Oh UnArcaneElection, bless your little baby Jesus heart bud.
Search Posts
Yes because martials accepting defeat and acknowledging their caster overlords is really the route we should be going.
People apparently hate the idea of martial doing fun or cool things. It has really made me think about leaving the hobby. In movies, books and cinema fighters are cool, they are strong and capable. In pathfinder they can move and full attack, or they are wasting their turns. Imagine the game of pathfinder brought to other media where the hero just 5ft steps forward, full attacks. The need for martial realism has killed the life of the game for me. Real life is not fun to me. If it was I would play it instead.....
That is fair, everyone could focus on defense and sacrifice damage but that is not a real solution. People don't want to grind out encounters. I will bring back up game and mmos were they took out the trinity; sure everyone could play tanky...but no one ever does but cause all they does is draw things out. I feel like combats should be less rocket tag, but only in that they last 2-3 more rounds. 4e had the problem of all the classes getting very tanky both inherently and in that they were encourage to all be buff. This led to a huge problem in combats, some where combats in mid to high levels took hours to resolve. I think that melee should be tasked with being tanky, and they should be given tools to enforce that role. Lets be real honest here. There is NO reason to ever not go for the wizard. If the creature in question has an int of 3 or higher they know magic is serious stuff. Especially in high magic settings like pathfinder there is no reason for you to ignore anyone who can cast spells. Also wizards and other spellcaster are the be example of defense being a poor trade off. Sure you could cast morror image as a standard action, or you could cast glitterdust and possibly win the combat(or if it is just one target: Blindness is permanent)
The problem is that defense is somewhat useless. Look, I love fighters; I always build them as durable as possible, and thus I always do myself a disservice. Defenses scale terribly, AC requires too much investment to stay current, saves will often only negate half, and DR is nice but is best a low levels and gets worse as you progress, and you can stack con to oblivion but all you get is the ability to take an extra hit or two. These things are fairly unimpressive on there own, but are amazing when put all together. The problem is that you become useless. You don't deal damage, and in pathfinder you have almost no way to ensure that you will be targeted. So the game become what a lot of mmos became when they tried to kill the trinity: dps is best. Healing and defense are sacrificed for faster more visceral combat, some people like this. I feel it takes away from some of the strategy and charm. But hey, I loved the 4e fighter more than any class in any table top game ever; so maybe I am Satan.
Well I died in that campaign last night. Apparently lawful people are banned from this kings castle(I went with my party to try and free the slaves). As we passed through the gate I was disintegrated, no save, by a Glyph of Law Bane(which I haven't found anywhere, go figure). I have never left a game before, not show up anymore, sure; but never flat out pack my stuff and leave. His sister came with me and when we left he was running the ranger through the rest of the mod ignoring us. Things like this really hurt the hobby for me. I might need to try pfs from now on. At least the gms are head accountable there. How I feel LG should be played : I like playing religious characters so I did what I thought would cause the least amount of problems. From your email I did get the feeling that you were attacking me as a roleplayer, and trying to say that I role played my character wrong. I accepted the actions of the Ranger because, lets face it I can either quite playing the game or I can have a different idea about being lawful good.I have explained my take on lawful good as being a guiding force of my party towards order and goodness. I talked the ranger out of several evil actions during the mod, but I talked him out of it. I didn't make any threats or ultimatums.
Being inflexible and bossy is why LG gets such a bad wrap. It is unrealistic, and a caricature of how real LG people would behave. He killed a man I felt was evil to the core, he killed him to save himself, our party, and the slaves. My character does not agree with it, but outside of the two dimensional "PALADIN SMITE!" mentality I can forgive my party for their transgressions and try to guide them to be a force for good. I see lawful good as being a driver of an out of control semi. Sure I could jump out at the slightest hint of trouble or I can stay and try my best to to guide it away from as many innocent people as possible. My character strives towards a world of order and goodness, where the rule of law bolsters the prosperity of all races. He never lies about anything that will not assure those goals, and he does not impose personal tyranny on those who fall short of his vision. I am perfectly okay with that, I just you didn't expect me to be a jerk or stick in the mud because I have ideals. And no I am not trying to bang
I always feel like these threads might be attempts to gather info on all the most broken feats to build some kind of super PC. Divine Protection seems awfully strong, but it might be interesting to see it as a free feat for everybody without the prereqs. It would certainly discourage dumping Charisma. Oracles can already get Divine Protection, and Paladins just get +1, so I guess Sorcerers would benefit most. Everybody who chose 12 Cha instead of 7 Cha would get a little boost too though, and PCs in general might be a wittier and more charming bunch. Fighters have it bad enough when it comes to saves, lets not give everyone a boost and a reason for DMs or pazio to upsize spell dcs. Sure you could have a fighter with more charisma maybe a 14 but then all you are doing is making yourself worse at what you do, in vain as you will never have the skills or bonuses to match real face classes. I am of the opinion that not everyone needs high charisma, and that it is okay to dump it to an 8 or 9 without having to RP as a ugly, swearing autistic pc. But hey I digress.
@Secret Wizard- I didn't even know that existed. Kolbold Loracles for Life! @kestral287-all i did was list a few of the ways to get charisma to stuff, it was not an actual effort to make a character. Also I thought slashing grace was Charisma to damage for some reason. Still, Charisma Loracles have got it going on.
So he was doing well while buffed? Darn that vile martial!!!!!!! The very notion of having buffs stacked and doing well, I mean the nerve!
I understand that you can't just toss dragons around, and if I had just started playing I could understand. But I have had home campaigns up to 17th level(most go to 6 before things fall apart) and in almost a decade I haven't seen one. I was just wondering if I was an outlier, or do most people not get high enough level to fight dragons?
I know people don't like Charisma as a dump stat but dang: -Sidestep Secret (oracle, lore mystery, revelation) Use Charisma to Ac and reflex saves instead of dex -Lore Keeper (oracle, lore mystery, revelation) Use Charisma to knowledge checks instead of int -Slashing Grace (feat) use Dex to dam with a one-handed slashing weapon -Divine Protection (feat) Gain Cha to all saves, doesn’t stack with Divine Grace (+1 to all saves instead) -Noble Scion (feat) Charisma to initiative -Toppling Spell (metamagic) use Charisma and CL for trip with force spells -Irrepressible (Faith Trait) use Cha instead of Wis on will saves versus charm and compulsion Thats just a few things I can put on one guy. Divine protection seems to be a bit too powerful, especially on a Loracle.
Well in Pathfinder, I'd rather run a PC that's a dragon. I would do a lot of terrible things to be in game where I could play as a dragon. Once I dmed a game where a guy wanted to play a Kobold, since he was going to be the only melee character I said he could use the Half dragon template....he found out Kobolds were draconic, not demonic...and played a teifling instead.
In game of course. I have been playing for....dang 9 years(is this how it feels to be old?) and have never had a run in with a dragon. Now it was Odd that in the 3.5 and 4e days that I had only really had the dungeon D of the couple but while this is Pathfinder, I still must admit I am surprised. Have you ever fought Dragons? If so how often? Do you find them cliche' or overdone? As odd as it sounds I almost think a lot of GMs I know avoid them as to avoid old tropes but it just winds up that no one uses them. I like dragons, they are pretty awesome. So where the hell are my dragons?
A perfect solution to this is to roll first, and role play the roll. Giving a roaring speech and then getting a terrible roll doesn't make sense to me. I know you love accents and the like but if you feel like you are doing poorly, then you can describe your bluff or diplomacy as though you were watching this stylish scoundrel talk his way around guards, kings and dragons.
The thing that people don't often get is that Charisma doesn't have to be rigid. I have played high Charisma bards that say the stupidest stuff imaginable, that tell outrageous lies; but guess what? People like him, he has a certain magnetism about him. Despite him being an ass at times and being silly at others, people can't help but be drawn to him. Charisma is more than sweet talking and looks, it is force of personality. Just remember, that you can say anything, people still will listen. You can be a lovable goof, you can be a serious con man, you can be stunningly gorgeous, or have a great reputation, or have people take everything you say the best way.
I have actually done this during the summers I would dm since I had a lot of free time. The best way to test a campaign is to know what characters your players will play and try to break it as much as possible. If I was going to play for more personal enjoyment I think I would play 4e. It is a great tactical minis wargame, and the way the offical mods are written you need little roleplay beyond having the characters make their skill checks and reading what happens do the the number of successes and failures.... Wait, was 4e made for this????? Sorry for the tangent but I feel like I have just cracked the code, and everything makes sense in the world.
A cleric casting harm does show how trivial the damage is but lets not forget that that is the tip of clerics and wizards who are one level away from 9th level spell, and can cast 3-5 8th level spells at least. Wizards are stopping time and creating their own plane of reality, clerics are summoning apocalyptic storms and gating in hordes of angels, the rogue is hiding pretty well; in pathfinder we call that balance.
Why can't he just be stealthy? He is level 16, lets face it, this stealth stuff is the coolest thing he will ever have with his character. I am of the opinion that a character build focusing on something shouldn't have his choices negated. Maybe most enemies should have anti magic fields and spell immunity; poor rogues and fighters always getting picked on for believe in their heart light.
Str-10
As far as class, I would have to say archer fighter or ranger. As I am an archer(recurve) in real life and have won more than a few competitions on the local level. May seem counter intiutive due to my low dex but I practice everyday so I figure I have weapon focus and spec. Too many people are giving themselves crazy stats. Half of the people here think themselves as supermen. This is why I don't ever play with people in games where they stat themselves. Delusional people everywhere.
While it is not my taste most GMs I play with are world crafters, by which I mean that they create a world and you better not mess it up. I won't complain, as despite people liking the games I run; I find no enjoyment running them,and thus have little room to talk. Although I will admit that sometimes when the GM expecting your party to have lots of magic and the table is 3 rogues, and a monk there is not a lot to do other than run away....a lot. ("I am sorry guys but my settings goblins and orcs are creatures of shadow can only be harmed by casting light on them first. I wanted cantrips to matter more......)
Another interesting thing to consider is if all min maxing is created equal. Take in mind my Battle Chef character:
Battle Chef:
Race: Human Heart of the Fields(+1/2 level to profession check) I was going to take half elf but realized that with the Focused Study alternative race trait that they get 3 feats for free rather than one.Plus more skill ranks.
Traits:
Class: Investigator
A dip in cleric in order to pick up some useful cantrips(create water and purify food seem really helpful, plus guidance for a bit more cooking cheese. Catch off Guard: Mandatory first level since I will be using Chef tools as weapons
Weapon:
Eventually I would try to make it Mithral, and enchant it. Str-12
This character is min maxed to be the greatest chef to ever live. Is this evil? Is this min maxing filth? Or can you min max if you have a goal in mind....say a really strong fighter 18 with a low charisma 7...or a really smart wizard 18 in, with little baby t rex arms str 7?
So what? I should deliberately gimp my character to avoid it being min-maxed? Said everyone in favor or optimization and min maxing ever. Thank you for making the argument for us. :)
Seriously though bud, if you really want to help the guy then do what I did when I was playing with my girlfriend. Be their friend in game. Be a buffing cleric. Allow him to face tank and cleave through enemies with his mighty buffs. Give him Guidance(the cantrip) or other social spells to help him shine. It boils down to needing to talk to him about it, or being an enabler.
Have you tried talking to the gm......so he could go easier on him Have you tried threatening that he might not play if he is murderated...Have you tried hitting the gm....(where it hurts, not bringing snacks?) Have you tried beating the gm....(at his own game?) this one seem somewhat still applicable Have you tried threatening the gm's family......(with death?) I would personally go through that list in order
Have you tried talking to him......
I would personally go through that list in order
@ Darksol- You know, I have never sat down to gm without knowing exactly what my players would be using. Of course I am a push over...what you want to play an awaken house cat with the dire template...hmmm a dire housecat arcane sorcerer with a bounded collar...take wild spell 1st lv and you have a deal! Anywho, I find gms rarely look at our characters, asking only for race and alignment before we start. Most detailed thing that gets brought up constantly is "Do we have a healer?"
Stone Lord Dwarf Paladin STR: 16 DEX: 12 CON: 14 INT: 10 WIS: 9 CHA: 1210/10 would have tons of fun
So this interesting tale starts with a close friend of mine inviting me to a new campaign her brother is running. I was weary, having heard he is very draconic about paladins and frequently even has clerics lose their powers(which I am fine with). Also I have heard that he despises martial classes and really prefers his martial to still use magic in some way, a problem for myself because I like playing a fighter. None the less she convinced me that I should give it a go and I thought I a character type in mind. We started at 1st level and the GM only asked us for some vague information about our characters(he wanted a flexible backstory he could fit in his world, not a problem). So I told him that I was a lawful good dwarf that was devoted to Torag and sought purity through faith, as well as general stone loving Dwarven goodness. Maybe a bit cliche' but I see less and less of the old school Dwarfs, particularly in pathfinder, as I have seen more Dwarven bards, and even Dwarven sorcerers than fighters or barbarians. I arrive at the game with the paladin code of Torag printed out with my character sheet as a personal guide on how to be more devout. The mod is fairly simple, but well ran and pretty interesting until there is a situation were slaves are involved. We find a group of escaping slaves attacking their slave master. I and my friend (playing a healer from old school 3.5) go and try to diffuse the situation. The slaver screams that he has a permit for the slaves and demands that we return them to the king so that they can be sacrificed. Seeing children in the lot I flat out say no, and ask the healer to tend to the slaves while I tend to the slaver(I took a trait that give me healing as a class skill). The dm told me that as a lawful good character I should respect the authority of the slaver, to which I replied: I am the Good lawful good, not the Lawful lawful good. I don't recognize the legitimate authority of those that keep slaves. He seem aggravated but also a little elated. Soon the ranger(who said he was going to hide in the trees and observe) alerted us to approaching men bearing the same seal of the slaver. Causing the slaver to say something like "this is the end for all of you I will see that you sacrificed right with them". The ranger, being chaotic neutral(aka....evil) straight up kills the guy and drags him off hiding in the brush. I sigh, verbally reprimand him but don't do anything else as the healer starts to lead the slaves away. I stay with the body, and kneel down in prayer waiting for the men to approach. When they do they see my character, praying with a holy symbol before the body and ask what had happen(politely I might add). I told them that I had been traveling alone when I came upon bandits loading slaves into a wagon and gutting the slaver. Unable to follow them immediately I decided to give the slaver his last rites. He looked shock, like I had just told him I ate five Aasimar babies alive and said roll bluff. I get a 16(I have 14 cha..yes as a dwarf, it is painful to waste a 16 in pb) and he says that they believe me. Thanking me and asking which way the bandits went, I point them to the wrong direction. Once again GM, shocked. They load the mans body, try to give me some gold for some reason(I refuse it politely) and they storm off. The GM says that I begin to feel weak and empty, that I feel my gifts start to leave me. To which I ask...what gifts. He says, you have lied which is directly against the wishes of Torag. To which I reply by showing him the code in which it says I can mislead others for my people. I lied for the sake of my party and for good. He said be that as it may, I had lied wantonly with no remorse and that I had fallen. To which I say....what do you mean. I am not a Paladin. He did not believe me. And ask to see my sheet. To which I complied, and he saw that I made the crazy saves against his magical ray traps(start of the mod) not because of divine grace but because of Steel Soul, and that I had not let the ranger be blatantly evil because I am lawful good, not because I have a paladin code. I explained that I merely was faithful and had printed out the code for reference. He just sat there for a while and said "okay". Then we moved on. Long story, not important but I was kinda laughing the whole time during the end and I thought it was interesting.
Even with a negative Con score, you should have more than 3HP at level 5 since you always get at least 1/level and max (adjusted for Con) at 1st. I added one a level but I am fairly sure that while you get the full amount a lv one the con bonus still can subtract. If not I will as 3 more.
I am just going to go the other way with this. We are playing every day this week(nothing else to do really). I am going to have every new character be the following, hopefully he gets the message since talking to him doesn't work. Dhamphir: -2 con
7hp @ lv5 Contrasting my last character: Dwarf: +2 con
60hp @lv 5(I was one shot by a charge atk hit on 30 to ac)
Some one that is just a Necromancer is generally assumed to be a specialist wizard, at least around my gaming friends. But Lets hope you are rigth:)Why did your necromancer have a chain shirt?Maybe he's a Cleric? Yes an undead lord cleric
Well I was a fiendish boor with smite good( I am good) and was a huge creature that beat a preception check of 32 with its stealth check. I was then told the ground shook as it walk and it knocked down all trees in its way(I had to roll reflex to dodge the falling trees btw) I am really starting to think it was malicious. I talked to him about it afterwards and he just acted really awkward about it. I might just have to stop playing with him.
So I made a monk using the unchained rules....he instantly made a fiendish dire boar charge me....it did 73 damage to me. And then killed me when I was down. Does he just hate me?
When I last played with him(couple of years ago) I was big into min maxing and being a bit of a powergamer. As the years passed though I have started to play more in the "make a fun character as strong as they can be without sacrificing flavor" category. He kept asking if I had anything to do, like he totally expected me to pull out some crazy character ability to save myself. Also I have to at least entertain that he didn't like my character and just wanted it dead. Though the way he was acting afterwards(offering to just bring me to life) makes that seem unlikely.
I am playing a solo campaign and need to be practically immortal to survive my gm. I am starting at level 5 and can use anything from pathfinder, as well as some 3.5 stuff if I asked first. I need to be pretty unstopable as he seems hellbent on sending cr encounters based on a party of level fives against my single guy. He has killed a diplomacer bard, and a necro cleric pretty much with one combat each, and I could really use your fine people help. I can also pick on of the following
Monk Clan- pick an element, one bonus spell of that element a spell level Horse Clan-never fall off mount, gains 4 rounds of rage, or if you have rage rage for 4 more rounds than normal Raven Clan- Bonus to linguistics, free once a day CLW CL/ class level Bat Clan- +5 to stealth and bluff, vanish spell once per day Boar Clan- +1 to melee atks, and weapon proficiency feat Ram Clan- +1 AC, all knowledge checks are class skills and you get a plus one. Wolf Clan- Get a magical tatoo every 4 levels
I would like to start off by saying I like tough games, I hate when the Gm coddles; but with with the great power being GM provides, there has to be a bit of responsibility. Consider the following situation: I was in a solo campaign playing a level 4 necromancer, with no items save a chain shirt, and some rations. I was not given any items or gold the two sessions I played. At the start of the second session I was following a character that was supposed to be my mother down an ally. Suddenly she cast hold person on me, while a team of archers use a readied action to fill me full of arrows. Each shot twice and was able to hit me rather easily; downing me after the first volley. The surprise round over, my "mom" pulls out a dagger and slits my throat. To me this seemed....excessive. He acted to be pretty surprised I died so quickly and offered me to come back "through sheer force of will" but I had died "fairly" and I said I would just reroll. I am sorry this has been so long, but in short. Should the GM ever show restraint? Or do you think they should go full out and use everything available to them? Are intelligent tactics, like charming a person(that is why I was told all my attempts at sensing motive and perception failed), leading them into an ambush of 10 readied archers, and making them helpless a good way to go about crafting encounters?
Ill just post this again since you seem to be trying to ignore it. I am starting to think you must be a troll, or just really really thick. I don't want to be insulting, but your premise is flawed; and your ignorance seems to be willful. This is not proof of what you are saying. "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit." The term innocent is clearly used. "Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others." Punishment of any kind can be implied to hurt, oppress or cause the death of others. To use this a way to say Killing is evil, is to imply (notice I use the same phrasing...) that hurting or oppressing people is inherently evil as well. So now not only can paladins not kill, but they cant hurt or oppress others. They can't even do nonlethal anymore..... -OWWWWWW you hurt me while trying to stop me from eating a baby, who are you A LAWFUL GOOD CHARACTER to tell me that eating babies is wrong, stop oppressing me! You effectively think the rules require a Paladin to sit in a corner praying, while running away from any confrontation. Lest they hurt an evil doer, or oppress them. Since Smite Evil exist, since they got other combat abilities I would say once again that this is absurd. Take to the logical conclusion; using your reading of the rules, A paladin can fall, if they fall over and land on someones toe. They can FALL FOR FALLING DOWN! Let me guess, the weapon proficiencies and combat abilities only exist to tempt them into falling. Well played Pazio, well played "People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others." This does not mean only neutral people can kill the guilty, it just states that while neutral people don't kill the innocent, they may not make sacrifices to save them. You are being ridiculous, and are effectively saying that paladins can't even hurt people without being evil, nor can they oppress them by idk...placing them under arrest. You can lie to yourself and say that is not what you mean but it is. You are saying to hurt, oppress, or to kill is evil. And that is not what it says. It says that evil implies those things, it specifically in every other instance says innocent people. I'm sorry. Paladin-kun isnt as adorable and innocent as you thought, or are trying so desperately to believe.
Unfortunately yes that is who it works. Like a lot of things in pathfinder, being cool has huge opportunity cost over being bland. It is better in every way imaginable to use a bow. In some ways it should be since one is actually a weapon. Feats like Deadly Dealer are supposed to impose feat pentalities that allow you to do unique things decently for an increased cost. Often these feats fail do to the games assumption that magic items are given at certain levels. There is no way to prevent cards from being destroyed so enchanting them is a foolish goal. However that being said there are ways to have them be pretty nice. Traits-
If you want improved Improvised Weapon Mastery to make the cards do a d6 with Deadly Dealer, then pick Surprise Weapons for a huge +2 boost to hit. If you don't want to invest two feats into it then take Rough and Ready for a free feat and a +1 to hit. They are both trait bonuses so they do not stack. Arcane strike will let you bypass a bit of DR, and saving the cash you would be using to enchant weapons will allow you some pretty cool items instead. You can then go: -Bard(arcane duelist, getting arcane strike for free, and the ability to use spells when DR is a problem. -Monk(of the Empty Hand), this lets you flurry with the cards, plus gain additional dr and enchantment bonus for free with them(and all improvised weapons) as you level. -Rogue, take the talent that gives you minor magic to qualify, and focus on using the cards to sneak attack, relying on the large amount of SA damage to punch throw DR and improve your damage (also see Slayer and Investigator, for more combat or skill focus respectively) I just realized that you didn't ask for this text dump, and that I answered you with the first sentence...but I don't want to have written this just to delete it.
I love this, and have spent way too much time reading it and everything it links to. Hopefully I can play this next weekend and I will see how well it pans out
Even if you were correct (and I disagree), you have yet to provide anything that proves your point except "I can take two words out of context and ignore the rest". This is not proof of what you are saying. "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit." The term innocent is clearly used. "Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others." Punishment of any kind can be implied to hurt, oppress or cause the death of others. To use this a way to say Killing is evil, is to imply (notice I use the same phrasing...) that hurting or oppressing people is inherently evil as well. So now not only can paladins not kill, but they cant hurt or oppress others. They can't even do nonlethal anymore..... -OWWWWWW you hurt me while trying to stop me from eating a baby, who are you A LAWFUL GOOD CHARACTER to tell me that eating babies is wrong, stop oppressing me! You effectively think the rules require a Paladin to sit in a corner praying, while running away from any confrontation. Lest they hurt an evil doer, or oppress them. Since Smite Evil exist, since they got other combat abilities I would say once again that this is absurd. Take to the logical conclusion; using your reading of the rules, A paladin can fall, if they fall over and land on someones toe. They can FALL FOR FALLING DOWN! Let me guess, the weapon proficiencies and combat abilities only exist to tempt them into falling. Well played Pazio, well played "People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others." This does not mean only neutral people can kill the guilty, it just states that while neutral people don't kill the innocent, they may not make sacrifices to save them. You are being ridiculous, and are effectively saying that paladins can't even hurt people without being evil, nor can they oppress them by idk...placing them under arrest. You can lie to yourself and say that is not what you mean but it is. You are saying to hurt, oppress, or to kill is evil. And that is not what it says. It says that evil implies those things, it specifically in every other instance says innocent people. I'm sorry. Paladin-kun isnt as adorable and innocent as you thought, or are trying so desperately to believe.
If that is how you want to roleplay that cool man, but I was terrified....actually terrified that was about to become slash fiction. I get it, you think killing is bad, and you want a no killing strong loving (if homoerotic) relationship between Paladin and God thats fine but it is just that...your role play. A God that is Lawful Good, but doesn't consider its tenets and practices to be a high enough standard for a paladin is absurd. You have a obvious bias against the death penalty being Good. That's fine, but neither you or any other should make a Paladin fall for following the tenets of his God. In your home games feel free to pull the teeth of your paladins so that are better at orally defusing situations without violence
-Use Phylactery of Faithfulness to ask Lawful Good God Ragathiel if he will take away your Paladin powers for executing a guy -Ragathiel says "no, in fact I kinda think its hawt" -Execute said guy -GM "you fall" -But but "Muh God" -GM "Show me where it says paladins can kill helpless victims without falling? I don't see it. Merely a boon for offering the god what he wants. Ragathiel offers you that, but that does not mean that killing the person was good or lawful, or that you won't fall. All it means is that Ragathiel approves, and being a creature that can be assumed to have at least enough capacity for personal complexity, as any given mortal, he could approve for a myriad of reasons." -But my God wants me to and he grants me my powers, the code is vague and no one with a modicum of common sense would expect the Paladins of a God to have a code that expressively goes against said God. -GM "The code grants you your powers, its not like it says anywhere that Paladins are gifted their blessing from their god. And the atonement spell you will now have to cast: it's not like it specifically says that you have to now ask your deity to forgive you for doing something he said was right...oh wait it does...and it does, well Rules are Rules, hate for this game to make sense"
This post is definitive. I have seen this ignored before so that the pointless argument could continue. This post must be addressed if the whole "killing evil, or executing criminals is evil" thing can continue. Lawful Good Gods are not only telling but rewarding this behavior as a Lawful Good action. Lawful Good Gods kill evil, Lawful Good Outsiders kill evil, Lawful Good Paladins have Smite Evil....and are reward in some cases for executing or killing evil.All executions are against helpless creatures, that's why it is an execution. The Lawful Good Empyreal Lord of Execution....is well Lawful Good. Your opinion of whether killing is bad or not(you can try and say you dont have an opinion, but I dont buy it) is irrelevant. By RAW you can kill helpless evil creatures and not only avoid falling, but actually gain boons from a Lawful Good Deity. How is this in question?
Fair enough, as I linked in my original post I am making a character that is optimized to be the best cook ever. I asked for advice specifically because I dont want to be a lout in combat, and have made sure that while I am great at cooking I can also cast spells with alchemy and pick up any skill slack the party may have. With an enchanted frying pan and studied strike I will not be the greatest combatant but I will be pretty decent for someone who can take care of most skills, find and disarm traps, all while being a 6th level spell caster. I also see how some people over blow there concept in order to take the spotlight. I am a cook, if there is a rare ingredient I might snatch some up, I might offer to cook up dragon we just killed in celebration of our victory. But jerks are jerks, and people who want the spotlight can come in any variety of "flavors" ;p tl;dr- jerks are jerks, I just want to make some jerky
Wouldn't a happy medium be just to let you decide to have it be a better weapon at +300 and let it be enchanted. Or to have it be a better cooking tool and just be +50 masterwork tool that cant be enchanted? Is using a frying pan a little goofy? Ya I guess it can be kinda goofy in a super cereal setting, but in a setting were a guy becomes a god because of a drunken bet, or any number of other odd things then it seems a lot less weird to me. I guess in a pathfinder society game I would just have to use a real weapon, but hopefully in a home game I can have a +1 flaming frying pan that lets me cook food and bash peoples skulls in. Semantics being what they are though I guess improvised weapons are just kinda terrible.
This is the reasoning I dont get. The flavor on a lot of things, such as Surprise weapons states that you are really good at using things not normally considered weapons. A frying pan will never be considered a weapon by most people. So ya you can "catch them off guard" while your cooking in your +1 flaming frying pan as you hit them in the face with it. Then there is this contradiction when I try to use a frying pan as a weapon. -Its not a weapon ts an improvised weapon....errr I mean improvised thing that hits stuff. Since it isnt a weapon you cant take proficiency in it you can't take weapon focus, and you cant enchant it. -Okay then it is an improvised doohicky and Ill just take improvised weapon traits and catch off guard, ill just carrying this thing around. -NOOOOOO, if you use it as a weapon all the time then it really isnt improvised right? -Fine, Ill just use a greatsword or something so I can do more damage, enchant it, and use less feats. -Thank god you have seen the errors of your munchkin ways! Thankfully this game has ways to stop you from being good at having fun.
In the CRB it just says they have to be masterwork, however some people are saying that this was changed in the Equipment supplement that said that a weapon must be a masterwork weapon to be enchanted. I would be fine giving up the +1 to hit for +2 to Profession Chef. As the goal of my character is to be the greatest Chef ever. To one day prepare feasts for the gods themselves
I am reading conflicting threads on whether or not I could ever enchant a Frying Pan. Some people seem to believe that Improvised weapons have to be spontaneous or they are no longer improvised. They are trying to say you can only use the Catch Off Guard feat if you are picking something up not carrying it. The trait Surprise Weapons says "You are skilled at fighting with objects not traditionally considered weapons" This seems to fit the flavor and form of Catch Off Guard as well. I see improvised weapons as improvised because they are not normally considered weapons, but you are still using them. It acts as a catch all so you dont need exotic weapon proficiency chair, you can just if you choose to be really good at hitting people with chairs. Some people are saying that improvised weapons are not weapons and thus can not be made masterwork. No masterwork broken bottle, sure, the common sense rule should be used for things like this. But a masterwork Frying Pan does exist IRL. Then there is the question of does the masterwork bonus count toward the skill or to attacking. It seems obvious to me that you would pay the masterwork weapon price if you wanted it to be a better weapon and would have the bonus be for the skill if you wanted it to be used for that. I don't see why you could choose when it is being made. Anyone heard word of this lately. Some people in threads I have read are downright terrified of people enchanting improvised weapons. Call 'munchkin" and saying it would break the game. I am trying to make a Chef of the Gods. I know the consensus seems to be that if you dare to improve numbers you are Satan, but is it really so bad to want to pick something flavorful AND it be good? I could use a real weapon and save some feats, traits, ect so that I am not useless in combat. But that seems boring when, with significant investment I can at least be mediocre doing something awesome. I would like to be something I can take to PFS, because even though I hate it on principle, it is the easiest benchmark to get GMs to allow it in game.. Thank you.
Well that is interesting. So I have a question now. Is this 1d4 the definitive of how much damage a frying pan does? Everywhere I have looked it is 1d6, including the prd reference document I linked above. As you suggest I think it should work like a club(1d6) but the trait specifically says that all of the listed items deal 1d4. Does this trait depower the frying pan, or does it set the damage for it in terms of all instances it is used. The monk of the empty hand, as well as the prd, plus the improvised weapon mastery all seems to point to light weapons do 1d4, one handed 1d6, two handed 1d8. I love the sap adept idea and it lets me be a whole lot more useful then I was going to be. Thanks for the ideas!
If you are taking Rough and Ready then you don't need Catch Off Guard, rarely if ever will an enemy be unarmed and Rough and Ready takes care of the usual Improvised Weapon penalties I did not see that Rough and Ready takes away the penalties as well, thats nice. So would you say that it is not worth the trait or the feat slot. Because Catch off Guard lets me take improvised weapon mastery to increase it to a d8(at level 11 though and I doubt 1d2 extra damage is worth two feat) This certainly has caught me off guard and frees up two feat slots, great stuff! Thanks
|