Christopher Lee's page

On further review, I'm kind of in love with the Warpriest. Seriously considering making one who worships Yog-sothoth that makes ominous, cryptic statements about the stars bringing him to the party.

Might not have the best Blessings, but I like the flavor.

I'll take the advice from all of you and make him awesome.

I'll probably talk to the GM. Of the divine classes, the only things that excite me are the Inquisitor and maybe a weird cleric of Yog-sothoth that spends his time mumbling about finding keys and the like.

I just can't seem to find a divine class that I want to play AND I feel like fits into the AP thematically. I'd much rather be playing an Android Alchemist (Grenadier) or a Techslinger (as bad as Gunslingers can be, I love the class).

As for their roles, I'm not 100% sure...but I get the idea they're all just kind of doing whatever and not giving any mind to specific roles or optimizing. The Investigator is a skill-monkey, I know that much. I'm 99% certain no one has taken leadership or gotten cohorts of any kind.

So I've been asked to join a Pathfinder group, and I'm in need of some advice since my PF knowledge is very rusty.

The group is level 8, and they're playing Iron Gods. There's currently 5 members, but one is leaving and I'm taking his spot. I get the idea that the group isn't terribly optimized, nor do they use wands for healing.

They're (not so) subtly pushing me towards a combat healer of some kind, since the guy I'm replacing is an Oradin. The other members are a Wizard, Investigator, Rogue, and "beater" (no one gave me a firm class on this).

My problem is that I'm not really excited about any of the Divine classes, and I really don't want to be a generic Healbot cleric.

Warpriest looks interesting, but 99% of the Blessings are hot garbage. Inquisitor would be my first choice, but I worry about not having good access to status removal like a Cleric.

What's a good class for general healing that can still be a front line combat character? Am I missing something with Warpriest or Inquisitor? Should I be looking at a Paladin (I generally don't like the alignment restrictions).

Any help is appreciated. Creation is 20 PB and all first party Paizo classes and races are allowed.

I'm a player who has played D&D since 1987, switched to PF because I hated base 3.x, and didn't particularly care for 4th, but still wanted that D&D fix...then switched back for 5E.

I'm inordinately excited for Starfinder. It sounds like Spelljammer crossed with Shadowrun, and I can't think of anything cooler at the moment.

@Christopher Lee - Please make a first level wizard that can trivialize 3 encounters per day at level 1. I want to see the build and the spells that have this ability.

Are you serious? 18 Int, specialist wizard = 3 sleep spells. Or Color Spray. Or Grease. The list goes on, and on. Done. Well, that was easy.

Oh, and he does it for less than 1GP per action, doesn't have to remain in the first range increment of a weapon, targets an area, and doesn't require an extra action to be able to do it again unlike the gunslinger.

Spell component prices are a joke at level 1...you can't seriously be using them as a justification on why Wizards aren't OP compared to Gunsliungers. a single feat renders the vast majority of them moot, anyway. Can you point me towards the feat that makes gunslinger ammo free?

If gunslingers are single-handedly ruining your game, you are doing something wrong. Sorry.

Yes, they get some cool abilities. Yes, they can pump out some serious burst damage. No, they are not some kind of unstoppable, game-breaking god class. Not even close.

I have ran several games with 'slingers of various archetypes, and have yet to really have an issue with them. In my current Mythic game, the gunslinger even has Limitless Range which makes the first range increment of his pistols 100ft. Surely my game must be horribly broken now, right? No, not really.

This is especially funny when compared to the Wizard who, at level 3, can reduce a dozen or more enemies to move actions only for 2-5 rounds with a single standard action. Or blind a similar amount of enemies with that same standard action. And 4 levels later later can apply negative levels with no save. Level 1? Let's use Sleep to trivialize encounters. And that's low level antics. At level 13 the Wizard can send people to another plane if they fail their save. What can the gunslinger do at that point? Damage. At level 17 they can gate in Pit Fiends and compel them to do their bidding. What can the gunslinger do at that level? Slightly more damage.

To recap:

Wizards: Can trivialize encounters from level 1 on in a single round. Can re-shape the world wielding arcane power. Can turn their enemies to stone, send them to other planes, or sap them of their life energy at a whim. Not OP.

Gunslingers: Can shoot things for decent damage. Targets Touch AC sometimes. A couple of times a day can sacrifice all their damage to do something like disarm at a distance. Gamebreakingly OP because....reasons.

Personally I'd just disallow the ability of non-modern firearms to ignore armor beyond the shortest range increment. It allows gunslingers to still have their special abilities without becoming overpowered.

That is literally how they already work. They only target Touch AC in their first range increment unless they spend Grit on Deadeye. Unless you are saying that Deadeye should be removed?

A crossbow is a Simple Weapon, and therefore available to more classes than the Martial Longbow. Being a Simple Weapon vs. a Martial, it SHOULD be worse than the Martial Equivalent at similar levels of investment.

The advantage of the crossbow (why it revolutionised warfare) has always been that it can be used by any old commoner... Which is reflected by the rules.

I think the problem is that people are expecting more of a Simple weapon than is necessary for it to fill the role of the crossbow within the rules.

No number of feats will make a dagger a kukri, why should the crossbow be different?

This is patently wrong. A character with 3 feats invested (Let's say Weapon Focus, Power Attack, and Weapon Spec) is nearly as effective (average of ~.5-1 points difference in damage)with a morningstar as they are with a longsword. One is simple, the other martial. There's no rule stating the guy using the morningstar has to use a move or full round action to "wind up the swing" and can therefore only attack every other round, or not move.

All this theory-crafting, and still we are left with the fact that crossbows, despite supposedly being easier to use, are still considerably less effective than normals bows after the investment of a hefty number of feats.

They are viable like a dagger is viable. Yeah, I suppose it is nice to have and if I have to use it in a pinch, it is better than not having a dagger...but why bother when literally every other similar option is superior? Actually, never mind. At least with a thrown dagger I can add a STR bonus. I've been playing a long time, and I haven't seen a single player fire a crossbow after 2nd level since my 2E AD&D days (and the only time they were used in 2E was after the implementation of the Player's Option that allowed them to ignore armor at short range). Anecdotal, I know, but it points to a problem with the weapon.

And the idea that crossbowmen can't become great based on ~~~MAH REALISM~~~ is frankly ludicrous. The Genoese crossbowmen should prove that. Or if, you know, you fire a crossbow in real life and watch the bolt go through a steel car door, then nearly through the opposite door as well. I've put a bolt through a corrugated metal wall with ease with one of those $50 hand crossbows you can buy at flea markets. At the least, they should get armor penetration bonuses.

But we're talking about a game where people fly and spew fire & lightning with wild abandon while fighting dragons that are being ridden by lich-kings, so what should realism even matter?

I suppose it means the target auto-succeeds on saves vs. illusions.

Yeah, that is pretty much what we came up with. I was just wondering if there were any othe rulings.

Also...now who's stalking who, Barry?!?!

Name of PC: Chuck
Class/Level: Air Elemental Sorceror/2
Adventure: Burnt Offerings
Catalyst: Eaten by Malfeshnekor
Story:

Name of PC: Uriel
Class/Level: Cleric of Sarenrae/11
Adventure: Fortress of the Stone Giants
Catalyst: Disintegrated by Mokmurian
Story:

Name of PC: <can't remember the first name at this moment> Ironbriar
Class/Level: Infernal Sorceror/11
Adventure: Fortress of the Stone Giants
Catalyst: Disintegrated by Mokmurian
Story:

The creature in question is a Taiga Giant in RotRL. It says in the stat block "immune to enchantment and illusion spells."

I had a dispute with my players last night about Illusion immunity, and I wondering if someone here could clear it up. If an enemy is "immune to illusion spells", does this include spells like invisibility? As in, can it see creatures effected by the spell?

Christopher Lee wrote:

Sir Gavvin wrote:

Magical disease = Evil, magical poison cloud = not Evil

It's weird to me that the plague plan is evil enough to force an alignment change, but using fuel-air bombs and magical poison clouds isn't. I guess that's fantasy gaming for you.

I like the plague plan, and I don't consider it evil enough to make a neutral character evil, or even a good character neutral. They are facing a force that far outnumbers their own and the very survival of their community is at stake.

Believe it or not, it was NOT a Good/Evil alignment shift. The Druid is NG and the DM said that she would shift on the Law/Chaos axis for tampering with the natural order by willfully engaging in biological warfare.

She was actually willing to take a shift from NG to TN, but from NG to CG would cause her to lose all her druid abilities. We had actually EXPECTED a shift to TN because the Contagion spell is specifically listed as evil. We had even searched out a sufficiently high level Druid to cast Atonement on her afterward.

You are right, the very survival of the community, the surrounding countryside and (if you want to stretch it a bit) the whole plane of existance was at stake. (The goblinoids were being controlled by Formian who were pouring through a planar rift and establishing beachhead colonies and had enslaved everyone they encountered). Our druid felt that she would do what she had to to save everything, even if it meant opposing her diety. We talked her out of it and came up with the alternative plan instead, only using her to scout the encampment as a goblin dog.

That makes more sense, unless the party took steps to ensure the plague didn't spread beyond the camp. Either way, I love the flour bombs.

Something like this could be quite effective, the big mitigator I could see would be the Gnolls' lack of compassion for each other. I could see them just rounding up the sick and burning them in a pit to stop the spread.

cartmanbeck wrote:

I think what you're not really giving enough credit to is that the Spell Dance is going to be extremely useful to highly mobile and Dex-based Magus builds. It could also mix very well with some levels in Rogue or any other class that grants Sneak Attack. Giving up a +1 to hit for a 10 ft movement bonus can actually make a huge difference in battles where tactical movement is highly important. (For example, if you can get flanking, you've just gotten a +2 to hit for giving up a +1 to hit and damage. For some characters, that's way better.)

Totally this. Positioning is crucial for certain Magus builds.

I'm at work with no access to my Core Books. Which race has this archetype?

Elf. Or human with the adoption feat. I'm pretty sure it is compatible with your homebrew archetype.

Magical disease = Evil, magical poison cloud = not Evil

It's weird to me that the plague plan is evil enough to force an alignment change, but using fuel-air bombs and magical poison clouds isn't. I guess that's fantasy gaming for you.

I like the plague plan, and I don't consider it evil enough to make a neutral character evil, or even a good character neutral. They are facing a force that far outnumbers their own and the very survival of their community is at stake.

I'm building a Prankster for a game, and would like some advice/critique of my build. I plan on being backline support with a ranged weapon/spells/Bardic Performance in combat, and a face outside of combat. I have a crippling fear of negative modifiers, so I had to bring my Str up.

Gnome
Prankster 3

Stats: (28 point buy)
STR: 10 (12)
DEX: 16
CON: 13 (11)
INT: 14
WIS: 10
CHA: 18 (16)

I'll be putting my lvl 4 boost into Con. I figure the 3 HP I missed can be replaced easier than the 3 skill points.

I'll be putting 1 point in most Knowledges to take advantage of the class skill bonus, and maxing Bluff or Diplomacy. I might also be taking Craft: Weapons, depending on racial traits.

My quandary comes in racial traits and feats. I'll definitely be taking Darkvision. I'm torn between Gift of Tongues and Master Tinkerer, though. The first fits the class more I think, but the second has a lot of flavor and I love the idea of crafting my own weapons and being able to use them regardless of proficiency.

I'm also torn between Magical Linguist and the default Gnome Illusions. A lot of Bard abilities are language dependent, so the DC boost could help a lot...but we also have a lot of illusions.

Finally, feats. Is Lingering Performance worth it? I'm also considering Breadth of Knowledge to get a bigger boost to knowledge skills, and Casual Illusions to buff my SoH and Bluff. I'm not looking to be super-optimized, I just want to be good at my job.

Thanks in advance for any help!

I mainly just want handouts for the cities. The map folio looks like it might work...

I just purchased the hardbound copy of RotR, and will start running it this weekend. I was curious if there was a way to purchase the maps from the AP for use in play?

That is true, Mergy, but I can see the issue in interpretting what the developer said. I know this kind of thing comes up all the time. That is why I was trying to focus on the change in wording between the site and the book printing.

Does anyone own a copy of the book to see if their wording has changed in their book? Or does anyone know why the wording may be different on the PRD than it is in the book?

This is an important oddity that seems pivotal to the issue at hand.

I checked the FAQ, and SKR specifically states that they qualify but can only use the feat while wearing the suit if their Str drops below 13 when not wearing it. Looks like I was wrong!

ust as a Str 11 character wearing a belt of strength +2 bumps him to Str 13 and allows him to take Power Attack, you can do this. You just couldn't use the feat without the belt/eidolon-suit.
—Sean K Reynolds, Wed, Aug 10, 2011

However, I'd like to point out that "gaining ability modifiers" does not apply to you gaining the ability score modifiers (such as +4 for having an 18) of the suit, but to the level based modifiers that the Eidolon gains. For example, at level 5 it still gets a +2 Str/Dex. Otherwise, you would also get it's mental "modifiers", which you don't.

I think I'm just going to tweak his feats a bit and keep playing him as a racist elven David Bowie with a fetish for dwarven females until I can start my own game.

I'll just cast Mad Monkeys every chance I get and laugh at their antics.

Still think you should go with AMY ALCHY, if only so I can see how it does in actual play.

Although I did feel a temptation to try AMY ALCHY, I resisted the call to play an ALLCAPS build. Very tempting, though...if for no other reason than to see everyone's reaction and get an actual battle report for you.

For some reason you're not reading the first part, where the summoner uses the eidolon's physical ability scores. That's what qualifies him for feats.

In any case, check the FAQ. You may not like the way the rules work, but they're still the rules.

I'm reading it, we are just reading it differently. You are reading it as "the Synth's score become these scores", and I am reading it as "The Synth's scores remain the same, he just gets to use the suit's scores...like if he were in power armor in a sci-fi game." The scores are never "his".

Ability Score Bonuses
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores.
Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give
only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase
to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics
listed with the relevant ability.

This tells me that since the PC's ability score is NOT increased, it does not count as an "ability score bonus". Sean Reynolds even specifically says the stats are "borrowed" and remain a sperate statistic in the FAQ if I remember correctly from another thread.

The "permanent bonus" rule only affects bonuses, which this clearly (to me, at least) is not.

I can't get to the FAQ from work, but if it specifically says that Synth's can qualify based off of their suits scores, then I guess that is that.

EDIT: Relevant quote I mentioned earlier

Summoner: What happens when a synthesist (page 80) takes a penalty, suffers an affliction, or has an ongoing effect when the eidolon disappears?

These effects persist on the summoner after the eidolon is gone. For example, a ray of enfeeblement on the fused character continues to affect the summoner after the eidolon is gone, as would a bestow curse spell or acid arrow spell, as would continuing poison damage. These effects apply to the character as a whole, and just because the eidolon is gone doesn't mean the summoner is freed from the effect (ability damage is tracked separately, as described in another FAQ, because it is a separate game statistic that the summoner "borrows" from the eidolon). If the condition or effect ends (whether from its duration running out, being cured/negated/dispelled, and so on) while the eidolon is gone, it doesn't return when the eidolon is resummoned. This applies to beneficial effects as well as harmful ones--an invisible summoner isn't suddenly visible if his eidolon disappears, nor does he become invisible again if the duration ran out while the eidolon was gone.

—Sean K Reynolds, 08/03/11

He can take Power Attack. The quote you highlighted includes "uses the eidolon's physical ability scores". He also "uses the eidolon's base attack bonus... and modifiers to ability scores."

Now, if they had wanted to, they didn't have to say the first part about using the eidolon's physical ability scores, because the modifiers clause would have achieved most of that for all intents and purposes. Since the summoner is using the eidolon's scores, however, he's got the prerequisites; since the summoner is using the eidolon's base attack bonus, he actually qualifies at level 1.

Negative, he GAINS the modifiers to ability scores (along with the natural armor bonus). I don't think the designers would have used that word unless they meant to make it clear that it is referring to the level based modifiers the Eidolon normally gains, which is why they included the natural armor bonus in the same statement.

Also, I don't see him "using" the scores as a bonus or enhancement. He is making use of them temporarily, his own scores remain unchanged.

At the end of the day, if it isn't fun playing the game their way, then don't. No gaming beats bad gaming. If I was faced with this scenario I'd offer to DM a game and play it by the rules, no cheese permitted. The encounters should be challenging without making half the party feel useless, and that's how I'd do it. If they didn't like it, then I tried. If they do (and they may appreciate the challenge) then it's a win.

You are absolutely right, and I plan on starting my own game in June or July, but right now work constraints (we are in the middle of a month long, major compliance inspection at my base and have been prepping for it non stop for the last 4-5 months) prevent me from doing so. I just want to vent some frustration by killing gnolls on the weekends right now.

AMY ALCHY?

Wow. Almost too good.

When you play in a group that is blatantly a power gaming group and show up with a "balanced" character your are basically being "that guy" who shows up with a handicapped and useless character.

That is basically the issue and what I'm trying to fix. I don't have a problem with them being super-powered, since everyone is equally superpowered...I just don't want to be the one underpowered guy.

I originally made the character to be good at what he did, but not overshadow anyone else in their role (and to look like Jareth the Goblin King) and was basing my expectations of average power levels on what I've normally dealt with in PF. I suppose the stat generating method should have tipped me off...

So I will be the one to ask ...

What level are you?

What races were allowed?

What was the stat array or creation method?

How much leniency do you have to change the character?

Is the Wealth by Level chart used for character creation?

Level 5 Conjurer (Teleportation subschool).

Race: Elf, but all races were allowed.

Stat method: Ridiculous. All stats start at 12, roll a D6 for each and it to the 12.

My stats:

STR: 13
DEX: 20
Con: 15
INT: 21
WIS: 16
CHA: 14

Traits: Warrior of Old, Dangerously Curious

Feats: Spell Focus: Conjuration
Toughness (I rolled crap for HP)
Improved Initiative
Craft Wand

Familiar: Rhamphorhynchus

Wealth by level was not used...he gave me some magic items of his choosing.

We can change characters pretty much at will once, we just have to ask.

I know what you're thinking "How are things beating your DC easily with a 21 Int at level 5?!?!". It is because we regularly go up against CR 10 encounters to challenge the mega-face stabbing Barbarian, Fighter, and Paladin.

Here's a suggestion: Don't TRY and compete with them all. Do something none of them can do instead. If they all dish mega-damage, focus on battlefield control, or maneuvers, or utility spells.

I've tried that...it is what the character was built to do since they already have a Sorceror acting as a mobile weapons platform. The enemies are beating my DCs easily, though, and ignoring nearly all of my control spells except for the Create Pit line. I'm not happy just being the buffer, which is what I've been relegated to.

Pretty much the only thing the party can't do to the XTREME right now is stealth/precision damage/skill monkey and battlefield control. They have a rogue, but she just kinda runs around hiding and doing nothig else.

I can't see how to get XTREME at battlefield control without getting my DCs higher...which isn't terribly easy to do.

Looking at the Synthesist and Magus threads now. The Synthesist looks pretty ridiculous, though it seems like his action economy would take a hit since he can no longer cast as himself and attack as his Eidolon in the same turn.

It seems much harder to "break" Pathfinder than 3.5...never thought i'd see that as a downside, haha.

No?... Unless what I'm looking at is based off an old printing or something? Here is my link.

It must be, or just a misquote:

While fused with his eidolon, the synthesist uses the
eidolon’s physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and
Constitution), but retains his own mental ability scores
(Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma). The synthesist gains
the eidolon’s hit points as temporary hit points. When these
hit points reach 0, the eidolon is sent back to its home plane.
The synthesist uses the eidolon’s base attack bonus, and
gains the eidolon’s armor and natural armor bonuses and
modifiers to ability scores.

It seems pretty clear that they are specifically differentiating between the scores and modifiers, and between the scores belong to the suit and the character. I read the second bolded section as the character gains the level based ability modifiers of the Eidolon suit. I read the first section to say explicitly that the physical ability scores remain the suit's, and are merely "borrowed" by the Synthesist, rather than augmenting like a belt.

I'd say he could NOT take Power Attack.

Well I would check out Treemonks site

https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=0AcNyxDTKvAmqZGRtZzhzdjZfMTFmNXdwM2ZjeA

Conjurers can be really powerful and the site has some great advice on what spells, magic items, skills, and prestige classes are your best options

I used his guide when I made my character. My issue is that the GM is having to pit us against such high level CR encounters that they easily beat my DCs and my summoned creatures get swatted like flies. I basically exist to do nothing but caste Haste.

Once you have seen a BBEG get slammed for 15D6 with a keen battleaxe that has a power to maximize critical damage if you roll in the crit range of the weapon on the confirmation onc eper day...you begin to feel inadequate.

Hey, I'm joining a new gaming group here in Korea and discovered today that my balanced Conjurer is completely overshadowed by every other member of the group to the point that it is un-fun. The GM all but actively encourages rules-cheesing...but I haven't tried to make a broken character in a very long, and neve rin PF.

He is allowing feats/races/classes from 3.5...but I'd like to stay pure PF if possible. I just want to be able to compete with characters like the Goliath barbarian with monkey grip and enlarged by the sorceror doing 5d6 per swing at level 5. And he is one of the less powerful characters. It is frustrating, and not really the type of game I like...but it is the only one in town at the moment, and I'm too busy to GM myself.

EDIT: We are level 5, and pretty much anything goes/is allowed.

Also posting to show interest. I just got to Korea, and need a gaming fix.

I just arrived here for a 1 year tour, and am looking for a gaming group. I can GM or play...I just need to find people, lol.

Is this idea insane? It came to me in a flash of inspiration...the Archaeologist is already a nod to Indiana Jones, why not give him a gun to complete the deal? And the MS archetype switches all relevant Gunslinger abilities to Charisma, which the Archaeologist should have a decent score in. A 2 level dip gives a couple of nice deeds, as well.

It might be easier to just take a feat to use a pistol..but I kind of like the idea. A charismatic, whip and pistol wielding adventurer fighting Nazis...err...the undead as he searches out ancient ruins and forgotten artifacts.

Thanks for the advice. I think I'm going to start with Evangelist just to have a bit of healing so my party doesn't die horribly before we hit level 2. I rolled pretty good stats, then found out the GM is also giving a free 14 and 15 to sub out, I used those to replace the two low rolls I had (11 and 9). I really hope he is bumping up the power level of the AP. Well, here is my tentative stat line.

Evangelist 1
Half-Orc

Str: 17
Dex: 14
Con: 15
Int: 14
Wis: 17 (15 +2 racial)
Cha: 16

I might switch Con and Cha, still not set in stone. Looking through traits and feats, now. How useful would having UMD as a class skill be?

I posted a while back about needing a character for a Jade Regent game, and the two most numerous responses were Witch and Bard, due to my party's utter lack of spellcasting or healing.

I don't really care for the Witch spell list, and I've never been a huge fan of bards,...and honestly I just want to smash faces in with a big piece of steel for once. I always seem to end up as the party caster.

However, I recently picked up UC and discovered the Evangelist. I think with a 1-2 level Fighter (or Barbarian) dip this could be an excellent battle priest, and i like the flavor of a priest of Gorum "spreading the word" about stomping heads. Maybe something like:

Evangelist 8/Fighter 2
Half-orc

Wis>Str>Cha>Con>Dex>Int

We are using the old 4D6, drop lowest, reroll 1's...so I expect generous stats.

Still working on a good feat progression.

Maybe pick up channeled smite at some point to utilize my channel energy dice.

Also, I will take at least one other perform skill and play hardcore metal for the caravan when not smashing heads in.

I'm absolutely terrible at optimizing, so any input is appreciated. I'm open to any suggestions, I just want to keep the Battle Evangelist theme. Also, I will take at least one other perform skill and play hardcore metal for the caravan when not smashing heads in.

Why do I keep repeating myself? Maybe it's better if you jsut read the ability.

Forbidden Schools for wizardsA wizard that chooses to specialize in one school of
magic must select two other schools as his opposition
schools, representing knowledge sacrificed in one area
of arcane lore to gain mastery in another. A wizard who
prepares spells from his opposition schools must use two
spell slots of that level to prepare the spell. For example,
a wizard with evocation as an opposition school must
expend two of his available 3rd-level spell slots to prepare
a fireball. In addition, a specialist takes a –4 penalty on any
skill checks made when crafting a magic item that has a
spell from one of his opposition schools as a prerequisite.
A universalist wizard can prepare spells from any school
without restriction.

See he didn't lose anything. At most he gave up a spell slot for that spell he absolutely has to have.

I know this is from forever ago, but now for the cost of two feats even this penalty can be removed, making specialist wizards even more desirable. You have to be at least 9th level, but still...

What if they were really good at their jobs? Its a bunny ears lawyer phenomenon. The person is utterly bad at anything BUT their jobs, but they're so good at their jobs it makes up for it. What are you looking for in a party wizard, someone you like or someone who lets you live through the dungeon? Sure, for hiring a store clerk someone you get along with is more important than a 2% increase in profits but a 2% increase in LIVING? Sheeeldon! get over here.

I'm an avionics maintainer...I have to work in close proximity to others, so if they smell terrible/have weeping pustules, or are horribly annoying, or so bland that I forget they exist...then it doesn't really matter how good they are, I don't want to work with them. Let them be awesome at the job down at the other end of the shop.

It's also been my experience that the ones who fall into those categories are also terrible maintainers, lacking the desire or drive to ever get better than mediocre. Purely anecdotal, of course.

Like I said...I can't reconcile dumping a stat, so I don't do it. I don't judge others for it, though...as long as they don't whine when they are terrible at whatever their dumped stat governs.

Back to the bell curve...

If you had a charisma of 5 or less you'd be in the lowest 5% of the population. If you had 20 people (say an average sized classroom) you'd probably have 1 of them.

How many people know that kid? Are they that hard to get along with?

How many gamers WERE that kid?

I honestly don't see this. The WoT D20 book, which has the exact same blurb explaining Charisma as Pathfinder Core, has examples of creatures with certain scores on the chart. A "5" is likened to a monstrous, three eyed frog beast, and is barely above a rat.

I don't have a PF Stat bell curve in front of me, but are you sure on 5%?

I've met very few people I'd consider to have a 5 Cha, and for the most part they have been repulsive in some way and I haven't been able to spend more than 10 minutes around them, or utterly unremarkable to the point that I ignore them on accident. I definitely wouldn't want to hang out with them 24/7 doing the same job.

The early fantasy is all about you being your equipment. There's nothing remotely special about you, its all about whatever it is that you're wearing. It makes every hero a generic cutout doll devoid of any special abilities besides the clothes someone slaps on him. King Aurthur could be ANYONE... he just happens to be holding excalibur. Random farm boy number 8 finds a magic sword and BOOM, its off to be a hero!

What i like about 3rd and pathfinder (and the briefly lived skills and powers) is that it lets you create characters that are not the sum total of their walking loot piles. The mechanical creation process gives me ideas for what kind of person I'm supposed to be playing. A dwarf with dodge and toughness is going to have a more laid back, outlive and outlast personality than one with power attack and cleave.

While I mostly don't have a horse in this race, I have to completely disagree with this. Arthur was charismatic and bright before he had Excalibur, while he was still wielding the sword from the stone. He bound everyone together with his will and charisma. Excalibur simply gave him great prowess in battle and a symbol of authority.

Beowulf was not the sum of his gear, he was a hero..smart, fast, strong, handsome.

Conan and Solomon Kane were not the sum of their gear, either. They were people whose natural attributes caused them to rise above others.

The same goes for Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas. Triply so for the hobbits, themselves! Their courage carried them, not their magic items...those only supported what already existed. Anduril did not make Aragorn great, Aragorn did that himself.

Almost all of the early fantasy I can think of has the gear secondary to the person.

I also never had an issue with my gear overshadowing my character in older RPG's. YMMV, however.

That said, I have no problems with people dumping stats as long as they RP it appropriately...but I rarely dump them myself. I just have a hard time feeling heroic as a drooling imbecile with a big piece of metal to hit things with*.

*This is not an indictment of optimizers, I understand that it is not indicative of all dump stats.

Matt Gwinn wrote:

Ok, then

Here's the OGL description of Rogue. Note the lack of ANY combat reference.

"... countless other professions that rely upon wits, prowess, or luck."

Shadowy Stalkers:normally means assassin types

Bandits:They don't fight, really?
Bounty Hunters: You think the bandit mentioned above is just going to throw down his weapons because you said so?

The word "combat" is not there, but it does not take require an epiphany to know that a rogue is not meant to not fight. Sneak attack is not just window dressing.

edit: removed snark

I would also like to point out that the first definition of prowess is: "exceptional valor, bravery, or ability, especially in combat or battle." And the third is "A valiant or daring deed"

It's been beaten to death, but a good character should at least have something useful to contribute in most situations. If he is worthless in combat, dump him in town and come back for him when the adventuring part is over.

So here are the questions.

Do you roll your characters?

Is your answer the deefault of your gaming group?

How long have you been gaming?

What system did you first game in?

Thank you.

1. Yes, 4D6 drop the lowest, reroll 1's. Roll two sets and keep the better one. Seems to give everyone a pretty decent array, and I like being powerful in my fantasy world. I feel that point buys are soulless, but, of course, it's probably because I was "raised" on rolling. Point buy has also seemed to encouraged stat dump min/maxing every time we have used it, YMMV. We also have more fun this way, and feel more heroic. You don't see fantasy heroes in books with a dumped CHA to eek out that extra bit of STR, do you?;)*

2. Yes, for this group.

3. Since 1988 when my stepdad taught me so I would stop breaking the swords off of his minis.

4. Basic D&D, then Heroquest, then AD&D onto WoD and 3.x. Dabbled in dozens of other games.

*All of these statements are utterly subjective, and I am aware of this.

+1 for witch. Has great battlefield control options, healing, and buff/debuff capabilities. And with the Hex's always has something to do.

Right now it is between Cleric and Witch. I don't really like the Witch on paper, but maybe it plays well. For some reason their spell list is extremely off-putting for me.

I posted this in the Jade Regent thread, then thought I might get more responses over here.

We are starting next week. We played through We Be Goblins last week.

My issue is that the group only has 3 PCs. We MAY be getting a 4th, but he's not sure.

So far we have:

Paladin
Rogue
Gunslinger (Guy who may or may not show).

Obviously, we are missing both arcane and divine spell casting. I still haven't settled on a class, and am torn because I have a compulsion to fill holes in the party. I WANT to play a Metal Oracle or similar, but we could probably use a wizard more. Any advice on what would be the best fit?

We are starting next week. We played through We Be Goblins last week.

My issue is that the group only has 3 PCs. We MAY be getting a 4th, but he's not sure.

So far we have:

Paladin
Rogue
Gunslinger (Guy who may or may not show).

Obviously, we are missing both arcane and divine spell casting. I still haven't settled on a class, and am torn because I have a compulsion to fill holes in the party. I WANT to play a Metal Oracle or similar, but we could probably use a wizard more. Any advice on what would be the best fit?

Christopher Lee wrote:

*flips through APG*

I think you just made my mind up. Looks like a great class. Thanks!

You're not going to be a Controller as an Inquisitor, they're more Striker with a dash of Healer/Leader (if you pick some healing spells to go that route).

But as long as you're cool with that, it should be fun. You can definitely provide a significant combat boost (particularly going ranged) to the party along with being more of a skills character than any of those listed, so you'll certainly be useful, but not in a battlefield control sense. Or not to any great extent anyway.

I've given up on controlling, mostly. I don't really enjoy it, and would go insane if it were my full time job. I'll "control" by, to paraphrase my employer the USAF, "Putting arrowheads on foreheads."

Christopher Lee wrote:

Inquisitor...hmmm...I kinda just wrote them off as fluffy RP classes. I've never seen one in play, are they good?

Their Judgments are very good, the solo teamwork feats are really nice (since they can switch them to whichever is best), and as of 5th level they can put Bane on their weapon for whatever they happen to be fighting. All that plus nice skill bonuses, an initiative boost and, at higher level, the equivalent of Evasion for Fortitude and Will.

They're very good.

*flips through APG*

I think you just made my mind up. Looks like a great class. Thanks!

Magus feels...hollow to me. I can't explain why, but it does.

Last time I tried an EK, it was a barrel of fail. That was 3.5...not sure how improved they are in PF.

DD is what I would be going for with Bard.

I don't like 90% of the Advanced Mutagens for Master Chymist.

Inquisitor...hmmm...I kinda just wrote them off as fluffy RP classes. I've never seen one in play, are they good?

I've decided that since I really like stabbing things, I'm probably going to play a rogue, ninja, or bard with UMD for spell support.

Mr. Hyde Alchemist is also in the running. As well as a halfling cavalier who rides a fierce wardog, if the tank has to leave...which he might. Of course, I know from experience that a small alchemist with Dex mutagens can Dex tank all day.

I really tried to like my dedicated caster builds, but the inability to reliably stab things really puts me off.

I'm joining a new group soon, and trying to make up my mind on a character. They are a small group, with the following roles filled:

Tank (Shielded Fighter)
Striker (Monk)
Heal/? (Cleric/Gunslinger)

I was thinking of filling them out with a controller, but can't decide between Wizard and Sorcerer. Wizards get the bonus of utility, but the Sorc bloodlines are looking awesome, and actually makes it a viable option (I hated sorcs in 3.x). I have no experience with sorcerers, though, so am looking for input on good bloodlines and such. I've read Minstrel's guide, but it doesn't include APG material.

I want to focus on control, summoning, and buffing.

My other plan is to just blow off filling the last role, and making a dapper Half Orc Alchemist named Reginald Danwater Pilkington IV, with his Orcy side coming out while under the effects of his mutagens. Of course, Master Chymist would be the goal.

This would be nice. As it is, 99% of poisons are utterly worthless after 1st level. DC 11 Fort and onset time of 4 hours for 1 con damage is useless.