HardMaple's page

32 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


So I am one of 2 players in a gestalt campaign for Reign of Winter (25 pt build).

I have a build I like, but I've been kind of interested in Words of Power too.

Wizard (Spellslinger) 1/Magus (Eldritch Archer, Kensai) 19//Monk (Scaled Fist) 1/Gunslinger (Mysterious Stranger, Musket Master) 1/Fighter (Trench, Armor Master) 4/Paladin 3/Unchained Rogue 11

1) Wizard (Spellslinger) 1: I like guns. I like spells. I like guns that cast spells.

2) Magus (Eldritch Archer, Kensai) 19: Cantrips means saving lots on ammunition. Arcane Pool. Fighter or Spell feats. Eldritch Archer works with firearms. Kensai gives INT to AC, INT to initiative, INT to damage, always act in surprise, etc.

3) Monk (Scaled Fist) 1: CHA to AC & CMD, Improved Unarmed for multiple close attacks without holstering firearm

4) Gunslinger (Mysterious Stranger, Musket Master) 1: CHA to Grit, Touch AC extended, CHA to damage. Free Rapid Reload.

5) Fighter (Trench, Armor Master) 4: 3 bonus feats that gets Unhindered Shield (buckler with spell casting and armor bonuses). DEX to damage with firearms, AC bonuses.

6) Paladin: Smite Evil, CHA bonus to all Saves, Immune to Fear, Immune to Disease, Swift self-heals. Wands of curing.

7) Unchained Rogue 11: sneak attacks (7d6 with Accomplished Sneak Attacker), in Surprise and 1st round (with lots of sneaking and Perception). Avoiding damage for some of the worst attacks in Pathfinder. Very scout(y) class. Add DEX to damage with Unarmed. Sniping. Free bonus attack when rolling initiative (@ 10th).

Bane Baldric; Goggles of Sniping

Seems MAD, but 25 pt build. INT for spell casting, AC, Initiative; CHA for AC, Grit, damage, Saves. DEX to AC, attack rolls vs Touch AC, and damage. You only need INT and either CHA or DEX high. The other can be moderate.

I have briefly looked over Words of Power, and its seems like an interesting ruleset. My question is this: is replacing the Magus levels with Word of Power Sorcerer worth the effort of learning the new rules? There are plenty of other things I can do with that time, if not.

I disagree. The description says "...can..." That means choice.

I would agree with that. But I could combine Bracers of Archery with custom Bracers of Armor; Cloak of Resistance with Cloak of Displacement; Amulets of Natural Armor with Might Fists; Ring of Protection with Sustenance; and other options that I haven't looked at yet.

I didn't know about combining magic items because I haven't done much item creation before. Thank you for showing me that.

Monks lose AC bonus, fast movement and Flurry of Blows while using Armor and shields.

So I'm in a gestalt solo campaign. Character is a combination Instructor Wizard, Reincarnated Druid, and Zen Archer Monk (plus 1 level Empyreal Sorcerer). I'm looking for which ITEMS will give the best boost to AC. No mithral buckler because of Druid. No Haramaki because of Druid AC bonuses. So Amulet Natural Armor, Ring of Protection, Bracers of Armor, Belt of Dexterity, Robe of the Archmage. But there are rings that better serve me; Bracers of Archery might better serve me as Zen Archer; Robe is expensive (so later levels). Wands of Mage's Armor, Shield and Protection spells. What am I missing? What might be better choices?

Gestalt is neither cheating nor was it excluded in OP.

As for negative levels: I lived with 2 for awhile, then 1 for awhile longer (considering 1 week cooldown of Restoration). I removed the negative levels with Scrolls of Restoration, which has a 75% chance of being found in Trunau (cost: 800 gp, Base Value 1,000 gp). Restoration is not in Druid's spell list, but it is in Inquisitor's. Requires level 10 to cast or a caster level check DC:11.

I started with a Gestalt Dwarf Druid (Reincarnated)//Barbarian (Unchained Invulnerable) for solo Giantslayer. By early Book 3, he is a Boggard Druid 11//Barbarian 7/Inquisitor 2/Ranger 2 (also had a brief period as a Suli); Tiger animal companion. Campaign is on hold while it rewritten to actually be challenging. A gestalt solo with animal companion totally destroys the APL vs CR model. And its hard to kill someone who [basically] can't die. He also stashes equipment sets near exploration points (places where he's likely to confront difficult enemies) so that he has something to use when he's killed, in order to get his preferred stuff back.

7 years old, 1979. It was the neighbor's game, so I don't know if it was the white box or the Basic Set rewrite. It didn't last long, so I played by my own rules until I bought the Red Box at 10 years old.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Player is using a Gestalt Paladin//Inquisitor til 5 I think, then switching to Druid (the animal companion is pretty useful). Also allowing Leadership at L7. Using UC rules, including the "Starting from Scratch" rules for lower BP gp costs. I will also allow a donation or loan (depending on desired amount) from Restov if player can be convincing enough (trade, security, etc).

There will be a lot of empty roles at the beginning, forcing slow growth. But I will add/change NPCs as necessary to fill them out over time.

For example:
If the PC creates a treaty with the Sootscales, then Chief will ask PC to bring Nakpik along to teach him. Nakpik could fill a kingdom role (such as Enforcer) or return to the Sootscales and take over as chief, creating a vassal kingdom.

Adjusting the encounters hasn't been to difficult yet, no more than necessary to fix them for any size group. I think the one encounter a day setup for Kingmaker makes it the best suited for solo play. Her 1/day abilities effectively become 1/encounter that way. I make exploration/mapping take 2.5x as long.

Overall, the Azlanti Gestalt with an Animal Companion combo is pretty strong. I think a treaty or alliance with Restov/Brevoy is an important key. But giving that so many Book 1 & 2 NPCs are in some way connected to Brevoy, it will fall into place. If not, Book 3 gives a great opportunity for that to happen.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I've been playing Fallout 4. Then looking at Azlantis in Pathfinder. How do I reasonably get an Azlanti into a solo campaign, since they are extinct? Cryogenic freezing, of course, or the Pathfinder version (mysterious magic). I like the Pathfinder rule set, but prefer a post-apocalypse story. So with this background, I get both.

The legends say that when the ancient Azlanti grew too big for their britches, the Aboleths called down the Starstone to destroyed Thassilon and Azlant. But many Azlanti survived as they were traveling other continents. To protect themselves during Earthfall, they fled to caves and other underground complexes. There they used ancient magics to put themselves into hibernation until the world had rebuilt itself.

In reality (in this world anyway), the ancient Azlanti were modern humans living in a technological, magic-less world. But their hubris led a great cataclysm that changed the world. Continents moved and the very fabric of reality changed. Humans and other creatures were mutated and changed by radiation and other hazards. The mutations were both physical and mental, and magic was born. Over 9 millennia later, history has been rewritten by the "wise sages" based on rumor and superstition.

The gods are real, including the ascended gods. Among them, the immortal hero Aroden. For centuries, the surviving Azlanti and their descendants followed his teachings. But as with all human religions, they began to twist his church to suit their own wants. When Aroden no longer recognized his people, he stepped away from the world. He took with magic gifts with him. Humans, their brains too small to comprehend the thoughts of gods, decided he must be dead. But he was merely waiting, with the infinite patients of someone who cannot feel the passage of time.

Aroden waits and searches. From time-to-time he discovers his lost Azlantis, hiding in underground vaults, waiting. When he finds them, Aroden wakes his countrymen and tasks them with bringing back the glory of Azlant and spread his teachings once again. Each has failed. And now Aroden has discovered a new hope. A single survivor, who will emerge from his underground nest into a world he grew up in but cannot recognize. Will he bring back glory and humanity to the world, or will his gnawed bones fade into dust like his beloved ancient kingdom?

Just play the game. Not everyone can be a Hall-of-Fame quarterback. Someone has to be the Wedge-Buster on Special Teams (I'm looking at you Fighter).

I'm sure the blood running down the back of his thighs would require more of a Bluff check than a Sleight of Hand check.

Faiths of the Balance, pg 17 (under Pharasma): "...you may not create undead, nor CONTROL them unless you do specifically for the purpose of destroying them."

On the other hand, you could change to a different deity. I haven't found any rules for this. But a cleric who violates the code of conduct of their deity loses all benefits until she atones, so I would rule a similar procedure for changing deity. Also, clerics aren't required to have a deity, so that's also an option.

Craft creates material items for personal/group use. Profession generates gold pieces (and sometimes substitutes for Knowledge). Profession: Armorsmith doesn't mean you are creating actual suits of armor. You could be melting ingots, tending the forge, creating molds, fitting armor, or sweeping the floor. Its there to generate income in your downtime before Ultimate Campaign was written.

All Hunch does is create story-telling and role-playing opportunities. It leads the guard to asking questions instead of just letting the spy walk through the gate unmolested. Perhaps the guard watches him a few seconds longer once he enters the gate. Or harasses the spy in the pub later that night. But a good Bluff build will overcome that (probably). What's the fun of a good build if you assume everything is automatic? RPGs are about story-telling; story-telling is about drama; Hunch creates drama. Its doing its job.

thejeff wrote:

I think you're wrong about the intent. I think the intent is pretty clearly to allow open discrimination against gays, not just the kind of examples you approve of.

The effects of the law as written are obvious and there has been the opportunity to do as you suggested and narrow it. As far as I can tell, the legislature and the governor want the broad law.

Give us something substantial to back these claims. All I see is interpretation. Give specific examples of why these legislators and governor want to legalize gay discrimination.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
The Fox wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

You might want to back up a second and recognize that you are essentially saying we should outlaw people being wrong.

Think about that for a second.

Nope. People can be wrong all they want...until that wrongness impacts someone else.

More to the point, who decides who is "wrong" on these matters? From an objective standpoint.

"I hate black people" is an opinion. It is a bigoted opinion, but it isn't "wrong". You can't prove to the man that he does not, in fact, hate black people.

Perhaps it is morally wrong, but I doubt anyone here wants to see the world after it has been taken over by the morality police (I imagine if would look a lot like Australia will in 20 years, if you pay attention to what's going on over there).

Thoughts are not being regulated by law, actions are. One is free to think whatever bigoted thoughts they want. One is free to share and express those bigoted thoughts as well. The legal line is acting on those thoughts in such a way as to limit the rights, freedoms and activities of others; or calling other people to actions that limit the rights, freedoms and activities of others. And that is where this poorly written legislation fails. The courts may one day determine its limits or fully strike it down. But before that can happen, a lot of good people will be discriminated against for no reasons other than ignorance and unsubstantial fears.

It was irresponsible of the Indiana Congress to pass this as written, and it is for this reason I believe the governor should veto it and send it back to be tightened up. There are certain uses of this legislation that can be tolerable, if better defined. For example: not forcing a medical professional to participate in an elective abortion if he/she has a religious objection to doing so. But a man holding hands with another man entering a bookstore certainly would not qualify. Unless they start fornicating, which is the only part clearly spelled out in both Judaism and Christianity (though I'm pretty sure public fornication of any description is well covered by other laws).

This one is tough. Core Rulebook says Standard Action Attack (Ranged) provokes, Full Attack of any kind does not provoke. The only reference that using a ranged weapon while threatened provokes is Point Blank Master in the APG. It really is going to depend how much weight your GM gives to feat descriptions that counter the core rules.

The rules do not say anything about a "base" weapon; only that it is of Masterwork quality and are not made of any special material. There is nothing in RAW that does NOT allow strength bonuses on an Arcane Bond Composite Longbow. Local rules may vary.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Silver Surfer wrote:

The arcanist took a real bite out of the wizard and IMO virtually puts the Sorceror into retirement.

Bloodrager puts Barbarian in the shade

The Shaman... a complete farce IMO.... just when I thought the Oracle was OP with Divine Protection and add to Charisma to everything.... then along comes the Shaman! Single handedly it has almost put the Oracle, Witch, Cleric and Druid out of business entirely!! What is a real joke was that the Druid had a whole load of Shaman archetypes years before the ACG!!!! I mean... why even bother?!?!!?

The group we started a couple of weeks ago involves a Witch, a Barbarian (Titan Mauler), a Fighter and a ranged Fighter. Half of these are classes you claim the ACG put "out of business entirely!!" Of course, we are about building the characters we want to play, not just min-maxing. Sounds more like you are having local issues with your game. I wish people would quit trying to force their problems on the entire game and the company.

I would say its 10d6. In the "Using Staves:" section, it only talks about modifying the spell with the caster's level, not class traits.

Gwen Smith wrote:

One level of Alchemist to add your Int mod to splash weapons.

Focused Shot to add Int to ranged attacks.
Deadly Aim to boost damage on ranged attacks.

"A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects." Acid Splash spell does not meet this definition (whatever the name may otherwise imply).

Focused Shot specifically states bow or crossbow.

Deadly Aim specifically says no touch attacks.

I think the "Heat Dangers" section on page 444 of Core Rulebook covers it will enough, without calling it by name. Mechanically, nonlethal damage and Fatigue are proper ways of handling it, IMHO. Calling it a sunburn is really just flavor.

Its actually not a "big issue". I've provided a real world guide for playing this character and its limits. That's just a nickle-and-dime argument that doesn't really change the point.

Average human IQ = 100; average human Intelligence score = 10. Dolphin IQ = between 35 and 49, average 42; dolphin Intelligence score = 2.

100-42 = 58. 10-2 = 8. 58/8 = 7.25 IQ per Int point away from 10. INT 10-4 = 6; 6*7.25 = 43.5. 100 (ave human IQ) - 43.5 = 56.5. INT 4 = IQ 56.5

IQ 56.5 = Mild Intellectual Disability. "Educable with adjustments. Can learn to care for oneself. Employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies. ...typically not caused by brain damage but part of the normal variance of intelligence."

At this level, a person:
-takes longer to learn to talk, but can communicate well once he or she knows how
-fully independent in self-care
-has problems with reading and writing
-is socially immature
-is unable to deal with responsibilities of marriage or parenting
-may benefit from specialized education plans

On a personal level: I have a 12 year old granddaughter who functions at this level. She would be capable of understanding the need for an escape plan and capable of idealizing such a plan. However the plan would be very simplistic. It would be as detailed as "sneak behind the guard, kill him with a karate punch, and take his keys" (she is convinced she knows karate because she saw it in a movie). Unfortunately, someone of this intellect would likely also be extremely sensitive to causing pain and therefore a terrible choice for an adventurer.

Move along, nothing new or creative to see here...

DeathQuaker wrote:

Three things to remember about Leadership:

- A cohort can never be more than 2 levels lower than the PC with the feat, regardless of Leadership score

Just the opposite. "Regardless of your Leadership score, you can only recruit a cohort who is two OR MORE levels lower than yourself." CRB, pg 129.

Therefore, a cohort can never be closer than 2 levels lower.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Due to the one-easy-encounter-a-day environment in KM, I use a different system for large groups. We are in Blood For Blood and have 6 PCs (including stone giant warrior and owlbear barbarian), 2 Cohorts, a shadow companion and an animal companion (bear). For APL, I add up all character levels for the PCs (not including cohorts and companions), then divide by four and subtract 1 to get CR for the encounter. We have level 13, 12, 11, 9, 13 & 11. Standard rules gives a APL of 12, too easy. My method gives APL 17-1 = 16.

Blood For Blood:
Area Q. The Swamp Scar has just a Spirit Naga Sorcerer 3 (CR 12, XP 19,200). Very easy encounter for 6 mid-levels. I added 2 levels of Sorcerer + 2 HD (CR 15, XP 51,200). Then added 3 Mobogos (CR 10, XP 9600 each) and 3 Boggard Fighter 8 (CR 6, XP 2400 each). It still only took 7 rounds for them to complete, though it used up about half of their combat spells and abilities and got a bit hairy for the owlbear barbarian at one point.

If its a single creature encounter, I up CR with either class levels or additional HD; then multiple weaker creatures to fill out the XP budget. Any group can quickly annihilate a single creature of appropriate CR, so multiple creatures is critical to making an interesting encounter.

I've been doing this since late in The Varnhold Vanishing. Its not appropriate for low-level groups, but works out fairly well for mid-level.

I'm wondering where your Will is at. A mid-level wizard with a Dominate spell and you become the weapon that destroys your party.

Ji-kun wrote:
HardMaple wrote:
Weapon Finesse for another +2 to hit. Put points in Acrobatics so you can get into flanking position to use your Sneak Attack for bonus damage. I should also like to tell you to get an elven curved blade for better damage, but you already took the two-weapon feat.
I don't see +2 attk anywhere on that descriptor.

Your Dex offers +3 vs. the current +1 with your Str.

Weapon Finesse for another +2 to hit. Put points in Acrobatics so you can get into flanking position to use your Sneak Attack for bonus damage. I should also like to tell you to get an elven curved blade for better damage, but you already took the two-weapon feat.