Morawk's page

A 2nd way is to move up, cleave into one target (hopefully the one who's still flat-footed), then surprise follow thru his friend standing there depending on how many there are and my AoO count, I can blind the 2nd guy(as an attack since he's flatfooted instead of the normal standard action) or trip the 2nd guy, his CMD is lower because no dex, and then (since he's flat footed)take my greater trip AoO to blind him on that one.

I know on the Surprise Follow-Through you can blind the second enemy. How do you get a trip on the second enemy instead of the blind? I know its not part of Felling Smash because you're using Cleave. Is there another Feat that's part of this build?

I really like the Skulking Slayer Rogue archetype and I'm trying to build without multi-classing. I know I won't have enough feats to mimic your build but I'm trying to get ideas to make the most of what I have.

Surprise follow thru can't be combined with Felling Smash, since Surprise follow thru works off of the Cleave feat which is a separate standard action. Felling smash takes its own standard action.

The things I listed in my post are different ways of getting various flat-footed options to maximize my dirty trick (usually blind).

1 way is to run in, felling smash, get the free trip, get the greater trip AoO to blind, and now they have to spend a standard to remove the blind and a move to stand up. Now they have a choice, attack while prone and blind, or remove the conditions and get no attacks.

A 2nd way is to move up, cleave into one target (hopefully the one who's still flat-footed), then surprise follow thru his friend standing there depending on how many there are and my AoO count, I can blind the 2nd guy(as an attack since he's flatfooted instead of the normal standard action) or trip the 2nd guy, his CMD is lower because no dex, and then (since he's flat footed)take my greater trip AoO to blind him on that one.

I could have spelled it out better, but there's a lot going on with those combos, in order to be very good at 2-3 ways to either get massive sneak damage or absolute lockdown control.

If I'm running in first, I actually don't go for the damage, I take the enemy's action economy instead. Once I have flanking situations, or say, another enemy comes out of a tunnel while we're already in combat, then I go for the damage.

In my area, I have a lot more system mastery than most of the other players, so I usually just lockdown the bad guys and let the other players get the kills. It makes them feel good about their characters, we still win, and I don't hog the show. When an encounter is written poorly, or unbalanced, I let loose and roll it, so we don't have to pay for the Rez. There was one where a 5th level party went up against a 7th level summoner and claw build Eidolon, plus a couple mooks. The Paladin ran in and dropped to 3 HP in the first full attack of the Eidolon, so I...

Absolutely nasty! Props!

Mine is a Lore Warden/Skulking slayer, fighting with a heavy Flail (d10 19-20x2 trip weapon) Using Felling Smash and Greater trip, as well as Cleave and Surprise Follow through.

It's surprisingly effective. 1d10+3d8+24 at 10th level (5/5), +28 trip, and another d10+3d8+24, or dirty trick to blind on the AoO from greater trip (skulking slayer can sub dirty trick since they're flat-footed from the charge).

Boots of Spiderclimb to be on the ceiling and not blocked from charge lanes, replace with boots of flying at higher levels.

Single target, charge/trip/blind. multiple targets, trip blind blind.

With Surprise Follow-Through and Felling Smash, when you hit the first enemy on that charge, it requires a separate swift action to trip them. Doesn't that end the Surprise Follow-Through? Or does the swift action trip occur while the first attack is continuing to the next enemy? Are you, in effect, performing two actions at once?

Well I'm sticking to my dump stat theory. You guys hash out whether appearance is a part of Charisma or not. Just make sure it doesn't any changes makes it a more important stat so people stop dumping the stat to boost other more important stats.

Morawk wrote:

It's not but obviously it's a negative or this thread wouldn't exist. Maybe people have a certain image in their head of what their character looks like and you're not going to get that with me and a charisma of 6. Have a str, dex, con, int or wis of 6 and you'll notice the negatives. Have a charisma of 6 and unless you're dancing, bluffing or playing diplomat, you'll never suffer any drawbacks. So, I'd make them feel the drawbacks through roleplay and maybe a slight aversion to them.

I would also be adverse to being forced to call my half-orc with a 16 charisma, "pretty."

I guess my dwarven sorcerer was, by necessity, very handsome, which I would also object to.

That would be a negative as well then.

-

Why do you have to dictate that a character is ugly to make them feel the drawbacks through roleplay? I mean, do you need to have people react badly to the way someone looks as opposed to the way a person acts or sounds?

Yes. I need to have people react badly to the way someone looks and how they act and sound. Because penalizing someone for act or sound is not enough of a deterrent to dumping Charisma as a stat. You're typical powergamer's response to a character with a Charisma of 6 with no penalty to looks will be, "My character is attractive but is not social, doesn't like people and has a bad attitude". That's not much of a deterrent. For an attractive character to have a Charisma of 6, he must have some severe issues. Maybe uncouth, disgusting in public, flatulence...I don't know. I just have to make sure that Charisma doesn't become a dump stat to boost other scores and I know most players are vain and wouldn't like that they're character is not attractive. That's somewhat of an effective deterrent.

Morawk wrote:

I don't see anything wrong with an ability score that has been that way for so many years without complaint.

It hasn't been without complaint. Does that mean there is something wrong with it now?

Morawk wrote:

It's a fact, unless players are playing a Charisma class, they dump their Charisma score and their needs to be some kind of balancing penalty for that besides not being very good at diplomacy, bluff or dancing.

Being ugly is a balancing penalty?

It's not but obviously it's a negative or this thread wouldn't exist. Maybe people have a certain image in their head of what their character looks like and you're not going to get that with me and a charisma of 6. Have a str, dex, con, int or wis of 6 and you'll notice the negatives. Have a charisma of 6 and unless you're dancing, bluffing or playing diplomat, you'll never suffer any drawbacks. So, I'd make them feel the drawbacks through roleplay and maybe a slight aversion to them.

I don't see anything wrong with an ability score that has been that way for so many years without complaint. As people have said earlier, it's a compound trait and emcompasses many things foremost, strength of personality which helps in social settings. I don't see why this bothers anyone so much unless they use Charisma as a dump score in the point buy method to increase their other uber stats for min/maxing and don't want any of the possible negative repucussions of doing that...the possibility of having the personality of a rock or being socially inept or god forbid, not attractive.

In the point buy method, you dump strength for other scores and you'll have a horrible to-hit and massive problems with gear and weight. Dump dexterity and you have major problems with armor class, reflex saves and ranged attacks. Dump constitution and you'll have problems with hitpoints and Fort saves. Dump intelligence and you lose skill points and your character is unlearned, slow or stupid. Dump wisdom and you're not perceptive, have no common sense and have gimped Will saves. Dump charisma and what? You get penalized for a few Charisma based skills? That's the penalty for dumping Charisma? That's it? There's a reason most people use Charisma as a dump stat. There's not really a drawback. So yeah, if I DM and you have a low Charisma score, you're going to have some negative repurcussions. Slow witted, socially inept, awkward and blah looking. I'm not going to let a player use it as a dump stat and then turn around and say they're awesomely attractive with perfect cheekbones and luxurious hair and just cast aside the Charisma score. It's a fact, unless players are playing a Charisma class, they dump their Charisma score and their needs to be some kind of balancing penalty for that besides not being very good at diplomacy, bluff or dancing.

Morawk wrote:

Perhaps allowing each player choose their favored class at character origination with the bonus. This bonus is lost once a player multiclasses and can never be regained. Existing hps/sps are not lost but just future levels in the favored class will not have it. So everyone gets to play their own class with the benefit but there's the incentive to stay in the one class. Maybe make Human and Half-Elves the exception to this rule. They can multiclass and whenever they take new levels in their favored class, they continue to get the bonus.

This is almost exactly what I suggested earlier - except that along wiht the one the play is allowed to choose - there is ONE arbitrary class too that is a favored class - based on the old D&D race/class combo standards (Dwarf fighter, halfling rogue, etc).

Robert

Yeah but that last little addition doesn't help with incentivizing people to stick with one class. I like one favored class only per player only. That's why it's the "favored" class. Favored above all others.

I can take out a powerful wizard as a disguise-mastered rogue. Boost my Charisma to some ungodly number and then disguise with my awesome skill and when the wizard reaches for his book (me)...

SNEAK ATTACK!

Muwahahaha!

(Thank you to Lidda for that awesome strategy!)

Morawk wrote:

I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.

I don't think so. Giving something roughly to power of a single feat isn't likely to stop someone from "power dipping" or even reconsider it. If they want the evasion of the rogue, I don't think that they would be worried about losing those 2 hp/skill points.

Also, if the bonus is actually good enough to change a person's mind, wouldn't it also encourage someone playing a elf cleric to "dip" in ranger a few levels to get that extra bonus?

-

I would like to see the favored class bonus go away right now. I would rather the bonus to playing certain classes be moved to racial feats or something else the race can choose to have a significant bonus for playing a certain class. I would rather be able to choose the bonus if I want it, than automatically having the bonus only if I play the class/race combination the DM/designer thinks I should be playing. Something not exactly like but similar to...

Elven Study
Prerequisite: Elf
Benefit: You gain 3 skill points plus 1 skill point per wizard level. Every time you gain a wizard level, you gain another +1 skill point. These skill points must be spent on the Knowledge skill.

I'll bet you money you'll still have people begrudge that little bonus as well. Perhaps allowing each player choose their favored class at character origination with the bonus. This bonus is lost once a player multiclasses and can never be regained. Existing hps/sps are not lost but just future levels in the favored class will not have it. So everyone gets to play their own class with the benefit but there's the incentive to stay in the one class. Maybe make Human and Half-Elves the exception to this rule. They can multiclass and whenever they take new levels in their favored class, they continue to get the bonus.

Selgard wrote:

I'm not trying to be thick, I just don't understand the "its a penalty" mentality.

What I don't get is why people are obsessing over the turn of phrase. Who cares if it's called a "penalty" or a "bonus" or a "racial feature", what benefit does it bring to the game?

From the groups I've played in there has been little trouble keeping archetypes populated. If you want to encourage a race/ class combination then you can easily do so within the racial traits. Why do you need to encourage elf wizards with an arbitrary bonus when the race gets +2 INT and Elven Magic?

Maybe we should be asking why other races have racial traits that don't support the favored class mechanism. For example the gnome illusion racial trait is more supportive of a wizard illusionist but the CHA bonus and favored class supports the sorcerer.

I see enough characters following archetype under core 3.5 that I don't see a need to add another mechanism to pigeon hole them into them.

I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.

Being that it's listed as a supernatural ability, I would think the ability isn't really "cast" but just done. Like an innate ability so it just works in the same round.

Count me in, with a couple of conditions:

No Lodoss Islandy cuteness. Something that looks like Record of Lodoss War itself would be acceptable.

Unlike those Warcraft mangas, treat your artists to some paint - no black/white.

Bow to these demands and the Thrice-Damned Regime and its Infernal Machinery shall support your endeavour.

I agree with ya. Someone mentioned earlier too, that it should be in the Korean manhwa style. Less, cute, more realistic manga style. Like Shaman Warrior by Park Joong-Ki. Less big eyes and lack of features. Shaman Warrior looks like a cross between manga, western style and natural life drawing. Search Park Joong-Ki and tell me if that wasn't in full Painter you wouldn't have a manga-face moment.

Exactly. It depends on the game, but there's a certain baseline that can be established, or rather, HAS BEEN established. The core rule set of DnD was written with exactly such a baseline in mind.

I played some casters back in 2nd ed myself, and let me tell you: in my experience, playing a spellcaster in 3.0 and 3.5 is unbelievably more fun, for the very thing you mention: I get more control over my spells! There's so many aspects of the game that are out of my hands. Why shouldn't spell selection allow for more player choice?

This is a variant of "we hiked to school barefoot uphill both ways and we liked it!" Certainly, new spells and magic items need to be considered before their use in game, but to say there weren't killer spell combos back in prior editions is simply not true. Many of the same spell tactics that LogicNinja and others have pointed out could have been pulled off in earlier editions as well.

Does it? I know a lot about the game, and it still excites me every time I get to play. LogicNinja obviously knows a lot about the game as well, and from the passion in his posts, you can tell he still derives a lot of enjoyment from it. Perhaps this is more of a player preference issue than a game balance...

Just giving my opinion, not trying to tell you how to play your game. Just saying sometimes it's easy to get lost in the mechanics and stats. Too much magic available and stuff loses it's luster for me. But that's just me. "What? It dropped a +4 INT Helm? Bah, already got one of those...I'm looking for at least +6. Let's pawn it though, because I've been meaning to get some +4 DEX gloves." I need to get used to that aspect of the new games heh.

Wow, do you guys ever think that there's just to much magic available in the world? I guess it depends on the style of the campaign that the DM is running and I'll admit that I haven't been roleplaying for a long while and am just returning to it. Magic just seems so readily available in the game now. Sort of World of Warcraft-like or video game-like. You could just go buy wands of X or 10 scrolls of Y.

Maybe the game's evolved now heh. When I played a wizard back then, I jumped for joy when I found a new scroll...it meant I could learn a new spell. I never once had access to a spellbook that had every spell in every core rulebook/splat book to craft nifty uber spell combos. My DM treated new spells or books like magic items and I think the game was better for it. We didn't all own books so the DM didn't give us free access to read every spell description. It takes some of the fun out of the game when you just know too much (and LogicNinja's grasp of the game mechanics is friggin impressive...I'm such a noobie). This convo is all too powergamy and everyone's lost sight of the most important thing of all and that's just to roleplay the story and have fun...not min-max.

But sorry to sidetrack. I understand the point of the beta-testing is to figure out where to break the game and improve it. You guys are doing a good job of it. :)

Morawk wrote:

Dunno about Western style. Everytime I think of Western style, Marvel comics come to mind. Fantasy genre in that style just doesn't seem all that new to me. But, I won't knock it til I try it. Let's just see a comic or graphic novel come out.

Dude, check out the art of Mark Smylie and Massimiliano Frezzato(I'd post more images, but I'm tied up at work now). And that's just for starters!

They should get plenty of image hits on Google.

Frezzato's work is nice. I dig that. The other artist is ok but not my cup of tea. Let's call up the Bizman to do some Pathfinder spreads. Simon Bizley. Now that would be wicked.

If you guys are still putting together a group and you still need a player, let me know. I haven't played D&D for awhile and I found Pathfinder while searching the net for possible groups to start again. If I can find a serious group, I don't mind acquiring the modules as I'm just getting back into it and my DMing probably isn't up to par. Feel free to email me anytime at paul dot v dot nguyen at comcast dot net.

The variety in the Pathfinder art is awesome. It's one of the things that drew me in (besides the awesome take on D&D). I like the realistic. I like cartoony. I like a mix of the two too. It's all great. So far, I've loved everything Pathfinder. So I trust in the judgement of the editors and writers. Keep doing what you do. I'm a Barnes & Noble/Borders-a-holic and I have a habit of just flipping through everything RPG in the bookstore just to look at art. Pathfinder products take the cake hands down. Now I need to find other Pathfinders in my area to play with so I can subscribe and order all this stuff.

Edit: And please, keep Wayne Reynolds around. His art rocks! Anime or not.

Graphic Novel - Western style, please and thank you.

Leave the Manga style to Exalted!

Actually...give me Exalted art hehe. Big, fat, oversized swords, cool looking characters and dramatic action sequences. Love it. Dunno about Western style. Everytime I think of Western style, Marvel comics come to mind. Fantasy genre in that style just doesn't seem all that new to me. But, I won't knock it til I try it. Let's just see a comic or graphic novel come out.

Sarah Robinson wrote:

I agree! Call it Graphic Novel!!! Never Manga...EVER! Finding artists for this would be fun.

Wow. SHOCK. Like the third time Sarah EVER posts it's for a random freak-out. WEIRD. :P

But yeah, I agree. If only we knew some super talented Asian artists, right?

There are good fantasy manga artists. Actually, while looking through the credits in some of the Paizo products, I noticed that some of the art is credited to UDON studios. There's an artist that's from that studio that drew the comics for the EXALTED RPG by White Wolf. He's very good and does the fantasy manga thing perfect. You can check out his work in a 6 part comics series called EXALTED. It's also in graphic novel form too. It's pretty awesome. Noi Sackda and Pathfinder would rock!

So, I have an idea for a religion system in this campaign setting. Under this setting there is no hard evidence of the existence of deities. There are, however, millions of spirits, and there are everywhere in the world (Think Japanese Kami). These spirits exist to provide humans with magical power in the same manner as deities, but unlike deities they can only do this if the individual is nearby. Furthermore, different spirits offer different types of magic. In game terms, each spirit has a general focus, like healing, divination, smiting, and the like. When a divine spellcaster prepares or learns a spell, a spirit of the appropriate focus provides the power instead of a deity. This requires prayer to the spirit in the same manner as one would pray to a deity. Spirits exist specifically for this purpose, so they do not refuse to give the power. Since there are millions of spirits, it is always assumed that there is an appropriate spirit close enough to give the power.

Under this system, Cleric domains show a preference for certains kinds of spirit, as divine spellcasters focus on types of magic that fit their moral beliefs or interests, and gain power from those types of spirit more often than from other types of spirit.

Since Clerics do not gain power from deities under this system, they cannot lose their spells and class features for misbehaving. This also applies to Paladins, and for the same reasons: there simply isn't a god to get mad at them for violating the code of conduct. However, there is an organization of Paladins that trains all Paladins and shows them which prayers to make to which types of spirit, and this organization keeps an eye on it's members. As a result, any Paladin who violates the code of conduct will have agents of this organization sent to either reform, or, if it should prove absolutely necessary, execute him or her. Paladins may not be able to lose their abilities for violating the code of conduct, but any such violations will be dealt with appropriately. It'll just be done in RP terms instead of through loss of power.

Now, just because there is no hard evidence of deities does not mean there is no belief in deities. Religion and the belief in higher powers still plays a large role in this campaign, and the lack of hard evidence of the existence of deities just serves to intensify religious tension and, at times, violence and prosecution. Spirit warship is also highly common, often alongside deity worship.

Spanky the Leprechaun is banned for hogging all the Lucky Charms.

I found this character class on the SRD, and it fits this campaign perfectly. I decree that it should be allowed, but the alignment should be any, not any neutral.

If he wants to use unlimited wealth to get super-powered, either make your own unlimited wealth super-powered character or make him go up against something bigger than him. If he gets to play whoever he wants, you can make him fight whoever you want. It's only fair. Make him go up against the Tarrasque. Alone. Advance it's hit dice, too.

That's how I handle the super-high ability score gestalt campaigns I love running. Sure, you get a really power character, but the bad guys are just as strong.

So, I'm creating rules for playing Pathfinder in a 17th/18th/early 19th century technology level. I plan to create a free PDF called Sloops and Sabers containing all these rules, but first I have to write them.

I plan to have extensive rules for naval combat and sailing in general in this PDF (It is the "Age of Sail", after all) and one of the things I was thinking about is sea shanties and how cool it would be if they had an actual effect on gameplay. So I wrote down what I think are fair rules for such a thing:

Cadences

A cadence is a song sung by several people while working or marching in order to coordinate timing. Cadences aid timing in physical labor and relieve boredom during monotonous work, making them useful for keeping people working hard over long periods. There are many different types of cadence, such as military marching cadences, sea shanties, mining songs, agricultural songs, and so forth. Instruments may be used, but very often are not. Whether or not an instrument is used has no gameplay effect when singing a cadence.

Cadences are generally call and response songs, where once person leads the cadence (usually calling one or two lines at a time) and the rest of the people singing call the chorus or a response to the lines called out by the leader. The timing of this is synchronized to the task being performed, so that a specific action is either performed or ended when the chorus is called. Only the person leading the cadence makes a Perform (Sing) check. Responding to the leader requires no check so long as the individual is familiar with the song (a DC 10, 15, or 20 Knowledge check [The DC depends on how common the song is and the Knowledge category depends on what kind of work the cadence is meant for] may be made if it is unsure whether someone should be familiar with a specific cadence). People with ranks in a profession skill should be considered familiar with local cadences connected to that skill, regardless of whether or not they have ranks in any knowledge skills. They should not be considered familiar with foreign cadences unless they have ranks in an appropriate knowledge skill or some other reason to know that particular cadence.

A successful Perform (Sing) check by the cadence leader against a DC appropriate to the type of work being performed (10 for the least demanding tasks, such as marching or harvesting crops, 15 or 20 for more complicated tasks such as many shipboard jobs, marching on poor terrain, or working in adverse conditions such as severe weather) gives a +1 bonus to Profession checks connected to the work being performed, plus an extra +1 bonus for every 3 points the cadence leader exceeds the DC by. A morale bonus of the same amount is gained to saving throws and ability checks directly related to the work being performed (such as saving throws connected to a forced march). During combat a cadence called by a military unit gains this bonus to fortitude saves against fatigue or exhaustion and will saves against fear only, and a cadence can only be called while the unit is in a tight formation and not running or charging (hustling is okay). A Perform (Sing) check should be made once per hour. A successful Perform (Sing) check while marching adds 10% to the distance marched that hour along with all the benefits listed above. This bonus is do to the marchers being kept in step, not morale. A failed Perform (Sing) check while leading cadence has no effect.

Cadences are very commonly used by militaries, so Barbarians, Fighters, Palidins, Rangers, Clerics, Warriors, and Cavaliers (all classes commonly found in military units) treat Perform (Sing) as a class skill when calling cadence.

This is the first rule I've written for Sloops and Sabers, and I would appreciate it if people would look over it and critique it's balance, ask about anything unclear, and generally tell me how good the rule is.

At the moment I'm working on melee weapons, specifically knives (the absence of armor and availability of firearms makes them one of the most common melee weapons, and I'm adding some knives not represented in medieval Pathfinder). I'll have them posted when they are ready.