Lord_Rachen's page

Going through some old stuff and just wanted to throw this custom class I created some time ago for a campaign we played, just in case anyone else has been looking to play a character like this.

We played up to level 15 or 17 cant remember. So it was used quite extensively with no problems at all, and it was pretty fun.

I have also included a set of custom items I created specifically for this class if any GMs want to use it.

It should be noted that I do generally run a high fantasy game with a pretty quick leveling system. So if you run a game with less magical items and slower leveling I'm not sure how it will hold up there.

Please let me know if you have used the class, how it held up, and any issue you ran into.

See link below for the class:
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Ip-Wq6NVcbVt

Special thanks to Homebrewery for making my ideas look professional.

Please go check them out at http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com its a pretty amazing tool.

I agree that its not a good way to deter powergaming. Which is not my intention in the first place. It more to blend everything together.

Also in my homebrews, that I mostly run, I always try to tie in personnel stories and events related to the characters. So I use characters traits and backstories as hooks and tools in my story writing to incorporate elements from their character creation into it.

While there's no right way to do it, it can feel like you're swimming upstream if you try to do things in a vastly different manner to the rest of your group. It's probably more important for you and the GM (or you and the player if you're the GM) to make sure you're vaguely on the same page about a character than to have hard-and-fast rules about this kind of thing.

I definitely agree with this, I'm not really hawkish about it. And I am the firm belief no matter how a GM wants to run the game, if the players aren't on board there is no use. Were here to have fun, and sometimes that means doing whats fun for the players even if that not how you as the GM always wants to do it.

My argument is a different tact saying that those who choose traits based on mechanical benefit will not be dissuaded by having to choose to add that to their background, while Lord_Rachen was suggesting some sort of restriction to force the mechanics and background to match each other. If players are choosing traits for the mechanics, it doesn't mean they wont attempt to role play their character but I believe that trying to create a restriction just isn't a fruitful avenue.

I think you got me all wrong, the purpose is not to dissuade nor restrict anyone from taking trait. I allow them all.

The purpose is to promote and blend the mechanics and roleplaying together. It is not to stop people from taking certain traits.

The player most certainly can just pick the most optimized trait or make the decision based on mechanics, they just then have to also bring it back around a work it into the roleplay aspect.

Its perfectly ok to have players write character backgrounds the most desirable traits that is not something I have a problem with.

That will just lead to character backgrounds being written to enable the most desirable traits or fights over what counts as "matching" your backstory.

Is a 14 dex wizard enough to qualify for reactionary?

There are no rules for it. I understand your intention, it simply wouldn't work well for the entire player base, but might work okay for individual game groups.

That's fine with me. I dont really see a problem there. As long as it makes sense in the backstory go ahead.

Maybe the wizard was an acrobat in a previous life or something and thus takes reactionary.

As long as it makes sense lore wise go ahead.

But when someone makes a character with a backstory and then picks traits that dont align or make any sense with their characters backstory has always felt off with me. And yeah their is no rule for it, its just a houserule thing that I do when I GM. Wacky weird things are fine as long as it can be justified within their own lore.

And yeah 14 Dex would be fine. But even if someone came to me with a low Dex character and took reactionary but justified it in their background I would be fine with it.
i.e. maybe they grew up in an abusive household with alcoholic parents or something that would fly into fits of rage and beating so their were always aware and on edge and its just a tick that stuck with them for the rest of thier life. Always staying in their room reading books etc. that why they ultimately became a wizard but arent very dexterous.

If someone wants to start with the Rich Parent trait it needs to be justified somehow. I feel like that should be the same for all traits.

Just personally how I run it. But Im not hawkish about it. its just a pet peeve of mine.

I really tend to like the idea that each trait you take needs to match your actual backstory and designed character.

So the non dexterous wizard who spent all his time studying should not be taking reactionary.

The trait needs to match the character, instead of just browsing the traits to find the best one and picking it even if it does not make sense lore wise.

One of my characters is a crafter that can use improvised weapons. She also runs a shop. She focuses on odd types of weapons like traveling kettles and battle ladders.

I was wondering if there were any odd types of armor that she could put in as well.

Odd materials would be useful as well.

A BATTLE WHEELCHAIR with a BATTERING RAM in the front!!!

If she makes that sort of stuff....

One interesting thing to to is shift the weapon into something you can palm/conceal: a Monkey's Fist! It's the only negligible bulk weapon so it works for that and if can save you bulk if you want to drag out more loot.

Also since I'm obviously not a particularly stealthy character, i like the idea of being able to "conceal" my main weapon if necessary.

Loreguard wrote:

While I am all for weapon staffs being able to shift into another 2-handed weapon. Technically, the rune says it can shift into a melee weapon that requires the same number of hands to wield.

It doesn't actually say it can shift into a different weapon using the same number of hand as you currently are wielding it in.

So technically the dagger requires one hand, the bastard sword requires 1 hand, and the two handed sword requires one hand.

The bastard sword requires 1 hand, even when you are wielding it with 2 hands and getting a benefit from that choice.

Simplest solution would creating a Greater Rune of Shifting, which has a prerequisite of being placed on a 1-h weapons that has a Two-handed property. And have the weapon be able to shift to any melee weapon that can be wielded with the same number of hands you are currently wielding it in.

I don't know that it is horribly broke to allow it to do as you said however, if your GM allows it, great. If your the GM and want to stick with more raw, I don't think it specifically is allowed, currently as written.

What might be a stranger edge case would be the Lance, which requires two hands to wield, so could shift into a two-handed sword. However, the lance when charging, mounted with a harness and moving at least 10' it can be wielded with 1 hand, reducing the damage die to d6. But it is certainly arguable then that it no longer requires 2 hands so during a charge, might be able to shift into a 1 handed weapon. Then the question for the corollary, of can a longsword or bastard sword shift into a lance during a charge? Or does the rune only operate based on the base nature of the weapon, not specific edge conditions?

Nope: The OP is talking about shifting his GRIP to two-handed, not shifting the weapon into a two-handed sword.

Reassuring to see someone else make the same misread I did...

Yeah shifting grip requires and action as far as I am aware.

Yup, you're correct. Keeping in mind that daggers and Bastard Swords are basically only effectively usable by completely different characters (one is a agile finesse simple weapon, the other is a big strength-based martial weapon) and two actions in combat is a lot just to switch your weapon around.

You can still use finesse weapons as strength based character. Although not always the best, for RP purposes I prefer always start the day with my deities preferred weapon.

So recently I have been slowly converting Monster Hunter Monsters into Pathfinder. I have a point in our current campaign where I will want to use them, just haven't got there yet.

So I was just looking for some input on some of the monsters I have created so far and see what other people think.

Anjanath
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SDYv2XVB-bNhKBBwSaxlToO3z2Msm29-

Pukei-Pukei
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1jCL3P4bcBPYIt_2UHKwBQ03ECRhlrNut

At that point though, I'd rather be the bone trooper, as that necrohive's going to spend the rest of eternity floating randomly in the middle of absolutely nowhere. Not an especially appealing fate.

Unless he's lucky enough to end up as a spaceship bugsplat.

So my group is turning into a bunch of "Murder Hobos" that think they still are the heros of the campaign...they are not anymore...and I was thinking of some ideas for a new campaign because things are probaly gonna go south for them soon...

Was thinking about just doing a goblin or monster campaign for them so they can just go full murder hobos...

Sooo wanted to get some input on the differences of running an evil PC campaign vs monster campaign.