Thanks for the input, all of you.
To clarify more, the 9th caster ban is common with the people I play: They feel that the game became more gritty without playing another system, at least in 3.5. It's my first time GMing PF to they.
And while I plan the game to go up 12th, I can't guarantee that will end at this point, because I play with this guys for 16 years and sometimes small campaings go around for years.
I will stick with the PFS bans as they look very reasonable.
So, I'm going to run a custom game in a homebrew setting, and I need to know some exploitable or problematic Archetypes and feats.
My actual ban list:
Feats: Calculating Mind, Leadership, Sacred Geometry, all item creation feats.
Classes: All 9th casting classes (more a lore/flavor decision)
Archetypes: Vivisseccionist, Primalist, Master Summoner and Synthesist.
Any more sugestions? The game should last up to 12th Level.
Thanks pal, but this Paizo subsystem sucks major ass, and is not exactly what I'm looking for.
I think that Lemmy can get a system where is easy enough to make balanced armors. There is no reason at all to use a Padded Armor, a Half Plate or various armors in the system because they suck. In a system where I can have a Half-Plate and Full-Plate in different niches, I will be more that happy.
A reasonable houserule is if you are not proficient in the armor, you will have a minimum ACP of 1 for light armor, 2 for medium armor, or 3 for heavy armor, because you don't know how to strap it properly.
Why punish martials even more with such stupid houserule? You want to have Magic Armor Proficiency to learn how to use a Mage Armor?
An ogre can carry a longbow, sure. But then he goes from 2d8+7 damage to 2d6 damage (also 3 less to his attack bonus), and any increase in this damage with a +str bow means also increasing the hell out of the bow's cost.
Make them use slings, it's free and will do 1d6+5 damage, instead of 2d6 with a bow. More thematic too, I guess.
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
My experience with GURPS Fantasy and Mutants & Masterminds say otherwise. There are no martial-caster disparity in both these systems, and in M&M the scombos are easily noticiable because you don't need to look for unexpected synergies between special abilities because the rules are lighter.
For me a high-level martial should fight like the over the top fighting scenes of Final Fantasy 7: Advent Children.
Massive jumps, impossible balancing feats, absurd riding skills, supreme endurance. Swim against a waterfall, run over falling debris, balancing on water, run for DAYS without getting tired, hold their breaths for hours.
Ah, yes, this old argument. Over and over and over with this. Every discussion on this forum about how something should work ends with this.
In a world where a well trained and experienced man can fight using only his fists against creatures with 16' to 32 ft. of height and WIN, how to chop a swarm is unrealistic or magical about it?
While not as simple as the gloves of dueling, slayers have bloodstained gloves and lenses of the predators gaze to boost the studied target bonus. And the slayers robe can apply the bonus to saves against the studied target.
Oh boy, didn't know about these items, my Tiefling Slayer will LOVE them!
Just to point out, Weapon Training plus Weapon Specialization & etc doesn't fare any worse that Studied Target. Throw on Gloves of Dueling and it does considerably better. Slayer is great, and much better for some builds, but I'm not sure exactly why people think it completely replaces Fighter.
Because you can be disarmed or sundered?
So we end up with a fast fighter with a couple more hit points and worse armor, or a fighter who trades his feats for sneak attack. Doesn't sound like a winning combo to me.
Slayer is a Fighter with better skill list, skill points, better saves and faster access to feats because of Ranger Fighting Style.
While it may not be evil to kill evil, it is a quick way to have a paladin fall on HOW you combat evil. Several examples of what makes for dishonorable combat are listed including poison, but it does go on to say "and so on".
To a Paladin, yes. The code forces the Paladin to be Lawful Stupid.
Zaros Liserii wrote:
I can understand your reasoning, but you lack any evidence in text from the actual game to make this claims. I at least provided some text from the books from the "father" edition of Pathfinder to suport that it's not evil to kill a Evil being.
But in the end nothing of this discussion matter, because Alignment IS one, if not the MOST aspect of the game that changes to game to game.