Avaricious's page

Hello Advice Column!

I have been perusing my archive of builds and noticed that I have been ignoring Martials... and I've been advised before that I shouldn't always bring a 9-Spell level caster to a campaign, sometimes outright threatened to "limited to being a Fighter" (their words, not mine).

I am seeking advice on archetype-stacking Fighter. The class features I wish to replace entirely are Bravery and Advanced Armor Training, and would like to have a modified Weapon Training feature that focuses on either one family, or one weapon only. Armor and Weapon Mastery are likewise expendable as frankly, I do not expect this build to ever be in a campaign that'll reach capstone 20. In essence it's a Fighter whose only retains some of its bonus feats.

Weapon/Armor Proficiencies are likewise expendable and I am willing to part with some of the bonus feats as some archetypes have locked options. Eventually Mithral Armors help mitigate a lot of the inconveniences, as I've come to love Mithral Kikko.

I looked at Ustalavic-Duelist/Siegebreaker/Dervish of Dawn as a stack but it's illegal because of the mandatory feats at level one, though one can houserule away their first feat choices in favor of one of the overlapping mandatory LVL 1 feats.

Seems crazy, I know, but Fighter as plenty of Feats that pass along its career path that one can still go for an interesting CMB playstyle that can not only DPS, but also debuff/control enemies a la Trip, Disarm, etc, and heck, even fun styles like shield bashing.

Be it as a polearm-wielder, a crossbowman, or someone using a rapier foolishly on an STR build, I seek a functional (not optimal, just synergistic) Fighter that does not fall into the traditional armored brute mold. I can roleplay well enough to in story mode, though having 2-3 skill/level is gonna hurt versatility.

The typical races I play are Gnome and Aasimar (small), though I do have a fondness for Fetchlings, and would like to RP a Strix someday. Humans I understand are about the best race to play PF, but RPing I prefer to take advantage of the diversity that's on Golarion.

Thanks for reading, and if you have any input, then please drop in.

How many of us have done it?

Reflecting, I enjoy taking a general American South accent in rural settings in my campaign. Reading through Hell's Vengeance 1 as a DM I certainly got that feeling about Longacre.

Had I a better grasp, I would love to incorporate more Boston, Chicago, and New York accents to my urban NPCs. As it stands, I still use my Bay Area slang to portray some urbanites.

Any particular cultures or accents that you as a DM/Player have enjoyed portraying in-game, even if it crosses PC thresholds in today's Trigger-Warning infused society?

At least once I have incorporated the opening chords of Dueling Banjos into the scenery.

I portrayed the Sheriff of Sandpoint (forgot the name) once being modelled on Buford T. Justice to my PCs. They learned to tolerate him, but the breaking point came where they needed someone who understood Goblin and he just happened to be the nearest NPC. I transitioned his Goblin "accent" from that ramble to smooth neutral newscaster English and it was hilarious when some Players broke character because of that difference.

"How does he speak Hick Common but perfect Goblin?!"

Just reading the entry plainly, at first glance you simply cast the spell through the firearm as if it was the origin point, should the spell be eligible as line, cone, ray, or melee touch.

Does the caster physically fire the weapon in the process?
1: Is this a combined action where a round is fired along with the triggering of the spell?
2: Does the spell, if a line/cone, now require a ranged touch attack roll a la bullet?

Usually I try to read the rules as literally as possible, hence my tears when I realized how horrible VMC was save for specialty builds and possible early entry.

It seems that this is just a way of trading school specialization for DC enhancement based on firearm's enhancement bonus... and a +5 end state is nothing to laugh at for saves.

I raise this because I am entertaining the concept of a Gunslinger (Musket Master) & Wizard (Spellslinger) multiclass character. One barrel, one shot a round, one spell a round is the goal, but reviewing the fine print, I no longer believe this is viable, though it would've been fun.

Planned Action Economy would've been:
Standard Action: Spellshot
Move Action: Reload (Rapid Reload + Metallic Cartridges. Lightning Reload can probably accelerate to Free Action)
Swift Action: Quickened Spell?

For added shenanigans I would've had the Spellslinger become a Wordcaster as well, with the ability to reshape so many more spells to be eligible to be fired out of the firearm.

Any feedback would be appreciated. If it needs to be houseruled I'll just shelve the project and build another oddball character.

99 Weapons I can't use.
Take one down, pass it around.
98 +1 Longswords on the wall!

I'm looking for feedback/roundtable talk on how other Players and DMs handle excess stuff in their game.

DMing, I've worked on the Magic Store policy, where in safe zones outside of dungeons and in metropolises, PCs have access to merchants that can just dump the goods off. It was easy in Sharn, and I imagine places like Absalom. This is usually handled at the end of, or in between sessions where the Players and I get together to hash out sheets and other story stuff that can get in the way of a steamrolling session. Two of my usually inattentive Players actually became very good sheet-keepers and value hunters off the SRD/Hero Lab with this as an incentive.

In a way, I commercialized/affiliated Adventuring. Anything else really falls into DMs just plain denying Players. Example, the Player has accumulated 90k in minerals/currency, what is preventing him from ordering up a Ring of Regeneration? If it's Core, why can't the Genie rip you off bartering for it? At least you have it.

Equipment = Power Level, I understand, but I thought that was the point why they existed, versus wonderful fluff about a Player's wardrobe or knick-knacks.

With how generous the APs are with loot drops, I am thinking that a 4:1 exchange rate in value may be more reasonable. So, in a typical 4-Player array, they can either keep said item or accept the loss for targeted gain at a 1:16 ratio of Treasure Value for their efforts versus having wagons of stuff that you will never see get sold off at "a proper source" like a metropolis/demiplane you are thousands of miles/planes away.

Case in point, I was in a Demiplanar Dungeon (handwaved as Planeshift/Teleport Proof) with no access to civilization and the +1/+2 weapons were stacking up inside the portable hole. Since we were adventuring with the DMNPC, aka Deus Ex Machina-Sue, we dumped out 70k in gear and opted for a rough 4:1 exchange rate to get equipment that we sorely needed, like Armor compatible with a Druid, a weapon the Monk can use, etc. Price gouging to the extreme, but at least we got back some of what we needed to be more competitive in the present. Frankly, it was doubtful if any of the seed characters were going to survive to the "finale" anyways, as we've already had two character deaths from the originals, much as we play defensively.

I don't alter the loot drops because I believe in Paizo enough that it's that way for a reason, but I do believe in the ability to opt out after the fact and just turn in that squad of mooks' equipment for at least somebody to benefit from.

Perhaps none of my Players have abused this system just yet, and I understand that there may be "broken" value-wise items out there, but sometimes DM indifference or bias can be a disservice to the table, particularly when a lot of campaigns aren't played to completion, and all that loot value is lost without ever having been enjoyed.

Heck, I've come up with a variant where one can turn in their +1 Ring of Protection for example, pay the difference between it and a +2 RoP, et voila, there's your upgraded equipment back to you.

Apologies ahead of schedule, but I am just hitting a wall comprehending and trying to conceptualize a build looking at the optimization guides.

I wish to be a Conjurer, first and foremost, possibly a secondary focus in Transmutation, and do not wish to rely on Evocation or Necromancy for flavor purposes (the latter will always be a moral convention in any PC I RP). I wish to deal damage/down the enemy (does not have to be fatal, but a guaranteed out short of DM Fiat) without being that maniac evocaphile constantly crooning about their sweet Fireball.

My goal is to create a Wizard, obviously, and I do not feel an archetype is necessary at this time.

The one Metamagic feat I wish to utilize (currently) would be Quicken Spell. My desired goal for feats is to enhance the DCs of saves to make against me, force re-rolls against opponents' successes, and if at all possible, raise my caster level. I am used to playing with groups where loot is rare, and the DMs are unable to deal with crafting and opt out (oh well, I don't mind, just one less thing to worry about, really). A focus on SR and succeeding on Concentration would be nice if it does not end up taking away crucial feats.

My eventual desired playstyle is to cast a spell using the Standard Action or Full Round Action, then utilize a quickened spell. If there's a way to convert the Move Action into another spell of action that a Wizard can perform, please lemme know!

Are there any Metamagic Feats, Arcane Discoveries, regular Feats that would help me guideline this character to being a character able to solo an equivalent level CR if possible?

In effect, I believe in constant, passive abilities versus many options all sharing the same finite resource.

And this is before I dive back into researching conjuration to make dem summons hit harder, laster longer, and wow... I'm setting myself up for a double entendre.

In Summary:

*No Item Creation because groups/DMs not familiar/comfortable
*Primary Focus on Conjuration, Secondary in Transmutation
*Abstaining from Evocation and Necromancy (current persona deems them blatantly destructive and wrong)
*Currently will only use one Metamagic Treat in Quicken Spell
*Wishes to raise DCs of saves and effects that sabotage those saves
*Wishes to boost Caster Level
*Peripheral interest in SR and Concentration
*Ability to maximize usage of Action Economy without tapping into Mythic.
*Peripheral interest on what to do when low on spells (Spellslinger, perhaps?)

Anybody have input/opinions?

I loved being the tier-9 mage in 3.5, but in current groups I feel my playstyle needs to evolve past just happy-spamming one spell a round while relying on teammates to protect me. All I had to do then was happily drop one effect a round and project color commentary on the conflict. Divine casters I have a lot of fun with because of how durable they are, but there's a whole new world of arcane fun to explore.

This current campaign I am in is currently taking place in Faerun, and the DM opted to run 3.5 pure after reexamining his earlier position where both 3.5/PF would be allowed in. My argument was that given the same amount of skill, a PF build was mechanically more powerful than their direct 3.5 counterpart and that to run the two simultaneously would lead to serious imbalance, because PF has evolved/developed beyond what 3.5 could handle.

Not to say that PF < 3.5, because the predecessor had a lot of incredible exploits itself (EX: Loved Wildshape, hated Grappling), but that just as 3.5 bloated with expansions, so did PF's consistent growth entails power creep, plus options that were never possible in Core 3.5.

A veteran player who joined the campaign today requested to run a PF Fighter versus a 3.5 Fighter, and we had to shoot him down. The three extra feats by L20, Bravery, Weapon Proficiency, and Armor Expertise may not be game breaking in a world of magic, but tack on the archetypes, and heck, that PF Fighter DOES have a lot more potential than a 3.5 Fighter. One could argue that PF Fighter is as versatile/effective as a 3.5 Fighter that had some Gestalt features. Heck, with alternate race traits, one could optimize to that level of effectiveness. The 3.5 Rogue and Barbarian that would be running next to him would look pretty bleak.

I'm not looking to raise controversy, but ask opinions on where PF and 3.5 are no longer compatible; I'm pretty sure a final divergence could have been as early as CRB 1st Edition -where the first thing I noticed was all the sweet goodies plain progression classes like Fighter and Sorcerer received a lot of goodies to where MC/PRC was no longer so necessary, but when cool stuff like Archetypes, Alternate Racial Traits, and a lot of the background stuff was being published. One of the most attractives features at launch to me was the revamped selection of feats and likewise revised skills. Eight Skill points/Level as a 3.5 Rogue looks impressive until one has to deal with having to dump multiple points in very similar fields. Synergy mitigated this, but a lot of PF PCs have more accommodating skill allocation than 3.5.

On a counterpoint: under what conditions do y'all feel where a Pure 3.5 Adventurer can be just as effective as a Pathfinder and be able to run in either's mechanical setting?

About a month ago, I concluded Council of Thieves with a two-player party, where I enabled Gestalt options from 3.5's UA. PC1 was an Oracle/Slayer, and PC2 was a Paladin Rogue, selections geared towards versatility and covering bases, but I had noticed that the Paladin was slightly more effective in DPS during combat. Not to poke fun or denigrate Council of Thieves, but I feel that AP was the lowest-threat of the series I had encountered thus far. Arcane was not represented at all in the party, but we managed just fine. It gave me a practical viewpoint on how Gestalts worked out. The adventure was skewed to our favor in that the XP was only split 2 ways, so the duo ramped up the progression very swiftly, particularly in that we thematically went the stealth approach with two characters able to sneak competently.

It may lead to a critical gap in duo-sized campaigns, but would it be more optimal to Gestalt two similarly-themed classes for the Synergy? Not to abuse mechanics like multiple Sneak Attacks -which I believe would not stack because they are same exact class feature and IIRC UA rules that identical features do not, but ones that benefit the same category.

Such as the combination of a Swashbuckler and a Rogue (unchained) in kicking ass with Finesse weapons, or an Arcanist's exploits parralleling the extra feats and school specialization of a Wizard versus an oddball build that would just seek to combine best HP, Skill, BAB, and Saves. It is nice to be a 9-Tier caster and full BAB combatant, but in Action Economy one would usually be only using half their offensive potential in a given round unless utilizing Quicken Spell.

Within that same vein, Arcanist/Sorcerer may be just as viable in that it provides Spell Spam endurance (I think in an Arcanist/Wizard they would share the same books and go off the Wizard spell progression and thus only receive one source of spells versus two -as in only 4 versus 10 or more 9-level spells ^_^) with the Arcanist Exploits bleeding synergistic benefits into the Sorcerer's vast magazine of spells, but in fighting higher-CR enemies, every boost to your DC feels like it matters more than sheer volume of attacks. Yes spam is more effects in the long run, but one may not survive to that point versus a higher probability of hitting first,hard, and last.

Pathfinder has a lot of variety to create using this 3.5 fun addition. It may not be effective, but a Druid/Summoner would damn near be a one-player party, and it would be hilarious to witness a Gunslinger (Musket Master)/Wizard (Spellslinger) combo. "One shot -and attached nuke- is all I need."

TL;DR what are your experiences, opinions, and analysis on Gestalt and where it's true potential really directs?

I love to crunch as much as I love to fluff, enough so that I cannot deny powergamer or munchkin labels -I love to roleplay very well, but will always build a competitive character to match that.

But, players & DMs, has there ever been a point where you felt your powergaming, or efficiency, has perhaps gone off the deep end?

I ask because there has been times where I know it has created resentment on the tables on which I played, and I have to ask myself the hard question of do I value playing my best over playing in harmony with everyone else. That unity is hard enough to achieve and not guaranteed, but do I have to throw away that drive to win as an ante?

Case in point, the group I am playing with is a mix of married and single soldiers. This means weekend games. The DM is a young mother who had to juggle preparation with taking care of a energetic child. Another player is her husband.

Tucked him away, launched campaign. At Level 6, she dropped us into Book 3 of Curse of the Crimson Throne: Escape from Old Korvosa.

A Four player party. Alchemist (False Priest), Swashbuckler (Inspired Blade), Witch, and myself, a Druid (Menhir Savant) with a juvenile T-Rex. Only the Swashbuckler was Good. Personally, I chose NE to play a narcissistic Druid. For example, my opinion on the plague was the real crime wasn't that it happened, but the disposal of the bodies by fire denied the Food Chain its fair due. After all, whomever survived on their own would have a better chance of passing on resistant genes to future generations as well. Plus, City Folk suffering? Oh yeah...

I think our only boon was that this group consistently gets seeded at 25-point buy for builds instead of 20.

We destroyed it. Not as murder-hobos, but anything she presented to us were confronted directly, almost at a pace which overwhelmed her. As in aggressive Bluff/Diplo/Intim checks across the party. I kept up a constant rythm of perception along with holding detect magic and cycling resistance whenever possible, yatta yatta. Other players likewise kept alert and guarded. We even alternated buddy-pairs that would leapfrog corridors and rooms in a sequential search method.

Maybe she had problems coping with our style from the DM side of the table (she usually plays WarPriest and is very good at being a fighting healer), or maybe we just forgot the point, that sometimes, being a little overwhelmed and awed by the enemy lends itself to a fun experience. As a DM, I like to represent even my mooks well, and I can see where another DM would appreciate not having all of their encounters efficiently steamrolled into sheets of XP & loot.

After the session, beyond the glory, I felt kinda bad. Anyone have anything like this happen to them?