Cptexploderman's page

Very similar in concept here would be a halfling all-into-Charisma and using Desna's Shooting Star for a kickass melee and ranged weapon. Then you don't need Dervish, among others means of gaining finesse, because that isn't necessary. The bulk of the build would be warpriest, which pumps the base weapon die, gets the DSS feat by swapping a minor blessing, and offers other utility to the character. (IMO the base warpriest is better than the more glass-cannony Arsenal Chaplain archetype, but YMMV.)

STR- 5
DEX+ 14
CON: 12 (halfling, 17,14,12,12,12,7 20pt array*)
INT: 12
WIS: 14
CHA+ 19
(*or 15,14,12,12,12,12 array with GMs who frown upon minmaxing.)

racial trait: Fleet of Foot
character traits: Fate's Favored, Dangerously Curious

01 uMonk1 [Invested Regent][Move+10], DFT:Desna's Shooting Star
02 Cleric1 (worship Desna)
03 Warpriest1 (slide DFT into minor blessing & retrain 1st-level feat to Crusader's Flurry), Quick Draw
04 Warpriest2 CHA>20
05 Warpriest3 FEAT(g), FEAT(w)
06 Warpriest5 [Channeling], (retrain Cleric1 into a level of Warpriest)
07 Warpriest6 FEAT(g), FEAT(w), ...etc.

* Four open feat slots
* Paladin-like saving throws due to Investiture.
* AC = 11 + Dex + Wis + (Fervor buffs) + (UMD'd Mage Armor) + Bracers, etc.
* Flurry with same charisma-based weapon into melee AND ranged.
* Since dex/str aren't attack stats, a Blinkback Belt is painless.

Dip a level into Oracle for any of several revelations using Charisma for AC and Reflex or CDD instead of Dex, and that stat can basically be dumped as unnecessary for anything except bonuses to some skills.

Interesting build but hard pass on the 5 strength. Any number of things that are pretty common shuts you down.

Doing some dark magic to Necro this thread, I've liked reading these and would like to offer forth my one stop combo that's the ultimate time out for just about anything troubling you.
Feeblemind + maze, almost no chance they'll stumble out before the 10 minute duration.

I can't speak to the state of Pathfinders celestial bodies but there is a simple cost effective way to end most, if not all life in time. It's not time efficient mind you, unless you got life times to spare.
Decanter of endless water, done. Well turn it on at fountain setting and drop it into the nearest ocean. If depth pressure is a concern, one could attach it to a buoy or some other simple solution. Ta da Lex Luthor'esk evil achieved.
P.S
One aspect I forgot, the Decantor should be set to fresh water when dropped into said Ocean. It'd speed things along slightly.

Arise chickun! Chickun arise!

In the Advance Class Guide there is a combat feat, Ranged Study. It allows you to use studied combat and in turn strike with a ranged weapon as long as you are with in 30 ft. You can pick it up long before 4th level and you're golden.

It's this simple, if you want to play 5 ed. then do so, if you like Pathfinder or whatever your playing then don't switch. Everyone (including myself) have been doing this back and forth on this aspect of this game is better than that, in truth it's all a matter of opinion and those opinions don't mean anything beyond a person taste.
If you simply must weigh all possible variables simply do your own research, go out to your gaming shop and thumb through these books or sit in on a game of said system. Better yet play the game once, or if that's not possible you can watch it streamed online. YouTube is a wonderful thing.
Everyone going on about their system of choice or why that system is less because of that, it starts out civil but quickly becomes conflict.(again I'm guilty of it too.) Go out and get your hands on these materials. The best judge of what works for you is you.

Now, young Skywalker... you will die.

Well good luck with your games both present and in the future Auxmaulous,houstonderek and Digitalelf. This back and forth is getting us no where. We aren't even speaking about the topic anymore.
Will I change over to 5th? No. Anyone that does I hope your games flow well and the stories ever interesting. I prefer Pathfinder, for my current and future games.

Cptexploderman wrote:

houstonderek wrote:

And when you got to "Stoneskin" levels, the fighter generally only failed his save vs. spells on a one or a two.

And stoneskin didn't stop grapple, overbearing or whatever the other one was, and all of them disrupted casting.

A fighter wouldn't get a save vs Stone skins? What kind of monster for a DM did you have? It's a magic effect cast on the caster not an effect that allows for an attacker to save versus it. Also the spell granted something like a d4 plus caster level in negating all attacks from a non spell source.

It wasn't the save vs. stoneskin that the fighter needs to save from, what HD is talking about is the saves he would need to make while the wizard was casting other spells/screaming while the fighter turned his head into grape jelly.

Stoneskin protected 1d4 +1 per two caster levels and each of those protections went down per attack he was exposed to in a round - not hits, but people trying to hit. So if a dart clown (3 attacks) and bow clown (2 attacks) both level 1 were attacking said wizard, that would count as 5 stoneskin(s!1!!!!1) that were taken off in that round. Hit or miss.

Magic attacks went right through - in addition to taking off hits. 3 magic missile attacks - 3 stoneskins wiped.

If you don't know it or remember it, please don't post it.

Back to the program in progress....

Stoneskin

I'm well aware sir, and I'd love to sit at a table and we hand craft say at 10 level one on one encounter me a Mage you a fighter as see how the event plays out. It would seem you don't know of what you speak. I'm trying to be civil I really am but the snarky bend to your speech will only end with these posts being pulled from the forum.

And when you got to "Stoneskin" levels, the fighter generally only failed his save vs. spells on a one or a two.

And stoneskin didn't stop grapple, overbearing or whatever the other one was, and all of them disrupted casting.

A fighter wouldn't get a save vs Stone skins? What kind of monster for a DM did you have? It's a magic effect cast on the caster not an effect that allows for an attacker to save versus it. Also the spell granted something like a d4 plus caster level in negating all attacks from a non spell source.

Yep. 2e didn't do much to change the 1e relationship between the classes, other than to eliminate a few all together and add one (core). The magic user was still a glass cannon, and wasn't anything close to the 3x wizard, level by level, until well into double digits.

Oh, and Stoneskin, iirc, was a sixth level spell, so I doubt any 5th level magic users were casting it (for Cptexploderman). I think you also forget that you have to declare your actions before you roll initiative in 1e (I forget if they still did that in 2e), that high level spells took a LONG time to cast, relatively, and, even if you're stone skinned, it didn't take much to disrupt casting.

If the wizard could get the spell off, yeah, big time wow. But, in AD&D, getting that spell off was far from certain, unless your DM was a total pushover or ignored a ton of stuff.

3x? Let's see, even the most powerful spells generally take as long to cast as the lowliest first level spell, you can practically do cartwheels while casting, and even if you do get hit, you have an incredibly easy concentration check. Couple all of that with DCs that scale faster than save bonuses, all kinds of stuff to make SR a pointless stat in most cases, and the fact that the AD&D fighter got that 2/1 or 3/1 AND his move, and in 3x it was either/or, oh, yeah, 3x was "wizard" edition.

One I didn't say a 5th level Mage was casting stone skins I simply mentioned stone skins as it made any weapon or physical damage well nothing it killed the Fighter. Two Stone skins casting time was next to nothing I don't recall but I do believe it was One? Also the Mage at 5th level did indeed only get one spell at 3rd level spell at 5th but also it mages also tended to have things like attack spell nicely enchanted on a wand.

137ben wrote:

Kthulhu wrote:

Well, for higher-level magic-users, damage dealing / blasting was actually one of the better options. When the also high-level enemy made it's very easy save, at least it took half-damage. Save or suck / die spells tended lean more and more towards the SAVE option as the wizard got higher level.

How does spell resistance (or some analog) work in AD&D? Once of the biggest criticisms of magic in d20 is that it is supposedly balanced by spell resistance, but so many of the best spells have SR: No that it is basically irrelevant. Does AD&D have a ton of spells that bypass magic resistance?

Almost nothing got past spell resistance. Fighters weren't caddies and sherpas in pre-3x D&D, not by a long shot.

Wizards of the Coast, for some reason, really liked wizards in 3x.

Uh, I think you're mistaken in at least your view on it being WotC that "loved" wizards and ect ect. I played AD&D and 2nd.. Mages as they were called were weak from level 1 to 4, once you learned fly and fireball you were the god king of your party. The Fighter with their 2/1 attacks upward to 3/1 could do nothing to a Mage, much less a Mage with stone skins.

I believe Cptexploderman is saying 5th edition is a repackaged SAGA system. But, since I am not him, I could be wrong.

You are correct sir. 5th different in many ways to the Saga ed. but the feel and the character builds feel like Saga. Again this just my opinion. I've watched 5th live streamed and read much of the PBH and it doesn't thrill me. I'll be keeping with Pathfinder.

Cptexploderman wrote:

Easy Kthulhu, it's a game. If you like it..as your unending posts in defense of 5th show you clearly have strong feelings for it. It's alright, dice up and have a go at it.

Did you ever consider that it might not be about the game? Anytime anyone defends WotC, 4E, 5E, etc. on these boards, they're automatically assumed to be fanatics - either of the company or the system.

The reality is that lots of people who like Paizo hate WotC, and they'll badmouth anything that WotC produces just on principle. While those people may have very legitimate reasons for not liking WotC, they often resort to expressing that dislike with poorly constructed arguments and complaints with no basis in reality. Putting "in my opinion" in front of any old ridiculous claim does not excuse someone from expressing themself clearly or doing some simple fact checking.

Regardless of preference, we have a responsibility to be clear and accurate and to add something of value to the conversation.

I agree, I also don't hate WotC or D&D. Advanced D&D all those years ago is the game I cut my teeth on so to speak. D&D will always hold a place in my heart, I've just not liked the last two versions of it. TSR fanboy right here. As for WotC I've played MTG on and off since Beta.

In all seriousness, I don't put stock in which class is better dreck. Every class has peaks and valleys and in most cases the whole dynamic of it a changes with a release of a new book. Is there a reason for a Monk?
Yes, it's an iconic class that been staple in RPGs for some time now. I've played more than a few and ran the table in kills and DM frustration. Play whatever you wish when you wish it. If everyone only played the so called powerful classes parties would only be comprised of Gun slingers, Summoners and Wizards ( Arcanists now as well).
How much fun would that be? If optimization is so important there are countless mini games where that mind set is key. In role playing not so much. Just my two cents, cheers.

Sure there is a reason to play a Monk, you wanted to play a Monk. A top knot having, sandal wearing, Kung fu (or any martial art style) bad a**. If the complaint is that other classes or hybrids can do as good or nearly as good at what the Monk can do then that's a personal problem.
Frankly if that's your gripe, then you must hate arcane spell users all day. L33T class wins..that last bit is sarcasm, or is it? *Tight shot of face, Que dramatic Music*

Cptexploderman wrote:

it's being repackaged as this edition

What does this even mean?

Between Pathfinder and 5e, one of them is something repackaged, and one of them is something new.

5e is new.

Oh, and Cptexploderman? Favoriting your own posts doesn't make it look like more people agree with you. It makes you look like you're desperate to make people THINK that more people agree with you.

Easy Kthulhu, it's a game. If you like it..as your unending posts in defense of 5th show you clearly have strong feelings for it. It's alright, dice up and have a go at it. 5th in my OPINION "simply that." draws heavily on Saga ed. Thus my repackaged statement. I fav'd my comment because it made me laugh sorry it's my troll knee jerk reaction. If it hurts you so deeply I promise I won't again.. Honest. I'm totally willing to hug this out, come on, bring it in.

Strangely enough most of the people I game with consider SAGA to be the best version of Star Wars they have seen, and they have played every version from West End's all d6 system to the current system with the unique dice.

Every group is different, my circle has played every edition of StarWars as well and consider the Saga edition a train wreck. To each there own I suppose but I can point out that the Saga edition at least in a life span and sales aspect failed.

I've looked at the D&D next and was underwhelmed to say the least. People complain about stat bloat and this or that, Pathfinder isn't perfect. There isn't a game that's perfect, this D&D 5th or next or whatever it's being repackaged as this edition isn't for me. It smacks of over simplification, it's simply a hybrid of that dreadful Saga edition that killed StarWars oh so many years ago. I've cast my lot in with Pathfinder and once a Goonie always a Goonie..wait sorry, got off track.
WoTC can "tap" a lot of things but my wallet isn't one of them.

The ACG is a solid book, adds a lot of play possibilities for characters. Personally I really like the Brawler and Arcanist. That said my group just started Iron Gods, I was inspired to play a cleric.. Sorry I added nothing to the thread. Cheers.

I think the topic has gotten a little skewed, in so far that people are throwing up hypotheticals and "what if" scenarios. The thread has turned into a place for people to butt hurt about caster = win opinions. There are encounters where the enemy will use the tactic of "rush" or use assets on the arcane caster. By that same statement there will be times when healers will be targeted, or the archer that's raining death will, or the steal clad juggernaut cutting a bloody path will be the immediate target.
As a player and a DM/GM/Storyteller ect. I can honestly say every encounter should be handled like it's the first, at least in unconnected encounters. If you have a baddie that's had first hand experience with the pcs and knows the caster is a threat that needs to be addressed at once then the tactic has merit. Or if the enemy has reason to target the caster, meaning it's part of the story then do so.
If you are simply doing it to target a player that's proven to be very effective against the adventures enemy element then your meta gaming. It's wrong and at end of the day this is a game meant to be enjoyed. Pathfinder modules and AP's are constructed in a manner that an arcane caster shouldn't shut down your session. If you are home brewing a game and the caster is shutting down the session, well plan more completely and know your players. If the player is intentionally being disruptive you can take them aside and talk it out.
Targeting repeatedly builds resentment and kills adventures and possibly gaming groups and finally friendships. Do what best serves the story and keep the narrative rolling.

Trapped in the past, Doctor Beckett finds himself leaping from life to life, putting things right, that once went wrong and hoping each time, that his next leap will be the leap home.

...sorry, had too.

Stone shape would not work, I'm pretty sure we've covered that. Have someone cast a Fabricate spell and you're done. Barring of course your DM simply doesn't allow you to use the multiple gems of total equal value.

I've never had a problem with starting wealth, mechanically it works fine for me. I'm sure everyone at first level would love to have more coin for this or that, but you have to make it work. I rarely play a martial characters, so the gold I often net for equipment is more than enough for my needs.
In the end do what's right for your group, if everyone is in agreement house rule it. I as the arcane spell jockey would never mind for my parties frontline or ranged specialists to be better outfitted, at the end of the day it's my hide that benefits.

Every roleplaying group is different, in mine at least this wouldn't fly. If I were to try and rationalize to my players why a random group of brigands "clearly an intelligent enemy." Were to use tactics designed to exploit an adventuring parties dynamic. Unless this particular group of brigands specialize in nicking adventuring parties.. But as I said each rp group is different, use what works for the entertainment of your players. If I had to take part in a group where for wearing robes I was being hunted my every opponent we meet, I'd do what most of my arcane casters do anyway- not wear robes. I'd stick to my explores outfit.

I'm my opinion to have every encounter -save for the lowest of Int creatures- rush the casters isn't running a roleplaying game and more akin to a minis game. To always attack the casters might be the most strategically sound course, "and by all means some enemies can and will employ this strategy" but to do so every time is plainly meta gaming. If I were in a game and my character was clearly being targeted in nearly every encounter is a game I'd excuse myself from.

I for one, love all the aspects of leveling my character. The evolution of the party and the mythology left in their wake. I complain some times to my group when we start a new AP because I feel cheated, I know I'm going to love the AP's but I dread their ends. I spend months playing these characters and they become a part of me in a sense. I dislike when we wrap up an epic AP and there is simply no materials to support further play.

I won't defame 3rd party publishers,"keeps up the good fight gents." but I'd like something to truly wrap up my characters journey that is a story wrote for and set in Golarion. I understand putting something in written form isn't cheap, but if the fear is running a print of high level modules that may or may not sell -perhaps only selling them in PDF form? That would cut a lot of the production costs out. Just my two cents, regardless I will continue to support Paizo and the amazing community of gamers it has gathered. Cheers.

I've always liked the look on my DMs face when I pulled a Feeble Mind followed by a Maze spell.

Ive got an idea for an evil cleric, in my history of running and playing in evil themed groups is the cleric "withholds" healing and granted they are not as refined a healer as there sissy la la counterparts but ive been toying with a new toon soon to be ran. Im going to play a NE Pharasma devoted cleric with the healing domain and death domain. My reasoning behind this is to have a healer thats skilled at cure spells (as per the healing domain) aswell as liberal (ab)use of negative channelings and random inflict spells we all love. My justification is my character will be a morbid plague doctor of sorts whos role in the church would be learning the nature (for himself atleast) of the mortal animial and ultimately death. On a plus side in an evil group, a cleric thats not strappted/stingy with the healy goodness makes friends or at least is is of higher value and last to be turned on. :) Im sorry for the shoddy wordsmithing as it its 4a.m. here, Cheers.