B0sh1's page

I really dislike the flavor of the 1st part of this adventure where meeting Iomedae is like meeting a trigger happy high school principal. I'll have to think about how to rework that. Having a LG deity immediately resort to punitive action seems out of place. My assumption is that this may due for the sake of page space and I could make a stretch that Iomedae doesn't have time to fool around as the Crusade hangs in a critical balance but I am definitely not playing this out as written. =(

If this can seamlessly support the maps from the APs and remove the pain of converting the maps into VTT format, that would be a huge benefit. Converting maps over is one of the more painful things about running a game via VTT.

"Morning comes"

I'm almost done with my staff build -- and walter I think you'll be adding a third type of magus (as opposed to the current Strength and Dexterity magus) -- the intelligence based magus.

I am very interested in how a int based magus works out. I've been thinking of that option with a non-bladebound build.

I'll have to read over Arcane Duelist. The Bard has never appealed to me so that's probably why I never considered the arcane duelist but you've made some interesting points though. Thanks for your analysis on this.

Here's where you can get Ogre's alchemist build if you want to include on this list.

Ogre's Alchemist Guides

Dervish Dance does not require a "free hand". You can hold objects such as wands, potions etc. See the link below where James Jacob is quoted as saying such.

PFS - Dervish Dance

However, is a spell considered a weapon in the off-hand and as such does it invalidate Dervish Dance? Well, again, I asked James Jacob and this is pretty much a GM call.

Spell Combat/Dervish Dance

I personally prefer to use wand wielder with the ridiculous UMD skill.

That's a good point TarkXT, if you go wand wielder, you also need to allocate skill points to UMD, it becomes part and parcel of utilizing the Wand wielder arcana.

B0sh1 wrote:

I usually use humanoid races as adversaries more than any class of "monster". I find it more dramatic and interesting.

I guess a close 2nd would be the various flavors of undead as level appropriate.

I've been playing with DMs who are like you for almost 2.5 years.

It's boring. Facing enemies who you can figure out what they are and their abilities real fast gets boring even faster. You'd think on a theoretical level that that wouldn't be the case, since you have all the classes to choose from! But nope, it's always roughly the same thing. Some melee guys, maybe a caster or two, possibly a ranged attacker.

With creatures and monsters, you never really know what they can do until you've identified them, and I've found it a lot easier to not metagame with creatures. It's easily conceivable that my character will know what a wizard can cast in game, so I can act accordingly.

Throw a beast I've never seen before (much less a beast my character has never seen), and combat suddenly just got a lot more interesting. Instead of "I charge at the beast and swing my axe for X damage!" it becomes "Oh s&+$, I swung my axe and the creature split in two!"

Sounds like a problem with the DM then again my group is new to Pathfinder. Most of us stopped playing prior to 2nd edition and picked back up in Pathfinder, so a lot of this is still new.

I've never had a problem with my group meta-gaming away an encounter or it not be challenging to them. There's enough feat options, races and creative license to make things always interesting.