Hey Paizo Community!
I would like your input on implementing Pathfinder gameplay at the school I work at.
I ran a forensic camp this summer and wound up talking to a student who would be entering my school in 7th grade...my school is 7-12th. He told me that his previous school had a CLASS for D&D (awesome!) and that his older brother (who I know) had helped teach it this year.
This obviously has gotten me thinking. I would like to start a Pathfinder group for the kids at my school. Initially I will GM, but eventually, I hope that is picked up by other kids.
Should I try to do this PFS legal...run a module or something? Or just run super fun scenarios and stop them wherever we need to?
Also, should I separate middle school and high school? Or keep them together at first?
Any suggestions are welcome. I want to create a really positive pathfinder experience fo these kids.
Mrs Lamontius, reporting!
He does, in fact, cook eggs!
Make eggs on the other hand..... That's stil my job.but geeze, as a biologist, that is getting crazy! :)
But,breakfast and coffee, Lamontius is the man!
They both attacked, and I rolled to see if they attacked rider, or mount, I rolled rider on both. The first babau landed all three attacks, plus sneak attack, dropping the PC below her con.
...I get the impression you're not resolving these attacks individually, but instead rolling them all at once and hitting the player with a massive final tally.
-- But these creatures had multiple targets; if the PC had gone negative after the nth attack, most sentient creatures will shift their remaining attacks to other applicable opponents (obviously they could have a mind to specifically slaughter a particular foe, but that does not appear to be the case in this encounter).
Also, while they all attack on the same initiative, they do not necessarily do so simultaneously. I.e., one would wait until the other finishes, then make its own attacks (moving toward another target if the first one was dropped by its partner).
GMs pooling multiple attacks is the #1 cause of PC death I have seen in PFS which is not otherwise immediately attributable to poor encounter design or foolish player tactics and unpreparedness for their Tier...with two of the three combining to result in a casualty in this instance.
All that said, if you DID roll attacks sequentially, the PC was at 2hp after the nth attack, and -11 after the nth+1 (with the character having a CON of 10) -- them are the breaks, and you did nothing wrong.
No, I rolled each creatures attacks individually. The Sorcerer was reduced to below zero hit points on the third primary attack from the creature. Unfortunately, that creature ALSO deals sneak attack damage, with I could not then deal to another character. The second demon then attacked the animal companion, as the PC was no longer a threat.
Step back, take a few deep breaths, and relax. When a player dies, especially as they progress ever higher into the levels, its to be expected. Its simply how the dice come down/luck/destiny/what-have-you.
How did the sorcerer react to being killed? Did they start crying, laugh it off, get angry, or simply seemed somewhat disappointed? If it was only somewhat disappointed or still acting like they are having fun its a good sign that they do not let their character's death impede the enjoyment of those around them.
Did the sorcerer ever once state something similar to you were being "unfair"? If not, its a good sign as the player accepts what happened and is "rolling with it".
I personally don't pull any punches for my players, but at the same time I will make sure too not pick on a character with all the monsters.
Yeah, I was definitely more upset about it then he was. It was totally a legit roll. Honestly, they had a +12 to hit, so I was hitting ACs in the 20s pretty frequently.
Lesson learned. I think that if I had just let it happen organically, I would have a better feeling about it at this point.
The sorcerer did have enough prestige in PFS to Rez his character... And frankly, he didn't seem too terribly upset. It was just sort of unnerving to me and I wasn't sure how to handle it. I've heard of parties withdrawing from this particular encounter, as defeating it is not necessary for success in the scenario.
I will say that the experience has resulted in my husband researching ways to overcome DR in the future! Had they had a paladin, or inquisitor in the party, it would have been a totally different scenario! But the two melee characters were dependent on iterative attacks, and with DR 10... That's tough! The archer, too, was getting a significant amount of his damage soaked, though after this session, he is taking clustered shot, so it will be less of an issue.
Hey all,
I killed my first PC in a PFS session today and was kind of at a loss on how to move on with the encounter. I one shotted a 7th level character within the first round of combat and sort oh had a "HOLY CRAP! THEY'RE ALL GOING TO DIE IF I PLAY THESE TACTICS!!" moment. I started really pulling punches, which I think resulted in some dissatisfaction for some of the players.
Here's what happened;
Spoiler:
I was running Blakros Matrimony in the 6-7 tier. The party was composed of a 6th level archer barbarian, a 6th level drunken monk, a 6th level rogue, a 5th level rogue, and two 7th level sorcerers. With the exception of one of the sorcerers (who was really quite great, but running a pregen), these are all experienced, mature players.
The party did great in the social encounters, pretty much trounced the barbarians thanks to a very large lightening bolt.... But then the wheels started to come off in the final encounter.
One of the sorcerers rides an animal companion and has a habit of charging head I first into combat. His animal companion attacked one of the babaus, then on their turn, two of the three babaus ( not in melee) used their summon ability, with one being successful to summon a fourth in flanking position with the sorcerer on her companion. They both attacked, and I rolled to see if they attacked rider, or mount, I rolled rider on both. The first babau landed all three attacks, plus sneak attack, dropping the PC below her con. Since the PC went down, which I felt super bad about... I said the second attack would then go to the mount, as they are intelligent creatures.
.....this is when I basically lost my cool. The PC started stating that in his absence, the companion would revert back to bestiary form... I'd never encountered a PC death, let alone with a companion, so we all started hashing it out, etc... Finally I ruled that his companion would stay in the fight and continue on his last command (attack), but it kept its companion stats. I was flustered, and I also started realizing that this party had very little in the way of overcoming the demons DR and that if I used th shadow demons deeper darkness, or some of its shadow magic they were royally screwed. So I started fudging rolls and not using as smart of tactics... It got a little messy, and I could tell that at least one player was annoyed that while I was definitely holding back, they were still in VERY bad shape. They wound up making it though by the skin of thei teeth, with another PC deeply in the negative at the end of the encounter.
I feel that if I hadn't started pulling up, I would have killed one or two more players in this fight...at the least... But I am left feeling like I should have just unleashed the hounds so to speak, and let them feel like thy REALLY accomplished something for winning.
Advice on dealing with this in the future would be much appreciated. Many thanks :)
Also, posted from my iPad, so my apologies for typos.
Better roll high on your survival, you'll have a bit of an adventure on the drive down.. Southbound traffic in the summer time due to the Del Mar fair / beach goers can be monstrous, CR 9+ at least.
Enjoy the game day! I'm sorry I'll miss it.
Errr. No, I actually am going to make Lamontius drive! ;) I drive too damned much! But thanks for the warning on the traffic! Ugh.
I totally channeled my inner Krieger while RPing a gnome in the last session I GMed, BTW! I'm sure I didn't do him justice, but wanted to let you know you'd inspired me!
You guys will have to swing on up to the LBC sometime soon! Always great to play with you! :)
It really is a question of your GM and the rest of your table. When I started PFS I was much more comfortable at the roll-play portion of the game and uncomfortable with the role-play portion of the game. But being at a table with other players that encouraged role play helped a lot. Playing regularly with a group of role-play minded players has helped even more. I am still more comfortable in the roll-play portion of the game, but with the right people to play off of, I am becoming more comfortable and better at the role-play portion of the game. It's simply a matter of finding the right GM and the right players to play with. Granted some of our session go long because of the role play, but we never seem to mind :)
Hey Katie,
I had a similar experience. I am much more comfortable tactically, both as a player and recently a GM, than I am role playing, I've definitely started to role play more recently...but it depends a lot on the make up of the group.
Lamontius, on the other hand is pretty much comfortable role playing anywhere! ;)
Take that gender stereotypes!
By the way, we are headed down to play We be Goblins, too, with you and Joanna this Saturday! Looking forward to it! :)
Session went great! The combats were well designed and the opportunities for role play and shenanigans were plenty!
Several players were STOKED to see Gamin on their sheet! :) probably because he kept shouting things like "aye, that big bloke looks like he knows how to wield a sword!" To the barbarian and " oh, you like big ones, do ye?" To the Druid after she cast shilleigah on her quarter staff... Good times!
Running this on Sunday! :) It sounds fantastic!
I am going to use a strategy our GM for Bonekeep used and have the players pre-roll some of their more passive skill checks to cut down on the metagaming.
I have a pretty solid RP plan for Koth' Vaul and I have my breathy Sheila Heidmarch down... but I really want to figure something out for Gamin!I think that's just too good of an RP opportunity to not do justice to! :D
FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THE GODS, LET HER CREATE HER OWN CHARACTER!!!!!
This includes
LET HER PICK HER OWN CLASS.
Character creation is a GREAT way to learn a system, for anyone. It is a way of focusing learning the rules you need to learn first for playing your character. While a GM can sit with a new player and guide them through the process, the player absolutely positively needs to be person in the driver's seat, with the pencil and paper, and making the choices.
If you want to get gender specifics into it, understanding the caveat that individual preferences vary widely, women psychologically typically are more "character oriented" in the stories they enjoy--they find a character they relate to, and then get into it that way. If you take away the agency to create the character, you're also in fact taking away the exact, best gateway to get a (typical) woman (and most people) interested in the system.
She should read through the core rulebook on her own, focusing on the races and class section, and then come to you with what she wants to play. If she's not sure, ask her some guiding questions about the kind of character she'd be interested in playing, have her write down some notes about her ideal character concept, and then pick out a race, class, fighting style, etc. from there.
If she is an ordinary, intelligent, creative adult, she should not need a lot of hand holding. And she should be treated as an ordinary, intelligent, creative adult, and like any other player, should be fully holding the reins of her PC from creation to gameplay.
Now, if she picks some really insanely complicated character concept, then you can say, "Do you understand this is an insanely complicated character concept?" But it should still be up to her to decide to go toward it or not.
I also agree with the advice that running a combat simulation one on one is a good idea (good idea for any new player), but also that she (like any...
Oh, Deatquaker, how right you are!
I happen to be a woman who loves role play...but happens to love tactics more. I am super combat oriented, both as a player and GM. I'm trying to spend as much time on my role play this time around as I do on combat prepping to GM this week. Hopefully it'll be fun! :)
I know you're pretty set on clouded vision, but haunted was pretty easy to manage. It really depends upon how much your GM is into playing it out. I think mine basically forgot about it for 6 levels.
Something else I would like to point out, you do get the opportunity, as an oracle to switch out a lower level spell at 4, 6.....etc. this can be really useful since your spells known are so limited. Also certain spells that are great early on, just really start to lose their appeal as you level.
One spell I picked up that served me quite well was sanctuary. It allowed me to spend a bit more time buffing (I played a greatsword wielding battle oracle) without having to worry so much about taking one to the face. :)
We actually just signed up for several PFS sessions at an upcoming con, and I specifically chose to play at the table of a couple female GMs. One of them is at least a 4 star GM, at that! I'm pretty excited about it and might even fan girl out a little bit! :D
Hopefully she's flattered an doesn't think I'm annoying.... ;)
I'm terrible at GM tactics--decent as a player, blah as a GM. Any tips, Lamontia?
Copious notes, DQ!
I seriously sit down and try to learn each of the NPC/monster's tactics like I would my own character. I research any spells/spell-like abilities and special attacks they have, and write out the details in the margin of the scenario, bestiary page, etc. I include the DC, if applicable, the condition it causes, the stat changes for that condition....pretty much everything! I then write out what I foresee each of them doing in the first couple rounds of combat.
So, for example, I was running 2 druids and their animal companions, the first druid remained in cover and cast Shillelagh, while the other stepped out and cast Entangle the first round. The second round, the other druid cast Entangle. It was the first encounter of the session, so they got smoked, but with two Entangle spells, it took the PCs quite a long time to deal with them! The encounter Lamontius is referring to where I almost killed some people, I was playing a Ghast, with three natural attacks...with that it's just full round attacking whenever possible, and not forgetting about the the amazing abilities it has like Aura of Stench, Paralysis, and Disease. So. Fun. :)
I also prepare all of my maps, in advance. So for a scenario that has three main maps, I will have the least exciting one drawn out on my wet erase mat, then the other two are either a flip mat or some 3-D terrain built with Terra-Clips. That way, I'm not drawing or building and all I have to focus on is running the encounters.
I find that the less I have to look up at the table, or even think about, the more I am able to just get down to it and start kicking some PC butt! Also, I am a pretty competitive person, and while I am absolutely rooting for the PCs, I kinda want to see them struggle a little bit. ;)
While I am sure a female DM can be just as capable as a male counterpart, I will say that I have seen some differences. Albeit, I have played D&D since 1980 and I never even played with a woman at the table until the mid-90's and those were mostly wives who were slightly interested in this odd past-time of ours and it usually did not last long.
I have played in a campaign ran by a female DM once and she was like many of the female players that I have since played alongside as she was way more into the role-play than the mechanics. I know that sounds very stereotypical of me to say, but I have often heard women describe what they want to do and look to the DM to tell them how they can do it. While most of the men that I have played with say what they are doing in terms of just game mechanics and die rolls.
So, this female DM was very good at the story-telling. She ran the Red Hand of Doom module and we all enjoyed it. We did have to help her out with rules from time to time, but we had all agreed to be nice and not argue the point like we normally would. It was one of the more civil games that I have played and the rules-lawyering was at a minimum.
I'm super combat oriented. Frankly, my husband is a much better role player than I am. I try to get a good balance going... But I would say, my challenging combat is what tends to be the hook in my sessions. I think it's pretty individual in that regard.
Overall, it's been good!
My second session, I had another GM greet me by saying "I hope you're prepared" in a droll voice....then turn to my husband and say " hey, Lamontius, how ya doin'? Haven't seen you in a while!" I'm not entirely sure where the hostility, or negativity came from....or how he dropped it so quickly when addressing someone else.
I think he figured out I was prepared when I pulled out my multilevel terrain, and role played all of my NPCs.
It certainly made me feel that I had something to prove though.
I put a lot into it, because frankly, I want to be good! I also think, that as a woman, you almost have to be better than most, to be respected. So I strive to seriously be better.
So far, I think it's working out.
Well... I was just joking about Durngrun's inability/unwillingness to see/admit there is a problem with Fighters...
But thanks, Lamontia. You're very kind. ^^
Wrath wrote:
In every situation you suggest, fighters can contribute.
Not any better than a commoner. They can't.
Sure, compared to commoners, Fighter are okay out of combat, but the fact that they have to be compared to the absolutely weakest class in the game says a ton about them.
Oh, Lemmy, I disagree. There are MANY ways to archetype or customize a fighter to make them useful in so many of those situations. I get it, they are not Jacks of all Trade.. But they can be damned useful, and damned deadly.
Who ever said fighters weren't fun to play? My last character WAS a fighter. My group has moved on pf for a while and we're currently running torg and I refused an invitation to join a rise of the runelords group but my next character was going to be a polearm based tripmaster or perhaps even a spear thrower. I also had one for a hand crossbow dual wielder.
Just to update you all, I have been GMing PFS consistently since my last post (5 sessions so far), and I have been having an amazing time. I put a significant amount of time into prep, building the scene,developing RP characters and combat. My table fills, with multiple people hoping to join it.
The coolest thing to me is that I am new,and I will only get better!
I Tried to GM at the local con over Memorial Day....but schedule made it impossible.
Labor Day it is on!
All three of those are viable options! Just depends upon how you want to go with it. You can get both Firearm Proficiency and Grit as Rogue talents if you would rather save your feats for something else, though you will have to wait until level 2 and beyond.
So, I know PF Society banned them, but in the interest of shifting this topic around and around, would the OP like to consider the skills capabilities of a Half-Elf Synthesist Summoner w/ Int 20 and tons of Skilled evolutions? I don't think that's been thoroughly discussed yet, in the line up of "better rogues."
only if you dip paladin
Hmmmm, but would it be a viable skill monkey? I'll have to see the build. Since the summoner is less bardy with its spell list, I'm sure it will fit the concept better.
So, I know PF Society banned them, but in the interest of shifting this topic around and around, would the OP like to consider the skills capabilities of a Half-Elf Synthesist Summoner w/ Int 20 and tons of Skilled evolutions? I don't think that's been thoroughly discussed yet, in the line up of "better rogues."
Seriously. No. Start another thread or something. This has gone on too long!
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.
Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points
+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.
Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.
So what you are telling me, is that for a normal rogue (not my non lethal rogue), that it's 2.5 extra damage per rogue talent for a level 10 rogue.
That sounds pretty good to me, especially considering that it will increase every two levels.
What is better for damage for the rogue? +10 damage per sneak attack at level 20, I'd sink 2 feats into that.... sinking 2 talents into that is even more doable.
The answer is obviously, play a ranger. Or anything else for that matter.
You may need to leave this thread before it corrupts you completely. (It is too late for me!)
Seriously. :)
I sound like my husband. I knew I spent too much time with him!
So what you are telling me, is that for a normal rogue (not my non lethal rogue), that it's 2.5 extra damage per rogue talent for a level 10 rogue.
That sounds pretty good to me, especially considering that it will increase every two levels.
What is better for damage for the rogue? +10 damage per sneak attack at level 20, I'd sink 2 feats into that.... sinking 2 talents into that is even more doable.
The answer is obviously, play a ranger. Or anything else for that matter.
Wait, there's still people who don't realize Powerful Sneak at all character levels lowers your damage output, and Deadly Sneak at best comes out about even at near level 20?
We hate them because they're horrific trap options that trick newbies into spending character resources to make themselves worse.
Except, I double my sneak attack dice while doing nonlethal damage with a bludgeoning weapon. So.... it's worth it.
And PS, It was worth it before.
There's no arguing Matthias...They have already decided. :)
Hm. I was reading "ends" as "is completed..." But I can certainly see what you're saying. I'm not sure that I agree with your reading of it though.
Ah that might make the difference. I was reading it as "fails due to inability to complete the stated charge"
Well, ends is a synonym of completes...so I don't think I am entirely off base here. :) But I get your point, man. You may be right, and if I have a GM rule that way, I'll go with it.
There you have it folks, High Skill, Decent AC Rogue, low HP, alpha strike rogue that can knock people the @#$% out for 249 Non Lethal Damage by the end of Round 1.
You have powerful sneak and deadly sneak along with 25 point buy. I am not impressed. I am sure your saves still suck also. IIRC the two sneak abilities are not good.
While I am totally with you on the 25 point buy...Why the hate for Powerful Sneak and Deadly Sneak? They're just Rogue talents...
If they are the ones I think they are, they look good on paper, but actually make you worse mathematically. I will go check and return, hopefully shortly.
You're taking a minus to hit, in exchange for your sneak attack dice rolling only 3,4 5,6... But it's like Power Attack, you don't HAVE to use it.
The Overrun is not an auto-success, but I either get a charge with sneak attack off on my intended enemy, or a charge with sneak attack off on the enemy I attempted to overrun.
Benefit: When making a charge, you can attempt to overrun one creature in the path of the charge as a free action. If you successfully overrun that creature, you can complete the charge. If the overrun is unsuccessful, the charge ends in the space directly in front of that creature.
So, even though that enemy is say, 5 feet in front of me, I still get to charge it. If I do succeed on my overrun, they are knocked prone (you're welcome BSF, you. are. welcome. )
It says the charge ends. It doesn't say you get the attacks from the charge on the person you failed to overrun.
Hm. I was reading "ends" as "is completed..." But I can certainly see what you're saying. I'm not sure that I agree with your reading of it though.
A Combat Maneuver roll is "an attack roll", so if you use your attack roll for overrun instead of a normal attack, you are not granted another attack in its place.
There you have it folks, High Skill, Decent AC Rogue, low HP, alpha strike rogue that can knock people the @#$% out for 249 Non Lethal Damage by the end of Round 1.
You have powerful sneak and deadly sneak along with 25 point buy. I am not impressed. I am sure your saves still suck also. IIRC the two sneak abilities are not good.
While I am totally with you on the 25 point buy...Why the hate for Powerful Sneak and Deadly Sneak? They're just Rogue talents...
The Overrun is not an auto-success, but I either get a charge with sneak attack off on my intended enemy, or a charge with sneak attack off on the enemy I attempted to overrun.
Benefit: When making a charge, you can attempt to overrun one creature in the path of the charge as a free action. If you successfully overrun that creature, you can complete the charge. If the overrun is unsuccessful, the charge ends in the space directly in front of that creature.
So, even though that enemy is say, 5 feet in front of me, I still get to charge it. If I do succeed on my overrun, they are knocked prone (you're welcome BSF, you. are. welcome. )
It says the charge ends. It doesn't say you get the attacks from the charge on the person you failed to overrun.
Hm. I was reading "ends" as "is completed..." But I can certainly see what you're saying. I'm not sure that I agree with your reading of it though.
...Like when I get it on every single charge, because I am a Scout...or how I ALWAYS get to charge because I took Improved Overrun and Charge through on my Scout...or how I have a +15 Acrobatics so I can almost always get a flank...or how I took Friendly Switch, so if that stupid Bard is in my spot, I kick him and his d4 sneak attack dice, out of the way.
....Oh wait, the player makes the situation??? Lamontius's sarcasm is rubbing off on me. ;)
Nothing situational about needing a straight line to the enemy through non-difficult terrain to get one sneak attack ...
Or, as I said, a straight line *through* another enemy.... But sure, I will give it to you, I only get to roll my 4d6 of weapon and precision damage off a charge the majority of the time. The rest of the time, I try to get sneak attack the more traditional way. Like jumping onto a table in a square the fighter can't occupy to get flank.
Getting through an enemy? Oh, I thought you were just using Charge Through as a quasi-exploit to give an ally a chance to step out of your way during a charge. What sort of CMB is a rogue sporting to be able to consider overrunning an enemy an, apparent, auto success?
Marthkus wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Superstitious is CRB
Yep my bad. Totems are still technically an archetype.
You do not have to be a totem warrior to select totem rage powers.
Except that you are one once you do take one of those powers.
That's not how archetypes work, you select your archetypes when you take your first level in the class, you don't gain them later.
APG wrote:
Rage Powers (Ex): The following new rage powers can be
taken by any barbarian that meets the prerequisites. Totem
rage powers grant powers in a theme. A barbarian cannot
select from more than one group of totem rage powers.
...
The Overrun is not an auto-success, but I either get a charge with sneak attack off on my intended enemy, or a charge with sneak attack off on the enemy I attempted to overrun.
Benefit: When making a charge, you can attempt to overrun one creature in the path of the charge as a free action. If you successfully overrun that creature, you can complete the charge. If the overrun is unsuccessful, the charge ends in the space directly in front of that creature.
So, even though that enemy is say, 5 feet in front of me, I still get to charge it. If I do succeed on my overrun, they are knocked prone (you're welcome BSF, you. are. welcome. )
...Like when I get it on every single charge, because I am a Scout...or how I ALWAYS get to charge because I took Improved Overrun and Charge through on my Scout...or how I have a +15 Acrobatics so I can almost always get a flank...or how I took Friendly Switch, so if that stupid Bard is in my spot, I kick him and his d4 sneak attack dice, out of the way.
....Oh wait, the player makes the situation??? Lamontius's sarcasm is rubbing off on me. ;)
Nothing situational about needing a straight line to the enemy through non-difficult terrain to get one sneak attack ...
Or, as I said, a straight line *through* another enemy.... But sure, I will give it to you, I only get to roll my 4d6 of weapon and precision damage off a charge the majority of the time. The rest of the time, I try to get sneak attack the more traditional way. Like jumping onto a table in a square the fighter can't occupy to get flank.
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.
Lamontia plays her character's low CHA by stabbing things that my character is trying to use Diplomacy with, preferably while also having her character make fun of mine for being a goody-two-shoes and stealing my lunch money.
That only happened once, Lamontius. You need to move on already. Geeze.
I would, but the body of the unarmed woman your character stabbed to death is blocking the doorway.
She DESERVED it!
Seriously, what kind of hero for shining good are you, anyway? Silver Crusade... Diploming with an Aspis Consortium summoner after she attempted (and failed) to murder us. Really, Lamontius, it is incredibly apparent that you're not filling out at least one part of that shiny full plate you're wearing.
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.
Lamontia plays her character's low CHA by stabbing things that my character is trying to use Diplomacy with, preferably while also having her character make fun of mine for being a goody-two-shoes and stealing my lunch money.
That only happened once, Lamontius. You need to move on already. Geeze.
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.
Working with other players is great! I love when a group has teamwork. When it has to happen for the character to be effective I have problems though.
But it is a problem of their own creation. I am highly effective on my own. If a party member would like to, oh, I don't know, share a bonus to hit and obliterate bad guys with me, excellent! If not, then I will rely on the fact that I have a well built character, that I actually know how to play and run with it. ;)
Well if you have a warrior at the table you have bigger problems.
Really though, the rogue does do much better if the other melee help him flank. This actually bothers me because it requires other people for him to do his job.
...Or she could just Feint to deny his enemies Dex. Which, with a couple of feats becomes a move action. Or as I said, take the Scout Archetype and sneak attack all day. Both totally independent of other player.
Question though? What's so bad about working with other players, anyway?
