Charon's Little Helper's page

You know what I thought was a huge step backwards?

Monster building.

In 3.5, we had tables explaining how to directly adjust the CR if you added HD, or if you made a critter bigger or smaller, etc. Pathfinder instead gives a table of target values for combat stats and says "just fudge it."

In theory I agree with you - but going by the 3.5 HD etc., some monsters you build were crazy OP for their CR, and others were push-overs.

WormysQueue wrote:

Jessica Price wrote:

And when that happens, that's great. That helps build an environment where the moderators and the community tend to feel like they're on the same side.

Though this may have its negative side effects too. Moderators are humans too and unluckily, that brings the tendency with it to turn one's blind eye to those people misbehaving that you feel are on your side too. And on the other hand, it might lead to a certain elitism against new members in that you try to teach them to hold too a developed informal standard when they actually do nothing wrong (apart from maybe stating an opinion that, while perfectly valid, doesn't fit this informal standard).

That is not meant as a general argument against community self-moderation, but it is something that happens and and it also has happened on these boards and probably will happen in the future again. Paizo is certainly not the worst offender on this particular front, but I've seen it happen often enough (especially elsewhere, be it as forum member or as moderator) that I'm a bit wary of community self-policing.

But that's also why I don't critizise how moderation gets handled here, though I personally think that it's sometimes a bit too heavy-handed. But better that than having the anarchy that comes with the opposite approach.

Yeah, I can attest that Paizo is definitely not the worst offender. There are some places where supposed moderators will actually attack those who they deem inferior/badwrongmale/icky-poo.

Didn't that sort of craziness lead to Green Ronin shutting down their forums?

IIRC there are direct quotes from Lucas indicating his...dislike of the new movies.

Personally I think the underlying story and setting for the prequels was fine. It was just executed very poorly, with bad direction to actors, bad dialog, and cheesy comic relief. The awesomeness that was Clone Wars series shows that the overall plot could have worked with better directors and scripting.

Except for the giant tangent in Ep1 on Tattoine. They would have been better off making Anakin already a young padawan (14-15 - make him hitting on the queen not weird) and had 2 Jedi sent to Naboo in the opening scene. (Qui Gon & Anakin's master)

Then they could have done something that Hollywood does well consistently - a buddy relationship between Obi Won & Anakin. (start out disliking/rivalry - grow to be friends) Then have both of their masters killed near the end, and Obi Won take him on as his apprentice. Would also explain his insubordination later.

On the other hand, I can see the point that HP as a mechanic is not really about wounds so much as fatigue until you drop to zero and below.

Of course, that interpretation is problematic for arrows, crossbows, and other ranged weapons...but that's not 5E's fault. HP in general are a legacy mechanic dating back to the original D&D. It's basically been broken since inception.

I always figured that HP was mostly your heroic awesomeness/skill/luck causing blows to just barely miss etc. (Ex: Some of those Stormtroopers were hitting the MCs' HP, they just weren't dealing enough damage to put any of them down. They were chewing through their heroic awesomeness/luck, which is why the MCs ran away from them.)

From that perspective, it kinda makes sense to recover all of it after a long rest. (Makes as much sense as a powerful barbarian who is barely wounded requiring far more magic to fully heal than a farmer who is on his deathbed. :P)

Out of total curiosity - mainly because I work in finance and was daydreaming about Paizo's business model (yes - it's odd) - does anyone have any idea as to the number of Paizo subscribers of their various lines? (Especially APs/modules because I've heard tell that they do a lot to drive the sales of the rules books as well.)

Pun Pun

"You cannot control what someone will do, but you can control how you will respond."

Well.. a Pathfinder enchanter can. :P

(Zen Archer, Tetori, Sohei, maybe Far Strike and Maneuver Master) can compete with (or surpass) the unMonk.

I'd add Sensei & Drunken Master to that mix. (Especially if you stack them.)

Since the errata Master of Many Styles does a pretty solid monk if you use it in combination with natural weapons (since it loses flurry it can combine unarmed with nat weapons rather well). Though without nat weapons it's somewhat sub-par. (before errata it was a stupidly good dip - but a horrible main class)

Sundakan wrote:

UnMonk is a sidegrade at best, a downgrade if you factor in Monk archetypes (which it can't use)

I would argue monk archetypes were always high-tuned upgrades stapled onto the clearly immensely flawed core monk chasis. Of course monk archetypes are strong. They were always meant to be strong to compensate for the godawful monk class. Unless those Core Monk archetypes were overpowered (tetori, zen archer, sensai, quiggong), nobody would touch the class with a 10 foot pole.

The UMonk class is solid and very capable on its own and can keep up with other classes. It would be a horrible mistake to bring back some of the old archetypes (except maybe tetori because I like what it did despite being overpowered) without serious rebalances to the point that they barely even seem the same archetype. It is healthier from a game design standpoint to ban old archetypes so they can start fresh and release properly balanced archetypes for the new UMonk.

I can't find it right now, but on a Umonk thread, when I brought up that Umonk was definitely better than core monk, and about equivalent to core monk with stacked archetypes (always qinggong & at least one more) but that the Umonk was far easier to build, a designer (I forget which) chimed in to say that that was basically what they were going for.

It was never meant to be an upgrade to a archetype stacked monk, it was an easy to build upgrade to the trap option which is the un-archetyped core monk.

Me, I blame Facebook. And Joss Whedon. But mostly Facebook.

I blame global warming.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

STR-based unchained rogue? why? did your GM allow you to swap finesse training for something else?

I was assuming that they meant core rogue. (Which no one should EVER play anymore.)

some gms don't allow unchained rogue as they veiw them as broken..... yet they still allow casters

Lol - unchained rogue is solidly in the top half... of martials.

It's only broken in comparison to core rogues - which they replace.

I'm a kobold. I can basically wear one boot.

As a reptile, are you cold-blooded? That would basically be the epitome of being 'cool'.

I'd lose my toes. The snow's six inches deep over here!

You could still wear boots.

Brother Fen wrote:

Worry less about the cool kids constantly saying "look at me"

I'm cool, right?

Just walk outside in shorts & no coat and you'll be extremely cool in no time at all. (Assuming that it's half as wintery where you are as it is where I am right now.)

It's a secret that the Illuminati don't want you to know about. *nods convincingly*

STR-based unchained rogue? why? did your GM allow you to swap finesse training for something else?

I was assuming that they meant core rogue. (Which no one should EVER play anymore.)

That is not the only reason for acrobatics. You can move around and through the enemy in order to get flanks.

It is quite easy to get a flank if your acrobatics is high enough.

True. The main issue is that it can drop you to one attack.

That's why rogues love melee bards as flanking buddies. The bard's damage is mediocre, so losing his iterative(s) isn't a huge loss, and HE can do the acrobatics for flanks while they get their full attacks. (Not to mention that the bard fixes any rogue accuracy issues.)

Fair enough, but the feats it refers to have the following references to swashbuckler in them:

Fencing Grace has "In addition, if you have the panache class feature, you gain a +2 bonus to your CMD against attempts to disarm you of your rapier while you have at least 1 panache point."

Slashing Grace has "When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a swashbuckler's or a duelist's precise strike) "

Starry Grace has "In addition, if you have the panache class feature, as long as you have at least 1 panache point, you gain a +5 bonus to your movement speed on your move action after taking an attack action with a starknife or on your Spring Attack or charge with a starknife."

Just because those three feats are intended for Swashbucklers (I agree - though others can use them too - I have a bard who does quite effectively) that doesn't necessarily mean that Two Weapon Grace is.

Pretty big investment in feats for something that would cut off access to your most important swashbuckler deed!

Is this feat truly just for fighters or rangers? or was it also meant to address swashbucklers (who very, very, very frequently take fencing grace or slashing grace).

It's also meant for Dex-based Unchained Barbarians, potential TWF bards, ninjas, TWF Warpriests, Dex Slayers, Dex Samurai...

Remember that you only get a few seconds.

I'd suggest fire based threats/puns.

"I'm too hot for you!"

"Mess with me and you'll get burned!"

"Out of the frying pan..."

"You make my blood boil!"

"You're fired!"

Two levels of Mesmerist can jack up your Will save by +3 & +Charisma. Enigma Mesmerist could be a solid dip for a rouge. (It's a weak archetype as a whole, but probably the best Mesmerist dip.)

While the same increase as a Paladin, you can also give your now high Will save to party members with a Mesmerist Trick.

CrystalSeas wrote:

Fabius Maximus wrote:

Osteopathy is about as scientifically proven to work as homoeopathy, i.e. not at all. The effect may be all in your head. It's great that it helps you personally, but I would be hesitant to throw money at what probably is quackery.

Are you sure you aren't confusing Doctor of Osteopathy with chiropractor?

Osteopaths are physicians who are licensed by the state and allowed to practice in hospitals just like people with an MD. There are even DOs who are full professors on the faculty of major Tier 1 university medical schools. For example

University of Michigan Medical School

Pretty much this. DO's are legit doctors. Allopathic doctors tend to spread the same misconception that Fabius has.

Fabius, don't take my word for it. Insurance companies pay DO's for OMM services. If they were bogus do you think that would be true?

I know this tangent has passed - but of note - many (potentially most) DOs were originally students who couldn't get into school to get their MDs. (DO schools are a bit easier to get into [considerably lower MCAT and GPA score averages for their students] and their schools do less research etc. Not that that matters much for primary care physicians - which I think DO medical schools focus on more.)

If he fails the saving throw, and decides to blindly fire at where the enemy was before, because you told him the wall is an illusion, and sees the arrow go through the wall instead of bouncing off, he now has proof its an illusion and can now see through it for future attacks.

Why? Because there is nothing else in the Pathfinder universe that it could possibly be but an illusion? lol Calling that proof is kinda BS.

Off the top of my head...

1. The wall could be a mimic (teleported there)

2. The wall could contain an extradimensional space.

3. The illusionary wall could look like any number of walls where that would happen naturally. (If you use a higher image spell, my personal favorite is a massive crackling wall of flame, because no one wants to get close to it. Or a latticework mesh of spiked steel glistening with poison.)

etc.

So you charge run at the wall, turns out the invisible spellcaster was there and did make a wall of iron. You fall prone.

This wont come up often since it's unlikely that someone will be working in concert with an illusion caster to make people do stupid things.

So the takeaway message here is, don't cast illusions where the enemy can see them.

It could be much meaner and not even require a second caster.

Have Silent Image up before someone gets into the room that the bottomless pit across the floor is solid.

When they enter the room, let them see you casting Silent Image again (doesn't matter what you do with it), which drops the illusion over the bottomless pit, which they now think is nothing but a silly illusion, so they walk out 'onto' the 'fake' illusion and fall to their death.

(It'd get more confusing if you start stacking illusions. Say you had Illusionary Wall covering the pit, and then use Silent Image to make an image of the pit. Which save would they take first? Could they fail just one? etc.)

Edit: Actually I'm not sure that the successful spellcraft should give the +4. As a GM I think I would probably rule that the successful identification allows you to act on the suspicion that something isn't real (so you would think to walk through the wall that just appeared) but not that you have "proof" that the wall isn't there.

I mean there could always be an invisible spell caster who actually casts a wall spell as a readied action in response to his friend casting silent image to create some very small feature (like an insect, or maybe just an illusion of the room itself exactly as it is).

Seconded.

Otherwise it would open up a can of worms. What if that invisible caster had instead cast Summon Monster? Would they get to attack the flat-footed AC of the spellcaster user who "knew" that they were just illusions due to their spellcraft check?

etc.

Charons little helper(who hopefully is kidding)

I'll never tell...

PK the Dragon wrote:

And then for a sandbox game, like the game I just started, I need XP or else I will effectively be using levels as a way to pseudo-railroad the party. Instead, players have full control over how the progress, based on the game system.

Interesting. I run mostly sandbox games and that's specifically why I dropped XP as a consideration long ago. Specifically, if the PCs decide they need to rob the baron to acquire the artifact in his private collection, the system will reward them with more experience if they just storm in and kill everything in their way than if they manage to get in and out quiet and clean and nobody gets hurt and nobody is the wiser. If I wanted to reward players for being creative and thoughtful and pulling something off I had to directly intervene to give them a bunch of XP even though there were no rules to tell me how much.

At that point, I figured "if half the XP awards I give out are arbitrary, why even bother tracking it at all." Most of the people I play with regularly assiduously attempt to avoid unnecessary fighting, and I see no reason to punish that impulse

While I know that a lot of people don't play with that rule, aren't you supposed to get XP for any sort of challenge you beat whether or not you use violence and/or the brute force method? So you should get the same XP for sneaking past the guards to the objective as you would for slicing them all up on your way in to get the objective.

When our character is stabbed, the GM gets up and stabs us! (Our group has a high turnover.)

You could always just use the range band system from FFG's SWRPG. I hated it at first but it grew on me. I realized that the more ranged combat there is, the less a grid really matters.

Yes - if a game is mostly long-ranged combat, you'd probably be better off either with something abstract, or using a tape measure. (I'm kinda surprised that more RPGs don't use tape measures. It seems to be a wargame only thing.)

Grids work best for melee & work pretty well for shorter ranges.

I think now that I've had time to think on it and sleep, I'd rather stay with feet. Personally, I generally find counting 5, 10, 15, etc easier than counting 1.5, 3, 4.5, etc. Especially going from 3 to 4.5 slows me down a bit.

If they did switch to meters - they'd probably switch to each square being two meters to prevent that kind of issue. (Yes - I know that two meters are a bit over 6.5 feet.) I think that was what d20 Star Wars did. (I think both Revised & Saga.)

I mean, the number of feet in a mile? Who even came up with that?

As CDDunkerson says above.

Plus it was also 1000 paces, back when that was a thing.

it'sm almost safe to assume haste is there... so 60' move is a plenty.

That means that you're giving up even more offensively.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

DrDeth wrote:

So, you move 15' in and then 15' out. If the foe takes a 5' step, you're out of range (for their full attack, with 5' reach)

Okay - so now you're also burning feats on Spring Attack?

In addition, you can only do that once, because you can't use Spring Attack against a target if you start in melee range.

I believe the idea is that someone more inclined to surviving attacks is engaged with the enemy. You're just darting in and out to do your thing.

In that case you'd be better off moving for the flank so that you get a full attack.

Note: I'm a fan of the Scout archetype, but you shouldn't rely upon it to get you SA consistently either as it's a subpar method.

Hence the spring attack for melee and using the ranged acid splash for non-melee needs.

Okay - but that's very limited.

There are ways to get Sneak Attack far more consistently. Spring Attack doesn't seem worth it on a rogue, which are generally feat starved.

So, you move 15' in and then 15' out. If the foe takes a 5' step, you're out of range (for their full attack, with 5' reach)

Okay - so now you're also burning feats on Spring Attack?

In addition, you can only do that once, because you can't use Spring Attack against a target if you start in melee range.

1. foe need to move to get to you

Why? You were in melee range when you made your melee attack after the 10ft of movement.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

DrDeth wrote:

Derklord wrote:

666bender wrote:

scout archtype , after level 8 offer 100% sneaks .

move 10' with spring attack and get a sneak.

For a single attack per round. Which means your damage will be absolutely abysmal.

Rogues just miss with their iterative attacks anyway. I suppose at lvl 20 or so you are missing out, but since games dont go much beyond 12 in most cases, I dont see you losing much.

and it usually stops your foe from doing a Full attack on you, which is very nice.

1. Unchained Rogues which hit with their primary attack are actually more accurate with their first iterative attack at level 10+ due to Debilitating Injury. (not counting TWF)

2. Unless the rogue is making ranged attacks (in which case you're already at range) how is moving 10ft before attacking going to prevent you from being full-attacked?

10' move on the scout archetype = auto sneak damage on the first attack.

I understand. What does that have to do with anything?

You have to move 10' before attacking to get the scout archetype's SA, so you're still in melee range unless using a ranged weapon.

Derklord wrote:

666bender wrote:

scout archtype , after level 8 offer 100% sneaks .

move 10' with spring attack and get a sneak.

For a single attack per round. Which means your damage will be absolutely abysmal.

Rogues just miss with their iterative attacks anyway. I suppose at lvl 20 or so you are missing out, but since games dont go much beyond 12 in most cases, I dont see you losing much.

and it usually stops your foe from doing a Full attack on you, which is very nice.

1. Unchained Rogues which hit with their primary attack are actually more accurate with their first iterative attack at level 10+ due to Debilitating Injury. (not counting TWF)

2. Unless the rogue is making ranged attacks (in which case you're already at range) how is moving 10ft before attacking going to prevent you from being full-attacked?

The technology for this was shown in The Karate Kid, it's the shower curtain costume. While in the curtain, you have total cover and total concealment from everyone and everyone has total cover and total concealment from you. However, your position is known, and people can still make attacks against your square. The negatives would outweigh the positives.

If we're taking this seriously, it might be worth it with the Moonlight Stalker feat line.

Really though, mechanically you'd be better off dropping smoke pellets in your square each turn. (Also combined with the Moonlight Stalker feat line.)

There are several things to do with Mesmerist.

You can go straight illusionist (for this I would definitely check to see how the GM rules of figments - as this varies greatly).

As others have said, you can also be a halfway decent gish, though really Bard does those better since he can use his spell-casting on long-term buffing where the Mesmerist is lacking, while the Mesmermist needs a good Charisma to get his DCs to solid levels.

If you go illusionist, a gnome can be good due to their +1 DC. Otherwise if you want a finesse build I'd suggest going Halfling, and in either case I'd suggest going melee with Slashing Grace.

If Halfling -

Str: 8
Dex: 16 (with racial & +1 from GM)
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 12
Cha: 16 (with racial)

Trait: Muscle of the Society

Feat: Weapon Finesse (aiming for Slashing Grace)

Make sure you wield a masterwork buckler (no reason not to once you can afford it).

Or if you want to be a melee thug with STR you can just take heavier armor proficiencies (since as a psychic you don't need to worry about Arcane Spell Failure). Going half-orc would be nice since you get greataxe & falchion proficiencies.

The crit damage from the Kukri is not dependent on positioning. It is a reliable constant that supports the twf rogue as he moves into higher level and starts crit fishing to inflict extra status conditions.

True - but a bigger crit is a % increase in damage, and a rogue's damage is low without SA. The crittable damage has to average 20 to make a kukri's damage higher than a shortsword unless you burn enchantment on Keen or a feat on Improved Crit (both of which are generally weak choices for rogues).

Once you can get into crit status effects that changes things, but that's only at the very highest levels for a rogue (since mid BAB) where most campaigns never reach anyway. (Though again - TWF rogues generally don't have feats to spare. The crit feats are great, but rogues generally have other feats they need to take.)

thank you guys, i'll have in mind what you said I´ll give him a dagger for TWF when needed and work with my partners for flank and intimidate :)

That doesn't really work well for an Unchained Rogue because you won't get Dex to Damage with both until level 11 unless you burn extra feats on Fencing Grace.

Unfortunately, rogues are rather poor at dirty fighting due to their low BAB, though you can definitely make a solid feint build.

The stats are okay, though I don't think that you need the CON that high. A 14 should be plenty.

Ex:
STR:8
Dex:19 (human bonus)
Con:14
Int:12
Wis:12
Cha:14

You should probably either go with an elven curved blade or go TWF, though if you use a single rapier you can use a masterwork buckler with no penalty even when you're not proficient.

If you're worried about durability, halflings make amazing rogues, especially if you want to go with a Feint build since they get the +2 Charisma. Just take the racial ability to get 30ft movement. Their +1 to hit, AC, & to all saves are very nice.

So for a Halfling -

STR:6
Dex:19 (human bonus)
Con:14
Int:12
Wis:12
Cha:16

Trait: Muscle of the Society

Feats: Improved Feint or TWF at level 1 - and then either take Improved Feint at 3 if you took TWF or take Elven Curved Blade proficiency, eventually picking up Greater Feint.

Unfortunately - the rapier is now a rather subpar weapon for rogues, at least until level 11 due to Finesse Training. This is because you don't get the damage of an elven curved blade (which gets 1.5 Dex) and you can't TWF effectively with a pair of rapiers.

If you want to go the rapier route, going with a Swashbuckler might fit your vibe better than a rogue.

Dredd (the 2012 movie - not the Stallone one)

Dodgeball

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure

In an attempt to re-rail this thread, which do you think is better for a 1-level unchained scaled fist dip on a paladin?

Str based, use a two-handed weapon, take crusader's flurry to flurry with that weapon.

Dex based, use unarmed strikes and an agile AoMF.

Two-handed with a weapon. You don't gain most of the advantages of unarmed with only a single level in Umonk (flying kick/higher dice damage etc.).

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Frankly - a Dex Sohei doesn't even need the VMC.

+12 from Dex

+4 Improved Initiative

+2 trait

+2 Elf thing

+10 Sohei ability

roll of 20

Total of 50 - ezpz

No traits; you're still tied at 48.

I actually already tweaked my previous post from +2 Elf to +4 Half-elf, so he's at 50 without the +2 trait bonus.

Doesn't this rule out the auto-20 for a VMC divination wizard?

Quote:

School Power: At 7th level, he gains the 1st-level powers of his chosen school. If any of those powers grant an extra effect at 20th level, the character does not gain that extra effect.

In that case Firewarrior44's build should just be changed from Slayer to Sohei Monk since they also get an auto-20 initiative at level 20.

At 1st level, a sohei can always act in a surprise round even if he does not notice his enemies, though he remains flat-footed until he acts. In addition, a sohei gains a bonus on initiative rolls equal to 1/2 his monk level. At 20th level, a sohei’s initiative roll is automatically a natural 20.

This ability replaces Stunning Fist.

Frankly - a Dex Sohei doesn't even need the VMC.

+12 from Dex

+4 Improved Initiative

+2 trait

+4 Half-Elf alternate racial

+10 Sohei ability

roll of 20

Total of 52 - ezpz

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

So - a charisma martial can't win a fight with the wizard, but if they win initiative they will be able to convince the wizard...

Last I checked the wizards were at 47/48 for initiative. Hows the fighter looking?

Oh - a fighter couldn't beat it - hence my mention of martials in general.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Actually - with Skill Unlock, you can get Diplomacy checks down to 1 round.

Sure, but that doesn't get round the fact that diplomacy is ineffective against those who mean you imminent harm or that it only works on NPC's:

Quote:

Check: You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature's starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier.

True - but I was just thinking about fighting a wizard with a martial in general. I guess that since my table always disallows PvP, I didn't think about it.

Wrath wrote:

Can you have custom items? Fighter will need them in an arena match.

Is there a chance for skill use? I mean PvP the right build could just outright talk an opponent into giving up with an opposed roll. Magic gear prevents mind control magic, but diplomacy, bluff and intimidate are not magic. What if I build my fighter to dump stat everything but will and charisma then just talk the wizard to death?

These are such wearisome threads. Yet strangely enticing....

Quote:

Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future.

It also takes 1 minute of interaction. No go in combat.

You can use bluff to feint, or intimidate to demoralize in combat as normal. If you think that will help, go for it.

Actually - with Skill Unlock, you can get Diplomacy checks down to 1 round.

With sufficient ranks in Diplomacy, you earn the following.

5 Ranks: The time required to influence a creature's attitude or gather information is halved.

10 Ranks: You can attempt to adjust a creature's attitude in 1 round by taking a –10 penalty. If you take 1 minute to adjust a creature's attitude, add your Charisma bonus to the number of hours that attitude change persists.

15 Ranks: You can attempt to adjust a creature's attitude in 1 round with no penalty. If you take 1 minute to adjust a creature's attitude, the duration of the resulting change is measured in days, not hours. You can gather information in 10 minutes by taking a –5 penalty.

20 Ranks: You can attempt to adjust a creature's attitude in 1 round with no penalty. If you take 1 minute to adjust a creature's attitude, the duration of the resulting change is measured in weeks, not hours. You can gather information in 1d4 minutes with no penalty.

So - a charisma martial can't win a fight with the wizard, but if they win initiative they will be able to convince the wizard to be friends. (Add a bluff check and they might be able to coup de grace them later. :P)

Dip one level into Scaled Fist as a Swashbuckler and go unarmored.