; and a new plaer). And why not? Aasimir and Tiefling characters are insanely powerful.

We've talked about options of bringing CR-4 monsters to low-tier campaigns in the thread "Battle Cattle". We're starting to see something Pathfinder was attempting to avoid... those weird "multi-class monsters" from 3.5 that cherry-pick abilities from several front-loaded classes to get insane number of attacks. And the modules are increasing the challenge to make up for this; I would be concerned about any newer-player base that tries to go into a Season 4 module, and expect the power levels to increase at Season 5.

So what are thoughts here? Should Paizo start locking things down, restrict the "alternate" planestouched, and make some rule that prevents the animals from joining the party if their CR is above the class level? Should they just let things be and increase the power of the campaign? Should they let it be but assume newer players won't access these books and keep the power level low (essentially making most "advanced" players cakewalk modules)? Should they reinforce the boon requirements for races like Tengu, Aasimir, and Tieflings (or at least require boons for Aasimir and Tieflings to have any but the "base" setup)?

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion

-Steven Weinberg, 2003

I'm happy to see what happens, but it's a bad sign when I consider myself mostly "in the know" and had no idea it was releasing next month...

Andorans are great, why not let them meddle in our affaris? Taldorans have slaves, Andorians free the slaves, we recapture the slaves, and give them to the Qadirans for resale. If it weren't for the Andorians it'd be a lot harder to keep the economy going...

Alchemist: Like, good flavor, mutiple viable builds, one bad kit that got banned in PFS and one overpowered 2nd level spell, but otherwise good.

Oracle: Like all around. Makes divine combatant viable; and lots of options.

Gunslinger: Ban. Both for power reasons (even Jason admits they can do 100+ damage and never miss non-monks around 10 levels) and flavor (you really have to stretch, unless your guys have guns too).

Ninja: Mostly upgrade to rogue. Awesome, and an excuse to have Cha on your rogue.

Cavalier / Samurai: Horse guys, a little weak, but "fine", dunno if I would play one, but have no issues with them.

Magus: Solid, good damage, the Eldrich Knight we always wanted.

Summoner: Overpowered under-thought class that needs banning.

Witch: A from-the-beginning mystic theurge (effectively) with nice hexes. I've banned Slumber Hex from my home game; but otherwise I like them, and have seen many fun builds.

So overall they are good; really the two you mentioned (out-of-flavor gunslingers and overpowered summoners) are the only ones I have issues with.