Immolate's page

Cash is hard to come by and the rulebooks are expensive. But there are ways that don't require the expense. Use the SRD rules if you have laptops or tablets and an internet connection. Ask for books for birthdays or Christmas (or whatever).

This may sound like politically correct platitudes, but diversity in a group is a benefit, though as you've learned, it comes with challenges. Everyone doesn't have to be serious in the game, just serious about the game for it to succeed. I have a group of friends that I've been playing with for 33 years. Some of them are serious role-players, some are competitive, some are jokers, and some are hack-and-slashers. What is important is how the group interacts as a group, as people. If they are compatible as companions, then the rest will work itself out. Do you really think a bunch of forty-something guys have faithfully assembled each week for decades because the game is just that good?

It's good for players to try creative things to overcome challenges, but you have to establish boundaries. Acting upon other creatures and even objects have well-established rules, though you'll always find gaps. If you want to push someone around, you have to bull-rush them, drag them, or some other combat maneuver. Inanimate objects aren't good at combat maneuvers, and magic is less effective than flesh when attempt to accomplish these maneuvers (with certain Bibgy exceptions). Items have hit points and hardness that must be overcome to "break" them. You can't easily overcome the hardness of a stone statue with magic missiles, and if you can, it will probably take a while. Then what are the odds of it falling in the right direction? Any reasonably intelligent creature would notice that you're chipping away at the statue's base and move away from it to avoid being crushed, or throw its weight against it to push it in your direction. Let them be creative, but you be creative too, and make things hard to do, just as they are in real life.

Keep in mind that monsters are typically interested in winning, not just providing a challenge to the party. They will cheat, misdirect and bamboozle just like the party does. Teach your party early on that whatever they bring to the game, the monsters can use as well. Players are always trying to find a rule or a gap in the rules that allows them to have a significant advantage. That's okay if they've invested the feats and skills necessary, but we DM's need them to be as careful a guardian of game balance as we are. We do that by giving them incentive to self-regulate, and by limiting their actions in a reasonable manner.

Example: if someone swings on a rope into the middle of a throng of enemy soldiers, they might find spears set against their charge, they'll be grappled by several soldiers right away, and stabbed repeatedly for their silliness, that is if they don't fail their DC15 climb check and fall flat on their back and render themselves unconscious.

It's hard to know all the tricks starting off, which is why most people play in other DM's campaigns for a while before taking the plunge. But when we started, there were no other DM's, so we had to learn the hard way. It can be done and it's really a ton of fun as well, so just keep at it and you'll be looking back at these times as some of the best some day.

Welcome back Kor. My crew and I also use your sheet for our campaigns. I'm really happy with the APG material you've introduced and hope that you can provide us with a format that we can use to input information for you to take some of the drudge work off your shoulders.

So from what I'm getting regarding these posts:

Demoralizing a shaken, frightened, or panicked enemy merely increases the duration, and does NOT increase the fear step.

Using any other ability that causes fear on an already demoralized enemy upgrades the fear step appropriately.

Is that right?

Not entirely. If you are currently frightened or panicked, and someone demoralizes you, it then potentially extends the shaken condition only. It will not cause additional rounds of the frightened or panicked condition.

If you look at the Enforcer feat, that provides a free-action demoralize attempt with every non-lethal attack that lasts for the number of points of damage inflicted. A sixth level fighter with haste could potentially panic a powerful boss in one round for the duration of the battle. Think half orc fighter with high charisma, intimidating prowess, enforcer, persuasive, sixteen charisma and eighteen strength (racial bonus) and at sixth level you have 9+3+4+2+2=20 against a 10th level BBEG with 14 wisdom. Success on a 2 or better. Fright would be 7 and panic 12. Average damage with a great sword is 13 without magic or power attack, so the BBEG drops his magic weapon at your feet and runs away for 13 rounds. Yeah that would be game breaking.

I respect a good round of rules lawyering as I have so often seen those who were diametrically opposed end up agreeing at the end of a passionate discussion, as long as they were willing to listen to logic and reason.

So let's take a closer look at the literal wording, page 198 of the core rules:

"You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge."

Closest space.... to what?

1) Closest space to your starting square? That seems to be the popular interpretation.
2) Closest space to the target? That would mean you would have to stop at 10' if you're using a lance, but 5' if you're large and have reach because you can still attack at 5', which would force you to give the target an attack of opportunity if it has reach. Seems an unlikely and problematic interpretation at best.
3) Closes space along your trajectory from which your opponent can be struck (Sean's take). Obviously, if your trajectory doesn't pass through a square in which you can attack your target, it isn't a charge, it's just a move.

The text of Ride-By Attack under Benefit says: "When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge)".

Under the assumption that an explicit rule cannot invalidate another explicit rule, and that if two explicit rules seem to conflict, one should chose the interpretation that does the least harm to both, I would chose #3 above, Sean's interpretation.

Since mounted charge requires one to explicitly "use the charge action" it cannot be required to then continue the straight line of the attack which will sometimes require moving through an enemy's square, an action explicitly forbidden.

If one instead choses interpretation #3, then mounted charge and ride-by attack no longer conflict, and no harm is done to someone using either mechanic.

Another factor arguing in favor of this approach is this: if an actor using ride-by attack can retain the benefits of a charge when not charging at center mass of the charged creature, why would an actor who must stop at the point of attack not get the same benefit? IOW, if there's a slot full of dragon within charging range and I have a clear path at it, why could I not charge the dragon (barring weak knees or a lethal attack of opportunity preventing it)? I must still charge ahead at center mass, although a friendly hobbit or a shrubbery is inconveniently placed there, invalidating my charge? Seems counterintuitive, in addition to forcing a differing interpretation of the same rule used for two purposes.

On the summary tab, "Attack Combination" is written as "Attack Comination" for all three iterations.

Also, trying to use "Custom" to put in my new Cavalier. Is there a way to provide martial weapon proficiencies or armor/shield proficiencies other than the extra feats at first level? I'm only allowed three so I can only put one martial weapon proficiency in at first level.

Kor,

Are you planning to add a macro that allows the user to export the character information and then import it to aid in moving a character from one version of the sheet to the next? Pardon me if it's already there. And yup, I know it wouldn't be an easy thing to do.

Kor... if there's any drudge work you need done, compiling lists what-have-you, please call it out.

I'm surprised I haven't been schooled on feats by now. I fully expected someone to pop up and say "hey why don't you use the 'win' feat. Take that and you win automatically".

I also kind of expected someone to throw down on me with the PWNTWF feat that you take at first level and you can do 29.7 times the damage of TWF using a two-handed weapon without taking another feat.

If you ladies and gentlemen aren't going to make quick work of me, then I'm going to have to do research on my own. Not fair.

Immolate wrote:

I did a bit of a study on the viability of TWF in preparation for a new campaign and I'd be happy to share what I learned.

Have you done any math with the new Falcata? If you use the feat Oversized TWF you have the same modifiers as light weapons and your doing 1d8 19-20(x3). Course it takes two MORE feats to do so on an already feat hungry build.

I wasn't aware there were any PF splatbooks out for PF. Where do you find Oversized TWF?

The D20PFSRD shows Sawtooth Sabre as 19-20 x2 which is good, but not competitive. Does your source book show different? Which book is it, out of curiosity?

One of the flaws involved in trying to optimize a character for s single purpose is that you necessarily make sub-optimal choices in other areas such as defense and utility. I try to avoid that but obsession is funny that way.

Taking weapon focus before power attack calculates out to slightly sub-optimal, assuming no buffs/only strength as an adder. The difference is 12.88 for Power Attack and 12.55 Weapon Focus. This is without a magic or masterwork weapon.

As for criticals, the payoff is at 8th level when your crit chance doubles. Up until then it lags a bit. Switching weapons at that point, however, isn't practical that I can figure out.

I certainly considered other races and racial double weapons as alternatives, but it didn't play for several reasons. First, a human can chose to put their attribute bonus in strength. That's critical for this build. Also, the extra feat allows the human to train an exotic weapon, so an alternate race would be a wash except for "other" benefits. Finally, none of the double weapons measure up from a crit perspective, although two-bladed sword comes closest.

Great discussion. You guys are making me think!

I did a bit of a study on the viability of TWF in preparation for a new campaign and I'd be happy to share what I learned.

I created a spreadsheet to track the math. It gets a bit hairy when you start trying to track critical damage and many iterative attacks.

My assumptions were as simple as I could make them while still trying to allow for a bit of "reality". I assumed that 20% of the targets would have an AC of the fighter's BAB+10. 40% would be below in 10% increments, and 40% above in 10% increments. So if you were first level with a BAB of 1, your AC spread would be 7/8/9/10/11/11/12/13/14/15. I recognize this is arbitrary, and that every game is different, but you have to start somewhere.

The fighter is human for the bonus feat, and put his +2 in strength. I modeled kukri and short swords throughout my level span comparisons. Kukri have the best crit ratio available (18-20 x2), while short swords have higher damage, while still being a light weapon. The idea was to not suffer the extra to-hit penalty of using a one-handed weapon in the off-hand, and to benefit from weapon focus, specialization and improved critical to both weapons.

What I found out is that short swords slightly beat out kukri in the first five levels, and that a two-handed weapon has parity... better under haste, but haste is the exception in the first five levels. Please note that my testing did not attempt to measure intangibles, and with more feats to spare, a two-handed fighter will have more intangibles to his advantage.

My assumption for the TWF for first fives levels were:
1st: TWF
1st: Double Slice
1st: Power Attack
2nd: Weapon Focus
3rd: Combat Reflexes
4th: Weapon Specialization
5th: Step Up
Kukri: 22.66 Short Swords: 23.46

I do not doubt that there were more optimum choices, and I invite criticism. The first level feats I think are optimum. Combat reflexes is an intangible, but with a high dex and some awesome awesomeness from the two-weapon warrior subclass... you betcha!

Moving into 6th-10th levels, the kukri zooms past the short swords as improved critical and critical focus kick in.
6th: ITWF
7th: Lunge
8th: Improved Critical
9th: Critical Focus
10th: Greater Weapon Focus
Kukri: 98.78 Short Swords: 90.96

From 11th-15th, Kukri establish dominance. Bleeding critical matters, unless I read it wrong, especially when you're critting plenty.
11th: Two Weapon Rend
12th: Greater Two Weapon Fighting
13th: Bleeding Critical
14th: Greater Weapon Specialization
15th: Blinding Critical
Kukri: 219.22 Short Swords: 207.98

My weapon assumptions were modest for magic. I didn't really try to follow through on a two-handed fighter comp because I didn't have the time to try optimizing feats for one, not that these are optimized for TWF.

Things that I learned from gaming the spreadsheet: crit is king starting level 8. Remember that x2 is the bottom, x3 is next, x4 and 19-20 x2 are the same, and 18-20 x2 is best. Would dual scimitars or rapiers be better at 11+ using Two Weapon Warrior? Yes, but the migration seems prohibitive. In addition, you're sacrificing 5% to-hit chance on both weapons, 10% later. Also, using a larger main hand weapon just doesn't pay off in the medium or long run, although you will benefit from it at first.

Haste, I think will propel two-handed weapons to parity or beyond once I have a chance to model them fairly. Right now, using rather crude feats, they are getting wooped. Strong items or buffs would just make it worse.

I didn't go beyond 15 because that doesn't happen often in the games we play. After a year you're ready to move on to a new campaign.

[edit] I was so impressed with the kukri, that I sent off for a nice one from Tora blade company in Nepal. Not cheap but wow... 14.6" of face-chopping awesome with a handle. If it's good enough for the chick in Resident Evil, it's.... sorry, what was I saying?

PS: if you try to model crits, remember that you have to model both chance of crit and crit confirmation chance when making the calculation. So a kukri at 8th level with a 50% to-hit chance has a 30% chance of critting (15-20) x 50% chance of confirmation = 15% crit damage add per hit for full crit damage. At 9th level with critical focus, it's 30% crit chance x 70% confirm chance = 21% crit damage add per hit. Less with iterative hits and less damage to off-hand due to power attack, so each has to be calculated individually.

Wow! Sweet character sheet. What are your plans for the APG? I've been having a ball with that all weekend long.

As for TWF with 2 scimitars, just have one be one size category smaller. You will end up with a -2/-4 penalty though.

Standard two weapon fighting is -10 offhand, -6 main hand.

I'm mulling through the rules right now, which is why I found this thread.