White Dragon

Bandw2's page

6,419 posts (6,786 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 10 aliases.


1 to 50 of 815 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
I am also morally opposed to the color orange existing, I do not know why.

but your icon...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tarantula wrote:

What would be more fun, is to take the combatants designed for the single arena fight, and throw them exactly as is to the escalating CR monster fight, or vice-versa. Take a character designed for escalating CR monster fight, and put them up in 1v1 situations.

Its not too hard to make a super specialized character who is great at their one trick. I think having to have rounded characters would equalize it out more.

how about a battle royal/hunger games situation?

last man standing wins, killing other players is allowed but creatures are added to the "arena".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
avr wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks the best way to do this would be to have them fight monsters of escalating cr until they die?
A charm/dominate or magic jar master would love that setup.

you forgot necromancer...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

well I mean the last one didn't even cast timestop. just greater possession.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Isn't it very DM player interaction to bargain with a Balor? I thought it gate worked quite a bit different from summon monster. I could see that being an issue.
not when you magic jar the Balor.
Wouldn't that still imply at some point you and the DM need some interaction when you solo and capture a Balor?
it happens mid match... probably in timestop, so you can also safely store your body.
lol I think your messing with me now. I honestly don't know this one. Can you technically summon anything in time-stop? Wouldn't it come out time-stopped if you could?

great you reminded me of the old problem on whether you still count as you if you get a new body. do spell effects follow bodies or the "soul".


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Also Baval and Brain you guys need to take it down a notch.
How so?

my sassometers are reading 11.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Isn't it very DM player interaction to bargain with a Balor? I thought it gate worked quite a bit different from summon monster. I could see that being an issue.
not when you magic jar the Balor.
Wouldn't that still imply at some point you and the DM need some interaction when you solo and capture a Balor?

it happens mid match... probably in timestop, so you can also safely store your body.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:


So, should I start writing a fighter guide?

honestly yes, because maybe then these various options might become an actual staple and not niche things that probably 95% of players will never remember off the top of their head. like make sure you have a section for specific very good swap-inable feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

are you quoting Genghis Khan or the movie?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
1 hour/level buffs are allowed, as are spells like contingency. What would the sohei monk do to kill the wizard that couldn't be countered?

It's an arena fight.

Forcing an opponent out of the arena is a win.

not necessarily, some arena fights have a pause until the combatant can re-enter the arena. some arena are designed so that gettign knocked out is impossible, such as the Colosseum in Rome.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

everytime this kind of thing happens no one actually posts a fighter build...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

here's my entry

he's a fighter

** spoiler omitted **

I Like it. I think i've played this exact character before except swap dex and con

he gets the con at 4rth level because at those lower levels you're close to 1 shot regardless of what you do, so you want to not get hit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

here's my entry

he's a fighter

Spoiler:
Clever man
Human fighter 1
N Medium humanoid (human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +0
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 16, touch 12, flat-footed 14 (+4 armor, +2 Dex)
hp 12 (1d10+2)
Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +2
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft. (20 ft. in armor)
Melee greatsword +5 (2d6+4/19-20)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 17, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8
Base Atk +1; CMB +4; CMD 16
Feats Iron Will, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (greatsword)
Skills Acrobatics +1 (-3 to jump), Climb +5, Survival +4, Swim +5
Languages Common, Halfling
Other Gear armored coat[APG], greatsword, backpack, bedroll, belt pouch, flint and steel, hemp rope (50 ft.), mess kit[UE], pot, soap, torch (10), trail rations (5), waterskin, 41 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Power Attack -1/+2 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.

round 1: hahahahaha(does he even get this far?)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cwethan wrote:
Wrath wrote:

Shoot an arrow with an attached portable hole designed to open up when the arrow strike. Wizard is destroyed as the extra dimensional spaces he has all over him interract badly with the portable hole.

Extra dimensional,things wizards likely have - pocket familiar, bag of holding, bag of useful things, some kind of dimensional component pouch, some kind of dimensional,storage for their spell books.

If the hole doesn't sit well with folks, do the same thing with a bag of holding on the arrow, just rigged to trigger like a net on impact with target.

BOOM!

Not to be that guy, but they aren't destroyed. They're sent to the astral plane, which... which will not kill a level 20 wizard. Or really almost anything else worth spending 25k or so on an arrow.

VICTORY BY RINGOUT!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
How does summoning and people without goz masks deal with an eversmoking bottle?

so since people went about this the wrong way, you're flavor of barrier then Detect magic then mage's disjunction the bottle

don't know how it took people this long.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

looks like Tacticslion carpet bombed the thread(with favorites).

but yeah, that seems accurate if you're only dealing with combat options.

Like I said, a fighter will never take down a nation-state, but a wizard could do it relatively easily.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
M1k31 wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
Old FAQ thread for whether manipulating material components requires a free hand.
I don't see an FAQ Answer on that page... was it answered at all?

it was not. he's asking you to FAQ it. even though this is one of those things that don't like to FAQ. they WANT it to be pretty nebulous.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

something I think no one went over. Multiclassing.

This system also makes it so you can multiclass caster classes fairly easily without much down side just like if you were multiclassing a level of fighter and ranger.

you can have a few Wizard levels multiclassed with a cleric and you can do that just fine, you even get to choose if your ENTIRE magic casting is based upon int or wisdom now. this is because your CL stacks just like BAB in this system and you still gain talents at the same rate you'd get them as normal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
Ryzoken wrote:

If I need a speedbump I'll buy a trained combat animal or roll a druid. That way my "fighter" has pounce and multiple swings that might actually hit. Oh, and if they eat it, the raise spells are cheaper.

And occasionally Mr Bitey likes to snuggle. Fringe benefit.

Have fun with Mr. Bitey, but I'll guarantee my fighters do a far better job.

in what way is your fighter better at snuggling... :I


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Avaricious wrote:
I play Mages, Arcane and Divine. I recognize the value of having Fighters in my group of friends... friends that help prevent me from getting beaten down, preferably by imposing themselves between the threat and I. Often and without fail.

shoulda been a cleric, not onyl can he tank but he can wub healing constantly for no real reason. and like make guys fight each other and stuff.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

*starts crying with face in hands sitting down on a curb*

edit: stroke of insight, I MIGHT still buy it since it's 1k, so i can move after I murder someone. maybe i can even stealth as part of that movement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

man this last hour has been weird, after my post i went to make lunch. I watched some funny stuff during that time. So i've gone from slightly annoyed, to jovial, to depressed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Johnnycat93 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Fighting is far more than dpr.

it's not really

people need to use readied actions and the like more often, also step up and strike line is(should be anyway) a common thing. also I mean fighters are the ones ones really capable of consistently 1 rounding CR+3 across all levels.

How is the fighter able to 1 round cr+3 enemies at all levels?

any time they get within range, then you stand up and strike. If they charge you, then it's a real winner. surprise round for fighter means they get with in range too, it's easy to sneak in heavy armor as a fighter.

like seriously, everyone else wastes a turn on buffing, usually to get good at killing a single enemy. fighter? higher DPR over 3 rounds and can kill more opponents using things like lunge or simply threatening more opponents.

okay specifics, my go to items for any melee build are quick runners shirt for that moment YOU NEED TO FULL ATTACK, boots of haste or whatever, and on fighter duelist gloves which is +2 to weapon training.

Just popping in to remind everyone that they nerfed the runners shirt and now it ends your turn after you use it.

I thought the nerf was you couldn't have like 12 in your closet that you could keep putting on, because i'm using that version(just 1 swift action movement per day).

has this thing been nerfed multiple times.

edit: looked it up, WHAT? omg that's actually severely lame. like it was already nerfed why did they nerf it again. what was 1 swift action per day movement breaking.

like now, this thing gives you basically no advantage except once per day you can add 30 feet to a sprint action.

like basically, why not just remove the item if they're going to do s~&@ like this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Napier 698 wrote:
The Sideromancer wrote:
To my knowledge, the knights have no other interaction with Antioch, whatever Antioch is. It's possible that Antioch refers to a place capable of producing several more similar weapons, but it's also possible Antioch refers to something else.

Antioch was a city in the Middle East. In Turkey, I think.

it's along the coast near the border of modern day Turkey and Syria if anyone cares. I only know this because it was one of the seats of the pentarchy.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

If I remember correctly there was this rpg called "TORG" which was a good answer to this question.

It's relevant because for a Pathfinder "invasion" of our world, it would like TORG, have to be accompanied by some serious changes in how physics works.

This throws a bit of a kink into thejeff's rosy scenario, as such a mixing would probably be the fall of our civilisation due to the disruption of commerce and the breakdown of the power grid... which is a pretty delicate house of cards.

if there' a fundamental change in the laws that stop how electricity works, don't worry about dying to demons you'll just die immediately.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:

Aren't there spells/items that generate cold? Can't they just counter the excess heat?

I mean we've pretty much told Conservation of Energy to take a flying leap, so why worry about pesky thermodynamics.

>:I


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Napier 698 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

^I don't think Heat Metal gets THAT hot. But it sure would be nice to have one of those rods in my apartment to save on electric bills in the winter (would need a way to turn it off and preferably reverse its function during the summer . . .).

you only need a temperature of a few kelvin to make a generator use that temperature difference... besides it's hot enough to burn you, that's plenty enough heat to use.
True, but it doesn't produce enough current to be useful, unless you connect a great many such generators in parallel. Even then, it will be Direct Current, which limits the distance that the power could be transmitted.

it makes rotational force... which can make AC or be turned into AC.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

Why are we so concerned about PFS itt?

I'm actually asking, it's not like everyone plays PFS, not even a majority of the player base does.

As was also pointed out earlier in this thread far more eloquently than I can parse at the moment, PFS is a good 'benchmark' for what campaigns accept/don't accept.

But in my particular case?

Because I REALLY want to play a TWF Tengu in PFS (that's what my -1 was initially) but the way the rules are set up at the moment they just Do Not Work For That.

EDIT: In addition, I am PFS #145296. I have seen numbers in the mid-200K range, possibly even the 300K range.

That means that if those numbers are unique to a given player, that is a *significant* number of people who play PFS.

You either need to run the archetype that let's you use two weapons as a standard action, or take Double Slice, Improved Vital Strike, and Weapon Trick.

I feel like if we're going to complain about PFS's problems, it needs to be done in the PFS forum. PFS is not the entirety of the PFRPG, and it is in no way a baseline for what is or isn't expected at anything other than PFS. Sure they have a lot of players registered, that doesn't mean they all play. It has a separate forum and a separate facebook for a reason.

OR you just let weapon training make up the difference when TWFing... just apply that double loving of weapon training, pop on some duelist gloves and woo. I seriously consider flat fighter and ranger the only ones capable of TWFing properly, but that's because of their flat damage bonuses, maybe unchained barbar too, but i haven't worked with them yet.

*it's at this point that BandW2 has gotten annoyed that people are saying fighters are bad at fighting, when really they're just bad at gaining the narrative power capable of taking down a nationstate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jokey the Unfunny Comedian wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

Third party exists and has fixes. Choosing to not use it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I could own and completely understand Every 3pp book, but if the GM doesn't approve of the source and material then it does me no good that I understand all these systems that fix classes.

The only advantage Paizo books has is that by being "official" they are more likely to be allowed than 3pp. But even then, there are things that are often banned. Words of power "fixes" a lot of issues, but with no further support and hardly any approval to play in games it isn't a fix.

So just because a solution exists, if it's not a main or popularly used subsystem or unbanned option, doesn't mean it's a viable fix to the problem.

Can of Worms fallacy

you just did my favorite fallacy

The Fallacy Fallacy

you brought up a logical fallacy and then did not explain where the logical fault was, using it as if it's existence is all the proof you need. In fact, this isn't even a slippery slope fallacy, he's saying that you can't assume all material exists/is in use, at any given time, which is logically sound.

he's saying that because something exists, does not mean it can, or is, being used.

Ha! You've just fallen into my trap, and used the Fallacy fallacy Fallacy!

I won't lie the irony was partly intended.

I however, can point out something is a fallacy if they're trying to use it for argumentative short hand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
So, I started trying to make a version that did have proper WBL, but it appears your PB is off as well, it's either 16 or 18 or you spent your ability score improvements in some area that I don't understand. if I don't include ability score bonuses, the PB is 21.

20 pt buy; starting stats, after racial mods:

17
15
14
13
10
8

4th +1 str
8th +1 dex

I get a lot of people accusing me of using 21 point builds. I don't, it is more efficient to start with odd stats.

Some of her favored class bonuses went into skills.

I put all FCB into skills and came 2 short when trying to match listed values. I'm using herolab so I know I didn't miscount.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

Third party exists and has fixes. Choosing to not use it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I could own and completely understand Every 3pp book, but if the GM doesn't approve of the source and material then it does me no good that I understand all these systems that fix classes.

The only advantage Paizo books has is that by being "official" they are more likely to be allowed than 3pp. But even then, there are things that are often banned. Words of power "fixes" a lot of issues, but with no further support and hardly any approval to play in games it isn't a fix.

So just because a solution exists, if it's not a main or popularly used subsystem or unbanned option, doesn't mean it's a viable fix to the problem.

Can of Worms fallacy

you just did my favorite fallacy

The Fallacy Fallacy

you brought up a logical fallacy and then did not explain where the logical fault was, using it as if it's existence is all the proof you need. In fact, this isn't even a slippery slope fallacy, he's saying that you can't assume all material exists/is in use, at any given time, which is logically sound.

he's saying that because something exists, does not mean it can, or is, being used.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:


I really don't understand how it can be super difficult to make a decent fighter due to requirements of system mastery and still complain about the lack off options. They have options, they can do stuff out of combat. They even get magic now, in a limited form.

A great deal of the better 'fixes' are not available in PFS.

A great deal of the better 'fixes' are not available in PFS Core.

If a class relies on a series of 'fixes' and they are not available in a campaign, then that class is unplayable for that campaign.

A 'simple class' should not require a system mastery PhD and two dozen splatbooks.

Then you need to specify that your problem is with PFS fighters and not PFRPG fighters.

Moving goal post

it's not really a moving goal post, it's just that many of the options are simply unavailable to a large audience, this has always been said. Like you keep mentioning stamina, and yet i haven't sat at a table that allows them, not because they're too powerful or anything, but because it changes so many feats that it's hard to keep track of the changes.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Zweihanders and the like were anti-pike formation weapons, they were designed with reach in mind so they could knock spears away and advanced. Fun fact about greatswords is they're a rather late invention being used primarily during the renaissance(the big pike era) and not medieval.

this I believe is largely the same purpose as nodachis.

They both historically were more ornamental than actual weapons, but did see use, usually against non-infantry targets.

realize that historically, longswords are weapons designed to be wielded in 2 hands, so to go beyond that makes it a sword that is VERY large, often 6-10 feet long.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

^I don't think Heat Metal gets THAT hot. But it sure would be nice to have one of those rods in my apartment to save on electric bills in the winter (would need a way to turn it off and preferably reverse its function during the summer . . .).

you only need a temperature of a few kelvin to make a generator use that temperature difference... besides it's hot enough to burn you, that's plenty enough heat to use.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kerney wrote:

I like the idea that all pathfinder players get the abilities of the character they are most emotionally attached to as part of this change.

I'd have an Eidolon.

does this mean i'd be a schrodinger's wizard?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:

The world would be consumed in a matter days by a shadow apocalypse.

Entire cities would be converted to undeath in a single night. Even high level heroes and the most powerful of dragons fall quickly to that much strength damage.

grenades work well enough. if they figure it out, dragon breath rounds also might actually be used in combat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

i was hoping for more discussion on whether a nodachi should be removed from polearm or a greatsword should also be a polearm.

medieval fighting techniques with claymores and other greatswords I could easily see them being added to polearm. The weapons are large and sluggish and were often wielded with them pointed at the enemy and used to keep them away from you. You would have 1 hand on the hilt and the other on the "guard", this gave you a lot of control of the sword so it could be used to thrust, slash or simply to swing it around with you changing position to keep the sword between you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
also why does only the fighter get this when the barbarian is basically in the same boat except for 2 more skill points per level? there is a few rage abilities but their still about chopping things up.
I have the same issue with barbarians as I have with fighter personally . They're so limited when it comes to "out-of-combat" situations it's ridiculous. Sure they can fly once you move out of core, but to me the "crossing a canyon" issue is a lot less pressing than solving mysteries, travelling long distances, dealing with obstacles, dealing with planar adventures, influencing people, raising armies, and sneaking around.

i had a barbarian alchemist with like +34 to intimidate at level 5. I should look him up again... he was a lizardfolk with a top hat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

i just think the biggest draw for choosing a fighter shouldn't be "you get feats"

should replace them with like fighter talents, or "rage-not-rage" powers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:


Quote:
have some of the best weapons and magic items at high level to compete with magic users

That on the otherhand is hard to do because of two reasons:

1. Everyone get's the same level of wealth.
2. Because magic items are too limited without making them cost a giant amount, and the fact that mages can create the items to do anything the fighter could then do.

The only way to really do such a thing would be to turn fighters into occultists (a class which taps into the power of items letting them do things that the item normally cannot do like using a flaming sword to make yourself grow).

a bard or inquisitor, etc, with the same items will turn out much better. :/

Milo v3 wrote:


Quote:
2- the fighter at high levels probably needs even better magic items. Gary Gygax gave him in D&D 1st edition the Vorpal sword, essentially a good chance to instantly kill his opponent. This item was erased/changed in 3.5 edition (or 3.0 already).
Vorpal swords are still in 3.0, 3.5e, and PF.

it used to instantly kill humanoids on a roll of 17-20, or something like that anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I don't know if we really need to judge classes on their ability to affect geopolitics, since the best way to do that is generally not "overt force".

I think it the best way to determine a classes narrative power. If a level 20th character can only keep killing a nations leaders and not really topple it then that's a lack of narrative power. mind you every nation has a few level 20 character's roaming around.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

i still say we need a fighter who can reliably topple a nation state


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Firebug wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
it's once per day, and for that I'd definitely use my feats elsewhere.
Wasn't that the definition of marshmallow fallacy a few pages back? Ignoring a actual solution(even if it's limited) just because you would rather choose something else that doesn't have a perceived limitation?

yes and I pointed out the reasoning behind the marshmellow fallacy is a fallacy, it's the irrelevant conclusion fallacy.

you're proving the conclusion that it exists, and then saying, the rest must follow, when there's no direct link between an option be available and it seeing actual use.

it's official we've moved onto Schrodinger's fighter.

But saying: The fighter cannot do X isn't solved by saying "with this ability the fighter can do X" you aren't proving anything.

Perhaps I should be more specific in my examples, but to do that I need more specific criteria to solve.

Shrodinger's fighter is a thing now because abilities like Warrior Spirit and the Training property.

If the problem here is limited uses per day, then you really have no argument because every other class is limited in uses per day for their problem solving abilities as well.

Depending entirely on what you're problem is, the fighter has a lot of decent ways around it:

Master Armorer -> Celestial Armor/Plate & Shield which combined allow you to cast Overland Flight which lasts 9 hours (one hour longer than the game's assumed adventuring day)

Item Mastery (Teleportation Mastery) -> opens up the Dimensional Dervish feat chain which the fighter can finish early using its own in class retraining mechanic, 1/day at 8th/9th level then twice at 14th (assuming you stay single classed) It's Pounce that can get you into combat without having to waste a move action so you can get in and start full-rounding from the start of the fight, but it's also Dimension Door which has its own narrative power

Both of those can be obtained without spending your actual feats, but you will have to have some ranks in UMD (4 to be exact).

I don't see how this is an irrelevant conclusion, I'm sorry.

I looked up all of these combinations and I don't see how any of them follow. specially since dimensional feats are general feats...

I'm inclined to believe that even if the fighter can get these abilities, so can a Warrior, and they both have to use all their resources to make 1 very specific kind of warrior. It's not even a class anymore, it's just a blank human wear a ton of magic items.

as for irrelevant conclusion. You're stating, well a fighter can do X, so it's all fine. except no one contests that, anyone can do X, you know who else can do X, a wizard and a warrior NPC class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

well, nice to know I helped people. '3'


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
** spoiler omitted **...

I was mostly having it conversationally to point out that "well average is better" that sometimes people don't get to roll average.

we were rolling this with dice, we had 4 d6s to our table(well maybe like 6 but whatever) so that meant everyone had to make character's not just me and I was holding up the table. so i was given extra stats.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
JonathonWilder wrote:
The way I consider it, I would actually double check a player's rolled stats to make sure they did not come of lower then 20 PB and I would let them reroll a stat lower then 7.

why not just give them a NPC stat array ad then have them roll 1d4s onto the array at that point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JonathonWilder wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
I was given the 1s on my highest stats... yes they were all below 10.

If I had a player who didn't have a single score over 10, I without a doubt I would let them reroll.

Though given my style of rolling happens to be for 4d6, rerolls 1s and 2s once, drop lowest. I very much doubt that would happen.

this was the third roll (or them about but i know i had rolled more than twice.)

also yes, I bring this up because it basically lives in infamy in my mind, so many bad rolls in a row (one of them had a 3), that the GM just gave it to me.

i just roll bad, hence why i play GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Fighters either weren't intended to participate past level 8 or they are proof of severe flaws in understanding the way thgle game changes as levels rise.

They were intended to use magic items to participate.

You might not like it, but it's a fact of life.

Don't like it? Okay. You're allowed to not like it. Some people do like it.

this feels like a non sequitur.

even with magic items, they still don't compare that well.

like I said, make a fighter who can reliably take down a nation state and not get caught.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

this got fun fast

^>wow!<


2 people marked this as a favorite.

a mythic fighter can choose to mimic a single spell list for spell prerequisites. he's just so mythic in power you know.

1 to 50 of 815 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>